Aid Floatillas Attacked

Wibbs

Yea like the deputy Israeli ambassador claiming on Pat Kenny's programme last night that they intercepted jihadi communications from the ships. It's a bit laughable. Of course they're used to courting American public opinion where this guff goes over real easy. Even moreso since 911. The amount of educated sound Americans I know that still believe or suspect Saddam had something to do with that.

Real simple. Show us the full video that the IDF have. After all ye were able to show the highlights pretty quickly. Hey dont even add sound for "security" reasons. Even forget the 3rd party stuff you've confiscated. Just show the world your video. Then we'll believe you. Like I say. Real simple.

Next watch them conflate anti semitism with issues with Israel. That usually gets people to pull their head in. Except of course the actual anti semites.

Theta

Manic Moran wrote: »

Before the US entered WWII, and at the height of the 'Happy Times' for the U-Boat fleet which was effectively trying to blockade the British Isles, the US was sending convoys of anything from food to war materiel to the UK. A number of the vessels were sunk, to include the occasional escorting US warship. Although the incidents certainly made the news, they were not viewed as 'Dasterdly underhanded German attacks on neutral vessels,' just the risks of doing business when trying to break through a blockade in a conflict. It took what was viewed as an unprovoked attack on the US military to bring them into the war. The Germans did not ask to stop to inspect the ships, they just sank them outright.

The blockade is in place in Gaza. You can argue over the legitimacy of the war to begin with, but it's there. Until the Israelis are satisfied that they should have no grounds for denying arrival in the place (i.e. inspect it themselves), there is inherent risk in trying to break the blockade.

NTM

They arent the same thing though.

The germans were doing it openly to make the brittish starve and suffer with the end goal of British capitulation and invasion. The Israelis are doing it under the guise of its good for all invloved because we are trying to stop weapons coming into gaza.

What have fruit and childrens toys have to do with stopping weapons coming in?

ejmaztec

bambooze wrote: »

Well this is interesting if not at all surprising..

Probe reveals flotilla lynchers have ties to Global Jihad

Some choice quotes..

The suspects are not cooperating with investigators. Most of them have no identification papers, and Israeli authorities are still trying to ascertain their identity.

Nevertheless, it is clear that the majority were recruited by the same IHH handler who organized the flotilla.

Some of the suspects were found to be carrying large sums of money. Others had Kevlar vests and gas masks; and all were found to be carrying weapons such as knives, metal clubs and slingshots.

Investigators have already concluded that this was the group that planned the violent resistance, which centered on the Marmara's top deck.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3897667,00.html

---

Of course this comes from israeli sources so make of it what you will..

As they refer to "flotilla lynchers", when no-one was actually hanged, I'll take it with a pinch of salt.

Son Of A Vidic

The Israelis have always been the masters in the disproportionate use of force. They'll fire 3 or 4 hellfire missiles at a militant traveling in a car, killing a couple of innocent men, women or children in the process. Their contempt for the lives of helpless civilians is appalling and not without it's irony. They constantly remind us of the holocaust they endured, yet they've treated innocent Palestinians as subhuman for many decades. It's high time they took a lesson from history themselves and stopped their Nazi behaviour.

Adamisconfused

A lesson for the IDF, as stolen from twitter. What not to do when fast roping onto a ship...
http://www.cnas.org/files/u16/aDbBc0.png

Manic Moran

Theta wrote: »

What have fruit and childrens toys have to do with stopping weapons coming in?

I presume that once they had inspected the stuff themselves, they would have had little grounds for denying the fruit and toys entry.

NTM

IT-Guy

Danny Wooden Savannah wrote: »

Not in the least.

But people are down playing how dangerous the attack on the IDF personnel was.

As for the Israeli's firing on the ships first, big deal. Completely in keeping with S.O.P.'s in any army to fire warning shots after verbal warnings.

The problems with these types of discussions is we get the usual lunatics running screaming in hysterics about the big bad Israeli's, completely blinded by hatred. And with a complete lack of understanding of conflict.

Lets me clear about something, from a laymans POV boarding the ship in international waters may have been an illegal act. But thats where the laymans point of view ends!.

Once onboard and under attack those IDF personnel had an obligation to protect themselves, their comrades from bodily harm and to protect themselves from being forcibly disarmed - it goes the same way for any soldier, regardless what flag he/she serves under.

Just wanna clear this up as I'm a little unsure. Are warnings shots supposed to go across the bow (my understanding of warning shots at least) or are they actually allowed fire ON the vessel if it fails to comply/stop? The bold part above seems to indicate both occurred?

strobe

Manic Moran wrote: »

I presume that once they had inspected the stuff themselves, they would have had little grounds for denying the fruit and toys entry.

