Israel attacks Aid Flotilla. At least 2 dead

Clawdeeus · 06-06-2010 04:33PM

halkar wrote: »

Below is from gaza flotilla survivors blog

There are many testimonials about the commandos being treated along with other injured. Israelis have all the cameras, phones, laptops that were on the ship. They must be busy with photoshop editing to suit their needs.

Why are you so convinced only one side in this situation has an agenda to push?

Very typical on extremists on both sides; unable to apply the same logic or standard of proof to something they hope is true/ untrue.

youcrazyjesus! · 06-06-2010 04:39PM

Clawdeeus wrote: »

Why are you so convinced only one side in this situation has an agenda to push?

Very typical on extremists on both sides; unable to apply the same logic or standard of proof to something they hope is true/ untrue.

Academics and humanitarian workers are not extremists.

Clawdeeus · 06-06-2010 04:45PM

youcrazyjesus! wrote: »

Academics and humanitarian workers are not extremists.

And why not? Why can a person not feel the need to bring aid to gaza and hate Israel, and want to turn an awful situation to their causes advantage?

And I assume you think all Israeli media and soldiers are?

Thank you for a perfect case in point.

Clawdeeus · 06-06-2010 04:47PM

youcrazyjesus! wrote: »

Academics and humanitarian workers are not extremists.

Also, just to clarify I wasnt refering to the activists or academics, I was refering to just the general public on both sides of the divide. Sorry it wasnt clear.

But my point stands. Of course all humanitarian workers and acadmics are not extremists. That does not mean none are.

I am also willing to bet the people on board had just as biased view about the blockade and the way Israel handles things, as the Israelis themselves have / had.

Ben Hadad · 06-06-2010 05:51PM

Clawdeeus wrote: »

Why are you so convinced only one side in this situation has an agenda to push?

Very typical on extremists on both sides; unable to apply the same logic or standard of proof to something they hope is true/ untrue.

Well who has been proven to have faked evidence in order to push their agenda?

The link below contains evidence that the IDF used regarding the weapons found on the boat. Oops looks like they didn't alter the EXIF data held on the pictures, which shows that the pictures were taken in 2006. :eek:

Also I challenge you to bring forward qualitative evidence to disprove any of the flotilla members testament or evidence.

http://www.politicaltheatrics.net/2010/06/the-gaza-flotilla-how-israel%E2%80%99s-ministry-of-foreign-affairs-fakes-photos-of-seized-weapons/

youcrazyjesus! · 06-06-2010 06:04PM

Clawdeeus wrote: »

Also, just to clarify I wasnt refering to the activists or academics, I was refering to just the general public on both sides of the divide. Sorry it wasnt clear.

But my point stands. Of course all humanitarian workers and acadmics are not extremists. That does not mean none are.

I am also willing to bet the people on board had just as biased view about the blockade and the way Israel handles things, as the Israelis themselves have / had.

Having an opinion on something does not mean you're biased. It's such an overused and irrelevant word. By your definition of biased every human who holds an opinion that comes down on one side of any particular argument is "biased".

I mean I disagree with plenty of people on this thread, I wouldn't consider them "biased". If they were writing for a national newspaper about it and their stories were leaning heavily in favour of Israel, then they would be biased.

BlaasForRafa · 06-06-2010 06:11PM

Ben Hadad wrote: »

Well who has been proven to have faked evidence in order to push their agenda?

The link below contains evidence that the IDF used regarding the weapons found on the boat. Oops looks like they didn't alter the EXIF data held on the pictures, which shows that the pictures were taken in 2006. :eek:

Also I challenge you to bring forward qualitative evidence to disprove any of the flotilla members testament or evidence.

That has already been discussed on this thread and Manic Moran gave a thorough explanation as to why this would happen. If your looking for conspiracy theories you'll need to do a bit better than that.

