Zionist piracy

[ElectricFetus]

If you watch that video I posted.
08 sec: first solider lands
11 sec: first soilder is dropped to the ground.
16 sec: second soilder lands.
20 sec: third solider lands
22 sec: camera change
23 sec: solider is being beaten, crow moves in with random bludgeoning objects
33 sec: another camera change.
37 sec: solider is dropped off top deck.
43 sec: solider "A" is being beaten.
52 sec: another camera change.
53 sec: solider "B" try to rescue solider "A" with paintball gun. Two attacker begin scrambles away possibly because their eyes are on fire and they are chocking on capsaicin, can't see any muzzle flashes from the paintball gun as it won't give off any.
56 sec: this happens really fast so watch it over and over in slow motion: thugs beating solider "A" drop or scramble!
57 sec: solider "A" is now up.
60 sec: can clearly see solider "A" is now holding a pistol.
End: clear division is formed from soldiers in corner and attackers who now cower away.

It look during this time one of the soldiers unloaded his pistol on his attackers, at least one attacker drops like a rock, at least 2 other scramble way possibly shot.

 

[S.A.M.]

Try this video instead:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QlE7kmSCf9I&feature=player_embedded

If you look closely, you can even see a magic trick.

Then watch this for the difference:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y2FJ_Ed_dis

 

[GeoffP]

Try this video instead:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QlE7kmSCf9I&feature=player_embedded

If you look closely, you can even see a magic trick.

Then watch this for the difference:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y2FJ_Ed_dis

What was the magic difference?

 

[Gustav]

Flotilla Choir presents_ We Con the World.mp4

In the clip, which was distributed by the Israeli government press office, the Israelis sing: "We con the world, we con the people. We'll make them all believe the IDF (Israel Defence Force) is Jack the Ripper."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...illa-attack-Israel-sorry-for-spoof-video.html


goebbels salutes the zionists....."heil!! ze holocaust deed not happen eizer!"

 

[GeoffP]

I also note the paintguns are clearly visible in the second video at 6:14.

The author of the second vid is right into it: "Loook how they hold each other under the water, to look poor and oppressed". The camera is jumping all over the place, but when it jerks as the flash-bang goes off there's suddenly some confusion over why it moved. (Maybe it was the Zionists.) And the long Zodiac the commenter supposedly couldn't see was right there. (Aha! Zionists only use one kind of Zodiac! Do not lie to me, hasbara pig!) And the "walking through iron" looks like he walked around it in the original vid. Is the new one modified? Answer me this: why would the Israelis use CGI when they could just film some idiots standing on a deck throwing things? Doesn't wash.

Some more crap about "how could they be exposed like that! They would be shot! This is just an amateurish film!" Such horseshit: after all, the nine protestors killed, Sam, were killed at point-blank range, no? This has been your line all along.

 

[GeoffP]

Flotilla Choir presents_ We Con the World.mp4

In the clip, which was distributed by the Israeli government press office, the Israelis sing: "We con the world, we con the people. We'll make them all believe the IDF (Israel Defence Force) is Jack the Ripper."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...illa-attack-Israel-sorry-for-spoof-video.html


goebbels salutes the zionists....."heil!! ze holocaust deed not happen eizer!"

Solution: attack the singers with metal sticks.

 

[pjdude1219]

Well...I didn't really believe the paintball gun thing...but that's a paintball gun.

could be an SMG with a scope. any who its an odd way to hold a pantball gun and the one handed arm extended is something you usually see with a real gun and not a pantball gun due the fact their heavy and its hard to aim with one like that.

 

[Billy T]

could be an SMG with a scope. ...

That does not seems as reasonable to me as it being a paint gun loaded with some eye/ nose irritant balls. Why would you need a scope even to fire at someone on the other end of the ship? Certainly not at someone a few meters away.

Conversely, I can believe that they may have expected trouble. (It would not surprise me one bit that Israel had undercover agents on the ship.) If there was a "hate rally" and some infiltrators wanting an incident for max PR, mixed in with an otherwise peace loving aid group and the commandos knew that they would get a "hot reception" to come armed with a non-lethal means to make disabling pain in face of a specific individual even if 4 meters from him. - I.e. a pepper spay ball gun would be a logical choice.

