Israel attacks Aid Flotilla. At least 2 dead

bambooze

gandalf wrote: »

But you have already said it was illegal.

I have?

gandalf

bambooze wrote: »

Just imagine the consequences.. hamas has long range heavy duty missiles all over gaza and a war breaks out - what do you think israel will do to gaza?

So basically you have admitted that a state of war does not exist between Israel and Gaza.

Therefore the blockade is illegal.

Therefore intercepting a convoy in International Waters is Illegal.

End of Story.

KyussBishop

Don't know if it was already posted here, but just read this after seeing it linked on Glenn Greenwald's blog:

...
In the third attack, the injuries turned to deaths. Four people were killed instantly while 12 others bled to death. Finally, the captain surrendered and agreed to take the Mavi Marmara to the Israeli port city of Ashdod after an Israeli soldier pointed a gun at a one-year-old Turkish child.

http://gazaflotillasurvivors.posterous.com/attack-came-in-three-phases-says-survivor-abb

Will be interesting to hear more of the story emerge as people are released (particularly if anything corroborates this).

bambooze

gandalf wrote: »

So basically you have admitted that a state of war does not exist between Israel and Gaza.

Therefore the blockade is illegal.

Therefore intercepting a convoy in International Waters is Illegal.

End of Story.

Not sure how you made that connection from what I said since I was talking about a hypothetical future conflict.

donkey balls

bambooze wrote: »

Well its more a matter of principle for israel - the blockade must be seen to hold, aid supplies can be trucked in. If the blockade is fails for whatever reason (pressure from the US for example) then the worry for israel is that its open season on iranian weapon shipments to hamas.

Israel obviously cannot trust hamas not to import missiles and if the blockade is ended then israel somehow has to monitor an endless stream of cargo ships from all over the world and somehow find out if any weapons are aboard.

i am talkking about a ship that is loaded here in Ireland under customs scrutiny regarding manifests etc

Wibbs

bambooze wrote: »

Sorry to disappoint you but I found the video on the twitter account posted by sceptre a few posts back..

http://twitter.com/IsraelIE

Man that feed, the official stuff is priceless in its BS and as pointed out by others as far as the demo was concerned utter fabrication. Good god have the Israeli government no shame in actually lying and playing the victim for the sake of PR all the bloody time? Any american say, reading that twitter account will likely believe it and imagine a huge crowd of Irish people burning Israeli flags while chanting God is great as Gaelige.

I saw similar in the interview on US TV with the Israeli rep. Full of BS again. asking the viewers to think of the flotilla as terrorist boats steaming towards the US to endanger its citizens and asking them to imagine their own coastguard intercepting it. All he was short of was the battle hym of the republic playing low in the background. The average American of all hues and faiths will hear this first, think on their own fears and run with it. Whatever "truth" emerges down the line will be glossed over, especially if it disagrees with Israel. The Israeli government and the people involved in voting for and backing them up literally have no shame.

I'll be honest, I have serious issues with any sort of radical Islam. Ive been banned from the Islam forum here in the past for my trouble. If in the highly unlikely event Sharia was touted in this country I would be on the streets and I wouldnt be carrying IV bottles ither, but more and more I see Israel as just as bad if not worse. At least the mad mullahs(tm) are obvious.

gandalf

bambooze wrote: »

Not sure how you made that connection from what I said since I was talking about a hypothetical future conflict.

So you are now saying that a state of war does exist between Israel and Gaza then?

Ever heard the phrase flip flop

KyussBishop

Actually, I should have posted a link to Glenn's blog in my last post, as he's posting a fair bit about these events, and his analysis on almost all topics is generally excellent:
http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/

EDIT:
This article in particular, gives some background on the psychology of why people defend Israel so intently on this, and other issues (which is quite relevant to this thread):
http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/06/03/israel/index.html

Mr.Micro

gandalf wrote: »

So you are now saying that a state of war does exist between Israel and Gaza then?

Ever heard the phrase flip flop

Its a state of war when it suits Israel so long as it does not have to afford the rights and protocols to the other side.

bambooze

KyussBishop wrote: »

"Finally, the captain surrendered and agreed to take the Mavi Marmara to the Israeli port city of Ashdod after an Israeli soldier pointed a gun at a one-year-old Turkish child."

