Zionist piracy

[Mrs.Lucysnow]

???

I asked you a simple question.

Since you're referring to the San Remo Manual to justify the blockade... Oh wait, sorry. You copied and pasted an opinion piece of why the San Remon Manual justifies the blockade. So much for taking information from multiple sources, integrating them, and actually thinking for yourself.

Whatever. If you're going to hide behind the Sam Remo Manual, that implies that you're accepting the fact that:

1. Gaza is a sovereign nation.

2. Gaza is a belligerent (ie. there has been a declaration of war between Gaza and Israel).

Follow me so far, sweetcheeks?

Oh, now let's take this one step further. States participating in warfare are bound by certain international laws. Some of these laws are known as the Geneva Conventions. Now, if Israel is indeed at war with Gaza, it's violating a fuckload of these Conventions. For example, the Fourth Convention, which prohibits the establishment of civilians settlements on territory captured during war (ie. territory captured during war cannot be annexed). That's precisely why the Israeli administration has been reluctant to acknowledge Gaza's statehood, and also why it has never openly admitted to being at war with this nation.

So, all I can say is, pick your poison. Either Israel is legally entitled to enact the blockade but is definitely breaking a fuckload of other international laws, or is not entitled to enact the blockade and is arguably breaking a fuckload of international laws.

Do you still want to argue legalities with me, honey?

Let's put it this way in terms many are fond of around here, when Hitler took over power in Germany his 'country' turned into a menace for its neighbors and needed to be stopped. Are you following me sweet cheeks? There were lot's of things Germany couldn't do under the Treaty of Versailles and yet they managed through industry to make enough arms and attack their neighbor . Now aren't you glad that Germany was finally stopped and turned into a 'country' with a civil society? I mean when they were left as some after-war fuck up with fighting between all the political factions and under a weak Weimar government it was rife to become something terrible. Israel is trying to contain Gaza and not allow it to turn into something that can hurt Israel proper all of which is entirely legal. Now you can argue that this isn't right and you can argue that it isn't working, but please don't pretend that the laws protecting their actions in this affair don't exist.

Oh and by the way it Hamas in Gaza IS totally belligerent and the actions we speak of was directed towards a group that had agitators on board and were indeed also belligerent.

The other points you are arguing have nothing to do with this particular topic. No one is arguing the 'legality' of settlements. The link I gave you address Israel's actions in terms of piracy, the embargo and the boarding of the flotilla.

You still feeling all right honey?

As for the rest when you have figured out what the world should do about breaking international law and completely getting away with it you can figure out how to stop Israel from doing the same. As it stands right now I don't see a whole lot of that going on. What I do know is that Hamas poses a danger to the region as long as it pits itself against Israel. If you really cared about the Palestinian people you would be begging them to ditch Hamas, THEN the world can focus on what Israel is doing wrong. In the meantime Hamas has an agenda it shows no signs of changing and there is too much danger in that.

 

[Mrs.Lucysnow]

The economic conditions in Gaza are terrible. Many are very poor and can not afford to buy ready to wear clothes, which are permitted to enter, but cloth for making your own is forbidden. That is why cloth is much more essential than finished clothes you cannot afford to buy.

It is the same story with many other items. Yes, you may import frozen fish, but not the equipment to catch any.

The whole point of these strange permitted / not permitted items is to keep residents of Gaza completely dependent upon the whims of the Israelis and stifle their efforts to gain any form of independence.

That may be the case but a blockade isn't supposed to be convenient is it? What people are forgetting is that blockades are a STRATEGY it is in place in the hopes that Hamas will be broken. If it doesn't work then yes they should remove it and take on a new strategy. When the international community sanctions a nation, don't you think they know that it will make things extremely difficult for the local population? The permitted or not permitted items are no more strange than what the UN did in Iraq that lead to this:

Infant And Maternal Health: "Low birth weight babies (less than 2.5 kg) rose from 4% in 1990 to around a quarter of registered births in 1997, due mainly to maternal malnutrition. UNFPA and other sources such as the International Federation of the Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies believe that as many as 70% of Iraqi women are suffering from anaemia." (§18)


Malnutrition: "The dietary energy supply had fallen from 3,120 to 1,093 kilo calories per capita/per day by 1994 - 95. The prevalence of malnutrition in Iraqi children under five almost doubled from 1991 to 1996 (from 12% to 23%). Acute malnutrition in Center/South rose from 3% to 11% for the same age bracket. Results of a nutritional status survey conducted on 15,000 children under 5 years of age in April 1997 indicated that almost the whole young child population was affected by a shift in their nutritional status towards malnutrition (Nutritional Status Survey of Infants in Iraq, UNICEF November 7 1998)." (§19)
Prices: The UN World Food Programme "indicates that according to estimates for July 1995, average shop prices of essential commodities stood at 850 times the July 1990 level." (§19)


