Rachel Corrie, Irish ship on Collision Course with Israeli Navy Near Gaza

youcrazyjesus!

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

:eek:

So you are quite happy for your taxes, if you pay any, to be used by individuals for their own purposes rather than what they were intended for?

What do you mean "for their own purposes"?

If they are in employment they've earned it. It's not anybody's business what they do with their money and any money in general that you're in receipt of legitimately you're entitled to do what you like with it. Your comments are stretching all logic.

Feeky Magee

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

:eek:

So you are quite happy for your taxes, if you pay any, to be used by individuals for their own purposes rather than what they were intended for?

In the grand scheme of things, I don't especially care what a handful of public servants are doing, it's not going to make a remote bit of difference to any tax I will have to pay. Actually, I would be happy that money I paid went to fund a humanitarian trip trying to make the world a better place, not that there's the slightest bit of evidence that anybody on board was there in any other capacity than citizens on their free time. Have you heard of something called leave? Or do you follow around public servants on holidays and throw eggs at them, or kick unemployed people when they're on a walk.

Now, please stop derailing a thread about an aid flotilla with obsessive comments about taxes.

FlutterinBantam

youcrazyjesus! wrote: »

Clearly.



You don't get to tell people what to do with money they're in receipt of legitimately. Whether through employment or other means.



You are aware there is no longer full employment? Yeah?



The only thing murky around here is the waters you desperately try to muddy with slanderous remarks every 5 minutes. You're losing the plot.



You are not the Revenue Commissioner. Paying tax does not give you special privileges as a citizen. It's an obligation and one most of us do without comment or fuss.

Any money these people may or may not be in receipt of is legitimate. You've offered absolutely nothing to suggest otherwise. If you can find out even IF Dr Lane is employed that would be a huge start. A week later and you've still not found out yet you still insist on slandering the man. :rolleyes:

Not slandering anyone, just asking questions.

I know a little more than I post here.

These people have apparently cost us a lot of money and time.

people like you just love to diss someone who is concerned about this and try to put the obsessive spin on.

Won't work on me pal, try some other tack;)

FlutterinBantam

Feeky Magee wrote: »

In the grand scheme of things, I don't especially care what a handful of public servants are doing, it's not going to make a remote bit of difference to any tax I will have to pay. Actually, I would be happy that money I paid went to fund a humanitarian trip trying to make the world a better place, not that there's the slightest bit of evidence that anybody on board was there in any other capacity than citizens on their free time. Have you heard of something called leave? Or do you follow around public servants on holidays and throw eggs at them, or kick unemployed people when they're on a walk.

Now, please stop derailing a thread about an aid flotilla with obsessive comments about taxes.

Derailing the thread?

What do you want?

Everyone agree with the operation and clap their hands when the 'heroes' return home and start the anti Israeli and anti US spin on national radio?

Jeebus ,how immature and naive can some people get.

youcrazyjesus!

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Not slandering anyone, just asking questions.

Your questions are as loaded as "are you a sex offender?".

I know a little more than I post here

These people have apparently cost us a lot of money and time.

You know a little bit more than you post here yet you don't know if Fintan Lane is employed by anybody? Come off it.

If you've any information that there was any more than medical and repatriation costs incurred by our State please let us know. If you've any evidence that somebody other than Israel is responsible please let us know. I'd like to hear all information you have as would everyone else. Surely you can tell us without compromising your source.

people like you just love to diss someone who is concerned about this and try to put the obsessive spin on.

Won't work on me pal, try some other tack;)

I'm not trying to get anything to "work", it's as clear as day from your posts you're obsessed about "your" taxmoney ending up in the hands of people whose political views you don't like.

Can I take a guess at something? Bitter about taxes, those in receipt of State money but who in your mind aren't entitled to it, academics and students.....you're a country Garda right?

Getting way OT actually. Mods will step in. I think I've made my point though, as have other other. In short: put up or shut up...change the record.

