Great article by Mark Steel of the independent: Of course, they were asking for it + Show Spoiler +
It’s time the Israeli government’s PR team made the most of its talents, and became available for hire. Then whenever a nutcase marched into a shopping mall in somewhere like Wisconsin and gunned down a selection of passers-by, they could be on hand to tell the world’s press “The gunman regrets the loss of life but did all he could to avoid violence.” Then various governments would issue statements saying “All we know is a man went berserk with an AK 47, and next to him there’s a pile of corpses, so until we know the facts we can’t pass judgement on what took place.” To strengthen their case the Israelis have released a photo of the weapons they found on board, (which amount to some knives and tools and wooden sticks) that the naive might think you’d expect to find on any ship, but the more astute will recognise as exactly what you’d carry if you were planning to defeat the Israeli army. It’s an armoury smaller than you’d find in the average toolshed in a garden in Cirencester, which goes to show the Israelis had better destroy Cirencester quickly as an essential act of self-defence.
It’s a shame they weren’t more imaginative, as they could have said “We also discovered a deadly barometer, a ship’s compass, which could not only be frisbeed at someone’s head but even had markings to help the assailant know which direction he was throwing it, and a set of binoculars that could easily be converted into a ray-gun.”
That would be as logical as the statement from the Israeli PM’s spokesman – “We made every possible effort to avoid this incident.” Because the one tiny thing they forgot to do to avoid this incident was not send in armed militia from helicopters in the middle of the night and shoot people. I must be a natural at this sort of technique because I often go all day without climbing off a helicopter and shooting people, and I’m not even making every possible effort. Politicians and commentators worldwide repeat a version of this line. They’re aware a nation has sent its militia to confront people carrying provisions for the desperate, in the process shooting several of them dead, and yet they angrily blame the dead ones. One typical headline yesterday read “Activists got what they wanted – confrontation.” It’s an attitude so deranged it deserves to be registered as a psychosis, something like “Reverse Slaughter Victim Confusion Syndrome”.
Israel and its supporters claim that Viva Palestina, made up of people who collect the donated food, cement and items for providing basic amenities such as toilets, and transport them to Gaza, wanted the violence all along. Because presumably they must have been thinking “Hezbollah couldn’t beat them, but that’s because unlike us they didn’t have a ballcock and several boxes of plum tomatoes”.
One article told us the flotilla was full of “Thugs spoiling for a confrontation”, and then accused them of being “Less about aid and more about PR. Indeed, on board was Swedish novelist Henning Mankell.” So were they thugs or about PR? Did they have a thugs’ section and a PR quarter, or did they all muck in, the novelist diverting the soldiers with his characterisation while the thugs attacked them with a lethal spirit level?
But some defenders of Israel are so blind to what happens in front of them there’s nothing at all they wouldn’t jump to defend. Israel could blow up a cats home and within five minutes they’d be yelling “How do we know the cats weren’t smuggling semtex in their fur for Hamas?”
If this incident had been carried about by Iran, or anyone we were trying to portray as an enemy, so much condemnation would have been spewed out it would have created a vast cloud of outrage that airlines would be unable to fly through.
But as it’s Israel, most governments offer a few diplomatic words that blame no one, but accept the deaths are “regrettable”. They might as well have picked any random word from the dictionary, so the news would tell us “William Hague described the deaths as ‘hexagonal’”, and a statement from the US senate said “It’s all very confusing. In future let’s hope they make every effort to avoid a similar incident.”
On June 03 2010 17:58 Kazius wrote: No it wasn't - if it was for a peaceful solution, they'd go via Ashdod harbor, where they could be searched for weapons, and then all aid would be sent to Gaza.
I'm afraid that you are simply parroting the usual IDF disinformation on this issue
And I'm afraid that you are parroting the usual Anti-Israel disinformation on this issue.
On June 03 2010 19:15 VegeTerran wrote: Great article by Mark Steel of the independent: Of course, they were asking for it
Brilliant article.
Want to go to war and provoke a violent confrontation? Forget guns, grenades, rocket launchers, all you need is a set of kitchen knives, and whatever piece of wood or metal you can find lying around.
On June 03 2010 17:58 Kazius wrote: No it wasn't - if it was for a peaceful solution, they'd go via Ashdod harbor, where they could be searched for weapons, and then all aid would be sent to Gaza.
