Israel, the Gaza Strip and an Attacked Flotilla

[Platty]

They should try listening to Tim Minchin.

 

[Daft]

Stupidity caused by desperation is still stupidity.

 

If they were genuinely intent of delivering the aid, and solely doing so, they would have taken the safer route of letting the Israelis or Egyptians deliverer it for them, as offered. However, their insistence on doing it themselves makes it blindingly obvious the had the main objective of deliberately flaunting the Israeli rules for the sake of flaunting the rules. If no alternative for delivering aid had been offered, then, fair enough. In this situation, though, I were presented with essentially two equal options, and decided to take the provocative one. The only possible explanation for their choice was to deliberately cause a confrontation with Israel, and it was predictable almost down to the exact execution as to what would happen to them.

 

 

 

Take up the offer made by Israel, or, indeed, the identical offer made by Egypt? If their true objective was just to get aid to Gaza, they would have taken these.

 

My God! What is wrong with you? The aim isn't just to get aid to Gaza. How on Earth can you be so short sighted? As I've said in every post it is to bring attention to the dire situation in Gaza, namely the systematic abuse of human rights.

[Emasher]

Stupidity caused by desperation is still stupidity.

 

If they were genuinely intent of delivering the aid, and solely doing so, they would have taken the safer route of letting the Israelis or Egyptians deliverer it for them, as offered. However, their insistence on doing it themselves makes it blindingly obvious the had the main objective of deliberately flaunting the Israeli rules for the sake of flaunting the rules. If no alternative for delivering aid had been offered, then, fair enough. In this situation, though, I were presented with essentially two equal options, and decided to take the provocative one. The only possible explanation for their choice was to deliberately cause a confrontation with Israel, and it was predictable almost down to the exact execution as to what would happen to them.

 

 

 

Take up the offer made by Israel, or, indeed, the identical offer made by Egypt? If their true objective was just to get aid to Gaza, they would have taken these.

 

I think you're missing the point. Israel has been getting away with numerous human rights violations for YEARS. Nobody has done anything because the United States is a big ally of Israel because there are enough wealthy jews in America who have the power to lobby the government into getting what they want. And nobody wants to stand up to this because they're afraid of being called anti-semetic (when in reality they aren't). Its quite obvious that the protesters knew what they were getting into when they started this. They may not have expected people would be killed, but it would be ignorant to suggest they didn't know people would get hurt. This whole situation is getting to the point where the only way the general population will pay attention to things like this, and perhaps convince the world's powers to do something about it, is by provoking Israel. Its an unfortunate situation, but there really isn't much else that can be done. If they were deliberately trying for a similar reaction to the one they got, and knew what they were getting into, I'm not sure you can't really call it stupidity anymore.

[The fish]

My God! What is wrong with you? The aim isn't just to get aid to Gaza. How on Earth can you be so short sighted? As I've said in every post it is to bring attention to the dire situation in Gaza, namely the systematic abuse of human rights.

 

Since the war in Gaza at the beginning of last year, to my knowledge, pretty much everyone in the developed world with some access to news knew about Gaza and the siege the Israelis have placed it under. I honestly cannot think of a single person I know who isn't reasonably well aware of the basics of the situation.

 

Yes, the situation should not have existed in the first place, but the legality of Israel's actions is somewhat irrelevant. Yes, the Israelis tend to act in a reactionary manner, but even they know better than to shoot (non-Palestinian*) protesters in such a situation. One could be forgiven for thinking that the elements of the flotilla who attacked the Israelis were trying to get themselves shot - in media terms, it almost worked. I say almost as the situation remains pretty much as it was before - everyone goes "fucking Israel", but does nothing.

 

*I mean this in an entirely serious way.

[Daft]

but even they know better than to shoot (non-Palestinian*) protesters in such a situation.

 

Actually they don't. There are numerous incidences of the IDF opening fire on non-Palestinian protesters. A woman from Malta was shot a couple months ago, a couple weeks ago a US protester was shot in the eye with a gas canister shattering the bone around her eye socket and my own tutor was shot by the IDF in the arse while doing research.

 

So really, I question just how much you are aware of the reality of the situation.

 

I'm not really sure what you're getting at with your response. What do you propose. Everyone give up?

[Emasher]

It'll be interesting to see if this issue comes up on the Larry King Live interview Obama's doing in a few minutes.

[The fish]

 

Actually they don't. There are numerous incidences of the IDF opening fire on non-Palestinian protesters. A woman from Malta was shot a couple months ago, a couple weeks ago a US protester was shot in the eye with a gas canister shattering the bone around her eye socket and my own tutor was shot by the IDF in the arse while doing research.

