UN finds Israeli raid on Flotilla unlawful

Sticky_Fingers · 23-09-2010 5:35am #1

From the BBC:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-11393836

Israel's military broke international laws during a raid on a Gaza-bound aid flotilla, a UN Human Rights Council investigation says.
Its report said the action by commandos, which left nine dead, was "disproportionate" and "betrayed an unacceptable level of brutality".
It said there was clear evidence to support prosecutions against Israel for "wilful killing".
Israel rejected the report as "biased" and "one-sided."
It insists its soldiers acted in self-defence during the 31 May raid.
Nine Turkish pro-Palestinian activists were killed and many others injured after Israeli commandoes boarded the six-ship convoy as it tried to breach an Israeli naval blockade of Gaza.
The convoy's passengers were detained and later deported by Israel.
There was widespread international criticism of Israel's actions, which severely strained relations with its long-time Muslim ally, Turkey.
'Biased' In a 56-page report, the UN panel of three international lawyers said: "There is clear evidence to support prosecutions of the following crimes within the terms of article 147 of the Fourth Geneva Convention: wilful killing; torture or inhuman treatment; wilfully causing great suffering or serious injury to body or health".

The Convention is an international treaty governing the protection of civilians in times of war.
The UN fact-finding mission also said the Israeli blockade of the Palestinian territory was "unlawful" because of a humanitarian crisis there.
The panel had interviewed more than 100 witnesses in Britain, Jordan, Switzerland Turkey, but not in Israel.
Before the report was released, Israel dismissed the Human Rights Council as being biased, politicised and extremist.
After the findings were published, it said the report was "as biased and as one-sided as the body that has produced it".
"Israel... is of the opinion that the flotilla incident is amply and sufficiently investigated as it is," said the Israeli foreign ministry in a statement.
"All additional dealing with this issue is superfluous and unproductive."
The Israeli government has begun its own independent inquiry into the flotilla raid, the Turkel Commission. It has two foreign observers, but critics say its remit is too narrow.
There is also a separate UN inquiry - ordered by UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon - into the raid. Israel has said it will co-operate with the investigation.

I especially like the part where the Israelis dismissed the report before it was even published and their assertion that there was no need for it in the first place calling it "superfluous and unproductive". Of course nothing is going to come of this, it seems that this is just par for the course where Israel is concerned.

old_aussie · 23-09-2010 6:09am

UN finds.....

I once found a good PC on the side of the road.

Mr Benevolent · 23-09-2010 7:09am

Israel - Pre-emptive strike specialists since 1948 :rolleyes: Who does their PR? They're a world joke by now. A very bad one.

old_aussie · 23-09-2010 7:14am

Confab wrote: »

Israel - Pre-emptive strike specialists since 1948 :rolleyes: Who does their PR? They're a world joke by now. A very bad one.

Learn history.

When Israel achieved its independence on May 14, 1948, the Haganah became the de facto Israeli army.

On that day, the country was invaded by the regular forces of Egypt, Lebanon, Iraq, and Syria.

http://www.onwar.com/aced/data/india/israel1948.htm

And the Israelis whipped the Arabs.

Terry · 23-09-2010 7:20am

Before the report was released, Israel dismissed the Human Rights Council as being biased, politicised and extremist.
After the findings were published, it said the report was "as biased and as one-sided as the body that has produced it".

Read: Anti-semitic.

"Israel... is of the opinion that the flotilla incident is amply and sufficiently investigated as it is," said the Israeli foreign ministry in a statement.
"All additional dealing with this issue is superfluous and unproductive."
The Israeli government has begun its own independent inquiry into the flotilla raid, the Turkel Commission.

Dear rest of the world; Go fúck yourselves.
Regards, Israel.

Sticky_Fingers wrote: »

From the BBC:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-11393836

I especially like the part where the Israelis dismissed the report before it was even published and their assertion that there was no need for it in the first place calling it "superfluous and unproductive". Of course nothing is going to come of this, it seems that this is just par for the course where Israel is concerned.

