Merged Israel Attacks Palestinian Aid Flotilla, According To Reports

[DC]

Ok - we agree on at least one thing, based on the evidence so far, the soldiers are not to blame for the fatalities.

Happy days

oh indeed.

 

[JihadJane]

You're a police man. You see a car entering a restricted area with signs all over the fences telling people not to enter. The car enters anyway and while you try to stop it with flashing lights and megaphone. When the car stops the people inside try to lynch you with knives, metal bars etc. The people are all around you attacking. You're a police man so you have a gun. You know you're going to be dead soon. Do you use it ? Do you use it?
Will using it mean that you acted in insanely disproportionate violence?

A pretty irrelevant analogy though, interestingly, a lot of innocent civilians have been killed at military checkpoints and in other "restricted ares" by soldiers for no good reason.

It is extremely questionable whether the ships were "entering a restricted area" or that the ships had any legal obligation to obey Israeli commands.

Where is your evidence that people were trying to "lynch" the soldiers?

The soldiers were disarmed and detained, not killed.

Can you explain why so many protestors were killed and seriously injured some, according to witness counts, after they had surrendered?

And how do you know that the people who were shot dead or injured by live ammunition were attacking anybody?

 

[bigjelmapro]

Will using it mean that you acted in insanely disproportionate violence?

Forget Jihadjane. She has no legal argument for even using the term disproportionate.

To her this term implies that until x amount of people are dead on your side (ie someone observing with a ticker), you can only kill y amount of people, with only y amount of bullets, whereas it is completely illegal to aim at any major parts, ie the head, even if said activists are wearing ceramic bulletproof vests.

Shooting in the head is deemed an automatic warcrime.

 

[Hittman]

no some posters seem to think its OK all Palestinians suffer because a minority of the Palestinians voted for Hamas. that is what i call Ridiculous.

All Palestinians suffer because a substantial number of them are deeply devoted to killing Jews, and nothing else. Israel had literally made the desert bloom. Palestinians are in deep poverty because most of their resources are devoted to Jew Killing.

Israel said "We'll give you this land if you stop trying to kill us." They agreed. Then, literally before the dust from the moving vans settled, they started firing rockets into Israel. Every. Single. Day. Then when Israel responds they're the bad guys.

what term do you want us to use, when we want to describe the punishment of all palestinians for the acts of a few? like in the case of the blockade for example.

Self defense.

what does the UN say about the Gaza blockade?

Who cares?

Anyone who uses the word restraint to describe any Israeli actions is clearly barking mad. Or lying.
Last time they used restraint was probably the Gulf war.

An entire civilization whose only purpose, whose only reason to exist, is to destroy your civilization, tends to have that effect.

Blockading aid to an entire population in response to the extremists there is illegal and morally reprehensible.

Even when the vast majority of that entire population gleefully voted for the extremists?

Frankly, I don't understand why Israel hasn't just said "Enough, already. We gave you a chance, we've tried and tried and tried to make peace, we give up. You have 30 days to pack up and leave. We don't care where you go. Take as much as you can carry or ship out. But leave, or die."
"Maybe your Arab "brothers" will stop using you as pawns and welcome you. It doesn't matter. In 30 days we're coming, taking everything, and grinding anyone left behind into powder."
"You've had hundreds of chances for peace. You obviously don't want it. So get out, or die."

It would be messy, and there's be cries of "genocide" and "final solution," but damn, how much crap are they supposed to put up with?

 

[RoboTimbo]

They had agreed not to use violent methods of resistance prior to setting of for Gaza, but actively choose to disregard these agreements, and thus they, too, are responsible for the Israeli soldiers feeling they had no other choice than to murder people. The best scenario would have been if all activists had honoured their prior agreement and never used any violence, but there are idiots in every movement.

The mercenaries they hired had agreed to that?

 

[DC]

The mercenaries they hired had agreed to that?

evidence for hired mercenaries?

 

[DC]

All Palestinians suffer because a substantial number of them are deeply devoted to killing Jews, and nothing else. Israel had literally made the desert bloom. Palestinians are in deep poverty because most of their resources are devoted to Jew Killing.

Israel said "We'll give you this land if you stop trying to kill us." They agreed. Then, literally before the dust from the moving vans settled, they started firing rockets into Israel. Every. Single. Day. Then when Israel responds they're the bad guys.



Self defense.



Who cares?



An entire civilization whose only purpose, whose only reason to exist, is to destroy your civilization, tends to have that effect.



Even when the vast majority of that entire population gleefully voted for the extremists?

