Gaza's aid ships - Make them answer questions

[Bergkamp-Genius]

Quartz, once again you are making an analogy with military operations and humanitarians on an aid mission.

First to look at the concept of "Aid":

The flotilla was not simply "humanitarians on an aid mission".

Whilst no regards life in Gaza as a piece of cake, the shops there do have food and consumer goods.

The need for "Aid" in Gaza is not as pressing as such a flotilla would have many believe.

No doubt here is poverty and high unemployment there, and there is clearly a need for some supplementation to the food supply. Yet many eat normally there, it is not akin to the East African famines we have seen over the years.



Second to look at the flotilla's participants:

Majority of them were civilians from various countries. Five of the six boats were escorted to Ashdod port without incident. The food/medical supplies were then transferred to Gaza.

This last boat had women and children on board.
Who remained in the cabins.

Yet the people on the deck, who fought the soldiers. Why did they chose to fight? They were pre-warned that the ship was being boarded.

They were not "humanitarian" aid workers.
They were military calibre personnel.

They were armed, with not just iron bars but firebombs and a pistol.
They wore ceramic plated body armour.
They instigated the violence, because all ships were in radio contact so they knew the other five were peacefully boarded.
Their use of force was not of a civilian nature.
If some one attacks you, and you have an iron bar...you might swing for them and hope they keep their distance.
This mob though attacked the commandos en masse, bludgeoning them whilst the troops were on the floor.
Attempted to bring the Israeli helicopter out of the sky.

The Israelis were prepared for, and trained in, physical force.
Yet intentioned on a peaceful resolution.

But the actions of the people on the deck show that these so called "Aid Workers" were prepared for, trained in, and willing for, physical force.

And you talk of Hamas propaganda, it looks like you got all that from the Israeli ministry of mis information...You would do yourself a lot of favours if you didn't just spew out this blinkered defence that the Israeli's have fed you.

What kind of a statement is this especially from someone who isn't there...

''The need for "Aid" in Gaza is not as pressing as such a flotilla would have many believe''.

The only people who would suggest that to be true is the Israeli's, everyone else would laugh at that statement as they will most of the other nonsense you have copied from the Israeli's prepared defence..and you should be ashamed to just trot it out like it is fact..
By all means put across the israeli side and the bigger picture,but defending the indefensible makes it harder to take any real points seriously..

[QuartzGooner]

Bergkamp-Genius, your tactic of claiming my defence is somehow "Propaganda" and "Not to be taken seriously" is a time honoured tactic of Islamic propaganda.

Of pre conditioning the debate so that it is skewed before it even starts.
Of declaring that any defence of Israel must be illogical, so that any defence must therefore be "propaganda".

Whether you are using it as such, or have just been conditioned by it, is not known to me.

I make my points in all seriousness, not as some sort of propaganda.

No I am not in Gaza, and neither are you, but I read across the media and have a number of friends who have been there.


If you were aware of the internal Israeli debate you would see that the concern is that the footage of the boat was not released quickly enough so that the world could see what the attack constituted, instead of the knee-jerk falsity that was printed of an attack on so called "innocent civilians".

Have a little look at the CCTV from the ship prior to and at the start of the Israeli's boarding the ship.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HZlSSaPT ... r_embedded#!

[Bergkamp-Genius]

Bergkamp-Genius, your tactic of claiming my defence is somehow "Propaganda" and "Not to be taken seriously" is a time honoured tactic of Islamic propaganda.
Of pre conditioning the debate so that it is skewed before it even starts.

Whether you are using it as such, or have just been conditioned by it, is not known to me.

I make my points in all seriousness, not as some sort of propaganda.

If you were aware of the internal Israeli debate you would see that the concern is that the footage of the boat was not released quickly enough so that the world could see what the attack constituted, instead of the knee-jerk falsity that was printed of an attack on so called "innocent civilians".

