You claim that all my arguments are based on emmotional appeal, and then you say I see beyond words.. Something's wrong here..Maybe, maybe not - but be careful of making such claims when your just as guilty of doing such.
Weren't you?Did I make such a claim?
or did you assume that I was speaking directly of you?
Research the answer yourself - it might enlighten you to your own baised views and the false information that has been feed to you by the supporters of terrorism.How do you define manufacture?Until the evidence is confirmed its only a claim. The explosive residue will determine if the missile was from Iran or if it was just a rocket made by Hezabollah.
Now there is evidence the missiles being used to strike Haifa are of Iran design and manafacture. Both by the claims of Hezabolla itself - they released that they were firing Raad 1, Raad 2, and Raad 3. The picture shown in the newscaste is one that looks very similiar to the Shinian 1 (Spelling) missile of Iran design and manafacture.
What I stated is only about the captives' trades. You started "quibbling" and getting us far from the point.Are you attempting to change what you stated to mean something else, because you misunderstood my comment? The issue that I was mentioning in that comment was information, not just trades.
No error was mine. IN the original definition I gave to it, I said "terrorizing organisations", and I don't think that applies to any resistance.A quibble it is indeed - the error was yours and attempts to change it are only quibbles. You made an attempt at rivisioning history and you were called on it. Any explanation otherwise is only a quibble, and flys in the face of what you stated.
I just did.Then look it up
I'm not claiming that I do not agree to this description of my arguments, I simply don't agree.emotional appeal is its own refutation.
Through what I read, I found nothing. Though, I know that a whole lot of Arabic countries requested the Israel be enforced concerning it's violation of the agreement. Some 3-4 years ago.FAS provides that answer - if you stand corrected by the document that it was not the UK, you should of seen where FAS provides the answer concerning the nation that provided the base assistance for Israel's development of nuclear weapons. It also clearly states what nation failed to request any enforcement concerning Israel's violation of the Non Profliation Agreements.
I am not going to educate you on the nation - but I will point you in the correct direction by refering you to the FAS website once again. If I just tell you, you will not discover for yourself that you have fallen victim to false information and propaganda of both sides.
Bookmarks