What's new

Israel Hijacks Aid cargo, executes hostages - Pak journo, Talat Hussain taken hostage

How do we know they meant harm and started the violence?
If they meant harm they would have been armed accordingly.
Those who mean harm and walk into hostile territory carry big guns.
When I said these 'peace activists' meant harm, it does not mean they intended to be violent from the beginning of their trip. Am willing to grant that everyone had peaceful intention but I pointed it out before and will do again: That no one sane would assume that boarding troops will be armed with paintball guns and pistols. Five of six ships complied with Israeli boarding troops. Why did not the sixth ship? Why did they armed themselves with improvised hand weapons? Because somehow they knew that Israeli boarding troops were wielding non-lethal weapons. How could they have known? Because most likely people from the other five ships informed them of that fact.

Don't you think the people on board were at least aware of what IDF does to those who attack, even if unarmed?
I have been hit by paintballs before. It is painful but not crippling. Look at the sixth photo in this post...

http://www.defence.pk/forums/914188-post1.html

Those men were armed with improvised hand weapons and WAITING at the door. Their clothing alone is enough to protect them from any distracting pain from painball shots. They can easily rush any boarding troop so lightly armed before the soldier could pull his pistol. If they were so fearful of the IDF, then why were they willing to ambush boarding troops? Because they were alerted to the fact that Israeli soldiers were armed with non-lethal weapons and no longer were so fearful.

At the end of the day the people on board were killed by real Israeli bullets, that is the fact of the matter so let us not go into the whole paintball scenario!
No...You cannot dismiss the fact that those Israeli boarding troops were so lightly armed. No boarding troops from any military does. But the fact that they were so lightly armed meant that Israel intended to have as non-violent a process as possible. Show the forum a single navy in the world that armed their assault troops with paintball guns. You had better believe that every navy in the world right now is laughing at Israel for being so foolish. A pistol is the proverbial last ditch defense for self when nothing else worked or is available. So if people were killed it was because they were sufficiently threatening, not because those Israeli troops intended to kill anyone the moment they set foot aboard. Five out of six ships complied peacefully. Why not the sixth? This fact everyone avoided. Again -- Show everyone a single navy in the world that armed their assault troops with paintball guns. Can you do that?

Let us look at it from another angle if people here are now reconstructing events to justify what IDF does.
Let me reconstruct events as well.
Many would agree that it would be perfectly in line with what IDF has been doing in the past.

The ships belonged to a neutral nation and the shipment was inspected by the neutral nation as well.
IDF knows that if it finds nothing contraband in all six vessels then they would have to let the flotilla pass under International law...
So what do they come up with?
They deliberately rough up the people on board one of the vessels to infuriate them and when they react an armed conflict takes place in which IDF manages to kill people (since they have more than paintball guns) and the entire episode is cited as an excuse to block the passage of the flotilla.
What kind of 'reconstruction' was that? This naval blockade is about three years old and ships have passed through before. This is no 'reconstruction' but merely your own fantasy story.

If Turkish warships had escorted the flotilla, Israel could not even board the flotilla.
As per international law, the guarantee of a neutral nation with accompanying warships, renders the right of inspection by the blockading country as null and void.
Really...??? Here is what a supposedly 'neutral' party must do in order to earn immunity from boarding...

International Humanitarian Law - San Remo Manual 1994
120. A neutral merchant vessel is exempt from the exercise of the right of visit and search if it meets the following conditions:

(a) it is bound for a neutral port;
(b) it is under the convoy of an accompanying neutral warship of the same nationality or a neutral warship of a State with which the flag State of the merchant vessel has concluded an agreement providing for such convoy;
(c) the flag State of the neutral warship warrants that the neutral merchant vessel is not carrying contraband or otherwise engaged in activities inconsistent with its neutral status; and
(d) the commander of the neutral warship provides, if requested by the commander of an intercepting belligerent warship or military aircraft, all information as to the character of the merchant vessel and its cargo as could otherwise be obtained by visit and search.
Look at item 'a' for starter. But in this, Turkey is hardly a 'neutral' party. Even though Turkey is not in an armed conflict against Israel, Turkey as a country is now hostile to Israel, from the citizenry to top leadership, Erdogan. Turkey is nowhere qualified as a 'neutral' party. If you want to talk 'neutrality', bring in the Swiss or Japan, for examples. Not Turkey. If all sides agreed to have a neutral party involvement, the blockading country effectively transferred that 'right to visit' to the neutral party. Even so, the blockading country still has the right to have representatives at any inspections for contraband-ed items. Whether the blockading country will send representatives or not is a matter of trust between the blockading country and this neutral party since the neutral party is the one who offered to do the inspections. Inspection representatives are not boarding troops.

Let us leave the rules of engagement which apply in case of a justified war time blockade for a moment.

Does the UN support the blockade?
Does the world support Israel on the blockade except USA which does it mostly out of its strategic interests?
We are discussing that Israel is running a blockade as if it is a legal and humane action, it is a most brutal act in every sense of the word and has to be condemned...
No mention of protocol would legitimize the blockade
Spare me the hyperboles. It does not matter if the UN endorses the Gaza naval blockade or not.

Charter of the United Nations: Chapter VII: Action with Respect to Threats to the Peace, Breaches of the Peace and Acts of Agression
Article 51

Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security. Measures taken by Members in the exercise of this right of self-defence shall be immediately reported to the Security Council and shall not in any way affect the authority and responsibility of the Security Council under the present Charter to take at any time such action as it deems necessary in order to maintain or restore international peace and security.
Israel withdrew from the Gaza Strip years ago...

Israel's unilateral disengagement plan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
...was a proposal by Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, adopted by the government on June 6, 2004 and enacted in August 2005, to evict all Israelis from the Gaza Strip and from four settlements in the northern West Bank.