Infrastructure: "In addition to the scarcity of resources, malnutrition problems also seem to stem from the massive deterioration in basic infrastructure, in particular in the water-supply and waste disposal systems. The most vulnerable groups have been the hardest hit, especially children under five years of age who are being exposed to unhygienic conditions, particularly in urban centers. The WFP estimates that access to potable water is currently 50% of the 1990 level in urban areas and only 33% in rural areas." (§20)

Health facilities: "Since 1991, hospitals and health centers have remained without repair and maintenance. The functional capacity of the health care system has degraded further by shortages of water and power supply, lack of transportation and the collapse of the telecommunications system. Communicable diseases, such as water borne diseases and malaria, which had been under control, came back as an epidemic in 1993 and have now become part of the endemic pattern of the precarious health situation, according to WHO." (§21)


Education: "School enrollment for all ages (6-23) has declined to 53%. According to a field survey conducted in 1993, as quoted by UNESCO, in Central and Southern governorates 83% of school buildings needed rehabilitation, with 8,613 out of 10,334 schools having suffered serious damages. The same source indicated that some schools with a planned capacity of 700 pupils actually have 4500 enrolled in them. Substantive progress in reducing adult and female illiteracy has ceased and regressed to mid-1980 levels, according to UNICEF. The rising number of street children and children who work can be explained, in part, as a result of increasing rates of school drop-outs and repetition, as more families are forced to rely on children to secure household incomes." (§22)
Society: On "the cumulative effects of sustained deprivation on the psycho-social cohesion of the Iraqi population [...] the following aspects were frequently mentioned: increase in juvenile delinquency, begging and prostitution, anxiety about the future and lack of motivation, a rising sense of isolation bred by absence of contact with the outside world, the development of a parallel economy replete with profiteering and criminality, cultural and scientific impoverishment, disruption of family life. [...] UNICEF spoke of a whole generation of Iraqis who are growing up disconnected from the rest of the world." (§25-26)

Mental health: The World Health Organization "points out that the number of mental health patients attending health facilities rose by 157% from 1990 to 1998 (from 197,000 to 507,000 persons)." (§25)

Economy: "The data provided to the panel point to a continuing degradation of the Iraqi economy with an acute deterioration in the living conditions of the Iraqi population and severe strains on its social fabric. As summarized by the UNDP field office, "the country has experienced a shift from relative affluence to massive poverty"." (§43)

http://www.casi.org.uk/guide/problem.html

You see I agree with Netanyahu that the West is behaving with hypocrisy over this, because every time you sanction a nation it leads to the above and they know it and they have done so on a number of occasions and continue to do so AND its always done on the premise that the nation is a danger to its citizens, and a DIRECT threat to other countries. When it didn't work in Iraq the Americans came up with an excuse to go in an finish the regime remember? Well before they did that they sanctioned the shit out of the population!!! In places like N. Korea we are just hoping that they all starve until there's no one left but their leadership, or better yet they simply fall apart internally and the government disintegrates, or the people turn and eat the leadership that has them in such a mess. If I were Israel I wouldn't want a Hamas government to be independent either!!! I would want the people to choose a more moderate representative!!! I mean seriously they are not doing themselves any favors by voting for Hamas!

 

[Mrs.Lucysnow]

@Billy T

Oh yes I forgot part of my rant. Where was I...yeah what's even more hypocritical is that the moment there is a government that is doing something 'wrong' like Burma for example we get angry because other nations either recognize the government and give them aid thwarting the sanction process, or we get pissed off because they are not STOPPED, removed etc.

What is it with everyone? You call on the UN at one point and declare ITS LAWS, international law and in the second breath you want the same people who sanctioned the toilet paper out of Iraq to come in and declare that Gaza is in peril.

Like the man said its all a bunch of bullshit!

Why were you all not decrying the UN when they shut Iraq down? Where were the blockades trying to not get killed in the No Fly Zone to bring convoys to the dying children of Iraq? Why isn't anyone trying to get into N. Korea? Now if there were ever a people that were completely FUCKED its the N. Koreans. I mean let me ask you this, have the people in Gaza taken to eating each other for survival lately?

Sorry but I find all this hand-wringing about a place that isn't even the worse bloody place on earth a little over the top. Its a fucked up situation, both sides have contributed to the troubles THEY share but let us not pretend that the embargo isn't legal based on the international law you people like to bring up all the bloody time.

Sorry but I had to just vent all that

 

[Billy T]

... The blockade amounts to Israel trying to see if they can disgruntle the people enough that they would turn on Hamas. Whether the blockade is right or wrong at this point from the governments strategic point of view depends on whether the blockade works or not. At the moment it doesn't seem to be working so they will have to re-strategize. Their aim is to force Hamas out of the situation and they have every reason to feel threatened by them.

I believe you are basically correct here. Also if life is made risky and unpleasant for an individual, quite often you can change his behavior. For example that is the idea behind "water boarding" a captive.

