Reports: Israeli ships attack aid flotilla

reply to post by ElijahWan


So I'll repeat my question. How do you know that it didn't go down the way Israel said it did? Why are you ready to believe the word of armed protesters over an armed military? If it were me on that boat and I saw a nation's army approaching the boat I wouldn't attack them unless I thought my life was in danger. Even if they boarded the boat, I would stand down and cooperate with them because, for one, they have the guns.

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
reply to post by ZeroKnowledge

 

Not that simple.
Lets review, which Ships attempted to break the blockade?

Actually it is that simple because a blockade is a passive act of agression all in and of itself.

It's more than a simple act of aggression:

A blockade is defined by the Encyclopedia Britannica as "an act of war by which a belligerent prevents access to or departure from a defined part of the enemy’s coasts."[4]

reply to post by black cat

So I'll repeat my question. How do you know that it didn't go down the way Israel said it did? Why are you ready to believe the word of armed protesters over an armed military? If it were me on that boat and I saw a nation's army approaching the boat I wouldn't attack them unless I thought my life was in danger. Even if they boarded the boat, I would stand down and cooperate with them because, for one, they have the guns.

I believe their ships were fired on first, then boarded.

Arraf said she was on the vessel called Challenger 1, an American ship, and that Israel contacted the boats by radio when they were 90 miles off the coast. "We were well into international waters," Arraf said. According to her, the ships were traveling close together, and she "saw the Israeli naval boats go up to [the Turkish vessel Mavi Marmara] and start firing. We heard a number of explosions ... The soldiers were throwing concussion grenades and firing." Arraf said she saw passengers use water hoses to defend themselves. "Eventually they overtook our ship," Arraf said. "They used concussion grenades, sound bombs, and pellets they fired at us and then jumped aboard the ship. We tried to keep them off. We told them, 'We are unarmed, this is an American vessel, we're international civilians, get off of our ship.' And then they started beating people -- my head was smashed against the ground." Arraf said that the flotilla was a political act designed to challenge the Israeli blockade "because it is illegal and it is collective punishment."

tpmlivewire.talkingpointsmemo.com...

reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler


I did not get part with turkeys/pork/weiner/dogs. Sorry, it was probably brilliant effort but my English sucks.
And i do not know about legality of Gaza blockade ,since people with different agenda provide different opinions. Without butter.
But i know that here

Civilians lost their lives here man, the shame is Israel's.

You are correct. Shame is on Israel and it should never be allowed to escalate as it did. However people who were on that boat did not defend it. No matter how you or others will twist it. They were there to confront with Israelis to "help" escalate it down the drain and again, shame on Israel for letting those peace activists achieve what they wanted.
They would do the same in Gaza waters, or in Israeli waters. You do not want to see this - fine. There. Whine (weiner?) is off.

reply to post by clay2 baraka


So Hamas in Gaza is not at war with Israel?

But we are sending a message [by firing rockets]: "We will not surrender. We have to fight the Israelis and we will win this battle."

english.aljazeera.net...

Originally posted by black cat
reply to post by ElijahWan

 

So I'll repeat my question. How do you know that it didn't go down the way Israel said it did? Why are you ready to believe the word of armed protesters over an armed military? If it were me on that boat and I saw a nation's army approaching the boat I wouldn't attack them unless I thought my life was in danger. Even if they boarded the boat, I would stand down and cooperate with them because, for one, they have the guns.

I'm not saying it went one way or the other. I'm simply saying Mr. Lizard isn't being anti-Semitic.

Now as for it going down the way Israel said it did...The reason I don't believe that is because 5 of the other boats didn't have this disruption, AND this was the lead boat in the flotilla. If the "activists" had been planning to fight the IDF they would have done so on MORE than just 1 ship. This leads me to believe there was some type of provocation on that ship that made these people pick up pipes, poles, knives etc etc.

One of the things about a specific IDF video I find HILARIOUS is they point out that "shock grenades" are going off in the air and the CAPTIONS in the video try to say it's activists throwing those grenades.....Now you'd have thought turkey would have seen these shock grenades when they checked the boat no? Therefore I can only infer that the shock grenades ALSO belong to the Shock Troops.....

I'm sorry but when a group of commandos come rappelling onto my ship, after Tear Gas, Flashbangs and such have gone off, I'm going to have a HELL of a time trying to calm down as my skin is burning, and I can't see or hear CRAP.....

Look the bottom line is this:

ISRAEL acted idiotically by conducting a night-time SPECIAL FORCES raid on the vessel in INTERNATIONAL WATERS.....The question isn't "did the activists attack the troops". The Question to ask the IDF is WHY did you act in the way you did, since I'm pretty sure I can think of atleast 20 other ways to handle the flotilla than boarding it with TEAR GAS/FLASHBANGS/ and Automatic weapons..... People wouldn't have DIED if ISRAEL HADN'T ASSAULTED THE SHIP.......PERIOD

I would love to see every developed country send one (1) humanitarian ship into Gaza in an International Flotilla.

What would you do then Israel ?? Would you dare attempt to attack ??


I do not think so. That is all it would take to break your ILLEGAL blockade.

Sickened by your murderous act. Disgusted by your defiance.



res

reply to post by ZeroKnowledge

You are correct. Shame is on Israel and it should never be allowed to escalate as it did. However people who were on that boat did not defend it. No matter how you or others will twist it. They were there to confront with Israelis to "help" escalate it down the drain and again, shame on Israel for letting those peace activists achieve what they wanted.

This is perhaps the most disturbing example of siege mentallity and the victim dictum I have ever witnessed in my life.

Do you really imagine that 10 people on that boat woke up that day and said, "Today is a good day to die, I want to be killed by the Israelis"?