 

So really, I question just how much you are aware of the reality of the situation.

 

I'm not really sure what you're getting at with your response. What do you propose. Everyone give up?

 

The gas canister clearly wasn't deliberate. Yes, the premise for dispersing the crowd was non-existent, but at no point did they try and injure anyone.

 

The other two lack any detail as to what actually happened. Also, note I said "in this kind of situation" - meant by that high-profile. The flotilla was subject to much discussion before the boarding, and I find it hard to believe even Israel thought "I know, let's go and shoot some of the people on those boats!"

 

I am very much aware of the situation, and how it's seen by both sides. I do question just how able you are to talk about this without projecting like there's no tomorrow.

 

What I am getting at is this: violating the Israeli rules in order to try and get them the shoot you is clearly both stupid and ineffective in drawing enough support to pressure Israel into lifting the blockade. What's needed is a firm, physically approach. The most realistic situation is transporting sufficient aid in by sea under UN-mandated military guard, searched by a reliable 3rd party prior to embarkation. Since Israel has given the finger to even the US with regards to illegal settlement building, more diplomatic options are looking increasingly unlikely to bear fruit.

[McPhee]

Of course it was a was for publicity but what else would you propose?

 

The international community has done absolutely NOTHING for long enough. Gaza is virtually functioning on solely humanitarian aid.

 

It's not stupidity. It's desperation, desperation for the innocent people who are suffering and being categorically denied their human rights.

 

The activists aren't looking for your less than useless sympathy.

 

What I'm saying is that Israel's actions towards the flotilla are irrelevant and not the issue. The blockade is there and they enforced it. The unfortunate events that happened on-board the ship are down to the activists who shouldn't have been there and who shouldn't have started a fight with Israeli troops.

 

The issue is the legality of the blockade and the wider issue of Israel's attitude toward Gaza. Different discussion.

 

While the flotilla takes the limelight in the media there will be no focus on the real problems in the middle east and what our role should be in resolving them. Personally I think it's time we (along with our allies) distance ourselves from Israel. The whole situation is a disaster and there will be no resolution while Israel maintains strong links with Western nations. The Israelis hold too much influence (certainly in the US) for a fair resolution to be met at the moment.

Edited June 4, 2010 by McPhee

[Emasher]

While this event itself will not cause any sort of meaningful response, It is, helping to get people to become more aware of what is going on, and see Israel in a more negative light. Something that will be required for the United States to distance itself from Israel.

[Debug Mode]

No. All of you saying 'The blockade exists and they are enforcing it, legal or not' can fuck right off. You know what'd make the blockade legal? If Isreal:

 

Declares an official war on Gaza

Occupies Gaza

 

But they clearly haven't done either as you know, it's a lot easier to just starve them to death via blockade as they personally don't have the balls to get their hands dirty if there really is a threat posed by Gaza.

 

Israel shouldn't have the right to enforce any thing, much like any other country if they have set up an illegal blockade. Yeah sure, enforce it with diplomatic relationships or some thing, but don't start killing humanitarians who give a shit about the people suffering.

 

Let's suppose your my neighbour right now. You're ill in bed, a friend decides to come by with some medication as you're not allowed out. I suspect they are going to give you all the tools you need to break into my home and murder me and my family in my sleep. So I go block them off and much to their obvious rejection of such stupidity and unfairness, proceed to hit me with their shopping bag. I shoot them in the face.

 

Don't go saying it's an exaggerated comparison as this blockade is born from ridiculously paranoid thinking and Israel should probably concentrate on other supposed 'problems', like Iran.

[Daft]

Gaza flotilla activists were shot in head at close range

 

Israel was tonight under pressure to allow an independent inquiry into its assault on the Gaza aid flotilla after autopsy results on the bodies of those killed, obtained by the Guardian, revealed they were peppered with 9mm bullets, many fired at close range.

 

Nine Turkish men on board the Mavi Marmara were shot a total of 30 times and five were killed by gunshot wounds to the head, according to the vice-chairman of the Turkish council of forensic medicine, which carried out the autopsies for the Turkish ministry of justice today.

 

The results revealed that a 60-year-old man, Ibrahim Bilgen, was shot four times in the temple, chest, hip and back. A 19-year-old, named as Fulkan Dogan, who also has US citizenship, was shot five times from less that 45cm, in the face, in the back of the head, twice in the leg and once in the back. Two other men were shot four times, and five of the victims were shot either in the back of the head or in the back, said Yalcin Buyuk, vice-chairman of the council of forensic medicine.