My name is URL

Is there any evidence to suggest that taxpayers money is being spent on the flotillas or is it just conjecture?

Nodin

prinz wrote: »

...and the 'slaughter of fishermen' isn't? :rolleyes: ..but of course I'm trolling, I'm spinning....

...given your proven track record of being less than aqquainted with the truth, thats hardly suprising.

FlutterinBantam

youcrazyjesus! wrote: »

Your questions are as loaded as "are you a sex offender?".



You know a little bit more than you post here yet you don't know if Fintan Lane is employed by anybody? Come off it.

If you've any information that there was any more than medical and repatriation costs incurred by our State please let us know. If you've any evidence that somebody other than Israel is responsible please let us know. I'd like to hear all information you have as would everyone else. Surely you can tell us without compromising your source.



I'm not trying to get anything to "work", it's as clear as day from your posts you're obsessed about "your" taxmoney ending up in the hands of people whose political views you don't like.

Can I take a guess at something? Bitter about taxes, those in receipt of State money but who in your mind aren't entitled to it, academics and students.....you're a country Garda right?

Getting way OT actually. Mods will step in. I think I've made my point though, as have other other. In short: put up or shut up...change the record.

Off topic!

Are you for real?

I am shining a light on the 'mariners' on the Rachel Corrie and going a little deeper than the normal poster might go.

You obviously don't like me doing that and feel rather uncomfortable.

I am more interested in the Grahams, Halliday, Maguire, Butterly et al and their motivation and funding rather than the minutiae of the operational events.

You obviously are a bit uncomfortable with that;)

hideous ape

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

:eek:

So you are quite happy for your taxes, if you pay any, to be used by individuals for their own purposes rather than what they were intended for?

I can't speak for anyone else here but I pay over €800 a month in taxes to this state.

If you work and pay taxes in this state then by default you agree for the state to do what the hell it wants with your taxes. By default you also agree to allow individuals do what the hell they want with your taxes. If you have a problem with your taxes going to people of certain cultures or social strata then you might be better off contacting your local TD or leaving the country.

Although when you present your theories that you don't want certain people from getting your taxes don't be surprized if you get called a loon and asked to leave your local TD's office!

Alternatively you could write your name and address on each and every bit of money you pay in taxes and then demand that the state provides you with a written record of where that money went;)

prinz

hideous ape wrote: »

The difference is that Israel will never have to face any enquiry to find out what actually happened. In a civilian stand-off situation if a person fires a shotgun at the police and he has also been given enough warnings to drop the weapon then most people accept that the police are left with no choice but to legally return fire.

I agree, you have reinfrced my point entirely. In the latest incident we don't know how many warnings were given / if there was an exchange of fire etc, in some instances sometimes it's not always a simple matter to capture people alive. In a military stand-off the above equally applies btw.

youcrazyjesus!

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

I am shining a light on the 'mariners' on the Rachel Corrie and going a little deeper than the normal poster might go.

Posting repetitive claptrap that contains precisely no information whatsoever is not "shining a light" on anything.

You obviously don't like me doing that and feel rather uncomfortable.

You're not doing anything. You're imparting no information on anything whatsoever.

I am more interested in the Grahams, Halliday, Maguire, Butterly et al and their motivation and funding rather than the minutiae of the operational events.

They've stated hundreds of times what their motivation is and the source of their funding for their ship is probably not hard to find, they'd tell you if you asked them I'm sure. The nature of their employment or otherwise is not hard to find either I'm sure, again it's probably something they'd tell you if you asked them.

You obviously are a bit uncomfortable with that;)

I'm not sure if you think you're being cute or clever here or something but for the record I'm not involved in any political group and never have been, nor do I know anybody involved in the flotilla. However I will be donating 100 euro to the next one.

Way to avoid my question too, I'll take that as a yes then. Surely you should be avoiding getting involved in politics and prying into the lawful business of private citizens for political purposes.
That could land someone in your position in very serious trouble.

