Israel butchers civilians in international waters

[Gorgon]

It's even easier to mosey in 20 pages after the thread began with new information and be the king of hind vison.

[Cycloneman]

It's even easier to mosey in 20 pages after the thread began with new information and be the king of hind vison.

Zionists bull****ting that these people "deserved it" because they knowingly prepared to (but did not actually get the opportunity to) engage in an act of civil disobedience isn't really "new information."

[Gorgon]

Perhaps.

 

And there is fact that if what they really wanted was to fight the Isralis one would think they could come up with better weaponry than clubs. Barricade vital areas of the ship for instance.

[Gorgon]

It occured to me that saying 'the protesters thought this' or 'the protesters wanted that' is nonsensical. They were a very diverse group, like in any demonstration there are going to be groups within groups, peaceful protesters and violent agitators alike.

[Hell Kitty]

They were a very diverse group, like in any demonstration there are going to be groups within groups, peaceful protesters and violent agitators alike.

 

And like any demonstration one disagrees with, the violent agitators will always be cast as representatives of the whole group.

[Rostere]

Nice, your source is Palestinian National Authority.

Okay, other than the government of Palestine, who would you trust to explain that yes, Virginia, malnutrition does exist at greater-than-normal levels in a country suffering under the Israeli blockade?

Oh, I don't know, an objective and independent source instead of the Palestinian propaganda machine?

 

Edit: Israel transfers an average of 15000 tons a week in humanitarian supplies, so if there's malnutrition it's not Israel's fault. Hamas meanwhile seems to have plenty of money to buy missiles and other weapons.

 

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100602/ap_on_...blockade_glance

 

Those 15000 is the Isreali blockade limit. No other goods are allowed to be shipped into Gaza at all. Also, the aid is not provided directly by Israel. "Israel transfers an average of 15000 tons a week in humanitarian supplies" should be "Israel allows for others to transfer an average maximum of 15000 tons a week in humanitarian supplies"

 

You should give the "Results" section of your link a look:

 

"Results: Gaza residents have institutionalized a system of smuggling tunnels under the Gaza-Egypt border to bring in consumer goods, fuel and building materials. Tunnels operated by Hamas loyalists are also believed to bring in weapons and cash. Hamas taxes the tunnel trade to boost its coffers. More than 100,000 jobs have been wiped out in Gaza and poverty has deepened. Support for Hamas has not lessened, as Gazans blame Israel for hardships. International demands that Israel lift the blockade were increasing even before the flotilla raid."

 

So the Palestinian population are supposed to rely on smuggling (and in this, they empower HAMAS), when you are shot on sight for going near the border to Israel? I think that you also must understand that this blockade is not the way to peace in the region.

[heathen]

No idea on the validity of this rumour:

 

http://www.popjolly.com/turkish-naval-wars...aid-mission-608

 

Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan is said to be considering sailing to the GAZA strip with an aid flotilla backed by Turkish Navy ships, international news media reported.The Lebanese newspaper al Mustaqbal quoted a security source as saying that the Turkish Prime Minister has been pondering a move that could break the blockage imposed by Israel against Gaza.

[Gorgon]

Meh, he just leaked the rumor for a free PR boost. He ain't gonna try that in a million years.

[Volourn]

"Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan is said to be considering sailing to the GAZA strip with an aid flotilla backed by Turkish Navy ships, international news media reported.The Lebanese newspaper al Mustaqbal quoted a security source as saying that the Turkish Prime Minister has been pondering a move that could break the blockage imposed by Israel against Gaza."

 

Yeah... it could break the blockage.. or it could be considered an act of war... military ships entering another country's land. That's just asking for trouble. No doubt, if the US were to think of doing soemthing like this, they'd be called evil troublemakers.

 

P.S. My gov't is as evil as Isreal as we board ships all the time randomly in international waters searching for weapons and illegal goods...

Edited June 6, 2010 by Volourn

[GreasyDogMeat]

B... but you weren't *there*. It's very easy to sit there and condemn the massacre of activists carrying humanitarian aid in international waters, but you weren't *there*."

 

Facts aren't based on where my ass is placed. I can condemn the massacre of these civilians just as easily as I can condemn any other, I don't need to personally have been shot to do so. Stop with the antisemitism, please.

 

Do you know what the difference between the Somali pirates and these Israeli commandos is? The Somali pirates have never killed anyone!

Oh, and you were there were you? It is fairly easy to condemn them when you do some actual reading and not react like a jew hater, like the video showing the Israeli commandos going in with non lethal weapons like paint guns and video of them being beaten and thrown off the ship. Stop with antisemitism mr. 'Zionist BS'? Yeah... sure... if you stop with the Hamas BS.

[Walsingham]

It occured to me that saying 'the protesters thought this' or 'the protesters wanted that' is nonsensical. They were a very diverse group, like in any demonstration there are going to be groups within groups, peaceful protesters and violent agitators alike.

