View Full Version : More Middle Eastern woes
Up to 19 reported dead as Israeli commandos storm vessels delivering aid to Gaza.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/10195838.stm
Right, Wrong, heavy handed??
"Israel says when its soldiers boarded they were attacked by the activists with knives, one of whom grabbed a soldier's gun"
"We were not going to pose any violent resistance. The only resistance that there might be would be passive resistance such as physically blocking the steering room, or blocking the engine room downstairs, so that they couldn't get taken over. But that was just symbolic resistance."
What do they expect if they are waving knifes around and grabbing guns from soldiers[lol]
"Israel says when its soldiers boarded they were attacked by the activists with knives, one of whom grabbed a soldier's gun"
"We were not going to pose any violent resistance. The only resistance that there might be would be passive resistance such as physically blocking the steering room, or blocking the engine room downstairs, so that they couldn't get taken over. But that was just symbolic resistance."
What do they expect if they are waving knifes around and grabbing guns from soldiers[lol]
"Israel says", Israel has been lying through their teeth since the moment Israel was formed.
What do they expect? They expect to sail freely in international waters without being attacked by state sponsored pirates. That is their right under international law.
You can see what happened here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xFEBbDkyrqQ
And please keep an eye on this site so you can be witness to any further Israeli crimes:
http://witnessgaza.com/
Sara Jevo
31-May-10, 09:11
I can understand Israel wanting to prevent weapons getting through.
I can understand people wanting to send humanitarian aid.
Surely, there must be a way to reconcile those two objectives, perhaps facilitated by a third party, without bloodshed and the loss of so many lives.
A good job Israel can robustly apply the blockade, or all the work to stop weapons coming through the tunnels will have been wasted.
If more countries were to police the sea lanes effectively we could starve terror out of existence. And disarm groups like the Somali pirates I should think :roll:
I can understand Israel wanting to prevent weapons getting through.
I can understand people wanting to send humanitarian aid.
Surely, there must be a way to reconcile those two objectives, perhaps facilitated by a third party, without bloodshed and the loss of so many lives.
Those ships aren't carrying weapons, they are carrying food and bags of cement.
A recent Amnesty International report says that four out of five Palestinians in Gaza need humanitarian aid, hundreds are waiting to get out for urgent medical treatment twenty eight have died waiting.
The Israeli siege of Gaza is illegal, it is not the Palestinians breaking the law it is the Israelis. The attempts to get much needed humanitarian aid to Gaza are legal, it is not the ships breaking the law it is the Israelis.
What sort of white supremacist attitude does the west have to believe Israel has the right to do as it likes regardless of the law while Palestinians have no rights at all, not even the right to eat?
A good job Israel can robustly apply the blockade, or all the work to stop weapons coming through the tunnels will have been wasted.
If more countries were to police the sea lanes effectively we could starve terror out of existence. And disarm groups like the Somali pirates I should think :roll:
Personally I don't want the country which tried to sell nuclear weapons to Apartheid South Africa policing international waters.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/may/23/israel-south-africa-nuclear-weapons
Sara Jevo
31-May-10, 10:20
Those ships aren't carrying weapons, they are carrying food and bags of cement.
A recent Amnesty International report says that four out of five Palestinians in Gaza need humanitarian aid, hundreds are waiting to get out for urgent medical treatment twenty eight have died waiting.
The Israeli siege of Gaza is illegal, it is not the Palestinians breaking the law it is the Israelis. The attempts to get much needed humanitarian aid to Gaza are legal, it is not the ships breaking the law it is the Israelis.
What sort of white supremacist attitude does the west have to believe Israel has the right to do as it likes regardless of the law while Palestinians have no rights at all, not even the right to eat?
I'm trying not to take sides and I'm not trying to solve a long-running sore on the human race. I'm just suggesting there must be ways to keep the peace AND feed people, without bloodshed like this. Resolving the conflict is a much more intractable problem.
I'm trying not to take sides and I'm not trying to solve a long-running sore on the human race. I'm just suggesting there must be ways to keep the peace AND feed people, without bloodshed like this. Resolving the conflict is a much more intractable problem.
Well yes, there is a way, the international community could insist Israel abides by international law.
Instead we impose sanctions on Iran which breaks no laws and give Israel more foreign aid than every other country in the world put together.
Crackeday
31-May-10, 11:27
Well yes, there is a way, the international community could insist Israel abides by international law.
Instead we impose sanctions on Iran which breaks no laws and give Israel more foreign aid than every other country in the world put together.
Are you a friend of george Galloway by any chance fred???;)
Iarn tries to build a bomb but thats Ok? Palestine has suicide bombers but thats ok?
Theres bad on both sides its just some choose to discredit israel while wearing blinkers when iran,Palestine etc are involved.
Are you a friend of george Galloway by any chance fred???;)
Iarn tries to build a bomb but thats Ok? Palestine has suicide bombers but thats ok?
Theres bad on both sides its just some choose to discredit israel while wearing blinkers when iran,Palestine etc are involved.
It's none of your damned business who my friends are.
If you are concerned about nuclear weapons then why not support Iran's proposals for a nuclear free Middle East?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/10191339.stm?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
Israel has the right to defend themselves with war ships, fighter planes, tanks and nuclear bombs because they is white.
Palestinians have no right to defend themselves, not even with loaves of bread and bags of cement because they isn't white.
Crackeday
31-May-10, 12:44
It's none of your damned business who my friends are.
If you are concerned about nuclear weapons then why not support Iran's proposals for a nuclear free Middle East?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/10191339.stm?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
Israel has the right to defend themselves with war ships, fighter planes, tanks and nuclear bombs because they is white.
Palestinians have no right to defend themselves, not even with loaves of bread and bags of cement because they isn't white.
Thats the funniest darn reply ive seen in ages!!!.
Thanks fred for making me smile :)
Mon e Israel!!![lol]
I note that nothing seems to be said about Egypt who considers itself as the leader of the Arab world. Egypt is a predominantly Muslim country with Islam as its state religion. Between 80% and 94% are identified as Muslim.
Bear in mind, the entire blockade would be ineffective without Egyptian participation.
Egypt maintains that it cannot open the Rafah Crossing since opening the border would represent Egyptian recognition of the Hamas control of Gaza, undermine the legitimacy of the Palestinian Authority and consecrate the split between Gaza and the West Bank.
When International activists arrived in Egypt, a surprise awaited them. The Egyptian government forbade their trip to Gaza. Their buses were held up at the outskirts of Cairo and turned back. Individual protesters who succeeded in reaching the Sinai in regular buses were taken off them. The Egyptian security forces conducted a regular hunt for the activists. the protesters were held up by Egyptian elite units in full riot gear, while red water cannon trucks were lurking in the background. Protesters who tried to assemble in Cairo’s central Tahrir (liberation) Square were mishandled... makes one think doesn't it?
[SIZE=2]I note that nothing seems to be said about Egypt...
Probably because it wasn't Egypt who last night launched an unprovoked attack on a NATO country.
Probably because it wasn't Egypt who last night launched an unprovoked attack on a NATO country.
What ARE you on about?
What ARE you on about?
Israel launched an armed attack on a Turkish registered ship in international waters. A Turkish registered ship in international waters is Turkish territory.
Under article 5 of the NATO treaty Britain should be going to Turkey's aid.
I can understand Israel wanting to prevent weapons getting through.
I can understand people wanting to send humanitarian aid.
Surely, there must be a way to reconcile those two objectives, perhaps facilitated by a third party, without bloodshed and the loss of so many lives.
Well done, finally someone who seems able to see both sides of this debate on this forum.
One thing I really do not understand about this forum is the amount of pro-Israel posters. They commit crime after crime (of course seeing as the US in their pockets nothing is done about it) and anyone who says this is wrong is an anti-semite (on this forum at least).
This incident has shown this yet again. I am a member of a few other forums, none political or religious or have any reason I can see to be biased in away and in them the majority of posters are condemning Israel. Here again we have the apologisers. And to me it seems little to do with what is actually happening but an unwillingness to agree with certain other posters. Maybe I am wrong it is just how it seems to a relative outsider.
Now from the information we have so far to me it seems clear Israel were wrong in this. They attacked an aid ship which seems to have had no weapons, they fired and guess what they received resistance. As to the civilians on board managing to take guns off the IDF - seems unlikely, or are the IDF that poorly trained?
As to Egypt. Well they have the blockade and I doubt it is for any humanitarian reason we can see. They were probably made to do it by some other power who was threatening them behind closed doors (maybe not directly but I am sure it is not done completely off their own backs).
I must admit I have not read a lot on the subject, especially the Egyptian parts, and some things might come out in the investigation that shows the aid ships weren't as innocent as they seemed but to me right now it seems clear cut who is in the right and who is in the wrong.
Now I see the kinds of things they are trying to stop entering I fully understand:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/8654337.stm
Actually I don't. And I don't understand how they keep getting away with it.
It should be borne in mind that 'Before the ships set sail from waters off the east Mediterranean island of Cyprus on Sunday, Israel had urged the flotilla not to try to breach the blockade and offered to transfer the cargo to Gaza from an Israeli port, following a security inspection.
This is the ninth time that the Free Gaza movement has tried to ship in humanitarian aid to Gaza since August 2008. Israel has allowed ships through five times, but has blocked them from entering Gaza waters since a three-week military offensive against Gaza’s Hamas rulers in January 2009. The latest flotilla was the largest to date.
Why on earth did the ship not accept this offer? they knew that the Israelis would react.
It should be borne in mind that 'Before the ships set sail from waters off the east Mediterranean island of Cyprus on Sunday, Israel had urged the flotilla not to try to breach the blockade and offered to transfer the cargo to Gaza from an Israeli port, following a security inspection.
This is the ninth time that the Free Gaza movement has tried to ship in humanitarian aid to Gaza since August 2008. Israel has allowed ships through five times, but has blocked them from entering Gaza waters since a three-week military offensive against Gaza’s Hamas rulers in January 2009. The latest flotilla was the largest to date.
Why on earth did the ship not accept this offer? they knew that the Israelis would react.
A security inspection that would most likely remove a lot of the aid as it is not allowed through. See the list from the BBC on my previous post.
I can see why they declined that offer. I do believe the group may well have realised it would never get through but at least they drew attention to the blockade. And the actions of the IDF only helped that :roll: Not worth the loss of life obviously though.
This is the ninth time that the Free Gaza movement has tried to ship in humanitarian aid to Gaza since August 2008. Israel has allowed ships through five times, but has blocked them from entering Gaza waters since a three-week military offensive against Gaza’s Hamas rulers in January 2009. The latest flotilla was the largest to date.
Why on earth did the ship not accept this offer? they knew that the Israelis would react.
Exactly, this is what the propagandists like fred wanted to happen, get a few of our partisans killed, then we can blame it on the Israelis, and the eyes of the world media will be upon us.
Boozeburglar
31-May-10, 15:15
This was a disgusting muderous criminal act.
There should be international support for humanitarian aid in the form of an armed force on board those ships, so those murderers would have had to make a decision that was not so easy.
There are your real bullies Fred.
Turkey would be justified in sending a substantial protection force on the next one, and God help Israel if they mess with Turkey.
A good job Israel can robustly apply the blockade, or all the work to stop weapons coming through the tunnels will have been wasted.
If more countries were to police the sea lanes effectively we could starve terror out of existence. And disarm groups like the Somali pirates I should think :roll:
Well said.....Who knows what was on these ships? We will never know....Is anyone going to tell US? Three sides to every story...one side/ other side and then the truth. Didin't they attempt to smuggle arms in before??
Too many players in this with their own self interests!
Exactly, this is what the propagandists like fred wanted to happen, get a few of our partisans killed, then we can blame it on the Israelis, and the eyes of the world media will be upon us.
"Propagandists like fred"?
Is that personal abuse I see here?
Now I see the kinds of things they are trying to stop entering I fully understand:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/8654337.stm
Actually I don't. And I don't understand how they keep getting away with it.
And in that link you will see BBC bias almost as blatant as this observation made by Craig Murray on his blog this morning.
In two and a half hours of coverage BBC News has interviewed the Israeli government spokesman and covered live an Israeli government press conference, while reporters have set out at length the Israeli government view of events nine times. There has been no attempt to interview anyone from the convoy organisers, from the Turkish government, or from the Palestinians, and no expression of scepticism or even reserve by any reporter about the Israeli version of events.
They say "Three years ago, after the Islamist Hamas movement seized power", what are they talking about? Hamas is the democratically elected government of Palestine.
Well said.....Who knows what was on these ships? We will never know....Is anyone going to tell US? Three sides to every story...one side/ other side and then the truth. Didin't they attempt to smuggle arms in before??
Too many players in this with their own self interests!
Where is it written Israelis may have all the arms they want while Palestinians may have none at all?
Don't Palestinians have a right to defend themselves?
What is it about Palestinians that they have no rights at all while Israel seems to have the right to do as they like regardless of international law? What is different about them?
Apart from their race that is.
"Propagandists like fred"?
Is that personal abuse I see here?
Fred, I know you get wound up about these issues...we all have issues we are 'crazy' about, but lets be honest...we are not hearing the whole truth. Take my Gov't/ your Gov't/ the Media...do we believe everything we read/ of course not.....Famous Media Statement...If it bleeds, it leads!
This thing in the Mid-East has been going on for...well you would know better than me.....is there a solution?? perhaps not.....
Perhaps the US/ UK/ Us and everyone else who has their sticky fingers in the pie should leave it alone.
We are bombarded here with the US having a comment on, Iraq/ Iran/ Korea/ Russia/ Afghanistan/ Congo/ Haiti/ China etc etc etc.... just now its Hillary Clinton posturing....you name it, they are involved.
Fred, I know you get wound up about these issues...we all have issues we are 'crazy' about, but lets be honest...we are not hearing the whole truth. Take my Gov't/ your Gov't/ the Media...do we believe everything we read/ of course not.....Famous Media Statement...If it bleeds, it leads!
This thing in the Mid-East has been going on for...well you would know better than me.....is there a solution?? perhaps not.....
Perhaps the US/ UK/ Us and everyone else who has their sticky fingers in the pie should leave it alone.
We are bombarded here with the US having a comment on, Iraq/ Iran/ Korea/ Russia/ Afghanistan/ Congo/ Haiti/ China etc etc etc.... just now its Hillary Clinton posturing....you name it, they are involved.
I know that Israel dropped commandos onto a Turkish ship in international waters firing live ammunition and tear gas at people with nowhere to go then when they make the ridiculous claim they did it in self defence people seem all to eager to believe them.
Just wondering why.
Boozeburglar
31-May-10, 16:20
I know that Israel dropped commandos onto a Turkish ship in international waters firing live ammunition and tear gas at people with nowhere to go then when they make the ridiculous claim they did it in self defence people seem all to eager to believe them.
Just wondering why.
Of course Fred, you conveniently ignore all the people who obviously do not believe them.
Sorry if you think that is personal abuse.
I know that Israel dropped commandos onto a Turkish ship in international waters firing live ammunition and tear gas at people with nowhere to go then when they make the ridiculous claim they did it in self defence people seem all to eager to believe them.
Just wondering why.
Yes I read about it.....but food for thought...
I knew someone who was part of the Shetland Bus during the 2nd World War where fishing boats were used to go to German occupied Norway.They hid their machine guns in 45 gallon drums and did all sorts devious things....Bad guys do the same things/ disguised..undercover on both sides...it goes on every day....
And Obviously the results of this conflict is not good.
Didn't a Palestinian Commander's son turn and give info to Israel, as he could'nt stand the killing any longer///Correct me if I am wrong! Oh and didn't the Int'l community deem the Hamas a terrorist group?
If they got more guns wouldn't there be more killing??? Bad enough with one side doing it!
I heard on the radio today, briefly, not sure of the source that the IDF opened fire to stop two IDF soldiers from being lynched.
Seems reasonable to me. In any event, this was a provocative attempt to get a reaction from Israel-seems to have worked!
I wonder if, lets say Scotland became independent and then lets say a radical government was elected under the leadership of say…. Alex the Fish.
They then avowed their intention of destroying England by any means.
Don't you think the English would take quite an interest in what was happening around the sea and ports?
I know that Israel dropped commandos onto a Turkish ship in international waters firing live ammunition and tear gas at people with nowhere to go then when they make the ridiculous claim they did it in self defence people seem all to eager to believe them.
Just wondering why.
Just a thought, but being clouted with steel crowbars, requires a reaction?
http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/World-News/Palestinian-Aid-Convoy-Two-Killed-As-Israeli-Navy-Clashes-With-Boats-Sailing-To-Gaza-Strip/Article/201005415640829?f=rss
This was a disgusting muderous criminal act.
There should be international support for humanitarian aid in the form of an armed force on board those ships, so those murderers would have had to make a decision that was not so easy.
There are your real bullies Fred.
Turkey would be justified in sending a substantial protection force on the next one, and God help Israel if they mess with Turkey.
I'd wait 'till the full story comes out, before you take the murdering ........stance :eek:
"The deadly dawn raid on a Turkish ship sparked a mass protest in Istanbul with 10,000 people marching through the street, burning Israeli flags."
Blimey! they got organised quick :eek:
Yes I read about it.....but food for thought...