I think you need to take a step back you are so wrapped up in this anti or pro Israeli thing you obviously can't see the wood from the trees.. don't constantly try to defend everything they do and repeat everything they tell you...take every incident as an individual incident and see it how it is, don't just role out a defence regardless of the actuality..

As for the boats..you don't set up your own blockade in international waters then send a commando squad to illegally board a boat that doesn't belong to you, then when you get resistance pass it off as you being the victim after you have blown them away for resisting...and the sad thing is you can't even see the ridiculousness of that defence..it's like breaking into someones house, them hitting you with a stick, you blowing them away, then blaming them....

[QuartzGooner]

No.

It is not like breaking into someone's house then blaming them for defending themselves.

It is warning the ship that it is not to enter a legally declared exclusion zone in a war area.

It was legal under maritime law for the Israelis to board the ships.

The commandos boarded peacefully, holding non lethal weapons held in case of protest.

No one was "blown away" when the commandos boarded. What newspapers do you read?
Where does it claim that?

They Israelis boarded one by one from a rope and were mobbed upon boarding.
The Israelis were not expecting a violent response.
The fighting lasted up to two hours.


The other five ships were boarded peacefully.

So why was there fighting on this one?

Perhaps these preparations had a lot to do with it?

Do they look like middle aged "Greenham Common" type women to you?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HZlSSaPT ... r_embedded#!

[northbankbren]

Am I correct in saying that the press in Israel are also condemning what took place?

[Cockerill's chin]

If you believe the special forces were engaging armed, trained combatants then how on earth can I debate with you Quartz? The video footage highlights a slingshot. This is hardly a match for special forces with night vision. You said these guys were military calibre? Please be realistic.

It was illegal under Maritime law. Under article 3 of the Rome Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Maritime Navigation of 1988, it is an international crime for any person to seize or exercise control over a ship by force.

I feel that extremists of any religion; whether they are Fundamentalists, Zionists or the Christian right wing are a paradox. Intelligent men stubbornly clinging to ignorant and narrow minded views with no regard for human life which threatens their belief.

You should mourn those people who died, Quartz. I pity you that you cannot see why.

[northbankbren]

What ever happens they better not feck with the Irish!!!!

The Irish taoiseach, Brian Cowen, warned Israel tonight that he expected no violence against those on the Rachel Corrie.

"If any harm comes to any of our citizens it will have the most serious consequences," he said, calling on Israel to guarantee the vessel safe passage through the military blockade of Gaza.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/ju ... el-warning

[QuartzGooner]

If you believe the special forces were engaging armed, trained combatants then how on earth can I debate with you Quartz? The video footage highlights a slingshot. This is hardly a match for special forces with night vision. You said these guys were military calibre? Please be realistic.

It was illegal under Maritime law. Under article 3 of the Rome Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Maritime Navigation of 1988, it is an international crime for any person to seize or exercise control over a ship by force.

I feel that extremists of any religion; whether they are Fundamentalists, Zionists or the Christian right wing are a paradox. Intelligent men stubbornly clinging to ignorant and narrow minded views with no regard for human life which threatens their belief.

You should mourn those people who died, Quartz. I pity you that you cannot see why.

A hunting catapult is a deadly weapon.
So is a pistol, which the people on deck had.
So are molotov cocktails.

The point is that the commandos had non lethal crowd control weapons drawn.

They had boarded five other ships with no incident, which would have been known to this ship because they were all in radio contact.

The guys on deck chose to rumble. It was their call.

It is international law that the country that operates an exclusion zone can search incoming ships.
In the past eight years, there have been three ships stopped by Israel/Cyprus which were carrying arms to Hamas!

Your point about religion is confusing to me. The Israeli government and military is frequently accused of being secularist and anti religious.

I did not wish these men to die, but having attacked the commandos they made that possibility likely. They sailed as "Islamic martyrs" in a cynical PR stunt, that roped in some people who genuinely believed they were doing good.

Hamas has now refused the food the ships delivered!
What does that tell you about their aims? Their cynicism?
If they were so desperate for food, they would not refuse it.


