Israelis shoot defenseless animals in Gaza zoo

[liberalismo]

Camel shot

[IFBBwannaB]

The news people who did these articles actually went to the zoo, took pictures, etc. There was even a picture of a dead camel that had been shot.

Took pictures long after the supposed shootings, you do know that was a war zone and that Hamas will surely kill those animals just to make the Israelis look bad.

I'm sure they either died by some stray bullet//etc or by Hamas.

[liberalismo]

Took pictures long after the supposed shootings, you do know that was a war zone and that Hamas will surely kill those animals just to make the Israelis look bad.

I'm sure they either died by some stray bullet//etc or by Hamas.

You're sure? Even though the news agencies and eyewitnesses say different?

If it were clearly a fraud, Israeli news sources would be rallying to refute them. But the only news sources on this support the initially stated facts that Israeli soldiers went wild.

[IFBBwannaB]

You're sure? Even though the news agencies and eyewitnesses say different?

If it were clearly a fraud, Israeli news sources would be rallying to refute them. But the only news sources on this support the initially stated facts that Israeli soldiers went wild.

Yawn, sure buddy, anymore baseless shit you got to share? You seem to always have an excuse for the terrorists, why don't you join them ?

[liberalismo]

Yawn, sure buddy, anymore baseless shit you got to share? You seem to always have an excuse for the terrorists, why don't you join them ?

You're not being rational. You deny the reputability of major news organizations only to defend Israel...Why?

[IFBBwannaB]

You're not being rational. You deny the reputability of major news organizations only to defend Israel...Why?

Maybe because they have no proof.....a photo of a dead animal and a Hamas supporter "eye witness" is far from proof.


You want proof to how Hamas is? You really want me to post videos of Hamas  grabbing children and using them as human shields?

[Hugo Chavez]

Maybe because they have no proof.....a photo of a dead animal and a Hamas supporter "eye witness" is far from proof.


You want proof to how Hamas is? You really want me to post videos of Hamas  grabbing children and using them as human shields?

animal hater.

[Nordic Superman]

You're not being rational. You deny the reputability of major news organizations only to defend Israel...Why?

Rational? I exposed the man making to quotes to the reporters as a jihadist. Question your own rationality comrade. The media has a duty to report what happened, unfortunately all they have for reference is one twisted jihadist. Let's check the shells and determine which weaponry they were fired from before we say either party is guilty. Comical someone making the statements you make would question another person's rationality.

[liberalismo]

Rational? I exposed the man making to quotes to the reporters as a jihadist. Question your own rationality comrade. The media has a duty to report what happened, unfortunately all they have for reference is one twisted jihadist. Let's check the shells and determine which weaponry they were fired from before we say either party is guilty. Comical someone making the statements you make would question another person's rationality.

You exposed the zoo owner as a Jihadist? Where?


If you want to wait until the shells are examined to determine who shot them to make a conclusion, why are you already concluding that Israel is is innocent of the crime? 

[Nordic Superman]

You exposed the zoo owner as a Jihadist? Where?

If you want to wait until the shells are examined to determine who shot them to make a conclusion, why are you already concluding that Israel is is innocent of the crime? 

"The Israelis can come and they can shoot us and send their missiles to kill us and they make us bleed. But some of us will survive, and we will be ready for them with our claws" - Mr Qassim

The above show jihadist aspirations.

Ever heard of this: "Innocent until proven guilty"

[liberalismo]

"The Israelis can come and they can shoot us and send their missiles to kill us and they make us bleed. But some of us will survive, and we will be ready for them with our claws" - Mr Qassim

The above show jihadist aspirations.

Ever heard of this: "Innocent until proven guilty"

If I owned a zoo and had many of my animals shot to death and the zoo destroyed, I'd be pretty pissed off too and I'd also make plenty of threats for revenge in a general sense. 

[Nordic Superman]

If I owned a zoo and had many of my animals shot to death and the zoo destroyed, I'd be pretty pissed off too and I'd also make plenty of threats for revenge in a general sense. 

Right whatever apologist; prove Israel guilty.

[IFBBwannaB]

Right whatever apologist; prove Israel guilty.

On the other hand, there are plenty of proofs that Hamas lied, killed and robbed from his people....

[Slapper]

"The Israelis can come and they can shoot us and send their missiles to kill us and they make us bleed. But some of us will survive, and we will be ready for them with our claws" - Mr Qassim

The above show jihadist aspirations.

Ever heard of this: "Innocent until proven guilty"

Talk about double standards.

[Nordic Superman]

Talk about double standards.

