Israel attacks Aid Flotilla. At least 2 dead

Foxtrol

Memnoch wrote: »

And the four bullets to the head and one to the chest? For a 19 year old? Come on. Shooting someone in the head isn't easy. You'd have to pretty much put your gun to their forehead and pull the trigger repeatedly.

Its close range not point blank range. You claimed earlier that they had automatic weapons. Maybe they used one of them. Again we have no context to his death just the "I want to kill..." part

Nothing to do with jurisdiction. Someone has a gun and are attacking you and people have already been shot dead. You're going to try to get that gun of them. If it was me. I'd definitely shoot back.

Funny how the raging terrorists showed more restraint than the Israelis. I mean they subdued at least 3 commandos (as we saw from the video and your quote) and they had guns. And yet not a single Israeli commando was killed.

Dont pretend that those on the boat thought it was the Somali's coming for them. They knew it was the IDF and decided to resist military officers. None of the recent reports state that they were fired on first by anything other than warning shots.

Some not for lack of trying...

Memnoch

Foxtrol wrote: »

So we're back to flotilla people should be believed but the IDF. Change the record. Also, "unarmed" is massively jumping to conclusions.

No need to. There are two versions of events. IDF and the people on the flotilla. I've made a pretty strong argument for believing one over the other.

Do I have to say it again? I dont take anyones word. I'm taking bits from every source. I'm not claiming all the eye witnesses are liers but thats the general feeling im getting from you about the IDF.

Yes, you are brilliantly cherry picking the statements that might help you justify the IDF's actions. And yes absolutely. The IDF are PROVEN LIARS, and I have no hesitation in saying so.

Oh and if you read it again you can see that it was fellow passangers who stopped them from being killed. If that isn't proof that there was a minority of people looking for a fight on the boat I dont know what will

Nope. It's not proof of anything. The IDF had attacked these people in the middle of the night and had already killed people from above. It's understandable that some people were a little bit enraged.

I've said it before. The IDF started a panic through their stupidity. Despite the fact that this was a mob made of 600 disparate individuals. I mean, it's not like they we're a well oiled military machine that follows orders no matter what. DESPITE that, not a single IDF soldier was killed. That's pretty ****ing remarkable if you ask me.

Especially when you contrast that with the fact that trained soldiers killed at least 9 people, but a mob of raging terrorists... how many people did they kill again? Considering they had guns and everything?

Foxtrol

Scofflaw wrote: »

Not really - the question is predicated on whether this was an armed conflict, and therefore legally a military blockade.

The difference is that the passengers probably genuinely believed that what they were doing was legally repelling an illegal assault, whereas Israel, because it has never accepted that the conflict has the legal status of a war, was doing something illegal according to its own legal view of the situation.

In other words, whatever the legal position is eventually found to be, the legal position Israel claimed to be in made what they were doing illegal, and what the passengers did legal.

regards,
Scofflaw

Personally, I dont care if I'm a dingy off wexford with my family, if the IDF attempt to board my dingy with thay sort of effort I would do what they say for fear that things would escalate and someone could get hurt. I'd worry about the legalities later. I have no desire to become a martyr and if one of my family members was to die due to me resisting I would hold myself partially responsible.

Memnoch

Foxtrol wrote: »

Personally, I dont care if I'm a dingy off wexford with my family, if the IDF attempt to board my dingy with thay sort of effort I would do what they say for fear that things would escalate and someone could get hurt. I'd worry about the legalities later. I have no desire to become a martyr and if one of my family members was to die due to me resisting I would hold myself partially responsible.

Except the IDF already shot dead a member of your family before coming on board. And maybe your wondering if they're going to kill the rest of you as well.

A Dub in Glasgo

Foxtrol wrote: »

Personally, I dont care if I'm a dingy off wexford with my family, if the IDF attempt to board my dingy with thay sort of effort I would do what they say for fear that things would escalate and someone could get hurt. I'd worry about the legalities later. I have no desire to become a martyr and if one of my family members was to die due to me resisting I would hold myself partially responsible.

What would you do if one of your family members was attacked?