Those Israeli citizens that refused to accept government compensation packages and voluntarily vacate their homes prior to the August 15, 2005 deadline, were evicted by Israeli security forces over a period of several days.[1] The eviction of all residents, demolition of the residential buildings and evacuation of associated security personnel from the Gaza Strip was completed by September 12, 2005.[2] The eviction and dismantlement of the four settlements in the northern West Bank was completed ten days later.

Look at this phrase...

Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs...
Ham-*** attacks came from Gaza. Withdrawal from a territory mean ceding control of said territory to another authority with a the expectation that said authority will exercise restraint and work towards a peaceful resolution to a conflict. So from the moment Ham-*** used Gaza to conduct military or paramilitary operations, Article 51 of the UN Charter came into effect, rendering this naval blockade eminently legal. The UN does not need to publish any statement of endorsement. Its own charter has that endorsement of self defense, of which a blockade is a mechanism of said self defense.

A blockade is usually accompanied by a belligerent occupation of a territory, either come before or after. But since Israel back in '05 willingly withdrew from Gaza, where is that belligerent occupation that everyone is talking about? A blockade is not an occupation. Egypt once had partial control of Gaza and is now maintaining a land blockade from Egyptian soil to Gaza. Why does no one accuse Egypt of 'occupying' Gaza?

Here is something for you to chew on...Gaza is not part of any country and that fact alone allows Israel to reoccupy Gaza as a belligerent power. But Israel chose not to reoccupy Gaza. So absent a belligerent occupation and a naval blockade that allows inspected cargo to pass through the blockade zone and into the territory, Israel is performing similar to a 'pacific blockade'...

Pacific blockade - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Pacific blockade was a term invented by Hautefeuille, the French writer on international maritime law, to describe a blockade exercised by a great power for the purpose of bringing pressure to bear on a weaker state without actual war.

That it is an act of violence, and therefore in the nature of war, is undeniable, seeing that it can only be employed as a measure of coercion by maritime powers able to bring into action such vastly superior forces to those the resisting state can dispose of that resistance is out of the question. In this respect it is an act of war, and any attempt to exercise it against a power strong enough to resist would be a commencement of hostilities, and at once bring into play the rights and duties affecting neutrals. On the other hand, the object and justification of a pacific blockade being to avoid war, that is general hostilities and disturbance of international traffic with the state against which the operation is carried on, rights of war cannot consistently be exercised against ships belonging to other states than those concerned. And yet, if neutrals were not to be affected by it, the coercive effect of such a blockade might be completely lost. Recent practice has been to limit interference with them to the extent barely necessary to carry out the purpose of the blockading powers.
No state stepped forward to claim to act on Gaza's behalf. No one wanted to openly wage a war against Israel. Why not? Truth is that no one care about the Palestinians and no state care because Gaza, the West Bank and the Palestinians themselves serves no strategic interests to them. The Palestinians are pawns in this religious war. If Iran is capable of wiping Israel off the map and did so, the Iranian mullahs would be as brutal in their occupation of Palestine just as they are in Iran. This 'pacific blockade' imposed by Israel is supposed to motivate internal changes in Gaza by the Gazans themselves away from the current low intensity but wearying war on both sides. Just as no state dared to step forward to challenge Israel in overt warfare, no state therefore is capable of even issuing a credible threat to compel Israel to impose this 'pacific blockade' either and Israel can impose an even harsher blockade than the current one, a blockade that is appropriate to a war of conquest. So the fact that this 'pacific blockade' exist and for years is an indication that Israel is willing to work with 'the international community' provided that this 'community' put the same public pressure on Ham-*** to stop using Gaza as a war staging ground.

The UN office for coordination of humanitarian affairs has state in May 2010 that formal economy has collapsed in Gaza.
What will this lead to?
Peace or violence?
Will this push the common man towards vengeance or silent acceptance of his fate?

Gaza is situated on the coast and has access to international waters.
Gaza has a significant fishing industry which has also suffered a lot.

Regardless of any justification, the blockade of Gaza is only making matters worse!
You cannot, in the interests of intellectual honesty, so casually dismissed justifications. Yes...Any act of war, and a blockade is an act of war, will produce misery. But then why not the same argument be applied against Ham-***? Are you afraid of appearing impartial? Again...Israel withdrew from Gaza in '05. What prompted this blockade? Just for the hell of it?

Israel Continues to Transfer Humanitarian Aid to Gaza
A flotilla of nine vessels organized by pro-Palestinian activists is currently en route to Gaza carrying various goods. However, the total amount of supplies transported by the flotilla, 10,000 tons, is less than the weekly average amount of goods transferred by Israel into Gaza.
Got that? This 'humanitarian aid' by sea is only a small fraction of what passed through by land. The goal of this 'aid' fleet was never to deliver any significant amount of aid but to harass Israel behind the shield of civilian immunity in a conflict zone. You have a problem with the blockade? One alternative is to allow Ham-*** access to weapons to continue the war and this alternative would be unacceptable to Israel. Acceptable to you I presume? Another is for Israel to impose a harsher blockade and reenter Gaza as a belligerent occupation power to take the war to Ham-*** itself. Another would be for the 'international community' to have a credible enforcement presence in Gaza to assure the Israelis of their border security concerns and eventually there would no be no blockade at all. The keyword here is 'enforcement' and unfortunately for the Jews this self appointed and self annointed group of 'international community' would sooner be filled with Ham-*** fighters who would waste no time donning the righteous robe of 'peace activist' and proceed to do Iran's work before they get around to improving Gaza..:lol:

Economic hardship is not the same as economic deprivation or destruction. Gaza is suffering economic hardship that is the result of this blockade. The alternative is worse. When Israel withdrew in '05, it was with the expectation that Gazans would be a peaceful autonomous territory that while may not be a state, Gaza can still be accorded respects due a state. Ham-*** destroyed that possibility.

