The hate mongers among us

Tue Feb 19, 2013 4:12 am » by **44z44**

Tue Feb 19, 2013 4:39 am » by **SUKHOV**

Zaff, make sure you don't sum yourself up in your thread title, people won't need to read the content!

:cheers:

Tue Feb 19, 2013 5:20 am » by **The57ironman**

.

...well ...........this is a controversial post that is very well done...

thanks zaff

:cheers:

.

Tue Feb 19, 2013 6:33 am » by **Shicreb El Aka**

Bump

(Good post 44zz44.)

Wed Feb 20, 2013 12:13 am » by **Pele**

I only just became a member, so I don't know anyone's stand on any issues, which will put me in an interesting yet delicate position.

Regarding hate, I have only watched the beginning of the first video, I am thinking that not much of these wars today are fought because of hatred, there are hidden and alternative motives.

Most of everything we do is motivated by survival,

:pray:

Wed Feb 20, 2013 12:15 am » by **Iwanci**

Good post and could be linked to another similar post by Phaeton... it is contraversial, but that is what conspiracy is all about... imo

Wed Feb 20, 2013 2:22 am » by **Noentry**

44z44 great post bro.

Excellent stuff :cheers:

Wed Feb 20, 2013 5:21 am » by **Harbin**

http://news.yahoo.com/israeli-sniper-posts-photo-child-crosshairs-163924256--abc-news-topstories.html

JERUSALEM - A photo posted online by an Israeli soldier showing a child in the crosshairs of a rifle scope has created a firestorm on the internet, drawing widespread criticism.

The photo was reportedly posted on Jan. 25 by Mor Ostrovski, 20, a member of an Israeli sniper unit. It shows crosshairs zeroed in on the back of the head of what appears to be a Palestinian boy in a village. The photo has since been taken down and Ostrovski's account has been deactivated.

"There are no other images to suggest that the photographer actually fired at the person in the image in this case," wrote Palestinian activist Ali Abuminah who runs the site Electronic Intifada and drew much of the attention to the photo. "The image is simply tasteless and dehumanizing. It embodies the idea that Palestinian children are targets."

Before the account was taken down, Abuminah posted other photos from Ostrovski's account that showed him in his olive green uniform holding a variety of weapons, including a sniper rifle.

Eytan Buchman, a spokesman for the Israel Defense Forces, told ABC News that Ostrovski told his commander on Saturday that he had not taken the photo himself but that he'd taken it off the internet. No disciplinary action will be taken.

"The picture in question does not coincide with IDF's values or code of ethics," the spokesman added in an e-mailed statement.

The uproar over the photo follows another posted by an Israeli infantryman on Facebook around a week ago. In it, he mocked the four Palestinian prisoners he was guarding by posing bound and blindfolded next to them. He was sentenced to 14 days detention after the brigade's commanders discovered the photo and ordered it taken down.

"Before the investigation began, it was discovered that the soldier was already judged by his commanders," Buchman said in a statement. "Since the documented offense isn't criminal and since the legal procedure conducted by the soldier's commanding officer was found appropriate, a disciplinary action was decided to be sufficient."

The IDF is active on social networking, disseminating statements on Twitter and Facebook and photos on Flickr and Instagram. But individual soldiers using social media have a history of getting the Israeli military into trouble.

In November, the head of the IDF spokesperson's social media unit landed in hot water after he posted a photo on Facebook with mud on his face, captioned "Obama style." In 2010, a reservist named Eden Abergil sparked outrage after posting pictures with blindfolded Palestinian prisoners. She told Israeli Army radio she didn't understood what she did wrong, but the IDF called the photos "shameful behavior."

On ABC ?!

Wed Feb 20, 2013 6:08 am » by **Seahawk**

Yeah, it's controversial. Who said that truth was never controversial? Good post, 44.