Merged Israel Attacks Palestinian Aid Flotilla, According To Reports

[a_unique_person]

I wonder how long before the useful idiots in the west frame this as "Israel masasacres peaceful Palestinian swimmers at the beach"?

When someone does that, let me know.

 

[JihadJane]

Andre Abu-Khalil, Al Jazeera cameraman,



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

You were the one who posted the link.

*edit

I've been going on for a few pages asking you to comment on this. Maybe you missed it each time.

Sorry to miss your pleas. I'd stopped reading this thread for a while due to the inhospitable signal to noise ratio.

Andre Abu-Khalil says the soldiers were grabbed not beaten and then "a second helicopter" came and started "shooting live bullets on the people".

I'm still not clear on the sequence of events. It seems that a first attempt to board was thwarted when the soldiers (armed with paintball guns?) were successfully arrested by the ship's crew. Then there was a second attempt to board (the attack on the ship broadcast by the Israelis in their now infamous they-beat-us-up-with-iron-bars so-we-had-to-shoot-them "self-defense" videos), accompanied by live fire from the helicopter and, by some reports, from surrounding military vessels.

If that's correct then the people talking about bullets being used before the soldiers hit the deck are talking about the second helicopter attack on the ship.

 

[Rolfe]

A pro-Palestinian group is a rock-solid, unbiased source.

Yes, I've noticed how everything that comes from any source that might be described as "pro-Palestinian" is dismissed as either unreliable or unlikely to be true.

Every pro-Israeli source is the unvarnished, honest-to-goodness truth, I suppose?

Rolfe.

 

[Eddie Dane]

I've read two interesting things on not-so-reliable Dutch websites.
Has anyone else come across the following?

-Turkish PM Erdogan said he will be on board of the next activist ship.
-Iran say it will give a military escort to the next flotilla.

If true, it would confront Israel with a real dilemma.

 

[JihadJane]

The former British ambassador claimed this was not piracy, because they had a military commission. Do you agree/disagree?

Yes, he might be right that, technically, it was actually an illegal act of warfare against Turkey rather than simple piracy.

Because they are trained for maritime operations. The regular IDF soldier, or even the Israeli police, aren't.

That doesn't answer my question. Why was a hyped-up unit trained to fight and kill terrorists sent to confront unarmed ("hot weapons") political activists?

Well, at the very least, the IDF's EW did not fully silence the MM, and the flotilla, because they were broadcasting images for a full hour before he was killed.

How does that contradict claims that the activists' viewpoint was silenced? Apart from those few chaotic broadcasts the world heard nothing from the activists for the first 48 hours, while the Israeli were free and busy concocting their familiar (historically) self-defense story.

You asked if it wouldn't be reasonable for them to attempt to disarm/stop the Commando from continuing to fire. I said it would be logical for them to make a move if they had the opportunity. I didn't say anything about it being rational, since now you have (paraphrasing) murdering commandos watching activists throw their comrades to the lower decks.

Sorry, I don't understand your paraphrase. Please rephrase!

At least one commando was thrown onto the lower deck because he had just shot someone. Seems he got off fairly lightly.

 

[IDB87]

I'm still not clear on the sequence of events.

Yes, it does seem a bit confusing.

It seems that a first attempt to board was thwarted when the soldiers (armed with paintball guns?) were successfully arrested by the ship's crew.

There were two attempts to board - one by helicopter, one by boat. The boats were driven off by hoses and thrown projectiles. Then the helicopters came in shortly after, and attempted to board by roping down onto the deck. You could say the first helicopter was the first assault (the second helicopter would naturally be the second assault), and there is video footage of the Commandos rappelling down armed with paintball guns. The fact they had paintball guns, and nothing else, is telling. If they were indeed using lethal force (after the failed first assault) why would a 'death squad' commando go in with a paintball gun?

They were certainly neutralized, in that they were beaten to the ground, disarmed, and perhaps detained. This is followed by the second helicopter coming in and using lethal force.

I'm unaware of any attempted boardings preceding this, or even a different flow of events.

Then there was a second attempt to board (the attack on the ship broadcast by the Israelis in their now infamous they-beat-us-up-with-iron-bars so-we-had-to-shoot-them "self-defense" videos), accompanied by live fire from the helicopter and, by some reports, from surrounding military vessels.

OK, and if that's true, then the activists are completely unfazed by gunfire.



They are standing RIGHT BELOW a helicopter. No one is getting shot, and there is no fire coming from the helicopter. Along the entire length of the deck activists are standing about or attacking the soldiers. When was this video shot - first assault or second?

 

[Eddie Dane]

Another thing that occurred to me:

Considering the enormous success of this form of activism, will this replace terrorism as a form of resistance?

I mean, not just in the Palestinian/Israeli conflict, but could this work for the Kurds, Polisario etc?

 

[IDB87]

Yes, he might be right that, technically, it was actually an illegal act of warfare against Turkey rather than simple piracy.

That's fine if you wish to use the word piracy for emotive purposes.