Increased humanitarian aid to Gaza after IDF operation Jan 2009
At the Cabinet meeting of 22 March 2009, the Government of Israel instructed the bodies dealing with the matter to enable the entry - without restriction - of foodstuffs to the residents of Gaza from all relevant sources, after it has been verified that they are indeed foodstuffs, and this in the framework of the humanitarian efforts. The Government directed that the foregoing be scrupulously implemented.

Essential food products including meat, chicken and fish, grains and legumes, fresh vegetables, dairy products, oil, flour, salt and sugar, in addition to animal feed, hygiene products, clothing, medicines and medical supplies are among the goods that are regularly delivered to Gaza.

Note: Gas for domestic use (cooking and heating) is supplied according to Palestinian demand and is not subject to any limitation by Israel. After the fuel depot at Nahal Oz was repeatedly attacked by Palestinian terrorists from the Gaza Strip, it was forced to limit its operations. The Kerem Shalom crossing has since been adapted to the transfer of fuel. In addition, a new gas line with double the capacity to transfer gas was built.
It is presented elsewhere on this forum other sources that Gaza is hardly deprived as your hyperboles would like us to believe.
 
Letter to the People of Turkey

By Dr. Arash Irandoost


Ever since you decided to trade in the Secularism of Ataturk for the Islamism of Erdogan, you also seem to have decided to forego your willingness to coexist with non-Muslims on a peaceful basis. These days all we ever seem to get from you, is video clips of your leader, Prime Minister Erdogan, behaving erradically and barking like a dog that its owner carelessly let off the leash. And if you don't know that Erdogan's master lives in Riyadh, then you don't know very much of what goes on in your own country.

But your affairs are your own. If you want to let a fanatic in a cheap suit destroy Turkish nationalism in the name of Islam, that's your business. But when he gets into business with terrorist organizations that attack, rape and murder our mothers and sisters (Iranian pro democracy women demonstrators), then it becomes our business. And when a country that persecutes its Kurdish, Assyrian and Armenian citizens, treat Iranian refugees like 3rd class citizens and hands them over to IRI thugs at every opportunity, and works tirelessly to appease a criminal regime, she must remember that we will not forget her erroneous ways.

You say you want an international investigation into the flotilla raid? Sure. Right after you allow an international investigation into that minor matter of Armenian genocide that you've been ducking for quite a while. As the new "standard bearer" in fighting for human rights, I'm sure you will agree that it's only fair that Turkey should undergo the same scrutiny it demands for other countries.

And then we can move on to the more than 10,000 political prisoners in your jails. A number that at times has topped 100,000. An independent investigation could also begin by looking into the torture and murder of political activists such as Engin Ceber. They could meet with representatives of TAYAD, the organization representing the families of prisoners. And they would no doubt be fascinated by the more than 1500 children in your prisoners who are there on "terrorism" charges. Like that 12 year old you arrested in 2008 for singing a Kurdish folk song. So by all means wrap yourselves in the banner of "Human Rights" and it will surely turn it into a noose and strangle you with it.

In Israel, Arabs are a legally recognized minority. Arabic is taught in schools and used as a legally recognized language. Meanwhile Kurdish identity is all but banned in Turkey and Iranian heritage and nationalism is under attack by the Islamist invaders. Kurdish names, folk songs and even the Kurdish language itself has been repressed.
Your regime has actually prosecuted and removed officials for simply incorporating a Kurdish phrase into a greeting. You screech self-righteously about the "Palestinian children"-- perhaps we should talk about the hundreds of Kurdish children arrested for throwing stones at protests. Arrested and charged with terrorism. Just more of the thousands of political prisoners of oppressed minorities in your prisons.

And perhaps next time your dog Erdogan gets up to bark up about human rights and gets through lecturing us on the use of force against Islamic terrorists, shall we discuss how many times you used jets to bomb Kurdish rebels who were lightly armed at best. Including in 2008 when you invaded sovereign Iraqi soil in order to continue your genocide of the Kurdish people in cooperation with criminal mullahs of Iran.

You talk about stolen land, when your entire country is stolen land, from Cyprus to Istanbul. Your regime is a racist illegitimate entity based on the oppression of the Kurds, the Armenians, the Assyrians, Iranians, and numerous others.
You went directly from being Imperialists to Fascists to Islamists, a truly dubious achievement for any nation. Your history is filled with slavery, ethnic cleansing, genocide and invasion. And that's just in the last century alone. If you had any sanity or shame, you would dig a hole, crawl into it, and hope that no one mentions words like "Minority Rights" or "Territorial Legitimacy" in your presence, instead of trying to use them as a club against Iranians and Israelis (Two nations whose national history predates yours by thousands of years).

But let us get back to your precious Islamist flotilla, decorated with Turkish flags that used to be more than just red versions of the Saudi flag. That ship you filled up with Muslim Brotherhood members and Islamist radicals bound for Gaza. Over in your wonderful nation of boundless freedom, reporters have been put on trial for even interviewing leaders of terrorist groups.

You sentenced the head of a Kurdish party to six months in prison for calling the head of the PKK, Mr. Ocalan, instead of just Ocalan. He joins the more than 800 Kurdish politicians you imprisoned in the last year alone. And after all that you actually have the nerve to pretend to be "outraged" when Israel intercepts your flotilla full of political terrorists?

You blockaded Armenia for Sixteen Years.

But of course we know how strongly you feel about blockades. Like the time you blockaded Armenia for Sixteen Years. Very well then. If you insist on sending vessels flying the Turkish flag to aid Hamas, perhaps Israel should begin sending tanks flying the Israeli flag to aid the PKK. And when a new democratic Iran is established, we surely will cut the flow of gas and oil to your arid, natural resource starved and useless land.

We're not big fans of the PKK, but since you've decided to friend Hamas and IRI murderers, then what's good for the turkey, just might be good for the gander. Or perhaps for every boat flying the Turkish flag that is sent to Gaza, Israel should donate a million to the Iranian pro democracy movement and PKK. I wonder how along IRI could last with direct financial help form Israel.

