PDA

View Full Version : Flotilla was full of Hostiles



Pages : [1] 2

***COMMANDER***
05-30-10, 05:57 PM
Link deleted

-Sauso-
06-01-10, 12:39 PM
Surprised there was no mention of this here. No need to make a new thread.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/israels-status-slips-as-governments-around-world-condemn-raid/article1587399/

***COMMANDER***
06-01-10, 01:49 PM
Watch this one.... With sound.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0LulDJh4fWI&feature=player_embedded

Link deleted

Fovezer
06-01-10, 01:54 PM
Surprised there was no mention of this here. No need to make a new thread.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/israels-status-slips-as-governments-around-world-condemn-raid/article1587399/

I read about this when it happened. Honestly, I am not really shocked, but it is absolutely appalling and Israel continues to commit war crimes and human rights violations. Imagine if Iran attacked an aid convey going to Iran. Can you hear the yells about terrorism? I believe the Turkish President said it best when he called this "state-sponsored terrorism."
http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/05/31/israel/index.html

An interesting anaolgy I have heard is that Israel is to the U.S. what North Korea is to China. I think that rings very true.

-Sauso-
06-01-10, 01:58 PM
Messed up situation, but it's more of a " poke poke poke " until the point Israel says " ok that's enough " than a aid shipment.

***COMMANDER***
06-01-10, 01:59 PM
Israel attempted to board a flotilla that was trying to illegally enter their country and the Commandos were armed with Paint Balls and the Activist attacked them with Iron Polls, wooden batons, Knives and then they were shot at...... They had every right to board those ships that were trying to enter in strict defiance of entering a country illegally especially after being told that were not allowed to enter and to not to continue.... They did it anyway and were hostile.

Watch the video of those savages attacking the Commandos.

-Sauso-
06-01-10, 02:00 PM
Well we really don't have all answers yet and people don't die from paintballs.

Fovezer
06-01-10, 02:10 PM
Messed up situation, but it's more of a " poke poke poke " until the point Israel says " ok that's enough " than a aid shipment.

That's exactly what it was. It was meant to bring attention to the genocidal blockade of Gaza and Israel reacted exactly how they wanted. They have hurt their image abroad even more.


Israel attempted to board a flotilla that was trying to illegally enter their country and the Commandos were armed with Paint Balls and the Activist attacked them with Iron Polls, wooden batons, Knives and then they were shot at...... They had every right to board those ships that were trying to enter in strict defiance of entering a country illegally especially after being told that were not allowed to enter and to not to continue.... They did it anyway and were hostile.

Watch the video of those savages attacking the Commandos.

So now it's on to "blame the victim"? I bet you also blame the girl when she gets raped, too. After all, she would never have got raped if she didn't dress too provocatively. So, at 4am, in international waters, the ship is attacked and people onboard try and fend off attack after, as they say, the Israeli's fired first, and they are the bad guys? I thought you believed in self-defense?

And "savages"? Really? You are calling parlimentarians, authors, and a Holocaust survivor, among others who were a part of this flotilla, "savages"?

***COMMANDER***
06-01-10, 02:12 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0LulDJh4fWI&feature=player_embedded

They switched to Live ammo after what you can see happening in the video..... It's overwhelming easy to see what happened to the Commandos and why they loaded live ammunition after the first ones that boarded were attacked and beaten.

***COMMANDER***
06-01-10, 02:16 PM
So now it's on to "blame the victim"?

Victims don't defy law and try and enter a country illegally after being told not to and it would not be allowed, thats aggression. And victims don't attack, they get attacked, so the Israeli Commandos would be the victims..... Watch the video.

Fovezer
06-01-10, 02:20 PM
Why am I not shocked that you only bother to post or accept without questioning the official Israeli explanation? That's why 10+ aid workers died and 30+ injured and fewer than 10 Israeli's were hurt. They were defending their ship from attack in international waters, and people on the ship said the Israeli's shot first. It's called self-defense.

hawgballs
06-01-10, 02:26 PM
Self defense in the sense that one needs permission to board a ship. The IDF guys weren't attacked, they were the aggressors.

***COMMANDER***
06-01-10, 02:28 PM
The Commando was attacked with a KNIFE.... and METAL PIPES.... They were entering ILLEGALLY after ignoring several warnings to turn back.... They attacked the Israeli Commandos.....

Very stupid move and they got the attention they ask for.

Arreo
06-01-10, 02:28 PM
And Isreal dosen't have the right to board foreign-flagged vessels in international waters.... I believe that's called piracy...

But I mean comeon, Isreal really needs to block those wheelchairs, instant coffee and chocolate bars from getting into Gaza so I guess it's OK.

***COMMANDER***
06-01-10, 02:30 PM
Yea, I know..... The way you see it, the Israeli Commandos attacked poor lost ship passengers with Metal pipes and knives. Yea, that sure isn't what ANY of the videos of the events show...... But you see it in your own way with blind eyes.

hawgballs
06-01-10, 02:30 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0LulDJh4fWI&feature=player_embedded

They switched to Live ammo after what you can see happening in the video..... It's overwhelming easy to see what happened to the Commandos and why they loaded live ammunition after the first ones that boarded were attacked and beaten.
They boarded a ship illegally. The Israelis were the aggressors here. And if it did indeed happen in international waters, there is no leg to stand on in defense of these tactics.

***COMMANDER***
06-01-10, 02:33 PM
It sure was boarded legally, they stated that they were going to enter Israeli waters and were headed in that direction..... They stated their intentions to enter illegally without their cargo being inspected and they did not heed the warnings to turn back.... So, international waters or not, because they made their intentions known, the ship was boarded legally and justifiably so.

Arreo
06-01-10, 02:34 PM
I mean my gods! Got to stop those Rascal Scooters and 500-piece puzzles from getting into Gaza

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EVrhQTiAJxM

hawgballs
06-01-10, 02:35 PM
Yea, I know..... The way you see it, the Israeli Commandos attacked poor lost ship passengers with Metal pipes and knives. Yea, that sure isn't what ANY of the videos of the events show...... But you see it in your own way with blind eyes.

No. The way I see it, they boarded a ship in international waters without permission. Those that boarded were the aggressors. I see IDF soldiers boarding a ship illegally, and the ship's crew seemed to be defending the ship and themselves from armed aggressors. Funny how you portray the guys with the guns as the victims of people with poles and pocketknives.

Even our own Sailors have to seek permission to board the very ships that they berth on....

***COMMANDER***
06-01-10, 02:36 PM
And Isreal dosen't have the right to board foreign-flagged vessels in international waters.... I believe that's called piracy...

But I mean comeon, Isreal really needs to block those wheelchairs, instant coffee and chocolate bars from getting into Gaza so I guess it's OK.

Yea, I guess those knives and metal pipes and lots of them were so the people in the wheel chairs could whopp a lamb in the head and then butcher it.....

Right on.

Arreo
06-01-10, 02:40 PM
It sure was boarded legally, they stated that they were going to enter Israeli waters and were headed in that direction..... They stated their intentions to enter illegally without their cargo being inspected and they did not heed the warnings to turn back.... So, international waters or not, because they made their intentions known, the ship was boarded legally and justifiably so.

Do you understand how law works in international waters? Ships are under the jurisdiction of of the country the vessel is flagged under as long as they are in international waters. Until a ship is in your country's territorial waters then you can have your coast guard/military board it under whatever law you have on the books.

So... boarding a vessel in international waters with the intention of commending it is... well pretty much the definition of piracy.

Fovezer
06-01-10, 02:40 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0LulDJh4fWI&feature=player_embedded

They switched to Live ammo after what you can see happening in the video..... It's overwhelming easy to see what happened to the Commandos and why they loaded live ammunition after the first ones that boarded were attacked and beaten.

Pure speculation on your part. As I have said, the Israeli's are said to have fired first so this could just as easily be a reaction to the commando's shooting aid workers. They are defending their ship from an aggressive assault in international waters.


Victims don't defy law and try and enter a country illegally after being told not to and it would not be allowed, thats aggression. And victims don't attack, they get attacked, so the Israeli Commandos would be the victims..... Watch the video.

I've seen the video. It was released by the Israeli government to support their claim. There were at least two choppers that soldiers fast-roped from, and we don't know if that's the first or second. They were attempting to bring supplies to an area that is being oppressed by the Israeli government and countless nations have condemned them for that blockade. And since when have the victims been the ones doing the invading? That makes no sense at all! So if I break into your house, and you attack me, you are the aggressor then, right? That's exactly what you are saying here, and it is completely nonsensical.

But if you want to continue to defend Israel, you have no right to complain about Iran anymore. Both are terrorist nations.

hawgballs
06-01-10, 02:40 PM
Yea, I guess those knives and metal pipes and lots of them were so the people in the wheel chairs could whopp a lamb in the head and then butcher it.....

Right on.Are you really charging that these guys were smuggling in dangerous knives and pipes?

DJ Ms. White
06-01-10, 02:42 PM
The activists were acting in self-defense. The Israelis were acting illegally. If they really weren't on a mission of peace there would have been guns and rpgs not things you'd find in a kitchen or lying around on a cargo ship.

The Israelis are persecuting a people in a most hypocritical fashion. It's disgusting.

Arreo
06-01-10, 02:46 PM
I'm not saying that the idea of these activists to run the blockade and enter Gaza wasn't stupid or illegal. It was both, and Isreal had the total right to stop them in their waters. Doing it in international waters is just asking for international condemnation and whoever authorized it was really freaking stupid.

DJ Ms. White
06-01-10, 02:49 PM
Maybe the UN should send out a peacekeeping task force to prevent piracy like this from happening. It's working in Africa against the pirates who illegally board ships there.

***COMMANDER***
06-01-10, 02:50 PM
You don't have to have permission to board a ship that has stated that it intends to enter your country illegally after being warned to turn back and not had it's cargo inspected..... They had NO IDEA of what was the contents of the ship were, but regardless if the ship was EMPTY, when you do not have permission to enter a country and have been warned not to and you state your intentions to do so anyway and do not heed the warnings, then your ship is now a threat and can be treated as one, even if it is in international waters. It was heading towards Israel and the intentions were known.

DJ Ms. White
06-01-10, 02:51 PM
Really? Show me the international law where it says so. Something factual.

Fovezer
06-01-10, 02:53 PM
I'm not saying that the idea of these activists to run the blockade and enter Gaza wasn't stupid or illegal. It was both, and Isreal had the total right to stop them in their waters. Doing it in international waters is just asking for international condemnation and whoever authorized it was really freaking stupid.

Even if it was in their waters, it wouldn't make it right. There are other ways to stop a ship outside boarding it and killing people. Hell, I don't even believe the blockade is legal under international law. Gaza still hasn't rebuilt from when Israel leveled it and massacre 1,400 people, and this flotilla was attempting to bring aid and, more importantly, attention to the plight of the Gazans. So it wasn't stupid. Illegal under Israeli law? Perhaps, but, again, the legality of the blockade is in question and has been universally condemned.

Arreo
06-01-10, 02:55 PM
You don't have to have permission to board a ship that has stated that it intends to enter your country illegally after being warned to turn back and not had it's cargo inspected..... They had NO IDEA of what was the contents of the ship were, but regardless if the ship was EMPTY, when you do not have permission to enter a country and have been warned not to and you state your intentions to do so anyway and do not heed the warnings, then your ship is now a threat and can be treated as one, even if it is in international waters. It was heading towards Israel and the intentions were known.

Maybe that's how it works in your fantasy land, but not in reality.

If a ship is in international waters it is under the jurisdiction of it's flagged country (Turkey in this case) and the laws of the sea. Once it enters the territorial waters of another country (Isreal) then it falls under all the laws of that country and can be searched, boarded and impounded.

But you can't board a ship 70 miles outside your territorial waters and call that legal. Unless the ship you are boarding is know to be engaging in acts of piracy under what's called hostis humani generis.

***COMMANDER***
06-01-10, 02:57 PM
I guess that they could have waited until it crossed into Israeli waters illegally and then blew it out of the water..... yet, Commandos boarded to inspect the ship that stated it was going to cross into Israeli waters illegally.

Fovezer
06-01-10, 02:58 PM
You don't have to have permission to board a ship that has stated that it intends to enter your country illegally after being warned to turn back and not had it's cargo inspected..... They had NO IDEA of what was the contents of the ship were,

Not true.

"The cargo consisted of food, medical aid and other supplies including cement, prefabricated housing and educational equipment, the group said. The Turkish prime minister said Monday that the vessels were inspected before they left port in Turkey to make sure the cargo did not include weapons."
http://www.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/meast/06/01/flotilla.questions/index.html

Arreo
06-01-10, 02:59 PM
I guess that they could have waited until it crossed into Israeli waters illegally and then blew it out of the water..... yet, Commandos boarded to inspect the ship that stated it was going to cross into Israeli waters illegally.

Wow... what world do you live in?

Show me any legal justification that says that a country can board another country's flagged vessel on the high seas because "they feel it's a threat"....

Fovezer
06-01-10, 03:01 PM
Maybe the UN should send out a peacekeeping task force to prevent piracy like this from happening. It's working in Africa against the pirates who illegally board ships there.

Turkey said next time an aid flotilla goes, it will be escorted by the Turkish Navy. Remember, Turkey is part of NATO, and if Israel were to attack another Turkish ship, they could try and invoke Article 5. Could be interesting, to say the least.

Arreo
06-01-10, 03:03 PM
What Isreal did (in my eyes, given that I am not an expert in international maritime law) is piracy.

Here is Article 101 from the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (http://www.un.org/Depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/unclos/closindx.htm) that defines piracy as:

(a) any illegal acts of violence or detention, or any act of depredation, committed for private ends by the crew or the passengers of a private ship or a private aircraft, and directed:

(i) on the high seas, against another ship or aircraft, or against persons or property on board such ship or aircraft;

(ii) against a ship, aircraft, persons or property in a place outside the jurisdiction of any State;

(b) any act of voluntary participation in the operation of a ship or of an aircraft with knowledge of facts making it a pirate ship or aircraft;

(c) any act of inciting or of intentionally facilitating an act described in subparagraph (a) or (b).
It seems to meet that pretty damn closely under a.ii, international waters are "a place outside the jurisdiction of any State".

DJ Ms. White
06-01-10, 03:03 PM
That will indeed be interesting.

Arreo
06-01-10, 03:06 PM
These two threads ought to be merged: http://www.teamplayergaming.com/showthread.php/82242-Obama-now-backing-Israel

Arreo
06-01-10, 03:16 PM
Besides, two more ships are going to try running the blockade today. Perhaps when Isreal "blows them out of the water" and kills a Nobel Peace laureate they can claim that the ship was a "threat".

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/06/01/rachel-corrie-aid-ship-he_n_595816.html

Isreal needs to wise the fuck up and start thinking about how their actions are going to be perceived by the international community before they start boarding ships and shooting people (even if those people were resisting which I will stipulate they were). I mean Isreal has now totally pissed off the ONE Islamic country (Turkey) that consistently supported their right to exist. Real freaking smart of them...

***COMMANDER***
06-01-10, 04:39 PM
If Turkey cared about not instigating Israel, they would not have allowed that ship to try and enter Israel..... So, do you actually think that Israel gives a crap about them being an islamic Country ? ?? ? You don't see Saudi Arabia instigating Israel.

***COMMANDER***
06-01-10, 04:53 PM
http://www.jpost.com/Israel/Article.aspx?id=177166


State attacks flotilla petitions
By DAN IZENBERG
01/06/2010
Court asked to deny petitions demanding flotilla activists' release.

The state, in a sharply worded response, asked the High Court of Justice on Tuesday to reject out of hand petitions pertaining to Monday's seizure of six vessels which were on their way to break the Israeli sea blockade on the Gaza Strip and deliver humanitarian goods to the Palestinians living there.

A panel of three judges headed by Supreme Court President Dorit Beinisch was due to hear the petitions on Wednesday at 4 p.m.

Toker
06-01-10, 05:00 PM
Well, it's from JPost. I'm convinced.

***COMMANDER***
06-01-10, 05:10 PM
http://www.jpost.com/LandedPages/PrintArticle.aspx?id=177063#


Israel faces int'l fury over flotilla By TOVAH LAZAROFF

01/06/2010

Turkey leads condemnation efforts, recalls ambassador. Israel’s top officials worked round the clock Monday to quell worldwide censure against its pre-dawn raid on a Gaza-bound flotilla in which 10 activists were killed.

Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu cut short his visit to North America and canceled his much-anticipated meeting with US President Barack Obama to head back to Israel, while the UN Security Council convened an emergency meeting in New York.

Israeli ambassadors around the world were called by their host governments to explain the incident. The Foreign Ministry, in turn, held a briefing with all ambassadors posted here.

Arreo
06-01-10, 05:26 PM
blah, blah, blah, do you have any ideas of your own or you just going to keep regurgitating Jpost articles like they are holy writ?

Go do some research yourself, form your own opinions....

***COMMANDER***
06-01-10, 05:38 PM
blah, blah, blah, do you have any ideas of your own or you just going to keep regurgitating Jpost articles like they are holy writ?

Go do some research yourself, form your own opinions....

Get your panties out of your teeth, sweetie, I made plenty of post, other than quotes from one of the most accurate news sources on the net.... You go do some research and you will find that some of the other reputable news sources reported the same.....

So stick your biased opinion where the sun doesn't shine. I got just as much to my opinion as you do yours and I don't instigate personal attacks. Maybe you need to grow some balls and open YOUR eyes.

bust331
06-01-10, 06:00 PM
Get your panties out of your teeth, sweetie, I made plenty of post, other than quotes from one of the most accurate news sources on the net.... You go do some research and you will find that some of the other reputable news sources reported the same.....