 

 

...

 

 

He calculated that during the bloodiest part of the assault, Israeli commandos shot one person every minute. One man was fatally shot in the back of the head just two feet in front him and another was shot once between the eyes. He added that as well as the fatally wounded, 48 others were suffering from gunshot wounds and six activists remained missing, suggesting the death toll may increase.

 

Sure does sound like self defence...

[The fish]

Sure does sound like self defence...

 

Yes, actually. Exactly.

 

Anything other than very short range, inaccurate and repeated shots would look like deliberate killing.

 

The entire quote points to a soldier firing at random at whatever was in front of him to force those attacking him back and clear space around himself.

 

As for the 48 wounded, if this was a deliberate act as you seem to be suggesting, why are they only wounded?

 

One round per minute as actually a very low rate, given the environment and events that happened.

 

Let's suppose your my neighbour right now. You're ill in bed, a friend decides to come by with some medication as you're not allowed out. I suspect they are going to give you all the tools you need to break into my home and murder me and my family in my sleep. So I go block them off and much to their obvious rejection of such stupidity and unfairness, proceed to hit me with their shopping bag. I shoot them in the face.

 

Don't go saying it's an exaggerated comparison as this blockade is born from ridiculously paranoid thinking and Israel should probably concentrate on other supposed 'problems', like Iran.

 

No, you don't get to call when your own example is exaggerated or not, I do.

 

Firstly, you offered to give the medication to me in bed, or even let another neighbour do it. You refused, without reason, and insisted on doing it yourself. Clearly your main intention is not to give me the medication, but to cause a scene.

 

Secondly, I have a history of breaking into your house and murdering members of your family, and keep firing rockets at your family when they're in the garden.

 

My friend didn't hit you with a shopping bag out of frustration, they charged at you with a metal bar. If you have trouble telling them apart, find one of each, and get someone to hit you with them. I'm sure you'll remember.

 

As my friend and about 30 other people hit you with their shopping bags/metal bars (apparently they're identical), you fire your weapon at them to try and stop them beating you to death.

 

 

Of course, what needs to happen is the police to turn up, tell you to piss off and grow the fuck up, and stop calling everyone who criticises you an anti-Semite, and ensure anyone can give anything (legal) to me. They also need to stop me trying to break into your house and murder your family, and firing rockets at them. Maybe someone should look at why I'm so desperate to murder your family. It's probably something to do with the fact you're building your extension in your other neighbour (who happens to be my brother)'s garden without his permission.

Edited June 5, 2010 by The fish
Automerged Doublepost

[ipaul]

Opinion piece

 

Just thought I'd throw that out there.

[Daft]

In response

 

And some evidence for the BBC bias mentioned.

 

What injuries were sustained by the Israeli commandos? I haven't seen any detailed reports.

[The fish]

What injuries were sustained by the Israeli commandos? I haven't seen any detailed reports.

 

It is odd, that. All armed forces around the world usually give out detailed reports about non-fatal injuries sustained by their personal.

 

Wait, there's me and my spelling again! It's not "U-S-U-A-L-L-Y", it's "N-E-V-E-R". Silly me!

[Mundi]

But in this case, would it not be beneficial to them to report on their injuries as to help their "Defending themselves" claim

[Debug Mode]

It is odd, that. All armed forces around the world usually give out detailed reports about non-fatal injuries sustained by their personal.

 

Wait, there's me and my spelling again! It's not "U-S-U-A-L-L-Y", it's "N-E-V-E-R". Silly me!

 

But in this case, would it not be beneficial to them to report on their injuries as to help their "Defending themselves" claim

 

Exactly. I'd put down my argument if it does turn out some serious damage was done to Israeli soldiers, especially the one reported as seriously injured if it's true, as a retaliation is inevitable in that situation. Even so, one injury = Nine deaths? Shots in the head? Were they never taught to immobilise enemies instead of out right killing them, making a mess of a situation for them selves? Bollocks.

 

How about we settle the entire thing with an independent report? Oh no, Israel has rejected calls for any thing but an internal reported conducted by themselves! Well way to fucking make it seem way more fishy guys.

 

No one on the opposition of this debate every where cannot answer back to how the blockade IS illegal. It's been argued that the fact Gaza fires rockets in to Isreal (and lets not forget vice verca shall we?) makes the blockade legal. Wrong. Israel has to declare war on the area, occupy the area or have evidence the ships have weapons on board (which the customs in most of these countries the ships are coming from will be searching for anyway). Boarding the ship in international waters, piracy. And breaking news, Israel has arrested more (and thankfully no injuries this time) activists in international waters, another breaking of international law as it's piracy yet again as it's technically kidnap.

