Quirky
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 4,146
- Points
- 1,260
They never had such things before, so anything else is an upgrade.
Hamas invaded Israel 2023
- Thread starter McG
- Start date
They never had such things before, so anything else is an upgrade.
OldSolduer
Army.ca Relic
- Reaction score
- 18,101
- Points
- 1,260
Agreed. But we best be careful. We denied Jews who were escaping the Nazis in the 30s
But they weren’t rabid murderers either
- Reaction score
- 219
- Points
- 680
Up early to watch the handover of remains this morning.
I noticed that the terrorist at the rear of this photo I snipped from the live coverage switched sides between Casket 1 and Casket 2. Probably should have stayed on the other side for Casket 2 ... or at least gloved his other hand. He may as well have unmasked himself. I'm quite certain Israel will have him identified soon enough and that his days are remaining days are now numbered.
I noticed that the terrorist at the rear of this photo I snipped from the live coverage switched sides between Casket 1 and Casket 2. Probably should have stayed on the other side for Casket 2 ... or at least gloved his other hand. He may as well have unmasked himself. I'm quite certain Israel will have him identified soon enough and that his days are remaining days are now numbered.
- Reaction score
- 219
- Points
- 680
Nor were they vowing to, teaching their kids to, or in execution phase of attempting to cleanse a geographic area of anyone from the river to the sea. When your ideology is murderous and your goals stated publicly, well don't be surprised if 'ye be treated as such.
- Reaction score
- 1,829
- Points
- 1,160
Tell that to the Liberals who are "importing" 5000 from Gaza. Plus, governments across the country that allow these protests.
Retired AF Guy
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 1,178
- Points
- 1,160
Three buses in Tel Aviv destroyed by bombs, two other identical bombs defused. Fortunately, buses were empty, so no causalities.
Whaaaaaa? They did this with Trump being in power?
OldSolduer
Army.ca Relic
- Reaction score
- 18,101
- Points
- 1,260
One can almost say with certainty his days are numbered. I wonder if they could ID him, kidnap him and persuade (by friendly gentle means of course) to tell them what they want to know...
daftandbarmy
Army.ca Fossil
- Reaction score
- 36,783
- Points
- 1,160
The pall bearers are probably Mossad...
The Associated Press, in The Globe and Mail says they got him "based on years of tracking Nasrallah along with “real time information” that made it viable. He said Nasrallah’s death had been confirmed through various types of intelligence, but declined to elaborate."
----------Hezbollah confirms death of leader Nasrallah in Israel’s strike on Beirut
BASSEM MROUE AND MELANIE LIDMAN
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
PUBLISHED 58 MINUTES AGO UPDATED 13 MINUTES AGO
Lebanon’s Hezbollah group confirmed on Saturday that its leader and one of its founders, Hassan Nasrallah, was killed in an Israeli airstrike in Beirut the previous day.
A statement Saturday said Nasrallah “has joined his fellow martyrs.” Hezbollah vowed to “continue the holy war against the enemy and in support of Palestine.”
Nasrallah, who led Hezbollah for more than three decades, is by far the most powerful target to be killed by Israel in weeks of intensified fighting with Hezbollah. The Israeli military said it carried out a precise airstrike on Friday while Hezbollah leadership met at their headquarters in Dahiyeh, south of Beirut.
The Lebanese Health Ministry said six people were killed and 91 injured in the Beirut strikes Friday, which leveled six apartment buildings. Ali Karki, the Commander of Hezbollah’s Southern Front, and additional Hezbollah commanders were also killed in the attack, the Israeli military said.
Lt. Col. Nadav Shoshani, an army spokesperson, said the airstrike was based on years of tracking Nasrallah along with “real time information” that made it viable. He said Nasrallah’s death had been confirmed through various types of intelligence, but declined to elaborate.
Shoshani declined to say what munitions were used in the strike or provide an estimate on civilian deaths in the strike, only saying that Israel takes measures to avoid civilians whenever possible and clears strikes ahead of time with intelligence and legal experts.
Israel’s Chief of Staff, Lt. Gen. Herzi Halevi, said Saturday that the elimination of Nasrallah was “not the end of our toolbox,” indicating that more strikes were planned. He said that the strike targeting Hezbollah leadership was the result of a long period of preparation.