P. Breathnach

Scofflaw wrote: »

... The difference is that the passengers probably genuinely believed that what they were doing was legally repelling an illegal assault....

I suspect that they did not actually stop to consider the legalities. Had they thought about it, I am sure they would have been pleased to see the law as being on their side.

Foxtrol wrote: »

Personally, I dont care if I'm a dingy off wexford with my family, if the IDF attempt to board my dingy with thay sort of effort I would do what they say for fear that things would escalate and someone could get hurt. I'd worry about the legalities later. I have no desire to become a martyr and if one of my family members was to die due to me resisting I would hold myself partially responsible.

That's no more than an initial position of "might is right", segued into "blame the victim".

Foxtrol

Memnoch wrote: »

No need to. There are two versions of events. IDF and the people on the flotilla. I've made a pretty strong argument for believing one over the other.

As have I.

Yes, you are brilliantly cherry picking the statements that might help you justify the IDF's actions. And yes absolutely. The IDF are PROVEN LIARS, and I have no hesitation in saying so.

No I was balancing out the fact someone posted that article as if it was solely about the soldier potentially getting a medal, ignoring the issues that dont put the flotilla in a good light. This is a regular occurrence so I should be used to it by now.

As are Hamas and Pro-Palestinian groups.

Nope. It's not proof of anything. The IDF had attacked these people in the middle of the night and had already killed people from above. It's understandable that some people were a little bit enraged.

I've said it before. The IDF started a panic through their stupidity. Despite the fact that this was a mob made of 600 disparate individuals. I mean, it's not like they we're a well oiled military machine that follows orders no matter what. DESPITE that, not a single IDF soldier was killed. That's pretty ****ing remarkable if you ask me.

Especially when you contrast that with the fact that trained soldiers killed at least 9 people, but a mob of raging terrorists... how many people did they kill again? Considering they had guns and everything?

There was not a mob of 600 people. Much less than that. So you're saying they stabbed them in places that they knew wouldn't kill them? As you can see from the girl on the boat there were good people on the boat who tried to protect the soldiers who were taken hostage. Similar to the guy earlier who asked others not to pick up weapons when clearly some did. I would believe your comments were nothing more than biased if you could only admit that there were a few on the flotilla who were looking for a confrontation.

Foxtrol

P. Breathnach wrote: »

That's no more than an initial position of "might is right", segued into "blame the victim".

No I would generally respect all countries military and police force whether I thought they had jurisdiction or not.

Foxtrol

Memnoch wrote: »

Except the IDF already shot dead a member of your family before coming on board. And maybe your wondering if they're going to kill the rest of you as well.

Show me the proof of that again?

I dont actually remember any.

Edit: I mean for the early shooting.

Memnoch

Foxtrol wrote: »

As have I.

What nonsense. You haven't made a single substantial claim that shows the IDF are trustworthy other than the fact that you seem to want it to be so and you conjecture every piece of information into this pre-formed idea.

No I was balancing out the fact someone posted that article as if it was solely about the soldier potentially getting a medal, ignoring the issues that dont put the flotilla in a good light. This is a regular occurrence so I should be used to it by now.

What issues? The quote from the British person is only confirming what has ALREADY been accepted on this thread. That as the Israeli commandos absailed down they were mobbed and attacked.

And the statements of someone who murdered 6 civilians and belongs to the IDF have no credibility.

There was not a mob of 600 people. Much less than that. So you're saying they stabbed them in places that they knew wouldn't kill them? As you can see from the girl on the boat there were good people on the boat who tried to protect the soldiers who were taken hostage. Similar to the guy earlier who asked others not to pick up weapons when clearly some did. I would believe your comments were nothing more than biased if you could only admit that there were a few on the flotilla who were looking for a confrontation.

Sorry but I'm not going to bolster your strawmanning. And I doubt at this stage anyone in this thread is taking your assertions seriously apart from the two people who already had a pro-Israli stance.

I'll say it again. A mob of people, including according to you, trouble makers, managed to subdue several Israeli soldiers, and despite the fact that they were armed to the tooth (according to the IDF) managed to not kill anyone, while the Israeli's, one of the most trained, elite military units in the world, had to kill at least 9 people?

