Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Irish rugby star to become hero in flotilla.

124678

Comments

  • #92
    prinz
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,598 ✭✭✭✭prinz


    mprgst78 wrote: »
    Surely the Israelis are not outright lying?

    Israelis would never lie. Ever.


  • #93
    mprgst78
    Closed Accounts Posts: 84 ✭✭mprgst78


    dlofnep wrote: »
    They have blocked many sources of food into Gaza. They allow basic foods into Gaza, but they block anything considered a 'luxury item'. That can be something as simple as a can of soda, to a bar of chocolate. They had banned macaroni.. Who bans Macaroni? They have also blocked musical instruments, house building materials (despite the fact that Israel has destroyed the Gazan infrastructure), and many other items.

    Now if they just banned weapons, knives etc.. People might be a little more understanding - But to block what they deem to be 'luxury items', definitely places the blockade under the title of 'collective punishment', and therefore it breaches the 4th Geneva Convention.

    They say that they've delivered a ton of food for every man woman and child (all free of charge by the way) over the past 18 months (article written May 2010) and you're saying they're war criminals because they didn't allow the chocolate to be delivered???


  • #94
    mprgst78
    Closed Accounts Posts: 84 ✭✭mprgst78


    prinz wrote: »
    Israelis would never lie. Ever.

    Pass me a bucket.


  • #95
    prinz
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,598 ✭✭✭✭prinz


    mprgst78 wrote: »
    Pass me a bucket.

    Going to stick your head in it and bang it with a wooden spoon? It was a joke.


  • #96
    dlofnep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,759 ✭✭✭✭dlofnep


    mprgst78 wrote: »
    They say that they've delivered a ton of food for every man woman and child (all free of charge by the way) over the past 18 months (article written May 2010) and you're saying they're war criminals because they didn't allow the chocolate to be delivered???

    They have broken the rules of the 4th Geneva Convention as they are implementing collective punishment. I'm not sure what it is about this you don't understand. They allow only the most basic foods into Gaza, and do not allow building materials.

    Therefore - the people are either living in makeshift tents, or clay huts - and are living on a diet of only the most basic foods. It absolutely qualifies as collective punishment.


  • Advertisement
  • #97
    Phill Ewinn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,007 ✭✭✭Phill Ewinn


    mprgst78 wrote: »
    They say that they've delivered a ton of food for every man woman and child (all free of charge by the way) over the past 18 months (article written May 2010) and you're saying they're war criminals because they didn't allow the chocolate to be delivered???

    You're using the word war. Accurate discription. What is happening is a dumbing down of the language generally, which I find irritating. There's also the brainwashing of thousands of poor dopes into going along with the zionist agenda. Another tactic used in this war. People with sense and charity are comming in boats to offer friendship and all people can do is have a pissing contest over who can repeat the most BS. Have a little think how lucky you are not to have been born palestinian.


  • #98
    mprgst78
    Closed Accounts Posts: 84 ✭✭mprgst78


    Phill Ewinn wrote: »
    You're using the word war. Accurate discription. What is happening is a dumbing down of the language generally, which I find irritating. There's also the brainwashing of thousands of poor dopes into going along with the zionist agenda. Another tactic used in this war. People with sense and charity are comming in boats to offer friendship and all people can do is have a pissing contest over who can repeat the most BS. Have a little think how lucky you are not to have been born palestinian.

    On what basis do you legitimize your occupation of the moral high ground? Your divine word?


  • #99
    mprgst78
    Closed Accounts Posts: 84 ✭✭mprgst78


    dlofnep wrote: »
    They have broken the rules of the 4th Geneva Convention as they are implementing collective punishment. I'm not sure what it is about this you don't understand. They allow only the most basic foods into Gaza, and do not allow building materials.

    Therefore - the people are either living in makeshift tents, or clay huts - and are living on a diet of only the most basic foods. It absolutely qualifies as collective punishment.