So stick your biased opinion where the sun doesn't shine. I got just as much to my opinion as you do yours and I don't instigate personal attacks. Maybe you need to grow some balls and open YOUR eyes.


I think he did plenty of research, research that proves you wrong. Look back a few pages and ya know...read? You randomly started spouting these "laws" which you somehow managed to formulate in your head, while he provided the CORRECT laws. So instead of talking out of your ass, do some research.

***COMMANDER***
06-01-10, 06:13 PM
Israel is in an "armed conflict" with Gaza, so there is a difference, other than the neutrality of just "ships at sea". He just knows that deep down, I am right and is frustrated.

Arreo
06-01-10, 06:17 PM
Get your panties out of your teeth, sweetie, I made plenty of post, other than quotes from one of the most accurate news sources on the net.... You go do some research and you will find that some of the other reputable news sources reported the same.....

So stick your biased opinion where the sun doesn't shine. I got just as much to my opinion as you do yours and I don't instigate personal attacks. Maybe you need to grow some balls and open YOUR eyes.

So JPost is suddenly one of the most accurate news sources on the net? By who's reckoning?

Blindly trusting Israel's side of the story (which is what JPost is) would be the same as reading Turkish newspapers that say it was a massacre of unarmed protesters and thinking that was 100% true.

There are two sides to any story and the truth is somewhere in the middle. You are saying that whatever Isreal is saying must be the truth. I'm saying that neither the Isreali story nor the activists story is the unvarnished truth.

Arreo
06-01-10, 06:18 PM
Israel is in an "armed conflict" with Gaza, so there is a difference, other than the neutrality of just "ships at sea". He just knows that deep down, I am right and is frustrated.

Show me some evidence of that. Show me a International Maritime law that allows Israel to board and seize a foreign flagged vessel on the high seas.

DJ Ms. White
06-01-10, 06:22 PM
Can we stop the petty bickering and get back to actual debating? And yes, that was directed at Arreo and Commander. You've both made personal attacks and should both most definitely know better given who you are.

***COMMANDER***
06-01-10, 06:24 PM
Arreo , I usually post 2 or 3 links from other news sources as well, but I am at work and multitasking on several projects, so since you have all the time in the world on your hands, you go do your research, that you act like you know so much about..... You want to know, then take the burden on yourself......

The ship had "STATED known intentions of ILLEGALLY entering Israel", and was on "due course", so go get to researching.... They made their intentions known.
Just like an airliner that has "stated that they are going to fly into a building in your country", you think you have to wait on them to enter your airspace, before shooting them down? You should be busy for a while on this project, so I am done with trying to help you. I'll catch yall later.

Red_Lizard2
06-01-10, 06:37 PM
Actually I'm pretty sure you DO have to wait for them to enter your countries Airspace. Example being if there was a plane that was going to leave Iran we knew was planning to blow up a building over here. We would have to get permission from Iran to enter its airspace, or wait til it goes over a country that permits us to fly in their airspace OR wait til it got into ours. We've had to do that with fighter jets to get them to Iraq or Afghanistan because some countries refused to allow us to enter their airspace (which if we did anyways is violation of their airspace and CAN be considered an act of war).

Further, Israel (From what I have seen) have been trying to make it sound like the whole flotilla was there under hostile intentions. Before I go on, do you believe this?

Arreo
06-01-10, 06:38 PM
Bam, bam, bam. One, two, three differing opinions on the legality of boarding ships in international waters.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/01/AR2010060102934.html
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503543_162-20006496-503543.html
http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/stories/s2915343.htm

So which is correct? What is 'right'? Again, are we maritime law experts? I freely stipulate that Isreal has the right under international law to blockade Gaza. They have the right to enforce that blockade. But do they have the right to do it on foreign flagged vessels on the high seas? And even if they have the right to do that, is is politically wise or morally correct?

Arreo
06-01-10, 06:42 PM
And how about looking at the other side's story. We've heard form the Israeli Defense Force though what Commander posted, now lets hear from someone who was there.

He's a former US Ambassador.... Wonder what he saw?
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2010/06/us_witness_to_israeli_sea_raid.html


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ob3YBiFQdoM

Red_Lizard2
06-01-10, 06:50 PM
from the link arreo posted earlier, another thing about ships on the high sea (not be a maritime law expert, I am assuming the ships were in an area that constitutes the high seas)

http://www.un.org/Depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/unclos/closindx.htm

Article110

Right of visit

1. Except where acts of interference derive from powers conferred by treaty, a warship which encounters on the high seas a foreign ship, other than a ship entitled to complete immunity in accordance with articles 95 and 96, is not justified in boarding it unless there is reasonable ground for suspecting that:

(a) the ship is engaged in piracy;

(b) the ship is engaged in the slave trade;

(c) the ship is engaged in unauthorized broadcasting and the flag State of the warship has jurisdiction under article 109;

(d) the ship is without nationality; or

(e) though flying a foreign flag or refusing to show its flag, the ship is, in reality, of the same nationality as the warship.

Arreo
06-01-10, 07:06 PM
Here Lizard, since Commander is busywith work I'll argue his side of things to the best of my ability.

The issue here is the fact that Isreal has declared a blockade of Gaza. And blockades are legal within international law as long as there ies a 'state of war' that is occurring between the two parties. That is, a sovereign state can blockade another sovereign state as long as a state of war exists. This strangely puts Isreal (at least in my read of things) as having backhandedly acknowledged that Gaza is in fact a separate state....

But, back to blockades. One can look at numerous examples of blockades in the 20th century that have been found to be legal under international law. The Cuban Missle Crisis for one, and the Maritime Exclusion zone the the British implemented during the Falklands war as another. But you say, no state of war existed between the US and Cuba, surely that means that blockade was illegal. Well, international law is a little strange when it comes to defining what a "state of war" is. Although Cuba was not in conflict with the US it was determined that basically (I'm simplifying things a bit) the status of Soviet troops and weapons in Cuba was a belligerent act.

Now, can a country that has blockaded another board ships in international waters? The answer is.... maybe, kind of and sometimes. The US did it during the Cuban Missile Crisis, NATO did it to Yugoslavia in the 90's and the Egyptians did it to Isreal in the Yom Kippur War. In all three cases ships were boarded on the high seas to enforce blockades. So, does that make it legal? Again, I'm no maritime law expert but I think the question of legality isn't that important to the people who enforce a blockade. They enforce it because they as a sovereign state have declared it so, and the international community rarely argues with them.

But in this case, the international community and the UN are arguing with it. So, what will happen? Probably nothing, since the US has made it pretty clear that it will (and already has) soften any language condemning Israel's actions.

Arreo
06-01-10, 07:11 PM
tl;dr The answer to was boarding ships on the high seas legal is: it dosen't seem to really matter much in terms of international law. Contries that declare blockades do so on their own authority and it is rarely if ever questioned or condemned.

Red_Lizard2
06-01-10, 07:41 PM
Trying to do some research via google (it is a bitch to find information on blockade laws for some reason :/ ) It appears the main argument is if the blockade is legal, and not so much the boarding of the ships. The question being asked is: Can Israel declare a blockade on Hamas/Palestine (both of which aren't countries)?

-Sauso-
06-01-10, 08:10 PM
http://english.aljazeera.net/


Since Jpost is being tossed around here.

rock_lobster
06-01-10, 08:23 PM
From what I've read/heard on the news, the ship had every intention of entering illegally, and after several warnings by the IDF to turn back, the ship continued on. Apparently the IDF boarded the ship and were attacked first, thus explaining why they resorted to deadly force. Regardless of what was on the boat, there are procedures set up that have been in effect for a while now (if I'm not mistaken). If you have nothing to hide, then why make a big scene over something that has been a normality for some time now?

If the US set up a blockade and someone tried to enter our waters illegally after many unheeded warnings, what do you think we would do?

jabberwock
06-01-10, 10:07 PM
Israel attempted to board a flotilla that was trying to illegally enter their country...

Just a guess, but I don't think the Gaza Strip is in Israel.

This whole argument gets more than fuzzy on that alone.

Blakeman
06-01-10, 10:14 PM
Trying to do some research via google (it is a bitch to find information on blockade laws for some reason :/ ) It appears the main argument is if the blockade is legal, and not so much the boarding of the ships. The question being asked is: Can Israel declare a blockade on Hamas/Palestine (both of which aren't countries)?

I think it is Israel regarding the Gaza strip more as a territory of itself and thus the blockade is legal. It is like if the Virgin Islands or Puerto Rico were to go communist all of a sudden, we would be freely able to blockade those territories as long as we stayed within those territories waters.

What Israel did was basically attack a foreign ship in international waters under the veil that it was a major threat. Had they just waited until they were within the Gaza territorial waters then they this wouldn't probably be as big a story as it is.

Fovezer
06-01-10, 10:24 PM
Here are accounts of passengers ON the ship:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/middle_east/10206802.stm
http://english.aljazeera.net/news/2010/06/20106193546785656.html

So what you have is a brutal attack against an unarmed ship and unarmed aid workers by a military force. Yet some people here, the Israel apologists, think that the victims are to blame for defending themselves from a brutal assault. If they were truly wanting a fight, would they really only use some sticks and little knives that can be found on any ship? Israel claimed that the massacre 1,400 Palestinians in December was also an "act of self-defense." Their insanely disproportional responses and need to punish whole groups for the actions of a few is well documented. The leaders of the Israeli government should be hauled off and tried for war crimes.

Arreo
06-01-10, 10:24 PM
From what I've read/heard on the news, the ship had every intention of entering illegally, and after several warnings by the IDF to turn back, the ship continued on. Apparently the IDF boarded the ship and were attacked first, thus explaining why they resorted to deadly force. Regardless of what was on the boat, there are procedures set up that have been in effect for a while now (if I'm not mistaken). If you have nothing to hide, then why make a big scene over something that has been a normality for some time now?

If the US set up a blockade and someone tried to enter our waters illegally after many unheeded warnings, what do you think we would do?

What procedures are you talking about? Getting aid into Gaza? Because the Isreali's have that on total lock-down (except the smuggling tunnels) and deceide on a what seems like a whim what items can and cannot get through.

The economic blockade of Gaza is systematically choking the population. The UN estimates that less then a quarter of the necessary supplies make it though to the people living there. The World Bank estimates that 80% of the imports into Gaza are coming through illegal tunnels from Egypt. Just think about that for a minute, 4 times as many supplies are coming through tunnels then Isreal is letting in by road. All construction material is banned from import by the IDF because it might be used to "build bunkers and fortifications" as a result there are thousands and thousands of homes that are still piles of rubble after the last Isreali military onslaught. Hospitals are destroyed and medical care has devolved to a medical level since the import of medicine is severely restricted. I mean hell IDF forces have, on multiple occasions, attacked UN observers and aid workers who were in Gaza doing their jobs and working in refugee camps.

So I for one agree with the stated goals of the activists that attempted to run the blockade. They wanted to bring food, medicine and other supplies to a people who are suffering. That is a good and noble goal and to quote MLK " one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws". Now, as I have previously said, I believe also that a number of the people who were on this flotilla did not have noble goals or non-violence in mind. They went looking for a confrontation and for violence. That is wrong and I believe does more harm then good.

Adding some sources:
http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/news/world/16-un+says+gaza+blockade+hinders+reconstruction+aid-hs-01
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/06/gaza-israel-death-un
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE50E2XK20090115
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1580933/Human-crisis-in-Gaza-is-worst-for-40-years.html
http://www.icrc.org/web/eng/siteeng0.nsf/htmlall/palestine-gaza-update-211209

BigHub
06-01-10, 10:52 PM
I was reading on the AlJazeera website....Blaming the US now?




Americans protest against the attack on the Gaza aid flotilla [AFP]
Perhaps now Americans will understand the true nature of the Israeli occupation.

It has never been about security. Not for one day. It has been about land and power. And this is where it has led. And we have made it possible.

Since at least the mid-1970s, only one country has had the power to force Israel to give up its dreams of permanent occupation of the West Bank: The US.
Source: http://english.aljazeera.net/focus/2010/06/20106162847943928.html

Arreo
06-01-10, 10:57 PM
I was reading on the AlJazeera website....Blaming the US now?

Source: http://english.aljazeera.net/focus/2010/06/20106162847943928.html

That is just some random guy (a UC history prof) with a rather out there opinion. He has a few good points in there, but most of it is just randomness.

I agree with:


And now at least 10 people are dead because of the shame, because of the inability of Israel's best friends to look it in the eye and say: "Stop this insanity. Treat Palestinians like humans before you destroy not only them, but you."

I'm very, very confused by:

Some day you can let the Palestinians have casinos and they will thank you.

(no, it dosen't make much more sense in context)

***COMMANDER***
06-01-10, 11:25 PM
tl;dr The answer to was boarding ships on the high seas legal is: it dosen't seem to really matter much in terms of international law. Contries that declare blockades do so on their own authority and it is rarely if ever questioned or condemned.
Yep, Israel and Palestine are in a Hostile conflict and are at arms against each other..... Hamas launched 2 more Katusha Rockets today and the Israeli airstrike killed 3 of them.
 

From what I've read/heard on the news, the ship had every intention of entering illegally, and after several warnings by the IDF to turn back, the ship continued on. Apparently the IDF boarded the ship and were attacked first, thus explaining why they resorted to deadly force. Regardless of what was on the boat, there are procedures set up that have been in effect for a while now (if I'm not mistaken). If you have nothing to hide, then why make a big scene over something that has been a normality for some time now?

If the US set up a blockade and someone tried to enter our waters illegally after many unheeded warnings, what do you think we would do?
They boarded to talk to them and set a line, in which in return, they were beaten with iron sticks and a fire bomb was thrown at them and one soldier was attacked with a knife and another has a hole in the left side of his face, where he was attacked, another has a torn rotator cuff. The 1st three Commandos that boarded were stripped of their equipment and one was thrown overboard after being beaten. Like I said earlier, they were attacked by savages.
 

Just a guess, but I don't think the Gaza Strip is in Israel.

This whole argument gets more than fuzzy on that alone.
Unless you are going to go through Lebanon, Egypt, or Syria, then you have to go through Israel to get to Gaza and they chose Israel and were Repelled away.
 

Here are accounts of passengers ON the ship:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/middle_east/10206802.stm
http://english.aljazeera.net/news/2010/06/20106193546785656.html

So what you have is a brutal attack against an unarmed ship and unarmed aid workers by a military force. Yet some people here, the Israel apologists, think that the victims are to blame for defending themselves from a brutal assault.
You must be blind or your flash player doesn't work, because it is overwhelmingly clear that as soon as the Commandos boarded the ship to talk with them, they were cut, stabbed, hit with metal pipes, beaten, stripped of their gear, had a fire bomb threw at them and were also shot at......, before the Israeli Commandos opened fire with live ammunition to defend themselves..... The people on the Flotilla clearly did not want to handle this peaceably and many of them do have links to terrorist organizations and support them, so these are not clean law abiding citizens but then again, if you are in your right mind, you do not attempt to enter soverign state, that has warned you not to enter, unless you are looking for a conflict or just plain STUPID.

HeavyG
06-01-10, 11:44 PM
Well we really don't have all answers yet and people don't die from paintballs.

Maybe if you freeze them...

But your point is taken. Israel continues to be a "loose cannon". They just do whatever they want because they have Uncle Sam behind them. I say we stop backing them and then see how long they last.

Blakeman
06-01-10, 11:53 PM
Unless you are going to go through Lebanon, Egypt, or Syria, then you have to go through Israel to get to Gaza and they chose Israel and were Repelled away.

Eqypt is also blockading them with Israel.

jabberwock
06-02-10, 12:12 AM
Unless you are going to go through Lebanon, Egypt, or Syria, then you have to go through Israel to get to Gaza and they chose Israel and were Repelled away.
 



Dunno if you've looked at a map, but Gaza is on the sea. Maybe that's why the aid was being delivered in a flotilla. Neither Lebanon nor Syria are attached to Gaza or even any part of Palestine, for that matter. Choosing the coast of the land you wish to deliver supplies to, and having a friendly (until just recently) toward Israel country inspect them on departure seems reasonable to me.

Fovezer
06-02-10, 12:19 AM
You must be blind or your flash player doesn't work, because it is overwhelmingly clear that as soon as the Commandos boarded the ship to talk with them, they were cut, stabbed, hit with metal pipes, beaten, stripped of their gear, had a fire bomb threw at them and were also shot at......, before the Israeli Commandos opened fire with live ammunition to defend themselves..... The people on the Flotilla clearly did not want to handle this peaceably and many of them do have links to terrorist organizations and support them, so these are not clean law abiding citizens but then again, if you are in your right mind, you do not attempt to enter soverign state, that has warned you not to enter, unless you are looking for a conflict or just plain STUPID.

Bullshit. You blindly accept the Israeli propaganda as fact, and that's sad. Typical lapdog. Lol, yeah, the commando's fast-roped down onto the ship because they wanted to "talk to them." I'm sure they brought a fruitcake, too. Are you really that delusional to believe that? Look, the commandos brutally attacked a foreign vessel. All the passengers say Israel fired first (http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2010/06/01-3), and I'm much more inclined to believe the stories of many different people as opposed to a government who would benefit from painting aid workers as terrorists. They were met with some minor resistance from people defending themselves. You think it is ok for the aggressors to engage in self-defense, but it is not ok for the victims? You're being completely asinine and spinning so hard I'm surprised you're still standing.