And the Israeli's acted in complete self defence.

And it was all down to incitement by those on the ship.

Seriously. If you can find people on here to buy this crap, let me know. I've got a bridge in Wexford.

Memnoch

Foxtrol wrote: »

Show me the proof of that again?

I dont actually remember any.

Edit: I mean for the early shooting.

Ah right, this would be the eye-witness report you DON'T accept from an INTERNATIONAL JOURNALIST because it doesn't fit your narrative of IDF "self-defence".

P. Breathnach

Foxtrol wrote: »

No I would generally respect all countries military and police force whether I thought they had jurisdiction or not.

If you believe that they do not have jurisdiction (as you might think of the IDF in your example of boating off the Wexford coast) on what basis would you accord them respect?

Foxtrol

Memnoch wrote: »

What nonsense. You haven't made a single substantial claim that shows the IDF are trustworthy other than the fact that you seem to want it to be so and you conjecture every piece of information into this pre-formed idea.

You're too blinkered to see that you basically agree with me on everything. The majority of the earlier IDF statements about what occurred on the boat have been corroborated by eye witnesses.

What issues? The quote from the British person is only confirming what has ALREADY been accepted on this thread. That as the Israeli commandos absailed down they were mobbed and attacked.

And the statements of someone who murdered 6 civilians and belongs to the IDF have no credibility.

And taken hostage and that she felt that they would have been beaten further or killed if others hadn't stepped in. Pretty sure eye witnesses coming out with fear for the safety of the IDF taken hostage is new.

Sorry but I'm not going to bolster your strawmanning. And I doubt at this stage anyone in this thread is taking your assertions seriously apart from the two people who already had a pro-Israli stance.

Though attempts have been made, I dont believe that anyone has shown any credible evidence to argue my point of view without resorting to saying its "conjecture" or "strawmanning", while concurrently not seeing that thats exactly what their opinions are.

I'll say it again. A mob of people, including according to you, trouble makers, managed to subdue several Israeli soldiers, and despite the fact that they were armed to the tooth (according to the IDF) managed to not kill anyone, while the Israeli's, one of the most trained, elite military units in the world, had to kill at least 9 people?

Thats more down to the incompetence of the IDF planning. It should have gone a lot smoother. I'll also add that it would have gone a lot smoother if flotilla hadnt escalated the situation further.

And the Israeli's acted in complete self defence.

Confirmed Hostages, video and eye witness claims (from both sides) have made it clear that the whole boat werent sitting around the campfire singing. You're blinkered to say otherwise.

And it was all down to incitement by those on the ship.

No obviously a lot is down to the IDF.

You're the biased and blinkered one who is placing no blame whatsoever on the flotilla.

Seriously. If you can find people on here to buy this crap, let me know. I've got a bridge in Wexford.

Everyone thinks everyone else is biased here. Dont worry if I was buying the crap I was hearing when I joined the thread first I'd be believing that the crew were all peace maker, Nobel prize winners who had no other motive then this delivery of aid (and of course not forgetting the boat filled with just passengers)

Foxtrol

Memnoch wrote: »

Ah right, this would be the eye-witness report you DON'T accept from an INTERNATIONAL JOURNALIST because it doesn't fit your narrative of IDF "self-defence".

Do you have the link again? I dont remember anyone claiming that someone was shot before they landed. Just that there were shots fired (which there could be many reasons for). Im open to correction

Foxtrol

P. Breathnach wrote: »

If you believe that they do not have jurisdiction (as you might think of the IDF in your example of boating off the Wexford coast) on what basis would you accord them respect?

Because I dont go out looking for a fight with "the man". I dont believe that just because I'm of the opinion that I'm in foreign waters that I have the right to stab, beat and take members of their military hostage, even if they try to board my dingy, especially when my actions could risk the lives of everyone on board.

Deep Easterly

P. Breathnach wrote: »

If you believe that they do not have jurisdiction (as you might think of the IDF in your example of boating off the Wexford coast) on what basis would you accord them respect?

Maybe I misheard but didn't one guy get shot 4 times in the head by one commando?

Sounds a little more than just 'self defence' to me.