And then there's the Republic of Cyprus. They might benefit from significantly upgraded air defenses. While the US insists on equalizing weapons sales to Turkey and Greece, Israel just might have something tastier to offer to one side. And the citizens of the Republic of Cyprus might actually be able to sleep peacefully in their beds, instead of being intimidated by savages showing off their F-16's over their heads.

Oh I know, what you're going to say. This means war. But you might want to reconsider. And what exactly was the last war you won single-handedly? And no, bombing starving Kurdish rebels from the air, or occupying Cyprus doesn't count. And how long could you fight that war, before a domestic Kurdish insurgency overthrows your little empire.

If that doesn't happen, you might want to think about the big Russian bear at your back. The bear has been eyeing you for a long time now. And with your military engaged in a disastrous war for the Great Caliphate, your borders would be temptingly open. And who exactly would bail you out then?

Oh I know you've made many great news friends, such as Ahmadinejad and that fat king in the Arabian Desert, who tells your Erdogan when to jump and how high., but if you think mullahs care about their Sunni brethren, you've got another surprise coming. Meanwhile old Abdullah in the desert can't even protect himself without the US Marines.
And if you think Obama would send them in to save your *****, you've got another thing coming. I'm sure if there were Russian tanks headed to Ankara, he'd make a vocal statement about it. And Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov would pretend not to laugh while hanging up the phone.

There is of course the European Union. Last time Russia pulled that trick, it was Britain that bailed you out in the Crimean War. But these days Her M(N)ajesty's Empire isn't quite in the same shape it used to be. Sure Cameron, Clegg and Harman will lick Erdogan's feet. But none of them want to be the next Tony Blair either.

Germany doesn't like you very much anymore. Perhaps that time when it got enmeshed in WW1 to protect your Ottoman Empire may have put them off. Or your internal campaign of subversion exploiting Germany's horde of Turkish laborers. What are you left with then? France, Italy or perhaps Austria will forget that whole pesky Gates of Vienna thing and this time ride to your rescue.

No, when Russian commandos are ripping off your wife's head scarf-- there will be no one left to save you. Not your newfound allies, or Erdogan who will take the first plane to Riyadh, with as much of the 18 billion in gold and cash he stole from Iran as his sweaty hands can shove into the pockets of his cheap suit. And just think of it, as the Hagia Sophia church that you turned into a mosque, will become a church again.

Istanbul will once again be Constantinople, which means a certain catchy 20's song will require a rewrite. Of course it may not happen exactly that way. But something close to it might happen. Erdogan's plan to change Turkey into a Muslim country will not succeed if alert pro democracy and secular Turks who have seen the human rights violation under Islam in Iran, have something to say in the next elections.

So when that day of reckoning comes, you will find that you have made enemies of former allies such as pro democracy Iranians, Israel and the US-- and that the new allies Erdogan has found for you in Islamic Republic and Syria would prefer a Russian controlled Turkey, that has no chance of ever reverting to a Kemalist government. And Erdogan's godfather in Saudi Arabia commands oil money, not troops. And while he might be willing to sink Turkey for the sake of Islam, perhaps there are Turks who value their nation, more than Islamism. If not, you can look forward to Erdogan "reforming" your country, until it has the military might of Pakistan, the literacy level of Saudi Arabia and the poverty rate of Egypt and rapist reputation of Iran’s mullahs. It is of course your choice.

People have the right to choose their destiny, for good or ill. And if you find that this letter is filled with contempt, it is a contempt fully merited by a regime that seeks to cloak its shameful betrayal of a former allies in the guise of human rights, when it brutally suppresses the rights of its own minorities. You may wish to go on dancing to the tune being played by Erdogan, to sheet music composed in Riyadh and Tehran. It is a very good tune. Filled with hate, violence and religious fanaticism. That also is your choice. But know that whatever you have was bought and paid by your ancestors who understood that Turkey would either modernize out of the gutter of Islam, or it would be washed away by the colonial tide. Your power does not come from Islam, it comes from the bread crusts of civilization that fall from the table of Europe and ineptitude of the corrupt mullahs of Iran. Abandon them for the red hued madness of the Jihad, and you will not rule over an empire, but over a wasteland. If you doubt that, look to the south and to the east. Look to the desert. You came from there once. And if you throw away your once secular and democratic country for the fanatical madness of Islam-- you will return there again.

Sincerely,

Your Secular Pro Democracy Iranian Former Friend

Dr. Arash Irandoost is a pro-democracy activist who advocates regime change in Iran. He denounces those who have corrupted the religion of Islam, make war with all free nations and intend to dominate the world with their theocracy. Dr. Irandoost's work has been published in numerous magazines around the world, as well as in hundreds of Internet magazines, websites and blogs. He is also a researcher and literary translator. He blogs at hakemiat-e-mardom. blogspot. com/

Letter to the People of Turkey | EuropeNews
 
As I understand it more then 10,000 missles have been fired into Israel and a state of war exists between the Palestinians and Israel. Also as I understand supplies can be shipped into Gaza thru Egypt. Israeli officials reiterate that there is no shortage of humanitarian aid in Gaza, but say that 10,000 tons of aid carried by ships will be transferred to Gaza after inspection.

As I see it the only purpose of this Aid Shipments is to confront Israel or eventually to ship war supplies to Gaza. If some one was shooting rockets at me or my family I would be doing the same things the Jews are doing and a lot more..
 
oh please....
do you listen to what United Nations said about GAZA blockade in September 2009 ?

UN Fact Finding Mission finds strong evidence of war crimes and crimes against humanity committed during the Gaza conflict; calls for end to impunity

go through http://www.unhchr.ch/huricane/huricane.nsf/view01/9B63490FFCBE44E5C1257632004EA67B?opendocument

or read this (published in March 2010)
http://www.ochaopt.org/documents/gaza_agriculture_25_05_2010_press_release_english.pdf

what Israel reiterates are all but lies..
 