Israel are dicks.
Yes, so are Hamas, but two wrongs do not make a right.

Mr Benevolent · 23-09-2010 7:23am

old_aussie wrote: »

Learn history.

When Israel achieved its independence on May 14, 1948, the Haganah became the de facto Israeli army.

On that day, the country was invaded by the regular forces of Egypt, Lebanon, Iraq, and Syria.

http://www.onwar.com/aced/data/india/israel1948.htm

And the Israelis whipped the Arabs.

You've forgotten who created Israel in the first place. 'One country promised the land of another to a third party.' Not a recipe for success. They should've stuck to their leader's original plan of moving to Africa. Far less potential for conflict.

arybvtcw0eolkf · 23-09-2010 7:38am

Confab wrote: »

They should've stuck to their leader's original plan of moving to Africa. Far less potential for conflict.

Yup, because Africa is devoid of war & strife?..

Or would you be comfortable ignoring another war in Africa?.

Oh, back to the report.. '"disproportionate" and "brutal" - thats the price for attacking Israel, hippies should remember this before they go pricking about in other people's business.

Oh roll on the hysterics....1 and 2 and ......

RMD · 23-09-2010 7:43am

I really ****ing hate Israel. Criticize them and suddenly you're anti-Semitic. Yes, you faced a genocide over half a century ago, I'm very sorry about that, but please for fúcks sake stop playing the victim card. Pack of pissed off cowardly bullies.

amacachi · 23-09-2010 7:45am

Oaklee Damp Background wrote: »

Yup, because Africa is devoid of war & strife?..

Or would you be comfortable ignoring another war in Africa?.

Oh, back to the report.. '"disproportionate" and "brutal" - thats the price for attacking Israel, hippies should remember this before they go pricking about in other people's business.

Oh roll on the hysterics....1 and 2 and ......

I love how you point out how predictable everyone's reaction to something ****ty that Israel did is in every thread about Israel.

Sticky_Fingers · 23-09-2010 7:50am

Terry wrote: »

Israel are dicks.
Yes, so are Hamas, but two wrongs do not make a right.

Never said they did, the world is a dirty shade of gray but the zealots on both sides of this conflict and their respective cheering section here on boards (and the media in general) only see it in black and white. Israel focked up here, the least they can do is admit it. Its obvious that Hamas are a bunch of murdering scumbags but Israel have not exactly showered themselves in glory.

Personally I would like the world to step back and offer the belligerents a compromise, put them on a desert island and let them duke it out themselves, no support for either side and no quarter asked for or given, winner takes all. Once a victor emerges I then suggest we nuke the island from orbit so their rabid zealotry doesn't infect anyone else and as a clear warning to others. Its the only way to be sure.

Mr Benevolent · 23-09-2010 7:52am

Oaklee Damp Background wrote: »

Yup, because Africa is devoid of war & strife?..

Or would you be comfortable ignoring another war in Africa?.

Oh, back to the report.. '"disproportionate" and "brutal" - thats the price for attacking Israel, hippies should remember this before they go pricking about in other people's business.

Oh roll on the hysterics....1 and 2 and ......

Israel's land was gifted to them from the UK, who took it from Palestine without any questions. That was frankly unpardonable and almost insane considering the political environment in the Middle East even before Israel showed up. Now Palestine is in tatters because of an agreement between two third parties that locked them out of the decision-making process. Israel's history of utter paranoia and refusal to openly negotiate has made matters a lot worse. Small wonder Israel is under constant terrorist attack, it's not exactly blameless itself. Israel has created all its own problems and a nuclear exchange would not surprise me. The only reason Israel has not been overwhelmed by now is the US friendship it has. If it does many other internationally repellent acts it may well lose that too in time.

Yup, because Africa is devoid of war & strife?..

Africa would've been a far better place to put Israel than the Middle East in terms of political sensitivity. Its current location virtually guarantees conflict.

Criticize them and suddenly you're anti-Semitic.

Agreed, it's very irritating.