Foxtrol

Deep Easterly wrote: »

Maybe I misheard but didn't one guy get shot 4 times in the head by one commando?

Sounds a little more than just 'self defence' to me.

Automatic weapons, inside the close confines of a boat. This guy could have had a knife inside another commando. Its all speculation apart from the fact that he has 4 bullet wounds in his head

Byron85

It seems Micheál Martin is becoming more and more ticked off at the Israelis as time goes on.

The Irish Government believes the Rachel Corrie should be allowed to reach Gaza, according to Minister for Foreign Affairs Micheál Martin.
He said the ship should be allowed to proceed to Gaza and unload its humanitarian cargo.
'If, as is their stated intention, the Israeli government intercepts the Rachel Corrie, the Government demands that it demonstrate every restraint.

'Those on board the Rachel Corrie have made clear their peaceful intentions and have stated that they will offer no resistance to Israeli forces. Based on these assurances, there can be no justification for the use of force against any person on board the Rachel Corrie.'

http://www.rte.ie/news/2010/0604/mideast.html

Memnoch

Foxtrol wrote: »

Do you have the link again? I dont remember anyone claiming that someone was shot before they landed. Just that there were shots fired (which there could be many reasons for). Im open to correction

Sigh, I swore to myself I'd stop arguing with you, because it's become circle time. So this is not further debate but a reply to your request for information.

http://vodpod.com/watch/3760407-interview-with-al-jazeeras-jamal-elshayyal-one-of-the-passengers-on-the-mavi-marmara

Interview begins about 50 seconds into the video.

2:00 - takes about the detail of the weapons used.

3:20 - Sequence of events.

Also...

An Israeli member of parliament confirmed that the passengers did not offer provocation or resistance to cause the shooting.

Haneen Zoubi said Israeli naval vessels had surrounded the flotilla’s flagship, the Mavi Marmara, and fired on it a few minutes before commandos abseiled from a helicopter directly above them.

Terrified passengers had been forced off the deck when water was sprayed at them. She said she was not aware of any provocation or resistance by the passengers, who were all unarmed.

She added that within minutes of the raid beginning, three bodies had been brought to the main room on the upper deck in which she and most other passengers were confined. Two had gunshot wounds to the head, in what she suggested had been executions.

http://www.thenational.ae/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100602/FOREIGN/706019813/1002/FOREIGN

As I said, this is in response to your request for more info. I'm done debating for now.

Foxtrol

T.W.H Byron wrote: »

It seems Micheál Martin is becoming more and more ticked off at the Israelis as time goes on.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2010/0604/mideast.html

Thats fair enough. You put up no resistance, you give them no excuse. If everyone had taken that decision then I dont think we'd be in the situation we're in now.

karma_

Foxtrol wrote: »

Thats fair enough. You put up no resistance, you give them no excuse. If everyone had taken that decision then I dont think we'd be in the situation we're in now.

You know what, I'm now totally convinced that you are dedicated to keeping this debate perpetually going round in circles. You are offering little to teh discussion and each time you have a point soundly defeated you bring up one that has already been debunked and discussed at length.

A Dub in Glasgo

It seems Israel can do no wrong in some eyes. Even when they carry out the most vile actions, you will get those who will justify / contexualise / blame the victims.

Just look at the amount of effort on this thread to justify it, they would be far better spending 5% of that time to try empathy. Moral cowardice at it's worst.

gandalf

Foxtrol wrote: »

Thats fair enough. You put up no resistance, you give them no excuse. If everyone had taken that decision then I dont think we'd be in the situation we're in now.

And if Israel had respected International Law we wouldn't be in this position.

If there was no illegal military assault on a civilian vessel in International Waters people would not have died, people and Israeli soldiers would not have been injured and over 600 people would not have been kidnapped and held in a country that they had no intentions of going to.

Foxtrol

Memnoch wrote: »

Sigh, I swore to myself I'd stop arguing with you, because it's become circle time. So this is not further debate but a reply to your request for information.

http://vodpod.com/watch/3760407-interview-with-al-jazeeras-jamal-elshayyal-one-of-the-passengers-on-the-mavi-marmara

Interview begins about 50 seconds into the video.

