Turkish PM to sail to Gaza

[Rosewin]

yesterdatm you said it was 50% make up your mind and no i am not going to look through 10 threads to find it to quote it.

Please do find and quote this because I do not recall anyone ever saying 50%

If not please no false accusations but let us discuss the issues and not each other.

Edited June 5, 2010 by Rosewin

[Agent X]

http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/full/470?opendocument

Article 51 begins talking about civilians in zones of conflict, but you should look closely at Article 69 on.

For people who may not trust the Israelis, maybe this is the best way to get our attention.

Thank you.

[keithisco]

Well if you don't like it, ignore me. When somethings stupid, it's stupid and must be treated in such a manner. Such as when people wrongly use rhetorical nonsense and fake anger such as the proclaiming of some things racist and illegal when they are nothing of the sort. Because that sort of thing is childish too and putting it that way brings it into perspective.

And you're right, I'm not concerned about such things. I don't give a damn if you consider it childish or not. Stop pigeonholing me and allow me to express myself in my own way. Trying to limit the way one expresses themselves is the true childish behavior as well as arrogant and elitist. There's always gotta be some retard who gets frustrated in this manner. "OMFG he's not discussing things the way I want him to. WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH".

And I want to see a link to that claim of only "25% is getting through".

Because some of that aid is on the verboten list as found in this thread:

http://www.unexplain...howtopic=183495

Which is found in this article from that thread:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8654337.stm

I gave you the links earlier, and the "contraband" list (according to Israeli govt) was also pasted in full with the appropriate links.

I think the only person getting "frustrated" here is you. You have the facts before you, many people have backed up comments with links but you appear not to be "concerned about such things".

Having an opinion is one thing, do not try to browbeat others that actually give substance to their opinion...

[Agent X]

Which is not you.

[danielost]

http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/full/470?opendocument

Article 51 begins talking about civilians in zones of conflict, but you should look closely at Article 69 on.

For people who may not trust the Israelis, maybe this is the best way to get our attention.

so you demand that isreal abide by the geneva convintion but no one else.

[keithisco]

Which is not you.

As I said, I posted the links.... it is up to you whether or not to read them.

[Agent X]

Sorry, but after your little whining I can't take you seriously.

[odas]

Greece and Cypress I don't know about, Ireland has said it will cooperate with Israel and send their boats to the port that Israel wants them to put in but it was the boat itself that decided to challenge the blockade.

Turkey is largely Muslim I believe, and many many many Muslims around the world hate Jews and want to see an end to Israel.

No. Many many many Muslims do not hate Jews, they hate the Israelie politc towards Palestinians.

Today, marks the day when a palestinian shoot Robert F Kennedy. This Palestinian was a Christian, revoltet by the US politics of support to Israel.

Thousands and thousands of Palestinian Christians fled Israel since 1948.

George Habash, a palestinian Christian is the founder of Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine.

No, it is not only and only muslims it is palestinians who are terrorised by the Israelie government.

[Agent X]

http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/full/470?opendocument

Article 51 begins talking about civilians in zones of conflict, but you should look closely at Article 69 on.

For people who may not trust the Israelis, maybe this is the best way to get our attention.

I have been reading the articles. There are some of problems that I have with it.

Gaza isn't a sovereign state or sovereign territory.

And Israel has been complying with this. They want the aid ships to dock at Ashdod to be inspected and then they let the ships go. If the aid ships would comply with this request, then there wouldn't be any violation of Geneva conventions. Instead it is the aid ships that try to violate the blockade in order to force Israel to violate the conventions so they can claim the moral high ground. Which is a deplorable tactic itself.

And aren't there rules about these aid ships not complying with the blockade as well? And shouldn't their countries be held responsible? Not to mention their crews?

And, I haven't come across the specific articles or print where it says these task are specifically the sole responsibility of the occupying power to carry these tasks out.

[chaoszerg]

Instead it is the aid ships that try to violate the blockade in order to force Israel to violate the conventions so they can claim the moral high ground. Which is a deplorable tactic itself.

I agree.

It's like trying to force your hand into a Bee's nest, then getting stung, then running off crying to anyone who will listen to you that you were attacked by Bees.

[+susieice]

http://www/icrc.org/ihl.nsf/COM/380-600066?OpenDocument

This covers blockades. Any state can offer a relief effort. Goods cannot be confiscated and must be guarded through dangerous territory to its destination if I read this right.

Edited June 6, 2010 by susieice

[danielost]

http://www/icrc.org/ihl.nsf/COM/380-600066?OpenDocument

This covers blockades. Any state can offer a relief effort. Goods cannot be confiscated and must be guarded through dangerous territory to its destination if I read this right.

link doesnt work.

I agree.

It's like trying to force your hand into a Bee's nest, then getting stung, then running off crying to anyone who will listen to you that you were attacked by Bees.

and having everybody getting mad at the bees.

[+susieice]

link doesnt work.

and having everybody getting mad at the bees.

Sorry, will go back and check it

http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/COM/380-600066?OpenDocument

Here ya go.

Edited June 6, 2010 by susieice

[danielost]

Sorry, will go back and check it

http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/COM/380-600066?OpenDocument

Here ya go.

It is ' collective relief ' which is referred to here. The obligation on the Occupying Power to accept such relief is unconditional. In all cases where occupied territory is inadequately supplied the Occupying Power is bound to accept relief supplies destined for the population.

The Conference added the words "whole or part of the" before the words "population of an occupied territory" on account of experiences during the Second World War. Sanction is thus given not only to schemes of assistance to the population as a whole, but also to those which are intended either for the population in certain localities only, or for particular classes of the population, such as women and children throughout the territory.

The Convention not only lays down that the Occupying Power must "agree" to relief schemes on behalf of the population, but insists that it must "facilitate" them by all the means at its disposal. The occupation authorities must therefore co-operate wholeheartedly in the rapid and scrupulous execution of these schemes. For that purpose they have many and varied means at their disposal (transport, stores, facilities for distributing and supervising agencies).

This paragraph should be compared with that granting protected persons who have remained or have been retained in the territory of a Party to the conflict, the right to "receive the individual or collective relief that may be sent to them" (Article 38), and to the similar stipulation in favour of interned protected persons (Article 108 ).

you missed that one. isreal offered to transport the aid as specified in the above paragraph.

[+susieice]

It is ' collective relief ' which is referred to here. The obligation on the Occupying Power to accept such relief is unconditional. In all cases where occupied territory is inadequately supplied the Occupying Power is bound to accept relief supplies destined for the population.

The Conference added the words "whole or part of the" before the words "population of an occupied territory" on account of experiences during the Second World War. Sanction is thus given not only to schemes of assistance to the population as a whole, but also to those which are intended either for the population in certain localities only, or for particular classes of the population, such as women and children throughout the territory.

The Convention not only lays down that the Occupying Power must "agree" to relief schemes on behalf of the population, but insists that it must "facilitate" them by all the means at its disposal. The occupation authorities must therefore co-operate wholeheartedly in the rapid and scrupulous execution of these schemes. For that purpose they have many and varied means at their disposal (transport, stores, facilities for distributing and supervising agencies).

This paragraph should be compared with that granting protected persons who have remained or have been retained in the territory of a Party to the conflict, the right to "receive the individual or collective relief that may be sent to them" (Article 38), and to the similar stipulation in favour of interned protected persons (Article 108 ).

you missed that one. isreal offered to transport the aid as specified in the above paragraph.

I missed nothing Danielost. Quote paragraph 3. And don't forget 4.

Edited June 6, 2010 by susieice

[danielost]

I missed nothing Danielost. Quote paragraph 3. And don't forget 4.

ok i wont.

PARAGRAPH 4. -- VERIFICATION AND SUPERVISION

The institution of measures for verifying and regulating the consignments follows logically from the foregoing provisions. Since the free passage of relief consignments represents an important exception to the measures enforcing the blockade, it is only right that the blockade authorities should have an opportunity of assuring themselves that the facilities granted are used only for strictly humanitarian purposes.

this means isreal has the right to search any and all cargo going into gaza. the other paragraph states that isreal only has to provide transportation, it does not have to let any ships through it's blockaid.

so those relief ships have to go to the port isreal tells them to and unload. where upon isreal then in inspect said cargo to keep what ever it deems illegal out of gaza. after that isreal then has to provide transportation to gaza for the rest of the cargo.

you really need to learn to understand things before you try to use them against people who do know what they are allowed to do.

[+susieice]

ok i wont.

PARAGRAPH 4. -- VERIFICATION AND SUPERVISION

The institution of measures for verifying and regulating the consignments follows logically from the foregoing provisions. Since the free passage of relief consignments represents an important exception to the measures enforcing the blockade, it is only right that the blockade authorities should have an opportunity of assuring themselves that the facilities granted are used only for strictly humanitarian purposes.

this means isreal has the right to search any and all cargo going into gaza. the other paragraph states that isreal only has to provide transportation, it does not have to let any ships through it's blockaid.

so those relief ships have to go to the port isreal tells them to and unload. where upon isreal then in inspect said cargo to keep what ever it deems illegal out of gaza. after that isreal then has to provide transportation to gaza for the rest of the cargo.

you really need to learn to understand things before you try to use them against people who do know what they are allowed to do.

Don't paraphrase only what you want Danielost. Hope others actually read it. It reads that a state which is neutral can organize a relief effort and it must be allowed through the blockade. It certainly should be searched for any weapons and then the occupier must provide an escort directly to the people for whom the relief is for. It can not be confiscated at the border or used for the occupying force. Since Turkey is a soverign state who was neutral in the conflict, the legality of boarding the ships at sea can be called to question under the Geneva Convention. I was asked for a link and there it is. It says what it says. Edited June 6, 2010 by susieice

[+DieChecker]

See, here's the big question, if it was truly about aid to Gaza why wouldn't they cooperate with the Israelis and put in to the port the Israelis want them to put in?

I've read it is because nearly everything you can think of is War Supplies to the Israeli inspection teams. When even blankets and rope are war materials, what is the point?

Well if you don't like it, ignore me. When somethings stupid, it's stupid and must be treated in such a manner. Such as when people wrongly use rhetorical nonsense and fake anger such as the proclaiming of some things racist and illegal when they are nothing of the sort. Because that sort of thing is childish too and putting it that way brings it into perspective.

And you're right, I'm not concerned about such things. I don't give a damn if you consider it childish or not. Stop pigeonholing me and allow me to express myself in my own way. Trying to limit the way one expresses themselves is the true childish behavior as well as arrogant and elitist. There's always gotta be some retard who gets frustrated in this manner. "OMFG he's not discussing things the way I want him to. WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH".

Pot -> Kettle

Gaza isn't a sovereign state or sovereign territory.

You're right. The situation is kind of like if Florida had all Federal programs cut off and all income shipping stopped till Charlie Crist is kicked out of office. Given, Floridians probably would have caved within a couple weeks, but Gazans appear to be really stubborn.

And aren't there rules about these aid ships not complying with the blockade as well? And shouldn't their countries be held responsible? Not to mention their crews?

You are probably right. Those crews should be given a trial and punished if found guilty. Just as the Israeli officers who ordered or planned the capture of the ships should be given a trial. If they are guiltless, there should be no problems. If they overreacted, then they will get a mark in their record and that will be that.

[+DieChecker]

As to the Turkist PM travelling to Gaza, I think it would be an interesting exercise to see exactly how stupid the officials in charge of these operations can be. It could be a good opportunity for positive press for both sides if done right.

[danielost]

Don't paraphrase only what you want Danielost. Hope others actually read it. It reads that a state which is neutral can organize a relief effort and it must be allowed through the blockade. It certainly should be searched for any weapons and then the occupier must provide an escort directly to the people for whom the relief is for. It can not be confiscated at the border or used for the occupying force. Since Turkey is a soverign state who was neutral in the conflict, the legality of boarding the ships at sea can be called to question under the Geneva Convention. I was asked for a link and there it is. It says what it says.

i didnt paraphrase anything i copied and pasted.

and it is questionable if turkey really is neutral in this or not.

yes the link says what it says. it says that isreal has the right to inspect the cargo fro cantriband. it states isreal cannot remove anything from the cargo but the cantriband. it says that isreal must provide transport for the rest of it. they offered that.

[MARAB0D]

what is it play time or something? why am i seeing stories of boats sailing towards Israel>? - after what's just happened, what point are they trying to prove, Israel should make a point and sink the lot.

But first they need to buy the North Korean torpedos, as these seem to be the best in the world - rip a cruiser in halves no worries!

[Moon Monkey]

It WILL end badly, but sometimes it is necessary to remove a greater threat to the world as a whole. If the Turkish PM is really going to do this, and is turned back or forcibly restrained then Israel will bring down a world of pain unto itself, by itself, and for totally ignoring the rest of the world.

Regime change in Israel would not be a bad thing at all, but the current incumbents that appear to hate any non-sephardic jews as much as Arabs will have nowhere to turn to.

I do not pray, I hold no religious views at all, I just hope that the Israeli Govt moves aside and doesnt reign down genocide on its own population.

The first 2 paragraphs are just bile and your opinion. As for your hope in the final one, if the israeli government does move aside it will not be them reigning down genocide on its population it will be those whose entire raison d'etre is the genocide of the jewish state and the israeli people. In between your pouring of hatred for Israel remember it is Hamas we are talking about allowing to get their hands on anything they want.

At best Israel only ever allows 25% of the aid sent to get through, the rest it keeps for itself. For your information I never use "OMFG" in ANY debate - it is childish, irrelevant, and shows a complete lack of debating etiquette. Clearly not something that concerns you however.

That is strange, if your figures are true. The UN and palestinian organisations say that the people of Gaza are only receiving (through Israel) 25% of goods that they were receiving before the blockade. Now if your "25% at best" figure is to be believed that would would mean that more than 100% of what they got from all sources before the blockade is now being sent as aid to Israeli ports for delivery to Gaza. As no one is starving, the markets are full, water runs, the air-conditioners still work, the internet is working, the mobile phone network is fine, the cars still go, they still have more medical resources than most of the arab world and the rockets still fly it begs the question would this extra 75% of the aid not be better sent to Darfur or some such rather than rotting in an israeli warehouse ? Why do the palestinian refugees get so much more than any other group in similar, and often much worse, circumstances who have not declared war on their neighbours ?

[keithisco]

The first 2 paragraphs are just bile and your opinion. As for your hope in the final one, if the israeli government does move aside it will not be them reigning down genocide on its population it will be those whose entire raison d'etre is the genocide of the jewish state and the israeli people. In between your pouring of hatred for Israel remember it is Hamas we are talking about allowing to get their hands on anything they want.

That is strange, if your figures are true. The UN and palestinian organisations say that the people of Gaza are only receiving (through Israel) 25% of goods that they were receiving before the blockade. Now if your "25% at best" figure is to be believed that would would mean that more than 100% of what they got from all sources before the blockade is now being sent as aid to Israeli ports for delivery to Gaza. As no one is starving, the markets are full, water runs, the air-conditioners still work, the internet is working, the mobile phone network is fine, the cars still go, they still have more medical resources than most of the arab world and the rockets still fly it begs the question would this extra 75% of the aid not be better sent to Darfur or some such rather than rotting in an israeli warehouse ? Why do the palestinian refugees get so much more than any other group in similar, and often much worse, circumstances who have not declared war on their neighbours ?

Not my figure, I posted the links to the figure, they are beyond dispute.

In Bold: That sentence makes no sense at all.

You have seen the list of "banned" articles (banned by Israel) posted here - you have no defence for that list - it is designed precisely to prevent Gaza from functioning in any sense of the word.

You have seen the figures for severe malnourishment in Gaza - you do not dispute them.

Your claims that everything is rosy in Gaza is so distorted as to be laughable - except of course, its not!!

Collective punishment of a civilian population is illegal by all International Laws. As soon as hamas won the democratic election in Gaza, Israel mobilised to set up the blockade and to control the population.

Edited June 6, 2010 by keithisco

[MARAB0D]

Collective punishment of a civilian population is illegal by all International Laws.

Keith, the terrorists are usually all civilians, even Osama ben Laden. Civilians are those who are not combatants, and the combatants are those who wear camouflaged combat uniform and are armed; even a soldier in a daily uniform is not a combatant, but rather a civilian too - say Salvation Army guys, they also wear military uniform, or the cops. It is completely outside of our expertise area, to advise Israeli government how to handle Gaza strip, we should not also advise the Gaza civilians how it is better to launch their daily Kassams, it is simply not our business. Let them sort their affairs without anyone interfering. There is a difference between holding political views different from those of Jewish politicians, and physically interfering into what these politicians are doing in their sovereign country. If you feel yourself a che gevara, then no need to talk at all, just go there, join Hamas and shoot. The impression is that in your own country everything is just perfect, and you do not have any reason to disagree with anything at all, so you divert your emotions on another country and its problems. If so then you sure need to learn Arabic, accept Islam and grow a beard, why wasting time instead of doing something productive?

[Rosewin]

Keith, the terrorists are usually all civilians, even Osama ben Laden. Civilians are those who are not combatants, and the combatants are those who wear camouflaged combat uniform and are armed; even a soldier in a daily uniform is not a combatant, but rather a civilian too

Irregular soldiers are not defined as civilians but combatants.