It was not immediately clear what effect the strike would have on Hezbollah or fighting between the sides that has dragged on for nearly a year. Israel has vowed to step up pressure on Hezbollah until it halts its attacks that have displaced tens of thousands of Israelis from communities near the Lebanese border. The recent fighting has also displaced more than 200,000 Lebanese in the past week, according to the United Nations.
The military said it was mobilizing additional reserve soldiers as tensions escalate with Lebanon, activating three battalions of reserve soldiers to serve across the country. The call comes after it sent two brigades to northern Israel earlier in the week to train for a possible ground invasion.
Shoshani, the army spokesperson, said that Israel has inflicted heavy damage on Hezbollah’s capabilities over the past week by targeting a combination of immediate threats and strategic weapons, such as larger, guided missiles. But he said much of Hezbollah’s arsenal still remains intact and that Israel would continue to target the group.
He said it is “safe to assume” that Hezbollah will retaliate and that Israel is on “high readiness.” But he said Israel hopes the blow to Hezbollah will change the course of the war.
“We hope this will change Hezbollah’s actions,” he said. “We have been looking for solutions, looking for a change in reality that will bring our civilians home,” referring to the approximately 60,000 Israelis who have been evacuated from their homes along the Lebanese border for almost a year. Earlier this month, Israel’s government said halting Hezbollah’s attacks in the country’s north to allow residents to return to their homes is an official war goal.
Iranian state television read the announcement from Hezbollah confirming Nasrallah’s death live, but there was no other immediate comment. Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei in a Saturday message said “the resistance movement, heading by Hezbollah, will decide the fate of the region,” in a statement read on state TV.
“All regional resistance forces are to stand by and support Hezbollah,” he said. He added that Hezbollah was strong enough to withstand Israeli attacks. Iran is the main supporter of Lebanese Hezbollah and other militant groups in the region.
Also on Saturday, Iran’s influential parliamentary committee of national security demanded “strong” response to Israel following a meeting of the committee. State TV also said people staged anti-Israeli rallies in support of Hezbollah in major cities and town across the country.
Hezbollah started firing rockets on Israel in support of Gaza on Oct. 8, a day after Hamas militants launched an unprecedented attack on Israel, killing some 1,200 people and abducting another 250. Since then, the two sides have been engaged in cross-border strikes that have gradually escalated and displaced tens of thousands of civilians on both sides of the border.
Hostilities escalated dramatically last week when thousands of explosives hidden in pagers and walkie-talkies used by Hezbollah detonated, killing dozens of people and leaving thousands, including many civilians, with severe injuries to the eyes, face and limbs. Israel is widely believed to be behind the attack. Israel has also killed several top Hezbollah commanders in Beirut in addition to the attack that killed Nasrallah.
Nasrallah’s death is a “historical moment,” said Orna Mizrahi, a senior researcher at the Tel Aviv-based think tank Institute for National Security Studies and former intelligence analyst for the Israeli military and prime minister’s office. “This doesn’t mean that Hezbollah is destroyed, because Hezbollah is made up tens of thousands of people,” she said.
Mizrahi noted that Nasrallah was sometimes a “voice of reason,” interested in engaging Israel in a war of attrition and holding the militant group back from using the full force of their formidable arsenal against Israel. Nasrallah’s death could prompt some less senior members of Hezbollah to unleash much stronger weapons than have been used in the nearly yearlong exchange of hostilities between Hezbollah and Lebanon, she said. The biggest question mark right now, though, is how Iran will respond, said Mizrahi.
Mizrahi added that Nasrallah’s death could provide a window of opportunity, while the organization is significantly weakened, for Lebanon to dilute Hezbollah’s far-reaching influence, especially in the south, that threatens to drag Lebanon into a full-scale war with Israel.
On Saturday morning, the Israeli military carried out more than 140 airstrikes in southern Beirut and eastern Lebanon’s Bekaa Valley, including targeting a storage facility for anti-ship missiles in Beirut suburb of Dahiyeh. Israel said the missiles were stored underground beneath civilian apartment buildings. Hezbollah launched dozens of projectiles across northern and central Israel and deep into the Israel-occupied West Bank, damaging some buildings in the northern town of Safed.