 

That's certainly what I heard from the friends who went with a land convoy.

[Wrath of Dagon]

I was under the impression that we were talking about Europe.

 

Yes, Israel has less than friendly neighbors. That doesn't mean that it's NOT a good idea to settle things with Palestine, quite the opposite. It's useless now with Hamas at the helm, but there have been more than a few opportunities for a reasonable deal in the past.

Well, that puts you ahead of most people in understanding the situation. Except that Ehud Barak did propose a very reasonable deal to the Palestinians in the past, and they rejected it.

 

As far as protesters being diverse, that's certainly true, but it should be noted that only the violent Jihadis got shot.

[Calax]

B... but you weren't *there*. It's very easy to sit there and condemn the massacre of activists carrying humanitarian aid in international waters, but you weren't *there*."

 

Facts aren't based on where my ass is placed. I can condemn the massacre of these civilians just as easily as I can condemn any other, I don't need to personally have been shot to do so. Stop with the antisemitism, please.

 

Do you know what the difference between the Somali pirates and these Israeli commandos is? The Somali pirates have never killed anyone!

Oh, and you were there were you? It is fairly easy to condemn them when you do some actual reading and not react like a jew hater, like the video showing the Israeli commandos going in with non lethal weapons like paint guns and video of them being beaten and thrown off the ship. Stop with antisemitism mr. 'Zionist BS'? Yeah... sure... if you stop with the Hamas BS.

You know the funniest thing? Your links are directly contradicted by other links within the thread

[Cycloneman]

Oh, and you were there were you? It is fairly easy to condemn them when you do some actual reading and not react like a jew hater, like the video showing the Israeli commandos going in with non lethal weapons like paint guns and video of them being beaten and thrown off the ship.

International waters equals justified self-defense. The activists captured two Israeli commandos without killing them, which clearly means they were using sublethal force, unlike the Israelis who opened fire on activists in ~international waters~.

Stop with antisemitism mr. 'Zionist BS'? Yeah... sure... if you stop with the Hamas BS.

So you admit you are an antisemite then.

As far as protesters being diverse, that's certainly true, but it should be noted that only the violent Jihadis got shot.

Only if you define "violent Jihadis" as "people who got shot."

[213374U]

International waters equals justified self-defense. The activists captured two Israeli commandos without killing them, which clearly means they were using sublethal force, unlike the Israelis who opened fire on activists in ~international waters~.

"Justified self-defense" does not cover assaulting anyone with axes and other objects that would be construed as deadly force in court... unless the soldiers were actually using or would have foreseeably used similar force themselves, without provocation. Do you have any proof of this? Being the victim of an illegal action does not necessarily mean that one is free to use deadly force in response...

 

If, as available evidence suggests, the soldiers were attacked as they were conducting their boarding operation, they had the right and the duty to use their weapons. Of course, the contention that the seizure of the ships is illegal in the first place is debatable -- Israel has officially declared a naval blockade, which under international law, gives them the right to board or even outright fire at any ships, civilian or otherwise, breaching said blockade, even in international waters. Now, when does a naval blockade become "lawful"? That's rhetorical, btw.

 

Lol @ "sublethal force", too. In 1941, during the opening phases of Barbarossa, the Germans captured millions of Soviets. By your logic, the Germans were obviously using "sublethal force", and weren't actually trying to kill anyone.

Edited June 7, 2010 by 213374U

[GreasyDogMeat]

Stop with antisemitism mr. 'Zionist BS'? Yeah... sure... if you stop with the Hamas BS.

So you admit you are an antisemite then.

Uh... are you seriously accusing me of being an antisemite? Me... the one rabidly defending Israel's actions? Do you know what the word means?

[Gorgon]

He's an anti everything else. You can recognize them by their liberal usage of 'Jew hater'

[Cycloneman]

"Justified self-defense" does not cover assaulting anyone with axes and other objects that would be construed as deadly force in court... unless the soldiers were actually using or would have foreseeably used similar force themselves, without provocation. Do you have any proof of this? Being the victim of an illegal action does not necessarily mean that one is free to use deadly force in response...

Let me give you a hypothetical situation: someone breaks into your house in full combat gear equipped with high-end military grade firearms, night vision goggles, etc. Are you "free to use deadly force in response"?

Lol @ "sublethal force", too. In 1941, during the opening phases of Barbarossa, the Germans captured millions of Soviets. By your logic, the Germans were obviously using "sublethal force", and weren't actually trying to kill anyone.

Yes, because as we all know, the Germans did not kill any Soviets. Wait, that's not true, you're a **** arguer and you just tried to pull the old equivocation fallacy on me.

If, as available evidence suggests, the soldiers were attacked as they were conducting their boarding operation, they had the right and the duty to use their weapons.

If, as available evidence suggests, the putschists were attacked as they entered the capitol building, they had the right and duty to use their weapons.

 

P.S. They did not use axes.