I knew someone who was part of the Shetland Bus during the 2nd World War where fishing boats were used to go to German occupied Norway.They hid their machine guns in 45 gallon drums and did all sorts devious things....Bad guys do the same things/ disguised..undercover on both sides...it goes on every day....
And Obviously the results of this conflict is not good.
Didn't a Palestinian Commander's son turn and give info to Israel, as he could'nt stand the killing any longer///Correct me if I am wrong! Oh and didn't the Int'l community deem the Hamas a terrorist group?
If they got more guns wouldn't there be more killing??? Bad enough with one side doing it!
So why does the west supply the side that does the killing with planes, tanks and war ships then?
We give Israel millions of dollars worth of military equipment every year then you try to justify the murder of humanitarian aid workers because they might have had a machine gun in an oil barrel?
I'm just trying to work out the difference between an Israeli and a Palestinian that one has the right to all the weapons they want and the other doesn't even have the right to an adequate diet.
Just a thought, but being clouted with steel crowbars, requires a reaction?
It looks to me like the crow bars were the reaction.
The ship didn't attack Israel, Israel attacked the ship.
It looks to me like the crow bars were the reaction.
The ship didn't attack Israel, Israel attacked the ship.
The ships had been warned to accompany the vessels to Ashdod in Israel or face boarding, but refused to comply.
Activists aboard the ships had repeatedly said they would not respond with violence to the navy's interception of their flotilla. That proved false.
On the smaller five of the six ships, the takeovers were without violent incident, and there were no casualties.
However, on the largest of the ships, the Marmara, commandos immediately were attacked by "peace activists," who used rocks, knives, axes, and metal pipes, said Col. Avi Benayu, IDF spokesman.The soldiers, he said, at first tried to respond with non-lethal crowd dispersion measures, but were set upon by attackers. The situation reportedly escalated dramatically after pistols of Israeli commandos were snatched and shot at the commandos. Benayu said that two IDF pistols with emptied cartridges were later discovered on the deck.
Some of the injured naval commandos have bullet wounds. One was stabbed in the chest.Among the ten wounded Israeli soldiers, one is reported in critical condition, and one in serious condition. None were killed. All are being treated at Israeli hospitals along with injured passengers.
The Navy made initial contact with the flotilla at 11 p.m. on Sunday, ordering the ships to follow them to Ashdod Port or otherwise be boarded. The ships responded by turning in the other direction.
http://israelinsider.ning.com/profiles/blogs/19-confirmed-dead-after (http://israelinsider.ning.com/profiles/blogs/19-confirmed-dead-after)
Boozeburglar
31-May-10, 17:18
I'd wait 'till the full story comes out, before you take the murdering ........stance :eek:
I have seen enough of these stories playing out in the media, and my instinct is on the money as far as I am concerned.
The ship being there was not an act of war; nor did any 'provocation' intended legitimise these murders.
This was not a heavy handed reaction to an uprising or anything like that; this was an act of premeditated mass murder.
The ships had been warned to accompany the vessels to Ashdod in Israel or face boarding, but refused to comply.
Activists aboard the ships had repeatedly said they would not respond with violence to the navy's interception of their flotilla. That proved false.
On the smaller five of the six ships, the takeovers were without violent incident, and there were no casualties.
However, on the largest of the ships, the Marmara, commandos immediately were attacked by "peace activists," who used rocks, knives, axes, and metal pipes, said Col. Avi Benayu, IDF spokesman.The soldiers, he said, at first tried to respond with non-lethal crowd dispersion measures, but were set upon by attackers. The situation reportedly escalated dramatically after pistols of Israeli commandos were snatched and shot at the commandos. Benayu said that two IDF pistols with emptied cartridges were later discovered on the deck.
Some of the injured naval commandos have bullet wounds. One was stabbed in the chest.Among the ten wounded Israeli soldiers, one is reported in critical condition, and one in serious condition. None were killed. All are being treated at Israeli hospitals along with injured passengers.
The Navy made initial contact with the flotilla at 11 p.m. on Sunday, ordering the ships to follow them to Ashdod Port or otherwise be boarded. The ships responded by turning in the other direction.
http://israelinsider.ning.com/profiles/blogs/19-confirmed-dead-after (http://israelinsider.ning.com/profiles/blogs/19-confirmed-dead-after)
The ships were in international waters, the Israelis had no right to order them to do anything. They had no right to threaten them with anything. They had no right to attack them.
The UN humanitarian co-ordinator said last week that the formal economy in Gaza has "collapsed" and 60% of households were short of food. According to UN statistics, around 70% of Gazans live on less than $1 a day, 75% rely on food aid and 60% have no daily access to water.
Luxury foods are banned and a UN report last year said that on average it took 85 days to get shelter kits into Gaza, 68 days to deliver health and paediatric hygiene kits, and 39 days for household items such as bedding and kitchen utensils. It said that school textbooks and stationery had been delayed.
The effect of the blockade was felt even more acutely in the aftermath of the invasion of the strip by Israeli forces in the winter of 2008-9, as materials needed for reconstruction were delayed or banned from entering Gaza. A UN factfinding mission described the blockade as "collective punishment".
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/may/31/gaza-blockade-israel
Why does Israel have the right to attack ships carrying humanitarian aid in international waters yet Palestinians have no rights at all?
What do you see so different between an Israeli and a Palestinian?
Tubthumper
31-May-10, 17:29
I reckon the 'Peace Activists' engineered it to end in confrontation, probably hoping for at least blood. That's what I would do in the circumstances; if nothing happens, there is no media coverage and therefore nothing gained in the campaign.
If however the Israelis had boarded the ship, come under attack, hadn't opened fire and their soldiers HAD been lynched/ beaten to death/ stabbed, what would the world have said?
In the same circumstances as these guys, I would have opened fire, to save myself and/ or my mates, regardless of the rights or wrongs of being on the ship, or the ship being boarded, or 'Peace Activists' trying to score points.
And I have to wonder - in these days of easily affordable helmet cameras, why don't BOTH sides record the entire proceedings so there's no doubt?
I reckon the 'Peace Activists' engineered it to end in confrontation, probably hoping for at least blood. That's what I would do in the circumstances; if nothing happens, there is no media coverage and therefore nothing gained in the campaign.
If however the Israelis had boarded the ship, come under attack, hadn't opened fire and their soldiers HAD been lynched/ beaten to death/ stabbed, what would the world have said?
In the same circumstances as these guys, I would have opened fire, to save myself and/ or my mates, regardless of the rights or wrongs of being on the ship, or the ship being boarded, or 'Peace Activists' trying to score points.
And I have to wonder - in these days of easily affordable helmet cameras, why don't BOTH sides record the entire proceedings so there's no doubt?
How about if Israel hadn't attacked the ships and allowed a lot of Palestinian children to go to bed not hungry for a change?
How about if Israel hadn't attacked the ships and allowed a lot of Palestinian children to go to bed not hungry for a change?
Or restock on missiles and artillery shells?
Or restock on missiles and artillery shells?
So what do you see so different between an Israeli and a Palestinian that one can have all the missiles and artillery shells they want yet the other can have none?
So what do you see so different between an Israeli and a Palestinian that one can have all the missiles and artillery shells they want yet the other can have none?
Because one has the avowed intention of destroying the other :roll:
And before you turn that around, if Israel wanted to wipe out the population of Gaza, they could and would
To answer your point about hungry children. The IDF had offered to distribute the aid, they were not prepared to allow it in without first being checked for weapons.
So what do you see so different between an Israeli and a Palestinian that one can have all the missiles and artillery shells they want yet the other can have none?
Dunno Fred. One side with weapons....bad.. Both sides with Weapons...badder.
Your right in a way/ there is no need for this violence, but you know everyone is at it......and we will never know if there is an Objective View.
Because one has the avowed intention of destroying the other :roll:
And before you turn that around, if Israel wanted to wipe out the population of Gaza, they could and would
And are doing.
So what do you see so different between an Israeli and a Palestinian that one can have all the missiles and artillery shells they want yet the other can have none?
The governments of the European Union, Israel, Japan, Canada and the USA classify Hamas as a terrorist organisation...
The governments of the European Union, Israel, Japan, Canada and the USA classify Hamas as a terrorist organisation...
Attack ships in international waters and murder aid workers then do they?
I'm with Fred on this one - this was a despicable act by Israel, and significant prsssure should be brought to bear on them to lift the blockade of Gaza.
I'm with Fred on this one - this was a despicable act by Israel, and significant prsssure should be brought to bear on them to lift the blockade of Gaza.
But what happens when they ease the thumbscrew? More attacks....Pray tell me...It is a bad situation...I agree.
But what happens when they ease the thumbscrew? More attacks....Pray tell me...It is a bad situation...I agree.
So the people of Gaza remain under attack every day?? Israel is the creator of the problem, by their treatment of the Palestinians.
Attack ships in international waters and murder aid workers then do they?
The dark side behind PLO's public mask of moderation is terrorism. Despite all its public pronouncements to the contrary, the PLO never fully and effectively renounced the use of terrorism to achieve its goals, nor has it stopped conducting terrorist acts against Israel and other nations. What it has done is shift the responsibility for conducting the terrorist actions to various "deniable" elements of the PLO (i.e. Popular Front for Liberation of Palestine) or "outside" organizations that ostensibly are part of a "rejectionist movement" and beyond the control of the PLO. From Black September to Hamas, all terrorist organizations have been linked to the PLO..
On October 7, 1985, PLO terrorists seized a 624-foot tourist ship called Achille Lauro. Shortly after that, they murdered and threw overboard a wheelchair-ridden American Jew name Leon Klinghoffer.
The dark side behind PLO's public mask of moderation is terrorism. Despite all its public pronouncements to the contrary, the PLO never fully and effectively renounced the use of terrorism to achieve its goals, nor has it stopped conducting terrorist acts against Israel and other nations. What it has done is shift the responsibility for conducting the terrorist actions to various "deniable" elements of the PLO (i.e. Popular Front for Liberation of Palestine) or "outside" organizations that ostensibly are part of a "rejectionist movement" and beyond the control of the PLO. From Black September to Hamas, all terrorist organizations have been linked to the PLO..
On October 7, 1985, PLO terrorists seized a 624-foot tourist ship called Achille Lauro. Shortly after that, they murdered and threw overboard a wheelchair-ridden American Jew name Leon Klinghoffer.
Well you will pardon me if I don't put too much store in governments that have illegally invaded two Muslim countries labelling a Muslim organisation terrorist.
As far as I'm concerned the Palestinians are defending their homeland from foreign occupation therefore they are not terrorist by any definition of the word. It is the Israelis who have committed acts which could rightly be described as terrorist. Like attacking a foreign ship in international waters last night, that is terrorism. Their attack on Gaza last year, that was terrorism.
So what exactly do you see as the difference between an Israeli and a Palestinian that the ones which do the killing are not terrorists while the ones which do the bleeding are?
Well you will pardon me if I don't put too much store in governments that have illegally invaded two Muslim countries labelling a Muslim organisation terrorist.
As far as I'm concerned the Palestinians are defending their homeland from foreign occupation therefore they are not terrorist by any definition of the word. It is the Israelis who have committed acts which could rightly be described as terrorist. Like attacking a foreign ship in international waters last night, that is terrorism. Their attack on Gaza last year, that was terrorism.
So what exactly do you see as the difference between an Israeli and a Palestinian that the ones which do the killing are not terrorists while the ones which do the bleeding are?
I refer my honourable friend to #47 above
From the guardian too! video; 'close-up footage of Mavi Marmara'
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/blog/2010/may/31/israel-troops-gaza-ships
Boozeburglar
31-May-10, 19:46
The governments of the European Union, Israel, Japan, Canada and the USA classify Hamas as a terrorist organisation...
Can you perhaps enlighten me as to which of these ships was under the control of Hamas?
The Drunken Duck
31-May-10, 19:49
From the guardian too! video; 'close-up footage of Mavi Marmara'
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/blog/2010/may/31/israel-troops-gaza-ships
Now that's pretty conclusive. And one of the reasons that I haven't commented on this topic before, I wanted to wait and see what video footage would surface. It certainly shows the soldiers being attacked as soon as they hit the deck BEFORE they have the chance to do anything.
In that scenario no wonder the Israeli's didn't hold back, I wouldn't have if anyone did that to my mates. If you initiate the use of force expect that as a response.
Boozeburglar
31-May-10, 19:57
From the guardian too! video; 'close-up footage of Mavi Marmara'
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/blog/2010/may/31/israel-troops-gaza-ships
So what?
If a group of heavily armed soldiers are committing an act of aggression against your vessel, i.e. abseiling down ropes carrying machine guns, you have every right to use whatever means of defence you have.
You have every reason to fear for your life.
If those are Israeli soldiers, and you are there as supporters of the people of the Gaza strip who routinely receive shoot first ask questions later, you have total justification to fight for your lives.
If they were not putting themselves in that position, nothing would have happened.
The question is not what happened when they did what they did, it is whether or not they should have done what they did.
They murdered those people.
Under the circumstances I think the IDF showed remarkable restraint.
Perhaps in future our resident Israel haters will be a bit more considered of their reactions.
Boozeburglar
31-May-10, 20:14
If there was a video on Youtube of a burglar crashing through my window armed with a shotgun, showing the point at which I start hitting him with a snooker cue, and my wife grabbing a kitchen knife to defend herself, there is not a court in the land that will clear that burglar of murder if he fires the shotgun and one of my family ends up dead.
Does not matter how many times he may have phoned threatening his attack either.
The Drunken Duck
31-May-10, 20:20
So what?
If a group of heavily armed soldiers are committing an act of aggression against your vessel, i.e. abseiling down ropes carrying machine guns, you have every right to use whatever means of defence you have.
You have every reason to fear for your life.
If those are Israeli soldiers, and you are there as supporters of the people of the Gaza strip who routinely receive shoot first ask questions later, you have total justification to fight for your lives.
If they were not putting themselves in that position, nothing would have happened.
The question is not what happened when they did what they did, it is whether or not they should have done what they did.
They murdered those people.
Actually, no.
You CANNOT abseil down a rope from a chopper without using two hands, I know because I have done it. And even if you could do it one handed you are being blown about that much you couldnt hold a rifle anyway. Watch the clip, the guys landing have NOTHING in their hands. And those vessels had been offered berthing in an Israeli port, they refused. They were asked to follow to an Israeli port for Inspection they refused and turned away. The last option for boarding was to land guys on by chopper, which is far from ideal for obvious reasons.
Any nation which has vessels intending to enter its waters is allowed to board them for inspection. Those ships had already refused to comply. Its not an act of aggression at all. We do it all the time in UK waters, Israeli waters are no different. But if you are saying that just because a guy abseils down onto your deck you can beat him with an iron bar for simply being an Israeli then that is simply ridiculous, a guy hanging from a rope is hardly a mortal threat to your life. The activists are clearly getting stuck in with weapons that had been handed out beforehand.
Which makes their recent claims of being innocent victims hollower by the second.
If there was a video on Youtube of a burglar crashing through my window armed with a shotgun, showing the point at which I start hitting him with a snooker cue, and my wife grabbing a kitchen knife to defend herself, there is not a court in the land that will clear that burglar of murder if he fires the shotgun and one of my family ends up dead.
Does not matter how many times he may have phoned threatening his attack either.
I've been on a ship. There aren't that many Iron bars laying around. They took weapons with them, for this circumstance-Peace protesters? :confused
Exactly, this is what the propagandists like fred wanted to happen, get a few of our partisans killed, then we can blame it on the Israelis, and the eyes of the world media will be upon us.
One of the most stupid comments i have ever read on any forum. you should be ashamed of yourself
Tubthumper
31-May-10, 20:34
BB, if it was a member of the police swinging through your window, having asked you to stop doing what you were doing and warned you what was going to happen if you didn't, and you then set about said polis with a baseball bat, you'd deserve to get clattered.
With minumum necessary force, of course!
And if, having bashed him on the head and knocked him over you then whipped his side arm and proceeded to spray rounds about...
Because one has the avowed intention of destroying the other :roll:
And before you turn that around, if Israel wanted to wipe out the population of Gaza, they could and would
To answer your point about hungry children. The IDF had offered to distribute the aid, they were not prepared to allow it in without first being checked for weapons.
The israelis are good at murdering Palestinians that is for sure and this latest act of murderous piracy has only confirmed this not more than 18 months since the israelis murdered 1400 Palestinians in the Palestinians own land.
attacking an nata ship in international waters is an act of war and as such should be met by nato response. or do we have a navy and air force that is fit for nothing?
Tubthumper
31-May-10, 20:43
Here, if there was 600 folk on the ship, was there room for all the aid they were taking?:eek:
Or did I pick that up wrong...
So what?
If a group of heavily armed soldiers are committing an act of aggression against your vessel, i.e. abseiling down ropes carrying machine guns, you have every right to use whatever means of defence you have.
You have every reason to fear for your life.
If those are Israeli soldiers, and you are there as supporters of the people of the Gaza strip who routinely receive shoot first ask questions later, you have total justification to fight for your lives.
If they were not putting themselves in that position, nothing would have happened.
The question is not what happened when they did what they did, it is whether or not they should have done what they did.