In Beirut’s southern suburbs, smoke rose and the streets were empty after the area was pummeled overnight by heavy Israeli airstrikes. Shelters set up in the city center for displaced people were overflowing. Many families slept in public squares and beaches or in their cars. On the roads leading to the mountains above the capital, hundreds of people could be seen making an exodus on foot, holding infants and whatever belongings they could carry.
At least 720 people have been killed in Lebanon over the past week from Israeli airstrikes, according to the Health Ministry.
----------
My only comment isand not just any other one, either!
Not sure why this is coming so many months after the fact, but a funeral procession was held for Nasrallah in Beirut today.
Israel buzzed it low and slow with 2x F-15 and 2x F-35.
GR66
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 5,031
- Points
- 1,160
Damn...what are the chances of the munitions release failing on all four aircraft at the same time???
- Reaction score
- 25,203
- Points
- 1,360
That’s some epic flex, right there!
- Reaction score
- 2,959
- Points
- 1,190
"We're still here, we're still watching, and there is nothing you can do about it. FAFO."
OldSolduer
Army.ca Relic
- Reaction score
- 18,101
- Points
- 1,260
Colin Parkinson
Army.ca Relic
- Reaction score
- 13,495
- Points
- 1,160
You can imagine how many pairs of underwear needed changing after that.
Colin Parkinson
Army.ca Relic
- Reaction score
- 13,495
- Points
- 1,160
Have you seen the new Hezz Leader? He got a squeaky cartoon voice, certainly will not inspire confidence. When the Israelis stop trying to kill you, because they think you will do more damage than they will......
www.memri.org
Amid Chants Of 'Death To America', Hizbullah Deputy Secretary-General Sheikh Naim Qassem Threatens 'Out-Of-The-Box' Attacks Against Israel: We Will Kill Them Where They Do Not Expect It; The U.S. Is Complicit In Israel's Genocide
Hizbullah Deputy Secretary-General Sheikh Naim Qassem said in a speech during a September 22, 2024 funeral held for Hizb...
- Reaction score
- 5,554
- Points
- 1,260
AI parodies (?) life, is shared by POTUS47 ...
... while also imitating art?
en.wikipedia.org
... while also imitating art?
War, Inc. - Wikipedia
daftandbarmy
Army.ca Fossil
- Reaction score
- 36,783
- Points
- 1,160
Bleeding Heart BBC busted ...
The BBC’s admission of serious editorial failures in its documentary Gaza: How to Survive a Warzone is not just a scandal – it is a moment of reckoning. This is, without doubt, one of the most humiliating debacles in the corporation’s modern history, and it vindicates those who have long highlighted the BBC’s institutional biases when reporting on Israel. The implications of this controversy go far beyond journalistic failure; they touch on issues of public trust, financial accountability, and even national security.
At the heart of this disgrace is the BBC’s failure to conduct even the most basic due diligence. That the narrator of the film – a child carefully chosen to evoke maximum emotional impact – was the son of a Hamas government official is not a minor oversight; it is an egregious failure of editorial integrity. Worse still, the BBC was misled by the independent production company it had commissioned, yet it failed to uncover the deception before broadcast. Such negligence is unacceptable in any context, but in the case of a documentary about a warzone – where misinformation can shape public opinion, influence policy, and even incite violence – it is nothing short of reckless.
And then there is the question of money. It has now emerged that the production company, Hoyo Films, made payments to the family of the child narrator. The BBC insists that these payments were ‘limited’ and that they were made via the boy’s sister’s bank account. But the critical issue is not the amount – it is where that money ultimately went. Given that Hamas controls Gaza’s economy and operates as a totalitarian regime, it is entirely plausible that these funds, in some form, ended up in the hands of individuals linked to Hamas, which is designated as a terrorist organisation under UK law. If that is the case, then the BBC’s licence fee – the money of British citizens, collected under the threat of legal penalty – may have been funnelled to a terrorist organisation. If that possibility exists, then law enforcement and counterterrorism authorities must investigate.
The BBC’s approach to complaints about its Israel coverage has long been characterised by arrogance and stonewalling. Time and again, concerns have been raised about its failures – whether in language choices, selective omissions, or outright factual distortions – only for the corporation to dismiss them with condescension. It was only through sustained pressure from figures like David Collier and myself, along with other indefatigable campaigners for media accountability, that the BBC was forced to confront its own wrongdoing in this case. But let’s be clear: had the BBC not been caught, it would not have admitted these failures. The pattern is always the same – deny, obfuscate, and then, when the evidence is overwhelming, reluctantly concede the bare minimum necessary to contain the scandal.