I am not excusing the Israeli leaders who decided to attack at 4:30 AM, instead of during daylight and first ask to inspect ship for weapons as any normal coast guard does. Israel could have come with small remotely controlled torpedo that would mess up the rudder and/or the prop of the ship so it was adrift if the boarding permission to inspect were refused, etc. Then the ship would be helpless and need an Israeli navy ship to tow it to harbor. I.e. Israel seems to have let their hate over ride their intelligence as they often do.

Once Israel planned to board by repelling from helicopters with small boats making a diversion AT NIGHT, they had no choice but to do so 70 miles off the coast because the ships unexpected slowed to arrive inside Israel's 12 mile limit during day light hours. The ships could slow, but not the sun - it rose about 5:30AM (my guess for spring at that latitude). Thus Israel had to go all the way out to 70 miles to have an hour of darkness left for their planned nighttime raid.

SUMMARY: Israel made a non-standard and bad decision to board the ship at night for its search of the ship. Israel long ago made a bad decision to keep out items like fishing poles and sewing thread and needles, etc. At least they have understood and changed this. - Now will only have a list of items that can not come in which they can support / defend as a threat to Israel. The current indefensible list invalidates their right to make a blockade as one of the requirements of a legal blockade is that it not cause disproportionate and needless harm to the citizens of the the blockaded country / region / population.

Again the real fundamental (and obviously failed for 60 years) mistake of Israel, IMHO, is not to defend 100% of its citizens, but chose to let a few be killed to justify the High Kill Ratio policy. In a decade or so, when infectious anthrax or Ebola balloons are killing 10s of thousands of Israelis, they will understand that too.

 

[ElectricFetus]

Try this video instead:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QlE7kmSCf9I&feature=player_embedded

And what evidence is there this is fake?

If you look closely, you can even see a magic trick.

And that is?

Then watch this for the difference:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y2FJ_Ed_dis

All bs claims like the "evidence" man did not walk on the moon.

0-45 sec: No ones denying israelis didn't shot anyone, and hte sound quality is very poor, heck its so bad you can't tell the diffrence between a pistol and a paintball gun with that!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=To3vySDH3ZA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RuI3OgJF9EY
45-1:20 sec: reports dribbling, stungrenades =/= bombs
1:20-1:50 sec: Israel jammed the communications, they don't deny that. The reasoning can be many.
1:50-2:06 sec: They got shot, everyone acknowledges that, how and way is the question.
2:06-2:40 sec: these are not videos of the same ship, shit they even taking place at different times, so you can't say ones fake and the other real by making a false comparison.
2:47-3:12 sec: Stun greneade overloads camera hence white frame
3:12 sec: looks real to me, not CGI
3:16 sec: If they were going to go to the trouble of CGI-ing and explosion they could have easily faked the sound of the blast.
3:16-3:40 sec: Logic does not make any sense
3:59 sec: Merchant ships often use fire-hoses on pirates so this in not unorthodox to hose boarding parties!
4:36 sec: Logic is self defeating: they had the time because Israelis were not shooting at them from afar.
4:57 sec: No they did not stop hosing, the video just got darker maybe because of a lack of search lights.
5:05 sec: Merchant ships are not allowed to be armed, we already gone over the legality of it, Israel could attack in international waters using the defending blockade clause, its not pretty sure but its the truth.
Also the claim of shooting doctors is not verified.
5:20-6:00 sec: Sound like paintball guns to me, and stun grenades droped on the ships.
6:09-6:22 sec: Clearly see at least 2 paintball guns!
6:49 sec: Security video cameras don't normally have audio
7:00-7:09 sec: video has gone through so many hands now god knows were that curser came from.
7:16 sec: this is a security video not a directed movie running for the oscars!
7:50 sec: its the same group of people, no shit, how is that an arguement against it?
8:04-8:42 sec: he passing through iron? I doesn't look like he passing through anything. There is an object in the foreground and then the his him walking in front of it, that suppose to be a CGI error because the whole video is CGI, no shit, So instead of say having a prop of actors on board the very ship they caught or on any other ships, they CGI the background of the ship for far greater cost and chance of CGI errors? ... or the object and the pants are the same color and the video is stored digitally causing a blend through effect as constant pixels are retained from one frame to the next in the digital compression. Occums razor favor the latter!
9:40 sec: it was audio of radio communications between ships, and this guy admits his wife voices came from one of the ships, thus proving the tracks validity not disproving it!
9:55-10:05 sec: can't tell what the soldiers doing, but can't see any kicking or a pistol.
10:12 sec: soldiers point guns, that what they do, us nothing for or against defending ones self.
10:27 sec: can't tell what that is, in fact from another video its claimed to be a list of Israeli citizens on the ship as protesters, so god knows what that is.