R0ot · 23-09-2010 8:11am

And what will the UN do about it....... NOTHING. :mad:

Sticky_Fingers · 23-09-2010 8:17am

Oaklee Damp Background wrote: »

Oh, back to the report.. '"disproportionate" and "brutal" - thats the price for attacking Israel, hippies should remember this before they go pricking about in other people's business.

Oh roll on the hysterics....1 and 2 and ......

NOTE*Not a personal attack, just making a point

Oaklee Damp Background lets say that if I was to comment on your sig and say that the picture really doesn't do a female member of your family justice you would be well in your rights to dole out a ban for personal abuse but would you say that you would have the right to come over to my gaff with a flamethrower and set the place ablaze and have your buddies shoot anyone who tried to flee the building.

I'm sure you as a rational person would consider this disproportionate and brutal. Why then do you see fit to justify an action that, while may not be as despicable as the one I've outlined above is still wholly irrational and disproportionate to the threat posed?

Your are one of the blind cheerleaders that I was alluding to in my earlier post, you and and your opposite number on the other side of the fence are the problem, blind to the faults of your "team" and thus having nothing constructive to bring to the table. The sad thing about it is that in this world its the blind men who seem to be kings while the one eyed among us who deplore the scummy actions of both sides can only look on in horror as both tribes try to justify the most heinous atrocities committed against each other with a childish "well he started it waah wahhh".

Zebra3 · 23-09-2010 8:32am

Oaklee Damp Background wrote: »

Oh, back to the report.. '"disproportionate" and "brutal" - thats the price for attacking Israel, hippies should remember this before they go pricking about in other people's business.

Israel's supporters should remember that Palestine was a peaceful place where muslims and a small numbers of jews and christians lived in harmony until the invasion of the country by European jews who went pricking about in other people's business.

Hamas and their likes only exist because of the brutal occupation the Palestinians have been under since 1948 which has resulted in the theft of four million acres of their land.

Israel is a state built on ethnic cleansing, land grabbing, torture and all sorts of human rights abuses.

23-09-2010 9:09am

What's the point in the UN even publishing a report, they're not going to do anything about it. Everyone will get on with business as usual and israel don't give a damn. Pack of paranoid cowardly bullies is right.

wes · 23-09-2010 9:56am

Oaklee Damp Background wrote: »

Oh, back to the report.. '"disproportionate" and "brutal" - thats the price for attacking Israel, hippies should remember this before they go pricking about in other people's business.

A wonderful attitude. I could make the same excuse for rockets against Israeli civilians, and say that the price they pay for nicking other people's land. Oh and harping on about hippies has gotten silly at this point. Making constant excuses for Israel by her supporters just make Israel look worse, and attitudes like the above are just making excuses for one sides terrorism. Either its wrong for both of them, or neither, you can't have you cake and eat it too.

**EDIT**
Now Hamas are utter scum, but then so are the IDF. There is no excuse for either sides actions. The only sane thing for supporters of either side, is to condemn either sides terrorism, and not make excuses.
**END EDIT**

Sea Sharp · 23-09-2010 9:57am

I think it's safe to say that Israel won't have to deal with any consequences for this.:mad::mad:

KyussBishop · 23-09-2010 10:12am

bluewolf wrote:

What's the point in the UN even publishing a report, they're not going to do anything about it. Everyone will get on with business as usual and israel don't give a damn. Pack of paranoid cowardly bullies is right.

^^ Well, even if the UN is pretty much impotent when it comes to doling out punishment on Israel, it's still good that Israel is receiving more and more open condemnation, as that really doesn't happen enough from official organizations/governments at the moment.

Most of Europe, and obviously the US, are still very (politically) friendly with Israel, and I don't think there is a whole lot of incentive for that to change at the moment.
While Israel's extremely strong lobby groups in the US stay powerful, nobody can do anything to Israel, and they are increasingly growing stronger ties with Europe too.

As for the divide people talk about, regarding people on both 'sides' of the argument in these forums: I rarely see anyone ever support or justify the actions of Hamas, so I don't know what people mean about there being cheerleaders on both sides.