Ben Hadad · 06-06-2010 06:32PM

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

That has already been discussed on this thread and Manic Moran gave a thorough explanation as to why this would happen. If your looking for conspiracy theories you'll need to do a bit better than that.

Sorry I had a look through Manic Moran's posts and couldn't find it. Could you tell me what post number it was?

Memnoch · 06-06-2010 06:52PM

Clawdeeus wrote: »

Why are you so convinced only one side in this situation has an agenda to push?

Very typical on extremists on both sides; unable to apply the same logic or standard of proof to something they hope is true/ untrue.

Okay, so the Israelis confiscated all the video and photographic evidence of the attack in which they shot 45 people on an aid ship in international waters and killed at least 9 people and refuse to release this to an independent authority.

Then they held these people incommunicado for three days and enforced a "communications blackout."

Meanwhile, they released video that is edited heavily in order to support their point of view, and have made outlandish claims (eg sophisticated weapons, members of flotilla are linked to terror organisations) that have been thoroughly debunked.

And finally, they refuse to allow an independent investigation into the incident (I haven't yet seen ONE person who was on the flotilla saying they aren't in favour of an independent investigation to establish the truth).

So really, even completely ignoring the IDF's past reputation in such matters, what exactly do YOU think a fair minded person should infer from the above?

Perhaps if the aid workers were as opposed to the idea of an open and impartial investigation of events as the IDF seem to be we would be more inclined to wonder about their honesty in the affair. As it stands, only ONE side seems like it has anything to hide.

Remy13 · 06-06-2010 07:17PM

Memnoch wrote: »

Okay, so the Israelis confiscated all the video and photographic evidence of the attack in which they shot 45 people on an aid ship in international waters and killed at least 9 people and refuse to release this to an independent authority.

Then they held these people incommunicado for three days and enforced a "communications blackout."

Meanwhile, they released video that is edited heavily in order to support their point of view, and have made outlandish claims (eg sophisticated weapons, members of flotilla are linked to terror organisations) that have been thoroughly debunked.

And finally, they refuse to allow an independent investigation into the incident (I haven't yet seen ONE person who was on the flotilla saying they aren't in favour of an independent investigation to establish the truth).

So really, even completely ignoring the IDF's past reputation in such matters, what exactly do YOU think a fair minded person should infer from the above?

Perhaps if the aid workers were as opposed to the idea of an open and impartial investigation of events as the IDF seem to be we would be more inclined to wonder about their honesty in the affair. As it stands, only ONE side seems like it has anything to hide.

it's simple..... he who controls the present, controls the past. he who controls the past, controls the future.

Irlandese · 06-06-2010 07:28PM

Scofflaw wrote: »

Captured commandos have bruises, have been stripped of their equipment. Is that supposed to be some kind of telling point?

We've heard from some very respectable people how the commandos were armed - again, if you need to hear that from someone both there and respectable:

That's at 1:31 on this video. The speaker is Edward Peck, former Chief of Mission in Baghdad under Carter and former Deputy Director of President Reagan's White House Task Force on Terrorism.

The point about the arms carried by the IDF soldiers are repeated in an interview he gave on return to the US here.

unimpressed,
Scofflaw

Are you serious?
Ronald Regan's Deputy Director of the Task Force on Terrorism?
Contras? Raping, skinning and hanging alive on trees, teachers, union officials and community nurses in Nicaragua, some of whom had attended an LGPSU General Conference as fraternal delegates? Mining Nicaragua's ports?
He was also Deputy Director of Covert Intelligence Programs at the US State Department. That is the one in charge of "wet work", black propoganda and other assorted "dirty deeds" on behalf of the "Second, but Permanent Government" of the USA.
You honestly expect to get away with quoting him? You actually believe a word the guy says? Really?
You are free to not believe me either, but I am glad to be far from being one of that sick organisations dirty agents.
One of my sources for contributions here is a close friend, a member of the commando team who were involved. He was not available for duty, but is proud of what they did, under awful conditions. They had poor intel, the wrong equipment and impossible orders to avoid bloodshed. In the face of violent, armed ( Iron bars, knives and assorted improvised projectiles) attacks and the grabbing of their colleagues, they had little choice but to revert to basic training and take out the ring-leaders.
Paintball guns, like airsoft rifles, are authentic replicas of the real thing, almost indistinguishable from same, even to soldiers, at a short distance. I may be doing some of these reporters a disservice in that they might easily have been honestly mistaken.
However, the violent activists who took them would have seen immediately what they were dealing with. But, as we know, the truth was one of the first casualties here.