They murdered those people.
well said
what is the difference bewteen israelis and Palestinians fred keep asking. perhaps the christians amongst us could answer that one?
I have a far more interesting question, Fred.
You are are a raving ant-semite.
The question is what turned you this way?
Here's a subsidiary question: who is coaching you?
I smell a rat....
Under the circumstances I think the IDF showed remarkable restraint.
Perhaps in future our resident Israel haters will be a bit more considered of their reactions.
under the circumstances time and again the idf have shown themselves to be a bunch of cowards and murderers and there terrorist government a bunch of liars and thieves
you would not have seen this bunch of cowards for dust if there had been a turkish warship present
this was murder and piracy and still the hypocriteical government sof europe and americaa look the other way
the british started this mess before ww2 with the belfour declaration giving something that was not theres to give to certain jews who repaid them by merdering british soldiers right left and centre
there has been murder, rape, theft , wanton destruction, supprezsion, lies ever since. the 19 last night add to the 1400 of 18 months ago add to who knows how many?
this murder and piracy must be condemned by any normal rational human being.
So what?
If a group of heavily armed soldiers are committing an act of aggression against your vessel, i.e. abseiling down ropes carrying machine guns, you have every right to use whatever means of defence you have.
You have every reason to fear for your life.
If those are Israeli soldiers, and you are there as supporters of the people of the Gaza strip who routinely receive shoot first ask questions later, you have total justification to fight for your lives.
If they were not putting themselves in that position, nothing would have happened.
The question is not what happened when they did what they did, it is whether or not they should have done what they did.
They murdered those people.
The ships had been warned to accompany the vessels to Ashdod in Israel or face boarding, but refused to comply.
Activists aboard the ships had repeatedly said they would not respond with violence to the navy's interception of their flotilla. That proved false.
The Drunken Duck
31-May-10, 21:12
And for those who cliam it was "illegal" for the Israeli's to board those vessels, lets have a look at Intenational Maritime Law ..
San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea, 12 June 1994 .. www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/3...1f002d49ce
SECTION V : NEUTRAL MERCHANT VESSELS AND CIVIL AIRCRAFT
Neutral merchant vessels
67. Merchant vessels flying the flag of neutral States may not be attacked unless they:
(a) are believed on reasonable grounds to be carrying contraband or breaching a blockade, and after prior warning they intentionally and clearly refuse to stop, or intentionally and clearly resist visit, search or capture;
(b) engage in belligerent acts on behalf of the enemy;
(c) act as auxiliaries to the enemy s armed forces;
(d) are incorporated into or assist the enemy s intelligence system;
(e) sail under convoy of enemy warships or military aircraft; or
(f) otherwise make an effective contribution to the enemy s military action, e.g., by carrying military materials, and it is not feasible for the attacking forces to first place passengers and crew in a place of safety. Unless circumstances do not permit, they are to be given a warning, so that they can re-route, off-load, or take other precautions.
Hmmm .. Para (a) is interesting .. ;) .. considering the openly stated intentions of breaking the blockade, the refusal to follow to an Israeli port for Inspection and the obvious resistance to the visit.
If there was a video on Youtube of a burglar crashing through my window armed with a shotgun, showing the point at which I start hitting him with a snooker cue, and my wife grabbing a kitchen knife to defend herself, there is not a court in the land that will clear that burglar of murder if he fires the shotgun and one of my family ends up dead.
Does not matter how many times he may have phoned threatening his attack either.
I suppose if the burglar informed you that he was coming to check if you had weapons, and you repeatedly told him that you would not resist and then you attacked him and he shot you, might be different...
Perhaps in future our resident Israel haters will be a bit more considered of their reactions.
Obviously not.
Before it was Jews who were starving in a ghetto surrounded by Nazis. Now it is Palestinians in a Gaza ghetto surrounded by Jews!
As usual, the Israelis are trying to portray the murder of 20 unarmed peace activists as an act of self defense. Machine gun toting commandos were attacked with sticks!!! One commando got skim milk powder thrown on his clean, freshly pressed uniform!
This is the classic Zionist tactic: despoil and kill and take everything. Then blame the victim for raising a hand in protest. Anti-Semite!!
http://www.henrymakow.com/again_zionists_are_setting_jew.html
before you comment you should be aware that Henry Macoiw is Jewish
From the guardian too! video; 'close-up footage of Mavi Marmara'
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/blog/2010/may/31/israel-troops-gaza-ships
Yes, the video shows armed Israeli soldiers attacking an unarmed civilian ship in international waters.
If it were Palestinians attacking an Israeli ship you wouldn't be blaming the Israelis for defending themselves. What do you see so different between an Israeli and a Palestinian?
Why do you consider Israelis have the right to attack who they want but no one has the right to defend themselves from them? When it was Israel who attacked the ship why do you say those who were attacked and defended themselves are to blame?
You seem to have an extreme bias here, what is it based on?
Before it was Jews who were starving in a ghetto surrounded by Nazis. Now it is Palestinians in a Gaza ghetto surrounded by Jews!
As usual, the Israelis are trying to portray the murder of 20 unarmed peace activists as an act of self defense. Machine gun toting commandos were attacked with sticks!!! One commando got skim milk powder thrown on his clean, freshly pressed uniform!
This is the classic Zionist tactic: despoil and kill and take everything. Then blame the victim for raising a hand in protest. Anti-Semite!!
http://www.henrymakow.com/again_zionists_are_setting_jew.html
before you comment you should be aware that Henry Macoiw is Jewish
Blinking heck Pegasus, calm down, no need for font size 14 (this is size 10) 'Zionist tactic' hmm.. I've been away flying, but these words seem vaguely familiar, now I know you've spelt 'defense' the American way, but you're not from over there, did you know old Stav? seems very much alike..
Attacked with sticks, hmm; bleeding iron bars m8, murder? nah. Self-defence? maybe
"Although portrayed in the media as a humanitarian mission delivering aid to Gaza, this flotilla was (not) a humanitarian mission. If indeed it were a humanitarian mission it would have accepted, weeks ago, during the planning stages, the offer by the Israeli authorities to transfer the aid, through to the port of Ashdod, to Gaza through the existing overland crossing, in accordance with established procedures. Many states and organizations, including the UN, are using those mechanisms on a daily basis. Carmon continued to say, "What kind of Humanitarian activists demand to bypass the United Nations, the Red Cross, and other internationally recognized agencies? What kind of peace activists use knives, clubs and other weapons to attack soldiers who board a ship in accordance with international law? What kind of Humanitarian activists, some with known terrorist history, embrace Hamas, a terrorist organization that openly shuns a two state solution and calls for Israel destruction, defying conditions set by the international community and the Quartet? The answer is clear: they are not peace activists; they are not messengers of good will. They cynically use a humanitarian platform to send a message of hate and to implement violence."
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3897076,00.html (http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3897076,00.html)
What next pegasus - some of my best friends are Jews? The standard denial!
This is an old song.
You likely have the responses by rote.
There's a big bundle of yellowing SS literature under your bed .
When you read it at night do you wear your helmet?
Just asking....
Yes, the video shows armed Israeli soldiers attacking an unarmed civilian ship in international waters.
If it were Palestinians attacking an Israeli ship you wouldn't be blaming the Israelis for defending themselves. What do you see so different between an Israeli and a Palestinian?
Why do you consider Israelis have the right to attack who they want but no one has the right to defend themselves from them? When it was Israel who attacked the ship why do you say those who were attacked and defended themselves are to blame?
You seem to have an extreme bias here, what is it based on?
Oh my God Fred, have you not been reading the previous posts? you must stop putting so many on 'ignore' you know, you miss so very much.. And NO I'm not bullying, just a friendly and kindly a pointing out..
The ships had been warned to accompany the vessels to Ashdod in Israel or face boarding, but refused to comply.
Activists aboard the ships had repeatedly said they would not respond with violence to the navy's interception of their flotilla. That proved false.
So what exactly gives Israel the right to order a foreign ship in international waters to accompany them anywhere?
So what exactly gives Israel the right to order a foreign ship in international waters to accompany them anywhere?
I think you have him on Ignore, but see #71
Wibble wibble
northener
31-May-10, 21:53
under the circumstances time and again the idf have shown themselves to be a bunch of cowards and murderers and there terrorist government a bunch of liars and thieves
you would not have seen this bunch of cowards for dust if there had been a turkish warship present
this was murder and piracy and still the hypocriteical government sof europe and americaa look the other way
the british started this mess before ww2 with the belfour declaration giving something that was not theres to give to certain jews who repaid them by merdering british soldiers right left and centre
there has been murder, rape, theft , wanton destruction, supprezsion, lies ever since. the 19 last night add to the 1400 of 18 months ago add to who knows how many?
this murder and piracy must be condemned by any normal rational human being.
A side issue...why do you believe a Turkish warship would have made a difference?
I'm meant to be on me space travels, stopp draggin' me back with interesting posts.....
And for those who cliam it was "illegal" for the Israeli's to board those vessels, lets have a look at Intenational Maritime Law ..
San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea, 12 June 1994 .. www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/3...1f002d49ce
SECTION V : NEUTRAL MERCHANT VESSELS AND CIVIL AIRCRAFT
Neutral merchant vessels
67. Merchant vessels flying the flag of neutral States may not be attacked unless they:
(a) are believed on reasonable grounds to be carrying contraband or breaching a blockade, and after prior warning they intentionally and clearly refuse to stop, or intentionally and clearly resist visit, search or capture;
That only applies to legal blockades.
The Israeli blockade of Gaza is illegal.
See UNSC resolution 1860. (http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2009/sc9567.doc.htm)
A side issue...why do you believe a Turkish warship would have made a difference?
I'm meant to be on me space travels, stopp draggin' me back with interesting posts.....
sorry
the presence of the Turkish Navy would have evened the odds
this from CNN
The Israeli troops "were not expecting to be attacked," said Jonathan Peled, minister-counselor at the Israeli embassy in Washington. He said the soldiers came aboard carrying paintball pistols, but were attacked with knives and metal bars. One naval commando was stabbed, prompting the soldiers to open up with live fire, killing the nine, he said
paint guns?
paint guns that carry real ammo? some liars are no very good
I think you have him on Ignore, but see #71
Wibble wibble
I don't have anyone on ignore, I am quite capable of ignoring people without any help.
See post #82.
The Drunken Duck
31-May-10, 22:10
That only applies to legal blockades.
The Israeli blockade of Gaza is illegal.
See UNSC resolution 1860. (http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2009/sc9567.doc.htm)
Read the maritime law bit again fred and tell me where it says it refers to "Legal Blockades" or "Illegal Blockades" In fact I will save you the trouble, it doesn't. It applies to "blockades" because they can be run by Sovereign nation in their waters if they so wish. Israel has decided to run a blockade, for whatever their reasons, therefore under International Maritime Law they are entitled to take the course of action they did in a)requesting the vessel follow them to port and b)boarding it when they didn't.
The UN Security Council don't have the Jurisdiction to overrule International Maritime Law last time I checked. The wording of that resolution makes all sorts of calls and suggestions but nowhere I can see does it even mention the word blockade let alone declare one illegal. You must learn to see what is actually written instead of what you want to see.
northener
31-May-10, 22:21
sorry
the presence of the Turkish Navy would have evened the odds
this from CNN
The Israeli troops "were not expecting to be attacked," said Jonathan Peled, minister-counselor at the Israeli embassy in Washington. He said the soldiers came aboard carrying paintball pistols, but were attacked with knives and metal bars. One naval commando was stabbed, prompting the soldiers to open up with live fire, killing the nine, he said
paint guns?
paint guns that carry real ammo? some liars are no very good
Sorry Pegasus, but that just confirms you original statement.
What difference would a Turkish warship have made to the situation?
Read the maritime law bit again fred and tell me where it says it refers to "Legal Blockades" or "Illegal Blockades" In fact I will save you the trouble, it doesn't. It applies to "blockades" because they can be run by Sovereign nation in their waters if they so wish. Israel has decided to run a blockade, for whatever their reasons, therefore under International Maritime Law they are entitled to take the course of action they did in a)requesting the vessel follow them to port and b) boarding it when they didn't.
The UN Security Council don't have the Jurisdiction to overrule International Maritime Law last time I checked. But you probably know best don't you ??, not like I hold a GMDSS GOC or anything.
UNSC Resolution 1860 makes the Israeli blockade of Gaza illegal therefore any action they take to enforce it is illegal.
Of course this isn't the only UN resolution Israel is ignoring, they are ignoring 38 UN resolutions passed since 1968.
We considered Iraq ignoring one resolution, which it turns out they didn't anyway, grounds to invade them.
What would you say was the difference? Why is Israel allowed to ignore so many resolutions while the false accusation that a Muslim country ignored one is grounds for invasion?
Why does Israel have the right to ignore resolutions when a Muslim country doesn't?
In a previous thread you said American soldiers seeing someone with something that looked a bit like a gun had the right to kill them with 30mm cannon round but now you say someone an a ship in international waters being attacked by Israelis with real guns does not have the right to pick up an iron bar to defend themselves.
What is the difference? Why do you think the Israeli has so many more rights than the Arab?
The Drunken Duck
31-May-10, 23:04
UNSC Resolution 1860 makes the Israeli blockade of Gaza illegal therefore any action they take to enforce it is illegal.
Of course this isn't the only UN resolution Israel is ignoring, they are ignoring 38 UN resolutions passed since 1968.
We considered Iraq ignoring one resolution, which it turns out they didn't anyway, grounds to invade them.
What would you say was the difference? Why is Israel allowed to ignore so many resolutions while the false accusation that a Muslim country ignored one is grounds for invasion?
Why does Israel have the right to ignore resolutions when a Muslim country doesn't?
In a previous thread you said American soldiers seeing someone with something that looked a bit like a gun had the right to kill them with 30mm cannon round but now you say someone an a ship in international waters being attacked by Israelis with real guns does not have the right to pick up an iron bar to defend themselves.
What is the difference? Why do you think the Israeli has so many more rights than the Arab?
One .. Your first line. YOU say that the resolution says that is illegal. Well I have read it and again it doesn't seem to mention the word blockade let alone declare it illegal. And even if it did it doesn't superpass International Maritime Law. No matter what you may think.
Two .. My point isn't based on UN Resolutions, its based on International Maritime Law, Law which clearly states the rights in a situation that we saw today. I AGREE WITH YOU that Israel has broken many UN Resolutions and I am not saying that is right. But it's a different issue and it doesn't change or affect Maritime Law one iota.
Three. Two different situations. The Apache crew opened fire because they thought they saw an RPG being pointed at them. That is a direct threat to life. And opening fire in that case was within their ROE. The people on that vessel attacked a man who could have been no threat to them as he was descending a rope he was holding with both hands. Of course they have the right to defend themselves IF presented with a danger to themselves. A guy descending a rope and then landing on a deck certainly isn't that. They just waded into them with iron bars in what was obviously a pre-meditated assault. If the Israeli had landed and openly pulled a gun on them I would be saying they were utterly justified in what they did. But I saw no gun on that clip. I just saw a mob lay into a guy the second he hit the deck, in fact they were trying to get to those guys before they hit the deck. Sickening.
Four .. I don't think that the Israeli has or should have more rights than the Arab. That is just empty rhetoric and an assumption about me by you in my view. For the record I AGREE WITH YOU that the blockade is morally wrong. I have just tried to explain it from a Maritime Law standpoint. You might also be well shocked to learn that I AGREE WITH YOU that Israel on many occasions behaves reprehensibly. But then so have the Palestinians. I actually used to support the Palestinian cause both morally and even financially. They lost my support though when they cheered and danced in the streets on 911 at the news of the deaths of so many.
Anyway, I have said all that can be said on the subject and I don't see any point in going round and round.
So I am out of this one and off out on the lash.
Three. Two different situations. The Apache crew opened fire because they thought they saw an RPG being pointed at them.
Are we talking about the incident I think we are talking about here? The one where the Apache crew circled the group of innocent people while all the time willing them to show something that looked like a weapon? I must admit I am confused.
One .. Your first line. YOU say that the resolution says that is illegal. Well I have read it and again it doesn't seem to mention the word blockade let alone declare it illegal. And even if it did it doesn't superpass International Maritime Law. No matter what you may think.
But the maritime law you quote only applies when two states are in armed conflict, that is not the case here. The UN has ruled that Israel is an occupying power, there is no war.
The blockade is illegal, under UN Resolution 1860 it is illegal, under the Geneva Convention it is illegal as it constitutes collective punishment and does not differentiate between civilian and military populations.
Now there are two possibilities, either the soldiers were acting for the Israeli government in which case it was a war crime or they acted independently in which case it is the law of the country which the ship was registered in which applies and it was murder.
See the Craig Murray blog (http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/), he's former head of the FCO Maritime Section, he knows about these things.
Are we talking about the incident I think we are talking about here? The one where the Apache crew circled the group of innocent people while all the time willing them to show something that looked like a weapon? I must admit I am confused.
yes i think thats what hes on aboput.
criminals must be held accountable for there actions
these were not military vessels posing any threat to Israel. they were ordinary vessesl carrying 10000 tons of humanitarian aid paid for not by israel. they were in international waters of the Med 90 miles off the coast of Palestine.
this is a war crime. 20 civilians are dead.
a white flag was raised
some of the posters on here are defending murder
there is no excuse
Are we talking about the incident I think we are talking about here? The one where the Apache crew circled the group of innocent people while all the time willing them to show something that looked like a weapon? I must admit I am confused.