From what I've seen, there are only people who fanatically support Israel; if the odd person or two does make a comment about Hamas (usually something along the lines of "sure I wouldn't blame them"), they are usually argued against, and they don't hold onto their argument in a death grip like a number of Israeli supporting posters do (i.e. they respond to reason, and don't have a concealed motive/bigoted-belief behind their arguments).

To paint it as both sides having their extreme supporters on boards, in my opinion, contributes (not often intentionally) to detracting/negating the overwhelming number of well argued (and mostly common-sense) anti-Israeli posts.

99% of the debates are about Israel vs The Palestinian People, not Israel vs Hamas (as much as people like to portray it that way, as a smear); most/all people do condemn the actions of Hamas.

Viper_JB · 23-09-2010 10:41am

Hamas was born out of a situation similiar to how the IRA came into being over here, both terrorist organisations but both were made to do what little they could to protect their people.

I condone none of their actions but their original intent was to protect their people. The palistinian people have gone through what can only be likened to a holocaust or mass ethnic extermination, at the hands of holocaust survivors. If this were to happen to any group of people I'd imagine a similiar terrorist group would form, what has happened to the palistian people over the last 60 years has been horrendous. I've always been amazed that people subjected to a similiar situation would be so callous about doing it to someone else.

Fratton Fred · 23-09-2010 11:39am

Confab wrote: »

Israel's land was gifted to them from the UK, who took it from Palestine without any questions. That was frankly unpardonable and almost insane considering the political environment in the Middle East even before Israel showed up.

Your post is a very very simplistic way of looking at it.

Britain took the land from the Ottoman empire when thy defeated them in 1917. Since 1915 the Uk was trying to establish a joint Arab/Jewish homeland there and in 1947 this happened.

The United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine or United Nations General Assembly Resolution 181 (II) Future Government of Palestine was a resolution adopted by the General Assembly on 29 November 1947 by a vote of 33 to 13, with 10 abstentions.[1]

The resolution recommended the termination of the British Mandate for Palestine and the partition of the territory into two states, one Jewish and one Arab, with the Jerusalem-Bethlehem area being under special international protection, administered by the United Nations. The resolution also contained a plan for an economic union between the proposed states, and a plan for the protection of religious and minority rights. The resolution sought to address the conflicting objectives and claims to the Mandate territory of two competing nationalist movements, Zionism (Jewish nationalism) and Arab nationalism, as well as to resolve the plight of Jews displaced as a result of the Holocaust. The resolution called for the withdrawal of British forces and termination of the Mandate by 1 August 1948, and establishment of the new independent states by 1 October 1948. A transitional period under United Nations auspices was to begin with the adoption of the resolution, and lasting until the establishment of the two states. However, war broke out and the partition plan was never implemented by the Security Council.

In May 1948 the Israeli leader, David Ben Gurion declared independance, the following day half the middle east invaded.

I can see why Israel are paranoid.

RMD · 23-09-2010 12:02pm

Hamas aren't the sole reason of violence. Political parties like Hamas are the products of a country being oppressed for decades. If the Israelis treated the Palestinians with the level of respect humans should receive then parties like Hamas wouldn't exist.

Parties like Sinn Fein only grew in popularity during and after the troubles, due to the involvement of the British Army and their clearly unionist siding. Oppress a group of people and extremist groups will emerge, and often with a lot of support.

wes · 23-09-2010 12:05pm

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Your post is a very very simplistic way of looking at it.

You also left out the arrival of Zionist colonists, who wanted to establish a Jewish homeland (based on stuff in the Bible) against the wishes of the pre-existing indigenous population. So your own view is pretty simplistic.

brianthebard · 23-09-2010 12:06pm

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Your post is a very very simplistic way of looking at it.

Britain took the land from the Ottoman empire when thy defeated them in 1917. Since 1915 the Uk was trying to establish a joint Arab/Jewish homeland there and in 1947 this happened.

