On June 09 2010 13:26 WinHouse wrote: It's pretty obvious what's up when a story about humanitarian civilians being killed becomes a 63 page thread.
Well, you obviously missed the point of the thread. In some peoples opinion (including me) the people on board were NOT humanitarian civilians. They were political activists provoking an escalation.
you know political activists are also civilians right?
Well they weren't just provoking an escalation, they attacked the boarding Israelis with knives chairs and metal rods.
Yea what would you do? If you hear a loud bang, and gun shots, then see soldiers coming down of helicopters with guns in the pitch black night, with navy surrounding your boat... Wouldn't you act irrationally given also the history of violence acts committed by Israeli soldiers on to civilians / journalists?
Why couldn't Israeli army board the ship in broad day light, or use any of the many different methods highlighted by the critics? More importantly how can you raid a ship on international waters....
Also it is not like they flotilla wasn't inspected twice in Europe before heading to Gaza!
On June 09 2010 13:26 WinHouse wrote: It's pretty obvious what's up when a story about humanitarian civilians being killed becomes a 63 page thread.
Well, you obviously missed the point of the thread. In some peoples opinion (including me) the people on board were NOT humanitarian civilians. They were political activists provoking an escalation.
you know political activists are also civilians right?
Well they weren't just provoking an escalation, they attacked the boarding Israelis with knives chairs and metal rods.
Yea what would you do? If you hear a loud bang, and gun shots, then see soldiers coming down of helicopters with guns in the pitch black night, with navy surrounding your boat... Wouldn't you act irrationally given also the history of violence acts committed by Israeli soldiers on to civilians / journalists?
Why couldn't Israeli army board the ship in broad day light, or use any of the many different methods highlighted by the critics? More importantly how can you raid a ship on international waters....
Also it is not like they flotilla wasn't inspected twice in Europe before heading to Gaza!
I'd slap myself for being dumb enough to let it come to that. Then I'd sit still with rest of the crew until the IDF commandos would come and arrest me. Taking a metal pipe and trying to fight seems pretty much retarded. And I mean something like Darwin Awards retarded. I wonder if you're aware that there probably isn't a military that hasn't shot civilians. IDF's reputation is not well-deserved because it seems to be the only military having this reputation despite not being the odd one out.
Some say because Hamas had an armada (whatever that means in this case) waiting by the Gaza shore, which could've led to the violence escalating. Some say it was politics. A group of commandos capture a terrorist supporting flotilla sounds very nice on the newspaper, and would certainly boost up the popularity of the ruling parties. The motive certainly wasn't to go there and kill people because that would make no sense what-so-ever (if that's what you were implying). It would be counter-productive.
Raiding a ship on international waters isn't a sufficient condition for a raid to be illegal.
Yet, there were things like bulletproof vests and flashbangs on board. Why?
I'd like to ask everybody to stop posting the israeli video above.
The boarding took a minimum of 2 hours. This is a video with bias commenting and it even cuts in the middle of the action so the video is not showing it's original content.
Before this "accident" Israel asked parts of their american jewish diaspora to help with the medial propaganda war that this to a big extent is.
This video was put on media early to give a biased perspective on the whole situation. What we need to see is a objective report on the whole boarding. But the U.N's proposal was neglected.
In my opinion Israel wants to postpone it so the reactions when the truth comes out won't be as aggressive as if it came out the day after the boarding.
I'd like to ask everybody to stop posting the israeli video above.
Under what evidence? The opinion that because the video is edited? Because the commentator was supporting Israel? Those are not good enough to discredit the video.
Before this "accident" Israel asked parts of their american jewish diaspora to help with the medial propaganda war that this to a big extent is.
I'd like to ask everybody to stop posting the israeli video above.
Under what evidence? The opinion that because the video is edited? Because the commentator was supporting Israel? Those are not good enough to discredit the video.
On June 10 2010 19:01 SirGlinG wrote: I'd like to ask everybody to stop posting the israeli video above.
The boarding took a minimum of 2 hours. This is a video with bias commenting and it even cuts in the middle of the action so the video is not showing it's original content.
Bias commentating, such as "this where they hit the commandos". Damn those biased Israelis.
I'd like to ask everybody to stop posting the israeli video above.
Under what evidence? The opinion that because the video is edited? Because the commentator was supporting Israel? Those are not good enough to discredit the video.
Before this "accident" Israel asked parts of their american jewish diaspora to help with the medial propaganda war that this to a big extent is.
Wheres the proof of this? Can you give a link?