However, as a general rule, this does not work on a population. Typically making their life risky and miserable only makes them hate you more and eventually some of the population will prefer to die, just for a chance to kill even only one of their oppressors.

For example, in WWII the Germans sent "buzz bombs" over England. They were essentially terror weapons and not targeted. When they ran out of fuel they just nosed over an usually fell into some field. None the less they could be heard and each terrified thousands of Brits, but not with the result the Germans had hoped for.

Thus the abuse, suffering, terror, Israeli is imposing on Gaza is not very likely to have the effect Israel desires either. It is much more likely to make it easier for Hammas etc. to recruit suicide bombers etc. Unfortunately, even the intelligent leaders of Israel are so blinded by hate, that they often act against their own self interest, sa do the hate blinded terrorist of Gaza.

That is why I CALL ON ISRAEL (as only they have the power to make a change) to adopt a defensive plan* which can prevent ALL loss of Israeli lives by Gaza terrorists, and keep it in place for about 40 years, to allow the majority of the hate blinded on both sides to die of old age. Then, and only then will real peace be possible.

IMHO, it is extremely in Israel's interest to switch to a defensive plan. Not be cause it could save a few Israeli lives (100 times more die in traffic accidents and fires, etc.) so from a national POV this loss of life is not significant. The reason why continuing the high kill ratio policy is very risky for Israel has to do with the development of biological weapons.

I don't know the time scale, but something like a decade more is available before the very deadly Russian weaponized anthrax (or even Ebola etc.) is dispersed over Israel. There are 100s of terrorist already who would welcome the chance casting lethal dust from high rise buildings in Israel. The Jews have a great culture, one which encourages music, education and yet has a lust for the joys of life. It deserves to live in peace, but if it keeps to the sword, it will die by the sword.

*Perhaps like this one (but like Electric fetus suggests high powered lasers may be able to trigger the incoming explosive of the Gaza rockets):
http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=1124159&postcount=115

 

[Billy T]

After reveiw according to international law Israel had the right to board even in international waters, so it all become moot.
http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions...the_gaza_flotilla_conflict_is_an_openand.html

I don't see how this is any reply to my point. I did not even mention fact the boarding was in what most consider to be "international waters." - My post was only refuting yours that claimed falsely (and in exact contradiction to the facts) that the flotilla planned to arrive in darkness. I will now read rest of your post.

 

[Mrs.Lucysnow]

Hey I am not arguing that it is working! I am saying that blockades are a strategy and a strategy that has been used throughout history. Sometimes it does work, sometimes it backfires. Only time will tell where the Israeli government is going with this, but please don't tell me that life is miserable under a blockade. The life is SUPPOSED to be miserable under a blockade. And the example of waterboarding doesn't fly with me as an example on this point, waterboarding was deemed illegal by the US itself but the Bush administration decided to use it anyway. Blockades are something that the entire international community has done for a while now, and yes we do consider those sanctions to be completely bloody legal and necessary.

If the people of Gaza are so stupid as to follow Hamas to their own demise then best of british luck to them! And no I don't think the hate will just disappear with the older generation, its being passed on like some mutant genetic trait. I mean just watch this:

http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/promises/

 

[Billy T]

...
Billyt, I wanna know what kind of idiotic country you come from where firing a rocket on civilian infrastructure is not an act of war.

Certainly it is an "act of war" as are blockades etc.

The point of my defensive suggestion is DEFENSE. Note the plan calls for a radar back tracking system so the launch point can have "the hell pounded out of it for within less than a minute -possibly even before the first fired Gaza rocket hits the ground in some case. Currently Israel shells open fields every day with artillery shells (about 100 per day) as preventive measure and just for artillery practice (with US supplied mobile155s, I think.). Once they killed an innocent family picknicking on the beach, etc.

I want all this stopped and it becomes very clear to the innocent Palestinians that they are only shelled when rockets have just been launched from the site. The current policy wins support for the terrorists in the general population - I want to reverse that. Make the local population hositle to the terrorist who only cause counter battery fire to fall on their neighborhood.

Eventually if 100% of the launched rockets are exploded high in the air and the lauch are is quickly subjected to counter battery fire, they will stop firing rockets - the rockets are useless and only getting fellow terrorists killed.

got to go eat lunch now - back later.

 

[ElectricFetus]

I don't see how this is any reply to my point. I did not even mention fact the boarding was in what most consider to be "international waters." - My post was only refuting yours that claimed falsely (and in exact contradiction to the facts) that the flotilla planned to arrive in darkness. I will now read rest of your post.

I think we have moved beyond that, and your claims on their movements being plan for day light does not make sense considering that Israel could attack at any time as their right. But I'll leave the videos of them up at night just before the boarding with clubs in hand preparing as proof they were preparing if not planing on a night attack.