could be an SMG with a scope. any who its an odd way to hold a pantball gun and the one handed arm extended is something you usually see with a real gun and not a pantball gun due the fact their heavy and its hard to aim with one like that.

SMG don't have hoppers! paint ball guns are held like, they are actually very light with 8-16 oz air cans and often all aluminum bodies unlike the steal of an uzi.

 

[ElectricFetus]

Israel could have come with small remotely controlled torpedo that would mess up the rudder and/or the prop of the ship so it was adrift if the boarding permission to inspect were refused, etc. Then the ship would be helpless and need an Israeli navy ship to tow it to harbor. I.e. Israel seems to have let their hate over ride their intelligence as they often do.

I wish there was some kind of technology that did that! One of the problems with fowling up the propellers is the chance of blowing the bearings and causing flooding from where the shaft protrudes from the ship.

Once Israel planned to board by repelling from helicopters with small boats making a diversion AT NIGHT, they had no choice but to do so 70 miles off the coast because the ships unexpected slowed to arrive inside Israel's 12 mile limit during day light hours. The ships could slow, but not the sun - it rose about 5:30AM (my guess for spring at that latitude). Thus Israel had to go all the way out to 70 miles to have an hour of darkness left for their planned nighttime raid. SUMMARY: Israel made a non-standard and bad decision to board the ship at night for its search of the ship.

I don't see a problem with a night attack. there goal was to take control of the ship, clearly not to kill as they would not have paintball guns if that was the case. Attacking at night provides greater chances to take over the ship.

Again the real fundamental (and obviously failed for 60 years) mistake of Israel, IMHO, is not to defend 100% of its citizens, but chose to let a few be killed to justify the High Kill Ratio policy. In a decade or so, when infectious anthrax or Ebola balloons are killing 10s of thousands of Israelis, they will understand that too.

I don't think its possible to protect every single citizen.

 

[GeoffP]

could be an SMG with a scope

An SMG with a ridiculously giant scope.

Moving right along -

. any who its an odd way to hold a pantball gun

Half my kills in paintball were made on a single-handed hold. I once got the owner of the field we used to play at on a one-handed burst from behind. His double-take before I fired was poetic. I grabbed the sapling growing behind the tires and leaned right out so that with my arm extension and the gun, the distance to target went from twelve feet to about eight or even seven. There was no reason not to so, since there's effectively no recoil and the weapon is extremely light.

Anyway: there's no reason not to hold one-handed on an essentially recoilless weapon. The thing has the accuracy of a musket anyway.

and the one handed arm extended is something you usually see with a real gun and not a pantball gun

Are you first claiming it's an SMG with a gigantic scope, and then saying that a person would be more likely to hold such an unwieldy weapon extended with one hand? A weapon that has actual, severe recoil? Flatly: no. Not possible. There is simply no question that the crew is holding paintball guns, which seems to have escaped Sam in the posting.

due the fact their heavy and its hard to aim with one like that.

Your point here actually supports me, not you: it's easier to aim one-handed with a paintball gun because they are extraordinarily light compared to a real gun.

Look: the debate on this one is well and truly over. Even Bells and Sam have twigged to this: witness that Sam hasn't come back on any of the points I just posted. They're paintball guns, period.