Go on then, show the double standard. Otherwise be man enough to retract your statement

[Ganuvanx]

We must arm zoo animals. This is a good solution.

[Slapper]

Go on then, show the double standard. Otherwise be man enough to retract your statement

Nordic, must we revisit this all the time? Seriously.

Just on this thread, you're all over the board. I mean liberalismo managed to come up with what was, in my opinion, a very sceptical and "benign" (by my standards) response to you and IFBB. IFBB jumps on his back with a "you do know that was a war zone and that Hamas will surely kill those animals just to make the Israelis look bad". I mean, this is the caliber of you two's rhetoric. Think about it, do we even need to say that the Israeli army murdered more than 1,000 human beings in the Gaza strip during the past couple of months? Are we in a position to say, to insinuate! that the Israeli army is perfectly capable (meaning has all the necessary weapons) of killing a camel? Furthermore, is the killing of an innocent camel serious enough to "damage" something that has been damaged for many years?: Namely the image of the Israeli soldier. Does this even need to be said?

You, on the other hand, offer an even more stupid response: "I exposed the jihaddist". Hence whatever comes out of his mouth is not to be trusted. Liberalismo, once again, managed to come up with a sensible and neutral response, not siding with anyone aside from the camel's owner, and seeing rage more than jihaddism in his comments. You, on the other hand, the queen of the benefit of the doubt, jump on his back with a "The media has a duty to report what happened, unfortunately all they have for reference is one twisted jihadist." Only to retract later on with a "The above show jihadist aspirations." Thus, in your eyes, he is no longer a jihaddist (which is what you said at the beginning,) he only aspires to be one. Comical. Embarrassing. What can I say?

Worst of all is the fact that your islamophobia is so deep it does not allow you to see simple faults like you calling someone who just lost probably his most priced posesion (and most likely some family members during the past two months) a "jihaddist" without requiring a single thread of evidence aside from his enraged comments, while the Israeli army, or a soldier belonging to it, having the history and weaponry to wipe out the world three times over is, in your eyes, INCAPABLE of killing an innocent camel and therefore an "investigation" is the next logical step to let the "truth", YOUR "truth" mind you, come to light.

Do you now see your double standards?

[IFBBwannaB]

Nordic, must we revisit this all the time? Seriously.

Just on this thread, you're all over the board. I mean liberalismo managed to come up with what was, in my opinion, a very sceptical and "benign" (by my standards) response to you and IFBB. IFBB jumps on his back with a "you do know that was a war zone and that Hamas will surely kill those animals just to make the Israelis look bad". I mean, this is the caliber of you two's rhetoric. Think about it, do we even need to say that the Israeli army murdered more than 1,000 human beings in the Gaza strip during the past couple of months? Are we in a position to say, to insinuate! that the Israeli army is perfectly capable (meaning has all the necessary weapons) of killing a camel? Furthermore, is the killing of an innocent camel serious enough to "damage" something that has been damaged for many years?: Namely the image of the Israeli soldier. Does this even need to be said?

You, on the other hand, offer an even more stupid response: "I exposed the jihaddist". Hence whatever comes out of his mouth is not to be trusted. Liberalismo, once again, managed to come up with a sensible and neutral response, not siding with anyone aside from the camel's owner, and seeing rage more than jihaddism in his comments. You, on the other hand, the queen of the benefit of the doubt, jump on his back with a "The media has a duty to report what happened, unfortunately all they have for reference is one twisted jihadist." Only to retract later on with a "The above show jihadist aspirations." Thus, in your eyes, he is no longer a jihaddist (which is what you said at the beginning,) he only aspires to be one. Comical. Embarrassing. What can I say?

Worst of all is the fact that your islamophobia is so deep it does not allow you to see simple faults like you calling someone who just lost probably his most priced posesion (and most likely some family members during the past two months) a "jihaddist" without requiring a single thread of evidence aside from his enraged comments, while the Israeli army, or a soldier belonging to it, having the history and weaponry to wipe out the world three times over is, in your eyes, INCAPABLE of killing an innocent camel and therefore an "investigation" is the next logical step to let the "truth", YOUR "truth" mind you, come to light.

Do you now see your double standards?

Yawn....seriously....you need help.

[Slapper]

Yawn....seriously....you need help.

Better yet:

[Nordic Superman]

Nordic, must we revisit this all the time? Seriously.