I can't recall which exact page number from this discussion it's on but it was on Teamliquid, an English source.
Then what is in your opinion of "good enough" to discredit the video?
All cameras and laptops were taken from at least the swedish people on the ships by the Israelis and they were not returned. A Israeli soldier even stole a sock from a swedish author for some reason.
All the camera material from the ship was taken under Israeli control. They can edit and do what ever they want with this. So in a propaganda war where only one side has gotten their chance to show their perspective we can not know what is truthful and what is not. I would have said the exact same thing if only the activists perspective were shown.
What we need to wait for is an objective investigation.
I can keep on doing this for a long time, if you have any criticism to add to this discussion please do but you won't stand a chance.
Here's an interesting perspective on the whole situation. Israel bords a ship on international water. This is illegal. Israel knocks down the captain who doesn't want to let go of his control of the boat since this is his right according to international law. Israel takes control over the ship. This is kidnapping and against international law. Israel steals material from people on the ship. Israel deports foreigners who they have kidnapped and brought into their own country against their will.
I don't stand by this as a good explanation since the question goes deeper and there's a lot of factors that need to be discussed. But these actions were done by Israeli military and decided by Israeli politicians. Should we not question it? Shouldn't all Israelis question why their gouvernment goes against international law?
In my earlier posts about the killings aboard the Mavi Marmara, I used terms like “kill shot” and “execution-style” to describe these events. I based my judgment on the narratives told by eyewitnesses and the Turkish autopsy reports. Some readers were taken aback and accused me of overstatement, exaggeration and worse. But this video vividly confirms my strong suspicions.
It shows IDF commandos executing a passenger on the Mavi Marmara with one and possibly two point blank shots from above into the victim who lies on the boat deck. In truth, one cannot distinguish the face of the victim since it is blocked by a boat railing. But from the muzzle flashes and weapon recoils and the downward direction in which the shooter looks at his victim, it is clear this is an execution just as I described earlier.
In my earlier posts about the killings aboard the Mavi Marmara, I used terms like “kill shot” and “execution-style” to describe these events. I based my judgment on the narratives told by eyewitnesses and the Turkish autopsy reports. Some readers were taken aback and accused me of overstatement, exaggeration and worse. But this video vividly confirms my strong suspicions.
It shows IDF commandos executing a passenger on the Mavi Marmara with one and possibly two point blank shots from above into the victim who lies on the boat deck. In truth, one cannot distinguish the face of the victim since it is blocked by a boat railing. But from the muzzle flashes and weapon recoils and the downward direction in which the shooter looks at his victim, it is clear this is an execution just as I described earlier.
My god, they are crazy. This put an end to the discussion I think...
I'd like to ask everybody to stop posting the israeli video above.
Under what evidence? The opinion that because the video is edited? Because the commentator was supporting Israel? Those are not good enough to discredit the video.
Before this "accident" Israel asked parts of their american jewish diaspora to help with the medial propaganda war that this to a big extent is.
Wheres the proof of this? Can you give a link?
The fact that it has been edited means EVERYTHING. Without context it has no value.
Let me break it down very simply for you.
Here is what the tape objectively shows:
As Israeli soldiers absail down onto the boat they are mobbed and attacked by some passengers on the boat with what look like bars or sticks (wooden or metal) of some type. And one is later thrown over board. (I think we both agree on this bit.
Now.... two possible explanations have been provided for this video.
Israeli version: The soldiers were attacked without provocation by protesters intent on causing an incident.
Flotilla version: The soldiers had already shot and killed at least one person on the boat and considering the IDF's reputation in this matter people felt they had to defend themselves.
Now...
One of the above is the statement of an organisation with a track record for killing innocent civilians and in fact committing war crimes and then LYING about it. AND They also confiscated all the possible evidence that would prove ONE WAY or the other, what the truth REALLY is, and REFUSE to release this to any independent authority.
While the other is based on eye-witness reports from international citizens in good standing.
In my earlier posts about the killings aboard the Mavi Marmara, I used terms like “kill shot” and “execution-style” to describe these events. I based my judgment on the narratives told by eyewitnesses and the Turkish autopsy reports. Some readers were taken aback and accused me of overstatement, exaggeration and worse. But this video vividly confirms my strong suspicions.
It shows IDF commandos executing a passenger on the Mavi Marmara with one and possibly two point blank shots from above into the victim who lies on the boat deck. In truth, one cannot distinguish the face of the victim since it is blocked by a boat railing. But from the muzzle flashes and weapon recoils and the downward direction in which the shooter looks at his victim, it is clear this is an execution just as I described earlier.
