News: Israel Attacks Gazan Aid Flotilla - Page 67

On June 11 2010 18:22 Spenguin wrote:
What chemical weapons on the flotilla? crazy

Anyway, as far as I can tell, no one mentioned that the Hamas refused to accept the aid which was on the flotilla

On June 11 2010 18:25 Doix wrote:


Not on the flotilla, but Israel did use them in the past. OldSkuLL made reference to it. I guess we kind of got slightly off topic here. My apologies.

On June 11 2010 17:57 OldSkuLL wrote:


It is clear that you dont have any idea on what happens in Gazze.
Israel has killed so many children. And they did this as a purpose. They believe some day these kids will grow up and try to take revenge.
I know they used chemical weapons on kids when they were playing at the beach.
The only reason that they didnt kill all the people at the ship is the power of Turkey.

On June 10 2010 22:49 angelicfolly wrote:


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.

Hah where did the court come from? We're discussing on a internet forum!
I'm sorry if I accused you but could you please explain where I did so?
I'll simply respond by copy pasting my first line
"I do realize that to prove a point you need proof so for now you'll have to trust or not trust my word".
To explain it further since the message didn't come through to you.
I do realize that proof is needed therefore my point is invalid unless you believe I'm not lying.



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.

I came to that conclusion since you didn't respond to my point, only added that there's pictures outsmuggled. I thought that you meant that since they had to smuggle out pictures, the rest were taken, that my point of only one sides perspective being shown was clear.

And if you reread my post you will see that I didn't at any point mention Israel taking everything.
I spoke specifically the swedish citizens on the boat. Even though they did take all footage material. But really? Is your counterargument to my point of israeli soldiers stealing all camera footage that a few pictures were outsmugglde? Really? Should I excuse myself for not knowing that the Israeli military failed to steal all that material? My point stands, from what you mentioned about smuggled pictures you're not disagreeing. If your're not disagreeing perhaps you're agreeing?

Sorry about making theories but since you didn't touch upon my point and I want an answer I need to try finding it myslef from your post

About the pictures; Had you added them in the post instead of pointing out that they exist somewhere in this 65page thread I would have looked at them.
Though I have seen pictures taken by turkish citizens on the ship.
But is your point that these are supposed to make Israels videos legitimate and objective?
Even if there was a balance of quantity of material from both sides in this conflict My point stands. An objective investigation can and should provide more truthful proof than two sides subjective perspective.




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.

Hmm my first sentence there was supposed to be
"If everybody stopped discussing this I would do the same"
Anyway perhaps it was unclear in my post so you feel it wasn't answered.
I'll try again.
I want people to stop posting a video which is edited by the Israeli side. This is but only a wish of mine and I have no control over you but at least I can try arguing about it.
My reason for this is that when the material out there is presented as evidence people will take it as evidence. But a critical mind such as yours or mine can understand that an edited video might hide something, therefore shouldn't be posted as evidence.

In short. I don't want a edited 2min video to be seen as evidence when there's tons of footage to choose from but it's been stolen by one side of the conflict. Especially as the boarding took over a couple of hours.
Israel has posted edited material as evidence.
My theoretical principal of waiting for a objective investigation has been broken, therefore it's just to criticize the edited material.



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.

Here's my question on this quote:
"but do you disagree with my whole point? Should we rely on only one subjective side of the situation?"
Here's your answer:
"The point is YOU are the one on the podium, and you're not taking your own advice. "

I completely agree with you on that no one should puthimself on a piedestal in a discussion.
But also. If you agree with me on the issue I discussed , which you didn't answer, perhaps there is no piedestal.
So once again what do you think?
Should we rely on only one sides perspective in a conflict of interest?



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)?

This perspective of mine which you feel is hard to discuss with is one respecting and following international law.
Detaining could be used if you dissapprove of international law.

If you wonder why I discussed kidnapping it's because you questioned it.
On the discussion of wether it was right or wrong according to international I'd like to see the counterarguments against it being a crime. As we discussed earlier. Proof is needed to back up arguments.




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.
Messy=in a disorderly state; causing mess or confusion; chaotic; disorderly

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.

There's a lot of people on this piedestal your'e speaking of. Amongst them the Israeli gouvernment etc.

"Point is the Everyone (countries) in the middle east has some hand in the bloodshed that keeps going. "
"We all should question why Hamas target civilians.
We all should question why Israel targets civilians."
We agree on something!
But does this lead to another agreement, that is the one we're discussing here.
We both think all sides should be questioned. Perhaps that means you also think we shouldn't rely on one sides prough only? If you agree with me on that then perhaps you'd stand by the U.N proposal of a New Zealand lead objective investigation?