Just on this thread, you're all over the board. I mean liberalismo managed to come up with what was, in my opinion, a very sceptical and "benign" (by my standards) response to you and IFBB. IFBB jumps on his back with a "you do know that was a war zone and that Hamas will surely kill those animals just to make the Israelis look bad". I mean, this is the caliber of you two's rhetoric. Think about it, do we even need to say that the Israeli army murdered more than 1,000 human beings in the Gaza strip during the past couple of months? Are we in a position to say, to insinuate! that the Israeli army is perfectly capable (meaning has all the necessary weapons) of killing a camel? Furthermore, is the killing of an innocent camel serious enough to "damage" something that has been damaged for many years?: Namely the image of the Israeli soldier. Does this even need to be said?

It was an incursion, war, it was not murder. Murder is Hamas using their own citizens as human shields. The very fact you claim the Israeli soldiers are murderers tells me where your mind is. Like I said, innocent until proven guilty. You're the one now jumping to the conclusion through your bias truth filter and determining the guilt of the Israeli army over that of human shield using Hamas militants.

You, on the other hand, offer an even more stupid response: "I exposed the jihaddist". Hence whatever comes out of his mouth is not to be trusted. Liberalismo, once again, managed to come up with a sensible and neutral response, not siding with anyone aside from the camel's owner, and seeing rage more than jihaddism in his comments. You, on the other hand, the queen of the benefit of the doubt, jump on his back with a "The media has a duty to report what happened, unfortunately all they have for reference is one twisted jihadist." Only to retract later on with a "The above show jihadist aspirations." Thus, in your eyes, he is no longer a jihaddist (which is what you said at the beginning,) he only aspires to be one. Comical. Embarrassing. What can I say?

Most Palestinians are jihadist, simply by virtue of electing a islamist organization to be their governmental representatives. If you think this single man's opinion is enough to hold up in court to declare the Israeli soldiers guilty, then you sir, are a clown.

Worst of all is the fact that your islamophobia is so deep it does not allow you to see simple faults like you calling someone who just lost probably his most priced posesion (and most likely some family members during the past two months) a "jihaddist" without requiring a single thread of evidence aside from his enraged comments, while the Israeli army, or a soldier belonging to it, having the history and weaponry to wipe out the world three times over is, in your eyes, INCAPABLE of killing an innocent camel and therefore an "investigation" is the next logical step to let the "truth", YOUR "truth" mind you, come to light.

Do you now see your double standards?

Haha, islamophobia. Nice use of a over used politically correct term. Islam has more than enough to scare a man who likes a free society and freedom for ALL. You're talking nonse also; show me the evidence his family members were killed - or as usual are you adding in some emotional falsehoods to give weight to this nonsense position? One moment you're tell me I'm seeing something incorrectly because of so-called-islamophobia only to go on to make an emotion induced assertion in the following words.

I didn't say the Israeli army isn't capable of killing a camel or a monkey. I said in this instance, there is NO evidence and there is a single real witness who is undoubtedly questionable. You're the one who wants everyone to believe in inherent Israeli guilt in every story like this.

[Slapper]

It was an incursion, war, it was not murder. Murder is Hamas using their own citizens as human shields. The very fact you claim the Israeli soldiers are murderers tells me where your mind is. Like I said, innocent until proven guilty. You're the one now jumping to the conclusion through your bias truth filter and determining the guilt of the Israeli army over that of human shield using Hamas militants.


Most Palestinians are jihadist, simply by virtue of electing a islamist organization to be their governmental representatives. If you think this single man's opinion is enough to hold up in court to declare the Israeli soldiers guilty, then you sir, are a clown.

Haha, islamophobia. Nice use of a over used politically correct term. Islam has more than enough to scare a man who likes a free society and freedom for ALL. You're talking nonse also; show me the evidence his family members were killed - or as usual are you adding in some emotional falsehoods to give weight to this nonsense position? One moment you're tell me I'm seeing something incorrectly because of so-called-islamophobia only to go on to make an emotion induced assertion in the following words.

I didn't say the Israeli army isn't capable of killing a camel or a monkey. I said in this instance, there is NO evidence and there is a single real witness who is undoubtedly questionable. You're the one who wants everyone to believe in inherent Israeli guilt in every story like this.

Nordic, read, stand back, let it sink in, understand.

You miss everyone's opposing point every single time.

You're letting your ego do the talking.

[liberalismo]

Too many people defending the Jews.

[IFBBwannaB]

Too many people defending the Jews.

How are you today Adolf?

[Nordic Superman]

Nordic, read, stand back, let it sink in, understand.

You miss everyone's opposing point every single time.

You're letting your ego do the talking.

No, you're letting your self righteousness do the talking.

[liberalismo]

How are you today Adolf?

Just fine...Jamal.