Photographs of beaten Israeli soldiers aboard Mavi Marmara Gaza Aid Flotilla

[BATMAN]

Now if i'm not mistaken this is a sack full of onions!!!!!!!!!!
and banana in the hand of lady

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

Hi, any news about our folks? did they got back?

last I heard, israeli authorities handed them over to Jordan. They are probably still in Jordan, or quietly made their way back to the holy motherland.

 

[Canaan]

Now if i'm not mistaken this is a sack full of onions!!!!!!!!!!
and banana in the hand of lady

Maybe this bag of onions made that dude cry. Onions can be a pain.

 

[Canaan]

Without disagreeing with most of what you said, my point still would be that an attack against armed commandos would invite some retaliatory action which should have been expected. I have made my feelings on the blockade & Israel's general treatment of the Palestinians known on other threads which is why I did not go into the legalities of the case.

Do you believe that if Pakistani (or Indian) commandos faced a similar situation, the outcome would have been any different? It's one thing to argue against the decision made to board the ship, it is something else completely to expect fellow soldiers of the commandos in the photos to take no action against the people attacking their buddies. Intentions are not necessarily transparent in such situations nor can you & I vouch for the objectives of the protesters in question. The question to be asked is under a situation like the one which transpired and with the information presently available to us, could the actions of the Israeli soldiers have a legitimate basis on which they were grounded. Whether the actions were more severe than necessary is something that can be argued while remembering that we have the benefit of hindsight. I would have to argue that Israeli soldiers can claim the benefit of partial exoneration on the basis of these photos. Regrettably, some of the protesters have been shown to have involved themselves in acts which might have brought on their & their fellow protesters heads, some very tragic consequences.

I can't guarantee that any other nation wouldn't have acted the same way or worse. But it really doesn't matter, as this would be pure speculation and hypothesizing not to talk about diverting the focus from the core of the problem, the illegal blockade and illegal piracy of aid vessels in international water. The matter of fact is that Israel broke international law and should be punished for it. Not give a MOH for the Zionist pirate that killed six of the nine by shooting them at close range in the head and back, and spread out lies about the activists being Al-Qaida and what not. That kind of attitude and arrogance really pisses me off. Instead Israel should admit they made a mistake, instead of trying to lie themselves out of it and try to deceive the world via their propaganda machine and lobbies.

 

[gambit]

I disagree. Israel's whole illegal blockade is over (its a matter of time) given Egypt has opened up its side indefinitely, which is in a stark contrast to all of the past openings.

The blockade is not illegal. Maritime legal experts, regarding peace and war, agreed in principle that this blockade is not illegal under both customary and codified laws. As for Egyptians...

Egypt: Gaza blockade a failure, border stays open - Yahoo! News

Egypt and Israel have maintained the blockade since Hamas took control of Gaza in 2007, with Israel describing it as an essential measure to stop weapons from reaching Hamas militants, who have hit southern Israel with rockets and in past years killed hundreds in suicide bombings.

The Egyptian security official said, however, that the closure has failed to achieve its goals, including the release of an Israeli soldier held by Hamas since 2006. Israeli airstrikes and Egyptian security efforts have also yet to choke off a bustling smuggling trade that uses hundreds of tunnels along the Gaza-Egypt border, though the official said Egypt is determined to shut them down.

Under the restrictions at the Rafah crossing point, Egypt is letting in some humanitarian aid but will not transfer large cargo shipments or construction material because the terminal is designed primarily as a crossing for travelers, said the Egyptian official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue.

...They are relaxing their rules for people but not for the same items that Israel considered to be 'contraband'. The Gaza Strip is not part of any country. If Egypt is collaborating with Hamas to use Gaza as part of the Israeli-Palestinians conflict, Egypt would be in violation of the Egypt-Israel peace treaty of 1979.

What Rachel Corie did was fine, what Mavi Marva passengers did was well within their rights as well. You and I can discuss the specifics of the boarding for a long time but there is no getting around the point that the world opinion is largely seeing this Israeli boarding as an illegal attempt that resulted in the killings of 9 people.

Here is what the captain of the Rachel Corrie had to say:

"I was ordered to stay on board the bridge," he said. "You have to realise the guy from the Mavi Marmara was basically executed by the Israelis, so I am standing there on the bridge by myself with no protection so at that stage you start to get worried."

They did what was right, yet the mistakes and the responsibility of the Israelis in this FUBAR of a situation is for all to see. They thought they could get away with murder, literally, yet again and this time got called out.

The Rachel Corie was scared, simple as that. For the original 'humanitarian aid' fleet, five of the six ships complied with Israeli request per accepted customary and codified maritime laws regarding blockades. The sixth ship resisted, its folly and the resulting deaths frightened the Rachel Corie. The Rachel Corie's captain can use all the hyperboles he want but he knows full well that his accusation that there were 'executions' would not stand before the court of maritime laws regarding blockades. The court of public opinion is separate issue and this is where Israel must tread carefully in trying to balance out the negative publicity with maritime laws that agreed with Israel.

Israelis can now maintain their shipping blockade for as long as they want but its certainly not going to work, because Palestinians are getting in and out of Gaza easily now from the Egyptian side. This I believe was one of the major goals of the aid flotilla and they have attained it.

The issue is not about Palestinians travel. If anything, Hamas is even more restrictive than Egypt or Israel, going back to the above news source...

Egypt: Gaza blockade a failure, border stays open - Yahoo! News

Hamas tightly controls access to Rafah, and only travelers with the proper permits can reach the terminal.

The issue is 'contraband' which under customary and codified maritime laws, the blockading country can be as specific as it want. For both Israel and Egypt, construction materials constituted 'contraband'.