That is the one.
There was another similar incident where American soldiers killed some Iraqi farmers ploughing their field.
http://www.youtube.com/user/Thunderf00t#p/u/191/Q5zzMIRznDk
I have a far more interesting question, Fred.
You are are a raving ant-semite.
The question is what turned you this way?
Here's a subsidiary question: who is coaching you?
I smell a rat....
This isn't the first atrocity committed by Israel, Israel has been murdering Palestinians for a long time but people didn't take much notice. Each day I read the world news and see they killed a couple of Palestinians here and a few Palestinians there and it didn't even make the UK papers. Then last year they killed 1,400 Palestinians all in one go and people started to notice but nobody did anything, people talked, people condemned, people forgot.
Then yesterday they killed up to 20 people on a ship taking aid to Gaza, not Palestinians, the ship carried aid workers from around the world, people from England, Ireland, Scotland, people like us and people they noticed.
Were you accusing me of being racist?
What next pegasus - some of my best friends are Jews? The standard denial!
This is an old song.
You likely have the responses by rote.
There's a big bundle of yellowing SS literature under your bed .
When you read it at night do you wear your helmet?
Just asking....
no you are not just asking. you are making a personal attack on someone that you dont know from adam or eve. you want to brush ober the death of 20+ civilians in an act of murderous piracy in international waters.
i remember the attack on the uss Liberty in june 1967 which killed 34 american sailors and seriously wounded 173. the agressor was thge same. the target was the same, a unarmed ship clearly flying the us flag. the israelis tried there bast to sink that ship for over 2 hours while johnson and macnamara held back the US Navy
do you want ot hear and deal with facts or is your level nothing more than personal insults form the gutter?
Blinking heck Pegasus, calm down, no need for font size 14 (this is size 10) 'Zionist tactic' hmm.. I've been away flying, but these words seem vaguely familiar, now I know you've spelt 'defense' the American way, but you're not from over there, did you know old Stav? seems very much alike..
used copy and paste . should have put the link i suppose. the copy kept the text size form the artile
This isn't the first atrocity committed by Israel, Israel has been murdering Palestinians for a long time but people didn't take much notice. Each day I read the world news and see they killed a couple of Palestinians here and a few Palestinians there and it didn't even make the UK papers. Then last year they killed 1,400 Palestinians all in one go and people started to notice but nobody did anything, people talked, people condemned, people forgot.
Then yesterday they killed up to 20 people on a ship taking aid to Gaza, not Palestinians, the ship carried aid workers from around the world, people from England, Ireland, Scotland, people like us and people they noticed.
Were you accusing me of being racist?
more and more Jewish people are speaking out against the racist facist murderous israeli govmt,
Considering yesterday’s news about Israeli nuclear submarines being stationed in the Gulf, the world must react quickly and severely. Israel is now officially mad and deadly.
thats from Gilad atzmon (www.gilad.co.uk (http://www.gilad.co.uk))
at least the new govmt here have said something at last,
Mr Hague called for the "unacceptable" restrictions on access to Gaza to be lifted and said there was a "clear need for Israel to act with restraint and in line with international obligations".http://uk.news.yahoo.com/4/20100531/twl-hague-deplores-gaza-aid-ship-deaths-41f21e0.html
Aaldtimer
01-Jun-10, 03:13
So, Peggy you have gone from 19 to 20 to 20+. but the actual reported figure is actually 9 dead...who is doing the lying?:eek:
Rather than worry about other people/ just read that 172 Civil Servants are being paid over 150,000 Pounds per year, with quite a few at over 250.000 pounds. And they do?
Come on 'guys and gurls'..........Lets get our own shop sorted out/ we are doing ours!..
People seem to be more amoured with Celine Dion being pregnant..
northener
01-Jun-10, 08:31
Pegagsus,
Just to clarify my question, I'm trying to find out why a Turkish warship would take an interest in an Isreali incident well outside Turkish water.
Regarding nuclear submarines'...to be a pedant, they're not nuclear subs, they're conventionally powered subs with nuclear capability.
If they have decided to station one of their subs permanantly off Iran in international waters, then they can. I'd say it's a good strategic retort to what they percieve to be a very real threat. If the nuclear boot was on the other foot, I'd say Iran would do the same.....
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article7140282.ece
Tubthumper
01-Jun-10, 08:49
The incident itself, while it stinks, is hardly a surprise bearing in mind that it was engineered to gain maximum world outrage. 500 people on a ferry, taking 'aid' - wouldn't they have been better off staying at home and campaigning, using the space on the ship for more aid like building materials, dried milk, electric wheelchairs(?!) etc.?
Maybe we should call the idea 'outrage tourism' - a load of well-intentioned young people on their 'gap year' could go to trouble spots around the world on a nice cruise ship, meet other people, learn about the world, get a bit drunk, get a bit of attention after setting about the police or army with iron bars and knives, then help raise world outrage for the cause by being shot.
It's better than just waving a placard and singing 'We shall not be moved'. :lol:
Perhaps in future our resident Israel haters will be a bit more considered of their reactions.
Just to clarify this - i am not an Israel hater. I dont hate anyone however I cant support Israel in this action and I am deeply saddened that people have been killed when taking humanitarian action. Now i know there is a whole thread here which suggests that palestinians are terrorists, israel is right in her actions, that attacking the soldiers with metal bars and chairs is sufficient action to get yourself killed and that they could very well have been carrying guns and other weapons. Im not getting into any of these arguments.
Israel was wrong to kill people on board a ship carrying humanitarian aid.
They did what they always do - a metal gloved fist slams down to break whatever it is they were threatened by - even if it is not much of a threat. Heavy handed and completely unnecessary.
To suggest that the only option open to trained professional soldiers when being hit with chairs or metal bars by a group of untrained civilians is to shoot them dead is frankly ridiculous.
Israel has a right to defend its own territory in the face of terrorist or other attacks but this was so far removed from that as to be horrifying.
Tubthumper
01-Jun-10, 09:03
Pegagsus,
Just to clarify my question, I'm trying to find out why a Turkish warship would take an interest in an Isreali incident well outside Turkish water.
Regarding nuclear submarines'...to be a pedant, they're not nuclear subs, they're conventionally powered subs with nuclear capability.
If they have decided to station one of their subs permanantly off Iran in international waters, then they can. I'd say it's a good strategic retort to what they percieve to be a very real threat. If the nuclear boot was on the other foot, I'd say Iran would do the same.....
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article7140282.ece
I very much doubt that the IDF would have given a flying toss whether there was a Turkish vessel in the area. They have shown many times that they are willing to take on anyone they see who threatens the existence of the Israeli state. And the Turks aren't daft enough to end up going to war with an ally over this.
Which brings me to a question - The blockade of Gaza is morally wrong, but how can Israel better protect its citizens from attack from Gaza?
This has brought the whole festering sore to the world's attention (except those who are more interested in Celine Dion's baby) and is an opportunity for pressure to be applied to BOTH SIDES to stop mucking about and (a) stop building houses on Palestinian land (b) stop lobbing rockets over the border.
Three years ago there was an incident where the Iranian military arrested British servicemen for entering their territorial waters. They were kept in good conditions for a few days before being sent home with new suits and some DVDs.
We had a thread about it here with a poll asking what we should do about it, one of the options included the use of scud missiles.
http://forum.caithness.org/showthread.php?t=23361
My question is...
If Iran had attacked a ship carrying humanitarian aid in international waters and killed up to 20 aid workers what do you think the response on this forum would have been?
Tubthumper
01-Jun-10, 09:13
To suggest that the only option open to trained professional soldiers when being hit with chairs or metal bars by a group of untrained civilians is to shoot them dead is frankly ridiculous.
I think that when an soldier, regardless of training and professionalism, goes into an unknown situation and is attacked by a mob bent on his death (and being stabbed, beaten with iron bars, being shot with your own pistol is NOT considered 'a bit of rough and tumble' in soldier terms) he will respond in any way he can to save his life. So please don't everyone act all outraged at his actions without at least condemning those of the 'peace activists'. Israel's attitude to the world stinks. The Gaza blockade stinks. But soldiers, doing their job and being lynched by a mob, also stinks.
Those 'peace activists' knew exactly what they were doing. And they must have known the risks involved. Granted, all those on board may not have been up for a ruck, but hey, you want to bring the world's attention to an injustice? Put your life on the line! And we should all be grateful to those who are willing to stand up and be killed for the disposessed.
EDIT- 6 soldiers were stabbed, shot and beaten to death. The perpetrators danced about the streets in the equipment they took from them. Their bodies were mutilated. They were sons, husbands and fathers. Even if the perpetrators had a genuine gripe, was that wrong? We should be grateful to ALL those who are willing to stand up and be killed for the disposessed.
I very much doubt that the IDF would have given a flying toss whether there was a Turkish vessel in the area. They have shown many times that they are willing to take on anyone they see who threatens the existence of the Israeli state. And the Turks aren't daft enough to end up going to war with an ally over this.
Which brings me to a question - The blockade of Gaza is morally wrong, but how can Israel better protect its citizens from attack from Gaza?
This has brought the whole festering sore to the world's attention (except those who are more interested in Celine Dion's baby) and is an opportunity for pressure to be applied to BOTH SIDES to stop mucking about and (a) stop building houses on Palestinian land (b) stop lobbing rockets over the border.
I agree, while I willingly hold my hands up to being pro Israeli in most circumstances, for the reason I have never forgotten a quote by one of the founders of the modern Israeli state (I don't know who) "From now on, if you want to persecute Jews, you will know where to find us"
And from that day on, the Arab world has been queuing up.
If you are a country whose every border holds out a hostile state, I believe your best defence is to overreact.
If the Palestinians were seriously concerned about the people of Gaza, they would work a lot harder to reconcile their differences with Israel. How about acknowledging their right to exist?
Three years ago there was an incident where the Iranian military arrested British servicemen for entering their territorial waters. They were kept in good conditions for a few days before being sent home with new suits and some DVDs.
We had a thread about it here with a poll asking what we should do about it, one of the options included the use of scud missiles.
http://forum.caithness.org/showthread.php?t=23361
My question is...
If Iran had attacked a ship carrying humanitarian aid in international waters and killed up to 20 aid workers what do you think the response on this forum would have been?
We never did get our boat back :mad:
Three years ago there was an incident where the Iranian military arrested British servicemen for entering their territorial waters. They were kept in good conditions for a few days before being sent home with new suits and some DVDs.
We had a thread about it here with a poll asking what we should do about it, one of the options included the use of scud missiles.
http://forum.caithness.org/showthread.php?t=23361
My question is... If Iran had attacked a ship carrying humanitarian aid in international waters and killed up to 20 aid workers what do you think the response on this forum would have been?
Couldn't resist.
My goodness fred don't you and your chum fib; '20 aid workers killed' It's nothing like that - where do you get these fantasy figures from? I'm afraid you loose whatever credibility you might have had by this silly exaggerating..
Oh yes before I forget; all this 'Blockade by the Israelis' - I've not heard a peep from you and your chum, that Gaza is also being blockaded by an ARAB state.
Now if you get a map and look carefully at the bottom left of the Gaza Strip you will see that an ARAB country (i.e. Egypt) is bordering a large part of Gaza - now this ARAB/Muslim country is also blockading Gaza. Why no hysterical spoutings about this?
Just wondered..
Oh yes before I forget; all this 'Blockade by the Israelis' - I've not heard a peep from you and your chum, that Gaza is also being blockaded by an ARAB state.
Now if you get a map and look carefully at the bottom left of the Gaza Strip you will see that an ARAB country (i.e. Egypt) is bordering a large part of Gaza - now this ARAB/Muslim country is also blockading Gaza. Why no hysterical spoutings about this?
Just wondered..
I also noticed the lack of Egypt being highlighted as an aggressor against Gaza. This may be a deliberate ploy by the Pro-Gaza lobby we have on the Org. And am I just being suspicious, but Pegasus's posts seem vaguely familiar style to a former Orger?
Tubthumper
01-Jun-10, 09:44
I'm not engaging at the moment, however I did notice that pegasus's spelling and punctuation (eg use of capitals) was much improved, indeed one could say normal, on some of his recent 'nice' posts.
Is there a cure for dyslexia being developed before our very eyes??:eek:
Couldn't resist.
My goodness fred don't you and your chum fib; '20 aid workers killed' It's nothing like that - where do you get these fantasy figures from? I'm afraid you loose whatever credibility you might have had by this silly exaggerating..
Oh yes before I forget; all this 'Blockade by the Israelis' - I've not heard a peep from you and your chum, that Gaza is also being blockaded by an ARAB state.
Now if you get a map and look carefully at the bottom left of the Gaza Strip you will see that an ARAB country (i.e. Egypt) is bordering a large part of Gaza - now this ARAB/Muslim country is also blockading Gaza. Why no hysterical spoutings about this?
Just wondered..
If you would like to read my post again you will see that I said up to 20 aid workers.
AFAIK Egypt hasn't attacked a ship carrying humanitarian aid in international waters and killed up to 20 aid workers.
Would you like to answer my question?
Tubthumper
01-Jun-10, 09:59
I just had another thought. I can't remember our pals ever making a post being critical of any nation apart from Israel, or criticising any terrorist organisation. Is that suspicious or what?
Edit: I just realised, they are always critical of the US and UK. And of military people.
I just had another thought. I can't remember our pals ever making a post being critical of any nation apart from Israel, or criticising any terrorist organisation. Is that suspicious or what?
Edit: I just realised, they are always critical of the US and UK. And of military people.
Yes...if Abu Hansa was posting on the org, that is what he would look like :Razz
Would any of the clique lie to answer my question?
I see from the poll that 10 people, over a fifth of replies, advocated the use of cruise missiles. I see that "some very unpleasant people visit his family and friends at 4 in the morning " got four votes.
What do you think the response would have been if Iran had attacked a ship carrying humanitarian aid in international waters and killed up to 20 aid workers?
Would any of the clique lie to answer my question?
I see from the poll that 10 people, over a fifth of replies, advocated the use of cruise missiles. I see that "some very unpleasant people visit his family and friends at 4 in the morning " got four votes.
What do you think the response would have been if Iran had attacked a ship carrying humanitarian aid in international waters and killed up to 20 aid workers?
Smoke Screen tactics now fred is it? Change the subject/thread, and maybe the Orgers will not see the mistakes about the allegation of casualties made in your earlier posts.
Crackeday
01-Jun-10, 10:36
Would any of the clique lie to answer my question?
I see from the poll that 10 people, over a fifth of replies, advocated the use of cruise missiles. I see that "some very unpleasant people visit his family and friends at 4 in the morning " got four votes.
What do you think the response would have been if Iran had attacked a ship carrying humanitarian aid in international waters and killed up to 20 aid workers?
I stand by my original post yourself and george Galloway could be one and the same!![lol]
Why do you have to keep refering to Iran, and only posting negative things about israel?
It is a very blinkered view you have of the country.
I will hold my hands up and admit that I am PRo Israel i'm not going to hide behind propoganda and incorrect numbers of dead.
Palestine may have hungry children but maybe if they stopped trying to wipe Israel off the planet and spend their money on food instead of arms then their children wouldnt be hungry?
Just to redress the balance here is a site with many interesting facts that I myself didnt know about.
http://www.pro-israel.org/
The Drunken Duck
01-Jun-10, 10:40
But the maritime law you quote only applies when two states are in armed conflict, that is not the case here. The UN has ruled that Israel is an occupying power, there is no war.
The blockade is illegal, under UN Resolution 1860 it is illegal, under the Geneva Convention it is illegal as it constitutes collective punishment and does not differentiate between civilian and military populations.
Now there are two possibilities, either the soldiers were acting for the Israeli government in which case it was a war crime or they acted independently in which case it is the law of the country which the ship was registered in which applies and it was murder.
See the Craig Murray blog (http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/), he's former head of the FCO Maritime Section, he knows about these things.
Israel and Hamas ARE in a state of armed conflict Fred. That's why the Israeli's are blockading, to stop the smuggling in of arms by sea. If they weren't in an armed conflict how on earth could they have had the "ceasefires" they had before ??, you have to have an armed conflict before you can have one !!, So it does apply. And even in International Waters a nation can run a blockade as long as they don't impede access to neutral ports.
And for the THIRD time .. NOWHERE does it mention the word blockade, let alone declare it illegal in that UN resolution. Its all fancy evasive language that's typical of the wishy washy UN. And the UN, even though they might think so DO NOT have the power to overrule International Maritime Law. Your just grasping at straws now by invoking the Geneva Convention. But why are you quoting a convention that covers armed conflict in a scenario you have just said is NOT an armed conflict ??
I mean you are even going on about Iran and "what if's", has it ever occurred to you that the reason they took those Marines hostage was because they claimed they were in their waters and therefore they KNEW that gave them the legal right to stop and search their boat on those grounds under Maritime Law ?? .. THAT is why such an argument raged about whether they were in Iranian waters or not, both Governments knew that was the issue surrounding the capture of those guys and the one that would make it legal or illegal under Maritime Law. The Iranians had no reason to stop their boat if it was in International waters, the Israeli's did in this case as they are running a blockade against a state they are in armed conflict with.