FlutterinBantam

hideous ape wrote: »

I can't speak for anyone else here but I pay over €800 a month in taxes to this state.

If you work and pay taxes in this state then by default you agree for the state to do what the hell it wants with your taxes. By default you also agree to allow individuals do what the hell they want with your taxes. If you have a problem with your taxes going to people of certain cultures or social strata then you might be better off contacting your local TD or leaving the country.

Although when you present your theories that you don't want certain people from getting your taxes don't be surprized if you get called a loon and asked to leave your local TD's office!

You do in your bollix!


Now ,let's get back to my point.

What the state does with my taxes, is certainly my concern.

I am perfectly entitled to interrogate the state and it's representatives as to how they use my taxes.

If I could draw attention to Mr. Callelly, why is there such a furore about that, and nothing about the other misuses of taxpayers money?

FlutterinBantam

youcrazyjesus! wrote: »

That could land someone in your position in very serious trouble.

:eek:

Explain how that would happen?

yogidc26

- http://www.youtube.com/user/RussiaToday could be the start of a war with the two navys

youcrazyjesus!

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

What the state does with my taxes, is certainly my concern.

It shouldn't concern you when the state is employing people to teach the next generation.

I am perfectly entitled to interrogate the state and it's representatives as to how they use my taxes.

You're entitled to interrogate precisely nobody. You can get involved in a debate but that's about it. Data protection laws means you can't pry into the affairs of other individual citizens. You can, if you position allows, run for election or join a political party or even start one up yourself. You can publish reports and so on although seeing as it's a week later and you still haven't found out whether Fintan Lane is employed by anyone that could take a while.

If I could draw attention to Mr. Callelly, why is there such a furore about that, and nothing about the other misuses of taxpayers money?

What other misuses? Specifically.

Run_to_da_hills

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Off topic!

Are you for real?

I am shining a light on the 'mariners' on the Rachel Corrie and going a little deeper than the normal poster might go.

You obviously don't like me doing that and feel rather uncomfortable.

I am more interested in the Grahams, Halliday, Maguire, Butterly et al and their motivation and funding rather than the minutiae of the operational events.

You obviously are a bit uncomfortable with that;)

Had you been about during and shortly after WW2 would you have bitched about Jews receiving interntional aid and assistance contributed by various international taxpayers (Whether direct or indirect) ?.

It goes without saying: "Put a beggar on horseback.. and he will ride to hell.!!l".

FlutterinBantam

][QUOTE=youcrazyjesus!;66278037It shouldn't concern you when the state is employing people to teach the next generation.[/QUOTE]

So I shouldn' give a toss what my children are being taught?

youcrazyjesus! wrote: »

You're entitled to interrogate precisely nobody. You can get involved in a debate but that's about it. Data protection laws means you can't pry into the affairs of other individual citizens. You can, if you position allows, run for election or join a political party or even start one up yourself. You can publish reports and so on although seeing as it's a week later and you still haven't found out whether Fintan Lane is employed by anyone that could take a while.

As a taxpayer I'm perfectly entitled to ask how my hard earned tax Euros are spent.

youcrazyjesus! wrote: »

What other misuses? Specifically.

I wasn't being specific.

youcrazyjesus!

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

:eek:

Explain how that would happen?

Eh digging up information on people because you don't like their politics, exposing their affairs to the public for your own political purposes when you have absolutely no evidence of illegality or wrongdoing is probably illegal.

For example, (I've no idea if he is or not btw) if Dr Fintan Lane requested and was granted 3 weeks leave in order to join the flotilla and you posted that information up on here criticising him and saying he's "misusing taxpayers money" (which I'm sure you'd do even though to the rest of humanity he's taking legitimate leave from his employment) that could land you in a lot of trouble in your own employment if it was discovered. If you posted up "such and such is in receipt of unemployment benefit yet joined this Gaza flotilla, they've no right to use my taxpayers money to go to Gaza blah blah blah" (even though what they do with their money is their business and it would be perfectly legitimate of them to leave the state for any reason) and exposed their business to the world for your own political purposes again it's something that could land you in trouble.