Your post is equally simplistic. It wasn't Britain's place to establish anything. Further their desire to have equality for Arabs and Jews is highly questionable, and their motives for setting up a Jewish Homeland were a mix of racism, nationalism and financial interests. You also ignore the 30 years between 1915 and 1947, when the British imported Jews to Palestine, allowed death squads to run amok and generally ****ing the place up for the natives, ensuring that by the time an actual state was established (again not Britain's place to do) everyone had had enough of it.

Son Of A Vidic · 23-09-2010 12:47pm

Sea Sharp wrote: »

I think it's safe to say that Israel won't have to deal with any consequences for this.:mad::mad:

Israel is above consequences, they don't even operate under international law. Haven't a lot of people died, just because of some charismatic guy making a claim on land generations ago?

Fratton Fred · 23-09-2010 2:24pm

wes wrote: »

You also left out the arrival of Zionist colonists, who wanted to establish a Jewish homeland (based on stuff in the Bible) against the wishes of the pre-existing indigenous population. So your own view is pretty simplistic.

brianthebard wrote: »

Your post is equally simplistic. It wasn't Britain's place to establish anything. Further their desire to have equality for Arabs and Jews is highly questionable, and their motives for setting up a Jewish Homeland were a mix of racism, nationalism and financial interests. You also ignore the 30 years between 1915 and 1947, when the British imported Jews to Palestine, allowed death squads to run amok and generally ****ing the place up for the natives, ensuring that by the time an actual state was established (again not Britain's place to do) everyone had had enough of it.

I could say the same, your posts are a very simplistic view of a very complex period of history.

Nodin · 23-09-2010 2:29pm

Fratton Fred wrote: »

I could say the same, your posts are a very simplistic view of a very complex period of history.

You could say it. You'd be entirely wrong, but yes, you could indeed say it.

speedboatchase · 23-09-2010 2:30pm

God, another bloody anti-Israel thread. You people are so predictable

arybvtcw0eolkf · 23-09-2010 2:32pm

Sticky_Fingers wrote: »

Makikomi lets say that if I was to comment on your sig and say that the picture really doesn't do a female member of your family justice you would be well in your rights to dole out a ban for personal abuse but would you say that you would have the right to come over to my gaff with a flamethrower and set the place ablaze and have your buddies shoot anyone who tried to flee the building.

Sure, enjoy the anonymity afforded to you by the internet and give it your best shot.

Sticky_Fingers wrote: »

I'm sure you as a rational person would consider this disproportionate and brutal.

Mention my family and I'm not a very rational person.. Like yourself, I'm just making a point.

In regards to attacking Israel, attempting to sail floatillas through a blockade, border incursions etc etc - everyone know's that Israel will respond with brutal and disproportionate force & thats the price for attacking Israel.

Personally I think if someone thinks they can afford to pay that price then Israel IMO is a fair target - they've pissed off a lot of people..

Only thing I'll say, and this goes for either side - going to war for peace is like fvcking for virginity - one doesn't bring the other.

Someday, like happened here in Ireland, there'll me a meeting of moderates. Peace will decend upon the region and everyone will look back and say "WTF was that all about".

curlzy · 23-09-2010 2:42pm

Oaklee Damp Background wrote: »

Someday, like happened here in Ireland, there'll me a meeting of moderates. Peace will decend upon the region and everyone will look back and say "WTF was that all about".

Hopefully yeah, but it won't be soon and what about all the innocents killed in the meantime? And in fairness the IRA blowing the **** outta the financial centres in London helped to start the discussion going up North didn't it? UN is ****ing useless though, they've as much power at tabloid press, name and shame is about all they can do. I don't think fighting for peace is like ****ing for virginity, if it was WWII would be ongoing.

brianthebard · 23-09-2010 3:10pm

Oaklee Damp Background wrote: »

In regards to attacking Israel, attempting to sail floatillas through a blockade, border incursions etc etc - everyone know's that Israel will respond with brutal and disproportionate force & thats the price for attacking Israel.

You have zero credibility on the topic of Israel. Its ok to kill people cause that's what Israel does, that's the best defence you can come up with? ffs.

Fratton Fred · 23-09-2010 3:11pm

Nodin wrote: »

You could say it. You'd be entirely wrong, but yes, you could indeed say it.

why?