My god, they are crazy. This put an end to the discussion I think...
Of course there is no surprise that they are holding on to the flotilla videos because they will provide without doubt the incontroveritble evidence of their crimes. If the videos exonerated the Israeli action, I'm sure they would have been released in full by now.
I can't recall which exact page number from this discussion it's on but it was on Teamliquid, an English source.
You do realize the burden of proof is on you? If its in this thread find it.
All cameras and laptops were taken from at least the swedish people on the ships by the Israelis and they were not returned. A Israeli soldier even stole a sock from a swedish author for some reason.
All the camera material from the ship was taken under Israeli control. They can edit and do what ever they want with this. So in a propaganda war where only one side has gotten their chance to show their perspective we can not know what is truthful and what is not. I would have said the exact same thing if only the activists perspective were shown.
Ummm, there are pictures that where smuggled out, that I posted!
What we need to wait for is an objective investigation.
Then why are not taking your own advice?
I can keep on doing this for a long time, if you have any criticism to add to this discussion please do but you won't stand a chance.
I don't believe I have ever had someone be so blatant offensive about a difference in opinion. Don't make a comment like that again it won't help you.
Here's an interesting perspective on the whole situation.
That's a keyword. With that said, kidnapping is such a stretch, The caption wanted to break the blockade, Israel wanted to stop him. Where were those foreigners supposed to go? I do believe that it is debated wither or not it was illegal depending on what document you use.
I don't stand by this as a good explanation since the question goes deeper and there's a lot of factors that need to be discussed. But these actions were done by Israeli military and decided by Israeli politicians. Should we not question it? Shouldn't all Israelis question why their gouvernment goes against international law?
You have already came to a conclusion then what use is it to discuss it further (theres a huge point here)? With that I have stated that the situation is a messy one. Shouldn't everyone question why Hamas targets civilians (another point)?
One muzzle flash and its described as several? Which when it did flash it looked to be over the rail. Even the Aurthur of the article says he won't vouch for it being a specific person. This video is hardly a smoking gun, the only evidence it really shows is Israel soldiers hitting something, wither this was an actual shooting or a specific person or a person in general the video doesn't give much to go on. Notice that they where beating something in the opposite direction of when the soldier took a shot?
On June 09 2010 13:02 Klaz wrote:
I have no problem taking what they show as having some credibility. The issue is with how you seem to be interpreting to arrive at conclusions that they DON'T show.
On June 10 2010 19:56 Klaz wrote:
The fact that it has been edited means EVERYTHING. Without context it has no value.
To you, LIKE I've stated several times already. Didn't we just argue about forming opinion?
Now.... two possible explanations have been provided for this video.
Israeli version: The soldiers were attacked without provocation by protesters intent on causing an incident.
Flotilla version: The soldiers had already shot and killed at least one person on the boat and considering the IDF's reputation in this matter people felt they had to defend themselves.
I haven't read any "eye witness" reports about them shooting and killing first. Only reports about tear gas, plastic bullets, tazers, and beatings. Which (without the beating part to an extent) is actually normal moves to take over a rouge ship. They where TOLD not to break the blockade Israel wasn't going to set by and say "ok where just going to keep screaming at you while you go by"...
One of the above is the statement of an organisation with a track record for killing innocent civilians and in fact committing war crimes and then LYING about it. AND They also confiscated all the possible evidence that would prove ONE WAY or the other, what the truth REALLY is, and REFUSE to release this to any independent authority.
They didn't confiscate all the evidence like you claim. What about the video you just posted? What about those photos? I also want you to say Hamas commits war crimes, and by admitting that you will see that this is NOT just a Israel problem. So klaz, didn't you say people are innocent until proven guilty? Why don't you apply the same concept to Israel?
Of course there is no surprise that they are holding on to the flotilla videos because they will provide without doubt the incontroveritble evidence of their crimes. If the videos exonerated the Israeli action, I'm sure they would have been released in full by now.
Theorizing, so it remains opinionated (which pretty much means it's really moot to keep arguing viewpoints)
On June 09 2010 13:02 Klaz wrote:
If you expect me to respond to your wild theorising then you shouldn't dismiss off hand the conclusions I'm coming to.
Big post again, so lets see If I'm missing anything.
I can't recall which exact page number from this discussion it's on but it was on Teamliquid, an English source.