NTM

There would be little grounds for denying it but that never seemed to stop them before now MM.

Manic Moran

IT-Guy wrote: »

Just wanna clear this up as I'm a little unsure. Are warnings shots supposed to go across the bow (my understanding of warning shots at least) or are they actually allowed fire ON the vessel if it fails to comply/stop? The bold part above seems to indicate both occurred?

I think it's a glitch in the English language. It is possible to be fired upon but not actually to be hit. Although the term 'shot across the bow' is commonplace, in actuality, such an act is useless: Who's going to see a 40mm shell travelling at a mile a second? (and where will it land?) To have effect, you need to fire into the sea in the proximity of the ship in question where you get nice big splashes.

NTM

IrishTonyO

Manic Moran wrote: »

I presume that once they had inspected the stuff themselves, they would have had little grounds for denying the fruit and toys entry.

NTM

Fresh fruit is not allowed, nor toys, nor pasta, nor pencils, nor cement and the list is quite a long one.

IT-Guy

Manic Moran wrote: »

I think it's a glitch in the English language. It is possible to be fired upon but not actually to be hit. Although the term 'shot across the bow' is commonplace, in actuality, such an act is useless: Who's going to see a 40mm shell travelling at a mile a second? (and where will it land?) To have effect, you need to fire into the sea in the proximity of the ship in question where you get nice big splashes.

NTM

That's what I was thinking alright, the splash would be visible more than the shell! Someone in either this thread or the other one posted about firing warning shots, that they start with small caliber weaponry then use progressively larger weapons up until say, the 40mm shell you mentioned. If that's true, is there any chance the warning shots actually hit the ship rather than landing in the sea around it, as the ships occupants claim to have been fired on before the Israeli troops boarded?

dvpower

IrishTonyO wrote: »

Fresh fruit is not allowed, nor toys, nor pasta, nor pencils, nor cement and the list is quite a long one.

There was an UN guy on the radio yesterday explaining that shampoo was allowed but conditioner wasn't. They tried to bring in 2-in-1 but it wasn't allowed.

Carlos_Ray

Manic Moran wrote: »

I presume that once they had inspected the stuff themselves, they would have had little grounds for denying the fruit and toys entry.

Is this sarcasm?

El Horseboxo

Captain Aria Shaliker of the Israel Defense Forces wrote:

First, you know, the soldiers tried to disperse, but in the end when they were shot at, you know when there was shooting... from the other side, there's no other way than turning from paint ball to live ammunition

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/middle_east/10208027.stm

Why is this Captain who was on board the ship claiming that they were shot at and that is why they switched to live rounds. Is this a hole in their story as there has been no guns recovered from the activists and there has been no official mention of them being found in Israel's statements. Well not that i have seen anyways. I have only seen the makeshift weapons that they claim were used against them. And if they were shot at with their own weapons (which is hard to believe) wouldn't they have been shot at with paint ball guns as they weren't using live weaponary at that stage. Israel's stories reek of lies and cover ups and over the next few days it will be clearly seen. They are already trying to discredit the activists by claiming they are linked to Isalmic terrorist groups. It's exactly text book handling of a situation like this so far. The spin doctors must be dizzy as fúck by this stage.

ScumLord

Padraig Mor wrote: »

The usual blinkered pro-Israel nonsense.

I'm not pro Israel, I've already said I'd be more por Israel I'm just not that naive to assume the Palestinians are completely innocent and that any act of violence they carry out does more to hurt their agenda than help it in this day and age.

Carlos_Ray

ScumLord wrote: »

I'm not pro Israel, I've already said I'd be more por Israel I'm just not that naive to assume the Palestinians are completely innocent and that any act of violence they carry out does more to hurt their agenda than help it in this day and age.

The age old cause and effect. Israelis continually steal land from, kill, and imprison Palestinians. Palestinians fight back. Israel says " look at how violent the Palestinians are!" before increasing its campaign of ethnic cleansing to the cheers of fox news viewers and brainwashed military men.

A ship attempts to deliver aid to starving and sick people.Armed Israelis bored the ship illegally in an attempt to seize control. The crew fight back. Israel says " look at how violent these people are!" before killing them.

I see Israel has rejected the UN's calls for an independent investigation. Wow what a surprise. Maybe Israel are the only ones "skilled" enough to find all the weapons that were being delivered to Hamas.:rolleyes:

Wibbs

Carlos_Ray wrote: »

I see Israel has rejected the UN's calls for an independent investigation. Wow what a surprise.