When I said these 'peace activists' meant harm, it does not mean they intended to be violent from the beginning of their trip. Am willing to grant that everyone had peaceful intention but I pointed it out before and will do again: That no one sane would assume that boarding troops will be armed with paintball guns and pistols. Five of six ships complied with Israeli boarding troops. Why did not the sixth ship? Why did they armed themselves with improvised hand weapons? Because somehow they knew that Israeli boarding troops were wielding non-lethal weapons. How could they have known? Because most likely people from the other five ships informed them of that fact.


I have been hit by paintballs before. It is painful but not crippling. Look at the sixth photo in this post...

http://www.defence.pk/forums/914188-post1.html

Those men were armed with improvised hand weapons and WAITING at the door. Their clothing alone is enough to protect them from any distracting pain from painball shots. They can easily rush any boarding troop so lightly armed before the soldier could pull his pistol. If they were so fearful of the IDF, then why were they willing to ambush boarding troops? Because they were alerted to the fact that Israeli soldiers were armed with non-lethal weapons and no longer were so fearful.


No...You cannot dismiss the fact that those Israeli boarding troops were so lightly armed. No boarding troops from any military does. But the fact that they were so lightly armed meant that Israel intended to have as non-violent a process as possible. Show the forum a single navy in the world that armed their assault troops with paintball guns. You had better believe that every navy in the world right now is laughing at Israel for being so foolish. A pistol is the proverbial last ditch defense for self when nothing else worked or is available. So if people were killed it was because they were sufficiently threatening, not because those Israeli troops intended to kill anyone the moment they set foot aboard. Five out of six ships complied peacefully. Why not the sixth? This fact everyone avoided. Again -- Show everyone a single navy in the world that armed their assault troops with paintball guns. Can you do that?


What kind of 'reconstruction' was that? This naval blockade is about three years old and ships have passed through before. This is no 'reconstruction' but merely your own fantasy story.


Really...??? Here is what a supposedly 'neutral' party must do in order to earn immunity from boarding...

International Humanitarian Law - San Remo Manual 1994

Look at item 'a' for starter. But in this, Turkey is hardly a 'neutral' party. Even though Turkey is not in an armed conflict against Israel, Turkey as a country is now hostile to Israel, from the citizenry to top leadership, Erdogan. Turkey is nowhere qualified as a 'neutral' party. If you want to talk 'neutrality', bring in the Swiss or Japan, for examples. Not Turkey. If all sides agreed to have a neutral party involvement, the blockading country effectively transferred that 'right to visit' to the neutral party. Even so, the blockading country still has the right to have representatives at any inspections for contraband-ed items. Whether the blockading country will send representatives or not is a matter of trust between the blockading country and this neutral party since the neutral party is the one who offered to do the inspections. Inspection representatives are not boarding troops.


Spare me the hyperboles. It does not matter if the UN endorses the Gaza naval blockade or not.

Charter of the United Nations: Chapter VII: Action with Respect to Threats to the Peace, Breaches of the Peace and Acts of Agression

Israel withdrew from the Gaza Strip years ago...

Israel's unilateral disengagement plan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Look at this phrase...


Ham-*** attacks came from Gaza. Withdrawal from a territory mean ceding control of said territory to another authority with a the expectation that said authority will exercise restraint and work towards a peaceful resolution to a conflict. So from the moment Ham-*** used Gaza to conduct military or paramilitary operations, Article 51 of the UN Charter came into effect, rendering this naval blockade eminently legal. The UN does not need to publish any statement of endorsement. Its own charter has that endorsement of self defense, of which a blockade is a mechanism of said self defense.

A blockade is usually accompanied by a belligerent occupation of a territory, either come before or after. But since Israel back in '05 willingly withdrew from Gaza, where is that belligerent occupation that everyone is talking about? A blockade is not an occupation. Egypt once had partial control of Gaza and is now maintaining a land blockade from Egyptian soil to Gaza. Why does no one accuse Egypt of 'occupying' Gaza?

Here is something for you to chew on...Gaza is not part of any country and that fact alone allows Israel to reoccupy Gaza as a belligerent power. But Israel chose not to reoccupy Gaza. So absent a belligerent occupation and a naval blockade that allows inspected cargo to pass through the blockade zone and into the territory, Israel is performing similar to a 'pacific blockade'...

Pacific blockade - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

No state stepped forward to claim to act on Gaza's behalf. No one wanted to openly wage a war against Israel. Why not? Truth is that no one care about the Palestinians and no state care because Gaza, the West Bank and the Palestinians themselves serves no strategic interests to them. The Palestinians are pawns in this religious war. If Iran is capable of wiping Israel off the map and did so, the Iranian mullahs would be as brutal in their occupation of Palestine just as they are in Iran. This 'pacific blockade' imposed by Israel is supposed to motivate internal changes in Gaza by the Gazans themselves away from the current low intensity but wearying war on both sides. Just as no state dared to step forward to challenge Israel in overt warfare, no state therefore is capable of even issuing a credible threat to compel Israel to impose this 'pacific blockade' either and Israel can impose an even harsher blockade than the current one, a blockade that is appropriate to a war of conquest. So the fact that this 'pacific blockade' exist and for years is an indication that Israel is willing to work with 'the international community' provided that this 'community' put the same public pressure on Ham-*** to stop using Gaza as a war staging ground.


You cannot, in the interests of intellectual honesty, so casually dismissed justifications. Yes...Any act of war, and a blockade is an act of war, will produce misery. But then why not the same argument be applied against Ham-***? Are you afraid of appearing impartial? Again...Israel withdrew from Gaza in '05. What prompted this blockade? Just for the hell of it?