 

[RescueRanger]

Total blunder on the part of the IDF, they had far less provocative and safer options than VBSS on Vessel carrying aid workers. Regardless of what argument you put across, death is never justified.

They wanted to make an example of the people on board this ship, and it failed. BTW labelling people "terrorists" and branding a aid organisation as a "terrorist" outfit without concrete evidence is indicative of the attitude of the Israeli government.

A few tid bits:
There is no such thing as non-lethal; the correct term is less than lethal. Everything from a beanbag to cayenne spray if deployed incorrectly can ultimately kill.

Troops are shown using Pepper Ball Guns: PepperBall Technologies Incorporated | Home. But considering the wind conditions present "Downdraft from Helo" "Breeze from Sea" + captured troops have no Respirators = (Ouch)!

 

[Musafar]

Those commandos deserved to be drowned.

 

[gambit]

Total blunder on the part of the IDF, they had far less provocative and safer options than VBSS on Vessel carrying aid workers.

Such as...??? And please provide a credible source that said those options were never tried.

 

[Ganga]

they were pirates. What right they have to hijack a forign ship in international waters???????????//

they got beaten by people on ship in self defense they killed people in ship in comitting a robbery/ kidnapping which is crime according to all laws of any land

They were in international waters but were heading towards Israeli waters.They were bound to be intercepted at some time.

 

[PlanetWarrior]

What's that old saying ? People who live in glass houses shouldn't be throwing stones

 

[Desertfalcon]

Israel may have had a right to board under international law and has a right to self defence as any country does, but the root of the problem is that the "self" that Israel defends was a country created by Europeans, for Europeans, on land that did not belong to them by displacing those for whom it did. Palestinian families that had owned the land and houses for generations were forced from their homes in order to pay for the crime of the Holocaust for which they bore no guilt.

I used to be more optimistic but the older I get the more I fear that there will be no solution to the problem. The only way Israel will disappear is through another disaster for the Jews. The only way they can stay is through the continuing one for the Palestinians.

 

[Comet]

Israel may have had a right to board under international law and has a right to self defence as any country does, but the root of the problem is that the "self" that Israel defends was a country created by Europeans, for Europeans, on land that did not belong to them by displacing those for whom it did. Palestinian families that had owned the land and houses for generations were forced from their homes in order to pay for the crime of the Holocaust for which they bore no guilt.

I used to be more optimistic but the older I get the more I fear that there will be no solution to the problem. The only way Israel will disappear is through another disaster for the Jews. The only way they can stay is through the continuing one for the Palestinians.

Europeans don't like Jews themselves. Over the history, Jew have faced problem in every part of Europe.

Making Israel was a nice way to get rid of Jews.

 

[prototype]

i just heard that iranian revolutionary guards r ready to provide protection for any ship that will sail towards gaza,it will make matter more worse

 

[Solomon2]

the root of the problem is that the "self" that Israel defends was a country created by Europeans, for Europeans, on land that did not belong to them by displacing those for whom it did. Palestinian families that had owned the land and houses for generations were forced from their homes in order to pay for the crime of the Holocaust for which they bore no guilt.

Where did you learn this sort of history? In school? In a church or mosque?

Not only Europeans, but (as I've pointed out previously) the Ottoman Caliphs themselves desired Palestine to become a national home for the Jews. Jews were already long-established as residents in Jaffa, Jerusalem, and Hebron. As the Zionist movement took hold, hundreds of thousands of dunams of land were purchased by Jews and Jewish organizations from Arabs. And the days I am writing of pre-date the Holocaust - the process started in the late nineteenth century, while Palestine was still under Turkish rule.

After WWI it was decided that Imperialism was the true enemy of peace. The disparate peoples of the Austro-Hungarian/German, Russian, and Ottoman Empires were separated into nation-states. The establishment of a Jewish homeland in Palestine was seen as part of that process. Under the British Mandate Jewish families were transferred out of Transjordan into Palestine in 1920.

What happened after independence was declared in 1947 is a more complex story; yet if more of the Arabs affected had remained in Palestine rather than depart, Israel would nevertheless be a reality. Much of the Zionist leadership had no desire for the Arabs (many of whom had helped build and defend the Yishuv and moved to Palestine to take advantage of the advanced economy the Jews brought to the area) to leave the Jewish State. Israel is still 20% Arab today.

What difference did the Holocaust make? The nations of the world realized that had a Jewish State existed before WWII then six million Jews need not have perished at the hands of a vicious regime and hate-filled people. Clearly, a Jewish State was a necessity, not an option. The homelessness of Europe's few remaining Jews, homeless and languishing in Displaced Persons camps, made establishing the Jewish State a matter of immediate urgency, not something that could be put off any longer, just to satisfy a Britain that was itself tired of playing with Imperialism.

in order to pay for the crime of the Holocaust for which they bore no guilt.

That wasn't for lack of trying, as various the various riots against and massacres of Jews celebrated by Arabs makes clear. ("Eyeless in Gaza" even cited a few of these a day or two ago as inspiration.)

Once the Ottomans and British departed, most Arab countries (Egypt, Yemen, Algeria, Sudan, Iraq, Lebanon, etc.) eventually expelled their remaining Jews and seized their property without compensation, for the benefit of local dictators, of course. Most of these Jews went to Israel.

 

[Solomon2]

Making Israel was a nice way to get rid of Jews.

One Israeli general I spoke to two months ago pointed out that in the 1947 Independence War Europe had declared an arms embargo against the warring parties. He declared that made the Jews feel that the Europeans had supported their independence only to deny them the tools to defend their lives. For a community that had been terrorized by Europeans (under Hitler) and Arabs that is exactly what it looked like.