    Let me get this straight. You're saying that:

    Country A repeatedly attacks Country B's civilians. Country B attempts to defend itself by securing its borders. Country B ships a ton of food to each of Country A's civilians. Country B is guily of war crimes because this food aid does not contain caviar and cigars.

    What am I missing?


  • #100
    Mr. Presentable
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,495 ✭✭✭Mr. Presentable


    dlofnep wrote: »
    They have broken the rules of the 4th Geneva Convention as they are implementing collective punishment. I'm not sure what it is about this you don't understand. They allow only the most basic foods into Gaza, and do not allow building materials.

    Therefore - the people are either living in makeshift tents, or clay huts - and are living on a diet of only the most basic foods. It absolutely qualifies as collective punishment.

    OK, I am no expert here, but isn't the Geneva Convention for Humanitarian treatment in War? In war it seems reasonable for one to stop the supply of luxuries to another.

    Also, I note Israel is credited solely with the blockade. Isn't Egypt also blockading Gaza?


  • #101
    The Brigadier
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,549 ✭✭✭The Brigadier


    dlofnep wrote: »
    It is illegal under the 4th Geneva Convention, which prohibits collective punishment. Since Israel has blocked legitimate sources of food, medical supplies and building materials - it affects a collective population, and therefore breaches the 4th Geneva Convention. It's quite simple. The blockade is illegal.

    Are Israel signed up to that? I believe they are only partial signatories to the Geneva Convention.


  • Advertisement
  • #102
    Phill Ewinn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,007 ✭✭✭Phill Ewinn


    mprgst78 wrote: »
    On what basis do you legitimize your occupation of the moral high ground? Your divine word?

    Whether I evolved from an ape or God made me man I have humanity. No ammount of propaganda or brainwashing will change that. The challenge is for you to see yourself as Gods tool. To use yourself for his good causes. Man up and take the challenge.


  • #103
    prinz
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,598 ✭✭✭✭prinz


    Mr. Presentable wrote: »
    Also, I note Israel is credited solely with the blockade. Isn't Egypt also blockading Gaza?

    Hush now Mr., it's not nearly as glamourous.


  • #104
    mprgst78
    Closed Accounts Posts: 84 ✭✭mprgst78


    Mr. Presentable wrote: »
    Also, I note Israel is credited solely with the blockade. Isn't Egypt also blockading Gaza?

    Sssshh! Don't burst their bubble!


  • #105
    Seachmall
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,041 ✭✭✭Seachmall


    Phill Ewinn wrote: »
    Whether I evolved from an ape or God made me man I have humanity. No ammount of propaganda or brainwashing will change that. The challenge is for you to see yourself as Gods tool. To use yourself for his good causes. Man up and take the challenge.

    Well you're certainly a tool, although whether that's God's tool or not I don't know.


  • #106
    The Brigadier
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,549 ✭✭✭The Brigadier


    Mr. Presentable wrote: »
    OK, I am no expert here, but isn't the Geneva Convention for Humanitarian treatment in War? In war it seems reasonable for one to stop the supply of luxuries to another.

    Also, I note Israel is credited solely with the blockade. Isn't Egypt also blockading Gaza?

    My understanding on things is the original geneva convention applies in times of war. Israel does not recognise Palestine as a sovereign state. They are not alone in this. As such Israel is not at war with Palestine and the geneva convention does not apply.

    I have yet to see any definitive ruling on this so calling the blockade illegal is simply opinion.


  • #107
    dlofnep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,759 ✭✭✭✭dlofnep


    Mr. Presentable wrote: »
    OK, I am no expert here, but isn't the Geneva Convention for Humanitarian treatment in War? In war it seems reasonable for one to stop the supply of luxuries to another.

    Incorrect.
    Art. 33. No protected person may be punished for an offence he or she has not personally committed. Collective penalties and likewise all measures of intimidation or of terrorism are prohibited.