I'm afraid that you are simply parroting the usual IDF disinformation on this issue
And I'm afraid that you are parroting the usual Anti-Israel disinformation on this issue.
Except I've provided explicit reasoning behind my stance. I welcome you to try and contradict the specific points I made. Or is it that you cannot do so and find it easier to simply dismiss my post out of hand?
On June 03 2010 19:15 VegeTerran wrote: Great article by Mark Steel of the independent: Of course, they were asking for it
Brilliant article.
Want to go to war and provoke a violent confrontation? Forget guns, grenades, rocket launchers, all you need is a set of kitchen knives, and whatever piece of wood or metal you can find lying around.
Oh come on now, I actually support your viewpoint, but that article was just silly. Obviously when Israel's supporters say that the aid organizers were looking for a confrontation they don't mean to imply that said organizers thought that they would be able repel an Israeli military strike. The accusation is rather that the organizers were seeking to martyr themselves knowingly so as to mar Israel's (less than) sterling reputation and garner international support for their cause.
On June 03 2010 19:15 VegeTerran wrote: Great article by Mark Steel of the independent: Of course, they were asking for it
Brilliant article.
Want to go to war and provoke a violent confrontation? Forget guns, grenades, rocket launchers, all you need is a set of kitchen knives, and whatever piece of wood or metal you can find lying around.
Oh come on now, I actually support your viewpoint, but that article was just silly. Obviously when Israel's supporters say that the aid organizers were looking for a confrontation they don't mean to imply that said organizers thought that they would be able repel an Israeli military strike. The accusation is rather that the organizers were seeking to martyr themselves knowingly so as to mar Israel's (less than) sterling reputation and garner international support for their cause.
Fair point. However the Israeli PR machine has sought to label the aid workers as not just "martyrs" but also as "terrorists," and in some cases allied to Hamas. Which has slightly different connotations. And I believe that is what the article is referring to.
On June 03 2010 17:58 Kazius wrote: No it wasn't - if it was for a peaceful solution, they'd go via Ashdod harbor, where they could be searched for weapons, and then all aid would be sent to Gaza.
I'm afraid that you are simply parroting the usual IDF disinformation on this issue that I will attempt to correct.
1) If they had followed Israeli instructions to go to Ashdod the Israelis would have taken control of the aid and then would have done what they always do. i.e. restrict the flow of the aid to a rate at less than 25% of what's required by the suffering populace of gaza and also remove items that they arbitrarily ban. Such as I've listed above eg chocolate, pasta, notebooks, pencils etc. So what the Israeli government was offering was not a viable alternative or compromise but simply the maintainence of an illegal and indeed immoral status quo.
Actual list of blockaded items: animals and fresh meat (just as any country limits their entry due to health concerns), canned goods (can and have been used in the past to smuggle explosives, and before I hear your rage, YES I KNOW SOMEONE WHO ACTUALLY SAW THIS), spices which scents mask that of explosives to dogs. Fabric for clothing (but not clothing itself) is not allowed, wood for large scale construction, musical instruments and newspapers are not allowed and I personally disagree with those because while they can be used for weapon smuggling, the damage these do to Israel from a security standpoint is greater than the advantage of blockading them. If I'm correct, this is the entire up to date list of blockaded items.
2) This idea of "weapons searches" is the smoke and mirrors that the Israeli government has been using all along to inflict collective punishment on the people of gaza. How else do you explain the presence of PASTA in the list of prohibited items?
It's not. And as an ex-soldier I have caught weapons attempted to be smuggled into Gaza. It's not smoke and mirrors because I can personally attest that these things are happening.
Firstly, the ships were searched at their departing ports in Europe, as well as Turkey (who until a couple of days ago were a major ally and trading partner of the Israeli government), as well as at Cyprus. The flotilla organisers also had no problem with Israeli officials checking their cargo at Turkey or Cyprus, or indeed Gaza port (which Israel control). But the fact is that Israel's real motivation was not to search for weapons but to limit and restrict the flow of aid.
As I mentioned in an earlier post, how would the UK feel if they were not allowed to search anything entering their country on the count that "it was checked elsewhere"? Israel enforced the blockade, because once exceptions are made the blockade is effectively over. This might seem fine to you, but it isn't for Israel. You are also ignoring the fact that Israel wants to exert pressure on Hamas to stop firing missiles at the Israeli general populace, and the blockade is one of the only ways it can do so in Gaza.
