Merged Israel Attacks Palestinian Aid Flotilla, According To Reports

[Pardalis]

The West Bank and Gaza is often refered to as "Palestine". Its no different than calling it "The Holy Land".

I disagree, I think what people refer to as "Palestine" is the whole region, which includes the state of Israel.

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Hey... y'all know what would have been frakking hilarious?

If one of the ships in the Hamas smuggling fleet was named the Rachel Corrie and the Israelis sank it by dropping a bulldozer pushed out the back of a C-130 on it.

The IDF boarded the Rachel Corrie without incident

http://www.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/meast/06/05/gaza.flotilla/index.html

Clearly the IDF has no sense of humor.

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

The West Bank (Arabic: الضفة الغربية‎, aḍ-Ḍiffä l-Ġarbīyä, Hebrew: הגדה המערבית‎, HaGadah HaMa'aravit)[1] is a landlocked territory[2] and is the eastern part of the Palestinian territories; on the west bank of the River Jordan in the Middle East. To the west, north, and south, the West Bank shares borders with the state of Israel. To the east, across the Jordan River, lies the country of Jordan.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Bank

Reading Wikipedia once and a while pays off.

We've been discussing the naval blockade of GAZA in this thread.

 

[Thunder]

I disagree, I think what people refer to as "Palestine" is the whole region, which includes the state of Israel.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_Palestine

The PLO has had observer status at the United Nations as an "entity" since 22 November 1974,[5][6] which entitles it to speak in the UN General Assembly but not to vote. In the United Nations the PLO is classified as a state with limited recognition.[7]

After the Declaration of Independence the United Nations General Assembly officially "acknowledged" the proclamation and voted to change the name of the PLO permanent observer to "Palestine".[9][10][11]

Now, as far as I am concerned, the occupation of Palestine ends when Israel and the PA sign a peace treaty establishing a Palestinian State in the West Bank and Gaza.

 

[DC]

I disagree, I think what people refer to as "Palestine" is the whole region, which includes the state of Israel.

i don't want to speak for "the people" but would like to distance me from that group you refer to as "people".
for me Palestine is the Gaza strip and the West Bank. Israel is Israel.

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Until Israel releases all footage unedited, their own and that of the journalists, I'm going with the story that IDF forces used live fire before even one of them boarded the ship.

Right... jews are guilty until proven innocent. Got it, thanks.

Me, I'm going with the New York Times story that two Israeli servicemen were stabbed before the shooting started.

 

[Thunder]

i don't want to speak for "the people" but would like to distance me from that group you refer to as "people".
for me Palestine is the Gaza strip and the West Bank. Israel is Israel.

As far as I am concerned, Israel USED to be Palestine.

Just how Gdansk USED to be Danzig, northern Poland used to be Prussia, Kaliningrad USED to be Koenigberg, and Texas USED to be Mexico.

New York USED to be New Amsterdam. Czech Republic USED to be the Austro-Hungarian Empire.

Things change. I think we all get the point.

 

[Pardalis]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_Palestine

Surely, when some people say "occupation of Palestine", they don't mean the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza, or the occupation of the "State of Palestine", they mean the occupation of the territory of Palestine.

As far as I am concerned, Israel USED to be Palestine.

Thanks for proving my point.

Didn't you just contradict yourself though?

 

[DC]

used to be = past
is = present

 

[Pardalis]

used to be = past
is = present

But the people saying "occupation of Palestine" don't accept the state of Israel.

Never have, don't and never will.

 

[Thunder]

Thanks for proving my point.

Didn't you just contradict yourself though?

ehh....are you suggesting the State of Israel is not on land that was once known as Palestine????

It was officialy known as the Mandate of Palestine. Its now divided between the State of Israel, and what the UN considers to be the State of Palestine, being the West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem.

why is there confusion here????

 

[Pardalis]

ehh....are you suggesting the State of Israel is not on land that was once known as Palestine????

If you accept the fact that Israel exists now and should keep existing in the future, then how can Israel be occupying itself?

 

[WildCat]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_Palestine

The PLO has had observer status at the United Nations as an "entity" since 22 November 1974,[5][6] which entitles it to speak in the UN General Assembly but not to vote. In the United Nations the PLO is classified as a state with limited recognition.[7]

After the Declaration of Independence the United Nations General Assembly officially "acknowledged" the proclamation and voted to change the name of the PLO permanent observer to "Palestine".[9][10][11]

Now, as far as I am concerned, the occupation of Palestine ends when Israel and the PA sign a peace treaty establishing a Palestinian State in the West Bank and Gaza.