 

[Norsefire]

Norsefire:



Nah. You people need to start listening more to people without a vested interest and a history of supporting violence. The violent "solution" has been tried over and over again, and it hasn't worked so far. You need some different ideas from people like me.

Ideas are fine, but what you want is actual legal intervention, and that's unjust, as it infringes on the sovereignty of the nation.

I'm open to diplomacy, but it's been tried again and again and the Jews don't want it. So what other choice is there aside from war?

Diplomacy will not restore the entirety of Palestine; at best, we would still have to give them half the land, and that's unacceptable.

 

[Billy T]

@Billy T ... what's even more hypocritical is that the moment there is a government that is doing something 'wrong' like Burma for example we get angry because other nations either recognize the government and give them aid thwarting the sanction process, or we get pissed off because they are not STOPPED, removed etc. ...

Sorry but I find all this hand-wringing about a place that isn't even the worse bloody place on earth a little over the top. Its a fucked up situation, both sides have contributed to the troubles THEY share but let us not pretend that the embargo isn't legal based on the international law you people like to bring up all the bloody time. Sorry but I had to just vent all that

No problem. Venting is useful. Helps reduce rage.

Although your post is "@Billy" it really has missed my point. I am not much concerned about the legalities, nor what other nations have done in the past, etc.

My concern is that both sides have so much hate that they can not think straight - act in the own self interest. Yes, the Palestinians hurt them selves by electing Hamas. Yes the Israelis hurt themselves by acts which enrage the world, especially their killing of so many innocents over the years as a side effect of their "high kill ratio" policy. - For example the Brazilian family of four on vacation in Lebanon blown to bits by Israeli bomb the first night of the invasion.

Israel has every right to defend itself, but should control their desire for vengeance and their hate, which is over-riding their intelligence, and making their longer term problem worse annually. They probably have lost their only friend in the Mid East (Turkey) now and in the hard economic times, a lot of political capital in the US which may cut into their aid dollars.

I am a pragmatist, not an international lawyer or political historian. I gave the Israeli / Palestinian problem some thought 6 years ago, and drawing on my decade of experience with how to defend warships from threats 1000 times more challenging than the crude un-guided, very subsonic Gaza missiles, which merely fall from the peak of their trajectory, I concluded it was very feasible to explode 100% of them with technology that was obsolete more than two decades ago.

Even the WWII technology which APL (where I worked for 30 years) invented (the proximity fuse) in the pre-transister age could kill >90% of all incoming Gaza rockets.

Thus I asked myself and others, repeatedly by posts, (17 times directly asking Mr. Spock):
"Why is Israel tolerating the deaths of a one or two Israelis each year?"
Only answer I know of reflects their hate and irrationality (given that this policy has not worked in 60 years). - Namely a few Israeli deaths are necessary to have a justification for their vengeance via the High Kill Ratio policy. If someone has another answer, please post it.

This hate on both sides is so intense it will take two generations for it cease to be the basis of Israeli policy and Palestinian voting. I.e. Israel needs to defend itself, not retaliate, so the hate can slowly fade away. If they "stay the 60 year old failed course" then some of the very lethal infectious (a few spores some else coughs into your lung and you will die) strains of anthrax smuggled out of Russian, but greatly expanded in volume (or Ebola, etc.) will kill many Israelis at some point in time. Perhaps just repeatedly launched by balloons from neighboring lands at night. Martyrs, willing to die of the disease throwing dust out of Tel Aviv high rise buildings would be more efficient use of the lethal dust.

The bible is correct: "Those who live by the sword will die by the sword." Making peace with your neighbors is the only long term solution. The High Kill Ratio policy must end and be replace by an active defense the Palestinians are incapable of penetrating.

There is this better alternative. See it at:
http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=1124159&postcount=115
Or better yet refine the ideas you can read there as Electricfetus has done.

 

[fedr808]

Certainly it is an "act of war" as are blockades etc.

The point of my defensive suggestion is DEFENSE. Note the plan calls for a radar back tracking system so the launch point can have "the hell pounded out of it for within less than a minute -possibly even before the first fired Gaza rocket hits the ground in some case. Currently Israel shells open fields every day with artillery shells (about 100 per day) as preventive measure and just for artillery practice (with US supplied mobile155s, I think.). Once they killed an innocent family picknicking on the beach, etc.

I want all this stopped and it becomes very clear to the innocent Palestinians that they are only shelled when rockets have just been launched from the site. The current policy wins support for the terrorists in the general population - I want to reverse that. Make the local population hositle to the terrorist who only cause counter battery fire to fall on their neighborhood.

Eventually if 100% of the launched rockets are exploded high in the air and the lauch are is quickly subjected to counter battery fire, they will stop firing rockets - the rockets are useless and only getting fellow terrorists killed.

got to go eat lunch now - back later.

Excuse me, but what kind of stupid family goes picnicking next to a launch site?

It's wrong place wrong time.