"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?

I'm glad that your opinion isn't completely formed yet. Mine isn't either but the problem is that it's completely formed among a lot of people and a part of this belongs to the video this whole discussion is about.

I'd like to dismantle your whole argument on this as well.

About the pictures that were smuggled out as you mentioned earlier. This was discussed above, if you have something to disagree with on my answer please post it!
"The pictures don't go well with a peaceful flotilla." No they don't. Israeli soldiers who boarded a ship on international water( which gives the people on the ship a right to defend themselves) were bleeding from stab wounds.
But does that change anything about my whole point? I'm not discussing how peaceful the flotilla was but how a onesided contribution to the worlds media brings a risk of footage manipulation. This is what my first post dealt with, what you should be answering.

You complain about me claiming your'e not answering my questions. Read my question and then your answer. Did you really answer it? (Hint It was a yes or no question)



Really doesn't matter, it all depends on the documents used and this has already been discussed in this thread.

You brought us into the part of how proof is needed to make a point valid.
Bring me your proof and I'll gladly read it.



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.

You need to see the document on wether it's legal or illegal to steal peoples private property on international water?
(not sure if the stealing took place on Israeli ground or not though.
But stealing is always stealing. Doesn't the Bible say something about that?
Though shall not steal?
Doesn't Israeli law prevent stealing?)



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.

Warning:
This part deals with the human being while in debate and doesnot relate to the main subject.
Read at your own risk.
+ Show Spoiler +

On June 11 2010 18:42 Kazius wrote:

I'm Israeli, and allow me to be the first to burst your bubble. We don't give a rats ass about "the power of Turkey", since we have "the power of the US", which is bigger. Okay? No chemical weapons have been used by the Israeli military excluding phosphorous, rarely, IN WARS, never in Gaza or the West Bank, unless you count tear gas as "chemical weapons". Israel DO NOT FIRE ON KIDS ON PURPOSE, as that would just be stupid. Are you saying Israel is a clever, ruthless conqueror who knows how to twist the media and the world around it's finger, but is actually stupid?

It's sad that you believe this. I'm not even angry at crap like this anymore. I'm just kind of depressed about it and try to change it, while knowing it's futile.

On June 11 2010 20:32 Klaz wrote:
So no, Israel never executes innocent children, they don't use banned chemical weapons in Gaza and they most definitely don't lie about it and try to cover up the truth.

On June 11 2010 21:06 Doix wrote:


The point I was trying to make is that killing Palestinians (incl children) isn't their goal. I wonder how many times soldiers passed children without shooting them. I doubt many people know all the factors which led up to what happened. Probably some shitty army bureaucracy and someone somewhere higher up told them to kill anyone that enters the zone, the commander decides to follow it to the letter. Maybe the commander once lost fellow soldiers to a child suicide bomber and just lost control at that point and wanted revenge. Maybe the commander was just a jackass...

Now don't get me wrong, I'm not justifying what they did, I'm just trying to say you can't just judge this stuff based on isolated incidents which help prove your point. It's not like the main headlines will be "Israel Soldiers pass by children and don't shoot them" so it is pretty difficult to find sources showing the army restraining.

I was going to stop debating with you since we seem to think so fundamentally different from eachother about the situation and that made us leave the subject (IMO you not answering my questions but it could be me not answering as well). The biggest difference that makes it difficult seem to be that you don't consider international law as something to follow.

Hah where did the court come from? We're discussing on a internet forum!
I'm sorry if I accused you but could you please explain where I did so?
I'll simply respond by copy pasting my first line
"I do realize that to prove a point you need proof so for now you'll have to trust or not trust my word".
To explain it further since the message didn't come through to you.
I do realize that proof is needed therefore my point is invalid unless you believe I'm not lying.

I came to that conclusion since you didn't respond to my point, only added that there's pictures outsmuggled. I thought that you meant that since they had to smuggle out pictures, the rest were taken, that my point of only one sides perspective being shown was clear.

And if you reread my post you will see that I didn't at any point mention Israel taking everything.I spoke specifically the swedish citizens on the boat. Even though they did take all footage material. But really? Is your counterargument to my point of israeli soldiers stealing all camera footage that a few pictures were outsmugglde? Really? Should I excuse myself for not knowing that the Israeli military failed to steal all that material? My point stands, from what you mentioned about smuggled pictures you're not disagreeing. If your're not disagreeing perhaps you're agreeing?