Bren:


There is a broad spectrum of Israeli press from right to left wing, each takes a different editorial line.
There is broad support among the population for the raid's intent to search the ships, as people know Hamas smuggle in arms.
There is discussion as to whether the tactics simply played into the hands of the Hamas PR Machine, but there is agreement that the soldiers had to defend themselves when attacked.

There was an Arab member of the Israeli parliament on one of the ships, she today criticised the search procedure, in a press conference at the parliament building.

[DanielD]

Am I correct in saying that the press in Israel are also condemning what took place?

Not condeming.. The only criticism is why the soldiers went up these ships without the appropriate weapons for this situation (aka fighting against an angry mob) and to the poor Intelligence by our side, not getting the information about the mercenaries that attacked the soldiers.

As for the boats..you don't set up your own blockade in international waters then send a commando squad to illegally board a boat that doesn't belong to you, then when you get resistance pass it off as you being the victim after you have blown them away for resisting...and the sad thing is you can't even see the ridiculousness of that defence..it's like breaking into someones house, them hitting you with a stick, you blowing them away, then blaming them....

As Quartz said in previous posts. The boarding was legal:

"A ship trying to breach a blockade can be boarded and force may be used to stop it as long as it is "necessary and proportionate", from the BBC website.

Before you jump the "how is killing people proportionate?" idea, you have to understand that the soldiers had no choice. If they weren't to drawn live weapons they would die themselves.

If you believe the special forces were engaging armed, trained combatants then how on earth can I debate with you Quartz?

Armed with knives, metal bars and axes, or there's an argument in that department?

They were paid in thousands of dollars and they seem very professional hiding their IDs. Additionally trying to tie the cable of the Israeli helicopter to the ship for it to crash.. They seem to be pretty well trained to me.

BTW, do you find them any different from the protestors on the other ships? Or are the ones who attacked the soldiers are as peacful as the protestors on the other 5 ships?

[Bergkamp-Genius]

As for the boats..you don't set up your own blockade in international waters then send a commando squad to illegally board a boat that doesn't belong to you, then when you get resistance pass it off as you being the victim after you have blown them away for resisting...and the sad thing is you can't even see the ridiculousness of that defence..it's like breaking into someones house, them hitting you with a stick, you blowing them away, then blaming them....

As Quartz said in previous posts. The boarding was legal:

"A ship trying to breach a blockade can be boarded and force may be used to stop it as long as it is "necessary and proportionate", from the BBC website.

Before you jump the "how is killing people proportionate?" idea, you have to understand that the soldiers had no choice. If they weren't to drawn live weapons they would die themselves.

Just so you know i have set up a blockade on the land that your home is on, i will be dropping in through your window one day with a machine gun, just make sure you don't resist, otherwise i will be forced to shoot you...It's totally legal as you know, i have said it is a blockade so it is a blockade, so i am totally within my rights to enforce my own self stated blockade.. Or does it only become legal when the Israeli's do it..

[QuartzGooner]

As for the boats..you don't set up your own blockade in international waters then send a commando squad to illegally board a boat that doesn't belong to you, then when you get resistance pass it off as you being the victim after you have blown them away for resisting...and the sad thing is you can't even see the ridiculousness of that defence..it's like breaking into someones house, them hitting you with a stick, you blowing them away, then blaming them....

As Quartz said in previous posts. The boarding was legal:

"A ship trying to breach a blockade can be boarded and force may be used to stop it as long as it is "necessary and proportionate", from the BBC website.

Before you jump the "how is killing people proportionate?" idea, you have to understand that the soldiers had no choice. If they weren't to drawn live weapons they would die themselves.

Just so you know i have set up a blockade on the land that your home is on, i will be dropping in through your window one day with a machine gun, just make sure you don't resist, otherwise i will be forced to shoot you...It's totally legal as you know, i have said it is a blockade so it is a blockade, so i am totally within my rights to enforce my own self stated blockade.. Or does it only become legal when the Israeli's do it..

What choice does Israel have?