And I don't need to check anyone's blog. I hold a GMDSS GOC, that's a Maritime Radio Officers Licence to you. And I have worked Rigs with big Panic buttons in the Radio Room that have been boarded, so I had to know the rules of it. You should check the facts Fred instead of sticking to your assumptions. You claims about war crimes and the laws of the flag ship of the country applying are nonsense. As usual, instead of seeing what actually applies out here in the real world you are making it up as you go along.
EDIT .. Just read Craig Murray's blog. Utter tripe, he is ignoring large sections of Maritime Law. For a former head of the FCO he seems to be letting his "Human Rights" head delude him a bit. Now I see where you are getting your views on this subject from, you would be wise to do your own research or listen to someone with Maritime experience instead of that misinformed zealot.
Smoke Screen tactics now fred is it? Change the subject/thread, and maybe the Orgers will not see the mistakes about the allegation of casualties made in your earlier posts.
Well now let's see what you had to say in that thread, apart from the usual ad hominem attacks on myself that is.
I believe the MOD before I would belive the Iranians
http://forum.caithness.org/showpost.php?p=206551&postcount=109
But the eventual MOD enquiry showed that I was right and you were wrong, it showed that Iran was telling the truth. It showed that America had drawn a line on the map where they wanted the border to be without consulting the Iranians and without even informing them where they had drawn it.
Yet over a fifth of orgers who responded wanted to use cruise missiles against Iran.
Well now let's see what you had to say in that thread, apart from the usual ad hominem attacks on myself that is.
http://forum.caithness.org/showpost.php?p=206551&postcount=109
But the eventual MOD enquiry showed that I was right and you were wrong, it showed that Iran was telling the truth. It showed that America had drawn a line on the map where they wanted the border to be without consulting the Iranians and without even informing them where they had drawn it.
Yet over a fifth of orgers who responded wanted to use cruise missiles against Iran.
And your point is what?? I still believe the MOD were correct, and IMHO the enquiry was a diplomatic cover up to save face.
And you are still making Smoke to change the subject
And your point is what?? I still believe the MOD were correct, and IMHO the enquiry was a diplomatic cover up to save face.
And you are still making Smoke to change the subject
You mean you only believe the MOD when they say what you want to hear.
You mean you only believe the MOD when they say what you want to hear.
If that is the way you want to twist it fred, then so be it [lol]
IJust to redress the balance here is a site with many interesting facts that I myself didnt know about.
http://www.pro-israel.org/
Thankyou Crackeday, a very informative web site
Tubthumper
01-Jun-10, 11:20
I've always tried to be pro-people rather than pro or anti any particular nation. There are things about how Israel conducts itself that horrify me. Just as there are aspects of the Moslem world that make me feel ill.
But I just watched the latest footage of the 'Israeli Outrage' being shown on the TV. It's like a feral mob. The last time I felt that sick was when two British squaddies got beaten to death by a mob in Ireland in the 1980s.
And I don't care whether the IDF has carried out atrocities in the name of security - two wrongs don't make a right. And I'm not ashamed to say if that had been me or my section in that situation, there would have been a lot more than 9 peace activists killed!
I don't hear many people here defending Israel's and Egypt's blockade of Gaza. But anyone on here who defends those 'peace activists' should be ashamed.
The Drunken Duck
01-Jun-10, 11:33
I've always tried to be pro-people rather than pro or anti any particular nation. There are things about how Israel conducts itself that horrify me. Just as there are aspects of the Moslem world that make me feel ill.
But I just watched the latest footage of the 'Israeli Outrage' being shown on the TV. It's like a feral mob. The last time I felt that sick was when two British squaddies got beaten to death by a mob in Ireland in the 1980s.
And I don't care whether the IDF has carried out atrocities in the name of security - two wrongs don't make a right. And I'm not ashamed to say if that had been me or my section in that situation, there would have been a lot more than 9 peace activists killed!
I don't hear many people here defending Israel's and Egypt's blockade of Gaza. But anyone on here who defends those 'peace activists' should be ashamed.
What he said. Every Word.
Funnily enough I had the same flashback of the silver car and the two guys getting dragged away when I saw that clip.
Then yesterday they killed up to 20 people on a ship taking aid to Gaza, not Palestinians, the ship carried aid workers from around the world, people from England, Ireland, Scotland, people like us and people they noticed.
And we are being told the peace activists were the agressors!
How can you attack an israeli machine gunner in the dark? most of the aid workers were sleeping. some put up white flags
I don't hate anyone.
I would though, if my family were suffering because of a certain person/people. I would if someone moved in next door and started calling my backyard theirs. I would if someone evicted me from my house because they felt unsafe when I protested at them stealing my backyard. I would if someone took away my home and my history. I would if someone treated me as a prisoner for the reason of my mere existance. I would if someone treated me as a terrorist, when having nothing else to loose I protested my losses. I would probably hate enough to become a terrorist as I would have nothing left to loose.
Do I condone terrorism then? No. But when people have no option, the make the only choice that they still have. Palestine and Isreal will never make peace. They are the unstopable object meeting the immovable one. Isreal makes no concessions or admits to historically being to blame for the situation as it stands. Hate generates more hate. The Palastinians will be happy when there are no Isrealis, the Isrealis will be happy when there are no Palastinians. There is no solution.
I've always tried to be pro-people rather than pro or anti any particular nation.
Then may I congratulate you on the tremendous job you make of hiding it.
Tubthumper
01-Jun-10, 13:24
I agree with you Ju, but I believe there MUST be a solution. The whole middle east political situation has the existence of Israel as its fulcrum - most of the countries in the area have learned to live with the situation, but there will always be those (on both sides) who see solutions only in terms of absolutes.
The para-clique on here will no doubt be baying for justice (following the lead of the media and believing everything that's on their nefarious websites). Just remember it's always the poor grunt at the front that gets hit on the head and stabbed or shot. It's never the keyboard warriors and newspaper leader-writers who screech for justice, stir up the ignorant masses but never move out of their comfort zones to help achieve it.
And we are being told the peace activists were the agressors!
How can you attack an israeli machine gunner in the dark? most of the aid workers were sleeping. some put up white flags
Was it the ones that were asleep or the ones with the white flags that were wielding the knifes, guns and iron bars? :confused
I agree with you Ju, but I believe there MUST be a solution. The whole middle east political situation has the existence of Israel as its fulcrum - most of the countries in the area have learned to live with the situation, but there will always be those (on both sides) who see solutions only in terms of absolutes.
The para-clique on here will no doubt be baying for justice (following the lead of the media and believing everything that's on their nefarious websites). Just remember it's always the poor grunt at the front that gets hit on the head and stabbed or shot. It's never the keyboard warriors and newspaper leader-writers who screech for justice, stir up the ignorant masses but never move out of their comfort zones to help achieve it.
I've seen no one saying we should attack Israel with cruise missiles. I've seen no one saying some very unpleasant people should visit the Israeli President's family and friends at 4 in the morning. I haven't even seen anyone saying we should freeze all Israeli assets in the UK, that was the winner in the Iranian poll.
I've seen no one saying we should attack Israel with cruise missiles. I've seen no one saying some very unpleasant people should visit the Israeli President's family and friends at 4 in the morning. I haven't even seen anyone saying we should freeze all Israeli assets in the UK, that was the winner in the Iranian poll.
So does that suggest to you that more people like Israel than Iran?
Why don't you have a poll and find out?
Good morning, Fred.
Time for some news from the gutter.
Yes that's me.
And I'm a bully too.
Oh, and I'm also a cliche-head!
Today's question is this: How do you committ mass murder with a paint-ball gun?
I anticipate at least 500 words reply in the Doomsday Mega Font.
So get yer helmet on, Pegasus!
But I doubt if too many Orgers are paying attention.
You see, we have seen it all before.
Fred and Pegasus arrive on the Org with their prejudices intact, and when the time comes for them to leave then their prejudices will still be intact.
I have a special grievance for the two of you. My grievance is this (pause to break out the Doomsday Font): YOU ARE BORING MY SOCKS OFF!!!!!!
You may riposte with your typical line "if you dont like it go to another thread"
No way, Fred. No way, Pegasus. This moral cesspool that the pair of you have created is infecting the entire ORG.
I think the time has come for you to find a new home, elsewhere, anywhere, as long as it is not on the ORG.
Free speech entails a modicum of responsibility.
But then free speech is not what you are all about is it....?
So does that suggest to you that more people like Israel than Iran?
Why don't you have a poll and find out?
Because I would probably lose what little faith in human nature I have left.
Was it the ones that were asleep or the ones with the white flags that were wielding the knifes, guns and iron bars? :confused
You believe the above yet no israeli was killed. Srange dont you think? :roll:
I have a far more interesting question, Fred.
You are are a raving ant-semite.
The question is what turned you this way?
Here's a subsidiary question: who is coaching you?
I smell a rat....
I continually hear the term anti-semite being used in relation to people who oppose the Satate of Israel, and don't understand its use in that context - semetic includes Arabs, it is not related to religion.............the vast majority of Jews in Israel aren't even semetic, they are caucasian.
Tubthumper
01-Jun-10, 15:24
Rich, this is a big subject for grown up people. Please act your age while you're here or we'll think of you as just another screwball.
Thank-you :D
Tubthumper
01-Jun-10, 15:31
I continually hear the term anti-semite being used in relation to people who oppose the Satate of Israel, and don't understand its use in that context - semetic includes Arabs, it is not related to religion.............the vast majority of Jews in Israel aren't even semetic, they are caucasian.
That's a point: never mind the semitic bit, are the Christian Israelis and Arabic Israelis counted as Jews, even though they don't follow the Judaic religion? And do our resident clique 'dislike' the average resident of the Nation of Israel, even though they not Zionists?
In fact, does the term Zionist only exist in the minds of the paranoid (along with illuminati) or is it an actual term in use among the ordinary human population? Maybe one of the clique can tell us.
Politics is about big people doing big things; life is about real people getting with their lives.
[quote=Tubthumper;715402]Politics is about big people doing big things; quote]
Really??? In the face of the recent changes in our government?
Tubthumper
01-Jun-10, 15:38
Really??? In the face of the recent changes in our government?
Hmmm. You may have a point...
Shabbychic
01-Jun-10, 15:57
Good morning, Fred.
Time for some news from the gutter.
Yes that's me.
And I'm a bully too.
Oh, and I'm also a cliche-head!
Today's question is this: How do you committ mass murder with a paint-ball gun?
I anticipate at least 500 words reply in the Doomsday Mega Font.
So get yer helmet on, Pegasus!
But I doubt if too many Orgers are paying attention.
You see, we have seen it all before.
Fred and Pegasus arrive on the Org with their prejudices intact, and when the time comes for them to leave then their prejudices will still be intact.
I have a special grievance for the two of you. My grievance is this (pause to break out the Doomsday Font): YOU ARE BORING MY SOCKS OFF!!!!!!
You may riposte with your typical line "if you dont like it go to another thread"
No way, Fred. No way, Pegasus. This moral cesspool that the pair of you have created is infecting the entire ORG.
I think the time has come for you to find a new home, elsewhere, anywhere, as long as it is not on the ORG.
Free speech entails a modicum of responsibility.
But then free speech is not what you are all about is it....?
Excuse me, but what gives you the right to decide who posts on here? Whether you, or I or anyone else agrees with Fred or Pegasus, they have as much right on here as anyone else. If they break the rules, that would be dealt with, like it has with others.
Free speech may come with a modicum of responsibilty, but it also comes with self control, and the ability to allow others to have their say too, whether you personally like it or not.
Good morning, Fred.
Time for some news from the gutter.
Yes that's me.
And I'm a bully too.
Oh, and I'm also a cliche-head!
Today's question is this: How do you committ mass murder with a paint-ball gun?
I anticipate at least 500 words reply in the Doomsday Mega Font.
So get yer helmet on, Pegasus!
But I doubt if too many Orgers are paying attention.
You see, we have seen it all before.
Fred and Pegasus arrive on the Org with their prejudices intact, and when the time comes for them to leave then their prejudices will still be intact.
I have a special grievance for the two of you. My grievance is this (pause to break out the Doomsday Font): YOU ARE BORING MY SOCKS OFF!!!!!!
You may riposte with your typical line "if you dont like it go to another thread"
No way, Fred. No way, Pegasus. This moral cesspool that the pair of you have created is infecting the entire ORG.
I think the time has come for you to find a new home, elsewhere, anywhere, as long as it is not on the ORG.
Free speech entails a modicum of responsibility.
But then free speech is not what you are all about is it....?
Why mention only the 2 of us? there are others who are objecting to the murder of civilians peace activists here and there is a silent majorotiy who are saying nothing so we do not know there opinion. then there are ones who have been banned like stavro and ones who left due to that ban that they deemed to be unfair and vindictive. i think that stavro and the others would be adding there voices here to if they were on. then guess what? you might be outnumbered. o dear! how would you cope with that boy?
you and youre type dont like multiple voices do you? it concerns you that the truth might be being aired. that the masses might be swayed by truth. that is why you answer facts with personal attacks and rubbish. thats why you think you can only deal with one voice. but even one voice -fred- is more than a martch for the whole load of you detractors and obscurers
moral cesspool? if you dont like hearing facts and having the spotlight shining on the agressors then hard luck. if you dont like the fact that the boat was flying a white flag then i know why.
i also reason that the reason for the unprovoked attack at night was that it would be difficult to video
even wililam hague has spoken out so things must be obvious and undeniable
The blockade of Gaza, restricting supplies to the population of Gaza is wrong.
The decision to put troops onto those ships was wrong.
The fact that many on the ships were armed with metal bars etc, and intent on using them was wrong.
The troops were put in a position that they had to defend themselves – their actions however “justifiable” were the result of a bad decision, and resulted in unnecessary deaths.
The debate is polarized, but looking at the simple fact that people who live in Gaza are being denied the basic supplies by an Israeli regime intent on smashing the Hamas government in Gaza. These people have been near driven into the sea.
I always hear that Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East...........wouldn’t it be great if EVERYONE got a vote and it was fully representative of the entire population, instead of this two state solution (or is that 3 state solution now).
Here's another T-shirt from PhilosophyFootball.com:
http://www.philosophyfootball.com/product_images/pimg4c04faeac5aaf_front
http://www.philosophyfootball.com/new_win.html
Tubthumper
01-Jun-10, 16:33
Scotsboy, your post: A1. Your T-shirt: A1++++ :~(
Tubthumper
01-Jun-10, 16:40
The blockade of Gaza, restricting supplies to the population of Gaza is wrong.
The decision to allow those ships to be filled with activists, many of whom had no intention of 'providing aid', to set sail into what could only be a disastrous confrontation was wrong
The decision to put troops onto those ships was wrong. But once the fuse had been lit by the ships setting sail, what were the alternatives?
The fact that many on the ships were armed with metal bars etc, and intent on using them was wrong.
My red text
My red text
You seem to be having trouble understanding. You still seem to see the people of Gaza as things less than human who have no right to have cement to rebuild their houses, which were destroyed by Israeli bombs, or water purifiers.
The Israeli blockade of Gaza is illegal, Israel has no right moral or legal to prevent Palestinians getting basic necessities, quite the opposite, as occupying power they have a legal obligation to ensure the people of Gaza do get them.
Can you get it out of your head please that Palestinians are not human and have no human rights, the alternative is obvious, the alternative was to leave the ships alone and let them deliver their humanitarian aid to people who are desperate for it.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/10208027.stm
Seems like there is complete confusion doubt and uncertainty about what happened.
We can of course do nothing but watch and wait. We have no way of ascertaining what the truth is. In the meantime people in Gaza struggle constantly to live any sort of life, Israel continues to build houses on occupied land, Hamas continues to lob rockets over the border and Israel continues to turn its nose up to UN resolutions. There is no real motivation for peace in this conflict. It would seem that both sides need real visionary leaders for anything like a peace to be brokered. ITs a shame that both sides have leaders who are so much less than the best of humanity.
Makes me very sad:(
Metalattakk
01-Jun-10, 17:40
the alternative is obvious, the alternative was to leave the ships alone and let them deliver their humanitarian aid to people who are desperate for it.
Actually, the alternative was to do as the Israelis asked and dock at the designated port for inspection.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/10208027.stm
Seems like there is complete confusion doubt and uncertainty about what happened.
Witnesses on the boats where they offered no resistance to the Israelis are saying they were shot at with rubber bullets, beaten and given electric shocks.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/10206802.stm
Witnesses on the boats where they offered no resistance to the Israelis are saying they were shot at with rubber bullets, beaten and given electric shocks.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/10206802.stm
Seemingly Sergeant Baker got a call from the governor of the county jail............sorry.
Tubthumper
01-Jun-10, 18:48
Load up, load up, load up... Sorry!
from the BBC website,
Further criticism of Israel came from UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon on Tuesday.
In an interview with the AFP news agency he said Israel's blockade of Gaza was responsible for the deadly raid.
"Had Israelis heeded to my call and to the call of the international community by lifting the blockade of Gaza, this tragic incident would not have happened," he said.