You do realize the burden of proof is on you? If its in this thread find it. I do realize that to prove a point you need proof so for now you'll have to trust or not trust my word since I won't read through the whole thread. I know for myself that I'm not lying, that's enough for me but if more people than one want's to find the source I might look through it. But if you also realize the burden of proof you're welcome to look for the evidence of it if you want to read about it!
All cameras and laptops were taken from at least the swedish people on the ships by the Israelis and they were not returned. A Israeli soldier even stole a sock from a swedish author for some reason.
All the camera material from the ship was taken under Israeli control. They can edit and do what ever they want with this. So in a propaganda war where only one side has gotten their chance to show their perspective we can not know what is truthful and what is not. I would have said the exact same thing if only the activists perspective were shown.
Ummm, there are pictures that where smuggled out, that I posted!
I take it that you agree on everything I mention in what you quoted here.
What we need to wait for is an objective investigation.
Then why are not taking your own advice? If everybody discussing this would do the same there I wouldn't start this discussion. But this argument started with me disagreeing with the posting of a video edited by israel. Should I stand by and say nothing when Israel are editing the only major sources we have on what happened? In my opinion they should also wait for a objective investigation instead of putting videos on the net after editing them. Do you disagree?
I can keep on doing this for a long time, if you have any criticism to add to this discussion please do but you won't stand a chance.
I don't believe I have ever had someone be so blatant offensive about a difference in opinion. Don't make a comment like that again it won't help you. It was indeed harsh but In my opinion we're not discussing something that is a question open for different opinions between two persons who understand the modern concept of democracy and the need for international law. This is indeed blatant once again but do you disagree with my whole point? Should we rely on only one subjective side of the situation?
Here's an interesting perspective on the whole situation.
That's a keyword. With that said, kidnapping is such a stretch, The caption wanted to break the blockade, Israel wanted to stop him. Where were those foreigners supposed to go? I do believe that it is debated wither or not it was illegal depending on what document you use.
I'm not sure what your're trying to say about my point here. Yes perspective is a keyword that's why I used it as a keyword...
If your'e questioning my definition of kidnapping please give your own definition of it instead of just calling it a stretch.
Boarding a ship, beating the captain, taking people on it as hostage, taking control of the ship. Wether it was right or not doesn't change what it is.
I don't stand by this as a good explanation since the question goes deeper and there's a lot of factors that need to be discussed. But these actions were done by Israeli military and decided by Israeli politicians. Should we not question it? Shouldn't all Israelis question why their gouvernment goes against international law?
You have already came to a conclusion then what use is it to discuss it further (theres a huge point here)? With that I have stated that the situation is a messy one. Shouldn't everyone question why Hamas targets civilians (another point)? Well I usually want to discuss things after I've come to a conclusion. How do you do it?
What does stating the situation to be a messy one change?
We all should question why Hamas target civilians. We all should question why Israel targets civilians. Your point is probably that we should question both sides and perhaps I wasn't clear on that in my post. Well yes we should!
So here's the questions and main points of my post that you for some reason didn't respond to. Here's a second chance!
Main points:
Do you agree that the material the media have right now is onesided and that there's a risk that Israel might "wash" the evidence so it fits the way they want the rest of the world to understand the situation?
Do you agree that a objective U.N lead investigation would be positive and lead closer to the truth than a purely Israeli one?
Extra questions for your pleasure:
Do you question Israels actions of boarding a ship on international water?
Do you question that they stole material from people on the ships?
What will it take in your opinion to make Israels actions to be considered faulty in this situation?
Edit: Klaz I left your questions for you to answer=)
I do realize that to prove a point you need proof so for now you'll have to trust or not trust my word since I won't read through the whole thread. I know for myself that I'm not lying, that's enough for me but if more people than one want's to find the source I might look through it. But if you also realize the burden of proof you're welcome to look for the evidence of it if you want to read about it!
No I'm not going to trust you. You don't make an accusation then tell the other party to "go look it up". You would be laughed out of court for something like that. YOU don't get a free pass, either provide the evidence or relinquish the point, those really are your only two options.
I take it that you agree on everything I mention in what you quoted here.
What!? How did you come to that conclusion? You proposed that Israel took everything, I provided evidence that they did not. In regards to the pictures you should actually look and see what they show before you make any more points on that subject.
If everybody discussing this would do the same there I wouldn't start this discussion. But this argument started with me disagreeing with the posting of a video edited by israel. Should I stand by and say nothing when Israel are editing the only major sources we have on what happened? In my opinion they should also wait for a objective investigation instead of putting videos on the net after editing them. Do you disagree?