Do you know what year the PLO was founded in?

Hint: it was prior to 1967...

 

[Thunder]

Do you know what year the PLO was founded in?

Hint: it was prior to 1967...

yeah? really?

So what.

The UN gave them observer status in 1974 and seems to have upgraded that status after the PLO declared statehood in 1988.

I don't care when the PLO was founded, and apparently, neither does the UN.

 

[IDB87]

It is high on their list of options because they are storm troopers.

Then why did they bring paint ball guns, tazers, and stun grenades and not carbines or assault rifles, or combat shotguns?

Do you have any supporting evidence for these claims?

The activists were refusing entry to heavily armed

Colorful description - what makes the commandos heavily armed?

They had a right to defend themselves

How many flotillas / ships have been boarded by Israel in the past (ships that attempted or broke the blockade) that resulted in death? What makes this one different?

something their attackers appear to have no trouble claiming for themselves, despite being the aggressors with all the technology of modern warfare.

They can claim they were savagely beaten, which they were, because of the recorded video. Despite your insistence on hand-waving it off, this counts as provocation for using lethal force.

What is the relevance of this 'technology of modern warfare'? What, specifically, are you talking about?

Those who did practice non-violent protest were also met with disproportionate violence.

Are you referring to people who were surrendering or the people blocking the way to the wheelhouse on other boats? What are your examples?

The brutality continued after their kidnap. They were also robbed of their possessions.

How were they brutalized after being detained?

Some of the activists decided to physically defend their boat from attack by armed, masked, armored commandos in international waters under cover of darkness.

What does some mean, in this situation? Are you in a position to know the exact number of activists who decided to physically defend their boat?

This was obvious to the Israelis before the boarding. The Israelis had plenty of time to rethink their strategy. The flotilla repeatedly told them that they were unarmed ("hot weapons").

Then there would be no cause to fear inspection, or even from going to a safe port and having the aid transferred by land under their supervision, correct?

The IDF, the original aggressors, chose to stick with their decicion to use extreme violence by sending in storm troopers, a decision made days before any contact with the flotilla.

Your own links state that they planned to use it as a last resort. Does it not say that, JJ?

Think a bit harder! There are some suggestions up-thread.



The flotilla consisted mostly of small, easily blockaded ships.

Would this still be piracy?

In most cases paint ball guns, tear gas, stun grenades (and "plastic" bullets) may be mostly non-lethal but they are certainly not "non-violent"!

Non-violent, as opposed to firearms. I guess if you wish to argue that they are violent, you can do so.

There are many witnesses now claiming that the IDF opened fire before their storm troopers hit the deck.

And there is a witness claiming they did not open fire until after three soldiers were jumped. Which one is a credible witness, and which one isn't? They are both activists.

In your opinion. Other ships have broken the blockade.

Were these other ships also scenes of massacres, as the MM has been coined?

Most of the world believes they had every right and that if governments won't act to effectively challenge Israel's crimes against humanity then it is up to ordinary citizens to do so.

Then they should be prepared to deal with the consequences.

You appear to be saying that the only way that Israel could respond was with violence. Is that right?

The violence (see:death) only happened after non-violent control was negated and had become ineffective.

You better go on a shooting spree then.

What? You claimed that activists were shielding these soldiers, and yet the first ones on the deck are pummeled - no one makes a move to 'shield' the soldiers, and if they did, the commandos are continuously pummeled. This is still justification for using lethal force.

Commandos should never have been sent onto the ship in the first place. The responsibility for the deaths and mutilation lies with those who sent trained killers onto an unarmed civilian vessel in international waters.

Your opinion.

No, it was you who ludicrously claimed that the grenades were used to clear the area for a safe landing,

Since the stun grenades and tear gas preceded the boarding, one can (safely) assume they were used to help control the area before IDF personnel was on the deck. How is this ludicrous?

Tear gas and stun grenade are designed to terrorize and cause panic.

Yes, that is a side effect. The main purpose is crowd control - physically disabling you in a non-lethal way.