This was a publicity stunt, and the result is the topic of the thread.
I disagree. The humanitarians on the flotilla wanted to show solidarity with the people of Gaza and show them that the world had not forgotten their plight. They also wanted to bring moral pressure to bear on the Israeli government to stop their illegal punishment of the 1.5 million civilians living in conditions far worse than that of many prisons. The topic of the thread is not becuase of what the flotilla did, but because of what the Israeli government did.
I.E. use a military attack on ships carrying humanitarian aid in international waters in the middle of the night. Moreover, they botched the operation BADLY and that is why you see the headlines that you see.
The Israeli government's hand was forced in this case. Why not go through the Egyptian border to Gaza? Because Egypt is blockading Gaza?
Not "Israel Defends Blockade" (pro-Israeli) or "Conflict on the Gazan Blockade" (neutral) but rather "Israel Attacks Gazan Aid Floatilla" (anti-Israeli). This (as an Israeli) does not surprise me, as I have seen every major media outlet use similar language for over 20 years now (when suicide bombers struck Israel in the mid-90s, CNN would use "killed" for the victims instead of "murdered", which was particularly antagonizing). I have previously posted in this thread here in order to give what I think is a more complete view of the situation, but the bottom line, that just the subject line on this forum (while is obviously a good one to create a massive flame war) has already made more of an impact than anything I could say. The bottom line is that after decades of media treatment in this line, people have already decided what their opinions are before delving further into the details of the conflict.
I submit that the real tragedy is that the Israeli people have become too introspective and do not realise that there is a legitimacy behind the way the world sees them. As for media bias, many argue that there is a lot of bias in support of Israel, and the U.S. support of Israel. BBC, CNN etc. still use the term "killed" for innocent victims of IDF atrocities, not "murdered".
The bottom line is that Israel needs to wake up, act in a more humane manner and quit treating the palestinian people with such disdain and brutality. Because whether you like it or not, the world is waking up to the fact that the way the Israeli government is behaving now is not at all far away from the behaviour of the Apartheid regime in South Africa.
I do not believe we are saints here in Israel. I don't believe there is anything we can do at the moment to be the good guys. When the IDF fires back at sources of fire, can it allow itself to make exceptions if someone is firing from a civilian building? When missiles are fired from UN subsidized school playgrounds, can Israel afford to just let people keep firing away? Unfortunately, the standard Hamas operation is done only from places where there is a high concentration of civilians. When there is collateral damage in which civilians are killed, they are not the target, they are accidental casualties, hence "killed" is the proper word. The IDF never aims at civilians without following the strictest rules of engagement. As opposed to a suicide bombing, in which the casualties are all targets, hence "murder" is the proper word.
While disagreeing with Israel's policy on a lot of issues, Israel is seen as far worse than it actually is. I say this because I am trying to solve the problem in practice, not just in writing in forums. Where are Israel's inhumane, disdainful or brutal actions in the life of the average Palestinian + Show Spoiler +
(and before you answer that like you actually know something: I've been to over 30 different Palestinian villages in the past decade, probably closer to 50)
? The internet is full of pictures of the worst that happens, but it really doesn't show what the average Palestinian lives like. You are watching the news and inferring that it is an accurate representation of reality: I submit to you that looking at the worst alone is not a good practice in understanding reality, and this is what you are doing.
That being said, I do not believe Israel handled this well, but after Israel left Gaza, Hamas did whatever they could to escalate the conflict and bring it to this point, as unfortunately this level of conflict keeps them in charge opposed to the much more moderate and secular groups.
To blame Hamas for escalating the conflict is disingenious. While I have no time for Hamas or their actions, the Israeli government have acted equally (and because they have more power and they don't hesitate to use it more) deplorably. I don't believe the current Israeli government is interested in peace, they simple use Hamas as a convenient bogey man to continue to act with impunity. The fact that they continue to build illegal settlements on occupied land in the West Bank (where Hamas are not in charge, but rather the Palestinian authority, with whom Israel have peaceful relations and who they recognize as legitimate government) is evidence of their true intentions.