    It is not reasonable for one to stop supplies of luxuries to another. Bearing in mind, that our idea of luxury items (jacuzzis, 3d TV's, leather couches) and Israel's idea of luxury items (toys, chocolate, macaroni) are completely different. The idea of Israel is to demoralise the Palestinian people, by only allowing them the most basic foodstuffs. Therefore, it most certainly is deemed as collective punishment, and is under the 4th Geneva Convention a warcrime.
    Mr. Presentable wrote: »
    Also, I note Israel is credited solely with the blockade. Isn't Egypt also blockading Gaza?

    Indeed it is, and is also guilty in this respect.


  • #108
    The Brigadier
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,549 ✭✭✭The Brigadier


    dlofnep wrote: »
    It is not reasonable for one to stop supplies of luxuries to another. Bearing in mind, that our idea of luxury items (jacuzzis, 3d TV's, leather couches) and Israel's idea of luxury items (soda, chocolate, macaroni) are completely different. The idea of Israel is to demoralise the Palestinian people, by only allowing them the most basic foodstuffs. Therefore, it most certainly is deemed as collective punishment, and is under the 4th Geneva Convention a warcrime.

    As I pointed out earlier I don't see how this covers the situation in question. I don't see how the Palestinians are protected?

    Can you show me a judgement to support this?


  • #109
    dlofnep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,759 ✭✭✭✭dlofnep


    The Brigadier wrote: »
    My understanding on things is the original geneva convention applies in times of war. Israel does not recognise Palestine as a sovereign state. They are not alone in this. As such Israel is not at war with Palestine and the geneva convention does not apply.

    Thus begins the conundrum. If Israel is not at war with Palestine, then there is no legal basis for a blockade. If it is at war, then it must adhere to the 4th Geneva Convention.

    Remember - the UN has declared the blockade illegal, which is far more important in my view.


  • #110
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    The Brigadier wrote: »
    My understanding on things is the original geneva convention applies in times of war. Israel does not recognise Palestine as a sovereign state. They are not alone in this. As such Israel is not at war with Palestine and the geneva convention does not apply.

    No, Israel does not recognise the West Bank, Arab East Jerusalem, Golan etc as being occupied. If an area is not occupied, then the Geneva convention does not apply. This is, of course, nonsense used to avoid giving basic protections to the Palestinians.

    The applicability of the Geneva convention to the occupied territories has been upheld by the contracting parties.
    http://www.fmep.org/reports/archive/vol.-12/no.-1/conference-of-high-contracting-parties-to-the-fourth-geneva-convention-declaration

    This is also the view of the UN and Red Cross.


  • #111
    dlofnep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,759 ✭✭✭✭dlofnep


    The Brigadier wrote: »
    As I pointed out earlier I don't see how this covers the situation in question. I don't see how the Palestinians are protected?

    Can you show me a judgement to support this?

    http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/06/05/israel-flotilla-un-idUSLDE65404020100605
    UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay said on Saturday Israel's blockade of Gaza is illegal and should be lifted


  • Advertisement
  • #112
    The Brigadier
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,549 ✭✭✭The Brigadier


    dlofnep wrote: »
    http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/06/05/israel-flotilla-un-idUSLDE65404020100605

    That isn't a judgement - just an opinion.


  • #113
    mprgst78
    Closed Accounts Posts: 84 ✭✭mprgst78


    dlofnep wrote: »
    http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/06/05/israel-flotilla-un-idUSLDE65404020100605

    Ah the UN Human Rights Council! Which Libya had the honour of chairing until recently. Where Israel is the only country permanently on the agenda! Let's all bow to the impartial judgements of the UN!


  • #114
    dlofnep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,759 ✭✭✭✭dlofnep


    The Brigadier wrote: »
    That isn't a judgement - just an opinion.

    I think the opinion of the UN Human Right's High commissioner carries substantial weight.