This should be a watershed moment. The BBC must not be allowed to continue marking its own homework. The so-called independent complaints process is anything but. The Editorial Complaints Unit may have a veneer of separation from BBC News, but it is staffed by individuals who are, in reality, part of the same institutional culture. This is not meaningful oversight – it is bureaucratic theatre designed to pacify critics while preserving the status quo. The BBC must be subjected to proper external regulation, with real consequences for editorial malpractice.
Beyond the institutional failures, this episode also exposes the broader problem of media manipulation in conflict reporting. The documentary itself was a deeply flawed piece of propaganda, rife with deceptive editing, mistranslations, and emotionally manipulative storytelling designed to present Israel as the aggressor and Gazans as passive victims. It is now confirmed that the film mistranslated the Arabic word Yahud – which means ‘Jew’ – as ‘Israeli,’ thereby obscuring the genocidal anti-Semitism embedded in Hamas’s rhetoric. This was not an innocent mistake; it was a deliberate choice that sanitised Hamas’s ideology for a Western audience.
The BBC now has an opportunity to confront the wider issue: the systematic exploitation of the media by Hamas and its affiliates. The world has been inundated with Pallywood – staged crisis videos, manipulated imagery, and misleading narratives that serve Hamas’s strategic interests. Instead of allowing itself to be a megaphone for this propaganda, the BBC should be exposing it. It should be investigating how Hamas uses child actors, fabricates casualty figures, and engineers photo ops designed to elicit Western sympathy while concealing its own war crimes.
If the BBC were serious about learning from this disaster, it would overhaul its entire approach to Middle East coverage. It would root out journalists and editors who have repeatedly demonstrated an ideological hostility to Israel. It would abandon the absurd pretence that it operates with absolute impartiality when, in reality, it has long harboured a systematic bias. This is the moment for reform – real reform, not just another round of meaningless internal reviews designed to kick the issue into the long grass.
The damage to the BBC’s credibility is now undeniable. It is not just those who exposed this scandal who should be vindicated, but also those who dismissed, ignored, or even defended the documentary who must now face accountability. The signatories of that ill-judged letter calling for the film’s reinstatement should reflect on their actions and issue a public apology. What did they think they were defending? A programme that engaged in fakery, deception, and mistranslation? A film whose integrity collapsed under the weight of the facts?
The BBC’s reputation is in tatters, and rightly so. If it wants to rebuild public trust, it must not only own up to its failures but demonstrate that it has the courage to change. The days of brushing aside complaints, gaslighting critics, and hiding behind bureaucratic processes must end. This scandal should mark the beginning of a long-overdue reckoning with the BBC’s chronic bias against Israel and its failure to meet the most basic standards of journalistic integrity. Enough is enough.
www.spectator.co.uk
The BBC’s reputation is in tatters after the Gaza documentary debacle
The BBC’s admission of serious editorial failures in its documentary Gaza: How to Survive a Warzone is not just a scandal – it is a moment of reckoning. This is, without doubt, one of the most humiliating debacles in the corporation’s modern history, and it vindicates those who have long highlighted the BBC’s institutional biases when reporting on Israel. The implications of this controversy go far beyond journalistic failure; they touch on issues of public trust, financial accountability, and even national security.
At the heart of this disgrace is the BBC’s failure to conduct even the most basic due diligence. That the narrator of the film – a child carefully chosen to evoke maximum emotional impact – was the son of a Hamas government official is not a minor oversight; it is an egregious failure of editorial integrity. Worse still, the BBC was misled by the independent production company it had commissioned, yet it failed to uncover the deception before broadcast. Such negligence is unacceptable in any context, but in the case of a documentary about a warzone – where misinformation can shape public opinion, influence policy, and even incite violence – it is nothing short of reckless.
