First, find out what isn't true…

June 9, 2010

Hezbollah/Lebanon & Israel. The Lebanese Military do not engage. Is there a strategy? Or is it the letter of the law at work?

Filed under: Lebanon — Tags: , , , , , — talknic @ 10:28 pm

ShortLink Translate – Hebreo / Arabe / Español / Francés / Italiano

Why doesn’t the Lebanese Military engage with Israel? Why Hezbollah as the active military agent? Contrary to popular Hasbara 101, the outcome of UNSC Res 1701 is very much in Lebanon’s favour. Is there a strategy behind the Lebanese Military not engaging? Or is it merely the law at work?

Key Points
1) Hezbollah are Lebanon’s legitimate/official resistance movement. Hezbollah are not the official Lebanese Military. Lebanon is a sovereignty. As such it can choose to have an official resistance movement whether other folk have classified that movement as a terrorist organization or not.
2) Were there to have been engagement with the Lebanese Military, Israel would have been at war with Lebanon.
3) If Israel was at war with Lebanon, UNSC Resolution 1701 would surely say as much

Key document – UNSC Res 1701


The implications ought be apparent. Israel was not at war with Lebanon the state. Lebanon the state could only be asked to control the elements within it’s Sovereign territories, which Israel was required to acknowledge and withdraw from.


Furthermore, the resolution assists Lebanon, by reinforcing the Lebanese Military and leaving the decision as to which of it’s legitimate armed forces (Lebanon’s legitimate armed forces) can or cannot be armed to the Lebanese Government.

Preamble: Welcoming the efforts of the Lebanese Prime Minister and the commitment of the Government of Lebanon, in its seven-point plan, to extend its authority over its territory, through its own legitimate armed forces, such that there will be no weapons without the consent of the Government of Lebanon and no authority other than that of the Government of Lebanon, welcoming also its commitment to a United Nations force that is supplemented and enhanced in numbers, equipment, mandate and scope of operation, and bearing in mind its request in this plan for an immediate withdrawal of the Israeli forces from southern Lebanon,

“Determined to act for this withdrawal to happen at the earliest,

“Taking due note of the proposals made in the seven-point plan regarding the Shebaa farms area,

Welcoming the unanimous decision by the Government of Lebanon on 7 August 2006 to deploy a Lebanese armed force of 15,000 troops in South Lebanon as the Israeli army withdraws behind the Blue Line and to request the assistance of additional forces from UNIFIL as needed, to facilitate the entry of the Lebanese armed forces into the region and to restate its intention to strengthen the Lebanese armed forces with material as needed to enable it to perform its duties,

In both instances The UNSC observes Lebanon’s Sovereignty over the territories encompassed during the war. Israel must withdraw.

It observes Lebanese Sovereignty INCLUDING a Sovereign’s right to arm WHOEVER it wishes, within it’s own Sovereign boundaries. It offers to HELP the Sovereign to achieve this aim. Israel must withdraw.

“Determining that the situation in Lebanon constitutes a threat to international peace and security,”

‘in Lebanon’. Not in Israel… Israel must withdraw.

“It also calls for Israel and Lebanon to support a long-term solution based on, among others, full respect for the Blue Line by both parties; full implementation of the relevant provisions of the Taif Accords; no foreign forces in Lebanon without the consent of its Government; no sales or supply of arms and related materiel to Lebanon except as authorized by its Government; and provision to the United Nations of all remaining maps of landmines in Lebanon in Israel’s possession.”

The above extracts are reiterated in point in the text of the Resolution.

Additionally “14. Calls upon the Government of Lebanon to secure its borders and other entry points to prevent the entry in Lebanon without its consent of arms or related materiel and requests UNIFIL as authorized in paragraph 11 to assist the Government of Lebanon at its request; If the Government of Lebanon the Sovereign State consents and requests…….. under the resolution, the implications ought be apparent to almost anyone but the most hardened Israeli apologista.

AND MOST IMPORTANTLY : 5. Also reiterates its strong support, as recalled in all its previous relevant resolutions, for the territorial integrity, sovereignty and political independence of Lebanon within its internationally recognized borders, as contemplated by the Israeli-Lebanese General Armistice Agreement of 23 March 1949;

IT SAYS : “Article V 1. The Armistice Demarcation Line shall follow the international boundary between Lebanon and Palestine.” Israel was declared independent of Palestine May 14th 1948. Israel has never legally annexed ANY territories to it’s sovereignty. The Armistice agreement says PALESTINE, not Israel!!

Oh…. BTW

June 8, 2010

More BULLSHITE for Israel. Helen Thomas did not say ‘Jews’. The reporter did.

Filed under: The lies they willingly tell — talknic @ 7:48 pm


The Ziofier strikes again. Hundreds of thousands become deaf in one foul (sic) swoop.

Helen Thomas was asked about “ISRAEL”. She was answering THAT question.

The reporter is the person who said “Jews”.

Are you also deaf? Do the test : See if you’ve been Ziofied like the Rabbi who should, at the very least, know that lying is against the basic tenets of Judaism.

June 7, 2010

AMAZING Mavi Marmara “weapons cache” discovery! A few suspect knives and slingshots.


(Adding information as the IDF story unfolds (sic) ) It is unfolding, in fact it’s falling to pieces.

06/04/2010 06:13 “the group they were facing was well-trained and likely ex-military after the commandos threw a number of stun grenades and fired warning shots before rappelling down onto the deck. “They didn’t even flinch,” he said. “Regular people would move.” “


Weird Paintball gun!


On careful reading, Israel was within it’s rights to intercept. San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea, 12 June 1994

However the nature of the intercept begs a few questions and the Israeli justifications are as full of holes as they are bizarre.

The Israeli’s claim the rappelling personnel wore asbestos gloves, making it impossible to use their weapons. Never heard of asbestos gloves in rappelling. One needs to be able to feel the rope, a light LEATHER glove is sometimes used so that the rope can be felt through the glove. Most folk’ll tell you it’s better to have full feel of the rope, no gloves at all. ( your life is in your hands, if you can’t feel the rope, it’s dangerous )

The rappelling rope passes through a figure 8 or belay device. A figure 8 twists the rope, because of the ‘lay’ of the internal fibres, eventually forming kinks/knots, same as an electrical extension cord develops knots when not rolled up using the ‘under over’ method

Modern military rappells on a rope usually use a belaying Device (BDs). Small, light weight, can be easily released, does not twist the rope, requires minimal hand pressure. I’ve used BDs & figure 8 AND taken photos/video, mid air, using my free hand and I’m no expert. In fact not at all fond of swing around on a rope mid air.

However looking closely at the video available, it seems they’re using a ‘silk’ rather than a rope as it varies in thickness. A ‘silk’ is a long length of cloth used by circus and burlesque performers.

The NY Times reports that the use of plastic/rubber bullets was planned and WERE fired from above.. “The crack of an Israeli sound grenade and a hail of rubber bullets from above were supposed to disperse activists, but instead set them in motion. ”

So again it seems the Israeli bullshit vendors have been busy at work..LYING….. again! One needs to double check ANYTHING put out by Israel concerning the Palestinians. They LIE and LIE and LIE again.

The some of the weapons seized – life threatening pepper spray Personal Pak

Giant knife :-) What a cutie. No doubt sharper but not as efficient as a bullet fired from out of the tiny knife’s reach

Israeli Govt website tries to show an alleged “Weapons Cache”
ShipBoard TOOLS
For the most part, they look like tools found on any ship. An axe is a tool on a ship. They’re in EVERY fire cabinet. A knife is a tool on a ship. Every sailor has one. The galley has heaps of knives. A hammer is a tool on a ship. So is a spanner. All ships carry sticks, (wood), broom handles, steel rods and pipes, ropes, cables, chain, angle grinders. It’s quite NORMAL ON A SHIP…FFS!! When you’re at sea you cannot just call into a hardware store.

The “weapons cache” seems to be nothing more than a few suspect knives and sling shots and

a ceremonial dagger used by the Imam in prayer meetings. Photo by a passenger, PRIOR to the intercept? Unless of course the IDF made him pose…Likely? No! Forgery? Looks like it

More on the dagger – cloning around for Israel

More Israeli BULLSHIT… From the Israeli Government web site “Flotilla leaders stated violence was premeditated”

What was QUOTED and what was actually said “We will definitely resist and we will not allow the Israelis to enter here.”….actually….“If Israel wants to board this ship, it will meet strong resistance. “

Hasn’t Israel ever heard of passive resistance and why does Israel need to lie?

Comments are closed. If you don’t get it from the existing comments, you’ll never get it

June 5, 2010

Faking it for Israel…(again). Pathetic propaganda 101. Alleged remarks from the Mavi Marmara


This has become a bit of a work in progress, as info is released. Last reviewed 5th July 2010 See also reviews in comments See Review 1

Samples taken from Haaretz
Audio conversion for analysis 44100 16bit wav mono
Samples taken from regions shown right bottom corner of the pics.
The analyzed wav file is 31.5 Mb. No I am not going to convert it to anything lower quality and/or upload it.