Tell me, do you think every single one of the 150,000 people at Hiroshima were baby eating evil murderers?

So do they not count?

Is it because they aren't arabs?

 

[Billy T]

Excuse me, but what kind of stupid family goes picnicking next to a launch site? ...

You don't have a clue do you. Look at a map: Gaza is between the place in Israel where the artillery was fired from and the sea, which is where the Beach is.

That is almost as dumb as the Israeli information officer the next day showing a map showing the near beach locations where the five of the admittedly six shells hit. Or the the official Israeli line for a couple of days that the family was killed by a land mine Hammas had planted in the beach to keep Israel from invading. - A totally silly cover story as neglects the reality that Israel went anywhere in Gaza at any time they wanted and would never attempt a beach landing to enter Gaza.

 

[Mrs.Lucysnow]

No problem. Venting is useful. Helps reduce rage.

Although your post is "@Billy" it really has missed my point. I am not much concerned about the legalities, nor what other nations have done in the past, etc.

My concern is that both sides have so much hate that they can not think straight - act in the own self interest. Yes, the Palestinians hurt them selves by electing Hamas. Yes the Israelis hurt themselves by act which enrage the world, especially their killing of so many innocents over the years as a side effect of their "high kill ratio" policy. - For example the Brazilian family of four on vacation in Lebanon blown to bits by Israeli bomb the first night of the invasion.

Israel has every right to defend itself, but should control their desire for vengeance and their hate, which is over-riding their intelligence, and making their longer term problem worse annually. They probably have lost their only friend in the Mid East (Turkey) now and in the hard economic times, a lot of political capital in the US which may cut into their aid dollars.

I am a pragmatist, not an international lawyer or political historian. I gave the Israeli / Palestinian problem some thought 6 years ago, and drawing on my decade of experience with how to defend warships from threats 1000 times more challenging than the crude un-guided, very subsonic Gaza missiles, which merely fall from the peak of their trajectory, I concluded it was very feasible to explode 100% of them with technology that was obsolete more than two decades ago.

Even the WWII technology which APL (where I worked for 30 years) invented (the proximity fuse) in the pre-transister age could kill >90% of all incoming Gaza rockets.

Thus I asked myself and others by posts:
"Why is Israel tolerating the deaths of a one or two Israelis each year?"
Only answer I know of reflects their hate and irrationality (given that this policy has not worked in 60 years). - Namely a few Israeli deaths are necessary to have a justification for their vengeance via the High Kill Ratio policy. If someone has another answer, please post it.

This hate on both sides is so intense it will take two generations for it cease to be the basis of Israeli policy and Palestinian voting. I.e. Israel needs to defend itself, not retaliate. If they "stay the 60 year old failed course" then some of the very lethal infectious (a few spores some else coughs into your lung and you will die) strains of anthrax smuggled out of Russian, but greatly expanded in volume (or Ebola, etc.) will kill many Israelis at some point in time. Perhaps just repeatedly launched by balloons from neighboring lands at night. Martyrs, willing to die of the disease throwing dust out of Tel Aviv high rise buildings would be more efficient use of the lethal dust.

The bible is correct: "Those who live by the sword will die by the sword." Making peace with your neighbors is the only long term solution. The High Kill Ratio policy must end and be replace by an active defense the Palestinians are incapable of penetrating.

There is this better alternative. See it at:
http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=1124159&postcount=115
Or better yet refine the ideas you can read here as Electricfetus has done.

Let me see now, the US has already decided they would pay for the 'Iron Dome' program designed to protect Israel and will pay for that in addition to what they normally give, this was said not even two weeks ago so no I don't see this shift in dollars you are speaking of coming from the US and makes your missile defense suggestion unnecessary. But I like how you blame the Israeli's and say they allow for their citizens to get killed so they could justify 'vengeance'. Are you also of the belief that the US allowed for 9/11 so they could justify a war in Iraq or Afghanistan? If so then don't even bother responding to my post because we won't have much to say to each other. Because of course the retaliation in Afghanistan and Iraq was also a form of revenge right? Soon, if one is to follow your stream of thought, there would be no reason to ever attack anyone or even actively defend yourself using military might because the strong and wealthy nations would be forced to turn the other cheek and concentrate on 'defense'. I get it. I certainly wouldn't want you as the defense advisor in any country were I am living, especially if there is a real enemy in the midst but I get it. You feel sorry for what you feel is the 'weaker' underdog side no matter what threat may come from them if they were ever allowed to gain strength. Because that's what were talking about right, I mean its easy for you or I to tell the Israeli's what they should or shouldn't fear because we don't have to live next door to a group that pledges to kill all the jews in Israel and take back the land.

