Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Ryinrea

Gaza flotilla attack: Autopsies

236 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

DieChecker

WMD's anyone?

That is a good one. Isn't the Israeli Intellegence agency supposed to be World Class? Yet they did not know anything supposedly about these ships and who or what was on them. I guess maybe the Israelis have no spy satalites? It is idiotic to believe that the Israelis did not know who/what and when every thing and person was that was on those ships. What did the ships all load up in a cave supplied by submarines? Come on!!

The justification is that they were trying to violate the blockade...

Are you sure you're following the same story every one else is?

It has been posted over and over again that there are legitimate reasons a ship can pass a blockaid. A blockaid is not a stone wall with no gate in it. Other ships had been allowed to pass in the past.

As you well know the flotilla was boarded to CHECK for weapons, if they KNEW there were weapons they wouldn't have gone in non-lethally. Forget the sticks, bars and knives as activist eyewitnesses have recounted that the live-fire shooting started after the first three israelis to board were beaten, stripped, taken hostage and disarmed. The eyewitnesses then saw young turkish men running back to the upper deck brandishing the israelis own pistols. Not israeli reports, activist reports.

And were any of those captured Israelis killed? There certainly was the opportunity.

"Fear and anger" made innocent peace activists run toward the Israelis firing at them?

They are same people you are calling suicide bombers. Basic same mentality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pseudo Intellectual
It has been posted over and over again that there are legitimate reasons a ship can pass a blockaid. A blockaid is not a stone wall with no gate in it. Other ships had been allowed to pass in the past.

Only if Israel allows them. In this case, the Israelis told them to dock at Ashdod.

They are same people you are calling suicide bombers. Basic same mentality.

So you admit the activists were Jihadists?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Moon Monkey

And were any of those captured Israelis killed? There certainly was the opportunity.

No. But neither was Gilad Shalit, doesn't mean they will ever get him back alive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rosewin

No. But neither was Gilad Shalit, doesn't mean they will ever get him back alive.

Terrorists who spare lives?

*rolls eyes*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Moon Monkey

Terrorists who spare lives?

*rolls eyes*

Is that a question ? Hamas could have killed Gilad Shalit when they killed the rest of his unit. Hezbollah could have killed those two reservists they took in 2006 when they killed the rest of their unit, but they waited and killed them later.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rosewin

Right because full Hamas members, Al-Qaeda agents, and others trained in terror schools were on the boat. This is embarrassing. truly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Moon Monkey

Right because full Hamas members, Al-Qaeda agents, and others trained in terror schools were on the boat. This is embarrassing. truly.

Where were they intent on taking that boat again ? Embarrassing, truly :yes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DieChecker

Only if Israel allows them. In this case, the Israelis told them to dock at Ashdod.

Technically that is not true. If they are declared humanitarian aid ships, then Israel has to have a reason, must have some evidence, that those ships are a threat, or dangerous. The lack of knowledge or Intellegence is not evidence.

Are you telling me that the world class Intellegence agencies working for Israel did not know what this rub-a-dub-dub group was doing and had loaded on their ships? I'll bet even the lazy gits in the CIA knew what was on those ships before they left harbor. Is the Israeli Intellegence network so weak that a tiny group of people who openly decared they were sailing to Gaza months ago was able to keep secret what they were shipping?

So you admit the activists were Jihadists?

I admit the crew that fought with the Commandos could be called jihadists. Everyone that surrendered, like 90%+ of the people involved were simple activists and working crew.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pseudo Intellectual
Technically that is not true. If they are declared humanitarian aid ships, then Israel has to have a reason, must have some evidence, that those ships are a threat, or dangerous. The lack of knowledge or Intellegence is not evidence.

The reason is that Gaza is blockaded. No ship was allowed to enter the area.

Are you telling me that the world class Intellegence agencies working for Israel did not know what this rub-a-dub-dub group was doing and had loaded on their ships? I'll bet even the lazy gits in the CIA knew what was on those ships before they left harbor. Is the Israeli Intellegence network so weak that a tiny group of people who openly decared they were sailing to Gaza months ago was able to keep secret what they were shipping?

Assumptions, assumptions, assumptions. Do you have any evidence Israel or the CIA knew exactly what was on the ships?

I admit the crew that fought with the Commandos could be called jihadists. Everyone that surrendered, like 90%+ of the people involved were simple activists and working crew.

Well, 90% of the passengers weren't up there beating the soldiers to death, so I don't see your point.

Edited by Pseudo Intellectual

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Leonardo

So you admit the activists were Jihadists?

I admit the crew that fought with the Commandos could be called jihadists.

No, the activists can not be called 'jihadists'. Those who used physical violence against the IDF might be criminals, if they cannot prove their actions were in self-defence.

PI,

I would ask that you stop attempting to deliberately flame-bait in discussing this topic. Your inflammatory rhetoric is grossly inaccurate, dishonest and, imo, intentional.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pseudo Intellectual

What exactly is "grossly inaccurate, dishonest and, imo, intentional" and "flame-baiting"? Pointing out inconvenient facts isn't flame-baiting, Leo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dan'O

America complained about Guantanamo and eventually it was shut down.