And then there is the question of money. It has now emerged that the production company, Hoyo Films, made payments to the family of the child narrator. The BBC insists that these payments were ‘limited’ and that they were made via the boy’s sister’s bank account. But the critical issue is not the amount – it is where that money ultimately went. Given that Hamas controls Gaza’s economy and operates as a totalitarian regime, it is entirely plausible that these funds, in some form, ended up in the hands of individuals linked to Hamas, which is designated as a terrorist organisation under UK law. If that is the case, then the BBC’s licence fee – the money of British citizens, collected under the threat of legal penalty – may have been funnelled to a terrorist organisation. If that possibility exists, then law enforcement and counterterrorism authorities must investigate.
The BBC’s approach to complaints about its Israel coverage has long been characterised by arrogance and stonewalling. Time and again, concerns have been raised about its failures – whether in language choices, selective omissions, or outright factual distortions – only for the corporation to dismiss them with condescension. It was only through sustained pressure from figures like David Collier and myself, along with other indefatigable campaigners for media accountability, that the BBC was forced to confront its own wrongdoing in this case. But let’s be clear: had the BBC not been caught, it would not have admitted these failures. The pattern is always the same – deny, obfuscate, and then, when the evidence is overwhelming, reluctantly concede the bare minimum necessary to contain the scandal.
This should be a watershed moment. The BBC must not be allowed to continue marking its own homework. The so-called independent complaints process is anything but. The Editorial Complaints Unit may have a veneer of separation from BBC News, but it is staffed by individuals who are, in reality, part of the same institutional culture. This is not meaningful oversight – it is bureaucratic theatre designed to pacify critics while preserving the status quo. The BBC must be subjected to proper external regulation, with real consequences for editorial malpractice.
Beyond the institutional failures, this episode also exposes the broader problem of media manipulation in conflict reporting. The documentary itself was a deeply flawed piece of propaganda, rife with deceptive editing, mistranslations, and emotionally manipulative storytelling designed to present Israel as the aggressor and Gazans as passive victims. It is now confirmed that the film mistranslated the Arabic word Yahud – which means ‘Jew’ – as ‘Israeli,’ thereby obscuring the genocidal anti-Semitism embedded in Hamas’s rhetoric. This was not an innocent mistake; it was a deliberate choice that sanitised Hamas’s ideology for a Western audience.
The BBC now has an opportunity to confront the wider issue: the systematic exploitation of the media by Hamas and its affiliates. The world has been inundated with Pallywood – staged crisis videos, manipulated imagery, and misleading narratives that serve Hamas’s strategic interests. Instead of allowing itself to be a megaphone for this propaganda, the BBC should be exposing it. It should be investigating how Hamas uses child actors, fabricates casualty figures, and engineers photo ops designed to elicit Western sympathy while concealing its own war crimes.
If the BBC were serious about learning from this disaster, it would overhaul its entire approach to Middle East coverage. It would root out journalists and editors who have repeatedly demonstrated an ideological hostility to Israel. It would abandon the absurd pretence that it operates with absolute impartiality when, in reality, it has long harboured a systematic bias. This is the moment for reform – real reform, not just another round of meaningless internal reviews designed to kick the issue into the long grass.
The damage to the BBC’s credibility is now undeniable. It is not just those who exposed this scandal who should be vindicated, but also those who dismissed, ignored, or even defended the documentary who must now face accountability. The signatories of that ill-judged letter calling for the film’s reinstatement should reflect on their actions and issue a public apology. What did they think they were defending? A programme that engaged in fakery, deception, and mistranslation? A film whose integrity collapsed under the weight of the facts?
The BBC’s reputation is in tatters, and rightly so. If it wants to rebuild public trust, it must not only own up to its failures but demonstrate that it has the courage to change. The days of brushing aside complaints, gaslighting critics, and hiding behind bureaucratic processes must end. This scandal should mark the beginning of a long-overdue reckoning with the BBC’s chronic bias against Israel and its failure to meet the most basic standards of journalistic integrity. Enough is enough.
The BBC’s reputation is in tatters after the Gaza documentary debacle
The BBC’s admission of serious editorial failures in its documentary Gaza: How to Survive a Warzone is not just a scandal – it is a moment of reckoning. This is, without doubt, one of the most humiliating debacles in the corporation’s modern history, and it vindicates those who have long...
www.spectator.co.uk
Retired AF Guy
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 1,178
- Points
- 1,160
The IDF has finally released its report into what happened on Oct 07. I haven't been able to find the actual report but the Times of Israel has a summary:
Similar threads