Israel Continues to Transfer Humanitarian Aid to Gaza

Got that? This 'humanitarian aid' by sea is only a small fraction of what passed through by land. The goal of this 'aid' fleet was never to deliver any significant amount of aid but to harass Israel behind the shield of civilian immunity in a conflict zone. You have a problem with the blockade? One alternative is to allow Ham-*** access to weapons to continue the war and this alternative would be unacceptable to Israel. Acceptable to you I presume? Another is for Israel to impose a harsher blockade and reenter Gaza as a belligerent occupation power to take the war to Ham-*** itself. Another would be for the 'international community' to have a credible enforcement presence in Gaza to assure the Israelis of their border security concerns and eventually there would no be no blockade at all. The keyword here is 'enforcement' and unfortunately for the Jews this self appointed and self annointed group of 'international community' would sooner be filled with Ham-*** fighters who would waste no time donning the righteous robe of 'peace activist' and proceed to do Iran's work before they get around to improving Gaza..:lol:

Economic hardship is not the same as economic deprivation or destruction. Gaza is suffering economic hardship that is the result of this blockade. The alternative is worse. When Israel withdrew in '05, it was with the expectation that Gazans would be a peaceful autonomous territory that while may not be a state, Gaza can still be accorded respects due a state. Ham-*** destroyed that possibility.

Increased humanitarian aid to Gaza after IDF operation Jan 2009

It is presented elsewhere on this forum other sources that Gaza is hardly deprived as your hyperboles would like us to believe.

Who is neutral here?

I thought that UN represents a neutral perspective and certainly a global perspective
What does it have to say about the whole affair?

Am i to assume that when UN reports denounce Israel, it is a trivial matter?
The same UN mandate on the other hand is taken very seriously when it is used as a jumping board to sanction other countries and carry out military interventions.
Am i to assume that the UN fact finding missions and reports are nonsense?
l
The UN says that only 1/4th of the required supply passes through the blockade and you paste a link by none other than the Israeli foreign ministry to contradict the reports by UN?
You portray that Israel is just inspecting goods, as if they let any non contraband item (food, medicine, utensils) reach Gaza no matter what the quantity.
That is not the case my friend!
Israel does not let more than a certain amount reach Gaza and this is why there is criticism from UN and ofcourse many other countries.
There is certainly a deprivation inside the Gaza strip as reported by most of the international organizations which deal with humanitarian crisis globally.

So the party which is using its military might to suppress the Palestinians and punishes them collectively is now the authentic source for passing judgment on its own actions?
The same party which has always been accused of using disproportionate force?
The same party which has been openly bulldozing Palestinian homes and annexing more and more land for itself (in defiance of UN mandate) is the sole victim here?

And i am the one who is being accused of resorting to hyperbole?

The flotilla raid highlights a humanitarian crisis which the world has so far failed to resolve.
The attempt to break the blockade and the ensuing raid has served as a warning flare to the entire world.
The bravery of these few hundred people from around the globe is certainly admirable to me and if their intent was to highlight what is happening here, then that certainly is not an evil intent.
Looking away from something cruel does not make it go away.
The world has seen it and from what i have read and heard, most of the world sees Israel in a very negative light over what it is doing.
 
Last edited:
Israel Navy reserves officers: Allow external Gaza flotilla probe

Officers denounce operation as 'military and diplomatic failure', slam government for placing blame on the activists.
A group of top Israel Navy reserves officers on Sunday publicly called on Israel to allow an external probe into its commando raid of a Gaza-bound humanitarian aid flotilla last week, which left nine people dead and several more wounded.

In a letter to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Israel Defense Forces Chief of Staff Gabi Ashkenazi, the Navy officers denounced the commando raid as having "ended in tragedy both at the military and diplomatic levels."

"We disagree with the widespread claims that this was the result of an intelligence rift," said the officers. "In addition, we do not accept claims that this was a 'public relations failure' and we think that the plan was doomed to failure from the beginning."

"First and foremost, we protest the fact that responsibility for the tragic results was immediately thrust onto the organizers of the flotilla," wrote the officers. "This demonstrates contempt for the responsibility that belongs principally to the hierarchy of commanders and those who approved the mission. This shows contempt for the values of professionalism, the purity of weapons and for human lives."

The Navy officers' letter came as Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was convening his top ministers to deliberate a United Nations proposal to create a joint international committee alongside Turkey and the United States to investigate the circumstances of the deadly raid.

The cabinet was also to discuss the creation of an internal committee to look into the incident. Netanyahu earlier Sunday rejected the idea of an international panel, and reiterated that Israel had the right to conduct its own investigation.

Netanyahu discussed the proposal for a multinational panel with United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon in a telephone call on Saturday but told cabinet ministers fon Sunday that Israel was exploring other options, political sources said.

"I told [Ban] that the investigation of the facts must be carried out responsibly and objectively," Netanyahu told ministers. "We need to consider the issue carefully and level-headedly, while maintaining Israel's national interests as well as those of the Israel Defense Forces."
 
Who is neutral here?
No one. And I hope YOU will not put up such a pretense.

I thought that UN represents a neutral perspective and certainly a global perspective
What does it have to say about the whole affair?
Then all 'The UN' has to do is have a credible deterrence force and enforcement mechanisms to ensure the Gaza Strip is not used as a war staging ground. Remember...Israel withdrew from Gaza in '05. Why do you refused to acknowledged this fact?

Am i to assume that when UN reports denounce Israel, it is a trivial matter?
No...But denunciations of Israel does not guarantee Israel's security.

The same UN mandate on the other hand is taken very seriously when it is used as a jumping board to sanction other countries and carry out military interventions.
Am i to assume that the UN fact finding missions and reports are nonsense?
The UN does not its own enforcement arm for any resolutions it passed. It rely upon the VOLUNTARY contributions of member states. The more serious the matter, the greater the demand for member states to comply to the UN's mandates. For this issue, no one stepped forward to ensure that Gaza is not used as a war staging ground. That left Israel. All the fact findings does not create such security.