Sorry to burst your bubble but it is still in operation.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/06/08/levin-gitmo-closure-going_n_604963.html

I'm not sure why someone so misinformed or ignorant on the subject is even commenting but hey, that sorta thing is nothing new around here. :no:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dan'O

I admit the crew that fought with the Commandos could be called jihadists. Everyone that surrendered, like 90%+ of the people involved were simple activists and working crew.

Well they just spoiled it for everyone then. Shame.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Leonardo

What exactly is "grossly inaccurate, dishonest and, imo, intentional" and "flame-baiting"? Pointing out inconvenient facts isn't flame-baiting, Leo.

How many IDF soldiers were beaten to death?

You posted...

Well, 90% of the passengers weren't up there beating the soldiers to death, so I don't see your point.

What is a jihadist, and how many of the activists are undeniably, uncontrovertibly and with evidence of their 'jihadist activities', jihadists?

You posted...

So you admit the activists were Jihadists?

Prove these statements of yours are 'inconvenient facts' and not blatant lies, intended simply as flame-bait.

If you cannot prove these statements are facts, then they are not facts, but your, grossly biased and misinformed, opinion.

Edited by Leonardo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pseudo Intellectual

I would discuss this, but first I want to know how those comments were "flame-baiting."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
susieice

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/gaza_blockade

Israel has lifted the ban on some items. Does anyone think this will harm their national security?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pseudo Intellectual

Good for the Gazans (even though, according to that article, most of the goods Israel has decided to allow into Gaza are already being smuggled into the Strip from Egypt), but does Israel really have any obligation to provide the Gazans with shaving cream and candy? Why not bring it all through Egypt?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
susieice

Good for the Gazans (even though, according to that article, most of the goods Israel has decided to allow into Gaza are already being smuggled into the Strip from Egypt), but does Israel really have any obligation to provide the Gazans with shaving cream and candy? Why not bring it all through Egypt?

Do they have any reason to deny it, other than to make someone's life miserable?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
eqgumby

Of course I think Israel has the right to defend itself. I just don't see where this whole flotilla has to be condemned as a terrorist action. A lot of good people risked everything to draw our attention to the plight of the Palesintian people. Our military would never be allowed to starve a population into submission.

You mean in a blockade action? Forced poverty? Like in CUBA? Like in IRAQ?

Yes, our government would. And does.

The flotillas goal was to provoke Israel and to "run" the blockade.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rosewin

With a greater overarching goal of delivering aid, not just this one time, but to insure the regular flow of aid is not deprived.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ryinrea

Our government did a embargo on Cuba, but never a naval blockade on Cuba which is also against International law

UN commands the US stop the embargo

And they never were going to take away people ways to get food, and supplies since they can trade with other countries. :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
eqgumby

Our government did a embargo on Cuba, but never a naval blockade on Cuba which is also against International law

UN commands the US stop the embargo

And they never were going to take away people ways to get food, and supplies since they can trade with other countries. :rolleyes:

Oooh, your soooo clever.

So what's to stop the Palestinians from trading with other countries?

Could it be the fact that they are importing WEAPONS FOR THE SOLE USE OF KILLING ISRAELI CIVILIANS?

After all, your country would NEVER do something illegal like that!!!

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2526490/posts

http://www.historyman.co.uk/ww1/Blockade.html

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aL04tV5Q9tKA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
eqgumby

Our government did a embargo on Cuba, but never a naval blockade on Cuba which is also against International law

UN commands the US stop the embargo

And they never were going to take away people ways to get food, and supplies since they can trade with other countries. :rolleyes:

I'm pretty sure this equates a naval blockade.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuban_Missile_Crisis

In addition to demanding that Russian Premier Nikita S. Khrushchev remove all the missile bases and their deadly contents, Kennedy ordered a naval quarantine (blockade) of Cuba in order to prevent Russian ships from bringing additional missiles and construction materials to the island.

http://www.hpol.org/jfk/cuban/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rosewin

The Cuban Missile Crisis did not lead to a sustained and illegal blockade that collectively punishes a population as if it were a medieval siege. The comparisons are also weak if attempting to equate the reasons for each. Israel has made it plainly clear that 'the idea was to put the Palestinian people on a diet'. I do not think Kennedy had the same idea in mind.

Edited by Rosewin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
eqgumby

The Cuban Missile Crisis did not lead to a sustained and illegal blockade that collectively punishes a population as if it were a medieval siege. The comparisons are also weak if attempting to equate the reasons for each. Israel has made it plainly clear that 'the idea was to put the Palestinian people on a diet'. I do not think Kennedy had the same idea in mind.

You don't think...

Yet Cuba suffered crushing poverty for how long?

The blockade is in place to prevent weapons from entering Gaza. The idea is to make life as rough as possible, so the people throw out their terroristic government.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.