And it looks like as per usual the US gov is backing them. Why independent investigation is an issue for either always puzzled me. Internal inquiries my bum TBH.

Wibbs

http://reubenbrand.com/wp-content/uploads/palestine.jpg I think this graphic really sums it up. Especially since 1967. I cant imagine any other nation state on earth being allowed and indeed supported in such land theft. How quick was the world in responding and sending in the troops when Maddass Hussain invaded Kuwait, with loss of life on both sides. Forget personal sides in this, what would a Martian think if they were watching this? And those green bits are getting smaller and smaller and smaller and people are dying on a daily basis because of it.

Sonnenblumen

IrishTonyO wrote: »

Fresh fruit is not allowed, nor toys, nor pasta, nor pencils, nor cement and the list is quite a long one.

Thats nothing in comparison to the much longer list of goods visitors cannot bring into Australia and there is no 'conflict' in that region.

El Horseboxo

Anytime anything is handled internally you know there is something they don't want somebody to know. You can apply that to anything in life. Does the fact that this will be handled by Israel and swept under the carpet not bother those supporting Israel's actions? Does that not make you think they have something to hide? Surely if you believe they are in the right then you should support an impartial international investigation.

Wibbs

Sonnenblumen wrote: »

Thats nothing in comparison to the much longer list of goods visitors cannot bring into Australia and there is no 'conflict' in that region.

Eh hardly comparing like with like in fairness. Apples and oranges really which of course is verboten.

K-9

Wibbs wrote: »

And it looks like as per usual the US gov is backing them. Why independent investigation is an issue for either always puzzled me. Internal inquiries my bum TBH.

This is where Obama disappoints me. It isn't a sly dig at him either, I understand the political nuances, but I expected better.

strobe

Sonnenblumen wrote: »

Thats nothing in comparison to the much longer list of goods visitors cannot bring into Australia and there is no 'conflict' in that region.

I was typing a reasoned response to that but I lost the will to continue so you get this message instead: I'm sure you can figure out for yourself what little relevance your post has in relation to anything.

Sonnenblumen

Wibbs wrote: »

Eh hardly comparing like with like in fairness. Apples and oranges really which of course is verboten.

On the contrary in Australia an apple is treated the same as an orange and lots of other 'food items' and are all 'verboten'. Perhaps in Israel and many other countries (including Ireland) why the importation of foodstuffs is prohibited.

I interpreted the OP was alluding (and probably misleading) in listing certain items which are banned but for other reasons.

Grounds/Reasons vary and are wide ranging around the world, and include food safety, agriculture safety, disease, pests, commercial protectionism etc

Hammer Archer

Sonnenblumen wrote: »

Thats nothing in comparison to the much longer list of goods visitors cannot bring into Australia and there is no 'conflict' in that region.

Eh I highly doubt Israel is banning these goods to protect Gaza's diverse, unique and highly delicate wildlife and ecosystem.

Run_to_da_hills

Jews celebrating attack on Turkish Aid Ship infront of Turkish Embassy,Tel Aviv.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=6a3_1275348204

Sonnenblumen

strobe wrote: »

I was typing a reasoned response to that but I lost the will to continue so you get this message instead: I'm sure you can figure out for yourself what little relevance your post has in relation to anything.

The pertinent point that the authorities publicly declared that the importation of specified goods was prohibited. Why then would anyone not recognise that constraint, especially 'flotilla members' whatever the humanitarian motivation. If you do not agree with the rules that is a different matter altogether, but what idiot is going to challenge the rights/wrongs of prohibition with authorities at point of entry?

IrishTonyO

Sonnenblumen wrote: »

Thats nothing in comparison to the much longer list of goods visitors cannot bring into Australia and there is no 'conflict' in that region.

Thats people flying into Australia not importers into the country, a stupid comparison

IrishTonyO

Sonnenblumen wrote: »

On the contrary in Australia an apple is treated the same as an orange and lots of other 'food items' and are all 'verboten'. Perhaps in Israel and many other countries (including Ireland) why the importation of foodstuffs is prohibited.

I interpreted the OP was alluding (and probably misleading) in listing certain items which are banned but for other reasons.

Grounds/Reasons vary and are wide ranging around the world, and include food safety, agriculture safety, disease, pests, commercial protectionism etc

They are banned by the Israeli's who control all delivery of aid and imports into the area. and please do not accuse me of misleading. And penciuls can really cause a lot of bother to the local ecosystem

Sonnenblumen

IrishTonyO wrote: »

Thats people flying into Australia not importers into the country, a stupid comparison

Stupid logic = attempting to import prohibited goods.