The UN says that only 1/4th of the required supply passes through the blockade and you paste a link by none other than the Israeli foreign ministry to contradict the reports by UN?
You portray that Israel is just inspecting goods, as if they let any non contraband item (food, medicine, utensils) reach Gaza no matter what the quantity.
That is not the case my friend!
Israel does not let more than a certain amount reach Gaza and this is why there is criticism from UN and ofcourse many other countries.
There is certainly a deprivation inside the Gaza strip as reported by most of the international organizations which deal with humanitarian crisis globally.
If there is a discrepancy between amount reported by one side against another, that still does not negate the fact that the blockade of Gaza is a legitimate enforcement tactic by Israel to convince the Gazans to pressure Hamas to cease its military operations. Remember...Israel withdrew from Gaza back on '05. This 'pacific blockade' is the far better option than an all out war. Now...Explain why is Israel's withdrawal from Gaza back in '05 irrelevant.

So the party which is using its military might to suppress the Palestinians and punishes them collectively is now the authentic source for passing judgment on its own actions?
The same party which has always been accused of using disproportionate force?
The same party which has been openly bulldozing Palestinian homes and annexing more and more land for itself (in defiance of UN mandate) is the sole victim here?
There is nothing wrong with deploying disproportionate force. That is the way of war and of law enforcement, if you had not notice. The police do not come to arrest you with only one officer. The police will come to arrest you with overwhelming force in manpower and weapons in hope that it will deter you from violence. In this case, paintball guns are far from disproportionate force.

And i am the one who is being accused of resorting to hyperbole?
Yes.

The flotilla raid highlights a humanitarian crisis which the world has so far failed to resolve.
The attempt to break the blockade and the ensuing raid has served as a warning flare to the entire world.
The bravery of these few hundred people from around the globe is certainly admirable to me and if their intent was to highlight what is happening here, then that certainly is not an evil intent.
Looking away from something cruel does not make it go away.
The world has seen it and from what i have read and heard, most of the world sees Israel in a very negative light over what it is doing.
Then all 'the world' has to do is give Israel the border security that all states deserve. Remember...Israel withdrew from Gaza back in '05.
 
No one. And I hope YOU will not put up such a pretense.


Then all 'The UN' has to do is have a credible deterrence force and enforcement mechanisms to ensure the Gaza Strip is not used as a war staging ground. Remember...Israel withdrew from Gaza in '05. Why do you refused to acknowledged this fact?


No...But denunciations of Israel does not guarantee Israel's security.


The UN does not its own enforcement arm for any resolutions it passed. It rely upon the VOLUNTARY contributions of member states. The more serious the matter, the greater the demand for member states to comply to the UN's mandates. For this issue, no one stepped forward to ensure that Gaza is not used as a war staging ground. That left Israel. All the fact findings does not create such security.


If there is a discrepancy between amount reported by one side against another, that still does not negate the fact that the blockade of Gaza is a legitimate enforcement tactic by Israel to convince the Gazans to pressure Hamas to cease its military operations. Remember...Israel withdrew from Gaza back on '05. This 'pacific blockade' is the far better option than an all out war. Now...Explain why is Israel's withdrawal from Gaza back in '05 irrelevant.


There is nothing wrong with deploying disproportionate force. That is the way of war and of law enforcement, if you had not notice. The police do not come to arrest you with only one officer. The police will come to arrest you with overwhelming force in manpower and weapons in hope that it will deter you from violence. In this case, paintball guns are far from disproportionate force.


Yes.


Then all 'the world' has to do is give Israel the border security that all states deserve. Remember...Israel withdrew from Gaza back in '05.

I acknowledge the fact that Israeli land occupation forces vacated in 2005.
However the IDF conducted military operations using maximum force and causing great damage even after 2005.
It means that vacation of land occupation forces does not imply that IDF guns are silent, on the contrary there have been punitive attacks which have seen the use of heavy firepower.

In 2006 the Israeli response to the capture of one of their soldiers and the rocket attacks certainly did not segregate between military and civilian targets once the guns started blazing.
Israel captured and killed many Hamas operatives, even capturing the elected representatives of government who belonged to Hamas, it is not like the blockade was an option chosen in lieu of a military operation.
The military operation was carried out in full force first killing hundreds of civilians (on top of militants) and generated condemnation from all across the globe.

Whereas certainly in war the objective is to overwhelm your enemies, deliberate targeting of civilians is something Israel has done many times and has been accused of this by many organizations and not just the Palestinians or the Muslim countries.
Israel's brutality is what gives justification to Hamas, in the backdrop of all the controversy regarding how Israel came into being at the direct cost of Palestinians.

The fact is that it is simply not a case of the entire world demonizing Israel as has been portrayed by those who claim that Israel has a right to defend itself and deserves a secure border.
Palestinians too have a right to their land and homes which the world has failed to guarantee as well.
At least the world has aided Israel to the extent that it can take on the entire Arab world, leave alone the Palestinians who are nothing in comparison in terms of military.

I claim to be neutral in the aspect that so far i am willing to see an Israeli and Palestinian state co exist side by side despite the fact that the manner in which Israel was created is certainly most disturbing.
However i do admit that day by day i feel this is not possible especially since Israel has a guaranteed veto power in the security council.

The cycle of violence started at the inception of the Israeli state and all the injustices henceforth have led to this point whereby Israel has gradually been granted absolute power over the Palestinians who were originally in absolute majority in the land called Palestine.
The grudge has only gotten worse and will lead to more violence and much more deaths for the Palestinians because no one backs their cause wholeheartedly with military support.

The Palestinians dislike Israel severely, i do not think the blockade will remove the enmity and deny space to Hamas even if the Palestinians in Gaza do not love Hamas.
Israel has been far too aggressive most of the time to cause such a transition whereby the Palestinians will throw out Hamas in a civil war and at a great cost to their lives.
 