2:00 - takes about the detail of the weapons used.

3:20 - Sequence of events.

Also...

An Israeli member of parliament confirmed that the passengers did not offer provocation or resistance to cause the shooting.



As I said, this is in response to your request for more info. I'm done debating for now.

Thanks for supplying that to me. I'm not going to debate this with you, just state a fact which I dont think anyone can disagree with.

1)I didnt hear at any point in the first tape were he says the guy got shot from the air before the troops landed. Yes he specifically says that he believed they were firing live rounds from the air before they landed but doesnt link those early shots with that guy who died.

2) Her claims have already been disputed by everyone (IDF & nearly all eye witnesses) including the guy in the first video.

Foxtrol

karma_ wrote: »

You know what, I'm now totally convinced that you are dedicated to keeping this debate perpetually going round in circles. You are offering little to teh discussion and each time you have a point soundly defeated you bring up one that has already been debunked and discussed at length.

Being out shouted does not make you wrong. My basic point is that the flotilla deserve a small portion of the blame for escalating the situation. In my eyes no one has yet produced a shred of evidence which shows that this situation was 100% Israels fault.

Foxtrol

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

It seems Israel can do no wrong in some eyes. Even when they carry out the most vile actions, you will get those who will justify / contexualise / blame the victims.

Just look at the amount of effort on this thread to justify it, they would be far better spending 5% of that time to try empathy. Moral cowardice at it's worst.

If thats directed at me you might take some time to read my posts. I just dont think a PR stunt masquerading as an Aid vessel holds zero percent of the blame. Others disagree.

Foxtrol

gandalf wrote: »

And if Israel had respected International Law we wouldn't be in this position.

If there was no illegal military assault on a civilian vessel in International Waters people would not have died, people and Israeli soldiers would not have been injured and over 600 people would not have been kidnapped and held in a country that they had no intentions of going to.

Agreed.

I also believe that decisions made by the flotilla were directly aimed at escalating the situation and hence Israel does not hold 100% of the blame.

gandalf

Foxtrol wrote: »

Agreed.

I also believe that decisions made by the flotilla were directly aimed at escalating the situation and hence Israel does not hold 100% of the blame.

It does you have just agreed with me. You have agreed that they broke International Law and if they didn't do that then this situation would not have occurred.

There is no "but" here.

karma_

Foxtrol wrote: »

If thats directed at me you might take some time to read my posts. I just dont think a PR stunt masquerading as an Aid vessel holds zero percent of the blame. Others disagree.

Why do you keep referring to it in these terms?

Why is it so hard to accept these were people who's prime motivation was to deliver aid and raise awareness about the plight of 1.5 million people affected by a disastrous blockade?

To simply cast it in this light is unfair given that there was absolutely no way they could have predicted how Israel could have behaved to stop it. There were many ways to stop the flotilla and most of them would have left everyone still alive.

To apportion blame we have to take into account how teh operation was carried out, where it was carried out and why. To after the fact blame the people on board for escalating teh matter is secondary to how the whole thing was instigated.

Anyway, this has all been discussed before and more eloquently that I'm putting it.

Foxtrol

gandalf wrote: »

It does you have just agreed with me. You have agreed that they broke International Law and if they didn't do that then this situation would not have occurred.

There is no "but" here.

Yes and if the "Aid ships" were not turned into a PR stunt masquerading as aid ships then the situation wouldnt have occurred and they would have been treated like previous flotilla's.

Look I'm done arguing this point as it just gives more posters ammo to call me an "Israeli apologist" or the like. Out of my mates the ones who get in the most fights on nights out are the ones who go looking for them. If you believe this allows them to put the blame squarely on the shoulders of the other party then fine, I dont. In my eyes the organisers flotilla and those who attacked the commandos have their share of blood on their hands. This in no way exonerates the IDF for the botched operation or Israels continued illegal actions but in my eyes it rather shares out the blame on all those who helped escalate this situation to the point were 9 people lost their lives while leaving many more injured. I might post on this thread again at another point but right now I'm sick of the consistent abuse and misrepresentation I'm receiving.