[Cycloneman]

Stop with antisemitism mr. 'Zionist BS'? Yeah... sure... if you stop with the Hamas BS.

So you admit you are an antisemite then.

Uh... are you seriously accusing me of being an antisemite?

Quote GreasyDogMeat:

"Stop with antisemitism...? Yeah... sure.. if you stop with the Hamas BS."

 

You are saying that you would stop with the antisemitism, ergo you have engaged, and continue to engage, in antisemitism.

Me... the one rabidly defending Israel's actions? Do you know what the word means?

Israel is not a semite, it is a state (an apartheid state, by the way). Palestinian arabs, however, are a semitic people, ergo antisemitism can extend to discriminating against them (i.e. your behavior). Deal With It.

[213374U]

Let me give you a hypothetical situation: someone breaks into your house in full combat gear equipped with high-end military grade firearms, night vision goggles, etc. Are you "free to use deadly force in response"?

Nope. Especially not if they are cops with a search warrant.

 

 

Yes, because as we all know, the Germans did not kill any Soviets. Wait, that's not true, you're a **** arguer and you just tried to pull the old equivocation fallacy on me.

"Deadly force" isn't a result-oriented definition, assclown. Attacking somebody with a machete constitutes an use of deadly force, regardless of whether you actually manage to kill them or not. Get a clue, m'kay?

 

 

If, as available evidence suggests, the putschists were attacked as they entered the capitol building, they had the right and duty to use their weapons.

Oh, I get it. You don't really have anything meaningful to say, so you're just posting random nonsense hoping somebody will interpret and find a meaning in it for you. Tough luck.

 

 

P.S. They did not use axes.

P.S. they did, alongside any guns they could take from the soldiers. Edited June 7, 2010 by 213374U

[Cycloneman]

Nope. Especially not if they are cops with a search warrant.

Let me get this straight: I could burst into your house, a Kalashnikov at the ready, and you would be wrong to defend yourself with force? Don't try to conflate this with something legal.

"Deadly force" isn't a result-oriented definition, assclown. Attacking somebody with a machete constitutes an use of deadly force, regardless of whether you actually manage to kill them or not. Get a clue, m'kay?

Why don't you just skip to the end, where you make up some bull**** about how they used lethal force? Wait, they didn't use lethal force, they subdued the commandos. What do you think they did? Stabbed them in the gut a couple times then stuck them in the brig? Please, offer some ****ing evidence besides blatantly biased reports of the Israeli government that there was lethal force applied by the activists. Let me remind you once more: multiple Israeli soldiers were subdued by the activists. None were killed. Compare to Israel's bodycount.

Oh, I get it. You don't really have anything meaningful to say, so you're just posting random nonsense hoping somebody will interpret and find a meaning in it for you. Tough luck.

Oh, I get it. You don't have any actual defense for your stupid viewpoint that it's A-OK to blow the **** out of anybody who stops you from committing a crime, so you're going to pretend like everybody else is just spouting bull**** while ONLY YOU can see the truth: killing people who try to stop you from robbing a bank is morally acceptable.

P.S. they did, alongside any guns they could take from the soldiers.

Yeah, no. Sources who were there say the Israeli commandos were disarmed and their guns were placed aside. I have seen video of the "weapons" on the ship which included some bars, slingshots, and a few knives. Never seen an axe anywhere.

 

Here, why don't you watch

and show me where the axes are. Edited June 7, 2010 by Cycloneman

[GreasyDogMeat]

Stop with antisemitism mr. 'Zionist BS'? Yeah... sure... if you stop with the Hamas BS.

So you admit you are an antisemite then.

Uh... are you seriously accusing me of being an antisemite?

Quote GreasyDogMeat:

"Stop with antisemitism...? Yeah... sure.. if you stop with the Hamas BS."

 

You are saying that you would stop with the antisemitism, ergo you have engaged, and continue to engage, in antisemitism.

Me... the one rabidly defending Israel's actions? Do you know what the word means?

Israel is not a semite, it is a state (an apartheid state, by the way). Palestinian arabs, however, are a semitic people, ergo antisemitism can extend to discriminating against them (i.e. your behavior). Deal With It.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/antisemitism

 

You are welcome to make up definitions if you want. So yeah... I guess in your alternate bizarro land I'm an antisemite.

[Calax]

Why is it that if anyone says anything mildly bad against the jewish people, it's anti Semitic but when anyone does that to any other group (or they do it to any other group) it's not made much of?

[Gorth]

Why is it that if anyone says anything mildly bad against the jewish people, it's anti Semitic but when anyone does that to any other group (or they do it to any other group) it's not made much of?

Because the world is full of these?

 

I wonder if it is a seasonal thing, but it seems like it is time for the regular reminder to those who skipped their anger management classes to go back and attend them. Plan B is us having reached the end of constructive contributions

[Aram]

It is fairly easy to condemn them when you do some actual reading and not react like a jew hater