The Massacre of the Gaza Aid Flotilla

Message boards : Politics : The Massacre of the Gaza Aid Flotilla
Message board moderation

To post messages, you must log in.

1 · 2 · 3 · 4 . . . 11 · Next

AuthorMessage
Matt Giwer
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 21 May 00
Posts: 841
Credit: 990,879
RAC: 0
United States
Message 999672 - Posted: 31 May 2010, 10:53:52 UTC - in response to Message 999652.  

Follow the aftermath from Israel's "we are innocent victims" point of view at the following link.

http://www.haaretz.com/


Unvarnished
Haaretz
Jerusalem Post
The origin of the Yahweh Cult
ID: 999672 · Report as offensive
Matt Giwer
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 21 May 00
Posts: 841
Credit: 990,879
RAC: 0
United States
Message 999880 - Posted: 2 Jun 2010, 6:27:03 UTC

A legal analysis of this action is relevant. The attack was not in Israeli territorial waters therefore Israel had no authority under any established law to board much less commandeer the ships.

This leaves two bodies of law which cover it. The first is it was an act of war against Turkey and a state of war can be declared to exist. Absent a state of war the murders and the hijacking were primarily to a Turkish flagged ship and therefore the law of Turkey applies to acts on board that ship. Thus Turkey can demand the extradition of all involved in the operation to stand trial in Turkey -- else a state of war can be declared to exist. Turkey will be in the right in this case.

Unvarnished
Haaretz
Jerusalem Post
The origin of the Yahweh Cult
ID: 999880 · Report as offensive
Profile Qui-Gon
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 15 May 99
Posts: 2940
Credit: 19,199,902
RAC: 11
United States
Message 1000037 - Posted: 2 Jun 2010, 16:49:40 UTC

What are your thoughts on the Cuban Missile Blockade? This is a rhetorical question, since it is clear your logic is flawed and your positions are worthless.

"Izziehuggers"? Really? Your use of that term only confirms the depths of your bias and thoughtlessness of your argument.
ID: 1000037 · Report as offensive
Matt Giwer
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 21 May 00
Posts: 841
Credit: 990,879
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1000163 - Posted: 3 Jun 2010, 0:37:24 UTC - in response to Message 1000037.  

What are your thoughts on the Cuban Missile Blockade? This is a rhetorical question, since it is clear your logic is flawed and your positions are worthless.


Are you claiming there are nuclear tipped ballistic missiles in Gaza? Are you claiming the US in fact prevented ships from docking in Cuba? Are you claiming the US determined which foods and spices Cuba was permitted to import? Are you claiming the US had the final authority on all Cuban imports and killed people to prevent ships from docking in Cuba?

If you are you might wish to participate in the soc.history,what-if newsgroup as you have quite an imagination. Your thoughts on alternate histories will be appreciated.

"Izziehuggers"? Really? Your use of that term only confirms the depths of your bias and thoughtlessness of your argument.


I am an American, a US citizen if you like. For me Israel is a foreign country.

Remember the Liberty!
http://www.ussliberty.org
Never forgive. Never forget.

For the record no one in any navy in the world can conceive of any way in which that attack was other than deliberate.

You might also note that despite repeated invitations Israel has refused to participate in live fire naval exercises when the US Navy is involved. Israel knows there is an accident waiting to happen.

Unvarnished
Haaretz
Jerusalem Post
The origin of the Yahweh Cult
ID: 1000163 · Report as offensive
Dena Wiltsie
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 19 Apr 01
Posts: 1628
Credit: 24,230,968
RAC: 26
United States
Message 1000202 - Posted: 3 Jun 2010, 3:34:02 UTC - in response to Message 1000163.  
Last modified: 3 Jun 2010, 3:43:04 UTC

What are your thoughts on the Cuban Missile Blockade? This is a rhetorical question, since it is clear your logic is flawed and your positions are worthless.


Are you claiming there are nuclear tipped ballistic missiles in Gaza? Are you claiming the US in fact prevented ships from docking in Cuba? Are you claiming the US determined which foods and spices Cuba was permitted to import? Are you claiming the US had the final authority on all Cuban imports and killed people to prevent ships from docking in Cuba?

If you are you might wish to participate in the soc.history,what-if newsgroup as you have quite an imagination. Your thoughts on alternate histories will be appreciated.