I didn't ask that. Between you and me right now, it isn't about what EVERYONE else is doing. You are not waiting for a objective investigation. You already came to the conclusion that Israel is completely guilty with no regard for some of the contrary evidence. Again this question was NOT about everyone but YOU who said we should wait for a objective investigation.
It was indeed harsh but In my opinion we're not discussing something that is a question open for different opinions between two persons who understand the modern concept of democracy and the need for international law. This is indeed blatant once again but do you disagree with my whole point? Should we rely on only one subjective side of the situation?
Wait, in your opinion where not discussing something that's open for different opinions? Why doesn't that fit? Anyways all that comment said" my opinion automatically invalidates yours because for some reason I'm special". Why say something so blatant just to ruffle someone else? The point is YOU are the one on the podium, and you're not taking your own advice.
I'm not sure what your're trying to say about my point here. Yes perspective is a keyword that's why I used it as a keyword...
If your'e questioning my definition of kidnapping please give your own definition of it instead of just calling it a stretch.
Boarding a ship, beating the captain, taking people on it as hostage, taking control of the ship. Wether it was right or not doesn't change what it is.
Because my perspective makes it a moot point to argue. You like a painting, I hate it. You say tomato I say tomatoe.
Heres one to replace kidnapping with, detaining.
That wasn't what your originally said. You questioned wither it was legal or not. Interesting response, I take it you ignore what I wrote about you saying we shouldn't form opinions yet (also interesting you would change the words up a little to still try to get that across)?
Well I usually want to discuss things after I've come to a conclusion. How do you do it?
What does stating the situation to be a messy one change?
We all should question why Hamas target civilians. We all should question why Israel targets civilians. Your point is probably that we should question both sides and perhaps I wasn't clear on that in my post. Well yes we should!
Well first off I wouldn't put myself on a pedestal with comments like everyone should wait to form a opinion, and then state a conclusion myself.
Well stating that it was a messy situation should let you know I acknowledge things when wrong with it, and by the very definition of messy it should tell you that nasty things happen.
That was kinda the point of that, but the full thing, this is more of a issue with the Meddle East in general. Point is the Everyone (countries) in the middle east has some hand in the bloodshed that keeps going.
"Do you agree on that the material the media have right now is onesided and that there's a risk that Israel might "wash" the evidence so it fits the way they want the rest of the world to understand the situation?"
Do you want a yes or no from me, gotcha moment at it's finest? I have pointed out that some pictures that are out ARE NOT form a Israeli point of view, actually they are from one of the flotilla passengers. WHICH does not go well with a peaceful flotilla. yeah like the rest of the world going to take Israels word for it. I don't really consider the material coming form Israel to be all that problematic. Why because not everything is out yet, and my opinion is not completely formed it.
I do not think an U.N. lead investigation would help. I would remind you that the UN itself is less then truthful about a lot of things and have problems of their own to worry about (at most the UN just doesn't help, but gets in the way). You do realize that it is not a purely Israeli lead investigation?
Do you question Israels actions of boarding a ship on international water?
Really doesn't matter, it all depends on the documents used and this has already been discussed in this thread.
Do you question that they stole material from people on the ships?
Are you talking about the cargo or personal belongings? I wouldn't say if you where breaking a blockade that you would get to keep anything that you intended to take into a country with you. In honestly this simply is not on my high list on this thread to find out, so if someone has a link to the actual law on that subject I'll take a look at it.
What will it take in your opinion to make Israels actions to be considered faulty in this situation?
Such a blatant loaded question. If you really haven't been paying attention, evidence. eye witnesses are pretty much at the bottom of being evidence before you provide any. Oh some of their actions where faulty, hence why I used "messy" situation.
Should be everything, just post If I messed anything.
On June 09 2010 06:04 Romantic wrote: This thread is now about how long it will take the simple majority of humanity to realize meeting violence with violence only escalates violent problems.
Never
Or rather that sometimes violence is necessary. Or how do you think the Nazis were supposed to be stopped?
There is justifiable violence but it is the exception. At least the US military of all things has finally realized this after 9 years of counter insurgency.
And yes, if you begin looking at history in 1939 or even 1933 it looks hard to stop Nazism without violence.
Well its hard when the Wall Street "elite" funded Nazism from its inception and funded the rise of Hitler and his war efforts. But hey, the victors right history so that will forever be labled a "conspiracy theory". Do some research on the Rothschild, Morgans, Fords, etc involvement in Nazism and other major world events.
On June 09 2010 06:04 Romantic wrote: This thread is now about how long it will take the simple majority of humanity to realize meeting violence with violence only escalates violent problems.