I know, though, that in your eyes Israel is a country that can do no wrong and has never done any wrong. They are perfect. :rolleyes: And I like how you have the gall to call a Holocaust survivor, European parliamentarians, authors, a Nobel Laureate, etc. as having links to terrorist organizations. That's just a crock of shit.

jabberwock
06-02-10, 12:19 AM
Eqypt is also blockading them with Israel.


On Tuesday, Egypt, which had been maintaining a blockade alongside Israel, opened its border with Gaza. Until now, Egypt had been allowing only a small number of people with serious medical needs to pass through the crossing. Now, the Rafah border is open for products to come in and people to go out. No closing date has been announced.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/israel-defends-actions-turns-attention-to-weakened-blockade/article1588812/


Props to Egypt for supplying a reasonable alternative.

rock_lobster
06-02-10, 04:12 AM
Maybe if you freeze them...

But your point is taken. Israel continues to be a "loose cannon". They just do whatever they want because they have Uncle Sam behind them. I say we stop backing them and then see how long they last.

A lot longer than you think they would.

Muqtar SGT_Clintok
06-02-10, 07:06 AM
Allegedly, the flotilla was given the option of heading to Ashdod ahead of time for inspection, but declined. If that is the case, then they wanted to pick a fight heading in, they definitely picked a fight once they were in, and from the body count, it looks like they got a fight. Mission accomplished Martyr-heads !!!

Israel should have waited for the ship to get closer. With that said, the video I have seen shows violent resistance, which cannot be talked away.

http://www.memri.org/report/en/0/0/0/0/0/0/4265.htm
Here's a article about some of those benevolent aide workers.

triggerhappy2005
06-02-10, 07:41 AM
Allegedly, the flotilla was given the option of heading to Ashdod ahead of time for inspection, but declined. If that is the case, then they wanted to pick a fight heading in, they definitely picked a fight once they were in, and from the body count, it looks like they got a fight. Mission accomplished Martyr-heads !!!

Israel should have waited for the ship to get closer. With that said, the video I have seen shows violent resistance, which cannot be talked away.

http://www.memri.org/report/en/0/0/0/0/0/0/4265.htm
Here's a article about some of those benevolent aide workers.

But Israel had no right to board the ship while it was in International waters.

Nor did it have the right to tell the ship what to do.

hawgballs
06-02-10, 07:56 AM
Arreo , I usually post 2 or 3 links from other news sources as well,................

No you don't. 99% of your links are JPost, and rarely do you back it up with any reputable news sources..... Oh, and it seems you also make up laws in your head.

HeavyG
06-02-10, 08:13 AM
I guess that they could have waited until it crossed into Israeli waters illegally and then blew it out of the water..... yet, Commandos boarded to inspect the ship that stated it was going to cross into Israeli waters illegally.

The Commandos ILLEGALLY boarded the ship, were beat down with pipes for invading a ship in international waters. Period. They returned with gunfire (again, illegal) murdered people trying to defend their ship.

***COMMANDER***
06-02-10, 09:29 AM
W'ell see how it plays out.... With a fleet of ships on due course to enter your country illegally, with stated intentions of aiding the enemy they are at war with and their is a blockade with, I think they have every right to stop the fleet, especially after their intentions were made and refused to change course.

We'll see how it plays out....

***COMMANDER***
06-02-10, 09:36 AM
Dunno if you've looked at a map, but Gaza is on the sea. Maybe that's why the aid was being delivered in a flotilla. Neither Lebanon nor Syria are attached to Gaza or even any part of Palestine, for that matter. Choosing the coast of the land you wish to deliver supplies to, and having a friendly (until just recently) toward Israel country inspect them on departure seems reasonable to me.

I know the area quite well...... They knew it was illegal to go through Israel, but tried to force their way.... If they wanted to get this shipment to who they wanted to get it through to, they could have asked Egypt, convoy on ground to Syria, Lebanon, or who ever would allow them passage, ground, air or sea.

There is a reason that there is a blockade going on and if the people want to fix this, they must not have a KNOWN Terrorist group as their leaders, it's as simple as that.

***COMMANDER***
06-02-10, 09:51 AM
Bullshit. You blindly accept the Israeli propaganda as fact, and that's sad. Typical lapdog. Lol, yeah, the commando's fast-roped down onto the ship because they wanted to "talk to them." I'm sure they brought a fruitcake, too. Are you really that delusional to believe that? Look, the commandos brutally attacked a foreign vessel. All the passengers say Israel fired first (http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2010/06/01-3), and I'm much more inclined to believe the stories of many different people as opposed to a government who would benefit from painting aid workers as terrorists. They were met with some minor resistance from people defending themselves. You think it is ok for the aggressors to engage in self-defense, but it is not ok for the victims? You're being completely asinine and spinning so hard I'm surprised you're still standing.

I know, though, that in your eyes Israel is a country that can do no wrong and has never done any wrong. They are perfect. :rolleyes: And I like how you have the gall to call a Holocaust survivor, European parliamentarians, authors, a Nobel Laureate, etc. as having links to terrorist organizations. That's just a crock of shit.

You are completely blinded by your own stubborn lopsided views.

First off, describe to us exactly what you mean by "Brutally attacked a foreign vessel" The Commandos got immediately attacked by metal pipes as soon at they were in reach and you call that minor resistance? And your last paragraph is plagiarism and I never said anything of the sort, so again, YOU twist things to satisfy your own thoughts and feelings, regardless if it is as far from the truth as it can be.... but typical of you.

The Hamas terrorist organization is in control of Gaza and is under a blockade and I understand you fully support and condone them, but that doesn't make it right. Hamas fires Rockets over to the Israeli citizens daily, trying to kill innocent people that are not military, but normal citizens going to school and the grocery store, yet are fired upon daily in attempts to kill them, just because they are Jewish and that is about as racist and hateful as it gets and is utterly wrong and I am sorry to see that you support these kind of organizations and this type of behavior. You don't see Israel flying over in their attack helos, killing Palestinians to pass the time. They target Hamas, that is planting mines on the fence and eliminates the ones that just fired over Katusha rockets over to the Israeli citizens....

triggerhappy2005
06-02-10, 10:05 AM
W'ell see how it plays out.... With a fleet of ships on due course to enter your country illegally, with stated intentions of aiding the enemy they are at war with and their is a blockade with, I think they have every right to stop the fleet, especially after their intentions were made and refused to change course.

We'll see how it plays out....

You're opinion and conjecture is irrelevent commander.

International law and abiding to it does matter.

triggerhappy2005
06-02-10, 10:10 AM
You are completely blinded by your own stubborn lopsided views.

First off, describe to us exactly what you mean by "Brutally attacked a foreign vessel"



The commandos had no right under international law to board a ship that was in international waters. They were on the ship illegaly.

They are not allowed to board a ship b/c of what they think might happen. Something must first happen, in this case the boat must first enter Israeli waters, and then they may legally board the ship.

Since they boarded the ship ILLEGALY, the were agressors BREAKING THE LAW.

triggerhappy2005
06-02-10, 10:14 AM
And now that Israel realized it fucked up, it's setting free the remaining flotilla activists.

If they were the hardcore jihadist terrorists that commander and muqtar make them out to be, why would they be set free?

By all means commander, indulge us.

http://edition.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/meast/06/02/gaza.raid.activists/index.html?hpt=Sbin

ems_goof
06-02-10, 10:24 AM
I'm going to go out on a wild and crazy limb here, and assume that the US Dept of the Navy "Commander's Handbook on The Law of Naval Operations" is decidedly accepted by the international community (found at http://www.usnwc.edu/getattachment/a9b8e92d-2c8d-4779-9925-0defea93325c/1-14M_%28Jul_2007%29_%28NWP%29 if anyone wants to look) for maritime activities and law.
I am not here to decide if the blockade is "legal" or "not legal", but I'm pretty damn sure if some a-hole kept firing rockets at my family, I'd be declaring war on their ass, and kick it into the last century. Below, my emphasis will be in bold.

http://www.usnwc.edu/getattachment/a9b8e92d-2c8d-4779-9925-0defea93325c/1-14M_%28Jul_2007%29_%28NWP%29

Chapter 7, "The Law of Neutrality" is of the most interest for this discussion. Specifically, Chapter 7.7, "Blockade". Please note, "Belligerent" is a description of any party of a conflict.
7.7.1 - "Blockade is a belligerent operation to prevent vessels and / or aircraft of all nations, enemy as well as neutral, from entering or exiting specified ports, airfields, or coastal areas belonging to, occupied by, or or under the control of an enemy nation. While the belligerent right of blockade is intended to prevent vessels and aircraft, regardless of their cargo, from crossing an established and publicized cordon separating the enemy from international waters and / or airspace."

7.7.2.4 - Impartiality
"A blockade must be applied impartially to the vessels and aircraft of all nations. Discrimination by the blockading belligerent in favor of or against the vessels and aircraft of particular nations, including those of its own or those of an allied nation, renders the blockade legally invalid."

Seems to me if you put to sea with the intention of running a blockade, it doesn't matter where you are, that blockade can be enforced on your butt. If you resist, especially against the Israelis, consider yourself lucky they didn't blow your ass straight to hell. They don't normally fuck around. I'd say what they did was not only legal, but relatively restrained compared to things they have done in the past.

triggerhappy2005
06-02-10, 10:29 AM
And this why Israel's actions were illegal. That boat was nowhere near Israeli waters and it was attacked.

Up to the point it was attacked, it had not made the attempt to enter Israeli waters and heading into that direction from many miles away does not constitute a breach or attempted breach.

You're wrong EMS.

Oh and that Commanders Handbook is not recognized internationally but just by the US and some Western European countries.

ems_goof
06-02-10, 10:40 AM
I'm wrong? Please show me where.
What part of this isn't clear. A deliberate attempt to run a blockade puts you at risk of enforcement, regardless of where you are. So please, show me where I'm wrong. Quote the law, as it applies during combat actions and a 3 year old blockade.
Your argument is the equivalent of saying people can violate borders before someone can take action against them. So during the Cold War, we would have to let the Russians actually land on US soil before we stopped them? Same situation.

7.7.4 - Breach and Attempted Breach of Blockade
"Breach of blockade is the passage of a vessel or aircraft through a blockade without special entry or exit authorization from the blockading belligerent. Attempted breach of blockade occurs from the time a vessel or aircraft leaves a port or airfield with the intention of evading the blockade, and for vessels exiting the blockaded area, continues until the voyage is completed. Knowledge of the existence of the blockade is essential to the offenses of the breach of blockade. Knowledge may be presumed once a blockade has been declared and appropriate notification provided to affected governments. It is immaterial that the vessel or aircraft is at the time of interception bound for neutral territory, if its ultimate destination is the blockaded area. There is a presumption of attempted breach of blockade where vessels or aircraft are bound for a neutral port or airfield serving as a point of transit to the blockaded area."

ems_goof
06-02-10, 10:42 AM
The commandos had no right under international law to board a ship that was in international waters. They were on the ship illegaly.

They are not allowed to board a ship b/c of what they think might happen. Something must first happen, in this case the boat must first enter Israeli waters, and then they may legally board the ship.

Since they boarded the ship ILLEGALY, the were agressors BREAKING THE LAW.

No, they have to enter the blockaded area, or state they intend to enter the blockaded area, which they had done, making this legal under international laws.

triggerhappy2005
06-02-10, 10:45 AM
International waters can not be blockaded. Only territorial waters can be.

And again, that manual is not international law. It is only recogniwed by the US and some Western European countries.

***COMMANDER***
06-02-10, 10:48 AM
And this why Israel's actions were illegal. That boat was nowhere near Israeli waters and it was attacked.

Up to the point it was attacked, it had not made the attempt to enter Israeli waters and heading into that direction from many miles away does not constitute a breach or attempted breach.

You're wrong EMS.

Oh and that Commanders Handbook is not recognized internationally but just by the US and some Western European countries.

7.10 - Capture of Neutral Vessels and Aircraft
"Neutral merchant vessels and civil aircraft are liable to capture by belligerent warships and military aircraft if engaged in any of the following activities:

2. Resisting visit and search
3. Carrying contraband
4. Breaching or attempting to breach blockade
6. Violating regulations established by a belligerent within the immediate area of naval operations
7. Carrying personnel in the military or public service of the enemy
8. Communicating information in the interest of the enemy

He is not wrong and they were 70 nautical miles on due course with stated intentions of crossing illegally into Israeli waters, to make contact and aid the enemy.

triggerhappy2005
06-02-10, 10:51 AM
And again, that manual is not international law. It is only recognized by the US and some Western European countries.

Rage!
06-02-10, 11:19 AM
I am pretty sure Commander is one of those pro-Israel tools that has been called into action to support Israel's actions on the Internet forums.

***COMMANDER***
06-02-10, 11:24 AM
Then, you show me where in INTERNATIONAL LAW, that it allows a vessel or aircraft to state their intentions of illegally entering an area and with the intentions of illegally aiding an enemy that is under blockade and is a known terrorist group. You can't, because they are at arms and there is a blockade on Gaza, because it is under rule of a terrorist organization and again is under blockade. They stated their intentions before the ships were boarded and the first 5 vessels did not resist or cause any conflicts and was peaceably handled..... The sixth vessel, was a hostile vessel.

Show me anywhere in International law that allows and condones aiding terrorist.

But by your far fetched views, which does not include a hostile area at arms, nor a blockade, it could be said that Israel could have allowed those vessels to continue on path and turn on the mini guns on the Israeli waters and allowed those vessels to float right on into the live ammunitions and sawed the bottom of those vessels into and let them sink...... Then, you would be ok with that..... You are so far out in the left and appears to be in support of Hamas, a terrorist organization as well.

ems_goof
06-02-10, 11:29 AM
Found this interesting. http://in.reuters.com/article/idINIndia-48994620100602
Also, your claim of the Manual not being recognized - it's based on the San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea, which IS internationally recognized.

***COMMANDER***
06-02-10, 11:36 AM
Kablammooooo!



Sent from my T-Mobile myTouch 3G using Tapatalk

_BuRn_
06-02-10, 11:50 AM
Blind leading the blind through a dark room at night, telling everyone around just what they see.

***COMMANDER***
06-02-10, 12:00 PM
Found this interesting. http://in.reuters.com/article/idINIndia-48994620100602
Also, your claim of the Manual not being recognized - it's based on the San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea, which IS internationally recognized.

Here is a snippet from the transcript:



Q&A - Is Israel's naval blockade of Gaza legal?
Wed Jun 2, 2010 7:03pm IST
By Jonathan Saul
(Reuters) - Israel has said it will continue a naval blockade of the Gaza Strip despite growing global pressure to lift the siege after a navy raid on a Turkish ferry carrying aid killed nine activists this week.
What is the legality of the blockade and did Israel's intervention breach international law? Below are some questions and answers on the issue:
CAN ISRAEL IMPOSE A NAVAL BLOCKADE ON GAZA?
Israel & Jews around the world will no longer be led like cattle to the Pits, the Showers & the Ovens.

A large number of people in the world are anti-semetic and it is up the the Jews, Christians and all people of good conscience to say “NEVER AGAIN”

***COMMANDER***
06-02-10, 12:01 PM
Looks pretty clear and precise if you ask me.

triggerhappy2005
06-02-10, 12:12 PM
They fucked up commander yahoo.

***COMMANDER***
06-02-10, 12:13 PM
http://www1.umn.edu/humanrts/instree/1909b.htm
Not counting the Firebomb that was used on the Commandos on the 6th vessel boarded, pay close attention to Article 24.....



Declaration concerning the Laws of Naval War, 208 Consol. T.S. 338 (1909).

Having regard to the terms in which the British Government invited various Powers to meet in conference in order to arrive at an agreement as to what are the generally recognized rules of international law within the meaning of Article 7 of the Convention of 18 October 1907, relative to the establishment of an International Prize Court;
CHAPTER I

BLOCKADE IN TIME OF WAR

Article 1. A blockade must not extend beyond the ports and coasts belonging to or occupied by the enemy.

Art. 2. In accordance with the Declaration of Paris of 1856, a blockade, in order to be binding, must be effective -- that is to say, it must be maintained by a force sufficient really to prevent access to the enemy coastline.

Art. 3. The question whether a blockade is effective is a question of fact.

triggerhappy2005
06-02-10, 12:22 PM
So why were the remaining activists let go if they committed an act of war?

***COMMANDER***
06-02-10, 12:23 PM
They fucked up commander yahoo.

Well, while you are sipping wine and eating cheese in France, why don't you prove to us that you are right, or are you just going to continue to look as you do now, like a kid jumping up and down screaming and saying nothing.

***COMMANDER***
06-02-10, 12:24 PM
So why were the remaining activists let go if they committed an act of war?

They were deported and Israel is trying to defuse the conflict, which approached them.

triggerhappy2005
06-02-10, 12:29 PM
Sounds like a weak argument to me. If someone breaks a recognized law, why wouldn't you try and convict them?

Should we do the same with enemy combatents we find in Afghanistan?

***COMMANDER***
06-02-10, 12:32 PM
Because they are of no importance, at least not the majority of them.... They may slow up a few ring leaders and possibly some with known links to terrorist groups, but for the majority, they are not worth the time or the money and will be deported back to their country of origin for their country to impose their law upon them that they broke, if they choose to do so.

triggerhappy2005
06-02-10, 12:34 PM
How do you know this?

ems_goof
06-02-10, 12:35 PM
So why were the remaining activists let go if they committed an act of war?

Is this a serious question, or are you just trying to be argumentative now? It's done all the time, as acts of mercy or compassion. Or, because the Israelis didn't feel like wasting their time and money on confining them. Who knows, and who cares. People are released all the time, even after a criminal violation, normally because it isn't worth the time and effort to prosecute them. Look to the US justice system for this. In my area, misdemeanor drug offenses normally are just tossed out (and the confiscated drugs just flushed down the toilet) because it isn't worth the time and effort to prosecute these people. Would you rather they have been detained, placed in a PoW camp, and given cheese sandwiches and water for the next few years?

Also, please note Article 37 above: (my emphasis)

Art. 37. A vessel carrying goods liable to capture as absolute or conditional contraband may be captured on the high seas or in the territorial waters of the belligerents throughout the whole of her voyage, even if she is to touch at a port of call before reaching the hostile destination.

***COMMANDER***
06-02-10, 12:37 PM
Should we do the same with enemy combatents we find in Afghanistan?

Big difference here. In Afghanistan typically when you capture an enemy combatant, they have planned to do harm or kill the protective or serving force. Typically are armed or in the planning stages of an attack.

The vessels captured heading to gaza were delivery supplies to the enemy. I do not think they were classed as enemy combatants.

triggerhappy2005
06-02-10, 12:37 PM
This whole thread is argumentative you dimwit.

I'm still waiting for commander back up those statements.

triggerhappy2005
06-02-10, 12:40 PM
Wouldn't providing the enemy with supplies or intent to do so be considered aiding Hamas in attacking Israel?

ems_goof
06-02-10, 12:40 PM
Well, I can call people names too you half-wit. Keep grasping at straws. It's amusing to watch.
First, you complain about "piracy". Then, it's shown to be legitimate per international rules of war.
Then, you complain about the unfair treatment of the "innocents" who were beating the Israelis with improvised weapons. But, when those same people are mercifully released with no long-lasting repercussions for their illegal activities, you ask why they weren't detained? Am I getting this right? How obtuse are you?

BigHub
06-02-10, 12:42 PM
I always live by this:

"Winning an argument on the internet is like winning the Special Olympics - Even if you win, you're still retarded."

/thread.

Highstakes72
06-02-10, 12:43 PM
What Isreal did (in my eyes, given that I am not an expert in international maritime law) is piracy.

Here is Article 101 from the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (http://www.un.org/Depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/unclos/closindx.htm) that defines piracy as:

(a) any illegal acts of violence or detention, or any act of depredation, committed for private ends by the crew or the passengers of a private ship or a private aircraft, and directed:

(i) on the high seas, against another ship or aircraft, or against persons or property on board such ship or aircraft;

(ii) against a ship, aircraft, persons or property in a place outside the jurisdiction of any State;

(b) any act of voluntary participation in the operation of a ship or of an aircraft with knowledge of facts making it a pirate ship or aircraft;

(c) any act of inciting or of intentionally facilitating an act described in subparagraph (a) or (b).

It seems to meet that pretty damn closely under a.ii, international waters are "a place outside the jurisdiction of any State".

That word..."inciting"...What does that mean again? That would mean that you could be considered a pirate for baiting someone into an action. I don't know maybe if you openly threatened to run the blockade...that should do. Of course I make weapons for a living so me personally I would have put a few 76mm holes through that ship once it crossed in Israeli territorial waters so there would not be any confusion. I expect no less of any nation, anywhere.

BigHub
06-02-10, 12:45 PM
I say we let the governments and courts do their thing instead of throwing around hunches and opinions.

ems_goof
06-02-10, 12:46 PM
But it's so amusing Hub.
Perhaps an e-tard argument on 3 hours of sleep isn't a good idea though, although I am awake enough to have researched the appropriate international law, brought it for all to discuss, and have been able to watch others' e-tears and cries of "foul" when they were shown to be wrong.

triggerhappy2005
06-02-10, 12:48 PM
That's the problem Hub. Israel let these murderous criminals go scott free. I'm just trying to understand why they would let such dangerous types walk free. Perhaps they might try to attack again.

It makes no sense to me.

BigHub
06-02-10, 12:48 PM
It's amusing for people who just sit in here and read it - like me and other users. Doesn't look too good for the people doing the fighting and arguing though.

BigHub
06-02-10, 12:50 PM
That's the problem Hub. Israel let these murderous criminals go scott free. I'm just trying to understand why they would let such dangerous types walk free. Perhaps they might try to attack again.

It makes no sense to me.


Who knows, it doesn't make sense to me either. They had their reasons apparently - and I'm leaving it at that.

triggerhappy2005
06-02-10, 12:53 PM
It's amusing for people who just sit in here and read it - like me and other users. Doesn't look too good for the people doing the fighting and arguing though.

I could care less Hub what others think. Really.

BigHub
06-02-10, 12:56 PM
More power to ya.

triggerhappy2005
06-02-10, 12:56 PM
Who knows, it doesn't make sense to me either. They had their reasons apparently - and I'm leaving it at that.

If they were they dangerous criminals they are being portrayed to be by commander and co, it wouldn't make any sense to let them go. Just like it wouldn't make any sense to let captured Taliban fighters go.

Only one conclusion can be drawn from this by an intelligent and rational person and that's Israel fucked up and they know it.

Should they have stopped the non weaponized flotilla, sure. But no one had to die. Classic Israel, just shooting the place up.

ems_goof
06-02-10, 01:14 PM
Pretty sure I'm intelligent and rational (despite any claims to the contrary by my wife), and I didn't come up with that conclusion.
So now it's okay for them to stop the flotilla. Please, make up your mind. And while I do believe anyone trying to beat people with pipes, knives, and chairs is dangerous, I don't recall describing them as such. I was simply put off by your adamant claims of "piracy" for an action that is founded in international law. By the by, piracy is defined as robbery on the seas within admiralty jurisdiction or a felony, such as robbery or hijacking, committed aboard a ship or aircraft, neither of which occurred here.

***COMMANDER***
06-02-10, 01:20 PM
Sorry trigger, but you were proved wrong, long ago.... EMS flat let the air out of your balloon and proved you dead wrong.... And all of your fan club left you all alone....

So, because the Commandos were attacked with Fire Bombs, Knives, shot at, and Metal pipes, which are all lethal force items, they were in turn responded with deadly force to contain the situation. Sorry it went that way, but they made their choice to attack the Commandos.

Tell you what, next time you see a cop, go to him and pull out a knife and approach him in a manner that he feels threatened and see if he puts a .40 cal right in the center of your forehead.... Yea, let us know how that works for you.

Just concede, you made an idiot of yourself with your LARGE SCREAMING post, that were utterly false. Just man up and save some face.

***COMMANDER***
06-02-10, 01:30 PM
http://www.jpost.com/Israel/Article.aspx?id=177169


IDF: Global Jihad links on flotilla
By YAAKOV KATZ
01/06/2010
Fifty 'Mavi Marmara' passengers tied to global jihad network.

Dozens of passengers who were aboard the Mavi Marmara Turkish passenger ship are suspected of having connections with global jihad-affiliated terrorist organizations, defense officials said on Tuesday, amid growing concerns that Turkish warships would accompany a future flotilla to the Gaza Strip.

According to the defense officials, the IDF has identified about 50 passengers on the ship who could have terrorist connections with global jihad-affiliated groups.

Toker
06-02-10, 01:34 PM
Fuck Israel already... That is all.

triggerhappy2005
06-02-10, 01:37 PM
Sorry trigger, but you were proved wrong, long ago.... EMS flat let the air out of your balloon and proved you dead wrong.... And all of your fan club left you all alone....

So, because the Commandos were attacked with Fire Bombs, Knives, shot at, and Metal pipes, which are all lethal force items, they were in turn responded with deadly force to contain the situation. Sorry it went that way, but they made their choice to attack the Commandos.

Tell you what, next time you see a cop, go to him and pull out a knife and approach him in a manner that he feels threatened and see if he puts a .40 cal right in the center of your forehead.... Yea, let us know how that works for you.

Just concede, you made an idiot of yourself with your LARGE SCREAMING post, that were utterly false. Just man up and save some face.

So, you want to get personal huh. Fine, two can play that game.

It's scary to think a fool like you actually trains our troops as you claimed in a post from some time ago. You're a clueless idiot who lacks respect from a great many here. Respect one would assume you would have considering your position in this community. Yes commander, you are sorry and for all the wrong reasons. Good night commander 'tin foil hat'.

***COMMANDER***
06-02-10, 01:40 PM
http://www.jpost.com/Israel/Article.aspx?id=176970


Navy escorts flotilla ships to Ashdod
By YAAKOV KATZ AND JPOST.COM STAFF
31/05/2010
IDF: Soldiers were met by well-planned lynch, concealed handguns.

Armed Navy ships escorted boats from the Gaza protest flotilla to Ashdod on Monday afternoon, hours after IDF soldiers and activists clashed in a fatal raid.


AP contributed to this report.

***COMMANDER***
06-02-10, 01:47 PM
Trigger, you are being misleading now.... go to bed.

Sent from my T-Mobile myTouch 3G using Tapatalk

-Sauso-
06-02-10, 01:49 PM
Interview with one of the people/activists/terrorists/jihadist (whatever they are being called today) on the main ship.


http://watch.ctv.ca/news/latest/israeli-raid/#clip308903

triggerhappy2005
06-02-10, 01:54 PM
Trigger, you are being misleading now.... go to bed.

Sent from my T-Mobile myTouch 3G using Tapatalk

Does the tin foil help with the reception?

***COMMANDER***
06-02-10, 02:08 PM
http://www.jpost.com/Israel/Article.aspx?id=176970


Photo by: AP
Navy escorts flotilla ships to Ashdod
By YAAKOV KATZ AND JPOST.COM STAFF
31/05/2010
IDF: Soldiers were met by well-planned lynch, concealed handguns.

Armed Navy ships escorted boats from the Gaza protest flotilla to Ashdod on Monday afternoon, hours after IDF soldiers and activists clashed in a fatal raid.

Yep real friendly thugs on those vessels huh?

Fovezer
06-02-10, 02:49 PM
Allegedly, the flotilla was given the option of heading to Ashdod ahead of time for inspection, but declined. If that is the case, then they wanted to pick a fight heading in, they definitely picked a fight once they were in, and from the body count, it looks like they got a fight. Mission accomplished Martyr-heads !!!

Israel should have waited for the ship to get closer. With that said, the video I have seen shows violent resistance, which cannot be talked away.

They refused because the Israeli's would not allow some of the stuff they were bringing. Stuff like cement to help rebuild after Israel flatten Gaza in December 08. Israel doesn't care and let's them suffer. There is a humanitarian crisis in Gaza, and some people are trying to draw worldwide attention to it. I'd say they've done a pretty damn good job of that.


http://www.memri.org/report/en/0/0/0/0/0/0/4265.htm
Here's a article about some of those benevolent aide workers.

Shocking that you would try and use an Israeli propaganda site (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MEMRI#Controversy) as a source.


You are completely blinded by your own stubborn lopsided views.

First off, describe to us exactly what you mean by "Brutally attacked a foreign vessel" The Commandos got immediately attacked by metal pipes as soon at they were in reach and you call that minor resistance? And your last paragraph is plagiarism and I never said anything of the sort, so again, YOU twist things to satisfy your own thoughts and feelings, regardless if it is as far from the truth as it can be.... but typical of you.

So Israel fires first, assaults the ship, and when some people try and defend themselves from attack, you lie and say they attacked the poor, defenseless commando's first? That's complete bullshit and revisionist history! I mean, it takes a suspension of all logic thought to think like you are. It's just retarded and a sad attempt to whitewash the events. And all you post are JPost articles, so we know you are swallowing the Israeli story hook, line, and sinker without so much as a question. It's really pathetic. Broaden your horizons some instead of swallowing whatever Israel feeds you.


The Hamas terrorist organization is in control of Gaza and is under a blockade and I understand you fully support and condone them, but that doesn't make it right. Hamas fires Rockets over to the Israeli citizens daily, trying to kill innocent people that are not military, but normal citizens going to school and the grocery store, yet are fired upon daily in attempts to kill them, just because they are Jewish and that is about as racist and hateful as it gets and is utterly wrong and I am sorry to see that you support these kind of organizations and this type of behavior. You don't see Israel flying over in their attack helos, killing Palestinians to pass the time. They target Hamas, that is planting mines on the fence and eliminates the ones that just fired over Katusha rockets over to the Israeli citizens....

Wow, Hamas fires some bottle rockets into Israel, so Israel punishes all Gazans for that with a blockade. Now that, most definitely, is illegal under international law. You can punish collectively for the actions of a few. I don't know how you can condone genocide, but bitch about some rockets that do virtually nothing. And you want to talk about civilian causalities? They massacred almost 1,000 civilians during the Gaza war! And wounded another 5,000! Look, if you want to support a terrorist state, fine. But you now have no right to complain about countries like Iran anymore.

Oh, and for the record, I've never once defended Hamas, but Hamas has nothing to do with this attack.

Fovezer
06-02-10, 02:52 PM
Yep real friendly thugs on those vessels huh?

Yep, those Israeli thugs were quite friendly!

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/2010/06/20106193546785656.html

hawgballs
06-02-10, 03:00 PM
Yep, those Israeli thugs were quite friendly!

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/2010/06/20106193546785656.html
Scary. Especially the picture of those monsters swinging pipes at armed soldiers.... Savages, don't they know that those pipes bruise?

jabberwock
06-02-10, 03:04 PM
I know the area quite well...... They knew it was illegal to go through Israel, but tried to force their way.... If they wanted to get this shipment to who they wanted to get it through to, they could have asked Egypt, convoy on ground to Syria, Lebanon, or who ever would allow them passage, ground, air or sea.


If you "know the area quite well" perhaps you can explain to me how a ground convoy to Gaza through Syria or Lebanon would avoid Israel?

http://img72.imageshack.us/img72/1169/israelu.jpg

Arreo
06-02-10, 04:00 PM
Here's a kind of scary Op-Ed pieece from the JPost (the most trusted news source in the world apparently).

http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Op-EdContributors/Article.aspx?id=177171

Basically it hypothesizes that the IDF overreacted to the convoy on purpose in order to provide casus belli for an all out war. That the Isreali government went into this situation hoping that it would cause tensions in the region to explode and allow them to launch airstrikes against Gaza, the West bank, or indeed strikes against Iran's nuclear facilities.

What do you all think of that? I'm not sure I buy his theories, but we do know that Isreal has wanted to take out Iran's nuke program for a long time. They've done it once before and I wouldn't be surprised if they were wanting to do it again. If doing so would be right or smart is not what I'm debating, but we all know that Isreal would like to do it...

Toker
06-02-10, 04:01 PM
Sounds like it is actually starting to make sense now...

-Sauso-
06-02-10, 04:09 PM
Well don't worry, Israel will investigate itself.

ems_goof
06-02-10, 04:36 PM
They refused because the Israeli's would not allow some of the stuff they were bringing. Stuff like cement to help rebuild after Israel flatten Gaza in December 08. Israel doesn't care and let's them suffer. There is a humanitarian crisis in Gaza, and some people are trying to draw worldwide attention to it. I'd say they've done a pretty damn good job of that.



Shocking that you would try and use an Israeli propaganda site (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MEMRI#Controversy) as a source.



So Israel fires first, assaults the ship, and when some people try and defend themselves from attack, you lie and say they attacked the poor, defenseless commando's first? That's complete bullshit and revisionist history! I mean, it takes a suspension of all logic thought to think like you are. It's just retarded and a sad attempt to whitewash the events. And all you post are JPost articles, so we know you are swallowing the Israeli story hook, line, and sinker without so much as a question. It's really pathetic. Broaden your horizons some instead of swallowing whatever Israel feeds you.



Wow, Hamas fires some bottle rockets into Israel, so Israel punishes all Gazans for that with a blockade. Now that, most definitely, is illegal under international law. You can punish collectively for the actions of a few. I don't know how you can condone genocide, but bitch about some rockets that do virtually nothing. And you want to talk about civilian causalities? They massacred almost 1,000 civilians during the Gaza war! And wounded another 5,000! Look, if you want to support a terrorist state, fine. But you now have no right to complain about countries like Iran anymore.

Oh, and for the record, I've never once defended Hamas, but Hamas has nothing to do with this attack.

Hamas is the controlling political party in Palestine, and there are ongoing attacks on the Israeli people which they make no attempt to stop, so yes, they've caused the issue.
"Rockets that do virtually nothing". So I can come to your neighborhood, start shooting off rockets that have the potential to kill dozens or even hundreds each, but they "probably" won't hit anything, so that's okay? The people that live or work in the area where the rocket attacks happen live in a state of terror every day, but it's okay because the rockets "do virtually nothing".
Yes, the concept of a blockade is to stop pretty much EVERYTHING from coming in. That's the whole point.

Arreo
06-02-10, 04:47 PM
Yes, the concept of a blockade is to stop pretty much EVERYTHING from coming in. That's the whole point.

No, no it isn't. International law only allows for blockades as long as the do not unduly harm the civilian population of the effected country. IE an arms embargo or an economic blockade target spesific portions of a country while allowing civilians to continue to survive.

Many people are saying that the Isreali blockade is in fact a form of collective punishment (IE there are rockets being fired from Gaza therefor all Gazans are punished) which is illegal under multiple articles of the Forth Geneva Convention (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Geneva_Convention).

I'll go dig up a really good article that I was reading this morning... if I can remember where I found it...

...bigdog...
06-02-10, 04:58 PM
there is no right to "defend yourselves from attack" when you are attempting to run a legitimate blockade. Israel said go back. Israel said stop. israel said prepare to be boarded and inspected. these people think they are above the law, so they can die out at sea for all I care.