"Izziehuggers"? Really? Your use of that term only confirms the depths of your bias and thoughtlessness of your argument.


I am an American, a US citizen if you like. For me Israel is a foreign country.

Remember the Liberty!
http://www.ussliberty.org
Never forgive. Never forget.

For the record no one in any navy in the world can conceive of any way in which that attack was other than deliberate.

You might also note that despite repeated invitations Israel has refused to participate in live fire naval exercises when the US Navy is involved. Israel knows there is an accident waiting to happen.

I lived through the Cuban Missile Crisis and we did turn ships. We would have sunk them if they didn't. We almost went to war because a Russian sub loaded up an nuclear tipped torpedo and readied it for firing. We also let ships through because the only cargo we were interested in had to be loaded on the deck where we could inspect it by air. If the stuff on deck looked like a missile then we would need to inspect it.

I would go to bed at night not knowing if I would wake the next day. The public knew much of what was happening but some of the background information has taken years to come out because it did involve deal making that was suspected but couldn't be proven till the records were opened. A very good movie about this time period is Thirteen Days. I watched it for the first time about a month ago and it brought back many memories of the those two weeks.

The ships Israel stopped had several members of Terror groups on them and the plan is to get enough public coverage that Israel will have to drop the blockade and let arms carrying ships through. Those arms will be sent to Israel shortly after they reach port. It comes down to if Israel wants to survive, they have no other option than to continue doing what they are doing.
ID: 1000202 · Report as offensive
Profile Qui-Gon
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 15 May 99
Posts: 2940
Credit: 19,199,902
RAC: 11
United States
Message 1000204 - Posted: 3 Jun 2010, 3:40:22 UTC - in response to Message 1000163.  

The Cuban blockade was designed to prevent weapons from getting to Cuba. The United States had the right in international waters to stop and inspect any ship for weapons (nuclear or not) that was headed to Cuba. If American Marines or sailors had been attacked in the process they would've had the right to defend themselves with deadly force. The purpose of the Palestinian blockade is to prevent weapons from getting to Hamas, and is based on a history of offensive rockets being fired into Israel. This blockade is in defense of their country, just as the Cuban blockade was in our defense.

The Israelis offered this "humanitarian" flotilla the opportunity to dock in Israel and have their goods inspected, but this was rejected for no other reason but to cause a boarding by the Israeli military. Videos released by the Israelis show the Israeli military members, who were armed with baintball guns, being attacked by the "humanitarians" who used pipes or sticks and threw at least one sailor from an upper deck to a lower deck.

The purpose of the Israeli blockade is not to keep "foods and spices" out of Gaza, but to inspect the contents of all boats for the presence of prohibited weapons. By refusing the inspection offered by the Israelis (they boldly admited their intent was to "run" the blockade) they set themselves up to be stopped and boarded. Just as we would have done if Russian cargo ships headed to Cuba (yes they were cargo ships, not military vessles) had not turned back.

Your thoughts on this matter are clearly biased against the Israelis as shown by your arguments such as:

1) "Are you claiming the US had the final authority on all Cuban imports and killed people to prevent ships from docking in Cuba?" (Yes, the US could have stopped any ship to inspect what they were importing, but that does not equal final authority on Cuban imports. Nor does stopping a ship for inspection constitute final authority on all imports. During the Cuban blockade we were poised to use force if we had been met with force.)

2) "For the record no one in any navy in the world can conceive of any way in which that attack was other than deliberate." (No one who read the press releases and interviews of these activists could reasonably conclude that their intention was other than to be boarded in order to provoke an incident just like this. Unfortunately, their tactic cost the lives of nine of the 600 "humanitarians" who tried this blockade running stunt.)

3) "Your thoughts on alternate histories will be appreciated." (I know what I saw on the news, and I know what I heard "humanitarians" say in their interviews. Your alternative slant on what they have admitted to is laughable and exposes your bias once again.)
ID: 1000204 · Report as offensive
Profile skildude
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 4 Oct 00
Posts: 9541
Credit: 50,759,529
RAC: 60
Yemen
Message 1000205 - Posted: 3 Jun 2010, 3:41:48 UTC - in response to Message 1000202.  

the odd thing is that the flotilla needed only to head to the nearby israeli port to be inspected. Heck the Israelis allow compassionate goods through. they only ask that they be allowed to inspect the cargo to prevent additional weapons from reaching hamas. I dont think thats to much to ask