The settlement issue is a problematic one, and I dislike those settlements (probably more so than you). But Israel have proven that they are willing to (if necessary, forcefully) remove settlements. The current Israeli government is interested first in the safety of Israeli citizens, and that is the platform on which they were elected. If the peace process would be shown to genuinely improve the security of the Israeli citizens, I believe that they would go ahead with it. But the last time there was a viable peace process then Israel was stuck handling the dissociation between the talks and the continuing increase of violent actions against Israel, until all trust in the peace process as happened in the 90s was destroyed. Israel left Gaza. All that was needed to keep the Israeli presence there at zero and have no interference in their way of life was that they do not fire missiles, but as a recurring theme to the peace process, once Israel ceded territory to the Palestinian people, rather than acting peacefully, the territory was used as a base for escalating attacks.
The average person wants peace, but the way it's looking, there is no partner for such a process in Gaza, and the Palestinian Authority and Israeli government have such a distrust between them at the moment that moving forward is only done an inch at a time. You may not see it, but both the Palestinian and Israeli people have become very bitter cynics when it comes to peace talks, yet as a people, both sides want peace to happen. You are looking at things without all the details, and quite frankly, I'm surprised I'm not numb to this type of rhetoric by now... like so many people are.
First i would like to say that i support Palestinians and their case. But my view on this event is quite different than most of Palestinian supporters.
People seem to forgot (or they didnt know in the first place) that in every group of activist there are some aggressive radicals. No matter what You are contesting, church, state, abortion, or whatever. They are always there, granted they could be small in numbers (usually only few %) but they are there. I happen to know such people, and i know they are fully capable of violence. I have no problem beliving they attacked Israeli soldiers, and willingly put themself in very risky situation. Hell they might even push to soldiers to situation when their only choice was to open fire, or get killed.
Most of the activist, (lets say 90%) are peacufully and was trying only to help. Some of them might be fucking saints, helping everyone and wishing harm to noone. But dont forget that rest of them are blood frenzied radicals willing to do anything for their cause. Sometimes that means dying for Your cause, sometimes that means killing for Your cause.
Mind, I am not saying that whats have happend, but that might have happend. I guess we will never know. Of course Israeli should have waited for Flotilla to enter their internal waters befere trying to stop them, but i fear that would have ended the same way.
Edit: Another point is this weapon issue. WTF are You people expecting? Rifles and granades?Lol. Knives, slings, wooden sticks are exectly the kind of weapons You should expect activist would use. Only thing thats missing from usaul arsenal are Molotovs coctails, but using them on Your own ship would be pretty stupid.
On June 03 2010 17:58 Kazius wrote: No it wasn't - if it was for a peaceful solution, they'd go via Ashdod harbor, where they could be searched for weapons, and then all aid would be sent to Gaza.
I'm afraid that you are simply parroting the usual IDF disinformation on this issue that I will attempt to correct.
1) If they had followed Israeli instructions to go to Ashdod the Israelis would have taken control of the aid and then would have done what they always do. i.e. restrict the flow of the aid to a rate at less than 25% of what's required by the suffering populace of gaza and also remove items that they arbitrarily ban. Such as I've listed above eg chocolate, pasta, notebooks, pencils etc. So what the Israeli government was offering was not a viable alternative or compromise but simply the maintainence of an illegal and indeed immoral status quo.
Actual list of blockaded items: animals and fresh meat (just as any country limits their entry due to health concerns), canned goods (can and have been used in the past to smuggle explosives, and before I hear your rage, YES I KNOW SOMEONE WHO ACTUALLY SAW THIS), spices which scents mask that of explosives to dogs. Fabric for clothing (but not clothing itself) is not allowed, wood for large scale construction, musical instruments and newspapers are not allowed and I personally disagree with those because while they can be used for weapon smuggling, the damage these do to Israel from a security standpoint is greater than the advantage of blockading them. If I'm correct, this is the entire up to date list of blockaded items.
Wood, newpspaers, fabric? Why is it that Israel is unable to adequately search these materials and determine if there are any weapons hidden? I would assume that the Israeli army has at least the level of competence that an average airport has when it comes to searching for weapons. Why is it easier to hide weapons in fabric than in grain?