If you want me to cite specific codes of conduct and, in fact, laws I'm sure given time I could dig them up.

If you want to find out about these people your best bet is to ask them, otherwise you're treading on thin ice.

youcrazyjesus!

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

]So I shouldn' give a toss what my children are being taught?

I'm saying it shouldn't concern you THAT the state is employing people to teach. The subject matter is a totally different subject.

As a taxpayer I'm perfectly entitled to ask how my hard earned tax Euros are spent.

Where your tax money goes is a matter of public record. You're not entitled to dig up the private business of individual citizens without very good reason.

I wasn't being specific.

I know. That's why I asked the question duh.

FlutterinBantam

youcrazyjesus! wrote: »

Eh digging up information on people because you don't like their politics, exposing their affairs to the public for your own political purposes when you have absolutely no evidence of illegality or wrongdoing is probably illegal.

For example, (I've no idea if he is or not btw) if Dr Fintan Lane requested and was granted 3 weeks leave in order to join the flotilla and you posted that information up on here criticising him and saying he's "misusing taxpayers money" (which I'm sure you'd do even though to the rest of humanity he's taking legitimate leave from his employment) that could land you in a lot of trouble in your own employment if it was discovered. If you posted up "such and such is in receipt of unemployment benefit yet joined this Gaza flotilla, they've no right to use my taxpayers money to go to Gaza blah blah blah" (even though what they do with their money is their business and it would be perfectly legitimate of them to leave the state for any reason) and exposed their business to the world for your own political purposes again it's something that could land you in trouble.

If you want me to cite specific codes of conduct and, in fact, laws I'm sure given time I could dig them up.

If you want to find out about these people your best bet is to ask them, otherwise you're treading on thin ice.

Jeez ..I'm all broke up here, bent outa shape.

I'm only asking the questions, not accusing anyone.

Don't bother citing codes of conduct, I'm well able to take care of myself.

You seem very defensive about all this stuff.

All I want to know is the background to these activists.

karma_

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Jeez ..I'm all broke up here, bent outa shape.

I'm only asking the questions, not accusing anyone.

Don't bother citing codes of conduct, I'm well able to take care of myself.

You seem very defensive about all this stuff.

All I want to know is the background to these activists.

Your not 'asking questions'

Your casting aspersions, and your aware your doing it.

Nodin

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

I'm only asking the questions, not accusing anyone.

You make vague off topic remarks. You're incapable of answering questions put to you.

youcrazyjesus!

Why do you think I would be defensive about it? It's not a rhetorical question.

Again, for the record I've no political affiliations nor do I know anybody involved in the flotilla. I am however concerned that somebody in your position would think it appropriate to expose details of the private lives of citizens because you don't like their politics and assume them guilty (without any evidence whatsoever, including not even knowing the nature of their employment) of some crime or wrondgoing simply because of the opinions they hold on some issues. The assuming them guilty without any evidence is the worst part. Spare me the "I'm only asking questions" routine. It's not fooling anybody.

hideous ape

prinz wrote: »

I agree, you have reinfrced my point entirely. In the latest incident we don't know how many warnings were given / if there was an exchange of fire etc, in some instances sometimes it's not always a simple matter to capture people alive. In a military stand-off the above equally applies btw.

You clearly missed the fact that I happen to share the idea that if a police force or army is fired upon then they are fully entitled to fire back in defence.

The crucial point in my post that you chose to ignore was that comparing a situation involving a civilian with mental issues to a terrorist group is not fair and should not be allowed to pass unchallenged.

This specific Israeli incident and Irish taxes are miles off topic...could a Mod please step in and drag this thread back on topic!

FlutterinBantam

karma_ wrote: »

Your not 'asking questions'

Your casting aspersions, and your aware your doing it.

'You're' by the way.

Shining a light in to the backgrounds of these 'activists' obviously has ruffled a few feathers.