In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope
ID: 1000205 · Report as offensive
Dena Wiltsie
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 19 Apr 01
Posts: 1628
Credit: 24,230,968
RAC: 26
United States
Message 1000206 - Posted: 3 Jun 2010, 3:52:35 UTC - in response to Message 1000205.  

the odd thing is that the flotilla needed only to head to the nearby israeli port to be inspected. Heck the Israelis allow compassionate goods through. they only ask that they be allowed to inspect the cargo to prevent additional weapons from reaching hamas. I dont think thats to much to ask

If they didn't want to dock in Israel for inspection, they could have docked in Egypt and be inspected there. Many ships have already done so and Egypt wants to keep the arms out as much as Israel does.

Instead they wanted to avoid docking and break the blockade. They seem to know people pretty well because almost no public opinion backs Israel.
ID: 1000206 · Report as offensive
Fayvitt
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 29 Nov 09
Posts: 217
Credit: 1,190,636
RAC: 0
Australia
Message 1000208 - Posted: 3 Jun 2010, 3:59:22 UTC
Last modified: 3 Jun 2010, 4:00:33 UTC

U.N. Human Rights Chief: Israel's Blockade of Gaza Strip Is Illegal

What part of this is not understood?

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,539363,00.html

Why are you defending something that the UN and international community had deemed illegal?

There's why the UN has no teeth. A decision is made that you do not like, so you choose to conveniently ignore the ruling.]

Edit: Even worse, the UN can't intervene. The US vetoes it.
ID: 1000208 · Report as offensive
Dena Wiltsie
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 19 Apr 01
Posts: 1628
Credit: 24,230,968
RAC: 26
United States
Message 1000210 - Posted: 3 Jun 2010, 4:03:17 UTC - in response to Message 1000208.  

U.N. Human Rights Chief: Israel's Blockade of Gaza Strip Is Illegal

What part of this is not understood?

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,539363,00.html

Why are you defending something that the UN and international community had deemed illegal?

There's why the UN has no teeth. A decision is made that you do not like, so you choose to conveniently ignore the ruling.]

Edit: Even worse, the UN can't intervene. The US vetoes it.

I could tell you what I think of the U.N. but I don't want a time out for language.
ID: 1000210 · Report as offensive
Fayvitt
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 29 Nov 09
Posts: 217
Credit: 1,190,636
RAC: 0
Australia
Message 1000218 - Posted: 3 Jun 2010, 4:39:36 UTC

Of course you wouldn't like the UN, Dena.

It's where the rest of the world gets to speak freely, and be heard. And most of it is in disagreement with the US and Israel.
ID: 1000218 · Report as offensive
Dena Wiltsie
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 19 Apr 01
Posts: 1628
Credit: 24,230,968
RAC: 26
United States
Message 1000221 - Posted: 3 Jun 2010, 4:52:56 UTC - in response to Message 1000218.  

Of course you wouldn't like the UN, Dena.

It's where the rest of the world gets to speak freely, and be heard. And most of it is in disagreement with the US and Israel.

You got that one wrong. The U.N. was founded to end war and bring peace to the world. Now days it consist of a bunch of big shots trying to line their pocket or that of their countries. If a vote such as stopping Iran from developing nuclear weapons comes up, the first question is will they still be able to get oil and trade with Iran. If the answer is no, that will be their vote. It was constructed by the World Government people and our government is already to big. I don't want to replace it with a bigger one.

I would rather see us less involved in world politics because every time we get involved we have to do the heavy lifting in the cleanup and most of the time our image declines as the result of our efforts. It's possible that if we let some of these countries fight it out they wouldn't be so interested in playing with war.

Many of our leader think we should go into the world and spread freedom. It was never intended to be that way, Yes we should spread freedom, but by example. You can't force a political system on a country when the people don't want it.
ID: 1000221 · Report as offensive
Matt Giwer
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 21 May 00
Posts: 841
Credit: 990,879
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1000243 - Posted: 3 Jun 2010, 7:00:27 UTC - in response to Message 1000204.  

The Cuban blockade was designed to prevent weapons from getting to Cuba. The United States had the right in international waters to stop and inspect any ship for weapons (nuclear or not) that was headed to Cuba. If American Marines or sailors had been attacked in the process they would've had the right to defend themselves with deadly force. The purpose of the Palestinian blockade is to prevent weapons from getting to Hamas, and is based on a history of offensive rockets being fired into Israel. This blockade is in defense of their country, just as the Cuban blockade was in our defense.