Maybe you would like to give us the complete history of Palestine from 1917 to 1948?

wes · 23-09-2010 3:15pm

Fratton Fred wrote: »

I could say the same, your posts are a very simplistic view of a very complex period of history.

I was just pointing out one of the many details that you left out actually. My post wasn't intended to be anything beyond that.

Now you can certainly claim that other people history is simplisitc, but I would very much disagree, as the Zionist version has long since been shown to be inaccurate, and very often by Israeli historians.

wes · 23-09-2010 3:16pm

Fratton Fred wrote: »

why?

Maybe you would like to give us the complete history of Palestine from 1917 to 1948?

Zionists started arriving in the late 1800's so we would need start earlier than 1917.

Mr Benevolent · 23-09-2010 3:16pm

Fratton Fred wrote: »

why?

Maybe you would like to give us the complete history of Palestine from 1917 to 1948?

People always have excuses for the Israelis.

PeterIanStaker · 23-09-2010 3:19pm

This report achieves nothing in real life. In some reverse - psychology way it reinforces the status quo.

amacachi · 23-09-2010 3:26pm

brianthebard wrote: »

You have zero credibility on the topic of Israel. Its ok to kill people cause that's what Israel does, that's the best defence you can come up with? ffs.

Drive past my house and I'll shoot you. You've had a fair warning, not my problem. :pac:

Fratton Fred · 23-09-2010 3:37pm

wes wrote: »

Zionists started arriving in the late 1800's so we would need start earlier than 1917.

I mentioned 1917 as that was when the Balfour declaration was made.

I understand as well that there may have been a few Jews kicking around that region as long as 3000 years ago as well, until they were expelled over a period of time by different factions, starting with the Romans.

brianthebard · 23-09-2010 3:44pm

amacachi wrote: »

Drive past my house and I'll shoot you. You've had a fair warning, not my problem. :pac:

But my house is right beside yours and I have to go past it to get to work!

Sticky_Fingers · 23-09-2010 3:44pm

Oaklee Damp Background wrote: »

Sure, enjoy the anonymity afforded to you by the internet and give it your best shot.

Mention my family and I'm not a very rational person.. Like yourself, I'm just making a point.

Of course just like the Israeli reaction yours is not in the least bit psychotic and no court in the land would ever convict you since you acted completely rationally and had ample justification for taking it, just making a point. You and Israel make perfect bedfellows.

Oaklee Damp Background wrote: »

In regards to attacking Israel, attempting to sail floatillas through a blockade, border incursions etc etc - everyone know's that Israel will respond with brutal and disproportionate force & thats the price for attacking Israel.

Sorry to bust your bubble but if Isreal wants to be taken seriously and not held in the contempt that its actions show that it deserves its got to start playing by the rules. Just because Hamas are murdering scumbags doesn't give Israel the right to be, they want to play dirty then the international community has the right and the duty to treat them like the turds they are acting like. It is people who are making weak tea excuses for them (sound familiar Oaklee Damp Background) who are enabling states to literally get away with murder. Oh and if I recall there were no arms found on the aid ships apart from some pathetic looking tools scared up by the IDF to justify their actions so your assertion that the members of the flotilla were attacking Israel is complete Glen Beck fantasy.

Someday, like happened here in Ireland, there'll me a meeting of moderates. Peace will decend upon the region and everyone will look back and say "WTF was that all about".

And does your justifaction of the raid on the flotilla bring this day any closer. Do you accept that Israel screwed up because if Israel and its apologists like you cannot see fault in your own actions then how can your expect your opponents to see fault in theirs, without which no common ground can be reached.

wes · 23-09-2010 4:02pm

Fratton Fred wrote: »

I mentioned 1917 as that was when the Balfour declaration was made.

Zionists started arriving in the late 1800's. We can't exactly ignore how Zionists ended up in Mandate Palestine in 1917, it leaves out a rather major chunk of history, so once again you are being entirely too simplistic.