Nato Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen called on Israel to release people and boats it had seized.
He spoke after an emergency meeting of Nato ambassadors in Brussels called by Turkey.
The United States has blocked demands at the UN security council for an international inquiry into Israel's assault on the Turkish ship carrying aid to Gaza that left nine pro-Palestinian activists dead.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jun/01/israel-investigation-attack-gaza-flotilla-us
No doubt Israel is guilty as hell now then.
Come on Egypt open your borders to the Gaza Strip, you are an Arab country, why are you not supporting your people?
Excuse me, but what gives you the right to decide who posts on here? Whether you, or I or anyone else agrees with Fred or Pegasus, they have as much right on here as anyone else. If they break the rules, that would be dealt with, like it has with others.
Free speech may come with a modicum of responsibilty, but it also comes with self control, and the ability to allow others to have their say too, whether you personally like it or not.
The thing is there aren't any rules here.
But if you'd like to help institute a few I would suggest limiting the size of these threads and having some means of limiting the amount of time the screwballs like Fred and Pegasus take up. Because it stinks the joint out and gives the impression that we Caithness folk are a bunch of weirdos.
As for Fred and Pegasus being allowed to have their say, they have been having their say for weeks now and what difference has it made? They remind me of Goebbels famous advice : tell your audience what you are going to say, say it, tell them you've said it, say it again etc etc etc
Tubthumper, you're statement about Semites does you little credit. Mr. Hitler was not talking about linguistic groups; he was not seding people to the camps because of their language or the distance between their ears. He was talking of a class of life he notoriously defined as sub-human. That's why the state of Israel was founded. To be a shield. To rescue surviving Jews.
You obviously have a problem with that. I am simply pointing it out.
At last, proof of what these 'Peace Activists' were using. It's terrible!
http://vodpod.com/watch/3743429-video-of-weapons-found-aboard-terror-ship
Tubthumper
01-Jun-10, 20:09
Tubthumper, you're statement about Semites does you little credit. Mr. Hitler was not talking about linguistic groups; he was not seding people to the camps because of their language or the distance between their ears. He was talking of a class of life he notoriously defined as sub-human. That's why the state of Israel was founded. To be a shield. To rescue surviving Jews. You obviously have a problem with that. I am simply pointing it out.
Oh dear. We've got another one. :roll:
Come on Egypt open your borders to the Gaza Strip, you are an Arab country, why are you not supporting your people?
They have.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jun/01/israel-flotilla-attack-egypt-borders
Tubthumper
01-Jun-10, 20:15
In the video they look like peace activists, don't they? All long hair and kaftans, doobies, peace and love etc.
Of course the IDF could have planted the evidence. But then there's the inconvenient video footage of shadowy figures using the stuff, isn't there. That's a bit naughty.
I wonder how the injured Israeli squaddies are getting on. I reckon some of their injuries must be pretty bad. I wonder how their mothers, wives, children and girlfriends feel?
They have.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jun/01/israel-flotilla-attack-egypt-borders
Well it's a darn pity they did not get their act together earlier and support their brothers!
Tubthumper what I said about the Foundation of the state of Israel happens to be the historical truth.
Is there an alternative explanation?
If so please let me know what it is.
I'm puzzled.
The thing is there aren't any rules here.
But if you'd like to help institute a few I would suggest limiting the size of these threads and having some means of limiting the amount of time the screwballs like Fred and Pegasus take up. Because it stinks the joint out and gives the impression that we Caithness folk are a bunch of weirdos.
No it's only for some that there are no rules here, if I were to call you a screwball I would get suspended.
Tubthumper what I said about the Foundation of the state of Israel happens to be the historical truth.
Is there an alternative explanation?
If so please let me know what it is.
I'm puzzled.
How about this:
The Balfour Declaration, a letter from British Foreign Secretary Arthur James Balfour to Lord Rothschild in which the British made public their support of a Jewish homeland in Palestine, was a product of years of careful negotiation.
Mr Hitler was Cpl. Hitler back in 1917 wasn't he?
Over to you Pegasus.
Tubthumper
01-Jun-10, 20:51
Rich I'll be frank. Some of your recent posting has been a bit bizarre. I'm not sure what I said about Semites that confused you, and I'm sure your masterly summation of the formation of the state of Israel is right on the money.
But please try to get a grip. This is not simply a bash Fredasus thread: They have a right to their viewpoint, as I have and you have.
Serious things have happened in the last 48 hours; perhaps for the Middle East and our entire civilisation, the die is cast.
OK Fred. You have my full permission to call me a screwball.
Tubthumper
01-Jun-10, 20:52
Seems like there is complete confusion doubt and uncertainty about what happened. We can of course do nothing but watch and wait. We have no way of ascertaining what the truth is. In the meantime people in Gaza struggle constantly to live any sort of life, Israel continues to build houses on occupied land, Hamas continues to lob rockets over the border and Israel continues to turn its nose up to UN resolutions. There is no real motivation for peace in this conflict. It would seem that both sides need real visionary leaders for anything like a peace to be brokered. ITs a shame that both sides have leaders who are so much less than the best of humanity. Makes me very sad:(
No doubt it will become clearer, then those with an interest will ensure it gets muddy again. Leaders needed, with vision AND balls.
And I'm sad too. Also very angry.
Tubthumper
01-Jun-10, 20:53
OK Fred. You have my full permission to call me a screwball.
Is that what he called you??? :eek: Gosh!
OK Fred. You have my full permission to call me a screwball.
The combined effect of clique members simultaneously hitting the report button might start an earthquake.
In the video they look like peace activists, don't they? All long hair and kaftans, doobies, peace and love etc.
Of course the IDF could have planted the evidence. But then there's the inconvenient video footage of shadowy figures using the stuff, isn't there. That's a bit naughty.
I wonder how the injured Israeli squaddies are getting on. I reckon some of their injuries must be pretty bad. I wonder how their mothers, wives, children and girlfriends feel?
THIS IS JUST MY OPINION
I also wonder how the mother of a newborn baby who dies because she does not have access to basic health care because of the embargo feels. I wonder how all the dispossed of EVERYTHING, including dignity, feel. I wonder how all the "mothers, wives, children and girlfriends" of "Israeli squaddies" think that perpetuating the way they are treating these people will make things better. The Palastinians have NOTHING else to conceed. Whatever Israel takes, it will NEVER be enough. The Israeli atitude has never been one to seek a peaceful solution, but to impose their will. Not wanting to invoke godwins law, but seeing as I am not the first to mention them: the situation in the middle east, with the direction it has, can only lead to a holocaust type situation. With Israel's policy toward palestinians, the only way to dispose of the problem would be to obliterate "a people" (The hatred, suffering and humiliation inflicted will bridge generations). To think that a country created due to the inhumane treatment it's people suffered, can within living memory inflict the same on others.
If for no other reason, those boats were in International waters when boarded. If Israelis want to claim control over Palestine (and I am not even going to ague the illegitimacy of doing so), they do not have juristriction over international waters.
Tubthumper
01-Jun-10, 21:04
You're right Ju. But I'd like to know how a Turkish skinhead repeatedly braining a soldier who is not a direct threat to him, with a metal rod will help that poor Palestinian baby?
It's just my opinion.
Rich I'll be frank. Some of your recent posting has been a bit bizarre. I'm not sure what I said about Semites that confused you, and I'm sure your masterly summation of the formation of the state of Israel is right on the money.
But please try to get a grip. This is not simply a bash Fredasus thread: They have a right to their viewpoint, as I have and you have.
Serious things have happened in the last 48 hours; perhaps for the Middle East and our entire civilisation, the die is cast.
Actually, Tubthumper, the die is not cast.
What we have here is a public relations crisis.
Let me explain how the Public Relations experts are going to play this one.
The model they are following is the Kubler Ross model of five steps of adjusting to bereavement. I enclose a version of it from wiki.
The model deals withn the five stages of bereavment from denial to acceptance.
Public opinion, innthe face of diaster, follows a similar pattern.
So I would predict that in 2 weeks time this crisis will have been forgotten about except in the topsy turvy world of Fred et al.
The apparent fickleness of the general public when confronted with outrage and disaster is actually a survival mechanism.
Calm down, folks. The worst has passed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K%C3%BCbler-Ross_model#Stages
"Israel holding 40 Britons in desert prison after Gaza flotilla raid"
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jun/01/israel-britons-desert-prison-gaza-flotilla-raid
If that were Iran who had kidnapped 40 Britons in international waters and were holding them in a desert prison I bet we'd be seeing a different reaction.
At last, proof of what these 'Peace Activists' were using. It's terrible!
http://vodpod.com/watch/3743429-video-of-weapons-found-aboard-terror-ship
Hope none of the aid workers sneezed or Israel will be claiming they used biological weapons.
The combined effect of clique members simultaneously hitting the report button might start an earthquake.
It's really bugging me this. What is this Clique you keep talking about?
Are you talking about a group that always engage with you on various threads and take an opposing view? If so I am one of them. I also take the opposing view to THEM on various other threads, often ones you take no interest in.
Now-by the same token you were in a clique with Stavro and others and now Pegasus and often Anfield (whom I agree with on many issues).
Relationships on this site are way too complex to accuse people of being in cliques-it's a red herring. :eek:
Mairead Maguire is on the MV Rachel Corrie and they are heading for Gaza loaded with humanitarian aid.
"Israel holding 40 Britons in desert prison after Gaza flotilla raid"
.
Best place for these liberal lefties.
How about this:
Mr Hitler was Cpl. Hitler back in 1917 wasn't he?
Over to you Pegasus.
thank you fred. lets not forget the part the transfer Agreement played in stealing Palestine and allolocating it to another people.
Balfour was between the british govmt and the Zionists and the transfer agreement was between Hitler and the Zionists . both allowed and encouraged jews to move in and occupy Palestine taking there wealth and belongings with them and displacing the native people .
the way that the pa;estininans have been treated since is the probl;em
Boozeburglar
02-Jun-10, 00:59
Rich I'll be frank. Some of your recent posting has been a bit bizarre. I'm not sure what I said about Semites that confused you, and I'm sure your masterly summation of the formation of the state of Israel is right on the money.
But please try to get a grip. This is not simply a bash Fredasus thread: They have a right to their viewpoint, as I have and you have.
Serious things have happened in the last 48 hours; perhaps for the Middle East and our entire civilisation, the die is cast.
They?
As far as I am concerned, some people were murdered.
None of them Israeli, on this occasion.
They?
As far as I am concerned, some people were murdered.
None of them Israeli, on this occasion.
Yes some people were murdered and relatively few, ten or twenty but the world noticed.
It isn't much considering since September 2000 Israel has killed over 6,300 Palestinians, mostly children, innocent civilians, averaging over two a day but the world has noticed.
This could be a turning point.
Boozeburglar
02-Jun-10, 01:30
Yes some people were murdered and relatively few, ten or twenty but the world noticed.
It isn't much considering since September 2000 Israel has killed over 6,300 Palestinians, mostly children, innocent civilians, averaging over two a day but the world has noticed.
This could be a turning point.
You are wrong. There has been a constant international campaign to bring Israel to account.
Perhaps it does not suit your purposes to regard it.
No one was murdered!
If someone was beating me with an iron bar and I had a gun I would shoot them to make them stop.
And so would anyone else.
Or would you just let them continue untill you were dead?
You're right Ju. But I'd like to know how a Turkish skinhead repeatedly braining a soldier who is not a direct threat to him, with a metal rod will help that poor Palestinian baby?
It's just my opinion.
A case of 250.693.724 wrongs not making a right, I think. BUT, what else would you expect the palastinians to conceed when they have nothing left except resistance? I suppose many on here think that if in the Palastinian situation they would stop resisting and lay down to be trampled on.
Liberal lefties, huh? At least they were speaking out about the criminal act of a state. They were standing behind their words for their convictions (In international waters, heading toward Palastinian waters (ie: not in Israeli waters). Not behind a keyboard, behind a screen, behind a nickname, behind their words. All it takes for evil to triumph is the silence of good people.
They have.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jun/01/israel-flotilla-attack-egypt-borders
Re opening Egypts border to Gaza)
Hmm.. seems to be temporary measure with Egypt opening it's border to Gaza - why does Hamas not allow it's own people to cross into Egypt?
JERUSALEM (AP) - Israel and Egypt signalled a temporary easing of the Gaza Strip blockade Tuesday following harsh international condemnation of the deadly Israeli raid on an aid flotilla en route to the sealed-off Palestinian territory. It was unclear, however, when Gaza's Hamas rulers would allow people to cross into Egypt and how long they would be permitted to pass.
Several thousand Gazans - some in cars with suitcases piled on their roofs, others on foot - rushed to the Egyptian border, hoping to take advantage of a rare chance to escape. After milling about for several hours, they were sent home by Hamas security forces.
The Hamas Interior Ministry said police were not prepared to open the crossing and did not say when they would do so.
There were signs, however, that the long-term strategic partnership between Israel and Turkey - the Jewish state's most important Muslim ally - would endure. Israeli Defence Minister Ehud Barak spoke to his Turkish counterpart Tuesday, and they agreed the raid wouldn't affect weapons deals, defence officials said. Among them is the planned delivery to Turkey of $183 million in Israeli drones this summer. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they were discussing sensitive military ties.
http://m.apnews.com/ap/db_16026/contentdetail.htm?contentguid=EcvtUoXb
You are wrong. There has been a constant international campaign to bring Israel to account.
Perhaps it does not suit your purposes to regard it.
How could there be a campaign when all people were allowed to hear were the lies? When when they murdered and oppressed then cried "victim", when no one dare speak against them or they yelled "anti-Semite", when any politician who opposed them would not be re-elected. When America declared any UN resolution against them would be vetoed.
No one was murdered!
If someone was beating me with an iron bar and I had a gun I would shoot them to make them stop.
And so would anyone else.
Or would you just let them continue untill you were dead?
The aid workers didn't attack the Israeli soldiers with iron bars, the Israeli soldiers attacked the aid workers with guns.
The aid workers were on a ship taking a cargo of humanitarian aid to Gaza, Israel attacked the ship.
The aid workers didn't attack the Israeli soldiers with iron bars, the Israeli soldiers attacked the aid workers with guns.
The aid workers were on a ship taking a cargo of humanitarian aid to Gaza, Israel attacked the ship.
Well we will just have to disagree with what we saw with our own eyes.
I've said all I want to on this thread....
Re opening Egypts border to Gaza)
Hmm.. seems to be temporary measure with Egypt opening it's border to Gaza - why does Hamas not allow it's own people to cross into Egypt?
The border was opened to allow humanitarian aid in not to let Palestinians out.
If Egypt thinks they are going to be hit with a huge refugee problem they will close that border pretty damn quick.
There are four million Palestinian refugees already from previous Israeli atrocities. Most of them in camps in neighbouring countries because Israel has denied them their legal and human rights to return to their homeland.
The border was opened to allow humanitarian aid in not to let Palestinians out.
If Egypt thinks they are going to be hit with a huge refugee problem they will close that border pretty damn quick.
There are four million Palestinian refugees already from previous Israeli atrocities. Most of them in camps in neighbouring countries because Israel has denied them their legal and human rights to return to their homeland.
"huge refugee problem" ?- 'Egypt defends Gaza wall
Egypt's foreign minister has said that a controversial wall being built along the country's border with the Gaza Strip will defend it "against threats to national security". Ahmed Aboul Gheit's comments, reported bythe state-owned Mena news agency on Tuesday, were the first official acknowledgement of the construction, which has been heavily criticised by Hamas. The new barrier is believed to consist of a series of steel sheets and pipes that will be buried deep into the ground to prevent the construction of smuggling tunnels under the 14km frontier.
"We are not talking about borders between Egypt and Israel; we are talking about steel borders between two peoples, one of these two peoples is under siege," he said.
"There are Arab League resolutions that call for breaking the siege imposed on the Gaza Strip. Now, instead of taking practical steps to break this siege, we get surprised with this steel wall. The Egyptian foreign ministry on Monday rejected a request by organisers to use the Rafah border crossing, the only entry into Gaza that bypasses Israel.
It warned that "any attempts to violate the law or public order by any group, whether local or foreign, on Egyptian soil will be dealt with in conformity with the law".
http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2009/12/20091222134531894506.html
"huge refugee problem" ?-
Yes, there is already a huge refugee problem caused by the Israeli ethnic cleansing of Palestine.
The border was opened to let aid in not people out.
my countrymen & women are still goinf
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qkNmwohwSeE
Yes, there is already a huge refugee problem caused by the Israeli ethnic cleansing of Palestine.
The border was opened to let aid in not people out.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/images/1851685553/sr=1-1/qid=1275474789/ref=dp_image_text_0?ie=UTF8&n=283155&s=books&qid=1275474789&sr=1-1
I was in the British Foreign and Commonwealth Office for over 20 years and a member of its senior management structure for six years, I served in five countries and took part in 13 formal international negotiations, including the UN Convention of the Law of the Sea and a whole series of maritime boundary treaties. I headed the FCO section of a multidepartmental organisation monitoring the arms embargo on Iraq.