I guess you are too young to remember it. The US had no right to do it not did it claim it had a right to do it. It was also accepted that if it came to violence it would be an act of war and could escalate into a nuclear exchange.

Things have not changed in maritime law. It was an act of war to take over a Turkish flagged ship. The actions of the people involved on both sides fall under the jurisdiction of the law of Turkey.

But if you know of a maritime treaty which makes Israel's actions lawful you be sure to cite it. So far Israel has cited no law nor authority for its actions.

As for the nonsense claim that these ships were carrying military weapons to Gaza I will await Israel producing them. So far as I have read Israel has made no claim these ships were carrying weapons. I country that knows was Iran is doing hundreds of feet underground under strict military secrecy certainly cannot claim ignorance of the cargo of these ships much less claim they were carrying weapons.

The Israelis offered this "humanitarian" flotilla the opportunity to dock in Israel and have their goods inspected, but this was rejected for no other reason but to cause a boarding by the Israeli military.


You do not pay attention at all. The obvious thing is that inspection can be done at sea. They were ordered to dock and unload in Israel and then rely upon the good faith of Israel to deliver the materiel.

Lets not get into fantasyland. Israel chose to board the ships. It was a free choice. No one made them do it. They were under no obligation to obey Israelis. The force Israelis used to force compliance was their own free choice.

Videos released by the Israelis show the Israeli military members, who were armed with baintball guns, being attacked by the "humanitarians" who used pipes or sticks and threw at least one sailor from an upper deck to a lower deck.


I saw the films of the passengers repelling boarders too. What is wrong with that? Be certain to cite a law against it. Israel has not done so. Maybe Israel is giving you the chance to go first. Think Leon Uris. Think Exodus II.

The purpose of the Israeli blockade is not to keep "foods and spices" out of Gaza,


But it does do exactly that. At the moment coriander is prohibited. A few months ago a US Congressman visited and demanded pasta be taken off the prohibited list. You missed some great pasta rocket jokes.

You should start paying attention to what is really going on. I do by reading Israeli newspapers so no one can claim my sources are biased against Israel. That is where I learned they are not allowed to import enough fuel to run their power plant 24/7 nor repair parts for their sewage treatment facilities which also do not run 24/7 so when not running raw sewage goes into the sea. Israeli newspapers have reported items of kitchenware, glassware, yarn and paper are also prohibited.

but to inspect the contents of all boats for the presence of prohibited weapons. By refusing the inspection offered by the Israelis (they boldly admited their intent was to "run" the blockade) they set themselves up to be stopped and boarded.


Israel has made no claim these ships were carrying weapons nor that they were suspected of carrying weapons. You have no idea what Israel demanded. You have no idea of the facts of the starvation blockade. When it started Israel said it was going to put Gaza on a diet. It has. Israel has displayed some of what the ships were carrying, crutches, wheelchairs, medicines but no weapons.

Just as we would have done if Russian cargo ships headed to Cuba (yes they were cargo ships, not military vessles) had not turned back.


And it would have been a act of war. Neither the US back then nor has Israel today cited any maritime law which sanctions such an act. Kennedy did not pretend it was lawful. He simply said it was going to happen.

Your thoughts on this matter are clearly biased against the Israelis as shown by your arguments such as:

1) "Are you claiming the US had the final authority on all Cuban imports and killed people to prevent ships from docking in Cuba?" (Yes, the US could have stopped any ship to inspect what they were importing, but that does not equal final authority on Cuban imports. Nor does stopping a ship for inspection constitute final authority on all imports. During the Cuban blockade we were poised to use force if we had been met with force.)


Israel does in fact claim absolute authority over what is allowed into Gaza and it further insists it all be delivered by land from Israel. Just to show you this is not altruistic, people wishing the materiel delivered have to hire Israeli trucks and workers to make the deliveries.

2) "For the record no one in any navy in the world can conceive of any way in which that attack was other than deliberate." (No one who read the press releases and interviews of these activists could reasonably conclude that their intention was other than to be boarded in order to provoke an incident just like this. Unfortunately, their tactic cost the lives of nine of the 600 "humanitarians" who tried this blockade running stunt.)