To get a rounded view on events one has to delve a little, dig up some background and get the real reason for all this stuff.

Peripheral punters see things in black and white and tend to form opinions based on their current mood, populist opinion without looking at the background of things.

Bit like the residents of Donnycarney who thought CJH was GOD .

Me!

Like to get the real story:cool:

youcrazyjesus!

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

'You're' by the way.

Shining a light in to the backgrounds of these 'activists' obviously has ruffled a few feathers.

Why would it "ruffle feathers" when you've imparted absolutely no information whatsoever and can't even find out if somebody is employed in UCC or not. Why would it "ruffle feathers" when even if everyone board is employed by the State or is in receipt of unemployment benefit it wouldn't mean anything anyway?

In order to "shine a light" you need to have information. You have absolutely no information whatsoever. All you've done is slander people with groundless accusations.

To get a rounded view on events one has to delve a little, dig up some background and get the real reason for all this stuff.

Peripheral punters see things in black and white and tend to form opinions based on their current mood, populist opinion without looking at the background of things.

Paranoid, deluded nonsense.

Bit like the residents of Donnycarney who thought CJH was GOD .

Haughey's popularity stretched a bit further than Donnycarney.

Offy

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

'You're' by the way.

Shining a light in to the backgrounds of these 'activists' obviously has ruffled a few feathers.

To get a rounded view on events one has to delve a little, dig up some background and get the real reason for all this stuff.

Peripheral punters see things in black and white and tend to form opinions based on their current mood, populist opinion without looking at the background of things.

Bit like the residents of Donnycarney who thought CJH was GOD .

Me!

Like to get the real story:cool:

Once again can you please stay on topic? It really looks like your only here to start a flame war. This was an interesting and informitive discussion till you got involved, please stop trying to annoy people.

FlutterinBantam

youcrazyjesus! wrote: »

Why would it "ruffle feathers" when you've imparted absolutely no information whatsoever and can't even find out if somebody is employed in UCC or not. Why would it "ruffle feathers" when even if everyone board is employed by the State or is in receipt of unemployment benefit it wouldn't mean anything anyway?

I'm asking questions not imparting information

youcrazyjesus! wrote: »

In order to "shine a light" you need to have information. You have absolutely no information whatsoever. All you've done is slander people with groundless accusations.

The reason you shine a light is to GET information.

youcrazyjesus! wrote: »

Haughey's popularity stretched a bit further than Donnycarney.

:rolleyes:You just don't get it do you?

FlutterinBantam

Offy wrote: »

Once again can you please stay on topic? It really looks like your only here to start a flame war. This was an interesting and informitive discussion till you got involved, please stop trying to annoy people.

Incorrect on all counts.

What counts for you as an interesting discussion is a bunch of posters trying to diss. the US and Israel and lauding the heroes on the Rachel Corrie.


I am trying to go deeper to get some background on the crew of the Rachel Corrie and this is obviously upsetting you.

Please don't try to mod this forum yourself.

youcrazyjesus!

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

I'm asking questions not imparting information

That's the point I was making. :rolleyes:

I think I've done enough to expose you as a charlatan whose only interest in this thread is to slander those whose politics you don't agree with by making vague statements and refusing to be specific about anything. It's totally obvious what you're up to. I hope nobody reading this takes you seriously.

I find it worrying that somebody in your position is so psychologically disposed towards being biased against those with a particular political viewpoint. You're not fit to wear the uniform.

OUT.

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

Haddockman wrote: »

Hopefully the taxpayer will not be footing the bill for their next deportation from Israel.

No, we should keep the taxes for hair do's and helicopter rides for our politicians. Right? :rolleyes:

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Looks like these 'activists' are winding up for another flotilla around September.

As a taxpayer, does one ever wonder who is funding these operations?.

It's a bit like these punters are kind of 'professional disturbers' who travel from cause to cause .

Rent -a- mob to be honest.

Hopefully my taxes are not used to support these Don Quixotes and that if they believe in their causes, let them fund them themselves.