About the pictures; Had you added them in the post instead of pointing out that they exist somewhere in this 65page thread I would have looked at them.
Though I have seen pictures taken by turkish citizens on the ship.
But is your point that these are supposed to make Israels videos legitimate and objective?
Even if there was a balance of quantity of material from both sides in this conflict My point stands. An objective investigation can and should provide more truthful proof than two sides subjective perspective.

Hmm my first sentence there was supposed to be
"If everybody stopped discussing this I would do the same"
Anyway perhaps it was unclear in my post so you feel it wasn't answered.
I'll try again.
I want people to stop posting a video which is edited by the Israeli side. This is but only a wish of mine and I have no control over you but at least I can try arguing about it.
My reason for this is that when the material out there is presented as evidence people will take it as evidence. But a critical mind such as yours or mine can understand that an edited video might hide something, therefore shouldn't be posted as evidence.

In short. I don't want a edited 2min video to be seen as evidence when there's tons of footage to choose from but it's been stolen by one side of the conflict. Especially as the boarding took over a couple of hours.
Israel has posted edited material as evidence.
My theoretical principal of waiting for a objective investigation has been broken, therefore it's just to criticize the edited material.

I completely agree with you on that no one should puthimself on a piedestal in a discussion.
But also. If you agree with me on the issue I discussed , which you didn't answer, perhaps there is no piedestal.
So once again what do you think?
Should we rely on only one sides perspective in a conflict of interest?

This perspective of mine which you feel is hard to discuss with is one respecting and following international law.
Detaining could be used if you dissapprove of international law.

If you wonder why I discussed kidnapping it's because you questioned it.
On the discussion of wether it was right or wrong according to international I'd like to see the counterarguments against it being a crime. As we discussed earlier. Proof is needed to back up arguments.

Messy=in a disorderly state; causing mess or confusion; chaotic; disorderly

There's a lot of people on this piedestal your'e speaking of. Amongst them the Israeli gouvernment etc.

We agree on something!
But does this lead to another agreement, that is the one we're discussing here.
We both think all sides should be questioned. Perhaps that means you also think we shouldn't rely on one sides prough only? If you agree with me on that then perhaps you'd stand by the U.N proposal of a New Zealand lead objective investigation?

I'm glad that your opinion isn't completely formed yet. Mine isn't either but the problem is that it's completely formed among a lot of people and a part of this belongs to the video this whole discussion is about.

I'd like to dismantle your whole argument on this as well.

No they don't. Israeli soldiers who boarded a ship on international water( which gives the people on the ship a right to defend themselves) were bleeding from stab wounds.
But does that change anything about my whole point? I'm not discussing how peaceful the flotilla was but how a onesided contribution to the worlds media brings a risk of footage manipulation. This is what my first post dealt with, what you should be answering.

You complain about me claiming your'e not answering my questions. Read my question and then your answer. Did you really answer it? (Hint It was a yes or no question)

You brought us into the part of how proof is needed to make a point valid.
Bring me your proof and I'll gladly read it.

You need to see the document on wether it's legal or illegal to steal peoples private property on international water?
(not sure if the stealing took place on Israeli ground or not though.
But stealing is always stealing. Doesn't the Bible say something about that?
Though shall not steal?
Doesn't Israeli law prevent stealing?)

This part deals with the human being while in debate and doesnot relate to the main subject.
Read at your own risk.

On June 11 2010 21:26 Ao_Jun wrote:
If you are trying to catch someone in a lie, then i think you are taking it too literally, i think the point is that israel is not systematically trying to exterminate palestinian children, and is even trying to avoid civilian casualties, which is not disproven by an isolated inccident.

On June 11 2010 21:26 Ao_Jun wrote:
About the child killing accident:
I don't know what your point is, if it is that a man killing a child is wrong then you're right, but that is not nearly isolated to israel. If it's the lack of punishment then i think you have to consider that prosecuting a man following orders might be different from prosecuting a civilian..

If you are trying to catch someone in a lie, then i think you are taking it too literally, i think the point is that israel is not systematically trying to exterminate palestinian children, and is even trying to avoid civilian casualties, which is not disproven by an isolated inccident.

I think people are underestimating how hard it is to fight a war when your enemy is hidden among civilians.

