MV Rachel Corrie being boarded NOW

So does anyone know if they made it or not? Has anything been confrimed yet?

Originally posted by BillRose
Clearly you are having a knee jerk reaction to what I posted. You have let your emotions guide your post.

Perhaps, but let's review. You said this:

You make a ton of sense and you use facts to back up your assertions.

The problem here is that you can not reason with people who are intellectually lazy and closed minded. By my own admission I am by no means a smart or learned man.

What I do to make up for this is try to think through using logic and facts to come to my own conclusion as to what happened. I try not to let my emotions clowd any of my thought processes. That way I can come to a rational conclusion of my own. Even then, I am still able to change my mind when new facts emerge.

As far as this topic is concerned, there has been NO CREDIBLE evidence to make me change my mind that Isreal AND Egypt acted legally in enforcing this blockade. Period.

Not that I have to tell you but... It is far easier to hate. The emotion is raw and can be addicting. It is the ignorant man's mental high. As witnessed on these threads.

So my interpretation of the above was that criticism directed towards Israel is a manifestation of irrational hatred. When you say you are willing to change your mind in the context of talking about ignorant people's 'mental high', it doesn't come off as an olive branch. It feels more like a holier-than-thou statement implying that the so-called 'haters' are too rigid in their ignorant mental patterns to do the same. I am certainly open to the idea that this is not what you meant and I admit I was reacting in part to the rampant dismissals I've seen all over ATS, not just to your words.

So far all I have seen from a MAJORITY (not necessarily you) is that Isreal is wrong for EVERYTHING she does. Period. They should just die.

Not direct quotes but close.

I've seen this as well. While I am quite critical of Israel's actions and don't buy into the 'holy bastion of democracy in a hostile world' argument, I actually began a thread begging people to stop that nonsense. I'm sure you can understand how a person would resent being lumped in with that instead of having their salient points spoken to.

All of the so called facts that have been presented to my by the "blockade runners" side have been flimsy, or with large portions of evidence left out. Period.

Hardly. Citing the San Remo Manual as if it were binding law is flimsy. Basing dismissal of the activist's reports as to what transpired, particularly that they were fired on prior to the boarding party dropping the fast rope, based upon the reports of the IDF is flimsy. Calling the IHH a terrorist organization because some parties have alleged they have connections - which have not been proven - is flimsy. Oversimplifying the role of Hamas in the Gaza strip is flimsy (more than 80% of their budget deals with social welfare, so while they've done bad things, that is not how they won the support of the Gaza residents). All of these have manifested as popular arguments proposing that the IDF free of responsibility for the deaths and injuries in this incident.

What I get from this incident is that this ONE ship of a floatilla of six wanted to cause trouble for Israel. There were a group of people on board the ship (not all) that wanted to confront the Israeli commandos as soon as they set foot on the ship with the intent of killing as many of the commandos as possible. These men that attacked the commandos knew that their primary weapons would be paint ball guns thus giving them the ability to close with their enemy and inflict harm. Even being able to steal a few of the commandos side arms and use the guns against them.

Context is everything. What the people on that boat did will likely be remembered as horrifically stupid, but it is not at all clear that Israel had any legitimate right to assault them in international waters, which is exactly what they did. Again, activists are reporting that they were fired upon before the boarding. Should this prove to be true the notion that they should have surrendered their right to self defense flies in the face of what we know about survival instinct.

These attackers knew that they were going to eventually be shot at. It appears that is what they wanted in the first place. They know what the response would be from the Israelies. Hence the gas masks and bullet proof vests.

I can think of many reasons why there would have been gas masks and bullet proof vests on the boats. Israel does have a history of killing protestors and using violent tactics against civilian populations. Activists protesting against such a state would do well to prepare defensively in such a manner.

Now, as for the "illegal" blockade. If it were so illegal as MANY here claim then why is Egypt assisting the Isrealies with the enforcement of it? This is a LARGE point many here miss when they insist that it is illegal. Again, if it were an illegal blockade I am more than certain that there would be some sort of legitimate forceable response from other countries to end the blockade.

I don't think pointing out Egypt's culpability does anything to suggest the blockade is moral or legal. To me all it means is that Egypt deserves to be heavily criticized for assisting in a campaign of collective punishment. The legality of the blockade is under dispute but I don't claim to be an expert in international or Israeli law and so I won't speak to whether it was legal. Of course activism and protest is often to change ostensibly legal policy to correct for harms, so suggesting no one should try to run the blockade because it's legal is a bit silly. I will say, however, that whether or not it's legal, the act of boarding this ship in international waters is highly questionable. The Rachel Corrie event is less controversial because she was so close to (or even within) territorial waters.

[Continued]

[edit on 5-6-2010 by JohnnyElohim]

Now about the intellectual lazyness comment of which you are upset with me about, I don't direct this at you per se as you are trying to have a honest conversation with me and whomever else you think disagrees with you and I respect that. You may not change my mind but I am open to your point of veiw.

I appreciate this sentiment but I think the below contradicts it somewhat.