We will hear various accounts of rubbish basically, and these drones will have access to the national airwaves at our expense.

Hopefully the well informed Irish public will understand the spin these people are putting on events and have the chutzpah and intelligence to take them for what they are..

Thought you were only allowed talk shíte twice a month?

FlutterinBantam

youcrazyjesus! wrote: »

That's the point I was making. :rolleyes:

I think I've done enough to expose you as a charlatan whose only interest in this thread is to slander those whose politics you don't agree with by making vague statements and refusing to be specific about anything. It's totally obvious what you're up to. I hope nobody reading this takes you seriously.

I find it worrying that somebody in your position is so psychologically disposed towards being biased against those with a particular political viewpoint. You're not fit to wear the uniform.

OUT.

heh heh When someone stands up and questions the people on the Rachel Corrie and their background, it seems to be perceived as treason.

Some of us have a little more savvy than others and like to get the vested interests and background.

What i'm up to is inquiring as to the motivation and funding of crew members of the Rachel Corrie and the use or not of taxpayers funds to repatriate them.

No more no less .

Offy

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Incorrect on all counts.

What counts for you as an interesting discussion is a bunch of posters trying to diss. the US and Israel and lauding the heroes on the Rachel Corrie.


I am trying to go deeper to get some background on the crew of the Rachel Corrie and this is obviously upsetting you.

Please don't try to mod this forum yourself.

Why can you not understand that diss. US and Isreal are acceptable when they are purposely killing civilians? Do you really believe that US and Israel are beyond doing wrong or do you believe that if US and Israel do something it must be right? Killing aid workers, civilians, fishermen is wrong. They are not solders nor terrorists. They are ordinary people just like me! Not all of us think war and death are desirable.
If you not interested in conversations like this one then why did you get involved?

Moomoo1

why does the background of the people of RC even matter?

fact is, they were on a mission to deliver aid and to highlight the plight of Gaza. Where they come from, what they believe in and what they do in their day job is not really relevant.

Offy

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

heh heh When someone stands up and questions the people on the Rachel Corrie and their background, it seems to be perceived as treason.

Some of us have a little more savvy than others and like to get the vested interests and background.

What i'm up to is inquiring as to the motivation and funding of crew members of the Rachel Corrie and the use or not of taxpayers funds to repatriate them.

No more no less .

Whats the heh heh for? Why do you find this issue funny?

FlutterinBantam

Moomoo1 wrote: »

why does the background of the people of RC even matter?

fact is, they were on a mission to deliver aid and to highlight the plight of Gaza. Where they come from, what they believe in and what they do in their day job is not really relevant.

It is to me.

It should be to you.

Moomoo1

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

It is to me.

It should be to you.

why?

FlutterinBantam

Moomoo1 wrote: »

why?

I would have thought that would be perfectly obvious.

Would you be happy with vigilantes patrolling your area without any care about their background.?

And before someone says I'm comparing the crew of the RC with vigilantes I'm not.

So you don't care about anyone's background as long as they do something you agree with.


You would be happy with drug dealers dishing out Xmas presents to your kids?


Yes?

Moomoo1

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

I would have thought that would be perfectly obvious.

Would you be happy with vigilantes patrolling your area without any care about their background.?

And before someone says I'm comparing the crew of the RC with vigilantes I'm not.

So you don't care about anyone's background as long as they do something you agree with.


You would be happy with drug dealers dishing out Xmas presents to your kids?


Yes?

woudln't be happy with vigilantes patrolling my area, no. Drug dealers giving presents - that's less controversial, as long as they weren't high or giving drugs as presents.

by your argument, because Wagner was an anti-semite his music is cr*p. Because Lawrence was anti-semite his books were cr*p. Because Clinton got head from Monica he was a cr*p president. And so on. But that's false.

What you are in real life only affects the role that you undertake in certain cases. This isn't a case where it bears any relation at all. The fact is they were delivering aid and nothing but aid, and there's no occupation in the world that would make one unsuitable for that job. Unlike the case with the patrolling vigilantes.