 

[Bells]

I also note the paintguns are clearly visible in the second video at 6:14.

The author of the second vid is right into it: "Loook how they hold each other under the water, to look poor and oppressed". The camera is jumping all over the place, but when it jerks as the flash-bang goes off there's suddenly some confusion over why it moved. (Maybe it was the Zionists.) And the long Zodiac the commenter supposedly couldn't see was right there. (Aha! Zionists only use one kind of Zodiac! Do not lie to me, hasbara pig!) And the "walking through iron" looks like he walked around it in the original vid. Is the new one modified? Answer me this: why would the Israelis use CGI when they could just film some idiots standing on a deck throwing things? Doesn't wash.

Some more crap about "how could they be exposed like that! They would be shot! This is just an amateurish film!" Such horseshit: after all, the nine protestors killed, Sam, were killed at point-blank range, no? This has been your line all along.

But shooting people execution style, in the back of the head at close range does wash with you?

That is acceptable, is it?

It is clear you prefer the line the IDF has fed you. So suck it up princess and explain to me how so many of those protesters were shot at point blank range in the back of the head? It isn't a line. It is a fact. Or are you going to claim that is false as well?

 

[Bells]

Look: the debate on this one is well and truly over. Even Bells and Sam have twigged to this: witness that Sam hasn't come back on any of the points I just posted. They're paintball guns, period.

I have been to paintball on many occasions. I have yet to see a single paintball like the ones the IDF was using on that boat.

Tell me Geoff, do you often use paintballs with pieces of glass in it? Some paintballs.

 

[GeoffP]

The mummy strikes!

But shooting people execution style, in the back of the head at close range does wash with you?

No, it doesn't. It isn't acceptable at all. I was referring to the claim of fakery on the part of the IDF. It clearly isn't so, or at least not in these videos.

Look: why don't you express your preferred final solution for this issue, since it's what we're discussing? Me, I think the IDF soldiers that killed people should be up on charges barring circumstances sufficiently extenuating to make their actions reasonable.

It is clear you prefer the line the IDF has fed you. So suck it up princess

Ad hominem. Again.

and explain to me how so many of those protesters were shot at point blank range in the back of the head? It isn't a line. It is a fact. Or are you going to claim that is false as well?

"As well" - interesting. So by "as well" you feel that the IDF video under discussion was indeed faked. But we've seen that that just isn't so.

As for those protestors shot, I haven't claimed that crimes weren't committed on board the ship - in fact, that has never been my position. I do feel that the riot was not entirely the fault of the IDF. I would have expected you to recognize this not-too-subtle differentiation of position. But you didn't. Curious.

I have been to paintball on many occasions. I have yet to see a single paintball like the ones the IDF was using on that boat.

Ah - so you do not, then, deny that the weapons seen in Sam's vids were, in fact, paintball guns. This was the point under discussion in this specific case. I thank you for your inadvertent confirmation.

 

[Bells]

The mummy strikes!

No, it doesn't. It isn't acceptable at all. I was referring to the claim of fakery on the part of the IDF. It clearly isn't so, or at least not in these videos.

Look: why don't you express your preferred final solution for this issue, since it's what we're discussing? Me, I think the IDF soldiers that killed people should be up on charges barring circumstances sufficiently extenuating to make their actions reasonable.

"Final solution". Interesting choice of words from you, don't you think?

I think the events on that boat needs to be investigated by those proposed by the UN. An international group of investigators. That is impartial. But that will not happen. The Israeli Government has refused and have said that the investigation should be an internal one. Shall we bet that those who executed those people on that boat will get a special recommendation and possibly even a promotion?

Ad hominem. Again.

And again, your hypocrisy never ceases to astound.

"As well" - interesting. So by "as well" you feel that the IDF video under discussion was indeed faked. But we've seen that that just isn't so.

As for those protestors shot, I haven't claimed that crimes weren't committed on board the ship - in fact, that has never been my position. I do feel that the riot was not entirely the fault of the IDF. I would have expected you to recognize this not-too-subtle differentiation of position. But you didn't. Curious.

