Merged Israel Attacks Palestinian Aid Flotilla, According To Reports

[a_unique_person]

Er, post #1418. Look I know it's inconvenient for you to address this, but weapons to be used against Israel have indeed been taken into Gaza by sea. Israel would be negligant if they didn't have a blockade.

Fine, what about the weapons used against Palestinians? Do we stop them? I would love to see that. It could mean a move towards the end of the conflict, no one dies.

 

[Jono]

A quick sideline question, or wondering rather, please humour me. Hamas sent some 500+ missiles into Israel in the intense period prior to the IDF invading Gaza inbetween the Bush-Obama presidency shift. I was told that 'only' 3 israelis were killed by the missiles. Naturally, it doesn't constitute a lesser evil of an attack simply because not more were killed, three is certainly tragic on its own (however, I might very well recollect the death-toll of those preceeding attacks erronously, or been misinformed).
No, my hovering question-mark is how on earth do you manage not to kill more people with 500 missiles, if your motive is to hit civilian bodies, or kill anyone in general? Were they wasting expensive weaponry for lone straddlers in the dester? Are Hamas' terrorists gunnery-squad as cock-eyed as they are fanatic?

 

[bigjelmapro]

yeah the UN is good to use their laws that alows israel to board a ship, but whne they say the Blockade is not OK, then the UN is demonized.

There's no 'their laws', its international maritime law.

UN has never stated that the blockade is illegal. Ban Ki Moon stated for the blockade to be lifted, sure, but has no legal basis for stating that its illegal. One hears crickets at the UN with other humanitarian situations, but oh dear, a ship is boarded trying to run a naval blockade, Israel's involved, run to their aid.

Answer the questions posed, stop running away from them.

 

[DC]

Google anti-Israel vs anti-other Middle Eastern (or Muslim if you wish) resolutions.

google Iran sanctions related to Nuclear programs
Google Israel sanctions related to Nuclear programs.

 

[DC]

There's no 'their laws', its international maritime law.

UN has never stated that the blockade is illegal. Ban Ki Moon stated for the blockade to be lifted, sure, but has no legal basis for stating that its illegal. One hears crickets at the UN with other humanitarian situations, but oh dear, a ship is boarded trying to run a naval blockade, Israel's involved, run to their aid.

Answer the questions posed, stop running away from them.

were they agreed on at a UN convention?

http://www.un.org/Depts/los/index.htm

 

[bigjelmapro]

No, my hovering question-mark is how on earth do you manage not to kill more people with 500 missiles, if your motive is to hit civilian bodies, or kill anyone in general? Were they wasting expensive weaponry for lone straddlers in the dester? Are Hamas' terrorists gunnery-squad as cock-eyed as they are fanatic?

The basis for their argument is that since Hamas has been so utterly incompetent in killing Israelis, that Israel is not allowed to act unless more are killed. That's where this pillaging of the legal term of 'proportionality' has been used, albeit, from the international media and even in reports, ie Goldstone report with actual experience lawyers, have used the term incorrectly, among other ones.

 

[Kotatsu]

I wouldn't really label it as 'dissuade', especially with the pile of weapons on the ready for the presumed boarding.

The video where the peace activists use a hose at the Israeli soldiers attempting to invade their ship is filled with attempts to dissuade them to board them, such as the hoses, the swirling chains and so on. There is also a lot of idiocy, such as throwing a large amount of plates on the Israeli boat, but the majority of what goes on there is what I would definitely call "dissuade".

Not boarding the ship would result in more people trying to break the blockade and refusing to be boarded to be searched for materials that can aid Hamas in the war effort.

And boarding these ships and murdering a lot of people apparently had the same effect, so I don't really see that anything was gained.

To my knowledge this carries a hefty prison sentence in other countries. Wouldn't you agree?

I have no idea, as I am at work and have not had time to listen to any news, and thus I am unaware of any large amount of money being found.

And, of course, it's easy to completely search a loaded ship at sea! No way could weapons be hidden underneath stuff!

Well, they seem to have had a pretty lax definition on what constitutes a weapon anyway, so no doubt they'd have found loads of weapons on the ships by simply looking into the kitchen with a pair of binoculars.

 

[bigjelmapro]

were they agreed on at a UN convention?

http://www.un.org/Depts/los/index.htm

So you're deflecting again. If they agreed to adopt already international maritime law, how does it become 'their laws'?

(as in solely for only their use, if they ever use them that is)

You going to answer why you used the Israeli casualty numbers?