Frankly, I don't understand why Israel hasn't just said "Enough, already. We gave you a chance, we've tried and tried and tried to make peace, we give up. You have 30 days to pack up and leave. We don't care where you go. Take as much as you can carry or ship out. But leave, or die."
"Maybe your Arab "brothers" will stop using you as pawns and welcome you. It doesn't matter. In 30 days we're coming, taking everything, and grinding anyone left behind into powder."
"You've had hundreds of chances for peace. You obviously don't want it. So get out, or die."

It would be messy, and there's be cries of "genocide" and "final solution," but damn, how much crap are they supposed to put up with?

what a nice example of simplified black and white thinking.
the sad thing is, it isn't even sarcasm.

 

[bigjelmapro]

A pretty irrelevant analogy though, interestingly, a lot of innocent civilians have been killed at military checkpoints and in other "restricted ares" by soldiers for no good reason.

Source? You're running, once again, with a false premise.

It is extremely questionable whether the ships were "entering a restricted area" or that the ships had any legal obligation to obey Israeli commands.

There's no questionable anything. Exclusion zone was publicly declared and had been so for years prior to this flotilla. According to the international maritime law already posted dozens of times now, it was legal for the IDF to board, detain and divert the neutral ship approaching a naval blockade.

But oh dear me, here you are making claims once again, without any sources stating such 'legal obligations'.

Where is your evidence that people were trying to "lynch" the soldiers?

Videos used. I know its confusing for an American to understand the concept of lynching in that it doesn't always involved hanging, ie mob justice against blacks in the US. It simply means: to put to death, esp. by hanging, by mob action and without legal authority.

The soldiers were disarmed and detained, not killed.

False premise. The soldiers were not killed because they fired back at those trying to kill them.

Can you explain why so many protestors were killed and seriously injured some, according to witness counts, after they had surrendered?

Show something a bit more credible that 'witness accounts' since, as provided throughout this thread, witness accounts doesn't quite add up to much if so many were proven to be utterly contradictory, given from within locked cabins/bathrooms, from other ships already in port, and many with questionable intentions.

Perhaps something a bit more credible? Such as a video to prove such events happened?

And how do you know that the people who were shot dead or injured by live ammunition were attacking anybody?

You're assuming the contrary? Either they were attacking IDF soldiers in the area in question, as on the main front deck, or they were caught in the cross fire.

 

[RoboTimbo]

evidence for hired mercenaries?

You should read some of the links before responding.

http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Government/Communiques/2010/Israel_Navy_warns_flotilla_31-May-2010.htm
"In a special meeting of the Israeli Security Cabinet on Tuesday (June 1), it was disclosed that approximately 40 people on the upper deck of the ship with no identification wearing bullet proof vests and using weapons against the IDF soldiers are considered to be mercenaries of the al-Qaeda terror organization. During this special meeting it became clear that while the civillian protestors were sent to the lower deck of the ship, this group of mercenaries split into organized cells in order to combat the IDF soldiers. The cabinet places full responsibility for the incident on those who started the violence which clearly placed the soldiers' lives in danger."

 

[DC]

You should read some of the links before responding.

http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Government/Communiques/2010/Israel_Navy_warns_flotilla_31-May-2010.htm
"In a special meeting of the Israeli Security Cabinet on Tuesday (June 1), it was disclosed that approximately 40 people on the upper deck of the ship with no identification wearing bullet proof vests and using weapons against the IDF soldiers are considered to be mercenaries of the al-Qaeda terror organization. During this special meeting it became clear that while the civillian protestors were sent to the lower deck of the ship, this group of mercenaries split into organized cells in order to combat the IDF soldiers. The cabinet places full responsibility for the incident on those who started the violence which clearly placed the soldiers' lives in danger."

thanks for the link to the claims,

again

Evidence of hired mercenaries?

 

[DreadNiK]

oh indeed.

so out of curiosity what do you make of this press release:

http://www.freegaza.org/en/home/press-releases/1191-civilians-under-attack-by-israel

I find it a disgusting lie (whether a lie because they know it to be untrue, a lie because they don't know what happened, or because they genuinely believe it did happen but have no supporting evidence other than hearsay that contradicts video footage from multiple angles, I don't care, if you are making a press release all three of those scenarios are equally repellant forms of lying to me)

And the logo used here:

http://witnessgaza.com/


This is all from the 'pro-Palestine' side - makes you wonder...

 

[RoboTimbo]

thanks for the link to the claims,

again

Evidence of hired mercenaries?

Since you ignore evidence, what evidence would you accept?