I feel dubious about any Government that confiscates all the video and equipment of journalists who are impartial and only release little snippets of what they want the world to see. Why don't they release the footage they have confiscated from the journalists on those ships?

As for those protestors shot, I haven't claimed that crimes weren't committed on board the ship - in fact, that has never been my position. I do feel that the riot was not entirely the fault of the IDF. I would have expected you to recognize this not-too-subtle differentiation of position. But you didn't. Curious.

No. You just kept rambling about some iron poles and singing.

Ah - so you do not, then, deny that the weapons seen in Sam's vids were, in fact, paintball guns. This was the point under discussion in this specific case. I thank you for your inadvertent confirmation.

Tell me, what paintball bullets has glass embedded in it? Calling it a paintball gun makes it sound like something fun.. like you know, paintball can be. But when said paintball guns uses bullets that has pieces of glass in the 'paintball bullets', doesn't make it a regular paintball gun, does it?

 

[iceaura]

They were attempting to run a blockade, they were conducting an illegal activity, the commandos had the right to take over the ship. If a criminal attacks the police its the criminals fault.

The legal principle that Israel can board by lethal force any ship on the Mediterranean,

by virtue of having declared for itself a blockade of Gaza, and certified for itself the legality of said blockade, in furtherance of its aggression against people it has certified for itself as its enemies in an aggressive war Israel started and now prosecutes on its own authority,

has been accepted on this forum as fact by everyone.

You need to find some other way to dodge the question, which is what the targets of armed boarding operations - assault by teams of armed men on the open ocean - are entitled to by way of response.

Somali pirates are not Somalis government, Somali pirates are not part of a government blockade nor do they attempt to diplomatically divert shipping.

So they have a couple of tricks to learn, in the media relations business.

 

[S.A.M.]

That does not seems as reasonable to me as it being a paint gun loaded with some eye/ nose irritant balls. Why would you need a scope even to fire at someone on the other end of the ship? Certainly not at someone a few meters away.

Not sure if you saw this Billy

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y2FJ_Ed_dis

but in the part of the footage which was smuggled out and released by DemocracyNow [shown as "real footage"], you can distinctly hear the sounds of shots from these "paintball guns". Unlike Israel's fake videos, these videos have accompanying audio

You can see complete report at Democracy Now here:

http://www.democracynow.org/2010/6/10/exclusive_journalist_smuggles_out_video_of

 

[GeoffP]

"Final solution". Interesting choice of words from you, don't you think?

Yes; I was wondering if you'd notice.

I think the events on that boat needs to be investigated by those proposed by the UN. An international group of investigators. That is impartial. But that will not happen. The Israeli Government has refused and have said that the investigation should be an internal one. Shall we bet that those who executed those people on that boat will get a special recommendation and possibly even a promotion?

They may. I hope it won't come to that. Or there may be reason for it. It's very unlikely that all the deaths were reasonable; but then again, the reports may be false. So far I've detailed a fair amount of evidence for a more even partitioning of the blame for this tragedy, and look what's happened.

And again, your hypocrisy never ceases to astound.

Really? Fascinating. I am a hypocrite because I object to a personal insult? How so?

I feel dubious about any Government that confiscates all the video and equipment of journalists who are impartial and only release little snippets of what they want the world to see. Why don't they release the footage they have confiscated from the journalists on those ships?

I don't know. I suspect that it may not paint the Israelis in a very positive light. Then again, the uncensored eyewitness accounts correspond to the story the IDF is giving out, as I've illustrated above.

No. You just kept rambling about some iron poles and singing.

And guilt and premeditation. Bells, it doesn't help your case to engage in weasel-wording here: we've discussed the significance of the iron "sticks" (now upgraded to "poles", I see, which is commendable progress) and the hate-rally (which I see is still relegated to a happyfuncampoutsingalong; well, Rome wasn't built in a day). You can't now dismiss the previous argument in that way; we've all seen it, and we know what it was about.