See post above for their names. The other information you requested is either unknown or I can't be bothered to dig it up for you, who, if I am not mistaken, claims they were all shot in self-defense.

Yes, thank you for that list. I don't think I've ever claimed everyone was killed in self-defense. You could link a quote?

Thanks for your opinion.

You have offered yours and I thank you for that.

Why's that then?

Maybe someone started filming half way through? Maybe whomever filed it was unable to get the entire incident on camera, or that perhaps the IDF destroyed the evidence. Whatever you choose to believe, I guess.

See my post above. It may that their commanders abandoned their, initial shoot-to-kill policy in favor of a later, more sensitive , shoot-civilians-in-the-legs, crowd-control tactic.

This is becoming tiresome. Their initial 'policy' was one of non-violence, hence the paintball guns, tazers, and other non-lethal weapons they were equipped with. The sidearms were used for 'emergency situations', and since they were in one, they used their sidearms.

You're right that civil disobedience is usually non-violent. I don't regard fending off pirates to be a justification for murdering the defenders, however. Speaking personally, I regard acts such as setting fire to the South African Embassy in London to be civil disobedience, too, as well as meeting police violence with violence. That is using civil disobedience in a more general sense, though i.e. refusal to obey a law because one believes the law is immoral.

Thank you for your opinion.

The UN Security Council gathered for an emergency session on Monday. Practically all its members condemned Israel’s actions with the peace flotilla, naming them “banditry and piracy, murder conducted by a state that has no excuses, no justification whatsoever.” In a formal statement the council also demanded the immediate release of ships and civilians held by Israel.

Russia’s spokesperson in the Council has particularly stressed that “the use of weapons against civilians and detaining vessels in the open sea without any legal grounds is a flagrant violation of universally recognized international regulations.”

Condemned, no justification, no excuses. Nothing about breaking any law. The U.N. calls it piracy, but your British ambassador does not. What's the deal?

You yourself are arguing that it is fine to use lethal force as self-defense against potential murderers.

Was there any indication that the commandos were going to use lethal force before boarding? They did not, and they did, according to two witnesses who were both activists. Who is right?

 

[WildCat]

yeah? really?

So what.

So what makes you think the "P" in PLO stands for the West Bank and Gaza? Those aeas belonged to Jordan and Egypt, respectively, at the time the PLO was founded.

 

[DC]

But the people saying "occupation of Palestine" don't accept the state of Israel.

Never have, don't and never will.

i don't know.

 

[Thunder]

But the people saying "occupation of Palestine" don't accept the state of Israel.

Never have, don't and never will.

the people I know, when saying "the occupation" or "the occupation of Palestine"..

mean the West Bank and Gaza.

are there OTHER people who mean ALL of Mandatory Palestine? sure

but they are extremist ideologues and I don't care about their opinions.

 

[carlitos]

This seems relevant

Israeli marines were held during ship raid-witness
Thu Jun 3, 2010 12:10pm EDT
* Soldiers freed after Israel agreed to airlift wounded

* Lebanese account echoes testimony from both sides



By Yara Bayoumy

BEIRUT, June 3 (Reuters) - Activists on a Gaza-bound Turkish ship seized four Israeli marines before other commandos stormed aboard using live ammunition, a Lebanese cameraman said in an account on Thursday that echoed elements of Israeli testimony.

...

But the account from Andre Abu Khalil, a cameraman for Al Jazeera TV, echoed other testimony, from both sides, that after an initial landing by a small group of commandos armed with anti-riot weapons was overpowered by activists wielding sticks, a second wave of marines stormed in, killing those in their way.

...

One activist used a loudhailer to tell the Israelis the four captive soldiers were well and would be released if they provided medical help for the wounded.

With an Israeli Arab lawmaker acting as mediator, the Israelis agreed to the request and the wounded were brought to the top deck where they were airlifted off the ship.

So, they held the injured soldiers as bargaining chips or hostages, after they hurt them. According to an Al Jazeera guy who was there, anyway.

 

[Thunder]

"But the account from Andre Abu Khalil, a cameraman for Al Jazeera TV, echoed other testimony, from both sides, that after an initial landing by a small group of commandos armed with anti-riot weapons was overpowered by activists wielding sticks, a second wave of marines stormed in, killing those in their way."

hmmmmmm.....