youcrazyjesus! · 06-06-2010 07:29PM

Clawdeeus wrote: »

And why not? Why can a person not feel the need to bring aid to gaza and hate Israel, and want to turn an awful situation to their causes advantage?

And I assume you think all Israeli media and soldiers are?

Thank you for a perfect case in point.

No. What I said is what I said. There's no need to invent more. Just deal with what I did say.

karma_ · 06-06-2010 07:33PM

Irlandese wrote: »

Paintball guns, like airsoft rifles, are authentic replicas of the real thing, almost indistinguishable from same, even to soldiers, at a short distance. I may be doing some of these reporters a disservice in that they might easily have been honestly mistaken.

Paintball guns are nothing like a real gun. There is absolutely no way anyone could mistake a paintball gun for a real gun.

gandalf · 06-06-2010 08:36PM

Irlandese wrote: »

Paintball guns, like airsoft rifles, are authentic replicas of the real thing, almost indistinguishable from same, even to soldiers, at a short distance. I may be doing some of these reporters a disservice in that they might easily have been honestly mistaken.

Actually I have to call you up on that assertion. Paintball guns are not authentic replicas of real guns, they are easily distinguishable as paintball guns and I have seen one on the video realised by the IDF. I have only seen one apparent on all the footage released by the IDF of the troops involved in the Illegal assault.

(airsoft ones are, I know because I am involved in the sport over here in Ireland)

06-06-2010 08:46PM

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

What might they be doing with all the raw footage that they stole? The evidence thus far shows that the Israelis are editing the footage before they show anything.

Remove 'photoshop' and they are doing exactly as halkar states

And you know this for certain yeah?

gandalf · 06-06-2010 08:51PM

Irlandese wrote: »

One of my sources for contributions here is a close friend, a member of the commando team who were involved. He was not available for duty, but is proud of what they did, under awful conditions. They had poor intel, the wrong equipment and impossible orders to avoid bloodshed. In the face of violent, armed ( Iron bars, knives and assorted improvised projectiles) attacks and the grabbing of their colleagues, they had little choice but to revert to basic training and take out the ring-leaders.

One thing if he is a member of S13 I would doubt very much that he would bad mouth them to someone outside that sphere as I believe most members of any active military unit would not criticise their comrades.

So basically your friend is saying his superiors made a "dogs bollix" of the planning.

What about his opinion on carrying out the operation in International Waters & at night?

Again because of the whole International Waters issue it can be argued that the people on the boat had a right to defend themselves. I believe they were mistaken as they were taking on troops who are normally used in combat operations like assassinations. Then again a Libyan crew fought back against Somali Pirates and were hailed heroes.

Iwasfrozen · 06-06-2010 08:52PM

Deleted User wrote: »

And you know this for certain yeah?

Of course he doesn't. But that doesn't stop him forming an opinion based on limited facts then strongly defending it on the internet.

A Dub in Glasgo · 06-06-2010 08:54PM

Deleted User wrote: »

And you know this for certain yeah?

Of course the footage has been edited. The raw footage will show the full thing but the Israelis will only release snippets plus it has been annotated.

gandalf · 06-06-2010 08:57PM

Deleted User wrote: »

And you know this for certain yeah?

Have you actually watched any of the footage that has been released?

It is obvious that it has been selectively edited.