Fratton Fred wrote: »

I understand as well that there may have been a few Jews kicking around that region as long as 3000 years ago as well, until they were expelled over a period of time by different factions, starting with the Romans.

Yes, and the Palestinians are descendants of the Jews who were not expelled (as well as the various invaders, as inter-marriage occured), as per recent genetic evidence. Personally, I fail to see how a 3000 year old land claim should have any relevance in the here and now. Sure, can't we all claim to be African if we go back far enough.

--Kaiser-- · 23-09-2010 4:07pm

This is the raid on the flotilla trying the break the Gaza blockade?
Where Israel said it would allow the flotilla in, as long as they could inspect the ships (obviously to ensure no weapons were being transported)?

The people on the ships refused to have their ships inspected . When the Israeli soldiers initially landed (without deadly weapons I might add) they were brutally beaten and kidnapped, thus provoking Israels reaction.

I think Israel were well within their rights to try to protect their country, if these individuals on the flotilla were as innocent as people think they would not have attacked Israeli soldiers and would not be dead.

Snakeblood · 23-09-2010 4:10pm

--Kaiser-- wrote: »

This is the raid on the flotilla trying the break the Gaza blockade?
Where Israel said it would allow the flotilla in, as long as they could inspect the ships (obviously to ensure no weapons were being transported)?

The people on the ships refused to have their ships inspected . When the Israeli soldiers initially landed (without deadly weapons I might add) they were brutally beaten and kidnapped, thus provoking Israels reaction.

I think Israel were well within their rights to try to protect their country, if these individuals on the flotilla were as innocent as people think they would not have attacked Israeli soldiers and would not be dead.

International waters. Israel can inspect boats that are in its waters, outside, it can suck a lemon.

wes · 23-09-2010 4:11pm

--Kaiser-- wrote: »

This is the raid on the flotilla trying the break the Gaza blockade?

Which is a illegal act of collective punishment of 1.5 million people.

--Kaiser-- wrote: »

Where Israel said it would allow the flotilla in, as long as they could inspect the ships (obviously to ensure no weapons were being transported)?

The people on the ships refused to have their ships inspected . When the Israeli soldiers initially landed (without deadly weapons I might add) they were brutally beaten and kidnapped, thus provoking Israels reaction.

The IDF had no right to board the boat in International waters. The IDF are the ones who attacked first, and the people on the boat were defending themselves from the IDF who had no business on there boat.

Secondly, the whole point of the Floatilla was to get in stuff that Israel banned e.g. stuff like Pasta at one point, so letting Israel inspect it would defeat the purpose as they wouldn't let in essential supplies.

--Kaiser-- wrote: »

I think Israel were well within their rights to try to protect their country, if these individuals on the flotilla were as innocent as people think they would not have attacked Israeli soldiers and would not be dead.

Ah yes, blame the victims...... Good to see that supporters of Israel not only refuse to condemn there actions, they actively come up with excuses. Good job making Israel looking worse and worse.

--Kaiser-- · 23-09-2010 4:17pm

The flotilla was heading towards Gaza, whether or not it was in international waters or not. They were well aware that they would be boarded too.

If you are on a supposedly peaceful mission with humanitarian aid and get boarded by Israeli soldiers (who already have a futhless reputation) do you;

a) put your hands up, act indignant but co-operate
b) start beating the soldiers with iron bars and handcuff them downstairs.

Those guys were out to cause trouble and they succeeded.

How essential is pasta exactly?

Sticky_Fingers · 23-09-2010 4:23pm

--Kaiser-- wrote: »

How essential is pasta exactly?

Pretty bloody essential if your living in a hovel where your house once stood before some d!ckhead put a tank shell through it.

Snakeblood · 23-09-2010 4:24pm

--Kaiser-- wrote: »

The flotilla was heading towards Gaza, whether or not it was in international waters or not. They were well aware that they would be boarded too.

If you are on a supposedly peaceful mission with humanitarian aid and get boarded by Israeli soldiers (who already have a futhless reputation) do you;

a) put your hands up, act indignant but co-operate
b) start beating the soldiers with iron bars and handcuff them downstairs.