Never
Or rather that sometimes violence is necessary. Or how do you think the Nazis were supposed to be stopped?
There is justifiable violence but it is the exception. At least the US military of all things has finally realized this after 9 years of counter insurgency.
And yes, if you begin looking at history in 1939 or even 1933 it looks hard to stop Nazism without violence.
Well its hard when the Wall Street "elite" funded Nazism from its inception and funded the rise of Hitler and his war efforts. But hey, the victors right history so that will forever be labled a "conspiracy theory". Do some research on the Rothschild, Morgans, Fords, etc involvement in Nazism and other major world events.
I must add to that, that during the rise of the nazism, a big part of the left wing/jew decided to flee instead of fighting politically, and some said that it was because of that the shit happen (victor klemperer for exemple). In France, everybody agree that the facism did not rise because of the power of the communism who gave an alternativ ideology. Back to the arabic muslim extremist: You CANNOT understand the rise of radical islamism without considering how the occidentals, during the cold war (and after), tried so hard to bring down the revolutionnary & communist factions that were so important in the arabic world (in afghanistan for exemple with the colonnel Massoud). So all the shit that happen today is, as always, the result of the idiotic politics of the occidentals.
I do realize that to prove a point you need proof so for now you'll have to trust or not trust my word since I won't read through the whole thread. I know for myself that I'm not lying, that's enough for me but if more people than one want's to find the source I might look through it. But if you also realize the burden of proof you're welcome to look for the evidence of it if you want to read about it!
No I'm not going to trust you. You don't make an accusation then tell the other party to "go look it up". You would be laughed out of court for something like that. YOU don't get a free pass, either provide the evidence or relinquish the point, those really are your only two options.
I take it that you agree on everything I mention in what you quoted here.
What!? How did you come to that conclusion? You proposed that Israel took everything, I provided evidence that they did not. In regards to the pictures you should actually look and see what they show before you make any more points on that subject.
If everybody discussing this would do the same there I wouldn't start this discussion. But this argument started with me disagreeing with the posting of a video edited by israel. Should I stand by and say nothing when Israel are editing the only major sources we have on what happened? In my opinion they should also wait for a objective investigation instead of putting videos on the net after editing them. Do you disagree?
I didn't ask that. Between you and me right now, it isn't about what EVERYONE else is doing. You are not waiting for a objective investigation. You already came to the conclusion that Israel is completely guilty with no regard for some of the contrary evidence. Again this question was NOT about everyone but YOU who said we should wait for a objective investigation.
It was indeed harsh but In my opinion we're not discussing something that is a question open for different opinions between two persons who understand the modern concept of democracy and the need for international law. This is indeed blatant once again but do you disagree with my whole point? Should we rely on only one subjective side of the situation?
Wait, in your opinion where not discussing something that's open for different opinions? Why doesn't that fit? Anyways all that comment said" my opinion automatically invalidates yours because for some reason I'm special". Why say something so blatant just to ruffle someone else? The point is YOU are the one on the podium, and you're not taking your own advice.
I'm not sure what your're trying to say about my point here. Yes perspective is a keyword that's why I used it as a keyword...
If your'e questioning my definition of kidnapping please give your own definition of it instead of just calling it a stretch.
Boarding a ship, beating the captain, taking people on it as hostage, taking control of the ship. Wether it was right or not doesn't change what it is.
Because my perspective makes it a moot point to argue. You like a painting, I hate it. You say tomato I say tomatoe.
Heres one to replace kidnapping with, detaining.
That wasn't what your originally said. You questioned wither it was legal or not. Interesting response, I take it you ignore what I wrote about you saying we shouldn't form opinions yet (also interesting you would change the words up a little to still try to get that across)?
Well I usually want to discuss things after I've come to a conclusion. How do you do it?
What does stating the situation to be a messy one change?
We all should question why Hamas target civilians. We all should question why Israel targets civilians. Your point is probably that we should question both sides and perhaps I wasn't clear on that in my post. Well yes we should!
Well first off I wouldn't put myself on a pedestal with comments like everyone should wait to form a opinion, and then state a conclusion myself.
Well stating that it was a messy situation should let you know I acknowledge things when wrong with it, and by the very definition of messy it should tell you that nasty things happen.
That was kinda the point of that, but the full thing, this is more of a issue with the Meddle East in general. Point is the Everyone (countries) in the middle east has some hand in the bloodshed that keeps going.
"Do you agree on that the material the media have right now is onesided and that there's a risk that Israel might "wash" the evidence so it fits the way they want the rest of the world to understand the situation?"