I am an instinctively friendly, open but unassuming person who always found it easy to get on with people, I think because I make fun of myself a lot. I have in consequence a great many friends among ex-colleagues in both British and foregin diplomatic services, security services and militaries.
I lost very few friends when I left the FCO over torture and rendition. In fact I seemed to gain several degrees of warmth with a great many acquantances still on the inside. And I have become known as a reliable outlet for grumbles, who as an ex-insider knows how to handle a discreet and unintercepted conversation.
What I was being told last night was very interesting indeed. NATO HQ in Brussels is today a very unhappy place. There is a strong understanding among the various national militaries that an attack by Israel on a NATO member flagged ship in international waters is an event to which NATO is obliged - legally obliged, as a matter of treaty - to react.
I must be plain - nobody wants or expects military action against Israel. But there is an uneasy recognition that in theory that ought to be on the table, and that NATO is obliged to do something robust to defend Turkey.
Mutual military support of each other is the entire raison d'etre of NATO. You must also remember that to the NATO military the freedom of the high seas guaranteed by the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea is a vital alliance interest which officers have been conditioned to uphold their whole career.
That is why Turkey was extremely shrewd in reacting immediately to the Israeli attack by calling an emergency NATO meeting. It is why, after the appalling US reaction to the attack with its refusal to name Israel, President Obama has now made a point of phoning President Erdogan to condole.
But the unhappiness in NATO HQ runs much deeper than that, I spoke separately to two friends there, from two different nations. One of them said NATO HQ was "a very unhappy place". The other described the situation as "Tense - much more strained than at the invasion of Iraq".
Why? There is a tendency of outsiders to regard the senior workings of governments and international organisations as monolithic. In fact there are plenty of highly intelligent - and competitive - people and diverse interests involved.
There are already deep misgivings, especially amongst the military, over the Afghan mission. There is no sign of a diminution in Afghan resistance attacks and no evidence of a clear gameplan. The military are not stupid and they can see that the Karzai government is deeply corrupt and the Afghan "national" army comprised almost exclusively of tribal enemies of the Pashtuns.
You might be surprised by just how high in Nato scepticism runs at the line that in some way occupying Afghanistan helps protect the west, as opposed to stoking dangerous Islamic anger worldwide.
So this is what is causing frost and stress inside NATO. The organisation is tied up in a massive, expensive and ill-defined mission in Afghanistan that many whisper is counter-productive in terms of the alliance aim of mutual defence. Every European military is facing financial problems as a public deficit financing crisis sweeps the continent. The only glue holding the Afghan mission together is loyalty to and support for the United States.
But what kind of mutual support organisation is NATO when members must make decades long commitments, at huge expense and some loss of life, to support the Unted States, but cannot make even a gesture to support Turkey when Turkey is attacked by a non-member?
Even the Eastern Europeans have not been backing the US line on the Israeli attack. The atmosphere in NATO on the issue has been very much the US against the rest, with the US attitude inside NATO described to me by a senior NATO officer as "amazingly arrogant - they don't seem to think it matters what anybody else thinks".
Therefore what is troubling the hearts and souls of non-Americans in NATO HQ is this fundamental question. Is NATO genuinely a mutual defence organisation, or is it just an instrument to carry out US foreign policy? With its unthinking defence of Israel and military occupation of Afghanistan, is US foreign policy really defending Europe, or is it making the World less safe by causing Islamic militancy?
I leave the last word to one of the senior NATO officers - who incidentally is not British:
"Nobody but the Americans doubts the US position on the Gaza attack is wrong and insensitve. But everyone already quietly thought the same about wider American policy. This incident has allowed people to start saying that now privately to each other."
http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/
Crackeday
02-Jun-10, 15:05
Theres been some googling to find all the Anti-Israeli propoganda in the last few posts!!!
No Imagination, just blinkered George Galloway fans who watch Press Tv and believe all the nonsense.
המוסד למודיעין ולתפקידים מיוחדים
[lol]
Theres been some googling to find all the Anti-Israeli propoganda in the last few posts!!!
No Imagination, just blinkered George Galloway fans who watch Press Tv and believe all the nonsense.
המוסד למודיעין ולתפקידים מיוחדים
[lol]
Earlier in this thread I pointed out a thread in this forum from 2007 regarding the arrest of British servicemen by Iran.
No one answered my question.
Answer my question first then start slinging your accusations of racism.
Theres been some googling to find all the Anti-Israeli propoganda in the last few posts!!!
No Imagination, just blinkered George Galloway fans who watch Press Tv and believe all the nonsense.
המוסד למודיעין ולתפקידים מיוחדים
[lol]
........and of course you wil know that the quote above is from former British Ambassador Craig Murray, who I'm sure if you read either of his two books (or excellent blog) you will see has plenty of imagination and is a very colourful character............far from blinkered.
Interesting that the Israeli's are "deporting" these militant extremists.........if they are so dangerous you would have thought they may want to hang on to them..........and have they found anything untoward in the cargo??...........answers on a postage stamp.
........and of course you wil know that the quote above is from former British Ambassador Craig Murray, who I'm sure if you read either of his two books (or excellent blog) you will see has plenty of imagination and is a very colourful character............far from blinkered.
Indeed and he is making the same point I made earlier in the thread.
America's defence of Israel is not just a betrayal of the Palestinian people, we have been riding roughshod over their human rights for the last 60 odd years, it is a betrayal of our NATO ally Turkey.
Turkish troops risk their lives in Afghanistan because they are loyal to their NATO allies but when a Turkish ship is attacked by a non NATO country America rushes to defend Israel not Turkey.
Crackeday
02-Jun-10, 16:13
Earlier in this thread I pointed out a thread in this forum from 2007 regarding the arrest of British servicemen by Iran.
No one answered my question.
Answer my question first then start slinging your accusations of racism.
Why should I answer your question when you dont answer anyone elses questions? (quoting propoganda isnt exactly an answer)
And bringing Iran into it all the time has nothing to do with the original thread! (Now can you see why i keep comparing you to george galloway, only thing missing is libya!!):lol:
Turkish troops risk their lives in Afghanistan because they are loyal to their NATO allies but when a Turkish ship is attacked by a non NATO country America rushes to defend Israel not Turkey.
"Turkish Nato forces in Afghanistan risking their lives because they are loyal to Nato!!!!!! "
Now that is one big shift for you fred, until now you have condemned all the allied forces for their conduct in Afghanistan.!!!!!!!!!
So is it that only Turkish Nato forces who are free from fred attack, I wonder why? Do I see a leaning toward the Muslims? And are we non Muslims, the Infidels here.
"Turkish Nato forces in Afghanistan risking their lives because they are loyal to Nato!!!!!! "
Now that is one big shift for you fred, until now you have condemned all the allied forces for their conduct in Afghanistan.!!!!!!!!!
So is it that only Turkish Nato forces who are free from fred attack, I wonder why? Do I see a leaning toward the Muslims? And are we non Muslims, the Infidels here.
Earlier in this thread I asked a question regarding Iran, no one answered it yet they still accuse me of racist bias.
Boozeburglar
02-Jun-10, 17:14
Hamsters on wheels.
Crackeday
02-Jun-10, 17:18
Hamsters on wheels.
I agree, think I'll leave well alone.
Hamsters on wheels.
You're right there..
wibble wibble
Well now let's see what you had to say in that thread, apart from the usual ad hominem attacks on myself that is.
http://forum.caithness.org/showpost.php?p=206551&postcount=109
But the eventual MOD enquiry showed that I was right and you were wrong, it showed that Iran was telling the truth. It showed that America had drawn a line on the map where they wanted the border to be without consulting the Iranians and without even informing them where they had drawn it.Yet over a fifth of orgers who responded wanted to use cruise missiles against Iran.
And your point is what?? I still believe the MOD were correct, and IMHO the enquiry was a diplomatic cover up to save face.And you are still making Smoke to change the subject
Earlier in this thread I asked a question regarding Iran, no one answered it yet they still accuse me of racist bias.
I answered Fred see above, and again whats your point, you have tried to bring other threads in, now your, blowing more smoke screens, by mentioning the Turkish Nato forces.
What has this to do with this particular thread?
I answered Fred see above, and again whats your point, you have tried to bring other threads in, now your, blowing more smoke screens, by mentioning the Turkish Nato forces.
What has this to do with this particular thread?
By attacking a member of NATO, one would expect NATO to retaliate against Israel............but NATO do not seem to be taking that course of action, why?
I answered Fred see above, and again whats your point, you have tried to bring other threads in, now your, blowing more smoke screens, by mentioning the Turkish Nato forces.
What has this to do with this particular thread?
You did not answer the question, "If Iran had attacked a ship carrying humanitarian aid in international waters and killed up to 20 aid workers what do you think the response on this forum would have been? ".
Everyone knows the answer, no one wants to say it.
Now we can discus the facts and leave personal attacks out of it or you can carry on accusing me of racial bias and I will keep reminding you of that question.
Now we can discus the facts and leave personal attacks out of it or you can carry on accusing me of racial bias and I will keep reminding you of that question.
Carry on fred, I have nothing to be ashamed of. But that sounds like a bullys threat to me [disgust]
By attacking a member of NATO, one would expect NATO to retaliate against Israel............but NATO do not seem to be taking that course of action, why?
After Turkey demand, NATO to meet over Israeli attack
NATO will hold a meeting of permanent representatives in Brussels.
Tuesday, 01 June 2010 11:15
NATO will hold a meeting of permanent representatives in Brussels after Turkey made a call for such a meeting following Israel's attack on ships carrying aid material to Gaza on early Monday. In a written statement, Secretary General of NATO, Anders Fogh Rasmussen, said that he was "deeply concerned with the loss of lives" due to Israel's attack. We expect to find out the reality in regard to Monday's incident at sea, Rasmussen underlined. NATO's spokesperson James Appathurai said that NATO's permanent representatives would hold an emergency meeting in Brussels on Tuesday after Turkey's request. http://www.worldbulletin.net/news_detail.php?id=59318 (http://www.worldbulletin.net/news_detail.php?id=59318)
But then: There were signs, however, that the long-term strategic partnership between Israel and Turkey - the Jewish state's most important Muslim ally - would endure. Israeli Defence Minister Ehud Barak spoke to his Turkish counterpart Tuesday, and they agreed the raid wouldn't affect weapons deals, defence officials said. Among them is the planned delivery to Turkey of $183 million in Israeli drones this summer. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they were discussing sensitive military ties.
http://m.apnews.com/ap/db_16026/cont...tguid=EcvtUoXb (http://m.apnews.com/ap/db_16026/contentdetail.htm?contentguid=EcvtUoXb)
By attacking a member of NATO, one would expect NATO to retaliate against Israel............but NATO do not seem to be taking that course of action, why?
I am not a Historian, so pray tell me how long this conflict has gone on?
By attacking a member of NATO, one would expect NATO to retaliate against Israel............but NATO do not seem to be taking that course of action, why?
Because the USA is a leading member of NATO and a staunch supporter of Israel. It will effectively veto any NATO response just as it does with any UN response.
Israel has breached more UN resolutions than any other country because it has such huge support from 'big brother' USA. Little wonder the credibility of the UN has diminished over the years.
It's little wonder the Arab nations and the Palestinians in particular dislike the USA.
They have a saying in Palestine, 'Tis better to die on your feet than live on your knees.' Until the Palestinians can get to their feet there will always be war in the Middle East.
Irans President said Israel’s interception was “inhuman” and would help lead to the country’s demise....
“The inhuman acts of the Zionist regime against Palestinians and preventing humanitarian aid to the Gaza people does not show the strength of the Zionist regime but shows its weakness,”
“All these acts indicate the end of the heinous and fake regime and will bring it closer to the end of its existence,” he said.
Suport from the Irish
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0kNey7lg-Nw
I am not a Historian, so pray tell me how long this conflict has gone on?
Some Jewish scholars will tell you 4,500 years. Others will say since the end of WW2 in 1945 or the end of the British mandate in Palestine in 1948.
All the arguements have been visited before and the debate continues to this day.
By attacking a member of NATO, one would expect NATO to retaliate against Israel............but NATO do not seem to be taking that course of action, why?
Some Jewish scholars will tell you 4,500 years. Others will say since the end of WW2 in 1945 or the end of the British mandate in Palestine in 1948.
All the arguements have been visited before and the debate continues to this day.
Tks...And perhaps another 4,500
Sure gives the Clintons lots of Air Miles!.
Tks...And perhaps another 4,500
Sure gives the Clintons lots of Air Miles!.
and sure kills injures and displaces lots of Palestinians . now even people taking humanitarian aid to them are treated the same way in intermnational waters
northener
03-Jun-10, 08:36
You did not answer the question, "If Iran had attacked a ship carrying humanitarian aid in international waters and killed up to 20 aid workers what do you think the response on this forum would have been? ".
Everyone knows the answer, no one wants to say it.
.........
I'll answer the question, Fred.
If Iran had chosen to send military forces on board ships in international waters because they believed that those ships could be carrying arms or personnel that could be used against them. Then I'd say that it would be a reasonable response to a percieved problem.
If Iranian TV had then shown these Western "aid workers" viciously beating the Iranian soldiers with iron bars ans throwing them over the side...your response would be?
I don't believe any merchant skipper or legitimate 'aid work' organisation that would not comply with a request from a military force. They've got more sense. Would you care to point out how many legitimate aid agencies start swinging weapons when confronted by armed troops? Cnristian Aid toting iron bars and attacking Somali troops? Oxfam throwing West African soldiers out of buildings? None.
You alluded to the detainment of RN personell by the Iranian Navy during a percieved border dispute. Was the response violent? No. because they knew what they were doing.
There's some real crap being spouted on this thread by those with their own tedious personal axes to grind. I'm no fan of Israel when it comes to their treatment of the Palestinians - or their US chums. But this constant parading of all things anti Israli/US/West by a squawking blinkered minority is nothing but polemics and white noise accompanied by a loud grinding noise.
Goodbye.
It is very interesting to me, that a couple of the most outraged people posting on this thread, when given the opportunity to comment on gun control, in the light of recent events, one makes a strange statement in favour of gun ownership and the other makes a joke :confused
I'll answer the question, Fred.
If Iran had chosen to send military forces on board ships in international waters because they believed that those ships could be carrying arms or personnel that could be used against them. Then I'd say that it would be a reasonable response to a percieved problem.
If Iranian TV had then shown these Western "aid workers" viciously beating the Iranian soldiers with iron bars ans throwing them over the side...your response would be?
I don't believe any merchant skipper or legitimate 'aid work' organisation that would not comply with a request from a military force. They've got more sense. Would you care to point out how many legitimate aid agencies start swinging weapons when confronted by armed troops? Cnristian Aid toting iron bars and attacking Somali troops? Oxfam throwing West African soldiers out of buildings? None.
You alluded to the detainment of RN personell by the Iranian Navy during a percieved border dispute. Was the response violent? No. because they knew what they were doing.
There's some real crap being spouted on this thread by those with their own tedious personal axes to grind. I'm no fan of Israel when it comes to their treatment of the Palestinians - or their US chums. But this constant parading of all things anti Israli/US/West by a squawking blinkered minority is nothing but polemics and white noise accompanied by a loud grinding noise.
Goodbye.
But the arrest of the British servicemen was legitimate, it was legal, it happened in Iranian waters, no one got hurt. Yet still over a fifth of the people who responded to the poll thought we should be firing cruise missiles at Iran. Are you seriously asking me to believe that if they had attacked a ship carrying humanitarian aid and killed up to 20 people the response would be less?
Yet you accuse me of talking "crap"?
You give the British servicemen credit for the arrest being peaceful. Don't you think that if the British servicemen had been attacked in the dark by a force descending from helicopters and shooting at them, they would not have defended themselves? Do you honestly believe that if Iran had attacked the boat carrying the British servicemen in the manner in which Israel attacked the boat carrying humanitarian aid that the arrest would have been peaceful?
Yet you accuse me of talking "crap"?
Here is an eye witness account of the incident from an Israeli MP on board one of the ships, she says the Israeli soldiers came in in the dark, they came in mob handed and they came in shooting.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k1sH_RE4CY0
She makes a valid point, due to a complete blackout of information the world is basing their judgement on just over one minute of heavily edited film released by the Israeli forces. What happened before? What happened after? Why did Israel jam all communications from the ship before and refuse to release any comprehensive or independent footage of the incident after?
Orgers Leaving
Must admit, I've banged my head against the wall a fair few times, but just manage to 'hang on in there' it's amusing reading some of the posts, I've even got friends in the south who I've recommended to have a look and invariably they fall about laughing with some of the nonsense.. but hey, it's a free country (honest) and folks can post what they like - no matter how boring or repetitive, or boring or repetitive..
It's like someone mentioned; hamsters going round and round and in reality getting nowhere..
Whoops sorry I'm off Thread here!
It is very interesting to me, that a couple of the most outraged people posting on this thread, when given the opportunity to comment on gun control, in the light of recent events, one makes a strange statement in favour of gun ownership and the other makes a joke :confused
to be sure, the murder of civilians whether in cumbria or on a boat carrying humanitarian aid in international waters is terrible and i am saddened by both incidents.As any normal human being would be.
you should desist from calling posters morons as you did with buggyracer on your gun topic ans you should also desisit from tryuing to make personal gain out of tradigy
Orgers Leaving
Must admit, I've banged my head against the wall a fair few times, but just manage to 'hang on in there' it's amusing reading some of the posts, I've even got friends in the south who I've recommended to have a look and invariably they fall about laughing with some of the nonsense.. but hey, it's a free country (honest) and folks can post what they like - no matter how boring or repetitive, or boring or repetitive..