 

[Jono]

The basis for their argument is that since Hamas has been so utterly incompetent in killing Israelis, that Israel is not allowed to act unless more are killed. That's where this pillaging of the legal term of 'proportionality' has been used, albeit, from the international media and even in reports, ie Goldstone report with actual experience lawyers, have used the term incorrectly, among other ones.

True, but my question was actually honest. Killing people, especially with missiles in those numbers, would in terms of the practical perfomance, be a walk in the park.

 

[DC]

So you're deflecting again. If they agreed to adopt already international maritime law, how does it become 'their laws'?

(as in solely for only their use, if they ever use them that is)

You going to answer why you used the Israeli casualty numbers?

i have already, try to follow the thread.

 

[Jono]

Well, they seem to have had a pretty lax definition on what constitutes a weapon anyway, so no doubt they'd have found loads of weapons on the ships by simply looking into the kitchen with a pair of binoculars.

As a semi-humerous note in this unfortunate and sad event, with no intention of downplaying what occured; on the boat Sofia they looked for weapons but didn't find any, until they searched Henning Mankell's stuff and found his gillette razor thingy and declared it a weapon. That really upset him.

 

[bigjelmapro]

The video where the peace activists use a hose at the Israeli soldiers attempting to invade their ship is filled with attempts to dissuade them to board them, such as the hoses, the swirling chains and so on. There is also a lot of idiocy, such as throwing a large amount of plates on the Israeli boat, but the majority of what goes on there is what I would definitely call "dissuade".

You're avoiding the core issue that this is a naval blockade their running, their provocation when the IDF boarded the vessel refusing to stop attempting to break a naval blockade, and the lethal force used against the IDF.

And boarding these ships and murdering a lot of people apparently had the same effect, so I don't really see that anything was gained.

Would you use the term 'murdering' for instance police officers that used deadly force against knife wielding suspects? Is there an equal application to this weighted term?

I have no idea, as I am at work and have not had time to listen to any news, and thus I am unaware of any large amount of money being found.

Search when you do then.

Well, they seem to have had a pretty lax definition on what constitutes a weapon anyway, so no doubt they'd have found loads of weapons on the ships by simply looking into the kitchen with a pair of binoculars.

Again, mentioned this before, the weapons were NOT in the kitchen when boarded, neither were the piles of metal bars, the machetes and various knives, on top of the molotov cocktails, they were being actively used (as seen in the videos) by these activists, and found strewn about the ship when the hostilities finally ended.

The usage of the object is what deems a certain object as a weapon, not its static state. The only exceptions to this term is with items such as a gun itself, although I would also doubt it would be classified as a weapon (as in its potential usage) if it were also sitting in a kitchen drawer.

 

[bigjelmapro]

i have already, try to follow the thread.

No. Trying to follow your reasoning:

i also think its wrong to let 1.5 million people suffer for the missiles from hamas that killed 22 people over the years.

Not only is the number inaccurate, but as I stated before, its not a justification for not doing anything, and not, as you stated, stopping weapons from entering Gaza, since the weapons are 'not Israel's business

*EDIT And forgot the usual practice of you downplaying an actual threat because only '22' were killed by Hamas's weapons.

 

[IDB87]

Talat Hussain, one of the 124 people arriving in Jordan following their release by Israeli authorities, claimed that the commandos “shot people in the forehead.” “I witnessed myself the first Israeli assault on the ship. There was no weapon on the ship,” Mr. Hussain told Aaj news channel by phone from Jordan. “Scuffles broke out when Israelis tried to arrest people. After that people threw at the Israelis whatever they got hold of.

Well, if by scuffles he meant the Commandos were immediately attacked and separated from one another, sure. Have you seen the videos I and others have posted when they are beaten with pipes and chains as soon as they hit the deck? That is not a scuffle.

“Four people were shot in the forehead in front me. I witnessed four people dying,” Mr. Hussain, executive director and anchorman of Aaj Television, said.

Execution style or what? Four people with gunshot wounds to the head does not denote execution. It very well may be true but there is no visual evidence to support it.

He added that he would provide video of the whole episode and further details later on in his television programme.

A_U_P and JJ what gives? I thought all of their cameras and equipment was taken / destroyed?

 

[IDB87]

Upon his arrival back in Turkey, he admitted some of the activists had grabbed the guns off soldiers in self-defence.

Fallout, are you paying attention?