Those guys were out to cause trouble and they succeeded.

How essential is pasta exactly?

International waters. Maybe you don't understand what that means. Israel didn't seem to. They have no jurisdiction, and no right in go into a sovereign vessel. I believe it was a Turkish vessel, which means it's essentially turkish land. They were invading.

meditraitor · 23-09-2010 4:25pm

--Kaiser-- wrote: »

How essential is pasta exactly?

This about sums up the pro isreal arguments for me :pac:

As for the report, nothing will be done...... any suggested action will be blocked by the US.

Its been a few weeks since Isreal commited any news worthy acts of savagery...... you know what that means? Theres a killing spree just over the horizon, palestinain kids or woman more than likely.

wes · 23-09-2010 4:26pm

--Kaiser-- wrote: »

The flotilla was heading towards Gaza, whether or not it was in international waters or not.

Yes, and they were attacked in International waters in the dead of night. Also, there is the UN report which found the whole thing unlawful.

--Kaiser-- wrote: »

They were well aware that they would be boarded too.

Which doesn't make the IDF attack right......

--Kaiser-- wrote: »

If you are on a supposedly peaceful mission with humanitarian aid and get boarded by Israeli soldiers (who already have a futhless reputation) do you;

a) put your hands up, act indignant but co-operate

b) start beating the soldiers with iron bars and handcuff them downstairs.

Those guys were out to cause trouble and they succeeded.

Well if they attacking in the dead of night, some people will protect themselves from a pack of well known murderer's. If they were really looking for a fight surely they would have done a lot better than using stuff that is commonly found on a ship.

Also, I would like to point out the only people who murdered anyone was the IDF. Also, why were some of the dead shot at point blank range or in the back?

--Kaiser-- wrote: »

How essential is pasta exactly?

What danger is Pasta exactly? I was using it as an example to show how petty and pointless some of the stuff they banned was. What possible reason could anyone have to ban pasta. Its truly pointless.

dr.bollocko · 23-09-2010 4:28pm

wes wrote: »

What danger is Pasta exactly? I was using it as an example to show how petty and pointless some of the stuff they banned was. What possible reason could anyone have to ban pasta. Its truly pointless.

...
The carb content's a bit high...

Terry · 23-09-2010 4:29pm

Sticky_Fingers wrote: »

Never said they did, the world is a dirty shade of gray but the zealots on both sides of this conflict and their respective cheering section here on boards (and the media in general) only see it in black and white. Israel focked up here, the least they can do is admit it. Its obvious that Hamas are a bunch of murdering scumbags but Israel have not exactly showered themselves in glory.

Personally I would like the world to step back and offer the belligerents a compromise, put them on a desert island and let them duke it out themselves, no support for either side and no quarter asked for or given, winner takes all. Once a victor emerges I then suggest we nuke the island from orbit so their rabid zealotry doesn't infect anyone else and as a clear warning to others. Its the only way to be sure.

I wasn't disagreeing with you.

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Your post is a very very simplistic way of looking at it.

Britain took the land from the Ottoman empire when thy defeated them in 1917. Since 1915 the Uk was trying to establish a joint Arab/Jewish homeland there and in 1947 this happened.

In May 1948 the Israeli leader, David Ben Gurion declared independance, the following day half the middle east invaded.

I can see why Israel are paranoid.

Britain in land grab shocker. More at 6.

wes wrote: »

Yes, and the Palestinians are descendants of the Jews who were not expelled (as well as the various invaders, as inter-marriage occured), as per recent genetic evidence. Personally, I fail to see how a 3000 year old land claim should have any relevance in the here and now. Sure, can't we all claim to be African if we go back far enough.

Indeed.
There's a castle named after my Family in Sligo. Actually there are 6 around there and Mayo. I don't think I'd stand a chance of claiming land once owned by my ancestors.

Wolfe Tone · 23-09-2010 4:29pm

Is there any corner of the globe that British imperialism has not managed to fcuk up in some way?

UN finds Israeli raid on Flotilla unlawful

Comments