As for the apology in your plan, you know where jews apologize for their needing a home after the holocaust all I have to say is BOLLOCKS! Why not get the British to apologize to the palestinians? They are the ones who set it up and were in control of the situation. Also I don't see why you should have to apologize to a group who's only sorrow is that they didn't get to be the one with THEIR boot in YOUR face because you see you haven't given one reason, not one, to show that the Palestinians would behave any better with a little bit of power if they had it.

Turkey: What kind of a friend is Turkey that it would send hostile vessels into Israeli water's KNOWING they would react the way they did? Also Turkey also sent a convoy into Egypt and yet I do not hear you saying how Egypt has lost Turkey as a 'friend' over the affair. They didn't kill anyone but they did beat the shit of them when the peaceful aid workers began THROWING ROCKS because Egypt decided they would only allow a handful of the full convoy to cross the border. The answer from the Turk who organized the event was 'Either all goes through or none goes through'. Yeah Turkey is really a very good friend.

This hate you speak of is very intense you are correct, watch the video I posted for you I think you would find it interesting.

The hate you speak of is only being spoken of from the Israeli side. You don't speak of it coming from the Palestinian side. I find this interesting because anytime I speak with those who have had to be in the camps in Lebanon or Jordan or have been in Gaza the first thing they will tell you is of the rabid, and I do mean RABID hatred the palestinians have towards Israel. A UN worker once said that 'they live to kill a jew'. Its so bad that in the camps in Lebanon they refuse to take part in civil society and do things for themselves like get a job, take the opportunity to live outside the camps, get an education, they would rather live in the camps where they live on handouts and get to be a big fish in a tiny puddle. You see they live with this false hope of this magical piece of land and the magical war they are going to martyr themselves for. Its such rubbish that all it has done is left them with the worst reputation in the ME. Sure the other arab nations defend them in principle but they don't want to take the shiftless ones. In Lebanon they hope for peace just so they can get rid of a population that should by now have assimilated into Lebanese society. These are the people of course that Israel is supposed to take back right? Because these kind of people are really know what it means to live in a civil society and how to work for themselves right? They are so focused on their 'cause' its so much a part of their identity that unless they were born in the West they are not very likely to be anything but trouble if they returned. Ever wonder why Palestinians allowed their children, their little boys to run around the streets flinging rocks at soldiers who would surely kill one or two of them? What is that exactly in your book? I mean if I were a parent with a young boy and hostility broke out I would keep them inside and I would never allow them to run the streets and throw rocks at men with guns. I mean why would they do that? Is it so they can show a picture of the 12 year old and say how he 'martyred' himself for his country? What kind of responsible person would allow their children to be on the front lines of that? What kind of responsible person who cares about the future generation would have them martyr themselves and face off an army? Hitler also called the children to the front lines when he was losing his war but we don't fucking show him respect for it!

I am going to mention this side because you seem not to recognize this side. You place all the blame on Israel simply because its wealthier, stronger and was more successful in the 'who can take what' game but we don't have to live with these choices mate. We don't have to live next door to Hamas, we don't have to live next door to people who believe it is their duty to kill us. Even in the States the proximity of the people who would love to attack the US is far enough that we can easily defend ourselves and we don't have suicide bombings. Does your missile defense plan stop suicide bombings and IED's and car bombings? Well does it? Because this IS what Israeli's have to live with.

So sorry but your post just seemed to be a bit...well...naive and placing the results of the game wholly on Israel when they are both carrying the burden of blame.

 

[pjdude1219]

the autopsies have been performed on the dead the majority of which were found to be shot at close range( estimate from the autopsies was 18 inches) either in the back or in the back of the head( most often seen in execution style killings) now I'm no expert in forensics but this would to cast serious doubt into the Israeli version of what happened IMO. someone not facing you isn't a threat.


also of note that all but one round pulled from the bodies were 9mm rounds. the last was a weird bullet that was filled with smaller pellets almost like a shotgun shell. it looked to be designed to break open after entering a body and through the pellets around. Though the rounds were found to be of a caliber mostly used in pistols it doesn't disprove the protesters accounts of being shot at with automatic weapons fire as SMG's(submachine guns) use the same rounds as pistols and would the weapon you would usually see in this kind of assualt.




http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20100604/wl_nm/us_israel_flotilla_autopsies

 

[mordea]

Israel is trying to contain Gaza and not allow it to turn into something that can hurt Israel proper all of which is entirely legal.

Patently false. The blockade is of disputed legality, given that Israel always backflips on whether it is in a state of war with Gaza, and whether Gaza is even a State at all. Furthermore, as I've already pointed out to you, a blockade must allow *enough* food in, by law. And finally, the other measures the Israelis have taken to subdue the Palestinians, such as the establishment of civilian settlements, are prohibited under the Geneva Conventions.

Now you can argue that this isn't right and you can argue that it isn't working, but please don't pretend that the laws protecting their actions in this affair don't exist.

And your copy and paste job of an opinion piece doesn't negate the fact that Israel is, quite simply, breaking a host of international laws.