Actual list of blockaded items: animals and fresh meat (just as any country limits their entry due to health concerns), canned goods (can and have been used in the past to smuggle explosives, and before I hear your rage, YES I KNOW SOMEONE WHO ACTUALLY SAW THIS), spices which scents mask that of explosives to dogs. Fabric for clothing (but not clothing itself) is not allowed, wood for large scale construction, musical instruments and newspapers are not allowed and I personally disagree with those because while they can be used for weapon smuggling, the damage these do to Israel from a security standpoint is greater than the advantage of blockading them. If I'm correct, this is the entire up to date list of blockaded items.
Firstly, thank you for participating in a legitimate debate and for posting reasoned and rational responses. For this you deserve respect and I will attempt to reciprocate in kind.
The problem is that Israel does not publish an official list of items that are blockaded. As such I'm not sure as to the validity of the above list. I have searched and been unable to find an official list sanctioned by the Israeli government. Which leaves humanitarian agencies and NGOs guessing. The simple fact of the matter is that the blockade itself is illegal as UN resolutions clearly mandate the UNRESTRICTED flow of aid into Gaza. The fact that the Gazians are getting a fourth of what they need compounds this.
Israel want to stop weapons that's one thing. But to stop things like Newspapers and A4 notebooks and chocolates, under the guise of stopping weapons, that's just ridiculous.
It's not. And as an ex-soldier I have caught weapons attempted to be smuggled into Gaza. It's not smoke and mirrors because I can personally attest that these things are happening.
Oh, I have no doubt that people DO attempt to smuggle in weapons. However, I equally have no doubt that the Israelis are exaggerating this and using this as an excuse to restrict aid in order to punish the civilian population of Gaza.
In the current example, the aid flotilla was checked by European governments as well as Cyprus and Turkey (a key Israeli ally). And Israel don't seem to have found any weapons attempted to being smuggled in. So you see, when Israel stop what is clearly a legitimate shipment of humanitarian aid, under the guise of searching for weapons, then people have a hard time believing that stopping weapons was their sole motivation.
As I mentioned in an earlier post, how would the UK feel if they were not allowed to search anything entering their country on the count that "it was checked elsewhere"? Israel enforced the blockade, because once exceptions are made the blockade is effectively over. This might seem fine to you, but it isn't for Israel.
Gaza is not part of Israel. In fact, Israel, I believe, has repeatedly stressed that it is NOT occupying Gaza. So the UK analogy is moot. The blockade, as I've pointed out is illegal and of course it should be broken. The UN mandates the flow of unrestricted aid to gaza.
You are also ignoring the fact that Israel wants to exert pressure on Hamas to stop firing missiles at the Israeli general populace, and the blockade is one of the only ways it can do so in Gaza.
Thank you for proving my point. Because when you talk about "pressuring hamas" the reality is that it is a punishment of the palestinian people.
I'm not ignoring it. This is the crux of the matter, and as far as I'm concerned, what the issue is really about. (with all that stuff about weapon searches being smoke and mirrors, as I pointed out).
Israel want's to "pressurise Hamas" by punishing the civilian population of Gaza. I don't really buy that their only motive is to stop rocket attacks, but even if that was the case, collective punishment on the civilian population of Gaza is in contravention to the fourth geneva convention on Human rights and a crime under international law. A blockade in support of this crime is also illegal.
The Israeli government's hand was forced in this case. Why not go through the Egyptian border to Gaza? Because Egypt is blockading Gaza?
No one forced their hand to maintain an illegal blockade. As for Egypt, the fact that they've kowtowed to Israeli threats and pressure is sad, but they weren't the ones who sent a fleet of warships to intercept a flotilla carrying humanitarian aid and they weren't the ones who attempted to board these ships with armed soldiers in international waters.
I do not believe we are saints here in Israel. I don't believe there is anything we can do at the moment to be the good guys. When the IDF fires back at sources of fire, can it allow itself to make exceptions if someone is firing from a civilian building? When missiles are fired from UN subsidized school playgrounds, can Israel afford to just let people keep firing away? Unfortunately, the standard Hamas operation is done only from places where there is a high concentration of civilians. When there is collateral damage in which civilians are killed, they are not the target, they are accidental casualties, hence "killed" is the proper word. The IDF never aims at civilians without following the strictest rules of engagement. As opposed to a suicide bombing, in which the casualties are all targets, hence "murder" is the proper word. While disagreeing with Israel's policy on a lot of issues, Israel is seen as far worse than it actually is. I say this because I am trying to solve the problem in practice, not just in writing in forums.