That comment I made was directed towards those people that claim they wish that the Israeli commandos would all have been killed or that some how what Isreal did was illegal or that they are pirates on international waters, or the people fighting the commandos were unarmed... ect, ect. You know the posts of wich I speak. The ones filled with abject hatred for Isreal for ANYTHING she does.

Those people are full of hate that are lazy and just let their anger take control.

So what you've said above is that people who harbor the opinion that Israel acted illegally, that the use of force was not proportionate, or that this was tantamount to piracy, are hate-filled ignorant bigots? This is exactly what I object to. I do see plenty of hateful posts and they disappoint me like you would not believe, but conflating views in this way is not productive.

I am sorry if I offended you but that is just how I feel.

I didn't take it personally but I thought something needed to be said.

Originally posted by twitchy
... The crew and passengers of the Rachel Corrie apparently had a made a pact to offer no resistance to an Israeli interdiction this time so maybe those lead paint balls won't be 'nessecary'....

Those supposely harmless paint balls used in the first assault, reported to be embedded with glass pieces meant to cut into flesh upon impact. Is there any truth to this allegation?

reply to post by JohnnyElohim


Look, I don't pretend to have all of the answers. All I can do is take things as they are presented. As I see them if you will.

As far as the so-called shootings before they commandos boarded the ship, ALL of the reports I have seen (and they tend to make sense to me) is that what the commandos were doing was firing plastic/rubber? bullets into the crowd on the deck to clear room for the boarding party. While these bullets can in deed cause serious injury if hit in the right place (majic bullet if you will) they are hardly lethal. Now, I imagine that it may feel like you have been shot for real and you may even bleed when hit. But the tactic holds up when one is trying to board a ship. I see no fault from Israel.

As far as them being in international waters.... I dunno? Maybe. But are we talking 5, 10, 25 or 50 nautical miles? Was the ship just about to break the blockade zone? Niether of us was there. We don't know.

I will not fault Israel for doing what she is doing. Whether condemned by the UN (that hates Israel anyway) or not. She is doing what she needs to preserve the lives of her citizens the way ANY other country would do in that very same situation.

Thank you for understanding that I in no way meant to insult those that are willing to ingauge in dialog and I don't think that everyone that disagrees with Israel hates her.

Originally posted by BillRose
reply to post by JohnnyElohim

 

Look, I don't pretend to have all of the answers. All I can do is take things as they are presented. As I see them if you will.

Absolutely, it's all any of us can do.

As far as the so-called shootings before they commandos boarded the ship, ALL of the reports I have seen (and they tend to make sense to me) is that what the commandos were doing was firing plastic/rubber? bullets into the crowd on the deck to clear room for the boarding party. While these bullets can in deed cause serious injury if hit in the right place (majic bullet if you will) they are hardly lethal. Now, I imagine that it may feel like you have been shot for real and you may even bleed when hit. But the tactic holds up when one is trying to board a ship. I see no fault from Israel.

They were steel bullets coated in rubber and reports indicate people were killed by them before the fast rope fell. If you watched someone getting shot to death would you be splitting hairs about the supposedly non-lethal nature of the weapons that did it?

As far as them being in international waters.... I dunno? Maybe. But are we talking 5, 10, 25 or 50 nautical miles? Was the ship just about to break the blockade zone? Niether of us was there. We don't know.

It is a matter of recorded fact, the flotilla was not yet in Israel's territorial waters.

I will not fault Israel for doing what she is doing. Whether condemned by the UN (that hates Israel anyway) or not. She is doing what she needs to preserve the lives of her citizens the way ANY other country would do in that very same situation.

In this case no lives were preserved and several were taken. The flotilla was not a material threat. Shooting those people did not save Israeli lives and arguably led to the injury of Israeli commandos. And there's that 'hate' word again. The UN censures Israel for human rights abuses that objectively took place. Many people argue that it's alright for Israel to engage in human rights abuses for a variety of reasons, but one cannot argue that they are not occurring. I would argue that pointing out wrongs isn't hate, but it's convenient for Israel to cast it as such.

Thank you for understanding that I in no way meant to insult those that are willing to ingauge in dialog and I don't think that everyone that disagrees with Israel hates her.

I appreciate that. It is a very heated subject for most.

Originally posted by Stewie
What right do they, the Israelis, have to arrest ANYBODY, in international waters?
This is crap.

S and F OP

Star to you Stewie ! They have no right to do that in International waters , seems they are exempt as usual .... if it was some other country doing that ... Well then it would be WAR !

reply to post by Donkey_Dean



Son,

Your eating this ISM garbage like crazy. Marx and Engles would be proud of you. lenin, Stalin, and Mao are cheering on the sidelines like cheerleaders on speed!

You spew crap like an arabic sewer leak. I've really never seen anyone dis Jesus. Your the first. congrats!

Originally posted by coolieno99

Originally posted by twitchy
... The crew and passengers of the Rachel Corrie apparently had a made a pact to offer no resistance to an Israeli interdiction this time so maybe those lead paint balls won't be 'nessecary'....

Those supposely harmless paint balls used in the first assault, reported to be embedded with glass pieces meant to cut into flesh upon impact. Is there any truth to this allegation?