So what? No one forced Israel to board the ship. It was their free choice based upon military power alone just as it was for the US back in the Cuban Missile Crisis.

3) "Your thoughts on alternate histories will be appreciated." (I know what I saw on the news, and I know what I heard "humanitarians" say in their interviews. Your alternative slant on what they have admitted to is laughable and exposes your bias once again.)


Repelling boarders is a lawful activity. Again, if you know of a law prohibiting repelling boarders you be sure to cite it.


Unvarnished
Haaretz
Jerusalem Post
The origin of the Yahweh Cult
ID: 1000243 · Report as offensive
Matt Giwer
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 21 May 00
Posts: 841
Credit: 990,879
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1000246 - Posted: 3 Jun 2010, 7:21:33 UTC - in response to Message 1000202.  

I lived through the Cuban Missile Crisis and we did turn ships. We would have sunk them if they didn't. We almost went to war because a Russian sub loaded up an nuclear tipped torpedo and readied it for firing. We also let ships through because the only cargo we were interested in had to be loaded on the deck where we could inspect it by air. If the stuff on deck looked like a missile then we would need to inspect it.


I lived through it too. At no time did the US claim it had a lawful right to stop and inspect these ships. So Israel has no lawful right. After inspection they ships were permitted to continue to Cuba. That was never intended to be the case by Israel. Further there was no reasonable expectation these ships were carrying weapons so the whole thing was just an demonstration of the ability to use excessive force and intimidate those who might follow.

I would go to bed at night not knowing if I would wake the next day. The public knew much of what was happening but some of the background information has taken years to come out because it did involve deal making that was suspected but couldn't be proven till the records were opened. A very good movie about this time period is Thirteen Days. I watched it for the first time about a month ago and it brought back many memories of the those two weeks.

The ships Israel stopped had several members of Terror groups on them


I have been reading everything Haaretz publishes on the subject and so far not a single name. Therefore the claim is bullshit until evidence is produced.

and the plan is to get enough public coverage that Israel will have to drop the blockade


One might get the idea they read Exodus by Leon Uris or at least saw the movie. The Jews in Palestine at the time supported many terrorist groups. One might ask why Israelis do not appear to have read the book or seen the movie.

and let arms carrying ships through.


These aid ships are loaded in public with media coverage invited. Israel could still inspect suspected ships at sea before allowing them to pass into Gaza. But this way it earns money forcing Free Gaza folks to hire Israeli trucks and workers to deliver it. There is always a shekel in it some place when it comes to Israel and other middle eastern countries.

Those arms will be sent to Israel shortly after they reach port. It comes down to if Israel wants to survive, they have no other option than to continue doing what they are doing.


So why is the amount and type of food permitted into Gaza subject to Israel's approved and prohibited lists? What do weapons have to do with these ships? What do these ships have to do with all ships?

The Hasbara team is out in force.

That is what I predicted.

Unvarnished
Haaretz
Jerusalem Post
The origin of the Yahweh Cult
ID: 1000246 · Report as offensive
Matt Giwer
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 21 May 00
Posts: 841
Credit: 990,879
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1000247 - Posted: 3 Jun 2010, 7:23:02 UTC - in response to Message 1000205.  

the odd thing is that the flotilla needed only to head to the nearby israeli port to be inspected. Heck the Israelis allow compassionate goods through. they only ask that they be allowed to inspect the cargo to prevent additional weapons from reaching hamas. I dont think thats to much to ask


You know that is not true. You know it was required to dock, offload and pay Israelis to deliver it to Gaza by truck. Why would you say something so patently false?

Unvarnished
Haaretz
Jerusalem Post
The origin of the Yahweh Cult
ID: 1000247 · Report as offensive
Matt Giwer
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 21 May 00
Posts: 841
Credit: 990,879
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1000249 - Posted: 3 Jun 2010, 7:27:24 UTC - in response to Message 1000210.  

U.N. Human Rights Chief: Israel's Blockade of Gaza Strip Is Illegal

What part of this is not understood?

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,539363,00.html

Why are you defending something that the UN and international community had deemed illegal?

There's why the UN has no teeth. A decision is made that you do not like, so you choose to conveniently ignore the ruling.]

Edit: Even worse, the UN can't intervene. The US vetoes it.

I could tell you what I think of the U.N. but I don't want a time out for language.


There is a lot you can do. What you cannot do is cite a law under which this action was conducted. You cannot because there is none.

Lets see. Pakistan declares Israel cannot ship directly to India but must ship through Pakistan. Pakistan boards an Israeli ship and kills a few people. Israeli apologizes for not obeying Pakistan and promises to abide by the imaginary law in the future.

Unvarnished
Haaretz
Jerusalem Post
The origin of the Yahweh Cult
ID: 1000249 · Report as offensive
Matt Giwer
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 21 May 00
Posts: 841
Credit: 990,879
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1000250 - Posted: 3 Jun 2010, 7:30:39 UTC - in response to Message 1000218.  

Of course you wouldn't like the UN, Dena.

It's where the rest of the world gets to speak freely, and be heard. And most of it is in disagreement with the US and Israel.


But Israel has a right to exist because the UN said so. Listen to the Izziehuggers. They are all in favor of UN authority except when it is against them.

BTW: I did not want anyone to get the idea I am saying Israel is any better than any other mideast country.
Unvarnished
Haaretz
Jerusalem Post
The origin of the Yahweh Cult
ID: 1000250 · Report as offensive
Alex Filatov

Send message
Joined: 8 Feb 10
Posts: 90
Credit: 148,574
RAC: 0
Russia
Message 1000256 - Posted: 3 Jun 2010, 7:51:08 UTC

I lived through the Cuban Missile Crisis and we did turn ships. We would have sunk them if they didn't. We almost went to war because a Russian sub loaded up an nuclear tipped torpedo and readied it for firing. We also let ships through because the only cargo we were interested in had to be loaded on the deck where we could inspect it by air. If the stuff on deck looked like a missile then we would need to inspect it.

In a fact, it was a Hrushev's pressure over our military. They calculated that if we attack that day with nuke, we're entirely wipe out US without serious consequences. Later calculations many years after show that this was not quite right.

There was not only one sub with nuke. There was many subs. But Hrushev has a humanity and said "i never will use nuke on people. It will be a henocide".

The cubanian rockets was a answer of US rockets in Turkey that could reach Moscow.

Hrushev was a man who saved all world from a insane war. In memory forever, rest in peace.
ID: 1000256 · Report as offensive
Matt Giwer
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 21 May 00
Posts: 841
Credit: 990,879
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1000259 - Posted: 3 Jun 2010, 8:06:17 UTC - in response to Message 1000204.  

...
The Israelis offered this "humanitarian" flotilla the opportunity to dock in Israel and have their goods inspected, but this was rejected for no other reason but to cause a boarding by the Israeli military. Videos released by the Israelis show the Israeli military members, who were armed with baintball guns, being attacked by the "humanitarians" who used pipes or sticks and threw at least one sailor from an upper deck to a lower deck.


You appear to be continuing Israel's deliberate confusion of humanitarian with non-violent.

I remind you Bill Clinton declared the Bosnian war to be a humanitarian war.

Hasbara is out if force. Hasbara being the Israeli word for Propaganda except in official translations where it translated as explaining.

Some day the Izzies might learn we know the explanation and still think it is bullshit.
Unvarnished
Haaretz
Jerusalem Post
The origin of the Yahweh Cult
ID: 1000259 · Report as offensive
W-K 666 Project Donor
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 18 May 99
Posts: 17729
Credit: 40,757,560
RAC: 67
United Kingdom
Message 1000263 - Posted: 3 Jun 2010, 8:36:48 UTC

Having read a lot of news reports on this incident, I have come to the conclusion that Israel is NOT at fault.

My reasons,
Recent filmed reports from inside Gaza indicate the markets are not short of food or any other essentials,
Other convoys have had no problems co-operating with the Israel authorities and driving into Gaza,
The Turkish Charity IHH which organised this effort has been linked frequently with extremist militant Arab groups.

If Israel does lift the blockade of the Gaza coastline. Who is going to police it to ensure no weapons are taken into Gaza?
ID: 1000263 · Report as offensive
1 · 2 · 3 · 4 . . . 11 · Next

Message boards : Politics : The Massacre of the Gaza Aid Flotilla


 
©2022 University of California
 
SETI@home and Astropulse are funded by grants from the National Science Foundation, NASA, and donations from SETI@home volunteers. AstroPulse is funded in part by the NSF through grant AST-0307956.