Oh and by the way it Hamas in Gaza IS totally belligerent

Which means absolutely nothing. If you ever learn to read, you will realise that the San Remo Manual requires that the belligerent be an actual country, and that a state of war actually exist between the two nations.

and the actions we speak of was directed towards a group that had agitators on board and were indeed also belligerent.

The evidence suggests otherwise. Quite simply, I'm going to with-hold making any claims of certainty until we hear the fully story. Given that the Israeli jackboots are continuing to hold many of the witnesses prisoner, that might not happen for some time.

The other points you are arguing have nothing to do with this particular topic. No one is arguing the 'legality' of settlements.

How cute. If pointing out the implications of your argument that the blockade is legal. You can't have your cake and eat it too, honey.

The link I gave you address Israel's actions in terms of piracy, the embargo and the boarding of the flotilla.

Yes, that seems to be all you are capable of. Copying and pasting, and parroting the party line. You aren't able of critically appraising the shit you post, nor are you able to appreciate its implications.

You still feeling all right honey?

I feel pretty good, watching you squirm and all.

What I do know is that Hamas poses a danger to the region as long as it pits itself against Israel. If you really cared about the Palestinian people you would be begging them to ditch Hamas, THEN the world can focus on what Israel is doing wrong.

Hamas is simply a reaction to Israeli Nazi brutality.

 

[Mrs.Lucysnow]

Patently false. The blockade is of disputed legality, given that Israel always backflips on whether it is in a state of war with Gaza, and whether Gaza is even a State at all. Furthermore, as I've already pointed out to you, a blockade must allow *enough* food in, by law. And finally, the other measures the Israelis have taken to subdue the Palestinians, such as the establishment of civilian settlements, are prohibited under the Geneva Conventions.



And your copy and paste job of an opinion piece doesn't negate the fact that Israel is, quite simply, breaking a host of international laws.



Which means absolutely nothing. If you ever learn to read, you will realise that the San Remo Manual requires that the belligerent be an actual country, and that a state of war actually exist between the two nations.



The evidence suggests otherwise. Quite simply, I'm going to with-hold making any claims of certainty until we hear the fully story. Given that the Israeli jackboots are continuing to hold many of the witnesses prisoner, that might not happen for some time.



How cute. If pointing out the implications of your argument that the blockade is legal. You can't have your cake and eat it too, honey.



Yes, that seems to be all you are capable of. Copying and pasting, and parroting the party line. You aren't able of critically appraising the shit you post, nor are you able to appreciate its implications.



I feel pretty good, watching you squirm and all.



Hamas is simply a reaction to Israeli Nazi brutality.

Hamas is belligerent. I mean even Japan consider's them a terrorist organization Actually its Hamas that seems more like Nazi's in the making not the Israeli's but nice try.

I have shown where it the blockade is legal under international law. Its not enough for you to say this is 'patently wrong' show me IN THE LAW where it is wrong. What you say about the Geneva Conventions didn't apply to Iraq when the UN and the US had crippling sanctions? Settlements are not the question here Mordea the flotilla-blockade situation is. So I can back up my facts can you back up yours? Show where it is legally wrong to set up crippling sanctions or form a blockade. There is food getting into Gaza. Blockades are not supposed to be fun for the population sunshine. That's why they are employed. They are used to topple Hamas.

So again: Can Israel Impose a Naval Blockade:

Yes it can, according to the law of blockade which was derived from customary international law and codified in the 1909 Declaration of London. It was updated in 1994 in a legally recognised document called the "San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea". Under some of the key rules, a blockade must be declared and notified to all belligerents and neutral states, access to neutral ports cannot be blocked, and an area can only be blockaded which is under enemy control.

"On the basis that Hamas is the ruling entity of Gaza and Israel is in the midst of an armed struggle against that ruling entity, the blockade is legal," said Philip Roche, partner in the shipping disputes and risk management team with law firm Norton Rose.

It wasn't an opinion piece, its a REUTERS piece. Reuters is a legitimate new agency and they asked experts in all fields. All you have done is make noise with no evidence. Come back when you have some.

Squirm indeed This is a science forum toots, an argument is accepted or not based on evidence. I provided you with evidence and you provide me with opinion. People who know lawyers don't need to squirm

 

[pjdude1219]

Hamas is belligerent. I mean even Japan consider's them a terrorist organization Actually its Hamas that seems more like Nazi's in the making not the Israeli's but nice try.

I have shown where it the blockade is legal under international law. Its not enough for you to say this is 'patently wrong' show me IN THE LAW where it is wrong. What you say about the Geneva Conventions didn't apply to Iraq when the UN and the US had crippling sanctions? Settlements are not the question here Mordea the flotilla-blockade situation is. So I can back up my facts can you back up yours? Show where it is legally wrong to set up crippling sanctions or form a blockade. There is food getting into Gaza. Blockades are not supposed to be fun for the population sunshine. That's why they are employed. They are used to topple Hamas.