The problem is that people just don't buy this "collateral damage" stuff any more. Every single time Israel has some excuse for why it is killing civilians or aid workers or journalists. The fact that Israel stops journalists from even covering what it is doing, routinely destroys their equipment and evidence doesn't help. Maybe if Israel acted more transparently and responsibly then there would be less condemnation and more understanding.
Again, using the most recent incident as an example. Why has the IDF siezed all the laptops, cameras, phones, blackberrys etc of the aid workers and journalists on board the flotilla? If they have nothing to hide and have done nothing wrong, why confiscate and destroy the evidence?
Where are Israel's inhumane, disdainful or brutal actions in the life of the average Palestinian + Show Spoiler +
(and before you answer that like you actually know something: I've been to over 30 different Palestinian villages in the past decade, probably closer to 50)
? The internet is full of pictures of the worst that happens, but it really doesn't show what the average Palestinian lives like.
You're right, I haven't been there, but here is what Amnesty International and the UN have to say on the issue.
Amnesty International has dubbed the blockade "collective punishment" resulting in a "humanitarian crisis"; UN officials have described the situation as "grim", "deteriorating" and a "medieval siege", but Israel says there are no shortages in Gaza, pointing to the aid it allows in. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7545636.stm#overview
I'm sorry if I take their word over yours or that of the Israeli government. The fact that you cannot even see the suffering that Israel is inflicting on the average people of palestine is deeply disheartening.
You are watching the news and inferring that it is an accurate representation of reality: I submit to you that looking at the worst alone is not a good practice in understanding reality, and this is what you are doing.
Perhaps if Israel did not put draconian restriction on journalistic coverage and did not attempt to censor and spin at every opportunity, there would be no need for this. Again the recent attack on the flotilla is a perfect example of this.
First, the confiscation of all video and photographic evidence. Second the information blackout via the illegal detention of over 600 aid workers for three days while the Israeli PR spun their stories without anyone to counter or refute them.
I mean, after kidnapping citizens of other countries in International waters, the IDF forced these people to sign papers saying they had entered Israel illegally. What a joke.
The settlement issue is a problematic one, and I dislike those settlements (probably more so than you). But Israel have proven that they are willing to (if necessary, forcefully) remove settlements. The current Israeli government is interested first in the safety of Israeli citizens, and that is the platform on which they were elected. If the peace process would be shown to genuinely improve the security of the Israeli citizens, I believe that they would go ahead with it. But the last time there was a viable peace process then Israel was stuck handling the dissociation between the talks and the continuing increase of violent actions against Israel, until all trust in the peace process as happened in the 90s was destroyed. Israel left Gaza. All that was needed to keep the Israeli presence there at zero and have no interference in their way of life was that they do not fire missiles, but as a recurring theme to the peace process, once Israel ceded territory to the Palestinian people, rather than acting peacefully, the territory was used as a base for escalating attacks.
The average person wants peace, but the way it's looking, there is no partner for such a process in Gaza, and the Palestinian Authority and Israeli government have such a distrust between them at the moment that moving forward is only done an inch at a time. You may not see it, but both the Palestinian and Israeli people have become very bitter cynics when it comes to peace talks, yet as a people, both sides want peace to happen. You are looking at things without all the details, and quite frankly, I'm surprised I'm not numb to this type of rhetoric by now... like so many people are.
If Israel truly wants peace, which based on their actions I remain unconvinced that they do. Then the first step is to give back occupied land and to start treating the people of Palestine as human beings and not as caged animals confined to a giant ghetto. Israel are the ones with the power, and so it is they who must act.
Hamas are a terrorist group, so we cannot expect better from them. But Israel is supposed to be a civilised state. Or are you saying we should expect the same standard of behaviour from the government of Israel as we expect from a terrorist organisation? If that is the case, should we also regard them in the same light as we regard a terrorist organisation?
Israel has ignored every single UN resolution including the division of borders in the original agreement. For now, they continue to behave as the oppressor and so are regarded as one.
Oh, I have no doubt that people DO attempt to smuggle in weapons. However, I equally have no doubt that the Israelis are exaggerating this and using this as an excuse to restrict aid in order to punish the civilian population of Gaza.