That was the final outcome friend.

People died, and lost their lives. Wives no longer have husbands, children no longer have fathers, mothers no longer have sons, and all you can focus on is the political cost to your nation?

Where is your compassion man? Does a person have to be an Israeli or a Jew for their untimely and violent death to be a tragedy in its own right?

Are human beings really just political pawns that can be so discarded so easily, so cheaply, so anonymously that even in their deaths, violent deaths, you really imagine you are the victim?

That your nation who murdered them are the victim?

Here is the plain truth friend, NO ONE caused those soldiers to go out and confront that boat, but Israeli Politicians and Israeli Military Commanders.

They made those choices, determinedly so, they sent armed men to confront ships on a humanitarian mission tying to feed the hungry and bring medicine to those who needed it, and you really see yourself as a victim?

You really see your nation as a victim?

News flash, you and your nation are the victims of your own policies, your own politicians and your own generals.

People died here friend, no you aren't a victim and neither is your nation, your nation is a victimizer and an agressor, and you become one by extension when you defend and promote that agression by being so self absorbed you can't even comprehend the human suffering your nation has visited on other people NEEDLESSLY.

Having bad English is understandable, having no real morallity or compassion?



[edit on 1/6/10 by ProtoplasmicTraveler]

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
reply to post by ZeroKnowledge

 

"Do you really imagine that 10 people on that boat woke up that day and said, "Today is a good day to die, I want to be killed by the Israelis"?


You know, it is quite possible they did...............bad example......

Originally posted by gambon

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
reply to post by ZeroKnowledge

 

"Do you really imagine that 10 people on that boat woke up that day and said, "Today is a good day to die, I want to be killed by the Israelis"?


You know, it is quite possible they did...............bad example......

Well gee, lets look at the astronomical odds there and contemplate how possible it would be for ten people to wake up wanting to die, and they just happened to be the 10 people out of 600 that the soldiers killed?

Evidently you didn't really understand the moral implications of the post, or what compassion really is.

It is not quite possible, it is astronomically improbable.

Thanks for displaying what it really means to 'not get it'.



[edit on 1/6/10 by ProtoplasmicTraveler]

reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler



Give up fella, you can't teach morality to the immoral any more than you can teach quantum physics to a billy goat.

The capacity for understanding just isn't present.

i get the implication, however it is a fact some may believe that to die like that would ensure a path to heaven , is it not , none of us know the amount or identity of any of the poor dead yet they are used like political footballs allready........

for example 5 decided it was a good day to die on the day of the london bombings .....

your example was a bad one , get over it....

[edit on 1-6-2010 by gambon]

reply to post by jackflap


Aren't concussion grenades, sound bombs, and pellets all non-lethal weapons? Why would the Israelis go from using non-lethal weapons to boarding ships unless the ships refused to follow instructions? If the Israelis intent was to kill all along, then why use non-lethal weapons at all? The story you cited doesn't make sense.

Just picked up Turkey is sending four ships and iserail wants to ease sanctions.

forget the easing that could be anything so lets go for the full removal of the ilegal naval blockade.

Kids will be sleeping a little better in their beds in gazza in a few weeks time and it's about time too.

I bet we are going to see some images that iserail are finding hard to disguise as talum powder this time.

Thanks to some of the jewish people that helped to make this possible so don't go thinking the world doess not know better.








[edit on 1-6-2010 by LieBuster]

[edit on 1-6-2010 by LieBuster]

reply to post by LieBuster


Do you have link for that news?

reply to post by black cat


That was an account from one of the people in the flotilla. The first accounts from the other ship was that their captain had been shot. Then they were boarded. Yeah, all those things are non lethal I suppose but it would sure make me think my life was in danger and when the perpetrators appeared, sliding down ropes, I would have taken action.

Originally posted by BlackOps719
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler

 

Give up fella, you can't teach morality to the immoral any more than you can teach quantum physics to a billy goat.

The capacity for understanding just isn't present.

My Billy Goat wants longitude and lattitude of where he can beam to you in time and space to eat your throw away tin cans!

He eats them like crazy, I can't drink that much soda, so I had to teach him quantum mechanics so he could get his own.

What were you saying about teaching morality again?

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler

Originally posted by BlackOps719
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler

 

Give up fella, you can't teach morality to the immoral any more than you can teach quantum physics to a billy goat.

The capacity for understanding just isn't present.

My Billy Goat wants longitude and lattitude of where he can beam to you in time and space to eat your throw away tin cans!

He eats them like crazy, I can't drink that much soda, so I had to teach him quantum mechanics so he could get his own.

What were you saying about teaching morality again?

Morality's an act of resistance and slaves don't resist.
They can't understand ethics.
They are the Wailing Wall.

Originally posted by Skellon
reply to post by Dock9

 

'Murder'

Definition:

1. crime of killing somebody: the crime of killing another person deliberately and not in self-defence or with any other extenuating circumstance recognized by law

uk.encarta.msn.com...

Surely as the killings occurred during a clearly illegal action they would be treated as murder whatever the circumstances. If I break into someones home and they catch me and attack me and I kill them in my efforts to defend myself I'm charged with and guilty of murder.

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler

Originally posted by BlackOps719
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler

 

Give up fella, you can't teach morality to the immoral any more than you can teach quantum physics to a billy goat.

The capacity for understanding just isn't present.

My Billy Goat wants longitude and lattitude of where he can beam to you in time and space to eat your throw away tin cans!

He eats them like crazy, I can't drink that much soda, so I had to teach him quantum mechanics so he could get his own.

What were you saying about teaching morality again?

Tell that goat to beam himself over here with a twelve pack of suds and I will glady fill his belly with all the cans he can eat


Now back to the subject at hand........