OH this is great! I havent even heard this one! CN is bad enough!

Next they will be having the things being sub tactical nukes

reply to post by coolieno99


Are you for real? Seriously... what "reports" are these? Why would they make paint balls "filled with glass to cut the flesh..." What purpose would that serve? If they were that sadistic they'd just use rock salt or something cheaper than elaborately created ammo that is completely improbable.

This is the kind of stuff that just drives me insane with the "discussion" (I use the term very loosely) about Israel.

People approach the issue with a anti-Israeli slant. It's like me asking someone "Have you stopped beating your wife yet?"

I wish people would apply the same measure to all events instead of pulling out different yard sticks depending on who the players are.

reply to post by felonius


Actually the people who hate Israel the most are right wing, not left.

Originally posted by Emilymary

Remember 729 means it is an Israel product.
Do NOT buy - boycott.
Remember the rhyme.
729 and you have to decline.
Do not shop at shops that send profits back to Israel, do not use businesses ditto.

Sounds easy enough, but take a look at this thread...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
They are taxing 300-400 billion dollars from our consumer markets.

Now all you Israel haters can see what the difference is between REAL peaceful, Civilized people and what happens when you have Arab troublemakers on-board.

The Irish sat out in the open with their hands up after they tossed rope ladders down to the Israelis to help them aboard.

The Arabs started a fight and got what they deserved.

End of story. Its legal and Israel has every right to defend itself no matter what you Anti-Semites think.

I'm sure my post will get lost amongst the side-to-side bickering, bantering, grandstanding and debate. *sigh*

Having my disclaimer out of the way, here are my true thoughts:

The Irish did the right thing. Be true, honest with your intentions, but don't back down -- and don't be stupid.

Can *ANYONE HERE* tell me why, WHY it's taboo and nearly a CRIME to question Israel? The second anyone questions their actions or motives, it seems an entire entourage of pro-Israeli folks lay down heavy handed responses.

Questioning government action by a country does not mean racism against an ethnic group!

This is *bleep* for brains thinking people. It's as if the world is brain-washed into thinking that Israel can never do ANY wrong, and questioning their actions is tantamount to treason.

I'm glad the Irish kept to their intended mission -- and I agree that Israel has the right (due to Palestine not keeping their people in check) to inspect the cargo.

Israel needs to make major concessions to ensure peace. Israel needs to remove themselves completely from disputed territories. Palestinians as well need to make huge concessions as well. POLICE YOUR RADICALS! Israel would not feel it necessary to be so heavy-handed if they could keep their people in check.

Sadly, it'll never happen. There are to many generations of blood-soaked killing that has tainted the very core of both sides.

I still do not understand how one cannot question the political/military actions of Israel without a S-storm of "you anti-semite!"???

I question my own government and I'm not called a "traitor" -- I'm called a concerned American citizen. I'm not sure when racial issues became so infused into the body politic of Israel -- but it NEEDS TO STOP.

.3

reply to post by Sky watcher


Arabs are Semites too.

The blockade is illegal.

The people on the Rachel Corrie backed down in the face of IDF bullies, though I don't blame them.

Well out of all the major UK papers news reviews for front pages tomorrow none are reporting the ilegal blocade or the arrest of the irish crew.

Do you need anymore proof that the zionist fully control the UK press ?

yeah sure it will make the back pages with bias reporting because they are use to telling us what to think all the time but i don't think many people will be buying it in more ways than one.

Zionist are excelent when it comes to false flag attacks and you can gurantee these are going to be comeing thick and fast in the near future but just like being called a terrorist nowadays it's wearing a bit thin and is fooling less and less people each time.

The people on the Rachel Corrie backed down in the face of IDF bullies, though I don't blame them.

Knowing the irish i was exspecting them to at least put up some token resistance but i think now that the deal had been done before they even left port.


[edit on 5-6-2010 by LieBuster]

Originally posted by InvisibleAlbatross
. . .

The blockade is illegal.

WRONG!

According to the law of blockade which was derived from customary international law and codified in the 1909 Declaration of London. It was updated in 1994 in a legally recognized document called the “San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea”. Under some of the key rules, a blockade must be declared and notified to all belligerents and neutral states, access to neutral ports cannot be blocked, and an area can only be blockaded which is under enemy control.

And here is a link for you to read, though I know you won't.

The people on the Rachel Corrie backed down in the face of IDF bullies, though I don't blame them.

Awesome! Peace activists being peaceful. Who woulda thunk it?

[edit on 6/5/2010 by Lemon.Fresh]

reply to post by LieBuster


There is not an illegal blockade. Time to study up on your laws there. You can start by reading the post right above this one.

Originally posted by Lemon.Fresh
reply to post by LieBuster

 

There is not an illegal blockade. Time to study up on your laws there. You can start by reading the post right above this one.

Time to study up on your laws? What part of "Applicable to Armed Conflicts" eludes you? Is Israel at war with Gaza now, or are they still just trying to starve them out? A rhetorical question of course but a forty year seige isn't exactly an armed conflict is it?

reply to post by twitchy


Are you trying to imply that there is no armed conflict between Gaza and Israel?