Zionist piracy

Status
Not open for further replies.
electric said:
The law does not specify distant, they could hypothetically strike anywhere
Cool. I can see why people would want to be Israelis.

electric said:
The somali government has not declared a blockade.
Exactly my point - they need to check that out. Life would be a lot easier for them if they were "Israeli legal", and the crews of the target ships weren't even allowed to resist.
 
Cool. I can see why people would want to be Israelis.

Any nation could in theory set up a blockade.

Exactly my point - they need to check that out. Life would be a lot easier for them if they were "Israeli legal", and the crews of the target ships weren't even allowed to resist.

Ok who would they be blockading?, for what reasons?, would the UN allow it as they did the Israeli blockade?
 
Who is resisting them with knives and "iron-y sticks"?

Notice that? Irony.

Ah yes, "irony".

You are aware that civilians on ships that have been attacked by Somali pirates have also used everything available at hand to defend themselves. Correct?

That ship was in International waters. They were attacked by an armed force. They were well within their legal rights to defend themselves against armed attackers. That is the point you're just not getting. They had been threatened for hours, as the IDF hounded them, as one journalist described, like a pack of hyennas on the hunt. Now, you keep going on and on about 'premeditation'. After hours of being hunted by the IDF, those passengers probably knew the attack was coming. So they got what they could to legally defend their ships. Do you get that yet? The use of iron bars and plastic chairs was used in the defense of their ships in International waters.. against armed attackers who had been threatening them for hours.

So you wish to discuss irony?
 
Ah yes, "irony".

You are aware that civilians on ships that have been attacked by Somali pirates have also used everything available at hand to defend themselves. Correct?

Is it?

That ship was in International waters. They were attacked by an armed force. They were well within their legal rights to defend themselves against armed attackers. That is the point you're just not getting.

Even if that were so, the point you're not getting is restraint. So far we've seen a fairly impressive array of evidence that the Israeli commandoes were quite restrained - until they were mobbed with "irony sticks". None of the other ships had such a problem. One wonders why.
 
Even if that were so, the point you're not getting is restraint. So far we've seen a fairly impressive array of evidence that the Israeli commandoes were quite restrained - until they were mobbed with "irony sticks". None of the other ships had such a problem. One wonders why.

Restraint?

Really?

Nine dead, majority of them executed by being shot in the back of the head and several others missing.

No Israelis killed, quite the contrary, those 'violent activists' provided them with medical care.
 
Even if that were so, the point you're not getting is restraint. So far we've seen a fairly impressive array of evidence that the Israeli commandoes were quite restrained - until they were mobbed with "irony sticks". None of the other ships had such a problem. One wonders why.

Restraint?

Really?

Nine dead, majority of them executed by being shot in the back of the head and several others missing.

Classic. Note the bolded text above, and your ignorance thereof.
 
Restraint?

Really?

Nine dead, majority of them executed by being shot in the back of the head and several others missing.

No Israelis killed, quite the contrary, those 'violent activists' provided them with medical care.

The IDF provided the activists with medical care as well, so I guess everything's smoothed over now. :rolleyes: In Turkey they published photos of the troops in the middle of their beatings, because the papers felt (in their own words) it was important to show the IDF wasn't invincible, that their soldiers would cry when beat with enough sticks. Gee that must have taken a lot of scientific experimentation for them to finally figure out, if that's how they think.

Sorry, this is BS. You can criticize Israel's handling of the situation (doing it closer to Gaza wouldn't have made any difference to the outcome, but whatever). You can criticize Israel's restriction of the resulting inquiries. But video after video is coming out, interviews in the papers, so many different sources, and they clearly show that the the Mavi Marmara had far more than just peace activists on board the ship. Can we stop pretending there weren't people on board looking for a fight, stop making facts up and save me the trouble of linking to the video where the lead IHH official on board tells the passengers what they're gonna do when Israel shows up? Sh*t, it's enough already.

Oh yeah, and note that the leaders and financiers of the Lebanese flotilla have apparently already declared their mission is more about delegitimizing Israel than about getting aid to Gaza, as in "Israel is an illegal entity that must be driven into the sea one way or another" delegitimizing. Can't wait to see what surprises they might cook up and who they're gonna blame when the IDF inevitably shows up to welcome them.
 
Last edited:
The IDF provided the activists with medical care as well, so I guess everything's smoothed over now

Except for the doctor they shot in the stomach when he was taking them back after giving them first aid. No good deed ever goes unpunished in Israel eh?

Not to mention the two days of torture to which they subjected the activists. Assembly line job in Israel - they already have the infrastructure to oppress people in large numbers/

When the Israeli forces picked him up, Larudee said, he was severely beaten and tied to a mast at the stern of their ship. His legs and hands were bound as he was subjected to the hot sun in wet soaking clothes for four hours. He said his body almost went into shock from the extreme hot and cold conditions.