It's like someone mentioned; hamsters going round and round and in reality getting nowhere..
Whoops sorry I'm off Thread here!
wrong place mate
to be sure, the murder of civilians whether in cumbria or on a boat carrying humanitarian aid in international waters is terrible and i am saddened by both incidents.As any normal human being would be.
you should desist from calling posters morons as you did with buggyracer on your gun topic ans you should also desisit from tryuing to make personal gain out of tradigy
I called his statement moronic, it's a quote from the gun lobby in America, a distinction you should learn.
What personal gain? All that has happened is I have been shot down in flames as I expected. But I said something that I felt needed saying. If you go back through some history you will find no inconsistency, I have been anti gun ownership and anti hunting ever since I joined the forum. And for 30 years previously.
EDIT .. Just read Craig Murray's blog. Utter tripe, he is ignoring large sections of Maritime Law. For a former head of the FCO he seems to be letting his "Human Rights" head delude him a bit. Now I see where you are getting your views on this subject from, you would be wise to do your own research or listen to someone with Maritime experience instead of that misinformed zealot.
I will let Craig Murray answer this himself.
Every comments thread on every internet site on the world which has discussed the Israeli naval murders, has been inundated by organised ZIonist commenters stating that the Israeli action was legal under the San Remo Manual of International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea.
They ignore those parts of San Remo that specifically state that it is illegal to enforce a general blockade on an entire population. But even apart from that, San Remo simply does not apply.
The manual relates specifically to legal practice in time of war. With whom is Israel at war?
There is no war.
Israeli apologists have gone on to say they are in a state of armed conflict with Gaza.
Really? In that case, why do we continually hear Israeli complaints about rockets fired from Gaza into Israel? If it is the formal Israeli position that it is in a state of armed conflict with Gaza, then Gaza has every right to attack Israel with rockets.
But in fact, plainly to the whole world, the nature and frequency of Israeli complaints about rocket attacks gives evidence that Israel does not in fact believe that a situation of armed conflict exists.
Secondly, if Israel wishes to claim it is in a state of armed conflict with Gaza, then it must treat all of its Gazan prisoners as prisoners of war entitled to the protections of the Geneva Convention. If you are in a formal state of armed conflict, you cannot categorise your opponents as terrorists.
But again, it is plain for the world to see from its treatment and description of Gazan prisoners that it does not consider itself to be in a formal position of armed conflict.
Israel is seeking to pick and choose which bits of law applicable to armed conflict it applies, by accepting or not accepting it is in armed conflcit depending on the expediency of the moment.
I have consistently denounced Hamas rocket attacks into Israel. I have categorised them as terrorism. If Israel wishes now to declare it is in armed conflcit with Gaza, I withdraw my opposition and indeed would urge Hamas to step up such attacks to the maximum.
Does Israel really wish to justify its latest action by declaring it is at war with Gaza? That is what the invocation of San Remo amounts to.
And I will add.
If, as Israel claims, they are not an occupying power in Gaza then they have no right under international law to police their territorial waters.
If they are an occupying power then they are obliged by the Geneva Convention to ensure humanitarian aid gets through.
Your wasting your time mate he's gone :roll:
But the arrest of the British servicemen was legitimate, it was legal, it happened in Iranian waters, no one got hurt. Yet still over a fifth of the people who responded to the poll thought we should be firing cruise missiles at Iran. Are you seriously asking me to believe that if they had attacked a ship carrying humanitarian aid and killed up to 20 people the response would be less?
Yet you accuse me of talking "crap"?
You give the British servicemen credit for the arrest being peaceful. Don't you think that if the British servicemen had been attacked in the dark by a force descending from helicopters and shooting at them, they would not have defended themselves? Do you honestly believe that if Iran had attacked the boat carrying the British servicemen in the manner in which Israel attacked the boat carrying humanitarian aid that the arrest would have been peaceful?
Yet you accuse me of talking "crap"?
Here is an eye witness account of the incident from an Israeli MP on board one of the ships, she says the Israeli soldiers came in in the dark, they came in mob handed and they came in shooting.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k1sH_RE4CY0
She makes a valid point, due to a complete blackout of information the world is basing their judgement on just over one minute of heavily edited film released by the Israeli forces. What happened before? What happened after? Why did Israel jam all communications from the ship before and refuse to release any comprehensive or independent footage of the incident after?
good video fred. thanks for finding it and sharing it with us
This from CNN,
The IDF on Wednesday released a 2½-minute edited video that it said was shot from cameras aboard one of the boats.
A time stamp on the silent video shows its first scenes beginning at 9:36 p.m. Sunday and its final scenes ending at 5:04 a.m. Monday, when the IDF says the "rioters initiate confrontation with IDF soldiers."
At one point, the video shows about 10 people milling about on the deck; then shows them wearing life jackets. Several of the people are carrying what appear to be poles.
The video is covered by an English-language written description of what the Israelis say is going on -- including the assertion that some of the people depicted are holding slingshots and metal poles and that one is holding a broken bottle. But the video quality is poor and those statements could not be independently confirmed.
Several of the people appear to don gas masks. At one point, a person appears to throw something off the ship. No IDF soldiers can be seen.
Asked about possible additional footage confiscated by the IDF from the activists, the IDF did not respond. The video can be seen at http://ht.ly/17ACaW
I called his statement moronic, it's a quote from the gun lobby in America, a distinction you should learn.
What personal gain? All that has happened is I have been shot down in flames as I expected. But I said something that I felt needed saying. If you go back through some history you will find no inconsistency, I have been anti gun ownership and anti hunting ever since I joined the forum. And for 30 years previously.
and how about you ducati ? are you saddened by the gunnning down of civilians whether they be in cumbria or in the med ? do you condemn both incidents oir only one of them?
And I will add.
If, as Israel claims, they are not an occupying power in Gaza then they have no right under international law to police their territorial waters.
If they are an occupying power then they are obliged by the Geneva Convention to ensure humanitarian aid gets through.
to be sure, thats a great way of putting it.
then they have no moral or legal justifiicartion at all as i suspected
and how about you ducati ? are you saddened by the gunnning down of civilians whether they be in cumbria or in the med ? do you condemn both incidents oir only one of them?
In normal life I would always avoid someone like you. Please do not talk to me directly it is very unsettling.
In normal life I would always avoid someone like you. Please do not talk to me directly it is very unsettling.
avoiding the question as per usual
avoiding the question as per usual
That's better. I do in fact deplore all suffering be it human or animal where ever it is in the world.
wrong place mate
That's was astute as I wrote; "Whoops sorry I'm off Thread here!" ;)
That's better. I do in fact deplore all suffering be it human or animal where ever it is in the world.
still avoiding the question as per usual ducati
That's was astute as I wrote; "Whoops sorry I'm off Thread here!" ;)
yes but it was quite deliberate beksiman wansnt it. you could have dleleted the post and put it up on the right topic
yes but it was quite deliberate beksiman wansnt it. you could have dleleted the post and put it up on the right topic
Gosh you are quick, aren't you?
from the BBC website,
Turkish post-mortem examinations found all nine of the dead had been shot, some at close range.
http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/47986000/jpg/_47986094_009437004-1.jpg The funerals are taking place at a historic Istanbul mosque
The dead include a 19-year-old Turkish citizen with an American passport - hit by four bullets in the head and one in the chest - and a national taekwondo athlete, Turkish media say.
I heard earlier that Hamas are not allowing the aid in after it was released by Israel. Reason; some Israelis that were on the boats haven't been released yet. I imagine that criminal investigations will be under way.
Interesting that Hamas would sooner make a point than allow Palestinians to have the aid and building materials they need.
I’m sure the relatives and friends of the victims will be delighted that their sacrifice means so much to the leadership of the souls they were trying to help.
I was no fan of Arafat, but at least he cared about his people.
[disgust]
I heard earlier that Hamas are not allowing the aid in after it was released by Israel. Reason; some Israelis that were on the boats haven't been released yet. I imagine that criminal investigations will be under way.
Interesting that Hamas would sooner make a point than allow Palestinians to have the aid and building materials they need.
I’m sure the relatives and friends of the victims will be delighted that their sacrifice means so much to the leadership of the souls they were trying to help.
I was no fan of Arafat, but at least he cared about his people.
[disgust]
Did Israel deliver all the aid from the ships or was it just five truckloads of electric wheelchairs which had had their batteries removed?
Did Israel deliver all the aid from the ships or was it just five truckloads of electric wheelchairs which had had their batteries removed?
I don't know, all I heard was it was the aid from the ships.
I don't know, all I heard was it was the aid from the ships.
You don't know? You don't know yet you decided to post your anti Palestinian propaganda anyway?
Don't you think you should have found out just what the aid the Palestinians are not accepting is before you posted?
It was the aid workers who raised the money to buy what was on those ships, it was the aid workers who bought or chartered the ships to deliver it, it was the aid workers who risked their lives to deliver it, it was at leas nine of the aid workers who died, all nine shot in the head, delivering it and you think Israel should be able to take five truckloads of wheelchairs without batteries to Gaza and then take the credit?
Haneen Al-Zoubi is a very brave lady to stand up amisdt the hatred of the israel knesset,
http://www.kawther.info/wpr/2010/06/03/calls-to-murder-mk-who-was-on-flotilla
she was so brave to be on the boat in the Freedom Flotilla but the knesset seems equally dangerous. not much of a democracy where one woman gets shouted and sworn at instead of being alloowed to speak -see the video on the lin,k
i hope she is ok
You don't know? You don't know yet you decided to post your anti Palestinian propaganda anyway?
Don't you think you should have found out just what the aid the Palestinians are not accepting is before you posted?
It was the aid workers who raised the money to buy what was on those ships, it was the aid workers who bought or chartered the ships to deliver it, it was the aid workers who risked their lives to deliver it, it was at leas nine of the aid workers who died, all nine shot in the head, delivering it and you think Israel should be able to take five truckloads of wheelchairs without batteries to Gaza and then take the credit?
You are a complete A. I said what I had heard and that is it. If you want to accuse every person who has disagreed with you of propaganda that is your problem. Do not bother responding to this post directly I will not be interacting with you on this board ever again. (and that goes for your pal too).
I heard earlier that Hamas are not allowing the aid in after it was released by Israel. Reason; some Israelis that were on the boats haven't been released yet. I imagine that criminal investigations will be under way.
Interesting that Hamas would sooner make a point than allow Palestinians to have the aid and building materials they need.
I’m sure the relatives and friends of the victims will be delighted that their sacrifice means so much to the leadership of the souls they were trying to help.
I was no fan of Arafat, but at least he cared about his people.
[disgust]
I used to think that as well, however some of the Palestinians I know are scathing of him specifically and the PLO in general..........hence the reason that Hamas were elected.
Evidence is emerging that many of the pictures of weapons released by the IDF which they say were found on the ships are in fact several years old.
http://www.politicaltheatrics.net/2010/06/the-gaza-flotilla-how-israel%E2%80%99s-ministry-of-foreign-affairs-fakes-photos-of-seized-weapons/
Foreign ships and people from all over the world were attacked by Israel in international waters. It is looking like evidence they presented to try and justify the attack is fake. How can anyone seriously say there shouldn't be an independent international investigation of the incident? How could anyone believe Israel should be allowed to investigate themselves?
Evidence is emerging that many of the pictures of weapons released by the IDF which they say were found on the ships are in fact several years old.
http://www.politicaltheatrics.net/2010/06/the-gaza-flotilla-how-israel%E2%80%99s-ministry-of-foreign-affairs-fakes-photos-of-seized-weapons/
Foreign ships and people from all over the world were attacked by Israel in international waters. It is looking like evidence they presented to try and justify the attack is fake. How can anyone seriously say there shouldn't be an independent international investigation of the incident? How could anyone believe Israel should be allowed to investigate themselves?
Weapons dont have to be new to be lethal.
Weapons dont have to be new to be lethal.
No, but photographs of weapons presented as evidence do.
Photographs Israel says were taken on the ship after the attack have digital timestamps on them years old.
DeHaviLand
04-Jun-10, 13:48
No, but photographs of weapons presented as evidence do.
Photographs Israel says were taken on the ship after the attack have digital timestamps on them years old.
Its true that the EXIF data on some of the pics show them to have been taken in 2003 and 2006. However closer examination of the EXIF data shows that these pictures are dated even before the camera in question was made! The only conclusion we can reasonably draw from this is that the photographer has been extremely sloppy and hasn't set the time/date stamp to the correct parameters. Doesnt look like a conspiracy to me, but then again it would be unlike the IDF to be so lackadaisical. This error would of course mean that the pictures in question could never be used as evidence in any criminal trial.
Its true that the EXIF data on some of the pics show them to have been taken in 2003 and 2006. However closer examination of the EXIF data shows that these pictures are dated even before the camera in question was made! The only conclusion we can reasonably draw from this is that the photographer has been extremely sloppy and hasn't set the time/date stamp to the correct parameters. Doesnt look like a conspiracy to me, but then again it would be unlike the IDF to be so lackadaisical. This error would of course mean that the pictures in question could never be used as evidence in any criminal trial.
Could you say where you got this information, I've done a search and can't find it.
DeHaviLand
04-Jun-10, 14:07
I did it myself fred. Checked the EXIF data then checked with the camera manufacturers for the release date of the camera in question. Turned out that one pic supposedly taken in February 2006, the camera wasnt released until June of the same year. Dont have all the details to hand as I'm at the shop and I did the research on my puter at home.
No, but photographs of weapons presented as evidence do.
Photographs Israel says were taken on the ship after the attack have digital timestamps on them years old.
Whoosh...........:D
I did it myself fred. Checked the EXIF data then checked with the camera manufacturers for the release date of the camera in question. Turned out that one pic supposedly taken in February 2006, the camera wasnt released until June of the same year. Dont have all the details to hand as I'm at the shop and I did the research on my puter at home.
I see.
I can't see the IDF taking photos for evidence using a camera with the wrong date settings.
What software did you use? Nothing I have will read them.
DeHaviLand
04-Jun-10, 16:23
I got the exif data from here http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread578433/pg1
The camera release date from here http://www.nikon.co.uk/press_room/releases/show.aspx?rid=217
Very strange that a professional photographer cant, or wont, set the date correctly on a £3500 camera, I know. But is there really an alternative explanation?
Nothing particularly rings true about these pics. If the EXIF data is accurate, the IDF were very sloppy. If the EXIF data has been manipulated, the manipulator was very sloppy.
If I leave the batteries out of my camera for a while, the time/date stamp reverts back to a date well before I got the camera. I've seen it suggested that this is the date the flash memory was installed, or date the camera was manufactured. This may indeed suggest why the date stamp in this case reads February 2006 and the camera release date was July 2006 (correction from June as I said earlier). It doesnt really answer the question of why someone who uses a £3500 camera lets the batteries run out the way I do on my £100 camera.
* when I say professional photographer, I'm assuming that if the pics were taken at the request of/by the IDF that the photographer has had some kind of photographic training/experience.
I got the exif data from here http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread578433/pg1
The camera release date from here http://www.nikon.co.uk/press_room/releases/show.aspx?rid=217
Very strange that a professional photographer cant, or wont, set the date correctly on a £3500 camera, I know. But is there really an alternative explanation?
Nothing particularly rings true about these pics. If the EXIF data is accurate, the IDF were very sloppy. If the EXIF data has been manipulated, the manipulator was very sloppy.
If I leave the batteries out of my camera for a while, the time/date stamp reverts back to a date well before I got the camera. I've seen it suggested that this is the date the flash memory was installed, or date the camera was manufactured. This may indeed suggest why the date stamp in this case reads February 2006 and the camera release date was July 2006 (correction from June as I said earlier). It doesnt really answer the question of why someone who uses a £3500 camera lets the batteries run out the way I do on my £100 camera.
* when I say professional photographer, I'm assuming that if the pics were taken at the request of/by the IDF that the photographer has had some kind of photographic training/experience.
I think the explanation could be that the IDF never intended the photos to be used as evidence in an enquiry at all.
Lets face it, they aren't photos of actual weapons anyway, with the exception of the slingshots everything is a photograph of things you would normally expect to see on a ship taking aid to Gaza. You aren't going to attack anyone with a bulletproof vest or night vision binoculars.
The photos did the job they were intended to do, the IDF released a highly edited video showing only what they wanted the world to see while making sure no one else's video could be shown, the people on the ship had everything confiscated even their clothes. They made sure the front pages of all the papers and the TV news were dominated by this and their declaration that they had found arms on the ships with photographs.
Several days have gone by now, the headlines are taken by other things, in Britain a shooting in Cumbria. It doesn't matter if it comes out that they lied and cheated, it isn't going to make the front pages if it makes the mainstream media at all. What is imprinted on the public consciousness is what they wanted imprinted and nothing else.
The photos are not evidence of anything, they are just a PR exercise.
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.