I acknowledge the fact that Israeli land occupation forces vacated in 2005.
Good...Finally some honesty...:rolleyes:

However the IDF conducted military operations using maximum force and causing great damage even after 2005.
It means that vacation of land occupation forces does not imply that IDF guns are silent, on the contrary there have been punitive attacks which have seen the use of heavy firepower.
Of course not. But it begs the question that to whom is Israel responding? The concession of a territory to an authority with no guarantee of a cessation of the armed conflict is a foolish gamble and one that Israel had to make. Not only that, the concession was also a ceasefire offer. Hamas refused to accept the ceasefire offer and Israel has no choice but to respond in kind and out of proportion. That made the naval blockade of Gaza eminently legal and any blame for the economic hardship and deprivation on the population rightfully fall upon Hamas.

I see no need to address the rest of your commentary.
 
As I understand it more then 10,000 missles have been fired into Israel and a state of war exists between the Palestinians and Israel.

10,000 missiles that have killed what? 3 people? :mps:

In turn, airstrikes that have killed thousands?

Also as I understand supplies can be shipped into Gaza thru Egypt.

They just unbanned 'snack foods.' Now think what is left to unban.

Israeli officials reiterate that there is no shortage of humanitarian aid in Gaza, but say that 10,000 tons of aid carried by ships will be transferred to Gaza after inspection.

Israel has no credibility.

As I see it the only purpose of this Aid Shipments is to confront Israel or eventually to ship war supplies to Gaza. If some one was shooting rockets at me or my family I would be doing the same things the Jews are doing and a lot more..

They announced months before that they were to challenge the Israeli Blockaid on Gaza, accompanied by widely renowned Humanitarians, retired soldiers, Holocaust Survivors, and even some Nobel Peace prize winners.

If someone was to tear down my house in order to expand their 'homeland', i'd fire a rocket into their face.
 
Murders on the Mediterranean

By Syed Talat Hussain

June 13, 2010

The writer is executive director news and current affairs at Aaj TV (syed.talat@tribune.com.pk).

The website democracynow.org gives a vivid, and by far the most authentic, video account of Israel’s attack on the main ship of the freedom flotilla carrying over 600 passengers including an eight-month-old baby.

The video is one of the many that are likely to come out in the weeks ahead captured by those who witnessed recent history’s most audacious insult to efforts to highlight the plight of 1.5 million Palestinians stranded in the Gaza Strip. It shows bullets being fired from the boats carrying Israeli commandos as they make a vain attempt to climb up the Mavi Marmara. It depicts passengers, including foreigners and an Arab member of Knesset, (the Israeli parliament), wade through staircases and corridors filled with the injured. As doctors make desperate efforts to revive those shot in the head or in the chest from close range, blood-splattered walls furnish cold testimony to the methods the Israelis used to take control of the ship: anyone who stood in the way to taking over the control room – which they eventually did in a little over an hour – had to be eliminated.

The video is filmed by a journalist who left banking for the electronic media and presently works in New York. For a brief period when we were prison mates he told me about the effort he had to make to preserve the video: at least a one hour video of the attack was transferred on to a chip measuring half an inch, safely tucked in a special slot in his underwear. He took a grave risk: the Israelis would have strung him upside down if they had found what he was up to. They had strip-searched all of us to ensure that we did not carry any pictures on us. He told me how he wanted to come on this journey because that was good for his budding career but as he saw the devastation caused by Israeli actions, his motive changed from a mere professional concern to angry defiance against Israeli impunity.

Others were not so lucky with their efforts to slip out of the ship, vital evidence of Israeli’s criminal conduct on international waters. Among the injured there were two Indonesians, both camera men, one shot near the collar bone and another in the arm he was holding the camera with. I had spent nearly 10 days with them starting from our journey in Istanbul. The Malaysians and the Indonesian combined had a large contingent, over a dozen, which included a female reporter as well. Deeply religious and belonging to the Tablighee side of Islam, some of them, including the one who got shot in the arm, would spend long hours praying and reciting the Quran. Not exactly active in his pursuit of news on the ship, he was standing in the corner filming the attack as it unfolded when he was knocked out by a sniper. On the upper deck, as mayhem spread I saw two men fall to bullets — the sound of which is amply recorded in the democracynow video. I had been in these situations before. I had enough experience to know that these were all sniper shots. No random bullet pierces the forehead’s center or rips through the heart. If there was any doubt about how these passengers had been killed it was removed when a cameraman who was leaning against me as we both attempted to record the events fell back on me with a bullet wound in his arm. Israelis knew who they had to kill to keep the lid on their beastly actions: the journalists topped the list.

Fortunately, the Israeli system is not foolproof and there is enough evidence floating around to pinpoint responsibility. At any rate each individual who was on the ship is an eyewitness who can blow away the pack of lies Israel, its global backers and a patently one-sided western media are churning out. For a change truth is holding the field of public opinion long misled by propaganda.

Published in the Express Tribune, June 14th, 2010.
 
Good...Finally some honesty...:rolleyes:


Of course not. But it begs the question that to whom is Israel responding? The concession of a territory to an authority with no guarantee of a cessation of the armed conflict is a foolish gamble and one that Israel had to make. Not only that, the concession was also a ceasefire offer. Hamas refused to accept the ceasefire offer and Israel has no choice but to respond in kind and out of proportion. That made the naval blockade of Gaza eminently legal and any blame for the economic hardship and deprivation on the population rightfully fall upon Hamas.

I see no need to address the rest of your commentary.

Finally?
My friend, i have been honest throughout the discourse.
No deliberate attempt on my part to hide facts.

The fact remains that might is right.
At the end of the day this is what dictates the state of affairs.
Isreal is stragically important to some countries who will go to any length to protect their interests.

The commentry i made was to bring to light the fact that amidst all the wars and conflicts, Palestinians always lost more and more.

The initial Palestinian demand was to reverse the creation of Israel which became all what it was not supposed to be as far as Palestinians were concerned, however this was moderated and eventually a huge shift occurred in which Palestinians were willing to co exist as two states with Israel.
However Israel does not offer much in negotiations and has always used force to have its way.
 
Last edited:

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom