^

Not being able to tell between an extremist and a civilian acting in self defense == being blind.

 

BTW, nothing illegal if they're suspect.

I can't put my finger on it exactly, but in very vague details it goes like this:

Some time ago there was a ship that was suspect of transferring weapons, not in Russia's interests and not far from Russia itself.

Guess what happened next? Oh, and they were in international waters.

 

Illegal you say. Hmm... Maybe you should protest against Russia also?

You know, some Uranium may do you good, like that former KGB agent maybe...

 

That was polonium, not uranium, you dunce.

Simple really, they drew knives. If someone will draw a knife at me, and I'll have the boom stick, I know I won't hesitate no matter the circumstances.

And if you will hesitate, then well, it's your life. Have fun with it!

Let me put this into perspective for you. Police barges into your home without a warrant. You draw a knife and move towards the officer. What do you think he'll do?

From your perspective it's illegal for him to barge into your house without a warrant, but once you drew that knife. Oh well, know you sure gave him a reason!

 

BTW, I've noticed something:

Ooooh, spooky not a word about Russia... I can almost feel that fear kicking in

They're a crazy bunch that's for sure. No one has the balls to go against them. And those who do, well let's just say that they tend to loose them, literally!

 

@Oblarg

Darn it, you're correct. Well, I can't remember all the details!

Edited June 1, 201015 yr by surreal

Simple really, they drew knives. If someone will draw a knife at me, and I'll have the boom stick, I know I won't hesitate no matter the circumstances.

And if you will hesitate, then well, it's your life. Have fun with it!

Let me put this into perspective for you. Police barges into your home without a warrant. You draw a knife and move towards the officer. What do you think he'll do?

From your perspective it's illegal for him to barge into your house without a warrant, but once you drew that knife. Oh well, know you sure gave him a reason!

 

BTW, I've noticed something:

Ooooh, spooky not a word about Russia... I can almost feel that fear kicking in

They're a crazy bunch that's for sure. No one has the balls to go against them. And those who do, well let's just say that they tend to loose them, literally!

 

What about Russia? Do you honestly thinking talking **** about Russia over the internet is going to get you poisoned with polonium? Because that's possibly the dumbest thing I've heard in months.

Of course not (but it did happen a few times!)

But public demonstration yes.

 

Even talking over the internet made some people disappear. But it's more restricted to Russia itself.

Edited June 1, 201015 yr by surreal

Of course not.

But public demonstration yes.

 

Russia isn't even a particularly large world power anymore. They have too many of their own problems to deal with to go around harassing (or killing) foreign dissidents, or even domestic ones if there are enough of them, I wager.

 

One outspoken man who is likely to be heard by a large number of people is completely different from the situation you're describing.

Simple really, they drew knives. If someone will draw a knife at me, and I'll have the boom stick, I know I won't hesitate no matter the circumstances.

And if you will hesitate, then well, it's your life. Have fun with it!

Let me put this into perspective for you. Police barges into your home without a warrant. You draw a knife and move towards the officer. What do you think he'll do?

From your perspective it's illegal for him to barge into your house without a warrant, but once you drew that knife. Oh well, know you sure gave him a reason!

Yes, and that would be wrong too.

 

BTW, I've noticed something:

Ooooh, spooky not a word about Russia... I can almost feel that fear kicking in

They're a crazy bunch that's for sure. No one has the balls to go against them. And those who do, well let's just say that they tend to loose them, literally!

**** Russia and its ****ty right-wing authoritarian government. Putin is a piece of human refuse who should have been thrown in the garbage along with his awful party.

@Oblarg

Sure, Russia isn't competent and not a world player. You just keep telling yourself that, it'll be alright.

They don't hold the largest nuclear arsenal in the world. No KGB agents in England died of mysterious cases. And his contact, a well known journalist lived happily ever after!

People talking about Putin over the internet don't disappear at all. FSB is just a police.

 

Excuse me, but where were you during 93-96 when Russians just reduced a city to ashes because of an oil line?

@Oblarg

Sure, Russia isn't competent and not a world player. You just keep telling yourself that, it'll be alright.

They don't hold the largest nuclear arsenal in the world. No KGB agents in England died of mysterious cases. And his contact, a well known journalist lived happily ever after!

People talking about Putin over the internet don't disappear at all. FSB is just a police.

 

Excuse me, but where were you during 93-96 when Russians just reduced a city to ashes because of an oil line?

 

Well, if you're just going to ignore most of what I said (and most of recent world history, for that matter), there's no point talking to you.

@lof

So what's wrong exactly? Him shooting you or you drawing a knife on him?

What will cause the shooting?

The more important question is: will you draw a knife when he barges in?

 

BTW, there is something we agree on!

I don't really like Putin either. Could be because of his king'ish appeal.

Edited June 1, 201015 yr by surreal

@Oblarg

I didn't ignore what you said. But to me it looked more like putting your head in the sand.

If you know Russia, there wasn't a single year in its history that it didn't have problems during it. Russia is always about problems.

Do you know how an average day of an average Russian starts? By drinking a beer. If that's not a problem I don't know what is. And it's only on the social level.

Saying that Russia has lots of inner problems, and thus they're not the force they used to be is being plain wrong.

Every government understands it. That's why they don't confront them, ever. Unless there is an ocean that separates the two countries.

 

But you didn't answer my question. Where was the whole opposition to Russia during 93-96? Did you look at the latest footage of Grozny? Why no one helps those poor bastards?

http://www.un.org/Depts/los/convention_agr...nclos/part7.htm

http://untreaty.un.org/ilc/texts/instrumen...8_high_seas.pdf

http://www.jag.navy.mil/organization/docum...curityMyths.pdf

None of these offer proof, I'm afraid, quite the opposite for the first two as none of the provisions applied to a ship which was not slave trading, a pirate, not flying a national flag etc. Under the definition given therein Israelis engaged in piracy- and the first two are effective duplicates too, fortunately I already knew the relevant sections so wasn't put off by link bombing- unless Israel has a recognised treaty which supercedes the provisions such as that used to monitor NK vessels, or it was part of a legally constituted blockade. Getting something from the US military saying they regularly ignore the relevant laws isn't proof either, it's as pertinent as me saying that because people regularly ignore speed limits those speed limits don't exist.

 

The only legal recourse is that the Israeli blockade is legally constituted (and since it's recognised by three whoops two now countries and specifically has been condemned listed as violating, at the least, the humanitarian component of a valid blockade that is very much an open question) the default position is that seizing boats in international waters is piracy.

http://www.un.org/Depts/los/convention_agr...nclos/part7.htm

http://untreaty.un.org/ilc/texts/instrumen...8_high_seas.pdf

http://www.jag.navy.mil/organization/docum...curityMyths.pdf

None of these offer proof, I'm afraid, quite the opposite for the first two as none of the provisions applied to a ship which was not slave trading, a pirate, not flying a national flag etc. Under the definition given therein Israelis engaged in piracy- and the first two are effective duplicates too, fortunately I already knew the relevant sections so wasn't put off by link bombing- unless Israel has a recognised treaty which supercedes the provisions such as that used to monitor NK vessels, or it was part of a legally constituted blockade. Getting something from the US military saying they regularly ignore the relevant laws isn't proof either, it's as pertinent as me saying that because people regularly ignore speed limits those speed limits don't exist.

 

The only legal recourse is that the Israeli blockade is legally constituted (and since it's recognised by three whoops two now countries and specifically has been condemned listed as violating, at the least, the humanitarian component of a valid blockade that is very much an open question) the default position is that seizing boats in international waters is piracy.

 

 

as this is a side issue, we will respond despite our withdrawal from a lof perverted thread.

 

sure they offer proof... you simply do not listen ... or read. please review our actual statement... the one you quoted. "a foreign warship may board and inspect on high seas pursuant to "right of visit" and treaty." we noted that the issue in question were much more complex than as defined by mk. we also noted that we did not know israeli treaties. so, please identify how Gromnir did not offer proof for that which was actual stated. regardless, our proofs clearly fulfill requirement.

 

 

HA! Good Fun!

Edited June 2, 201015 yr by Gromnir

Egypt has opened their section of the blockade to these ships, so it's curious that Israel claims they will continue their current path of blocking these aid ships.

 

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/06/02/2915852.htm

It's curious that Israel is not admitting defeat, really...

Personally, I would much rather be tossed from a ship than shot dead by firearms.

I disagree. Drowning isn't a pretty thing.

There have been no reports of any killed Israeli soldiers.

 

Not yet. Ten of them are in the hospital, some in very critical condition. The guy who was yanked off the rope, beaten by a half-dozen people then dumped over the rail to the lower deck is in pretty bad shape as well. According to some of the various video clips I've seen, he was the first guy there. He didn't have a chance.

I've really been disgusted about how the world media, including most American media, have reported this incident. Instantly, Israel was deemed guilty of heinous crimes and howls of outrage were echoed around the globe. Then we find out that all the ships were invited to dock in Israel, off-load their supplies for inspection, then carry them into Gaza overland. The flotilla refused this. Did the world media report this? I don't know, but the only way I learned about it was from a single comment in the middle of an Israeli-bash session on CNN. The we learn that every boat boarded was informed that it was going to be boarded and escorted to said Israeli dock before boarding began. Five of those went smoothly. On the sixth boat, soldiers were attacked and beaten even before the first guy landed on deck. NO! screams the activists. YES, says the video.

 

Again, all the extenuating factors are ignored and Israel continues to be castigated in the media. No wonder the world is so biased against Israel that half the population of the planet is convinced of Israel's complete and total guilt based solely on allegations.

 

Whether we like the military blockade or not, Israel is technically at war with Hamas and has every right to inspect any ships bringing cargo to the area. Don't forget that over 1 million tons of food, fuel, medical and other supplies are supplied to Gaza by Israel every year... that's one ton for every person there. Gaza is not starving. Israel is feeding them and giving them water at its expense. These howls of genocide are repulsive. Did Israel screw this mission up? Obviously, because it had not considered that confrontation, not aid, was the primary mission here. That was an unforgiveable intelligence snafu, since many in the flotilla had already been bragging that very thing to any who would listen.

 

I find the title of this thread not only repugnant, but verifiably false and inflammatory. Every time there is any kind of a dust-up involving Israel, this same damned thing happens. Israel is evil, living only to slaughter peaceful innocents and starve them into submission. Thing is, there are two sides to every story, and I'm sick of the world media pretending that there is only one, thereby breeding more and more irrational hate-mongers who are unable to separate reality from sheer prejudicial and bigoted pap.

Edited June 2, 201015 yr by ~Di

Then we find out that all the ships were invited to dock in Israel, off-load their supplies for inspection, then carry them into Gaza overland. The flotilla refused this. Did the world media report this?

Yes, they did. But unlike the Fox News (or wherever you get your news from) they also happened to mention that Israel sets their own rules as to what constitutes humanitarian aid. Rules that seemingly override what the rest of the world (and the UN) sees as humanitarian aid. This means that only a fraction of what the boats were carrying would ever reach the civilians in Gaza and the rest would be stolen by Israel. This happens all the time (read what other help organizations have been put through by the Israeli government) and this is the very reason they are trying to send boats directly to Gaza!

 

If you stop to think for a moment: if Israel were so kind-hearted and willing to help and just wanted to inspect the goods, why on earth do you think Ship to Gaza chose to try to circumvent this? Why go through all that trouble if they were free to help the people in Gaza?

 

The rest of the post is typical Di nonsense. Yeah, sure, the rest of the world is biased against Israel for no reason whatsoever.. And the video released by Israeli forces clearly shows the entire picture and is not a propaganda piece.. And Gaza is not starving, which is why the entire world is currently engaged in trying to bring food/aid to the civilian population.. And please forget that they boarded these ships on international waters.. Or the fact that nine people were killed by soldiers bearing firearms (and no soldiers were killed, despite the video showing how they were brutally attacked)..

The Israeli authorities thought the passengers were going to play by the usual 'rules' and passive resistance methods which have developed following the first world bank demonstrations, and the decided that they were going to surprise them and end it before the protesters could get their standoff and be dragged off in handcuffs in front of the cameras.

 

When the Israeli spokesman says that the protesters solely are responsible for the deaths that is simply a logical failure. Israel instigated this. Cause and effect - Israel is responsible regardless of how little they wished or planned for this outcome. They could and should have handled this differently.

 

The media reaction is not surprising, what was known was that possibly up to 16 civilians had been killed following a midnight commando raid. The rumor mill going wild, this person shot, this person wounded. The passengers included some very respectable names, EU parliamentarians and former middle east envoys, and journalist across the board have learned to be wary of any official Israeli -and while were at it also Palestinian- version. There are no official sources not concerned with covering their asses and serving their agenda, none the least bit interested in self scrutiny or getting to the truth.

 

Yes, we have seen passengers attacking the boarders, shooting in self defense is a plausible scenario, but what else is on those video files. If it's anything detrimental to Israel surely we are never going to see it.

Edited June 2, 201015 yr by Gorgon

OK Gromnir, I'll accept your initial point was irrelevant to the specific situation, rather than wrong.

 

Then we find out that all the ships were invited to dock in Israel, off-load their supplies for inspection, then carry them into Gaza overland. The flotilla refused this.

While this has been discussed already it bears restating: Israel defines a whole bunch of things as not being humanitarian aid, apart from construction materials and pre fabs and the like things as trivial as pasta (rescinded once John Kerry queried it), fresh meat and coriander are banned, and most importantly they do not publish what is acceptable or not so there is no way of knowing what Israel will arbitrarily seize at any given time. As such the Israeli offer was entirely disingenuous and a sop to those predisposed not to investigate but take its word at face value. Given the complete lack of weapons except for improvised ones such as kitchen knives I think we can safely assume there were not any AKs or rockets on board, nor even simple firearms except the ones the commandos brought.

 

I know most of the usual suspects have been parroting the "it's a weapons embargo" line on US TV, but it's a load of rubbish. It's utterly arbitrary and designed specifically to be able to shut out anything and everything that Israel wants whether or not there's any justification for it.

I dont see how you can reasonably take Israels side in this. The fact is that they boarded civilian ships on international water in a clear breach of international law, and in the process killed and injured a large number of civilians. There is no defending that. The argument that the civlians resisted violently is moot, because they had every right to defend themselves against the attack by the same international laws.

 

 

There were no terrorists or contraband on those ships and Israel knew that. This was meant to be a show of force to discourage further activist help to the Palestinians. A part in the plan to make living conditons in gaza so appaling that the Palestinians will leave on their own accord.

Edited June 2, 201015 yr by Kaftan Barlast

OK Gromnir, I'll accept your initial point was irrelevant to the specific situation, rather than wrong.

 

Then we find out that all the ships were invited to dock in Israel, off-load their supplies for inspection, then carry them into Gaza overland. The flotilla refused this.

While this has been discussed already it bears restating: Israel defines a whole bunch of things as not being humanitarian aid, apart from construction materials and pre fabs and the like things as trivial as pasta (rescinded once John Kerry queried it), fresh meat and coriander are banned, and most importantly they do not publish what is acceptable or not so there is no way of knowing what Israel will arbitrarily seize at any given time. As such the Israeli offer was entirely disingenuous and a sop to those predisposed not to investigate but take its word at face value. Given the complete lack of weapons except for improvised ones such as kitchen knives I think we can safely assume there were not any AKs or rockets on board, nor even simple firearms except the ones the commandos brought.

 

I know most of the usual suspects have been parroting the "it's a weapons embargo" line on US TV, but it's a load of rubbish. It's utterly arbitrary and designed specifically to be able to shut out anything and everything that Israel wants whether or not there's any justification for it.

 

You forgot that the Israeli blockade only allows for a certain amount of aid to be shipped every week. So, if the Israeli government had been allowed to take care of the shipments, that would have meant no change compared to what the Gaza strip gets normally.

Like I said Di, it takes two to tango. I am not keen on commandos firing on civilians with lethal ammo, for that is indeed an overreaction however it did get the response that most activists want in their causes.

My favorite part about this discussion (besides the SECRET IRANIAN CONSPIRACY TO OVERTHROW ISRAEL, of course) is that somehow, civil disobedience is awful and terrible and the people who engage in it share in the responsibility for whatever the government does. When Gandhi got arrested by the British in 1930, he totally deserved it, hand on my heart.

Just because you disagree with the Law does not give you the right to disobey the Law. Disobey an unjust Law all you want, but be prepared to accept the consequences.

"SECRET IRANIAN CONSPIRACY TO OVERTHROW ISRAEL"

 

Since when was this a secret? I always thought Iran was quite upfront with this plan? hMMM..