That doesn't answer my question. Why was a hyped-up unit trained to fight and kill terrorists sent to confront unarmed ("hot weapons") political activists?

You're moving those goal posts. You claimed they were 'hardened commandos' and now you're claiming they were hyped up (by that article you linked which said they would not use force unless they had to, which, being commandos, they already know). Hardened Commandos, who are trained in maritime operations, were used to board the MM.

How does that contradict claims that the activists' viewpoint was silenced?

It doesn't, per se.

Apart from those few chaotic broadcasts the world heard nothing from the activists for the first 48 hours,

They had an hour to broadcast images, audio, footage of boarding.

Sorry, I don't understand your paraphrase. Please rephrase!

These Commandos are viewed as 'death-squad pirates' etc, implying they are murderers. They have now seen activists throw one of their comrades to a lower deck, perhaps injuring him very badly. That was not rational.

 

[Mister Earl]

In the U.S, they use what is called "Escalation of Force". The pneumonic device used is "Shout, show, shove, shoot". First, shout a warning. Second, show your weapon so they can see you are armed. Third, shove them back and away. Fourth, shoot to kill. Needless to say, the last option is only utilized when there isn't an alternative.

Now, I don't know if the Israeli commandos have the same procedure, but many nations use pretty much the same thing with slight variations. From what I understand happened (based on what little info is available), it sounds like they followed proper escalation of force. Whether or not it was warranted, I do not know. I wasn't there.

 

[Skeptic]

Well one of the reasons I'm not likely to take the UN's word on what is a "Medieval tactic and collective punishment" is that they did exactly the same thing for 13 years, if not worse...

But they aren't Jews. Different rules apply.

 

[Skeptic]

i can understand people writing "peace" activist. but why "activist"?

"Activist" implies initiative and action.

Most of the "activists" in this case, certainly European ones, are actually boobs, naive useful idiots used by Hamas & co. for their own purposes.

They are controlled or activated, but they do not really act.

ETA: Originally wrote "most of the activists here", meaning the activists under discussion (e.g., those on the ships in the flotilla), not people who post here. Edited for clarification.

 

[a_unique_person]

I've read two interesting things on not-so-reliable Dutch websites.
Has anyone else come across the following?

-Turkish PM Erdogan said he will be on board of the next activist ship.
-Iran say it will give a military escort to the next flotilla.

If true, it would confront Israel with a real dilemma.

Idea 1 good, idea 2, bad. Creating a military confrontation defeats the whole purpose. That's been happening for years, and achieved nothing to date.

 

[BeAChooser]

-Turkish PM Erdogan said he will be on board of the next activist ship.
-Iran say it will give a military escort to the next flotilla.

If true, it would confront Israel with a real dilemma.

Not really. But it might confront the western world with one.

 

[BeAChooser]

Perhaps JJ can comment on this statement too … by Othman Batirri?

At 4:15, tens of Navy boats carrying tens of soldiers tried to board the ships. They were met by resistance. Peaceful resistance.

The veracity of that is challenged by what is seen in the video tapes already posted to this forum.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HZlSSaPT_OU "Flotilla Rioters Prepare Rods, Slingshots, Broken Bottles and Metal Objects to Attack IDF Soldiers" (from security cameras on the Mavi Marmara)

Those preparations don't jib with his "peaceful" description.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B6sAEYpHF24 "Mavi Marmara Passengers Attack IDF Before Soldiers Board Ship"

In the second one, you can see a box of plates, a stun grenade, as well as other material are thrown down onto the boarders' boat. Long chains are being swung at the occupants. Metal rods, wooden clubs and chairs are being brandished. That doesn't look very "peaceful" to me.

By the way, Jane, here's a question I haven't heard answered. Why were there so many people (over 500) on this small ship? The videos show them scurrying about like rats and almost in equal numbers to the rats that must have been on that ship. Why such a large number only on this ship? Why wouldn't the other ships need similar numbers? What purpose did they serve in the context of it being an aid ship? Were that many really needed to distribute whatever was on the ship when it arrived? Were any of them doctors or the equivalent, on their way to treat the people of Gaza? I haven't heard of that being the case. Don't you think the space they required could have been put to better use holding real aid for the people of Gaza? Like food? And finally, why did so many of the "activists" lack IDs and instead carry envelopes filled with cash ($10000 each, according to reports)? Don't you think there are cheaper, faster and safer ways to get cash to the poor people of Gaza, if that's what they need? The money was intended for them, right? Because if it wasn't, what was it for, Jane? And if money is what Gazans need, why don't we just skip this whole aid ship nonsense and just mail them cash? If money really is what Gazans need, maybe those 500+ "activists" should just have gotten real jobs back home and sent some of what they earned to Gaza? Hmmmmmm?

Do you have an answer to any of these questions, Jane? Or are you going to continue regurgitating your own delusions and the inconsistent lies of those you cite as witnesses to those delusions? Because if that's your only response, I'll have to laugh at you.