 

[BeAChooser]

Even more details:

http://www.jpost.com/Israel/Article.aspx?id=177452

The IDF has identified one of the passengers aboard the Mavi Marmara , which navy commandos commandeered earlier this week, as the ringleader of a group of mercenaries who were recruited from a city in northwest Turkey, according to new details from the military’s ongoing investigation of the Gaza flotilla.

The IDF identified a group of about 50 men – of the 700 on board – who were well-trained and were stationed throughout the ship, mostly on the upper deck, where they laid an ambush for the IDF soldiers who rappelled onto the deck from helicopters.

The members of this violent group were not carrying identity cards or passports. Instead, each of them had an envelope in his pocket with about $10,000 in cash. The defense establishment suspects the funding for the mercenaries may have come from elements within the Turkish government.

… snip ...

In videos from the Marmara released this week by the IDF, this group of men can be seen preparing to confront IDF commandos. The videos, taken by the ship’s security cameras, show the group of activists brandishing metal bars, slingshots, and other assorted weaponry.

The group was split up into smaller squads that were distributed throughout the deck and communicated with one another with handheld communication devices. The men wore bulletproof vests and gas masks.

One video clearly shows a member of the group throwing a stun grenade onto the IDF commando vessel that pulled up alongside the Marmara. Another video shows how groups of at least four or five men swarmed each commando that landed on the top deck, beating them with metal bars, and in one case throwing a soldier off the third deck.

That sure is an interesting group of "peace" "activists". That is the description that leftists here and abroad (and in the MSM) were and have been using, right? Makes them look more than a little foolish, doesn't it?

 

[DreadNiK]

Perhaps something a bit more credible? Such as a video to prove such events happened?

Little bit disingenuous imo - the IDF confiscated all the video footage on the boats?

Would you at least agree it would be good if Israel immediately released, unedited, all footage from and relating to the boat and the incident? (I can see good arguments as to why they might not want to do this, but to me they don't outweigh the good a full disclosure policy would be for their political situation)

 

[DC]

so out of curiosity what do you make of this press release:

http://www.freegaza.org/en/home/press-releases/1191-civilians-under-attack-by-israel

I find it a disgusting lie (whether a lie because they know it to be untrue, a lie because they don't know what happened, or because they genuinely believe it did happen but have no supporting evidence other than hearsay that contradicts video footage from multiple angles, I don't care, if you are making a press release all three of those scenarios are equally repellant forms of lying to me)

And the logo used here:

http://witnessgaza.com/


This is all from the 'pro-Palestine' side - makes you wonder...

i think the claim that its in violation to international law because it was in international waters, is wrong, but that is based on my interpretation of the laws. im no expert. If its a lie, dunno. its their interpretation, and before reading the involved laws, i would have agreed on it. maybe they just dont know better, maybe they know and lie about it.

about the shooting as soon they landed on the deck, is not convifmed by the videos i have seen.
but the video doesnt show everything.
thats why i hope there will be a honest and independent investigation into it.

 

[DC]

Since you ignore evidence, what evidence would you accept?

evidence to YOUR claim they where hired mercenaries.
the Israelis were smart enough not to claim something like that according to your link.

 

[DreadNiK]

i think the claim that its in violation to international law because it was in international waters, is wrong, but that is based on my interpretation of the laws. im no expert. If its a lie, dunno. its their interpretation, and before reading the involved laws, i would have agreed on it. maybe they just dont know better, maybe they know and lie about it.

about the shooting as soon they landed on the deck, is not convifmed by the videos i have seen.
but the video doesnt show everything.
thats why i hope there will be a honest and independent investigation into it.

sorry, what?!

They claim, without evidence and with video evidence to directly contradict their claims, that soldiers fired into sleeping civilians the moment they landed on the boat....

Do you or do you not consider that a lie, and if so, is it not a disgusting lie and one very unbecoming of a humanitarian aid organisation?

I want to be very clear on this...

 

[JihadJane]

"... which clearly placed the soldiers' lives in danger."

So who got shot?

Names, please, and where they were in relation to those fighting the boarders.

 

[Thunder]

Frankly, I don't understand why Israel hasn't just said "Enough, already. We gave you a chance, we've tried and tried and tried to make peace, we give up. You have 30 days to pack up and leave. We don't care where you go. Take as much as you can carry or ship out. But leave, or die."

well, now that we have the Fascist-genocidal point of view, would anyone like to provide a slightly less murderous and blood-thirsty solution?

Stalin, Mao, and Goering would be very proud.

 

[RoboTimbo]

So who got shot?

Names, please, and where they were in relation to those fighting the boarders.

Your contention is that your life is only in danger if you're shot? There is absolutely no other way for your life to be in danger? Interesting.