    The blockade also violates UN Security Council resolution 1860, which states:
    "an immediate ceasefire in Gaza leading to a full Israeli withdrawal, unimpeded provision through Gaza of food, fuel and medical treatment, and intensified international arrangements to prevent arms and ammunition smuggling.

    The provision of food is not unimpeded, therefore - it violates this resolution. Anything else? I can do this all day.


  • #115
    mprgst78
    Closed Accounts Posts: 84 ✭✭mprgst78


    dlofnep wrote: »
    I think the opinion of the UN Human Right's High commissioner carries substantial weight.

    The blockade also violates UN Security Council resolution 1860, which states:



    The provision of food is not unimpeded, therefore - it violates this resolution. Anything else? I can do this all day.

    Again, the UN is a corrupt, ineffective, anti-semitic bureaucracy that has lost all moral authority. Only a nieve dolt would continue to hold it in any esteem.


  • #116
    The Brigadier
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,549 ✭✭✭The Brigadier


    dlofnep wrote: »
    I think the opinion of the UN Human Right's High commissioner carries substantial weight.

    The blockade also violates UN Security Council resolution 1860, which states:



    The provision of food is not unimpeded, therefore - it violates this resolution. Anything else? I can do this all day.

    But is does that breach make the blockade illegal?

    I'm not in favour of the blockade, quite the opposite in fact. I am just not sure it is actually illegal in any way.


  • #117
    dlofnep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,759 ✭✭✭✭dlofnep


    mprgst78 wrote: »
    Ah the UN Human Rights Council! Which Libya had the honour of chairing until recently. Where Israel is the only country permanently on the agenda! Let's all bow to the impartial judgements of the UN!

    You're deflecting. The reality is - food is blocked, and therefore - it is deemed as collective punishment. I'm astounded the the lengths supporters of Israel will go to, to defend their actions. There is no defence for blocking children's toys, chocolate, coriander, fruit juices and other foods. It is simply unacceptable, and affects a collective population.


  • #118
    dlofnep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,759 ✭✭✭✭dlofnep


    The Brigadier wrote: »
    But is does that breach make the blockade illegal?

    I'm not in favour of the blockade, quite the opposite in fact. I am just not sure it is actually illegal in any way.

    Answer yourself the following questions.

    1) Does Israel have a right, under any circumstances to block food, fruit juices and toys to a collective population? If so, cite me where this is legally permissible.

    2) Is Israel at war with Gaza?

    3) If not, what is their justification for their blockade, and routine attacks on Gazan territory?


  • #119
    Predalien
    Closed Accounts Posts: 946 ✭✭✭Predalien


    As regards the Geneva conventions even if it's not an international conflict from a technical point of view wouldn't common article 3 apply anyway?


  • #120
    prinz
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,598 ✭✭✭✭prinz


    mprgst78 wrote: »
    Again, the UN is a corrupt, ineffective, anti-semitic bureaucracy that has lost all moral authority. Only a nieve dolt would continue to hold it in any esteem.

    Well colour me purple and call me a 'nieve' dolt. It's far from perfect but it's the only thing we've got.


  • Advertisement
  • #121
    dlofnep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,759 ✭✭✭✭dlofnep


    mprgst78 wrote: »
    Again, the UN is a corrupt, ineffective, anti-semitic bureaucracy that has lost all moral authority. Only a nieve dolt would continue to hold it in any esteem.

    That's peculiar, considering it was Israel that sought recognition for their independence from the UN. But then again - anyone that criticises Israel is always casted as anti-Semitic. Primarily because Israel actually has no logical defence for it's actions, and results in the lowest common denominator of defence - which is to throw mud on those who criticise it, in a hope that it sticks.

    It truly baffles me that anyone thinks the primary motive for global criticism of Israel is one based on ethnicity or religious beliefs. It would be much more logical to assume that the criticism is based on Israeli actions, rather than something as trivial as religion or ethnicity.


Advertisement