Yet we have Israeli supporters here, telling us with a straight face that there is no need for an independent investigation into the killing of 9 civilians on a humanitarian vessel in international waters

On June 11 2010 22:49 Klaz wrote:


(As has been pointed out, I was refuting a very specific issue which BlackJack has to articulately conveyed)

The problem is that there is a pattern to these incidents.

1. Break international law/disregard civilian lives/stamp out freedom of the press by killing reporters and destroying their equipment

2. Make claims to justify actions. Claims that range from outright denial to inevitably some from of blame the victim.

3. When claim is shown to be an obvious falsehood simply make more claims.

4. Eventually hold an investigation without any independent scrutiny in which no one is held accountable and Israel takes no blame for its actions.

5. Rinse and repeat.

This happens every single time and has happened again in this flotilla incident. And until and unless the IDF is held to account for it's actions in a criminal court Israeli soldiers will continue to show flagrant disregard for human life.

Excuses might be made for why an Israeli Commander shot an killed a completely innocent 13 year old girl in cold blood. But excuses cannot be made as to why this individual was allowed to escape with what amounted to little more than a slap on the wrist. And it is the unwillingness of the Israeli government to hold itself or its military to accountable for any wrong doing that is most damning.

Or to put it another way, if a Hamas fighter had shot a 13 year old Israeli girl, and then walked up to her and executed her as she lay helpless on the ground. Would any Israeli citizen, OR those who defend the actions of the IDF time and time again accept that adequate punishment would be "illegal use of his weapon, conduct unbecoming an officer and other relatively minor infractions."?

Who was held to account for the use of White Phosphorous in Gaza? Who was held to account for shooting dead a British journalist? The list goes on.

In fact the ONLY time there was an independent investigation into the IDF's behaviour they were found guilty of war crimes.

Yet we have Israeli supporters here, telling us with a straight face that there is no need for an independent investigation into the killing of 9 civilians on a humanitarian vessel in international waters.

On June 11 2010 23:16 angelicfolly wrote:
Completely ignore what is posted then, you dropped the argument, you have no right to still make the same claims. It's interesting that you didn't deal with all that's been posted against the flotilla, but yet, haven't I? You want to still make those claims then DEAL with the evidence against them. But I guess because I'm a Fox News watcher you don't have to listen to me (sarcasm).

Straight face, same could be said about the flotilla, so lets not go there.

On June 11 2010 23:54 UdderChaos wrote:


I don't understand the double standard people seem to have when it comes to Israel. How many people have got away with literal murder in past wars? How many IRA terrorists who killed innocent civilians in cold blood were freed in the good Friday agreement, how many of the Nazi soldiers were held accountable for the worst genocide of a race in history? How many of the men who used white phosphorus on the US side in the war in Iraq were held accountable? how many of the Vietnam and Korean war crimes committed by the US were properly investigated and proper punishment given out? Who was held accountable for the Dresden bombings carried out by the allied forces? When was J. Robert Oppenheimer sentenced to death for creating the worst weapon of all time, and being responsible for the death of 250,000 Japanese?

The point is war is ugly, it's naive to think otherwise. Even the "good sides" in war commit atrocities. Finding one account of a child of 13 being killed in cold blood without much repercussion, as shocking as it is, doesn't prove anything. As war is pretty stupid and no side is totally good, both commit mass murder, all you can do is sympathize with one side more than the other, usually based upon mercy and intentions, and although the 13 year old girl incident doesn't seem merciful it's hardly genocide. Which side is worth sympathizing with is usually to do with what each individual perceives as "going too far", which is difficult to judge when murder in war is not considered "going to far", where do you draw the line? I think the key is in the reasons for the violence, for example the taliban's reason for starting a war, and then doing 9/11 isn't self defense, while world war 2 was the allies defending themselves, and Dresden was losing sight of what they were doing along the way, and venting emotional revenge and anger at the opponent. In the Israel Gaza situation i think it's less clear cut, we fucked up after world war 2 setting up Israel and basically kicking out the Palestinians, and it's not exactly the Israelites fault, as we offered something to them that we basically stole from someone else. Now you can argue all day about whether what i said is wrong and who's fault it is that the war started, and i could be wrong, i accept i don't fully understand the situation, but i can't help feeling sorry for Israel, as it does seem like certain people in surrounding countries basically want to kill all the Jews, and because of their religious fanaticism you can't tell them any different. I understand this isn't the only reason, i realize that Israel has provoked other countries around them, but there still is that element, that's why i feel like they are the most worthy of my sympathy in the whole situation. Well that's how i see it anyways.