Do you want a yes or no from me, gotcha moment at it's finest? I have pointed out that some pictures that are out ARE NOT form a Israeli point of view, actually they are from one of the flotilla passengers. WHICH does not go well with a peaceful flotilla. yeah like the rest of the world going to take Israels word for it. I don't really consider the material coming form Israel to be all that problematic. Why because not everything is out yet, and my opinion is not completely formed it.
I do not think an U.N. lead investigation would help. I would remind you that the UN itself is less then truthful about a lot of things and have problems of their own to worry about (at most the UN just doesn't help, but gets in the way). You do realize that it is not a purely Israeli lead investigation?
Do you question that they stole material from people on the ships?
Are you talking about the cargo or personal belongings? I wouldn't say if you where breaking a blockade that you would get to keep anything that you intended to take into a country with you. In honestly this simply is not on my high list on this thread to find out, so if someone has a link to the actual law on that subject I'll take a look at it.
What will it take in your opinion to make Israels actions to be considered faulty in this situation?
Such a blatant loaded question. If you really haven't been paying attention, evidence. eye witnesses are pretty much at the bottom of being evidence before you provide any. Oh some of their actions where faulty, hence why I used "messy" situation.
Should be everything, just post If I messed anything.
Just going to reply in general to what I've read you post. First, just to let you know it is my opinion that the flotilla was a planned PR event to trigger an Exodus (1950s) type event, and Israel was silly and fell for it, and is now engaged in PR recovery. So I'm at least not very biased toward either side.
A few statements which you seem to dispute 1) Israel made an active attempt to confiscate material witness evidence from the ship 2) There were quite a few people on the ship who recalled being fired upon before the boarding; some people in this thread contemplated that perhaps they were just warning shots which were misinterpreted by the ship members 3) A 2 minute edit of an event which spanned hours is sufficient evidence for us to derive conclusions, when the entire event lasted hours and the most important part - the events which led up to the boarding, are completely left out.
There is also my opinion wherein you state that the legality of the boarding is debatable depending on which document you decide to interpret: however, if we consider the document which the Israelis find most relevant, the 1994 San Remo manual, then the only binary relationship in which the boarding is legal is between Israel and the United States (I think the US is the only country which recognizes the blockade as legal). Could be wrong in that regard. At any rate, in my opinion what is important is not so much the legality of the event, but rather the fact that it happened. This \was amazingly stupid, to do this in international waters. Completely terrible PR. I wonder what will happen next, as the current leadership is feeling somewhat trigger happy so to speak.
On another note, anyone have recommended readings (books, articles, etc) on the whole history of the Israel-Palestinian conflict and any relevant side topics (for example, the sudden industry of American support for Israel only AFTER the 1967 war), both in terms of history and legal arguments?
I do realize that to prove a point you need proof so for now you'll have to trust or not trust my word since I won't read through the whole thread. I know for myself that I'm not lying, that's enough for me but if more people than one want's to find the source I might look through it. But if you also realize the burden of proof you're welcome to look for the evidence of it if you want to read about it!
No I'm not going to trust you. You don't make an accusation then tell the other party to "go look it up". You would be laughed out of court for something like that. YOU don't get a free pass, either provide the evidence or relinquish the point, those really are your only two options.
I take it that you agree on everything I mention in what you quoted here.
What!? How did you come to that conclusion? You proposed that Israel took everything, I provided evidence that they did not. In regards to the pictures you should actually look and see what they show before you make any more points on that subject.
If everybody discussing this would do the same there I wouldn't start this discussion. But this argument started with me disagreeing with the posting of a video edited by israel. Should I stand by and say nothing when Israel are editing the only major sources we have on what happened? In my opinion they should also wait for a objective investigation instead of putting videos on the net after editing them. Do you disagree?
I didn't ask that. Between you and me right now, it isn't about what EVERYONE else is doing. You are not waiting for a objective investigation. You already came to the conclusion that Israel is completely guilty with no regard for some of the contrary evidence. Again this question was NOT about everyone but YOU who said we should wait for a objective investigation.
It was indeed harsh but In my opinion we're not discussing something that is a question open for different opinions between two persons who understand the modern concept of democracy and the need for international law. This is indeed blatant once again but do you disagree with my whole point? Should we rely on only one subjective side of the situation?
Wait, in your opinion where not discussing something that's open for different opinions? Why doesn't that fit? Anyways all that comment said" my opinion automatically invalidates yours because for some reason I'm special". Why say something so blatant just to ruffle someone else? The point is YOU are the one on the podium, and you're not taking your own advice.