Trusting a bunch of nut job activitist begging for attention and money for their agenda over governments in the region (not just israel) is ridiculous. Not just ridiculous...typical childish bullshit.

If there is a blockade on Cuba, and American's say "we're going to run the blockade, and we're going to bring food and freedom to cubans"....then they're going to get sunk, regardless of what is or isn't on their boat.

There are right ways of bringing aid through israel's territory to Gaza and the West Bank....and then there's hostile, activist, dumbass ways. None of that aid is going to make an ounce of difference, and none of the people on that boat give a shit. They want to be on TV, to imagine they are somehow bringing awareness and heat to the debate, and that they are so desperately relevant to teh situation.

They aren't. so again....they can sink and die out there. they assume such a risk when they think the world outside of their bubble of activism is a pretty place. It's not. But hey, sticking it to the jews sure is fun, right?

The REAL debate here is about the legitimacy of the the blockade itself, and the occupation of Israel. and that's at least a worthy discussion. EVEN SO, none of that discussion involves saying "fuck your blockade, I do what I want". Just like that dumb italian journalist that got shot up in Iraq when her driver said "fuck it" and drove through an american road block. Doesn't matter if you don't respect the road block. Doesn't matter if you don't like the occupation. Doesn't matteer if you're an EU citizen, and thus you must be "more entitled" than the average Iraqi that DOES have to stop at that roadblock. What matters is, there's a road block. you see it. You drove through it. You get shot.

There's a blockade...and in this case an ISREALI blockade, where you know they are already on a hair trigger given their last few decades of drama and bullshit from Hamas et al.....and you decide to say "fuck it, I'm an activist, I do waht I want", and run the blockade.

Die at sea. either there is law, and acceptable ways of changing the law, or there is no law. these people chose to say "there is no law". And in that case, all that remains is firepower. The guys with the guns then win the argument (and that was Israel in this situation).

Arreo
06-02-10, 04:59 PM
http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Middle-East/2010/0602/Was-Israel-s-raid-on-Gaza-Freedom-Flotilla-legal
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/law/article7142055.ece

Basically, the raid in international waters was legal if and only if the blockade of Gaza is legal. The blockade is legal if and only if it is implimeneted in a way that is in accordance with international law. It is in accordance with internationl law (the Geneva convention) if and only if it can properly distinguish between harming those who attack Israel from civilians. The blockade must shield the civilian population of Gaza from as much hardship as possible.

And I would contend strongly (as does thee UNHCR, the Red Cross and Amnesty International and pretty much anyone except Isreal and the US) that Isreal is failing miserably at that. The seige of Gaza is affecting every single person living there, regardless of their age, sex or participation in firing rockets/throwing stones/shooting soldiers. The Isrealis are basically punishing everyone for the actions of the militants. That is a violation of international law and has been condemned as such by many world leaders and NGOs.

Edit: Exactly Big, the raid is perfectly legal and just as long as the blockade is legal. Which.... I don't think it is.

...bigdog...
06-02-10, 05:02 PM
If you "know the area quite well" perhaps you can explain to me how a ground convoy to Gaza through Syria or Lebanon would avoid Israel?

http://img72.imageshack.us/img72/1169/israelu.jpg

another turd looking for a fight.

Hey, clown. Commander is saying there are ways, ground and sea, that are available that ISRAEL ACCEPTS to get aid into Gaza and West Bank. The US uses them. US NGO's, and EU NGO's use them. the UN uses them. And thus, any legitimate aid that truly wants to AID uses them.

Instead, we have a bunch of cowboy yahoo's saying "fuck the man, let's run the blockade". Pity more of them weren't injured to get the point across. Hear an irish ship is on it's way....let's see how amenable they are this time to being boarded, to slwoing the fuck down, and respecting the fact that you don't just drive a ship full of "stuff" into a hostile territory without having to jump through a few hoops.

Activist pieces of shit ruin it for all the people that actually give a shit about what's going on, want to change things, and make some progress. You make everyone look like a hostile, idiotic fool. "let's get a ship, say we're putting some aid on it, and sail it to israel" = provocation. Have the ship inspected, provide documentation on who's on that ship, and what their intentions are. Alllow the ship's cargo to be checked by the authorities there.

Or....get shot. Welcome to the rest of the world. The Mediterranean and the Middle East are not the Gulf of Mexico and North America.

...bigdog...
06-02-10, 05:06 PM
Scary. Especially the picture of those monsters swinging pipes at armed soldiers.... Savages, don't they know that those pipes bruise?
right. I'm sure you're going to stand there, and turn the other cheek. you seem like that kind of guy who would, even though fully armed and serving in the capacity to control, just stand there and be beaten with a pipe, have rocks thrown at you, and stabbed.

American cops certainly NEVER shoot anyone who comes running at them with a pipe or knife. Ever. And if they did....omg it would be so unfair to all the pipe wielders out there.

yawn.

...bigdog...
06-02-10, 05:07 PM
Edit: Exactly Big, the raid is perfectly legal and just as long as the blockade is legal. Which.... I don't think it is.

and you base that on what? Plenty of aid DOES go into Gaza by boat and sea. And if that's true....then how is the blockade illegal?

We blockade the NK's just as much, if not worse. Much worse. What of that blockade?

SovietDooM
06-02-10, 05:08 PM
WHoo PIPE WEILDER A2137C

Arreo
06-02-10, 05:08 PM
another turd looking for a fight.

Hey, clown. Commander is saying there are ways, ground and sea, that are available that ISRAEL ACCEPTS to get aid into Gaza and West Bank. The US uses them. US NGO's, and EU NGO's use them. the UN uses them. And thus, any legitimate aid that truly wants to AID uses them.



Which is why Isreal only allows a quarter of the supplies that the UN says are necessary to provide for the basic existence of the Gazan population?

Sure, they let some aid get in there. They also shut a lot of it out or refuse to allow it in because it might be used to "build bunkers". For two years they wouldn't allow shoes and t-shirts to go into Gaza. They denied fuel oil from getting there for the better part of a year, and only relented when the power station was forced to shut down...

http://www1.voanews.com/english/news/middle-east/Israel-Allows-Clothing-Shoes-Into-Gaza-89875157.html
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/05/28/world/main6526479.shtml
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7395745.stm

How is that a just blockade? How is that not targeting a civilian population?

...bigdog...
06-02-10, 05:09 PM
the blockade, also, has been in effect for years. I'm positive the UNSC has made declarations and resolutions establishing whether or not it is legal. If the UNSC said the blockade is illegal, then the blockade is illegal. If they didn't, when asked or challenged (as I'm sure it was), then it's not illegal. At least according to about the only international "law" there is.

Fovezer
06-02-10, 05:16 PM
Hamas is the controlling political party in Palestine, and there are ongoing attacks on the Israeli people which they make no attempt to stop, so yes, they've caused the issue.

No, they haven't caused it. Israel has been oppressing the Palestinians for far longer than 3 years. Plus, before the Gaza War, there was a ceasefire agreement, which Israel broke, leading to more rockets. So I am not trying to absolve Hamas of any blame, but I am also not naive enough to pretend it is all the fault of one side and the other side is just a perfect little angel.


"Rockets that do virtually nothing". So I can come to your neighborhood, start shooting off rockets that have the potential to kill dozens or even hundreds each, but they "probably" won't hit anything, so that's okay? The people that live or work in the area where the rocket attacks happen live in a state of terror every day, but it's okay because the rockets "do virtually nothing".

The rockets don't even kill a dozen people a year, let alone one rocket. Look, I agree Hamas is wrong for shooting off rockets, and I will not defend them, but the level of violence Israel responded with and their callous disregard for civilians led to a massacre in 2008/2009. They weren't just killing members of Hamas, they were indiscriminately killing civilians, too. It's borderline genocide!


Yes, the concept of a blockade is to stop pretty much EVERYTHING from coming in. That's the whole point.

Including adequate building supplies to rebuild, inadequate food, water, and medicine, etc. It is also illegal to punish a group of people for the actions of a few under international law, so Israel is breaking that one. It is a war crime.

ems_goof
06-02-10, 05:16 PM
Well, if you want to pull the Geneva Convention into this, the rocket attacks that Hamas continue to perform would constitute a "grave violation" of the Fourth Geneva Convention. Specifically: "Extensive destruction and appropriation of property not justified by military necessity and carried out unlawfully and wantonly" Or, would you like to claim that blindly firing off rockets into areas full of civilians isn't "destruction of property not justified by military necessity".
Notice, Palestine have NOT signed onto the Geneva Convention, so they aren't afforded the protections listed. See the Fourth Geneva Convention, Article 4.
http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/385ec082b509e76c41256739003e636d/6756482d86146898c125641e004aa3c5

Art. 4. Persons protected by the Convention are those who, at a given moment and in any manner whatsoever, find themselves, in case of a conflict or occupation, in the hands of a Party to the conflict or Occupying Power of which they are not nationals.

Nationals of a State which is not bound by the Convention are not protected by it. Nationals of a neutral State who find themselves in the territory of a belligerent State, and nationals of a co-belligerent State, shall not be regarded as protected persons while the State of which they are nationals has normal diplomatic representation in the State in whose hands they are.

...bigdog...
06-02-10, 05:17 PM
Which is why Isreal only allows a quarter of the supplies that the UN says are necessary to provide for the basic existence of the Gazan population?

Sure, they let some aid get in there. They also shut a lot of it out or refuse to allow it in because it might be used to "build bunkers". For two years they wouldn't allow shoes and t-shirts to go into Gaza. They denied fuel oil from getting there for the better part of a year, and only relented when the power station was forced to shut down...

http://www1.voanews.com/english/news/middle-east/Israel-Allows-Clothing-Shoes-Into-Gaza-89875157.html
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/05/28/world/main6526479.shtml
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7395745.stm

How is that a just blockade? How is that not targeting a civilian population?

And?

What was the purpose of the blockade? We embargo'd Iraq for years, and certainly the oil-for-food program didn't do much to help them. We knew it. As did the one responsible for being embargo'd int he first place.

So?

who's ultimately responsible for this blockade, and has the power to make it stop?

25% of what the UN says the people need? So....gazans are at somali-level of starvation and malnutrition? they're dying by the 100,000's? Really?

If all we're going to do is think "I want to say this" and then go find an article that we can link that says it.....we aren't finding out what's going on. We're just justifying what we want to think is going on by people who make money off providing such a justification.

Are there people smuggling weapons and bombs and terrorists into Gaza, by air, land, sea, and tunnels? Yes. Fact. Proven. On all sides of the border. So long as these things occur...what is Israel to do? Just say fuck it, we don't want to make activists unhappy? Do you think israel gives a shit about activists?

Does israel have an open border policy? Does Israel not have soverignty over it's own waters (given that Palestine is israeli territory)?

When did that blockade come into existence, and why? And if that's not even relevant in the analysis of the situation....then this discussion, like most, is a bunch of talking heads talking tough, but not rational people thinking about the issue, and solving it.

so long as people are getting caught smuggling bombs, and weapons, and terrorists into Israel (and they are), then Israel will be vigilant in policing it's borders. As is the US. As is China. And russia. and ______. All this boils down to is activists hoping to be famous, and hoping even more than, when the bullets come, someone other than them will be shot so they can be even MORE famous, and tell the story of the dead people. Not real doctors, and nurses, and teachers, and builders who want to make a difference.

Arreo
06-02-10, 05:19 PM
the blockade, also, has been in effect for years. I'm positive the UNSC has made declarations and resolutions establishing whether or not it is legal. If the UNSC said the blockade is illegal, then the blockade is illegal. If they didn't, when asked or challenged (as I'm sure it was), then it's not illegal. At least according to about the only international "law" there is.

Umm.... they have.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_Resolution_1860
http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N09/204/26/PDF/N0920426.pdf?OpenElement



Expressing grave concern also at the deepening humanitarian crisis in Gaza,

Emphasizing the need to ensure sustained and regular flow of goods and
people through the Gaza crossings,

Recognizing the vital role played by UNRWA in providing humanitarian and
economic assistance within Gaza,
(...)

2. Calls for the unimpeded provision and distribution throughout Gaza of
humanitarian assistance, including of food, fuel and medical treatment;

3. Welcomes the initiatives aimed at creating and opening humanitarian
corridors and other mechanisms for the sustained delivery of humanitarian aid;

4. Calls on Member States to support international efforts to alleviate the
humanitarian and economic situation in Gaza, including through urgently needed
additional contributions to UNRWA and through the Ad Hoc Liaison Committee;

They did again on Tuesday: http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2010/sc9940.doc.htm


The Security Council stresses that the situation in Gaza is not sustainable. The Council re-emphasizes the importance of the full implementation of resolutions 1850 (2008 )and 1860 (2009). In that context, it reiterates its grave concern at the humanitarian situation in Gaza and stresses the need for sustained and regular flow of goods and people to Gaza as well as unimpeded provision and distribution of humanitarian assistance throughout Gaza.

They've condemned it and expressed concern multiple times.

Arreo
06-02-10, 05:22 PM
And?
25% of what the UN says the people need? So....gazans are at somali-level of starvation and malnutrition? they're dying by the 100,000's? Really?

I find it hard to belive also, but given that it is coming from reports generated on the ground by UN humanitarian observers... I tend to trust it. Unless the UN is lying about it and so is the Red Cross, Amnesty, OXFAM, and all the other NGOs?

...bigdog...
06-02-10, 05:22 PM
It's borderline genocide!

Including adequate building supplies to rebuild, inadequate food, water, and medicine, etc. It is also illegal to punish a group of people for the actions of a few under international law, so Israel is breaking that one. It is a war crime.

Israel is a nuclear armed power, with more than adequate resources to fully dispose of any people in its vicinity. easily. And without consequence. Iran doesn't have the capacity to deliver, Iraq is off the grid, and Egpyt, syria, lebanon, jordan, and others in the region will lie down and beg for mercy just as they did decades ago.

Given Israel's superiority in the region, militarily........where's the genocide again? How many millions of gazans are there? Why isn't israel killing them "indiscriminately"?

throwing around words like genocide in the israeli/palestinian conversation is yet another reason nobody takes this crap seriously. Go look up Rwanda, or Serbia, or Iraq, or Sudan, or something that actually even remotely approaches genocide if you're going to say such junk.

Given the level of provaction Israel has endured, for decades now, from inferior parties, activists, and politically motivated wannabe extremists.....it's amazing gaza and the west bank even exist. Did the US tolerate such extremism? No. We destroyed 2 countries simply because some buildings were blown up and some people died in downtown NYC.

the absence of perspective here simply indicates the absence of thought. Propaganda and bullshit.

Arreo
06-02-10, 05:26 PM
And?
Are there people smuggling weapons and bombs and terrorists into Gaza, by air, land, sea, and tunnels? Yes. Fact. Proven. On all sides of the border. So long as these things occur...what is Israel to do? Just say fuck it, we don't want to make activists unhappy? Do you think israel gives a shit about activists?

Does israel have an open border policy? Does Israel not have soverignty over it's own waters (given that Palestine is israeli territory)?

When did that blockade come into existence, and why? And if that's not even relevant in the analysis of the situation....then this discussion, like most, is a bunch of talking heads talking tough, but not rational people thinking about the issue, and solving it.

so long as people are getting caught smuggling bombs, and weapons, and terrorists into Israel (and they are), then Israel will be vigilant in policing it's borders. As is the US. As is China. And russia. and ______. All this boils down to is activists hoping to be famous, and hoping even more than, when the bullets come, someone other than them will be shot so they can be even MORE famous, and tell the story of the dead people. Not real doctors, and nurses, and teachers, and builders who want to make a difference.

Absolutely, I agree with you. The smuggling tunnels are the means by which weapons and explosives are getting into Gaza. And that is reprehensable.

But that shouldn't mean that 1.5 million people are reduced to living in collapsed buildings facing shortages of water, power, food and medicine all while having no jobs. Not everyone of those 1.5 million people are firing rockets or shooting IDF soldiers. There are better ways to deal with a problem then just walling it off and calling it a solution.

And I don't call it a "war crime" or "genocide" or whatever. That's stupid and sensationalist.

It is a humanitarian crisis, and one that has a very simple man-made cause.

...bigdog...
06-02-10, 05:28 PM
Umm.... they have.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_Resolution_1860
http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N09/204/26/PDF/N0920426.pdf?OpenElement


They did again on Tuesday: http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2010/sc9940.doc.htm



They've condemned it and expressed concern multiple times.

condemning it, and expressing concern are NOT the equivalent of issuing an order (which the UNSC has the power to do, and Israel has requirement to accept as a member of the UN) to remove the blockade. Sure, people will claim the veto powers of the US, England, and maybe france.....but such vetoes didn't protect Iraq when material breach was declared in 1441. Or in authorizing the oil-food embargo, and many others.

As for the NGO's whining.....what are they to do? Say "everything is fine"? when are you ever going to see an organization that's very existence (financially) is dependent on people's perception of need? Are we ever going to see the church say "ok, no tithe this year, we had a good 4th quarter in 2009"? No.

So, I don't believe what most NGO's say. And I most certainly don't believe anything coming out of the UN general assembly. Nor do I believe anything coming off the UN's human rights commission.

If the UNSC wants to stop the embargo, then they can pass a resolution to do so. They won't, for whatever reasons, likely tending on the ultimate legality of the blockade/embargo, esepcially when compared to similar actions against NK, Iraq, Iran, Somalia, etc.

Arreo
06-02-10, 05:31 PM
If you choose not to believe the UNHCR or NGOs then that is your business. If you choose not to belive the video that journalists bring out of the Palestinian territories, or the pictures they take, or the stories they write then that is your problem.