So again: Can Israel Impose a Naval Blockade:

Yes it can, according to the law of blockade which was derived from customary international law and codified in the 1909 Declaration of London. It was updated in 1994 in a legally recognised document called the "San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea". Under some of the key rules, a blockade must be declared and notified to all belligerents and neutral states, access to neutral ports cannot be blocked, and an area can only be blockaded which is under enemy control.

"On the basis that Hamas is the ruling entity of Gaza and Israel is in the midst of an armed struggle against that ruling entity, the blockade is legal," said Philip Roche, partner in the shipping disputes and risk management team with law firm Norton Rose.

It wasn't an opinion piece, its a REUTERS piece. Reuters is a legitimate new agency and they asked experts in all fields. All you have done is make noise with no evidence. Come back when you have some.

since you show yous facts could you please explain how close range shots to the back and back of the head is self defense. I mean I would love an explanation on how people aledgedely attacking the soldiers, an act that requires them to be facing the soldiers, get shot in the back when the soldiers defend them selves.

 

[Mrs.Lucysnow]

Sorry PJ, haven't read your article yet. I can't reply to another members posts and read your links at the same time.

 

[Mrs.Lucysnow]

since you show yous facts could you please explain how close range shots to the back and back of the head is self defense. I mean I would love an explanation on how people aledgedely attacking the soldiers, an act that requires them to be facing the soldiers, get shot in the back when the soldiers defend them selves.

Here PJ the article has the answer to your question:


"Israel said the multiple gunshot wounds did not mean the shots were fired other than in self defense."

"Pulling the trigger quickly can result in a few bullets being in the same body, but does not change the fact they were in a life-threatening situation," the spokesman said.

So unless you can re-create the situation to show that this is untrue its not evidence that they didn't act in self-defence. By the way if the evil Israeli's as you like to call them, wanted to hide a crime why would they hand over the dead bodies?:shrug:

The article also points this out which I found strange: 'No-one at Turkey's forensic laboratory could immediately be reached for comment.'

 

[mordea]

Hamas is belligerent.

Really? I don't ever remember contesting that point.

Actually its Hamas that seems more like Nazi's in the making not the Israeli's but nice try.

No, sorry, it's the Israelis who are Nazis. Like the Nazis, they are occupying a native people. Like Nazis, they are defying international law by annexing territory that is not there. Like Nazis, they engage in collective punishment to break the spirit of an occupied people. Like Nazis, they deny the populance food to weaken them. Like Nazis, they spin propaganda to justify their aggression, painting the native occupied people as the aggressors. Like Nazis, they have political prisoners, and are known to torture them. Like Nazis, they wish to displace or annihilate an entire ethnic group, leaving the land behind for incorporation into a 'greater Israel'.

I have shown where it the blockade is legal under international law.
Its not enough for you to say this is 'patently wrong' show me IN THE LAW where it is wrong.

Been there, done that. The fact that you obtusely refuse to acknowledge this is incidental. I'm not obliged to continually spoon-feed you.

What you say about the Geneva Conventions didn't apply to Iraq when the UN and the US had crippling sanctions?

What are you crapping on about? The Geneva Conventions only apply when two or more belligerent States are in a state of war.

Settlements are not the question here Mordea the flotilla-blockade situation is.

Nice dodge. Again, I'm pointing out the implications of your stance. If the blockade *is* legal, then pretty much everything else the Israelis are doing in annexed territory is illegal. Indeed, even annexing territory is prohibited by the Fourth Geneva Convention.

So I can back up my facts can you back up yours? Show where it is legally wrong to set up crippling sanctions or form a blockade.

Been there, done that. Learn to read.

There is food getting into Gaza.

Not enough of it. Therefore, Israel is still breaking international law in regards to the blockade, even if you try to hide behind the San Remo Manual.

Blockades are not supposed to be fun for the population sunshine.
That's why they are employed.

Originally Posted by Lucysnow
The embargo makes life hell, yes I know that. The embargo is SUPPOSED to make life hell, otherwise why have an embargo. ”

“ Originally Posted by Lucysnow
... the embargo is there to make sure that Hamas doesn't get any arms into Gaza, no rockets, no BB guns and no chewing gum. So there.


I highlighted this direct contradiction of yours in a previous post, and you failed to respond. I wonder why? Could it be because Zionist apologists are intellectual cowards who plug their ears and scream "La la la!" when faced with an argument they cannot refute?

So again: Can Israel Impose a Naval Blockade:

More copypasta? I've read your shit once, it doesn't need to be spammed on the forum again.

It wasn't an opinion piece, its a REUTERS piece.

It was an opinion piece at REUTERS. Surely you understand that even top class news sources have editorials and opinion pieces?

Squirm indeed ... People who know lawyers don't need to squirm

Oh my, you know lawyers! Colour me... unimpressed.