"Yes, we took their guns. It would be self-defence even if we fired their guns. We told our friends on board: 'We will die, become martyrs, but never let us be shown... as the ones who used guns'. By this decision, our friends accepted death, and we threw all the guns we took from them into the sea."

So instead of surrendering, they added to the body count...on purpose? Is that how I'm reading this?

"I took off my shirt and waved it, as a white flag. We thought they would stop after seeing the white flag, but they continued killing people," he said.

Depends on what else is going on, and whether or not that white flag was visible. Outside on a deck in the middle of the night, a white flag (during what essentially equates to a riot) could be missed, maybe on purpose, maybe on accident. Either way the man waving the white flag was not shot or executed, so it must have been successful at the least?

 

[Kotatsu]

You're avoiding the core issue that this is a naval blockade their running, their provocation when the IDF boarded the vessel refusing to stop attempting to break a naval blockade

I acknowledge that, and have done so since I started posting in this thread. It is evident from the Ship to Gaza homepage that this is what they stated they would do, what they had in mind when they set out, and what they at all times anticipated that they would do.

I still do not think that there is any reason to murder people when you yourself have put yourself in the position where someone is beating you up.

An honest question:
Could it have been possible for larger Israeli ships to simply try to block the path of the convoy ships, once it was clear for them that they risked being injured or even killed if they boarded the ships because of the way the violent morons of the Mavi Marmara behaved? Could some sort of cruiser or something either just place itself in the convoy ships' path, or try to push them gently out of the way, or would they be outmaneuvered by the convoy ships?

I have no idea what sorts of ships the Israeli have, but if that would be at all possible, then I think that is something that could perhaps be tried when that Irish ship comes. If they can just delay the Irish ship long enough, it will eventually run out of petrol and be forced to either surrender peacefully or return to some other port in the area.

Or is this suggestion entirely unreasonable?

I do not necessarily think that the Israeli were unjustified in trying to stop the ships, and as I wrote in an earlier post, I'm guessing that was what the convoy organisers hoped for, as that would give them more publicity than if they were actually allowed to enter Gaza. I also find it utterly despicable that the passengers of the Mavi Marmara, despite having agreed to use only non-violent resistance techniques, attacked the Israeli soldiers. However, the Israeli soldiers murdered several people, and that is even worse. No one should be allowed to hide behind being a soldier when they have murdered someone, even in war.

Would you use the term 'murdering' for instance police officers that used deadly force against knife wielding suspects? Is there an equal application to this weighted term?

Yes, I would. Unless it can be shown that the police was physically or mentally incapable of solving the problem in any other way. For instance, in the unlikely event that the police was strapped into some Saw-esque contraption that made him fire a gun every time he blinked, I would not count this as a murder. I would also not call it murder if a death happened through an accident or through neglect. In all other cases, the killing of man by man is always murder. Maybe not in the legal sense, but to me, it certainly is in the moral sense.

Search when you do then.

Feel free to post your sources whenever you have time.

Again, mentioned this before, the weapons were NOT in the kitchen when boarded, neither were the piles of metal bars, the machetes and various knives, on top of the molotov cocktails, they were being actively used (as seen in the videos) by these activists, and found strewn about the ship when the hostilities finally ended.

And where were they before the hostilities began? Is this known? Where they were afterwards is entirely uninteresting, as I assume the Israeli soldiers were not stupid enough to allow the idiots who had just attacked them to place their metal bars in their special racks, and the knives in their drawers, and the scarves in their boxes after the hostilities had ended. It seems more likely that these would have been strewn about as a result of the peace activists just dropping them where they stood, after the event.

 

[a_unique_person]

A_U_P and JJ what gives? I thought all of their cameras and equipment was taken / destroyed?

I said cameras and other equipment were taken. That is what the journalists said. If some got out, it was not for lack of trying.

 

[DC]

No. Trying to follow your reasoning:


Not only is the number inaccurate, but as I stated before, its not a justification for not doing anything, and not, as you stated, stopping weapons from entering Gaza, since the weapons are 'not Israel's business

*EDIT And forgot the usual practice of you downplaying an actual threat because only '22' were killed by Hamas's weapons.

you are free to hold your oppinion, i am free to hold mine

 

[IDB87]

I said cameras and other equipment were taken. That is what the journalists said. If some got out, it was not for lack of trying.

How many people were detained on the MM? How could 'some' get out?

 

[IDB87]

And where were they before the hostilities began? Is this known?

They were being gathered.



1:47 on.

:44

Were those gas masks for civilians in Gaza?