The soldiers refused to release him unless he told them his name. He repeatedly refused, but said he would cooperate only if they released him from the mast. They finally agreed and took him below deck. "For the remainder of the trip to the port, we got along fine," he said.

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2010/06/03/paul_larudee_flotilla_account

Gilad Atzmon has written a good column on Israeli mentality "Sobbing and shooting"

http://atlanticfreepress.com/news/1/13417-shooting-and-sobbing-by-gilad-atzmon.html
 
Historically, ships that tried to break a blockade were sunk. Those guys are lucky any of them are left alive.
 
Except for the doctor they shot in the stomach when he was taking them back after giving them first aid. No good deed ever goes unpunished in Israel eh?

Not to mention the two days of torture to which they subjected the activists. Assembly line job in Israel - they already have the infrastructure to oppress people in large numbers/



http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2010/06/03/paul_larudee_flotilla_account

Gilad Atzmon has written a good column on Israeli mentality "Sobbing and shooting"

http://atlanticfreepress.com/news/1/13417-shooting-and-sobbing-by-gilad-atzmon.html

You miss the point. These are the kinds of things to be dealt with in the investigation, and if you don't like who's doing the investigation, you can complain about that too. I'm merely trying to stop the retarded charade going on here that the Mavi Marmara was doing everything possible to avoid bloodshed. Even if I were on that ship defending myself from an Israeli commando I was convinced was about to seriously harm me, and my fanatical devotion to religion had led me to arm myself with an axe and a pipe in advance, I wouldn't keep beating on him after I've already disabled him and still call it "self-defense". If anyones want to argue "well, I would have the right to detonate a nuke on the IDF if that's what it takes to defend the ship", then we saw the outcome of this type of thinking, and will see it again as many times as needed.

I've read reports now that much/most (?) of the aid on that ship wasn't even in condition to be delivered even if it had all arrived without incident- expired medicines, expired foods. Sounds like their intent was to show they could send whatever they want to Gaza in the future, regardless of what its purpose might be- as in Israel wouldn't have a right to blockade them even if they were still shooting rockets, even if the aid ships were carrying ammunition, because in their minds Israel has no right to exist outside Poland.
 
I bet you would have made a good apologist for those who turned away the St Louis too. There is never a lack of people who justify doing the wrong thing, whether it is sending children back to the ovens or denying them security and food

Anyway, horror of horrors, a positive representation of the flotilla in an American newspapers

cleveland.jpg


This cartoon by Jeff Darcy appeared in the Cleveland Plain Dealer on June 3. This was clearly a breakthrough. The ADL and CAMERA immediately unleashed the Israel Lobby’s flak machine; they wouldn’t tolerate such favourable representation of what the American Jewish Committee calls ‘The Terror Flotilla‘. It did not take long for the editors to cave and issue a grovelling apology.


http://pulsemedia.org/2010/06/19/the-lethal-dove/

But of course they did.
 
I bet you would have made a good apologist for those who turned away the St Louis too. There is never a lack of people who justify doing the wrong thing, whether it is sending children back to the ovens or denying them security and food

I'm afraid you've got the wrong guy- I wasn't on the flotilla's radio channels telling the IDF to go back to Auschwitz.
 
You do know that has been proven to be dubbed in and was never actually said right?

Who "proved" it, how was it "proven", and what's your source? It better be something really damn good, otherwise I need to ask how you can throw out any evidence Israel gives but accept anything that comes from their opponents.
 
electric said:
Ok who would they be blockading?, for what reasons?, would the UN allow it as they did the Israeli blockade?
Any government of any region of Somalia has far better justification for blockading their entire coastal waters against European shipping than Israel has for blockading Gaza against anyone.

Including jurisdiction.

But you are correct, the UN would be unlikely to "allow" such behavior from anyone except Israel or the US. It would be worth trying anyway, though. The first step would be hiring the kinds of media influences that Israel has learned to deploy over the years.

CPT said:
Who "proved" it, how was it "proven", and what's your source? It better be something really damn good, otherwise I need to ask how you can throw out any evidence Israel gives but accept anything that comes from their opponents.
If the past several decades of agitprop and manipulation have not taught you the nature of the Israeli media operations, my guess is you haven't been paying attention.

Yes, the first reaction to anything from official Israeli military sources should be to demand physical evidence independently evaluated by people with direct and unmediated access to all relevant information. There are few less reliable or more consistently dishonest sources, and nothing should be taken on faith from them.
 
Yes, the first reaction to anything from official Israeli military sources should be to demand physical evidence independently evaluated by people with direct and unmediated access to all relevant information. There are few less reliable or more consistently dishonest sources, and nothing should be taken on faith from them.

Even less from unproven third parties, Ice. Have you seen the link promulgated about this issue?
 
geoff said:
Even less from unproven third parties, Ice
Not at all. "Unproven third parties" of the kind involved here have a somewhat better record, in hindsight, of reasonable accuracy in similar events.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top