Iwasfrozen · 06-06-2010 08:59PM

gandalf wrote: »

Have you actually watched any of the footage that has been released?

It is obvious that it has been selectively edited.

It's been edited, but there is no proof to say it has been selectively edited.

gandalf · 06-06-2010 09:03PM

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

It's been edited, but there is no proof to say it has been selectively edited.

Well only until all RAW footage is released to an International UN backed investigation I think it is safe to say the footage released has been selective to back up one version of events.

jill_valentine · 06-06-2010 09:03PM

Some paintball guns are indeed replicas, but the replica models are uncommon and as far as I know, the ones we're talking about here were the standard ones. Not always an easy distinction to make in the scary helicoptery dark, but still, worth saying.

Iwasfrozen · 06-06-2010 09:04PM

gandalf wrote: »

Well only until all RAW footage is released to an International UN backed investigation I think it is safe to say the footage released has been selective to back up one version of events.

You still can't make mad claims about it being selectively edited unless you have seen the entire raw footage. Which I'm presuming you haven't.

06-06-2010 09:06PM

gandalf wrote: »

Have you actually watched any of the footage that has been released?

It is obvious that it has been selectively edited.

Of course it's edited.
But has it been photo-shopped? changed in anyway etc.
The only possible complaint is context.

I'm no Israel fanboy but I'm not jumping on the "all the activists were saints" band wagon either.

Fuhrer · 06-06-2010 09:12PM

Deleted User wrote: »

Of course it's edited.

And you know this for certain yeah?

hmmm

gandalf · 06-06-2010 09:13PM

Deleted User wrote: »

Of course it's edited.
But has it been photo-shopped? changed in anyway etc.
The only possible complaint is context.

How did they get the annotations on some of the foot then? They used editing software like photo shop.

I'm no Israel fanboy but I'm not jumping on the "all the activists were saints" band wagon either.

And if you read my contributions on this thread I haven't either but my main gripe is the whole question about the operation being illegal in International Waters and the methods used by Israel on the boarding operation like carrying it out at night with special forces commandos who are normally used in combat operations.

06-06-2010 09:21PM

gandalf wrote: »

How did they get the annotations on some of the foot then? They used editing software like photo shop.

I'm using the term photoshop as a general term for changing what the video shows and not for subtitle/notes added.
So my question was whether the footage was a fraud.
No one has evidence of this that I can verify despite the usual huffing and puffing in a thread like this one.

And if you read my contributions on this thread I haven't either but my main gripe is the whole question about the operation being illegal in International Waters and the methods used by Israel on the boarding operation like carrying it out at night with special forces commandos who are normally used in combat operations.

Quite similar to my [few] posts on this thread also.
I don't know enough about marine law to know whether theres grounds to the Israeli claim that they can board in international waters if they believe theres a threat to their security.
My own view is as stated earlier,frankly boarding was ridiculously ott.
I suspect it also played into the hands of some manipulative activists.

Memnoch · 06-06-2010 09:24PM

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm using the term photoshop as a general term for changing what the video shows and not for subtitle/notes added.
So my question was whether the footage was a fraud.
No one has evidence of this that I can verify despite the usual huffing and puffing in a thread like this one.

Whether the footage is a fraud or not is completely irrelevant. The fact that it shows a 15-30 second period (talking about the nightvision commando video) in a 3 hour siege renders it meaningless for coming to a judgement about the right or wrong of the matter.

manipulative activists.

Care to back up that claim with some evidence?

06-06-2010 09:26PM

Fuhrer wrote: »

hmmm

selective quoting of my posts doesn't make for good debate.
Go back and read what I was replying to please rather than throwing away the context.I was looking for evidence of fraud.
None proffered yet.
Much wild conjecture though.

Dar · 06-06-2010 09:27PM

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Which I'm presuming you haven't.

And probably never will.

Israel attacks Aid Flotilla. At least 2 dead

Comments