Maybe it is just a giant conspiracy to suck aid dollars from us and really everything is just going peachy-keen in Gaza.

...bigdog...
06-02-10, 05:33 PM
Absolutely, I agree with you. The smuggling tunnels are the means by which weapons and explosives are getting into Gaza. And that is reprehensable.

But that shouldn't mean that 1.5 million people are reduced to living in collapsed buildings facing shortages of water, power, food and medicine all while having no jobs. Not everyone of those 1.5 million people are firing rockets or shooting IDF soldiers. There are better ways to deal with a problem then just walling it off and calling it a solution.

And I don't call it a "war crime" or "genocide" or whatever. That's stupid and sensationalist.

It is a humanitarian crisis, and one that has a very simple man-made cause.

exactly. So which is the cause, and which is the effect? Hamas, or Israel?

If it's which came first...it's going to be Hamas. there was no blockade (to this extent) prior to Hamas being in power, and most certainly showing ther absence of intent to police their own people, stop extremists, and bring terrorists to justice.

Recall, Afghanistan was destroyed for such things. Here...israel runs a small potatoes blockade....and they're somehow way out of line?

I'd love to hear how you "deal with this problem" without walling it off and calling it a solution. Open borders between israel and gaza? everyone just puts their guns down and goes back to work?

that kind of pie in the sky bullshit works here in teh states, when unions are striking to give pensions to their great grandchildren's children.

End the blockade...hell...end all of it, and let them have their land....and what happens? Peace? Hamas and Hezbollah and Islamic Jihad and the usual suspects all just say "good" and shake hands and it's over?

are we at that point of naivety now?

Arreo
06-02-10, 05:34 PM
condemning it, and expressing concern are NOT the equivalent of issuing an order (which the UNSC has the power to do, and Israel has requirement to accept as a member of the UN) to remove the blockade. Sure, people will claim the veto powers of the US, England, and maybe france.....but such vetoes didn't protect Iraq when material breach was declared in 1441. Or in authorizing the oil-food embargo, and many others.

So the US dosen't protect Isreal on the UNSC? They veto any resolution that has any teeth to it...

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/UN/usvetoes.html

How is that not protecting them?

_BuRn_
06-02-10, 05:37 PM
Image removed by DancingCorpse. If you want to post images from other sites, use TPGs image uploader or use a image hosting website.


Nothing to see here folks, please return to your normal activities.

ems_goof
06-02-10, 05:37 PM
The same way China always vetoes anything dealing with North Korea maybe?

...bigdog...
06-02-10, 05:37 PM
If you choose not to believe the UNHCR or NGOs then that is your business. If you choose not to belive the video that journalists bring out of the Palestinian territories, or the pictures they take, or the stories they write then that is your problem.

Maybe it is just a giant conspiracy to suck aid dollars from us and really everything is just going peachy-keen in Gaza.

maybe. Just as people choose not to believe videos american's show of us building schools, and hospitals, and roads in Iraq and Afghanistan. Or videos showing someone being beaten by the cops having a knife in their hand, high out of their mind, screaming I'm going to kill you, and struggling.

the video's you see are certainly real. Do they represent the truth...or simply the video you see that someone wants you to watch (and gets paid for you to watch)?

how about the video's of BP actually trying to stop the oil leak in the gulf? How fun would it be to watch those? Oh.....certainly not as much fun as watching the rig exploding, or the saw getting stuck, or the top kill failing, or the _______?

Bad news is always way more fun, and profitable, than good news. You know this.

Imagining that I think things are peachy keen in Gaza just makes you one of those activist, out of your mind, snobs I mentioned above. Either you really give a shit, or you just want to sit on the porch, drink some tea, spit out your dip, and say "those damn _______. can't trust em".

fill in the _____ with...

republicans
democrats
jews
mexicans
US soldiers
Iraqi soldiers
EU nations
UN nations

I'm not interested in such a conversation.

Arreo
06-02-10, 05:37 PM
You keep saying Afghanistan, but last time I checked we didn't bomb the infrastructure of that country indiscriminately and then refuse to help rebuild it or indeed let anyone else rebuild it.

We restored power-plants, built schools and bridges, fixed hospitals, provided water purification systems.

What has Israel done to help rebuild Gaza? What have they done to help the civilians there? By Israeli logic we should be not allowing any aid into Afghanistan because a percentage of it's population still is shooting at Coalition forces.

...bigdog...
06-02-10, 05:38 PM
So the US dosen't protect Isreal on the UNSC? They veto any resolution that has any teeth to it...

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/UN/usvetoes.html

How is that not protecting them?

Feel free to bring up the UNSC resolution that was passed to end the blockade, with teeth, that was vetoed. Love to read it.

Or...do we just sit on the porch, and say such things?

...bigdog...
06-02-10, 05:40 PM
You keep saying Afghanistan, but last time I checked we didn't bomb the infrastructure of that country indiscriminately and then refuse to help rebuild it or indeed let anyone else rebuild it.
so agian...israel is a well armed, hgih technology, nuclear power with the capacity to destroy entire nations in the region.

Israel bombed them indiscriminately? really? their infrastructure? who.... the palestinians....or Hamas? who's infrastructure is it?

...bigdog...
06-02-10, 05:42 PM
Nothing to see here folks, please return to your normal activities.

what is this joke?

When was Palestine EVER a country in the last 1000 years? Prior to it being established by the UN/allies after WWII....it was controlled by syria, egypt, and jordan, and the palestinians were just as marginalized and discriminated against then as they are now. I guess they just chose not to throw rocks at the cops back then, though. that...or we just didn't have as much fun reading about it.

...bigdog...
06-02-10, 05:44 PM
So the US dosen't protect Isreal on the UNSC? They veto any resolution that has any teeth to it...

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/UN/usvetoes.html

How is that not protecting them?

and even then.....how many abstentions we seeing in these votes? England, Germany, France, Japan, Norway....

but oh....we vetoed it, so it must be us protecting them.

You imagine what you want to read, and then you go searching for something that says that. That's not the way it's supposed to work.

_BuRn_
06-02-10, 05:46 PM
what is this joke?
...and the palestinians were just as marginalized and discriminated against then as they are now..


Well that just makes it all dandy.

jabberwock
06-02-10, 06:50 PM
another turd looking for a fight.

Hey, clown. Commander is saying there are ways, ground and sea, that are available that ISRAEL ACCEPTS to get aid into Gaza and West Bank. The US uses them. US NGO's, and EU NGO's use them. the UN uses them. And thus, any legitimate aid that truly wants to AID uses them.




Unless you are going to go through Lebanon, Egypt, or Syria, then you have to go through Israel to get to Gaza and they chose Israel and were Repelled away.
 



If you "know the area quite well" perhaps you can explain to me how a ground convoy to Gaza through Syria or Lebanon would avoid Israel?

http://img72.imageshack.us/img72/1169/israelu.jpg

There is no fight here, just pointing out glaringly obvious factual errors. If you go through Lebanon or Syria, you go through Israel. Simple geography.

You seem to be the one ALWAYS looking for a fight, bigdog. Name calling for correcting 100% false statements is stretching it a bit, even for you.

***COMMANDER***
06-02-10, 07:27 PM
Like was stated, there are checkpoints that Israel mans and approves aid in..... Known routes, that are approved before the aid gets there and is welcomed and checked and much passes through inspection. You want to come through sea and avoid the inspections and just hop up on the ports of Israel and unload, prepare to attempt through Israel, because Israel has had enough and is not going to tolerate it and seems to me that they need to make some examples of Illegal Rogue parties that state their crimes while they are in the action of those crimes....

This other vessel coming in, Israel is not going to try and appease and keep friends this time, they are going to get down to business and treat the vessel as it is, an unauthorized vessel in route to enter Israel without going through the Israeli government for permission to be granted to them....

I bet they won't be so nice this time, especially after their Commandos got hurt this last go around trying to be all nice about it.

Toker
06-02-10, 07:29 PM
I bet it gives you a hard on, eh?

***COMMANDER***
06-02-10, 07:35 PM
I bet it gives you a hard on, eh?

Look man, if this is all you have to bring to the discussion, take a hike, while you can on your own free will.

-Sauso-
06-02-10, 07:39 PM
Why would some women bring children on the boats? Seriously some stupid people there. When you know you will be confronted with force.

I am by no means picking sides in this situation since it's always a gong show over there.

Arreo
06-02-10, 07:39 PM
I bet it gives you a hard on, eh?

And on that tasteful note, I bid adieu to this thread. There's no point in having a debate if this is what it devolves into.

***COMMANDER***
06-02-10, 07:44 PM
Why would some women bring children on the boats? Seriously some stupid people there. When you know you will be confronted with force.

I am by no means picking sides in this situation since it's always a gong show over there.

It shows the mentality of activist on the ship.

Toker
06-02-10, 07:44 PM
Look man, if this is all you have to bring to the discussion, take a hike, while you can on your own free will.

338

***COMMANDER***
06-02-10, 07:47 PM
And on that tasteful note, I bid adieu to this thread. There's no point in having a debate if this is what it devolves into.

Don't worry yourself about a post like that, he won't make another one like that, but to use that one post in reference to the 18 PAGES of post and 1500 views is way extreme..... But you can bow out at any time... Many learned a lot from this thread. It is very educational, especially when so many have been misinformed in the past about the situation.

Toker
06-02-10, 07:48 PM
I understand. I'd do the same if BD was owning my ass that hard too...

Toker
06-02-10, 07:49 PM
Don't worry yourself about a post like that, he won't make another one like that, but to use that one post in reference to the 18 PAGES of post and 1500 views is way extreme..... But you can bow out at any time... Many learned a lot from this thread. It is very educational, especially when so many have been misinformed in the past about the situation.

Out of curiousity, what did you learn?

...bigdog...
06-02-10, 08:15 PM
It shows the mentality of activist on the ship.exactly. You'd think aid ships would be full of professional aid related types. Doctors. Lawyers. Teachers. Engineers. Nuns and bandages kind of stuff.

But no...those people are going to do the right thing, follow the rules, and get to the people they want to help in a manner that will help them. And what fun is that? How's that going to make the front page of the huffington post and aljazeera.bbc?

So instead, we'll put people that will make little difference, and unhelpful and risky situations like small children on the boat. So it'll look good on tv when they're all killed by the idf.

Such people being used to sell newspapers and push agendas. Nothing more.

Now... this irish ship has like 5 people on it. That at the 5 or 6 crewmen.....means it perhaps is a LEGIT aid ship. One that has been inspected by customs agents, and likely will submit to being boarded by israeli agents prior to landing in gaza. Like any legit aid program...you play ball because your TRUE OBJECTIVE is to help people so you submit to the local authority. You don't spit in the face of the sovereign and act like there is no law just to look good on tv.



Posted from Samsung Moment using Tapatalk

...bigdog...
06-02-10, 08:19 PM
There is no fight here, just pointing out glaringly obvious factual errors. If you go through Lebanon or Syria, you go through Israel. Simple geography.

You seem to be the one ALWAYS looking for a fight, bigdog. Name calling for correcting 100% false statements is stretching it a bit, even for you.

He's not making a false statement. That's the whole reason I say your punk ass is just looking for a fight. Read it. Coubtries can find legit ways to enter by land sea and air. Even syria and lebanon and jordan. All of those countries can, and DO coordinate aid convoys into gaza. By land. Through israel if not in egypt and then into gaza. Dufus.

Posted from Samsung Moment using Tapatalk

...bigdog...
06-02-10, 08:44 PM
We restored power-plants, built schools and bridges, fixed hospitals, provided water purification systems.

What has Israel done to help rebuild Gaza? What have they done to help the civilians there? By Israeli logic we should be not allowing any aid into Afghanistan because a percentage of it's population still is shooting at Coalition forces.

That's not the right analogy. Because most certainly "aid" coming into afghanistan is cleared by the US before it even leaves its home country. You don't just get on truck, fill it up with stuff, and drive across the border or land at an airport in kabul. Or in baghdad for that matter.

We arrest and even kill people that do such things unannounced and without papers pretty routinely i'd assume. That's because we don't want things brought in to help the enemy. Israel does the same thing as us, then. Does it affect more than the enemy? Perhaps. but such wouldn"t be an issue if the taliban would surrender their leaders and disband and if militants from pakistan and other sources would stop cauisng trouble. Such wouldn't be a problem if hamas would concede power, turn over terrorists (on the world's list of legit terrorists, not just israel's), and be a proactive, believable ally in the war against such things like hamas, hezbollah, al qaeda, etc.

Afghanistan refused to do that, and we destroyed them, leaving them with a puppet government that we control. Same in iraq, with a few other reasons attached. So.....why isn't israel allowed to do the same to gaza and west bank? Why all the drama? Why not the same occupation combined with puppet regime change?

You can't expect israeli contractors to build roads and hospitals in gaza without the IDF being the controlling presence.

So as usual...you're stuck between the rock of imperialism in occupation and regime change and the hard place of international whining and politics.

Pity we get to choose the rock, and israel doesn't. Issues and casualties might be smaller in scale in israel and gaza's case. Perhaps a bit more localized. But the only real solution still remains a full and total military takeover and integration of the palestinians into israeli society.

Posted from Samsung Moment using Tapatalk

...bigdog...
06-02-10, 08:53 PM
And the smart reader would see that I just said a 2 country system is untenable, and that israel needs to get over it, grow up, be civil, and accept that they won't be the voting majority in their own land. Because the whole situation stinks from the creation of israel up to today. Modify the constitution, put whatever protections in place so both peoples can cooexist. That's the only end.

And it's imposssible. Wars have been fought over much less, so get it over with. But then, of course, israel going to war with palestine is like us going to war with cuba. It's just not fair. For some reason....fairness has something to do with fighting a war...like this is some kind of boxing league with designated weight classes to ensure a "good fight".

Posted from Samsung Moment using Tapatalk

_BuRn_
06-02-10, 09:19 PM
And the smart reader would see that I just said a 2 country system is untenable, and that israel needs to get over it, grow up, be civil, and accept that they won't be the voting majority in their own land. Because the whole situation stinks from the creation of israel up to today. Modify the constitution, put whatever protections in place so both peoples can cooexist. That's the only end.

And it's imposssible. Wars have been fought over much less, so get it over with. But then, of course, israel going to war with palestine is like us going to war with cuba. It's just not fair. For some reason....fairness has something to do with fighting a war...like this is some kind of boxing league with designated weight classes to ensure a "good fight".

Posted from Samsung Moment using Tapatalk


Extremely insightful post, well said.

jabberwock
06-03-10, 03:59 AM
He's not making a false statement. That's the whole reason I say your punk ass is just looking for a fight. Read it. Coubtries can find legit ways to enter by land sea and air. Even syria and lebanon and jordan. All of those countries can, and DO coordinate aid convoys into gaza. By land. Through israel if not in egypt and then into gaza. Dufus.

Posted from Samsung Moment using Tapatalk


From COMMANDER,
"Unless you are going to go through Lebanon, Egypt, or Syria, then you have to go through Israel to get to Gaza."

You said "through Israel". Commander stated something entirely different. I read the fuck out of it already, and that's why I posted. Either COMMANDER accidentally writes sentences that are directly opposed to what his intended meaning is, or he's wrong. Either way it's still wrong. It was a simple correction that seems to be misunderstood.

My punk ass likes reading, and my assumption is that people write what they mean.


"I don't know what you mean by 'glory'," Alice said.
Humpty Dumpty smiled contemptuously. "Of course you don't -- till I tell you. I meant 'there's a nice knock-down argument for you!'"
"But 'glory' doesn't mean 'a nice knock-down argument'," Alice objected.
"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone. "It means just what I choose it to mean - neither more or less."
"The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so many different things."
"The question is," said Humpty Dumpty, "which is to be master - that's all."

***COMMANDER***
06-03-10, 09:29 AM
http://www.jpost.com/International/Article.aspx?id=177328


US concerned over IHH-Hamas ties
By HILARY LEILA KRIEGER
03/06/2010
State Department: Links between al-Qaida, IHH "can't be validated."

WASHINGTON – The US government confirmed on Wednesday that the Turkish aid organization behind the ship Israel commandeered Monday had contacts with Hamas, and expressed deep concern over that relationship.

The United States considers Hamas a terrorist organization, though officials noted yesterday that the Turkish aid group, Insani Yardim Vakfi, known by its Turkish initials IHH, had not been designated as a foreign terrorist organization.

triggerhappy2005
06-03-10, 09:31 AM
So if they had 'contacts' with Hamas, why were they let go?

And what do they mean when they say contacts?

Are they inferring there is a relationship between the two?

If so, why were they let go?

This makes no sense.

***COMMANDER***
06-03-10, 09:37 AM
http://www.jpost.com/International/Article.aspx?id=177334


'Don't submit to outside probe of raid'
By ILAN EVYATAR AND YAAKOV KATZ
03/06/2010
Former UK commander urges Israel to act.

Israel should not agree to an independent international inquiry of the raid on the Gaza flotilla that left at least nine people dead, Col. (ret.) Richard Kemp, the former commander of the British forces in Afghanistan, told The Jerusalem Post Wednesday.

“Israel has a democratically elected government and like every other democratically elected government in the world, Israel should carry out its own investigation,” said Kemp.

triggerhappy2005
06-03-10, 09:51 AM
As if the Jpost is an impartial observer.

That's like asking Fox News for an impartial critique on Dick Cheney.

Keep digging that hole commander.