As if.

Also this from that blog..

"They used paintball guns on passengers — the ammunition mixed with glass."

paintball ammo with glass?? :rolleyes:

Scofflaw

Wibbs wrote: »

Man that feed, the official stuff is priceless in its BS and as pointed out by others as far as the demo was concerned utter fabrication. Good god have the Israeli government no shame in actually lying and playing the victim for the sake of PR all the bloody time? Any american say, reading that twitter account will likely believe it and imagine a huge crowd of Irish people burning Israeli flags while chanting God is great as Gaelige.

Certainly looks vicious:



Clearly they're lucky they weren't shot. There's poles and all kinds of weaponry - aren't those things at the front firebombs?

amused,
Scofflaw

bambooze

gandalf wrote: »

So you are now saying that a state of war does exist between Israel and Gaza then?

Ever heard the phrase flip flop

I have never made any comment on the existence or otherwise of an official state of war.

gandalf

bambooze wrote: »

I have never made any comment on the existence or otherwise of an official state of war.

Well you're in Israel its a simple yes or no answer.

Are Israel at war officially with Gaza?

KyussBishop

bambooze wrote: »

As if.

Also this from that blog..

"They used paintball guns on passengers — the ammunition mixed with glass."

paintball ammo with glass?? :rolleyes:

That's a fairly cynical reply, just outright dismissing the article (with information from someone who was there).
In the case of paintballs, they can be made with glass, or actual glass pellets can be used.

bambooze

KyussBishop wrote: »

That's a fairly cynical reply, just outright dismissing the article (with information from someone who was there).
In the case of paintballs, they can be made with glass, or actual glass pellets can be used.

Really? OK then I stand corrected, I'd never heard of that but then I've never seen or used paintball gun. I had visions of them cackling while grinding up glass to mix with the paint which seemed a little unlikely.

Edit to add: as for the rest of the article, it may indeed contain some truth but the whole pointing a gun at a baby thing I find very hard to believe.

bambooze

gandalf wrote: »

Well your in Israel its a simple yes or no answer.

Are Israel at war officially with Gaza?

Sorry but I am not qualified to comment on the official on-paper status. The reality on the ground is that there is some kind of half-assed ceasefire but its certainly not peace.

gandalf

bambooze wrote: »

Sorry but I am not qualified to comment on the official on-paper status. The reality on the ground is that there is some kind of half-assed ceasefire but its certainly not peace.

So I its a no then.

That's a laughable answer though, you live there and you have no idea if a state of war exists or not.

gandalf

bambooze wrote: »

Really? OK then I stand corrected, I'd never heard of that but then I've never seen or used paintball gun. I had visions of them cackling while grinding up glass to mix with the paint which seemed a little unlikely.

Edit to add: as for the rest of the article, it may indeed contain some truth but the whole pointing a gun at a baby thing I find very hard to believe.

Well there is a patent for one.

http://www.freepatentsonline.com/6223658.html

Google is your friend

bambooze

gandalf wrote: »

So I its a no then.

That's a laughable answer though, you live there and you have no idea if a state of war exists or not.

You're trying to trip me up on a matter of international law which I have said I am not qualified to comment on. Israel is pretty much constantly at war with a dizzying and ever changing array of terrorists organisations, the precise official status with regard to a specific group has never really been of much interest to me. Sorry to disappoint.

baldbear

The autopsy report is going to be in tomorrows papers. Looks like the Israelis are liars.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jun/04/gaza-flotilla-attack-autopsy-results

Scofflaw

bambooze wrote: »

You're trying to trip me up on a matter of international law which I have said I am not qualified to comment on. Israel is pretty much constantly at war with a dizzying and ever changing array of terrorists organisations, the precise official status with regard to a specific group has never really been of much interest to me. Sorry to disappoint.

Then it doesn't really become you to be so definite on the question of the legality of the assault, since it depends on the state of conflict between Israel and Hamas.

Legally, you know.

regards,
Scofflaw

alastair

Wibbs wrote: »

Actually on the fire bomb notion, I'm surprised that they werent lobbing loads of them. I mean you're on a ship, with a dirty great fuel tank, access to bottles and flares and apparently fireworks and you want to resist and apparently planned to do so. Well molotov cocktails would be the first thing I would think of. It sounds like any resistance was on the spot and not exactly thought through.