The democratically elected Hamas government in Gaza is in a state of war with Israel.
The Hamas government fires 1000's of missiles into Israel, it sends suicide bombers into Israel, it frequently attacks the border fence, it holds an Israeli soldier hostage, it also attacks the Egyptian border guards, and it is increasingly strengthening ties with Al-Queda, Hezbollah and Iran.

Israeli civilians and military withdrew from Gaza in 2005, yet attacks increased after this!


A blockade is a well known feature of maritime law/warfare.

The UK used one to justify sinking the Belgrano.

[Bergkamp-Genius]

As for the boats..you don't set up your own blockade in international waters then send a commando squad to illegally board a boat that doesn't belong to you, then when you get resistance pass it off as you being the victim after you have blown them away for resisting...and the sad thing is you can't even see the ridiculousness of that defence..it's like breaking into someones house, them hitting you with a stick, you blowing them away, then blaming them....

As Quartz said in previous posts. The boarding was legal:

"A ship trying to breach a blockade can be boarded and force may be used to stop it as long as it is "necessary and proportionate", from the BBC website.

Before you jump the "how is killing people proportionate?" idea, you have to understand that the soldiers had no choice. If they weren't to drawn live weapons they would die themselves.

Just so you know i have set up a blockade on the land that your home is on, i will be dropping in through your window one day with a machine gun, just make sure you don't resist, otherwise i will be forced to shoot you...It's totally legal as you know, i have said it is a blockade so it is a blockade, so i am totally within my rights to enforce my own self stated blockade.. Or does it only become legal when the Israeli's do it..

What choice does Israel have?

The democratically elected Hamas government in Gaza is in a state of war with Israel.
The Hamas government fires 1000's of missiles into Israel, it sends suicide bombers into Israel, it frequently attacks the border fence, it holds an Israeli soldier hostage, it also attacks the Egyptian border guards, and it is increasingly strengthening ties with Al-Queda, Hezbollah and Iran.

Israeli civilians and military withdrew from Gaza in 2005, yet attacks increased after this!


A blockade is a well known feature of maritime law/warfare.

The UK used one to justify sinking the Belgrano.

Israel has the same choice as everyone else, to deal with situations in an appropriate manner, not with overkill with no regard for innocent human life and no regard for international law and condemnation.

Ask yourself this would the Israeli government operate the way they do in these kind of situations if the yanks didn't turn a blind eye to it...i doubt it, but as it is as long as the yanks allow this kind of behaviour to go unpunished the leaders of Israel will continue to use overkill, knowing they will get away with it and the yanks wonder why the arabs don't trust them...
If the Iranians had done something similar there would have been huge condemnation from us and the Yanks and numerous UN resolutions pushed through to punish them and we would be on the brink of war with them...but this will be swept under the carpet in no time at all behind the scenes by the americans..so perpetuating more of the same...

As for the Belgrano...even if there were any parallels in the situations which there are not, quoting another supposedly similar incident in history does not make it any more right now..

[QuartzGooner]

It is complete rubbish to say Israel acts with no regard to innocent human life.

As I have stated before, many missions have been cancelled mid-mission when civilians have got in the way.

The people on deck on the sixth ship were up for a fight, and they got one.
They could have met the commandos peacefully like the people on the other five ships.

Israel is at war with the government of Gaza, the UK was at war with the government of Argentina. Arms ships have been sailed to Gaza before, and intercepted. Israel had to be sure this was not one of those. It was legal to intercept the flotilla.

There are clear parallels with the Belgrano.

[Cockerill's chin]

It takes a peculiar mind to draw parallels with an armed military vessel at a time of war and a neutral aid vessel. Your attempts at justification strike of clutching at straws.

Unfortunately, in countless of military operations, Israel have not placed high enough regard on innocent civilian life.

[DB10GOONER]

Did we really need a SECOND thread on this? I'm locking this one down because the main posters are just repeating themselves at this point, so let's keep all of this on the original thread please - which will stay open whilst it stays civil.