 

[DC]

"Activist" implies initiative and action.

Most of the "activists" in this case, certainly European ones, are actually boobs, naive useful idiots used by Hamas & co. for their own purposes.

They are controlled or activated, but they do not really act.

ETA: Originally wrote "most of the activists here", meaning the activists under discussion (e.g., those on the ships in the flotilla), not people who post here. Edited for clarification.

activists would be enough, no "" needed. they are activists.

 

[yairhol]

I've read two interesting things on not-so-reliable Dutch websites.
Has anyone else come across the following?

-Turkish PM Erdogan said he will be on board of the next activist ship.
-Iran say it will give a military escort to the next flotilla.

If true, it would confront Israel with a real dilemma.

Both are true, at least in words.
The thing is, Erdogan said he will be on board the next acivist ship escorted by some of The Turkish military fleet. - I see this on the same scale as pronouncing war on Israel.

About Iran....ah, who cares. They're all words and nothing more. Kind of like Saddam Hussein was prior to the Gulf war. "It will be the mother of all wars". The majority of his army stopped fighting back in what? a couple of days?

 

[Jono]

Most of the "activists" in this case, certainly European ones, are actually boobs, naive useful idiots used by Hamas & co. for their own purposes.

I've been out of the loop for a while and missed plenty of intermediate information these past days; so Hamas et al was in part behind this flotilla fiasko?

 

[Stout]

We're invited to believe that the small, poverty-stricken group represents a genuine threat of genocide against the large, prosperous, well-armed nation. It doesn't appear credible. Far from there being any danger of the Palestinians ejecting the Israelis from the entire territory, the danger seems to be of the Palestinians themselves being left with no remaining territory. Whether what they have at present could be a viable state is debatable.

The problem here is that small poverty stricken group ( not that small actually ) would like to carry out their threats of genocide outlined in the Hamas, read democratically elected government, charter however their poverty is a result of Israel denying them the opportunity to carry out that goal.

Is the goal of genocide really the goal of the Palestinian people, or is it the goal of a radical Islamic Fascist government that the people had the misfortune to "elect"

Situations where two disparate groups have genuine claims to the same bit of territory are never good. But no peace is ever likely to be reached if one side is intent on obliterating the other. The paradox is that while an Israeli might hear this statement as supporting their view that the Palestinians would like to eject the Israelis, the rest of the world sees it in terms of Israel's excessive heavy-handedness in trying to disadvantage the Palestinian territories into oblivion.

Rolfe.

I agree, this situation is not good. All we have right now is the covenant in the Hamas charter that states they want to obliterate Israel, and the word of a few extreme right wing freaks that nobody is even considering equating with the Israeli government, claiming that Canaan is the promised land.

I'm curious as to whether "the rest of the world" has spent any time and effort studying this issue. before cast Lead, I hadn't and probably would have sided with the knee jerk *Israel attacked aid convoy* crowd.

Realistically speaking, Israel has no way of obliterating the Palestinian people, save the nuclear/chemical/biological scenario. Where does Israel expect those people to go ? Just up and leave? A very difficult scenario, especially now that we've seen Hamas keep the people from "escaping" when the Rafah border crossing was recently opened.

IMO, Israel is left with very little choice and this tactic of trying to heavy hand the Palestinian people into growing a collective brain, tossing out Hamas and signing a pact on non belligerency is the most humane option available to them.

Yes, it sucks that the Palestinian people are being used as pawns. Uses as pawns by Hamas, used as pawns by the Israelis, and used as pawns by useful idiot activists. Someone once said that the political section of the JREF is where skepticism comes to die. I tend to disagree with this sentiment as IMO, we're seeing the voice of reason applied to the pro-Israeli side taking on the voice of passion in the same way we see science taking on woo in the other sections.

 

[Mycroft]

i can understand people writing "peace" activist. but why "activist"?

For me its because "activist" evokes images of a college age person volunteering to make signs, organize demonstrations, hold discussion groups and write articles in support of a political cause. They want change, but they're willing to work within the process to bring about change by raising awareness, educating people and changing minds.

The people on these flotillas, the worst of them should be described a agent provocateurs. I believe they cynically provoked violence knowing full well the IDF could end up using deadly force, I believe they were fully aware of the propaganda nightmare that would be for Israel, and I believe they were fully willing to place human lives in danger for that goal.

The best of them want to break the blockade. They don't just want to get the Palestinians more chocolate or coriander, they want the blockade to be gone. That means allowing Hamas to arm itself with weapons from Iran or other places. They are partisans. They are part of the war, they've chosen a side, that side is Hamas.

 

[Mycroft]

i think the ban on certain goods should be lifted and the Israeli Government should release a list of banned goods, so those that want to send aid, know what is allowed in and what not.

I think that's a reasonable opinion. It takes Israeli security needs into account, yet also addresses Palestinian humanitarian needs.

So with such an easy solution to push for, how come "activists" spend so much time, money, and effort putting together flotillas to break the blockade?