Micky Dolenz

Alright Lads, reign it in please. Please try and keep this somewhere near the original topic. It would be a shame to have to close it.

Thanks

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

Moomoo1 wrote: »

why does the background of the people of RC even matter?

fact is, they were on a mission to deliver aid and to highlight the plight of Gaza. Where they come from, what they believe in and what they do in their day job is not really relevant.

Because, if any dirt can be dug up on them, then somehow, their whole mission can be debunked... for some reason or another...

Moomoo1

Colson Eager Serf wrote: »

Because, if any dirt can be dug up on them, then somehow, their whole mission can be debunked... for some reason or another...

but how can it be debunked? If you are dying of thirst and a guy brings you water, will you ask for his occupation and motive, check his documents, and only accept water if he's of a suitable enough character to be delivering water to people dying of thirst?

Offy

An Irish activist whose ship was blocked from delivering aid supplies to Gaza has accused the Israeli government of committing "slow genocide" against the Palestinian people.
Nobel peace prize-winner Mairead Maguire was deported with fellow campaigners from the MV Rachel Corrie after the vessel failed to break through Israel's illegal blockade.
After landing in Dublin with four other Irish crew members, Ms Maguire pledged to return to the war-torn territory and renew her efforts to help those who live there.
"Gaza has been cut off from the world for over three years. The people of Gaza don't have enough basic things for their needs," she said.
"It's Israeli policies that are causing this - there is a slow genocide of the Palestinian people."
There were emotional scenes at Dublin airport as the deportees were reunited with family and friends.
Embracing her husband Jack, Ms Maguire said efforts to end the blockade must now be stepped up.
"We would go back, of course - the international community, we all have a role to play to tell this story," she said.
"US President Barack Obama has the power to say to the Israeli government, 'enough is enough, your policy is not acceptable and you must choose peace'."
Also returning home were former UN assistant secretary-general Denis Halliday, ship captain Derek Graham, his wife Jenny, and Dundalk film-maker Fiona Thompson.
From: http://uk.news.yahoo.com/21/20100607/tuk-maguire-gaza-blockade-genocide-e1cd776.html

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

Moomoo1 wrote: »

but how can it be debunked? If you are dying of thirst and a guy brings you water, will you ask for his occupation and motive, check his documents, and only accept water if he's of a suitable enough character to be delivering water to people dying of thirst?

I'm agreeing with you

There is no reasoning behind digging up dirt on the activists past. It doesn't matter a shít. It just gives some people feul, in other words, FB can bítch and whine about how the activists have a shady past etc etc, which means fcuk all really.

Offy

Colson Eager Serf wrote: »

I'm agreeing with you

There is no reasoning behind digging up dirt on the activists past. It doesn't matter a shít. It just gives some people feul, in other words, FB can bítch and whine about how the activists have a shady past etc etc, which means fcuk all really.

Its a political tactic, discredit your opponent to turn the general public on them. It implies FB sees the activists as opponents.

Run_to_da_hills

This will be a very interesting PR challenge for the Israel authorities to try and stop this ship particularly if it is anchored in international waters.

http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id...onid=351020101

Manic Moran

What good is it going to do anyone if anchored in international waters?

Note that they're planning on sending the aid ships through Egypt, not direct to Gaza.

NTM

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

Offy wrote: »

Its a political tactic, discredit your opponent to turn the general public on them. It implies FB sees the activists as opponents.

I understand how it works in a political environment, but not this, what is the point of doing that here? It serves no purpose.

Offy

Colson Eager Serf wrote: »

I understand how it works in a political environment, but not this, what is the point of doing that here? It serves no purpose.

It does no good here, its trolling imo.

Offy

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

This will be a very interesting PR challenge for the Israel authorities to try and stop this ship particularly if it is anchored in international waters.

http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id...onid=351020101

It certainly gets my interest. I look forward to seeing Israels response.