I'm not sure what your're trying to say about my point here. Yes perspective is a keyword that's why I used it as a keyword...
If your'e questioning my definition of kidnapping please give your own definition of it instead of just calling it a stretch.
Boarding a ship, beating the captain, taking people on it as hostage, taking control of the ship. Wether it was right or not doesn't change what it is.
Because my perspective makes it a moot point to argue. You like a painting, I hate it. You say tomato I say tomatoe.
Heres one to replace kidnapping with, detaining.
That wasn't what your originally said. You questioned wither it was legal or not. Interesting response, I take it you ignore what I wrote about you saying we shouldn't form opinions yet (also interesting you would change the words up a little to still try to get that across)?
Well I usually want to discuss things after I've come to a conclusion. How do you do it?
What does stating the situation to be a messy one change?
We all should question why Hamas target civilians. We all should question why Israel targets civilians. Your point is probably that we should question both sides and perhaps I wasn't clear on that in my post. Well yes we should!
Well first off I wouldn't put myself on a pedestal with comments like everyone should wait to form a opinion, and then state a conclusion myself.
Well stating that it was a messy situation should let you know I acknowledge things when wrong with it, and by the very definition of messy it should tell you that nasty things happen.
That was kinda the point of that, but the full thing, this is more of a issue with the Meddle East in general. Point is the Everyone (countries) in the middle east has some hand in the bloodshed that keeps going.
"Do you agree on that the material the media have right now is onesided and that there's a risk that Israel might "wash" the evidence so it fits the way they want the rest of the world to understand the situation?"
Do you want a yes or no from me, gotcha moment at it's finest? I have pointed out that some pictures that are out ARE NOT form a Israeli point of view, actually they are from one of the flotilla passengers. WHICH does not go well with a peaceful flotilla. yeah like the rest of the world going to take Israels word for it. I don't really consider the material coming form Israel to be all that problematic. Why because not everything is out yet, and my opinion is not completely formed it.
I do not think an U.N. lead investigation would help. I would remind you that the UN itself is less then truthful about a lot of things and have problems of their own to worry about (at most the UN just doesn't help, but gets in the way). You do realize that it is not a purely Israeli lead investigation?
Do you question Israels actions of boarding a ship on international water?
Really doesn't matter, it all depends on the documents used and this has already been discussed in this thread.
Do you question that they stole material from people on the ships?
Are you talking about the cargo or personal belongings? I wouldn't say if you where breaking a blockade that you would get to keep anything that you intended to take into a country with you. In honestly this simply is not on my high list on this thread to find out, so if someone has a link to the actual law on that subject I'll take a look at it.
What will it take in your opinion to make Israels actions to be considered faulty in this situation?
Such a blatant loaded question. If you really haven't been paying attention, evidence. eye witnesses are pretty much at the bottom of being evidence before you provide any. Oh some of their actions where faulty, hence why I used "messy" situation.
Should be everything, just post If I messed anything.
Just going to reply in general to what I've read you post. First, just to let you know it is my opinion that the flotilla was a planned PR event to trigger an Exodus (1950s) type event, and Israel was silly and fell for it, and is now engaged in PR recovery. So I'm at least not very biased toward either side.
A few statements which you seem to dispute 1) Israel made an active attempt to confiscate material witness evidence from the ship 2) There were quite a few people on the ship who recalled being fired upon before the boarding; some people in this thread contemplated that perhaps they were just warning shots which were misinterpreted by the ship members 3) A 2 minute edit of an event which spanned hours is sufficient evidence for us to derive conclusions, when the entire event lasted hours and the most important part - the events which led up to the boarding, are completely left out.
There is also my opinion wherein you state that the legality of the boarding is debatable depending on which document you decide to interpret: however, if we consider the document which the Israelis find most relevant, the 1994 San Remo manual, then the only binary relationship in which the boarding is legal is between Israel and the United States (I think the US is the only country which recognizes the blockade as legal). Could be wrong in that regard. At any rate, in my opinion what is important is not so much the legality of the event, but rather the fact that it happened. This \was amazingly stupid, to do this in international waters. Completely terrible PR. I wonder what will happen next, as the current leadership is feeling somewhat trigger happy so to speak.
On another note, anyone have recommended readings (books, articles, etc) on the whole history of the Israel-Palestinian conflict and any relevant side topics (for example, the sudden industry of American support for Israel only AFTER the 1967 war), both in terms of history and legal arguments?
EPT