***COMMANDER***
06-03-10, 10:06 AM
Photo by: .
'Don't submit to outside probe of raid'
By ILAN EVYATAR AND YAAKOV KATZ
03/06/2010
Former UK commander urges Israel to act.

Col. (ret.) Richard Kemp, the former commander of the British forces in Afghanistan, told The Jerusalem Post Wednesday.

This is a British Commander, not an Israeli.

triggerhappy2005
06-03-10, 10:17 AM
Just b/c a British person says it, doesn't mean it's the correct thing to do.

An incident involving citizens from different countries, especially if they were the victims, should involve all affected countries.

Self-policing obviously doesn't work with Israel.

***COMMANDER***
06-03-10, 11:04 AM
Just b/c a British person says it, doesn't mean it's the correct thing to do.

An incident involving citizens from different countries

Self-policing obviously doesn't work with Israel.

Oh, you talking about the ones that have direct links to Hamas (a terrorist organization) or the blind sheep followers that jumped on the bandwagon.

Let me ask you a direct question.... Do you support, condone, agree with, or approve of the Hamas terrorist oganization?

Fovezer
06-03-10, 12:00 PM
A 19-year-old American citizen was among one of the dead. He was shot four times in the head and once in the chest.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/06/03/furkan-dogan-us-citizen-k_n_599173.html

Yep, that definitely sounds like self-defense, and not overkill or an execution at all! Come on, Commander, don't you have another shitty JPost article to post about how this kid probably shot himself, or whatever the official Israeli story is that you need to regurgitate?

And Israel is off sabotaging ships now, too. They really have no shame.
http://www.irishcentral.com/news/Irish-ship-Rachel-Corrie-was-sabotaged-by-Israeli-intelligence-says-report-95425309.html

bust331
06-03-10, 12:03 PM
No no fove....he was using a club, that automatically warrants being shot in the head 4 times.

/sarcasm

_BuRn_
06-03-10, 12:14 PM
I don't agree with the word 'terrorist' and how it is applied Ad nauseam this day and age.

All instances are point of view exercises where terms become fluid - terrorist, rebel, freedom fighter, patriot.

It a depends on where you get your news from and whether or not it was your family and friends dying.

...bigdog...
06-03-10, 12:22 PM
No no fove....he was using a club, that automatically warrants being shot in the head 4 times.

/sarcasmright. so next time you're getting pulled over for something you think you are innocent of, do it with a club in your hand, run towards the cop, and hit him with it.

On any street in America.

And you'll get shot. And likely killed. And no one is going to feel sorry for you.

What the fuck kind of reasoning says, when soldiers land on your boat to enforce a blockade you KNOW is in place (regardless of whether you think you are "innocent" or entitled to disregard it), that you get clubs and knives and poles, and start fighting the soldiers?

And then.....what the fuck kind of idiot acts surprised when said soldiers shoot and kill you?

Oh...he got shot in the head 4 times. I'm sure if he had only been shot ONCE, you would all be saying "oh, yes, that's fine then".

Fucking....pathetic....wannabe....activist.....idi ots. Such is why such issues persist, and will persist. Because the "voice of the movement" are the idiots posting above.

And please do let me know how it works out for you, when you protest your next ticket with a club. Hell, just jump out of the car, pick up a rock, and throw it at the cop. That seems acceptable practice in most parts of the world. So do it here, and let's see what happens. Or perhaps, just jump out of the car, and jump up and down all crazy, and scream "death to cops" as he's walking towards you. Let's see how that works out as well.

And not a god damn person here is going to pity, or feel sorry, or even stand up for you. So....why are we standing up for these people again? What "right" did they have to do what they did? Were they all just sitting on the deck, with their arms folded, allowing the inspection? Were they sitting there in silent protest, truly non-violent? Or....did they do what the videos CLEARLY show....and start a fight.

You don't blame the cop pulling you over for speeding who shoots you. You figure out why you got shot, regardless of whether or not your were speeding. Get out of the car with any form of hostility directed at that cop, and you get shot.

BigHub
06-03-10, 12:27 PM
It's amazing how things work.

...bigdog...
06-03-10, 12:29 PM
I had this same conversation with some german and french scientist friends long ago, about the difference in the ways we see things like cops and law. Our police carry fire arms. We do what the police tell us to do.

They say it's because we live in a police state, and that we are afraid, and that it's totalitarian.

and I say it's because we have a mutual respect for the law, and wish that those who are truly breaking the law be punished. Severely.

In germany, on any given may day.....if not all of europe....people are out there specifically to fight the cops. Same goes for WTO protests and geneva protests and ____ protests. Out there SPECIFICALLY to fight the cops.

Why don't they do that here? Because we are afraid? ...or because we understand that laws exist for society to function. Rule of law, or chaos. You don't pick and choose which laws YOU want to observe, just as you don't want the government to pick and choose which laws it wants to enforce. We get that, and they don't.

For a recent showing of this, see: Greece, where people are so angry their entitlements and taxes are going to change, they start burning their own cities down, including their own citizens working in their own businesses.

Fucking....pathetic....worthless.....activist....i diots.

You know what's also interesting about these pieces of shit, worldwide? Their age seems to never change.

Why are they always in that 18-25 age bracket? Anything come to mind?

Yeah...it's the having a job, a family, children, money, responsibility, and understanding of the big picture. It's called growing the fuck up, and realizing your parents aren't always going to come and post your bail and solve your problems.

That, and it's the arm chair wannabe that read, and comment, but never bother to actually get out there in the tear gas and do some time for the riot. No...they'll just cheer from the sidelines, in here, where it's safe. So they can look like they give a shit and feel like they're going to make a difference.

...bigdog...
06-03-10, 12:36 PM
I don't agree with the word 'terrorist' and how it is applied Ad nauseam this day and age.

All instances are point of view exercises where terms become fluid - terrorist, rebel, freedom fighter, patriot.

It a depends on where you get your news from and whether or not it was your family and friends dying. that's like saying you don't agree with the word "enemy" in a war. Of course it's all a matter of perspective as to who the "enemy" is. North vs South. Nazi's vs Allies. Jews vs Arabs. Whatever.

But to say that you don't agree with the word "terrorist".....a terrorist is like a saboteur. Someone who's not acting under the authority of a government or entity, but rather as an individual, or group, transcending borders and thus government accountability for their actions. Guys like Osama bin laden are "terrorists".

Is he a freedom fighter? Who's freedom is he fighting for? Yours? Al Qaeda's? What people is he trying to free?

Or...we can act all educated and stuff.... and pick up on the blogs and postings of the snooty, and REPEAT what they say when they cringe at calling someone a terrorist, because it sounds bad, and impartial, and we want to sound smart, and unbiased. Such lamity.

BruceBloodMaster
06-03-10, 12:36 PM
Those are two Really Good posts BD ! and I say that not to blow smoke up your ass but its Exactley how I feel about this matter ! The other thing that seems rather funny to me is that these "peaceful" protestors on the boarded ship seemed to all (if not most) Gas Masks............. seems to me that the last time I was on a cruise ship the didn't hand out gas masks but then again that was a long time ago. Maybe things have changed. Peaceful MY ASS !

...bigdog...
06-03-10, 12:45 PM
I don't blame them for trying to protect themselves, peacefully. Of course....why would you need a gas mask unless of course you anticipate provoking the authority to use gas against you.

or perhaps....they were simply in a box labelled "children's medicine" intended for delivery to the palestinian authority, aka Hamas, aka people who would likely want to use gas masks.

Such is the reason such things have to be inspected, and confiscated. Because even if they WERE for protection of those on the ship who just so happen to think that the Israeli's gas people for fun (and they're entitled to think that).....when they land in palestinian territory, they most certainly aren't going to be taking that gas mask back with them.

Same goes for anything useful.

Peopel should also keep in mind, when aid convoys are going into gaza, it MATTERS WHO THE AID IS GOING TO. Any rational person knows that when bags of rice are indiscriminately thrown off the back of the truck in somalia, or rwanda, or _______ in conflict, the people with the GUNS (who are likely the source of the problem) are going to get fed first, bandaged first, and stockpiled, FIRST. Israel can at least TRY to control who gets what. But you land that boat on a dock in Gaza, and Hamas (the GOVERNMENT) is there, waiting to take the goods, and distribute them as THEY see fit. Not what the PEOPLE see fit.

But oh....no......some dumb ass, misguided, pie in the sky wannabe's got killed thinking the world is a joke and their parents will save them...and it's such a tragedy.

how about we make a flotilla to bring equal rights to women in Dubai and Saudi Arabia? We'll just land the boat, and start snatching off people's scarves and burkhas. Or how about we make a flotilla of aid and send it off into North Korea. We'll just land, hand out food and medicine, and get on our boat and leave, right? Everything will be just fine.

But oh...somehow the logic and rationality is different when it's israel and arabs. For some reason, israel gets none of that benefit of the doubt, none of that respect of sovereignty, and understanding.

_BuRn_
06-03-10, 12:56 PM
that's like saying you don't agree with the word "enemy" in a war. Of course it's all a matter of perspective as to who the "enemy" is. North vs South. Nazi's vs Allies. Jews vs Arabs. Whatever.

But to say that you don't agree with the word "terrorist".....a terrorist is like a saboteur. Someone who's not acting under the authority of a government or entity, but rather as an individual, or group, transcending borders and thus government accountability for their actions. Guys like Osama bin laden are "terrorists".



http://astridvanwoerkom.wordpress.com/2010/05/14/autistic-teen-charged-with-terrorist-threat-over-sketch/

Just a small example of the misuse this word has seen of late. You can argue the definition, I stated I have a problem with its misuse.
It has become a label and stigma that gets freely applied anytime those in control wish to manipulate the audience to produce the desired emotional response.
While you are right on many points, your incessant need of one-upmanship detracts from the validity of your arguments.

You can blog about that if you like.

...bigdog...
06-03-10, 01:06 PM
I'm not the one here having to go look up my responses on some blog. You just did.

Sit around and feel smart. It's what most sideliners do. Sip the coffee. Smirk at the TV. Make jokes about "those people". But make no difference in the matter.

And even so, this link about some kid making a "terroristic threat"....is simply the criminal charge. It's not "assault". It's not "battery". Perhaps they should have named it "hostile threat", but instead, the criminal code named it terroristic. HAs nothing to do with the "terrorist" usage of the word, and instead is about the "Terror" word itself. TTP/TPG has had to report a few "terroristic threats" we've received. AKA "death threats".

But....we all know what you're getting at.

"I don't like calling people who put bombs in their backpacks, get on trains, and blow them up 'terrorists'". Right. And you'd like to call them what again?

Freedom fighters? Like soldiers? So what conventions and laws say that it's perfectly normal, and fair game, to put bombs in your backpack, seek out purely civilian targets, and blow them up? Schools, hospitals, passenger trains?

And of course, here comes the "well, the US has killed xyz civilans in 123 civilian targets..." blah blah blah looked up on wikipedia response. And that may be true. And when we do so, it's a BAD THING, and we apologize, and we strive to not do it again, and we try to make it right, and people get in trouble. Because it's wrong. BEcause it's illegal to attack civilians and other disinterested parties in a war. Because....

and here it comes....

Because if we were to SPECIFICALLY SEEK OUT SUCH CIVILIAN, NON-MILITARY, NEEDLESS KILLINGS, we'd be accomplishing nothing other than terrorizing innocent people going about their business, uninvolved in the war.

By all means, when Hamas, and IJ, and Hezbollah, and Al Qaeda want to man up and attack military targets, checkpoints, and fight soldier to soldier, like international laws compel them to do......they aren't "terrorists". They're a military. They're soldiers. Like those guys in Yemen being human torpedoes against the Cole.....pretty much soldiers doing their thing.

But when they send in suicide bombers to blow up passenger trains in london, or air planes in the US, or schools in Pakistan, or Mosques in Iraq, or night clubs in indonesia......to make a statement.....you're a fucking terrorist. And your unwillingness to apply that definition...as if that gets you some sort of intellectual street cred because you read it on some blog....indicates you could care less about the plight of most of these people.

...bigdog...
06-03-10, 01:16 PM
And even so, this link about some kid making a "terroristic threat"....is simply the criminal charge. It's not "assault". It's not "battery". Perhaps they should have named it "hostile threat", but instead, the criminal code named it terroristic. HAs nothing to do with the "terrorist" usage of the word, and instead is about the "Terror" word itself. TTP/TPG has had to report a few "terroristic threats" we've received. AKA "death threats".

http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=us+criminal+code+terroristic+threat

from one of the links...

his misdemeanor charge occurs when an individual communicates any type of threat that causes a person or group to be in fear of bodily harm, disrupts an assembly, public gathering or the use of a public building or indicates an attempt to interrupt or disrupt any type of public service such as telephones, water, sewage or electricity.

Terrorist threat charges can also occur with threats to the government or any school, public officer or emergency service organization as well as those directed as particular private individuals. Stalking, harassment and public misconduct and also result in terrorist threat charges.

change the name of the offense...but the offense is still the same. Some states call it "criminal threats", but terroristic makes more sense, since the threat itself is meant to cause fear/panic/apprehension. criminal threat...would be like saying "I'm going to steal your identity and make false purchases on your accounts". That's not very terrorizing, or intimidating.

BigHub
06-03-10, 01:21 PM
Remember the definition of a terrorist as well.

"A person whose desperation has overcome their fear of authority."

I would cite it, buuut it's in my head. I just got done taking my Terrorism class this past semester, made an A in it - and also made Dean's List... woo. Carry on.

jason_jinx
06-03-10, 01:33 PM
I had this same conversation with some german and french scientist friends long ago, about the difference in the ways we see things like cops and law. Our police carry fire arms. We do what the police tell us to do.

They say it's because we live in a police state, and that we are afraid, and that it's totalitarian.

and I say it's because we have a mutual respect for the law, and wish that those who are truly breaking the law be punished. Severely.

In germany, on any given may day.....if not all of europe....people are out there specifically to fight the cops. Same goes for WTO protests and geneva protests and ____ protests. Out there SPECIFICALLY to fight the cops.

Why don't they do that here? Because we are afraid? ...or because we understand that laws exist for society to function. Rule of law, or chaos. You don't pick and choose which laws YOU want to observe, just as you don't want the government to pick and choose which laws it wants to enforce. We get that, and they don't.

For a recent showing of this, see: Greece, where people are so angry their entitlements and taxes are going to change, they start burning their own cities down, including their own citizens working in their own businesses.

Fucking....pathetic....worthless.....activist....i diots.

You know what's also interesting about these pieces of shit, worldwide? Their age seems to never change.

Why are they always in that 18-25 age bracket? Anything come to mind?

Yeah...it's the having a job, a family, children, money, responsibility, and understanding of the big picture. It's called growing the fuck up, and realizing your parents aren't always going to come and post your bail and solve your problems.

That, and it's the arm chair wannabe that read, and comment, but never bother to actually get out there in the tear gas and do some time for the riot. No...they'll just cheer from the sidelines, in here, where it's safe. So they can look like they give a shit and feel like they're going to make a difference.


soooo what you are saying is the grass roots movement/tea party activist/stop obama-pelosi express falls into your activist stereotype? or just against the groups you personally do not approve?

-Sauso-
06-03-10, 02:12 PM
" Israel is expected to reject calls from the United Nations and others for an international investigation of its deadly raid on a Gaza-bound aid flotilla."

Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2010/06/03/israel-gaza-ships-flotilla.html#ixzz0poafKvH5

Consultant
06-03-10, 02:24 PM
soooo what you are saying is the grass roots movement/tea party activist/stop obama-pelosi express falls into your activist stereotype? or just against the groups you personally do not approve?

I think the group he is talking about is the uninformed vocal and inactive majority of activists. Some of the tea party people are taking steps they think will improve the situation. They vote in elections, run for office, and contribute to campaigns.

triggerhappy2005
06-03-10, 03:37 PM
Oh, you talking about the ones that have direct links to Hamas (a terrorist organization) or the blind sheep followers that jumped on the bandwagon.

Let me ask you a direct question.... Do you support, condone, agree with, or approve of the Hamas terrorist oganization?

Start a new thread with this as a question and I will gladly answer it. It has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that Israel fucked up.

_BuRn_
06-03-10, 04:41 PM
You are spot on, here come the wiki numbers.

The United States entered multiple countries and destroyed massive amounts of infrastructure, causing large numbers of civilian casualties both through direct conflict and through starvation / lack of health care.

96,663 – 105,408 Iraqi Civilians dead
8,768 - 28,360 Afghan Civilians dead

http://www.iraqbodycount.org/database/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilian_casualties_of_the_War_in_Afghanistan_%282 001%E2%80%93present%29

The definition of the word terrorism - the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion, violent acts which are intended to create fear (terror), are perpetrated for an ideological goal, and deliberately target or disregard the safety of non-combatants.

By that definition the US is the largest terrorist organization in the world. We routinely bomb funerals and weddings to kill 'terrorists' with unmanned aerial vehicles so we dont have to look those we kill in the eye and scare the rest out of being what we call 'evil'. We are using lethal force to scare a population into following our ideology. "Operation Enduring Freedom" is a very pretty name to describe the "Shock and Awe" we used to terrorize the shit out of a backwards country we didn't approve of. Did each of those dead people present a direct threat to our freedom? Hell no. But we killed them, just the same. You say we don't do it deliberately so we are different, well I disagree, someone ordered our armed forces there to destroy, that was a deliberate action.

So we declare a "War On Terror!" and send our friends and brothers and sisters to die in the sandbox to roadside bombs because the "resistance", sorry 'terrorists' have no means to directly attack in return. Much respect to all the men and women in the armed forces, but the reasons they were sent I cannot agree with, nor can I condone many of the actions they are ordered to take.