Just nitpicking here before going back to work, I believe that the Israeli's are hardly exaggerating the smuggling of weapons when so many rockets and missiles are fired into Israel.
Just nitpicking here before going back to work, I believe that the Israeli's are hardly exaggerating the smuggling of weapons when so many rockets and missiles are fired into Israel.
And the general gist, any problems I'll check back later
I have no doubt that Hamas use rocket attacks and attempt to smuggle weapons in. However, this cannot be used to justify such a draconian restriction of aid and collective punishment of the palestinian civilian population. I'd even be happy if the Israeli government insisted on UN inspection of all aid shipments. At least then no one could accuse Israel of deliberately restricting the flow of aid.
The rockets, if they are being smuggled in, are probably coming in from tunnels via Egypt. Putting arbitrary restrictions on the import of newspapers isn't going to have any effect on that.
On June 03 2010 21:43 Spenguin wrote: Unfortunately I believe Israel doesn't really trust the UN a whole bunch, afaik the UN has changed a lot since Israel became a state.
Wait, how many civilians, aid workers and journalists has the UN shot and killed in the past 10 years? Now compare that to Israel.
Don't trust the U.N. Fine. How about Nato? heck, fuck nato, I'd even be content with American troops inspecting the aid for weapons, as long as the aid itself was unrestricted.
Firstly, an interview by the former deputy director of President Regan's white house task force on terrorism, Edward Peck, I believe also a former U.S. ambassador, where he states:
that the commandos that boarded his ship were armed with machine guns and pistols, and "a couple of them had paintball guns."
Secondly
"Al Jazeera's Jamal Elshayyal, who reported from the ship before the raid, was also sent to Turkey after being released by the Israelis. He said that he witnessed some of the killings, and confirmed that at least "one person was shot through the top of the head from [the helicopter] above. Our correspondent was on the top deck when the ship was attacked and said that within a few minutes of seeing the Israeli helicopters, there were shots being fired from above....
"The first shots [coming from Israeli boats at sea] were tear gas, sounds grenades and rubber coated steel bullets. Live shots came five minutes after that. There was definetly live fire from the air and from the sea as well."
"There is no doubt from what I saw that live ammunition was fired before any Israeli soldier was on deck.
Interview starts about 45 seconds into the video. Interesting points at 2 minutes in and then 3:20 minutes in he talks about the sequence of what happened and who did what first. Around 5 minutes in he talks about how the Israelis left three critically injured people untreated for 3 hours despite repeated requests and allowed them to die.
TBH this doesn't surprise me in the least, because the video realised by the IDF showed the commandos boarding but not what had happened before that.
Is it any surprise that the people in the ship tried to fight off the commandos after they had seen their fellow passengers shot and killed from above?
If the whole reason for the assault was to check for weapons, which is reasonable, why did they insist on delivering the goods themselves instead of just checking for weapons? Why did they film knives and metal bars? Those are not weapons. They can kill someone in theory, but well, many things can. Every rock can do that, and I bet there are plenty of rocks in Gaza. Not to mention that those things have a place on such a huge ship.
Israelis are right in their security concerns. The aid flotilla was right in their concerns that many of the goods would not make it to Gaza. This could have been easily avoided in advance, but neither side wanted to. BOTH sides planned this through and knew that people could be dying, I'm pretty sure.
The whole story is so stupid, 2 sides using an aid flotilla as a political instrument is so inhumane and makes me want to vomit. People dying just because of that? I'm not able to express how I really feel about that...
It is not nearly as bad as what US/UK/Germany etc are doing to the surrounding countries, though.
On June 03 2010 22:34 Spenguin wrote: Well Al Jazeera would contradict anything Israel says.
Al Jazeera are an internationally known and respected news organisation. Can you show me any independent evidence that calls Al Jazeera's integrity into question?
Did you even watch the interview?
A reporter on the vessel has far more credibility to me than the IDF. But hey the Israelis have nothing to hide right, that's why they won't allow an independent international investigation into the incident. That's why they broke the cameras and stopped reporters from recording or broadcasting after they took control. That's why they've siezed all video and photographic evidence.
Yeah, trust THOSE guys, they've got nothing to hide. Honest.....
EPT