 

So, those who defend this absolutely disgusting barricade, what's your argument?

 

EDIT: It also seems The Fish has decided to break my simplicity of the blockade from medicine to rockets, many other people and extensions. Please continue to be a fucking idiot when you try to spew more bull shit into your next reply. Learn to fucking empathize with the people suffering rather than sitting on your computer chair being sucked into the main steam story of the event which relies on looped 2 second video clips with, lets face it, 'weapons' that are barely visible.

Edited June 5, 2010 by Debug Mode

[The fish]

So, those who defend this absolutely disgusting barricade, what's your argument?

 

Dude, take up a job as an OHP - you're projecting hard enough.

 

Exactly. I'd put down my argument if it does turn out some serious damage was done to Israeli soldiers, especially the one reported as seriously injured if it's true, as a retaliation is inevitable in that situation. Even so, one injury = Nine deaths? Shots in the head? Were they never taught to immobilise enemies instead of out right killing them, making a mess of a situation for them selves? Bollocks.

 

Regardless of training, I think doing things by the book goes out the window when a dozen people are hitting you with metal bars. Everything I've read points to the killings being non-deliberate (I hesitate to use the word accidental) in immediate, not entirely self-controlled self-defence - the inaccuracy, the range involved, the fact no one else was killed on other vessels, the lack of 'execution' style shootings, and the fact most of those shot weren't fatally wounded.

 

 

How about we settle the entire thing with an independent report? Oh no, Israel has rejected calls for any thing but an internal reported conducted by themselves! Well way to fucking make it seem way more fishy guys.

 

Armed forces worldwide really don't like other people poking their noses into them, especially Israel. Nothing special, really.

 

 

No one on the opposition of this debate every where cannot answer back to how the blockade IS illegal. It's been argued that the fact Gaza fires rockets in to Isreal (and lets not forget vice verca shall we?) makes the blockade legal. Wrong. Israel has to declare war on the area, occupy the area or have evidence the ships have weapons on board (which the customs in most of these countries the ships are coming from will be searching for anyway). Boarding the ship in international waters, piracy. And breaking news, Israel has arrested more (and thankfully no injuries this time) activists in international waters, another breaking of international law as it's piracy yet again as it's technically kidnap.

 

Assuming you're first sentence was meant to be "No one on the opposition of this debate anywhere can answer back to how the blockade IS legal", I, for one, don't think it is. Given Israel's record with the whole 'international law' thing, I think we have little alternative, from a practical perspective, to role with it and accept the legality, without enforcement, isn't going to deter Israel in the slightest.

 

An important question is that if the rockets stop, would Israel stop bombing Gaza?

 

From the Israeli point of view, the sheer attempt to get something into Gaza without them checking it first is evidence of attempts to supply weapons. This, to them, counts as reason to believe the ships have something to hide.

 

There weren't any injuries on this latest boarding for the same reason no one got shot on the other 5 vessels in the first raid - they didn't try and kill the Israeli soldiers.

 

Is it actually technically kidnap? The people on the ship were suspected of attempted to be running weapons to be used against Israel, and refused to submit to inspection with the stated aim of reaching Gaza. It was essentially a police action (legal in the same way it's legal for the Royal Navy to board ships suspected of drug smuggling in the middle of the Atlantic).

 

Basically, the blockade itself is of questionable legality, and, quite frankly, stupidly implemented, but the boarding of the ships is perfectly legal. They were, after all, suspected of weapon smuggling, and refused to comply with the orders from the military to who's territory they were heading.

[McPhee]

Pretty much what I was about to write there, fish.

 

I do find myself pondering who is right in all of this though. If Israel do remove all sanctions from Gaza would it really jeopardise Israeli security? Is the idea that they're at war with the whole of the Arab world a hangover from it's inception as a state? Are Hamas fighting for freedom, or do they want to destroy Israel and reclaim lost lands? There's no way of knowing. Stepping back from Gaza could be the right thing to do, or it might be the biggest mistake Israel ever makes.

[Emasher]

Refusing to be searched in this case doesn't necisarily mean they had suspicion to believe there was anything on board the ship. This was a major initiative and there were many high profile people on board the ship from various countries. The reason they were refusing to submit to the blockade was because they were protesting the blockade. There's a huge difference between a ship supplying humanitarian aid, and a ship that is suspected of smuggling drugs.

 

Secondly, the ship wasn't heading towards Israel, it was heading towards Gaza.