Ships have massive fuel tanks, but they're filled with diesel, which is no use if you want to make a molotov firework.

A Dub in Glasgo

baldbear wrote: »

The autopsy report is going to be in tomorrows papers. Looks like the Israelis are liars.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jun/04/gaza-flotilla-attack-autopsy-results

From the same article

The nine victims

Cengiz Alquyz, 42
Four gunshot wounds: back of head, right side of face, back, left leg

Ibrahim Bilgen, 60
Four gunshot wounds: right chest, back, right hip, right temple

Cegdet Kiliclar, 38
One gunshot wound: middle of forehead

Furkan Dogan
Five gunshot wounds: nose, back, back of head, left leg, left ankle

Sahri Yaldiz
Four gunshot wounds: left chest, left leg, right leg twice

Aliheyder Bengi
Six gunshot wounds: left chest, belly, right arm, right leg, left hand twice

Cetin Topcuoglu
Three gunshot wounds: back of head, left side, right belly

Cengiz Songur
One gunshot wound: front of neck

Necdet Yildirim
Two gunshot wounds: right shoulder, left back

Byron85

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

From the same article


The nine victims

Cengiz Alquyz, 42
Four gunshot wounds: back of head, right side of face, back, left leg

Ibrahim Bilgen, 60
Four gunshot wounds: right chest, back, right hip, right temple

Cegdet Kiliclar, 38
One gunshot wound: middle of forehead

Furkan Dogan
Five gunshot wounds: nose, back, back of head, left leg, left ankle

Sahri Yaldiz
Four gunshot wounds: left chest, left leg, right leg twice

Aliheyder Bengi
Six gunshot wounds: left chest, belly, right arm, right leg, left hand twice

Cetin Topcuoglu
Three gunshot wounds: back of head, left side, right belly

Cengiz Songur
One gunshot wound: front of neck

Necdet Yildirim
Two gunshot wounds: right shoulder, left back

With the exception of the last victim, all of the above are kill shots. You don't need international law to see that.

bambooze

Scofflaw wrote: »

Then it doesn't really become you to be so definite on the question of the legality of the assault, since it depends on the state of conflict between Israel and Hamas.

Legally, you know.

regards,
Scofflaw

I haven't really commented on the legality other than pasting in a bit from that San Remo thingy and saying it seems like they were covered, however I also mentioned that others had pasted extracts from other legal docs that backing the view that it was not legal. So as I say, not my area.

donkey balls

baldbear wrote: »

The autopsy report is going to be in tomorrows papers. Looks like the Israelis are liars.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jun/04/gaza-flotilla-attack-autopsy-results

a 60 yr old and a 54 yr old(ok he was a taekwondo champion) and yet the might of the idf cant handle these two men:rolleyes: without shooting them at close range.

bambooze

baldbear wrote: »

The autopsy report is going to be in tomorrows papers. Looks like the Israelis are liars.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jun/04/gaza-flotilla-attack-autopsy-results

How do you get to that conclusion from the autopsy report?

In fact I notice no mention of a shot to the TOP of the head as was claimed by the al jazeera journo..

Byron85

bambooze wrote: »

How do you get to that conclusion from the autopsy report?

In fact I notice no mention of a shot to the TOP of the head as was claimed by the al jazeera journo..

No, only the middle of the ****ing forehead. :rolleyes:

gandalf

bambooze wrote: »

You're trying to trip me up on a matter of international law which I have said I am not qualified to comment on. Israel is pretty much constantly at war with a dizzying and ever changing array of terrorists organisations, the precise official status with regard to a specific group has never really been of much interest to me. Sorry to disappoint.

The question is are Israel at war with Gaza, not are Israel at war with Hamas.

As someone living in Israel with an obvious interest in current affairs it is very surprising that you have no idea about this. I for one would certainly know if my country was at war with another territory if I had an interest in current affairs.

So again are Israel at war with Gaza?

ejmaztec

bambooze wrote: »

How do you get to that conclusion from the autopsy report?

In fact I notice no mention of a shot to the TOP of the head as was claimed by the al jazeera journo..

If you're splitting hairs over that, you've lost the plot.