So we freely use the tools of terror and declare war against a word.
A small group bombs some towers, we wipe out most of the infrastructure supporting a civilian populace.
But its ok, we'll rebuild it!..... The way we want it, with our 'Freedom ' ideology installed under the threat of violence.
Hence my discomfort over the application of the word terrorist.

As for my part of being a lame brained activist, I spend my time trying to convince people who are capable of understanding that they need to look at these issues in different lights, to take and assimilate all the filtered news and media into a semblance of the truth. By generalizing all 'activist' into a nice little group you can piss on because it makes you feel better about how little you can change in the world, you do yourself a dishonor. As in all groups, there are the good and the bad, judge each by their merit, not by some mental image you have worked up in your own mind.

triggerhappy2005
06-04-10, 10:51 AM
http://www.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/meast/06/04/gaza.raid.autopsies/index.html?hpt=T2

It looks like Israeli commandos executed some of the passengers.

Not surprising really.

ems_goof
06-04-10, 04:09 PM
I bet the members of Hamas never did anything remotely like that.

triggerhappy2005
06-04-10, 04:53 PM
I sure they did, that's what terrorist organizations do.

asianator365
06-04-10, 07:47 PM
Israel should have just torpedoed the boats and said North Korea did it (completely sarcastic/no-point comment).

Red_Lizard2
06-04-10, 11:58 PM
I bet the members of Hamas never did anything remotely like that.

Acting like Hamas really shouldn't be a goal to try for

***COMMANDER***
06-05-10, 12:36 AM
http://www.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/meast/06/04/gaza.raid.autopsies/index.html?hpt=T2

It looks like Israeli commandos executed some of the passengers.

Not surprising really.

Speculation and far fetched not to mention your far left news source. The whole incident is on video and they didn't execute anyone.... They sure got things in order though. They stopped the bullcrap. They took control of the situation and stabilized it.

The dead, got what they asked for..... Go attack any soldier with a deadly weapon and see what you get...

Stupid idiots....

ems_goof
06-05-10, 08:59 AM
Wow, look at what happened last night. Ship came in, stopped as they were told, were peacefully boarded, ship was sent to the proper port of entry, nobody was hurt, and after inspection, the cargo will be sent by land to the Palestinians.
Amazing what happens when you do what you're told.

Fovezer
06-05-10, 11:02 AM
Speculation and far fetched not to mention your far left news source. The whole incident is on video and they didn't execute anyone.... They sure got things in order though. They stopped the bullcrap. They took control of the situation and stabilized it.

The dead, got what they asked for..... Go attack any soldier with a deadly weapon and see what you get...

Stupid idiots....

ROFL! You, of all people, are complaining about a news source?! That's rich! One, CNN is certainly not "far left", and two, the only news source you ever use is the JPost! Damn, you have no shame for the blatant hypocrisy, do you?


Wow, look at what happened last night. Ship came in, stopped as they were told, were peacefully boarded, ship was sent to the proper port of entry, nobody was hurt, and after inspection, the cargo will be sent by land to the Palestinians.
Amazing what happens when you do what you're told.

That's because Israel learned that they didn't want another bloodbath on their hands and decided to do it during the day and not to start lobbing concussion grenades and shooting before the raid. When the aid workers didn't think they were fighting for their lives, they were peaceful. So I think that this, along with the peaceful outcome on 5 of the other 6 ships in the first flotilla, proves that the Mavi Marmara was not "full of hostiles," but rather some of the aid workers were set off by Israeli aggression and were fighting to save their lives. Amazing what happens when you are not in fear of your life.

And most of the cargo will not be sent to Gaza, it will be confiscated. Among the things they were bringing were supplies to rebuild after Israel bombed Gaza to pieces. Over a year later, Israel still will not allow them to rebuild. At least the flotillas have brought the humanitarian crisis in Gaza caused by the illegal blockade into the spotlight again.

DJ Ms. White
06-05-10, 05:38 PM
Speculation and far fetched not to mention your far left news source. The whole incident is on video and they didn't execute anyone.... They sure got things in order though. They stopped the bullcrap. They took control of the situation and stabilized it.

The dead, got what they asked for..... Go attack any soldier with a deadly weapon and see what you get...

Stupid idiots....
What about the American citizen who got 4 bullets to the head?

***COMMANDER***
06-05-10, 06:41 PM
What about the American citizen who got 4 bullets to the head?

You mean the aggressor that had dual citizenship with Turkey and the US?

Hmmmm, do I need to pull up some data to see which terrorist organization he was connected to.

***COMMANDER***
06-05-10, 06:42 PM
ROFL! You, of all people, are complaining about a news source?! That's rich! One, CNN is certainly not "far left", and two, the only news source you ever use is the JPost! Damn, you have no shame for the blatant hypocrisy, do you?



That's because Israel learned that they didn't want another bloodbath on their hands and decided to do it during the day and not to start lobbing concussion grenades and shooting before the raid. When the aid workers didn't think they were fighting for their lives, they were peaceful. So I think that this, along with the peaceful outcome on 5 of the other 6 ships in the first flotilla, proves that the Mavi Marmara was not "full of hostiles," but rather some of the aid workers were set off by Israeli aggression and were fighting to save their lives. Amazing what happens when you are not in fear of your life.

And most of the cargo will not be sent to Gaza, it will be confiscated. Among the things they were bringing were supplies to rebuild after Israel bombed Gaza to pieces. Over a year later, Israel still will not allow them to rebuild. At least the flotillas have brought the humanitarian crisis in Gaza caused by the illegal blockade into the spotlight again.

Do you have enough balls to reply to this thread ? http://www.teamplayergaming.com/showthread.php/82506-Do-you-approve-of-Hamas

***COMMANDER***
06-05-10, 09:44 PM
I didn't think he had to Cohungas to state where he really stands....

Fovezer
06-05-10, 10:48 PM
Do you have enough balls to reply to this thread ? http://www.teamplayergaming.com/showthread.php/82506-Do-you-approve-of-Hamas

Why should I reply to a ridiculous thread? Why don't you tell me how supporting the Palestinian people and how wanting to see the end of an Israeli-imposed humanitarian crisis equates to supporting Hamas? It's a red herring.

If we want to play this game, do you support the Likud party, which can trace its history back to a militant Zionist terrorist group called the Irgun?

***COMMANDER***
06-05-10, 10:58 PM
I know you support and approve of Hamas, you just aren't a big enough man to admit. So be it.... You answered the question without answering.

Fovezer
06-05-10, 11:04 PM
I know you support and approve of Hamas, you just aren't a big enough man to admit. So be it.... You answered the question without answering.

Whatever, man. Keep it up with these childish retorts all you want, but I am not going to play this game. I asked you to explain how supporting the Palestinian people equates to supporting Hamas, and you have not. Why? Because you can't. It is a ridiculous red herring on your part.

BruceBloodMaster
06-05-10, 11:39 PM
Correct me if I'm wrong......... but didn't the Palestinian People vote Hamas into Power ??

***COMMANDER***
06-06-10, 12:44 AM
Correct me if I'm wrong......... but didn't the Palestinian People vote Hamas into Power ??


Plus, the militants went door to door, with their guns and told the people who to vote for and they left them with one choice, Hamas. Not what I would call a democratic fair election and their were not any monitors to ensure this wasn't happening, but when you have terrorist controlling the area, which no rules apply to, you are guaranteed to get this every time, just like in North Korea and also Iraq under the Sadaam regime.

Fovezer
06-06-10, 01:49 AM
Wow, Commander, you really are full of shit. Do you seriously just make that shit up on the spot?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_legislative_election,_2006#Conduct_of_ the_poll

Here are all the observers of the election. There were over 1,000 of them:
http://www.elections.ps/admin/pdf/Number_of_observers_-_plc_elections__2006_EN.pdf

But hey, who am I to let facts get in the way of your delusions?

triggerhappy2005
06-06-10, 02:42 AM
Plus, the militants went door to door, with their guns and told the people who to vote for and they left them with one choice, Hamas. Not what I would call a democratic fair election and their were not any monitors to ensure this wasn't happening, but when you have terrorist controlling the area, which no rules apply to, you are guaranteed to get this every time, just like in North Korea and also Iraq under the Sadaam regime.


What proof do you have of this?

Something other than Jpost as well.

CivilWars
06-06-10, 09:59 AM
What proof do you have of this?

Something other than Jpost as well.

He gets great reception on his HAM radio when his tin foil hat is on. :grin:

While I lean more to Commander's beliefs than I do Trigger's or Fov's spewing this BS makes "our side" look just as retarded as those who BLOW Barry's horn no matter how bad he screws up and breaks promises. Sprinkle in a little unbias sometimes.

QuickLightning
06-07-10, 02:01 PM
Speaking of Trigger... what happened to his account? It says exiled and his name is crossed off?

***COMMANDER***
06-07-10, 03:53 PM
Speaking of Trigger... what happened to his account? It says exiled and his name is crossed off?

Trigger was sited banned for 7 days for Hijacking threads and repeated personal attacks on others. He has had countless warnings and suspensions for this before, hopefully this time it will sink in.

***COMMANDER***
06-07-10, 03:54 PM
http://www.jpost.com/International/Article.aspx?id=177685


Analysis: Turkey also stands to lose
By HERB KEINON
07/06/2010
Ankara’s role in flotilla story doesn't look good.

Talk to our envoys in Europe, and they will say that the flotilla disaster is just one of a string of recent Israeli missteps responsible for the harshest censure of Israel seen and heard on the Continent in years.
It is not just the Mavi Marmara incident, but also the decision to build 1,600 housing units in Ramat Shlomo when US Vice President Joe Biden was in Israel in March, and the alleged passport forgery used in the hit in Dubai in January against Hamas commander Mahmoud al-Mabhouh, that has led to an accumulated sense in Europe that something is badly off kilter in Israel.

***COMMANDER***
06-07-10, 03:59 PM
Iran says they are going to send some warships with the Iranian Revolutionary Guards to escort two ships planning on entering Gaza illegally.

That is an outright provocation and I have a strong feeling how this will end.

http://www.jpost.com/MiddleEast/Article.aspx?ID=177713


Report: Iran to send ships to Gaza
By JPOST.COM STAFF
07/06/2010
Iranian Red Crescent planning two aid ships this week.

The Iranian Red Crescent announced on Monday that it will be sending two ships to Gaza this week.

AFP quoted the Red Crescent director for international affairs Abdolrauf Adibzadeh as saying: "One ship will carry donations made by the people and the other will carry relief workers. The ships will be sent to Gaza by end of this week."

Jonas Quin
06-07-10, 04:09 PM
I fear this will not end well...

rock_lobster
06-07-10, 05:14 PM
I read that earlier this morning via my I-phone =) I laughed the entire time I was reading it. Regardless of whether or not you like Israel or think they are right or wrong, they will still kick the shit out of whoever is escorting ships through the blockade. I think this is just a huge ploy to further make Israel look even worse in the eyes of the international community while boosting the image of Iran.

Iran escorting these ships with the sole purpose of breaking the blockade isn't going to help the situation, but they know full well when shit hits the fan, Israel is going to catch most of the blame regardless. Just a shame so many Iranian soldiers are going to die............

DJ Ms. White
06-07-10, 05:29 PM
It's a stupid move on the Iranians part if they're playing for a war. Then, the Israelis won't have any qualms about taking out the enrichment centers.

***COMMANDER***
06-07-10, 05:32 PM
Iran is more than willing to sacrifice two warships and the guards on board so they can cry foul..... They are looking to escalate the situation and they will succeed at it, unless enough pressure is put on them to stop the suicide that they are trying to commit. If anything makes it into Israeli waters, it won't be those two warships and the aid ship will be directed at best to a port where it can be offloaded and inspected and then the passengers onboard that are not hostile if any, will be deported back.

***COMMANDER***
06-07-10, 05:33 PM
And then, if Iran retaliates, all Hell is going to break loose....

DJ Ms. White
06-07-10, 05:37 PM
http://www.godweb.org/maps/img/middle_east_pol_2003.jpg
Looking at that, either country is going to need permission for air strikes onto the other.

Doesn't Israel have a ballistic missile sub or two stationed in the Persian Gulf? Maybe the war will be all naval.

***COMMANDER***
06-07-10, 05:40 PM
Who would Iran ask permission from for an airstrike?

Yes, Israel has subs in the Persian gulf and I bet Iran will to.

Sent from my T-Mobile myTouch 3G using Tapatalk

DJ Ms. White
06-07-10, 05:42 PM
They would need the permission of Iraq and either Syria or Jordan. Otherwise, it's technically an act of war.

***COMMANDER***
06-07-10, 06:31 PM
They send those warships towards Israel with the intentions of illegally entering Israeli waters and they have succeeded in a provocation for an act of war.

rock_lobster
06-07-10, 07:43 PM
They send those warships towards Israel with the intentions of illegally entering Israeli waters and they have succeeded in a provocation for an act of war.


I'm pretty sure that's what they want. Iran (as well as most other in the middle east) know full well Israel isn't exactly well liked in the eyes of the international community, especially since the recent flotilla incident. So now Iran tries to make itself look like the hero in escorting "aid" to Gaza. Thing is, isn't the blockade considered leagl? In which case Iran's clear intent to break the blockade and provoke Israel into military responses, should be noted by everyone, but it won't. It will be pinned on Israel and Iran knows this. Kind of clever on their part really.

***COMMANDER***
06-07-10, 08:11 PM
I think it will back fire on them.... The world is more educated now and the blockade is legal.

rock_lobster
06-07-10, 08:14 PM
I think it will back fire on them.... The world is more educated now and the blockade is legal.

I'd like to think the World is more educated, but I dunno. Regardless, what the international community thinks is irrelevant when it comes to Israel. They look out for themselves first and worry about outside opinions later which makes them quite dangerous. In the end, Iran is only furthering it's demise by provoking Israel.

Nuckle
06-07-10, 08:26 PM
I am shocked that Christianity has not been brought into this debate. The fact that our nation was built upon Christian faith and values is the reason why the US backs Israel at all costs. The day we stop backing them is the day all hell will break loose. So there, I said it. Flame on.

Fovezer
06-07-10, 10:21 PM
I think it will back fire on them.... The world is more educated now and the blockade is legal.

From the UN Human Rights Council:

"1931. The Mission concludes that the blockade policies implemented by Israel against the
Gaza Strip, in particular the closure of or restrictions imposed on border crossings in the
immediate period before the military operations, subjected the local population to extreme
hardship and deprivations that amounted to a violation of Israel’s obligations as an
occupying Power under the Fourth Geneva Convention. These measures led to a severe
deterioration and regression in the levels of realization of economic and social rights of
Palestinians in the Gaza Strip and weakened its social and economic fabric, leaving health,
education, sanitation and other essential services in a very vulnerable position to cope with
the immediate effects of the military operations.
http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrcouncil/docs/12session/A-HRC-12-48.pdf

That's a lot of violations, and that's just on the blockade. So they commit crimes against humanity, but hey, since it's Israel, it's cool by you, right? Read that whole report, it will hopefully open your eyes.

***COMMANDER***
06-08-10, 12:06 AM
Dealing with terrorist in an urban environment is a tuff situation and something that not many nations have encountered. Most of the times in a normal situation, uniformed armies are fighting each other, but when you have terrorist involved, with plain clothes, you have to separate the two and it's not easy.

A way to handle this is to cut off the aid and separate the trouble makers from the do gooders and in in the case of Gaza, you do just that. Gazans have to suffer and so do the terrorist and in this case, the gazans are suffering because of the terrorist, so if they want a better life, they have to separate themselves from the terrorist and point them out and help aid to get rid of them, so they can have a normal life, just like everyone else would like to live in.

I didn't spend a whole lot of time reading your post, but I will read it tomorrow and see if I didn't cover everything in this post.

***COMMANDER***
06-08-10, 01:46 AM
1931 to 1936 in an armed conflict is old news.... The Israeli army gets down to business, but a lot has changed and neither you nor I were around in the 30's..... Got anything in the last 20 years you care to debate?

DJ Ms. White
06-08-10, 10:13 AM
Commander, those aren't years, I don't think. Israel wasn't around till post WWII. So, that means that stuff is in the last 20 years.

Fovezer
06-08-10, 02:08 PM
1931 to 1936 in an armed conflict is old news.... The Israeli army gets down to business, but a lot has changed and neither you nor I were around in the 30's..... Got anything in the last 20 years you care to debate?

Those aren't years, those are paragraph numbers from the report I linked to. The report is regarding the blockade and the recent war in Gaza and general treatment of Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank. If you had at least skimmed the report, you would have seen that.


Dealing with terrorist in an urban environment is a tuff situation and something that not many nations have encountered. Most of the times in a normal situation, uniformed armies are fighting each other, but when you have terrorist involved, with plain clothes, you have to separate the two and it's not easy.

A way to handle this is to cut off the aid and separate the trouble makers from the do gooders and in in the case of Gaza, you do just that. Gazans have to suffer and so do the terrorist and in this case, the gazans are suffering because of the terrorist, so if they want a better life, they have to separate themselves from the terrorist and point them out and help aid to get rid of them, so they can have a normal life, just like everyone else would like to live in.

I didn't spend a whole lot of time reading your post, but I will read it tomorrow and see if I didn't cover everything in this post.

So you are admitting that Israel is practicing collective punishment, which is a violation of international law? You cannot make innocents suffer for the actions of a few. That is illegal. Hamas is not going to go anywhere because Israel's actions lend credibility to them and keeps them in power. Israel is bringing this upon themselves.