When I first started I said “Unless other information is made available, it seems likely to be another absolutely PATHETIC attempt at propaganda by some LYING IDF schmuck (who hasn’t got a clue about faking audio)”. The IDF have since released the alleged un-edited version of events. More ‘explanations’ = more ‘revelations’ (cute word, I think I’ll use it :-)

The IDF have patched together variety of transmits, designed to give the impression they were calling the Mavi Marmara. Yet NONE of the released transmits can be accurately attributed to either a call to the Mavi Marmara or from the Mavi Marmara

Rev 1
Revelations 1 : – All transmits from this ship should have the same transmit sound between words. (see earlier postings)
Rev 1 Defne Y, Defne Y, this Israeli navy warship calling you on channel 1 6 do you read me?”

Rev 1The Defne Y call sign will have it’s allocated call frequency recorded somewhere. It’s NOT the Mavi Marmara!

Revelations 2: – “..have had their good dayevening, sirr are you ready to invite us on board or not yet?”

Revelations 3 : – Note the transmission noise between words on this transmit……

…..compared to
Revelations 3 : transmit…..

These must be transmits on an intercept, from a different IDF vessel and a different Activist Vessel, not the Defne Y.

Revelations 4 : – Activist Vessel reply : “no not yet, we have Rev 1 ??change over a saddle board ?? minutes to 15 minutes time “

Revelations 5 : – Israeli Navy reply : “That’s good your stairs, that’s fine about that you have one off, time when you will should be stand by along aside the gangway with his lugguage and the passport after first the Rev 1 pilot will be come board, Ok?”

We know it was a large vessel, needing a ‘staired’ gangway.

However, the navy signal noise is not the same as that for the initial navy Defne Y, Defne Y call on the released transmits. and it’s a friendly boarding, with pilot and letting a passenger off!!


A) the IDF first releases a false accusation, purposefully edited to give the impression the transmission came from the Mavi Marmara. They claim it came from a ‘passenger’ of the Mavi Marmara. They know the inflammatory alleged statements will spread like wildfire (it is still spreading un-corrected) and these remarkably clear transmits will bolster their claim that the activists on the Mavi Marmara were aggressive. It’s PROPAGANDA.

B) the IDF releases an alleged unedited version of alleged transmits, in order to prove their ‘material’ is genuine, at the same time admitting their ‘claim’ of the origins is inaccurate.

C) the other transmits from activist vessels are cordial, all have interference and in places are almost un-intelligible

D) All the other vessel radio transmits are full of interference. Isn’t it AMAZING, that the derogatory remarks, are SO CLEAR? Clearer than anything else transmitted and with a different transmit noise from all the others. Almost as if they’ve been purposefully recorded and inserted.

E) the IDF has yet to explain how exceptionally clear onboard communications from passengers, got onto a maritime channel. Fact is, THEY CAN’T. An open channel would be totally flooded, rendered inoperable, an impossible mess. The IDF open channel is an open MARITIME channel, for vessel transmissions. Onboard communications are not on a maritime band.

Conclusion. The IDF proof does not ‘prove’ anything other than the now confirmed fact – their alleged material was edited to give the impression it came from the Mavi Marmara.

Link to this section

Earlier postings analyzing the first alleged transmits same methods/sample rates.

IDF video shows flotilla passengers tell Israel Navy to ‘go back to Auschwitz’ screams the Haaretz headline……Published 23:28 04.06.10

“Army releases audio recording of exchange between Israel Navy ships and passengers on the Mavi Marmara, the central ship of a Gaza aid flotilla raided by Israel on Monday”

It’s doubtful the messages came from the one ship’s radio, a spectrum analysis of the transmission ‘white’noise, i.e., taken from the small gaps of silence BETWEEN their words, shows three different levels of transmission ‘white’noise, with three very different frequency ranges. Furthermore, onboard/passenger communications are completely separated from a ships transmits. Completely different radio communications systems, band, frequencies.

“We have permission from the Gaza Port Authority…”

(alleged) “Go back to Austwitz”

(alleged) “We’re helping Arabs…”

Gap between words “We have permission from the Gaza Port Authority…”

Gap between (alleged) words “Go back to Austwitz”

Gap between (alleged) “We’re helping Arabs…”

Note the difference in the end of transmission noise. Frequencies different..
(alleged) “Go back to Austwitz “ – end of transmission

(alleged) “We’re helping Arabs…” – end of transmission

Unless other information is made available, it seems likely to be another absolutely PATHETIC attempt at propaganda by some LYING IDF schmuck (who hasn’t got a clue about faking audio)…See Review 1

Comments are closed. If you don’t get it from the existing comments, you’ll never get it

Create a free website or blog at