Tell me, what paintball bullets has glass embedded in it? Calling it a paintball gun makes it sound like something fun..

To you, perhaps.

But the real message of this fact is about Israel premeditation, care and intent. The supposition from your "side" has been that the IDF came in with guns blazing, and that the story about the paintball guns was a sham. But they didn't come in with machineguns blazing, and the paintball gun story was true. They really brought them; modified for riot control, seemingly, but paintball-riot-guns nonetheless. The story that you and Sam and pj have been pushing is that the IDF came in loaded for bear, rather than quail - machineguns blazing as they descended; but this is apparently false. There was a tragedy afterwards, yes, but the IDF doesn't appear to have been trying for one. What happened afterward, if massacre it be, seems more like the work of individuals than a concerted goal planned by Israel. As such, it falls into the area of domestic justice which - it is to be hoped, if unlikely - will be fair.

I appreciate your stand on Gaza - it is highly principled. But you do justice a disservice when you disown the facts, such as hate-rallies (which I am certain you would condemn at the drop of a hat otherwise) and mob violence.

Similarly, when you resort to personal attacks - all falsified - and bile, you do me a disservice as a poster.

 

[ElectricFetus]

The legal principle that Israel can board by lethal force any ship on the Mediterranean,

by virtue of having declared for itself a blockade of Gaza, and certified for itself the legality of said blockade, in furtherance of its aggression against people it has certified for itself as its enemies in an aggressive war Israel started and now prosecutes on its own authority,

has been accepted on this forum as fact by everyone.

You need to find some other way to dodge the question, which is what the targets of armed boarding operations - assault by teams of armed men on the open ocean - are entitled to by way of response.

Again I'll quote reuters on this:

Under international law it can use force when boarding a ship.

"If force is disproportionate it would be a violation of the key tenets of the use of force," said Commander James Kraska, professor of international law at the U.S. Naval War College.

Israeli authorities said marines who boarded the Turkish vessel Mavi Marmara opened fire in self-defense after activists clubbed and stabbed them and snatched some of their weapons.

Legal experts say proportional force does not mean that guns cannot be used by forces when being attacked with knives.

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE65133D20100602

So they have a couple of tricks to learn, in the media relations business.

No, no one can match the power over media of the elders of Zion from their orbital Jew fortress, there Jew beams are too powerful!

 

[S.A.M.]

Again I'll quote reuters on this:

Why Reuters? Why not these?

On Monday, the International Committee of the Red Cross marked three years since Israel began its current blockade regime with a clear condemnation of the policy. In the words of the ICRC:

The whole of Gaza's civilian population is being punished for acts for which they bear no responsibility. The closure therefore constitutes a collective punishment imposed in clear violation of Israel's obligations under international humanitarian law.

Or these?

In 2008, a group of NGOs – Amnesty International UK, CARE International UK, Christian Aid, CAFOD, Medecins du Monde UK, Oxfam, Save the Children UK and Trocaire – said the same in a report:

Israel’s policy affects the civilian population of Gaza indiscriminately and constitutes a collective punishment against ordinary men, women and children. The measures taken are illegal under international humanitarian law.

The blockade has been condemned by the UN’s most senior humanitarian official John Holmes as a form of collective punishment (see OCHA report) , a view echoed by the UN’s commissioner for human rights Navi Pillay.

In December 2009, Amnesty International's UK director Kate Allen said that “the wretched reality endured by 1.5 million people in Gaza should appal anybody with an ounce of humanity”, with “sick, traumatised and impoverished people” collectively punished “by a cruel, illegal policy imposed by the Israeli authorities”.

This has been affirmed by the group’s Middle East and North Africa Director, as well as in AI’s annual report:

The scope of the blockade and statements made by Israeli officials about its purpose showed that it was being imposed as a form of collective punishment of Gazans, a flagrant violation of international law...

Human Rights Watch executive director Kenneth Roth has put it bluntly: "Israel's blockade policy can be summed up in one word and it is punishment, not security."

http://mondoweiss.net/2010/06/a-wre...y-still-israel-seeks-to-justify-blockade.html