 

Also, didn't Israel say they boarded the ship because it refused to submit to the blockade, not because they suspected it was carrying illegal cargo?

 

One of the things I'm finding very disturbing about the entire thing is the fact that the Israelis stole a bunch of video footage from press on board the ship, and are now controlling the footage that the Media has of the event.

Edited June 5, 2010 by Emasher

[The fish]

I do find myself pondering who is right in all of this though. If Israel do remove all sanctions from Gaza would it really jeopardise Israeli security? Is the idea that they're at war with the whole of the Arab world a hangover from it's inception as a state? Are Hamas fighting for freedom, or do they want to destroy Israel and reclaim lost lands? There's no way of knowing. Stepping back from Gaza could be the right thing to do, or it might be the biggest mistake Israel ever makes.

 

I think two major things, in the grand scheme of things, need to happen - first is Israel needs to stop building in the West Bank, and begin an organise and controlled pull out of settlers there, followed by military presence.

 

Second is that a Good Friday-style agreement is needed. All parties need to grow up, and come to the table. The Palestinians need to denounce any violence, and take active steps to persecute anyone who attempts to use violence against the Israelis. Israel will then be in a position where they can't justify any sort of military action what so ever, and even America will tell them to pull the other one. Both sides need to recognise each other as a sovereign state, and stick firmly to the 2000 Camp David Summit boarders.

 

Of course, one major, major problem is that the Israelis, as almost exclusively Jews, see themselves as "The Chosen People", which goes some way to explain why they always think negotiations are irrelevant, and that they have the right to do as they wish.

[Emasher]

I think two major things, in the grand scheme of things, need to happen - first is Israel needs to stop building in the West Bank, and begin an organise and controlled pull out of settlers there, followed by military presence.

 

Second is that a Good Friday-style agreement is needed. All parties need to grow up, and come to the table. The Palestinians need to denounce any violence, and take active steps to persecute anyone who attempts to use violence against the Israelis. Israel will then be in a position where they can't justify any sort of military action what so ever, and even America will tell them to pull the other one. Both sides need to recognise each other as a sovereign state, and stick firmly to the 2000 Camp David Summit boarders.

 

Of course, one major, major problem is that the Israelis, as almost exclusively Jews, see themselves as "The Chosen People", which goes some way to explain why they always think negotiations are irrelevant, and that they have the right to do as they wish.

 

I mostly agree with what you're saying, however, the Palestinians really do have a right to be pissed off:

 

 

I also don't think the United States will stop supporting Israel as long as the Rothschild family, as well as other wealth jewish families are paying to lobby the US government. It would take something really atrocious on Israel's part for them to be able to overcome that.

[Debug Mode]

Touché, good response, I stand corrected.

 

Thing is, this 'suspect of carrying weapons' has been fair too over played by Israel. This ship has been custom checked (providing there was no avoidance by the ship/failure in the system) and if it has not then fair play. But this guilty until proven innocent with added media blackout and gag order til you get home business is outrageous. All the people want to do is help them out with aid, because they, and for good reason, are damn suspicious of the offers to deliver it by land from Ashdod.

 

It's one thing to board the ship in question of whether the contents are within the law, it's another to arrest every one, check the contents and disallow them from going any further with it as 'they will take it themselves by land'. Then again my negative response to this supposed delivery offer may be influenced by the Royal Mail.

 

In summary, I just feel it's going too far. Fair play to Israel wanting to keep out the dangerous stuff, but let the people on their way afterwards when proven innocent. (There were a couple hundred people on the first flotilla, it's a shame if this metal bar story is true, puts them in a bad crowd)

 

I also don't think the United States will stop supporting Israel as long as the Rothschild family, as well as other wealth jewish families are paying to lobby the US government. It would take something really atrocious on Israel's part for them to be able to overcome that.

 

Five fucking stars. I was a bit afraid of going in to such a topic, what with my opinion the Illuminati theory was born from Neo-Nazism, but I definitely believe the US, like always, is being controlled by the lobbyists considering the contradictory attitude to the Iran situation.

 

Not going any further onto this topic myself, it seems to bring out the crackpots with blind Jewish hatred thanks to conspiracy theories.

[McPhee]

I mostly agree with what you're saying, however, the Palestinians really do have a right to be pissed off:

 

 

Let's not even go down this road. Far, far too messy. That map is horribly misleading and the idea that Palestinians have a right to be pissed off is a dangerous one, something that has been holding up the peace process for years now (Hamas regularly talk of reclaiming lost lands etc.).

[Emasher]

You can't really discuss this issue without going down that road I'm afraid.