Israeli Forces attack Aid Flotilla to Gaza

[Eurytus]

Apparently several of the dead were shot in the head at close range. At least one was shot in the back.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jun/04/gaza-flotilla-activists-autopsy-results

The results revealed that a 60-year-old man, Ibrahim Bilgen, was shot four times in the temple, chest, hip and back. A 19-year-old, named as Fulkan Dogan, who also has US citizenship, was shot five times from less that 45cm, in the face, in the back of the head, twice in the leg and once in the back. Two other men were shot four times, and five of the victims were shot either in the back of the head or in the back, said Yalcin Buyuk, vice-chairman of the council of forensic medicine.

[Samalander]

The "Rachel Corey" have said FU to their own government's compromise offer which they managed to wrangle from Isreal.

They are still hellbent on running the blockade.

Our own government, shocked at international response, but still adament about the blockade, is playing safe defense.

What is the probable outcome of all this? A clash in Israeli territorial waters tomorrow.

[Samalander]

Apparently several of the dead were shot in the head at close range. At least one was shot in the back.

Eh... so what?

If someone attacks a soldier and one of his buddies sees this and shoots him in the back, what's wrong with that?

And if someone was stabbing me with a knife, I would definately put a bullet in his head.

P.S

Where is the international inquiry about all the bugs in this new forum?

[Ser Reptitious]

We are all biased, but I do not presume to be a source myself. If I back up my claim, I don't use a source made up, for instance, by a pro-settler group, since I simply do not trust it.

All that matters is whether a particular source has its facts/numbers right. If you feel that they are incorrect, feel free to counter them with your own evidence. Otherwise, I really don't think it matters whether a source is biased or not (and bias one way or the other is an accusation that can always be thrown around, as already mentioned).

Yes, compared to 220,000 Arabs who received Israeli ID's and residency. Hardly ethnic cleansing.

Yes, 100 people a year on average..But the true story is a bit different: East Jerusalem residents who did not live in E.Jerusalem for more than 7 years, and did not visit once, their residency was revoked.

http://www.cbs.gov.il/hodaot2007n/11_07_084b.doc

The Jerusalem issue is not normal. The people who received residency are, in many cases, affiliated with a national movement opposed to Israel and not yet at peace with it. There have been ethnic clashes in the area for 40 years. Ofcourse its not a normal case, there's a low-intensity conflict going on for decades in the region, and it has caused both sides to enact controvercial policies, many of them I do not support. But this is a far cry from saying there's an ethnic cleansing program going on in east Jerusalem, especially when hundreds of thosuands of Arabs received residency.

Well, they pretty much had no choice but to give the Arabs of East Jerusalem residency back in 1967 when the whole world was watching closely. And of course even now they can't just kick them all out in large numbers. The uproar and associated risks would be too great. Much easier to chip away at the block gradually.

But hey, we could keep going round and round in circles all day long. The fact is that I'm hardly the only one who feels that all the facts point towards low-level ethnic cleansing taking place in East Jerusalem. In fact, that bastion of hard-left wing islamofascism, The Economist, appears to feel the same way. But the authorities in charge are smart enough to muddle their tracks enough so that it's easy enough for people such as yourself to maintain plausible deniability.

ETA: This little tidbit from The Economist article linked is very interesting (and saddening):

Israel’s interior ministry is stripping ever more East Jerusalem Palestinians of residency papers. In 2008 nearly 4,600 lost them, 20 times the previous years’ average.

[The Progressive]

But the Are you kidding me? "Overpowering" Israeli soldiers with violence and holding them? In effect, kidnapping Israeli

soldiers?! What the heck kind of response do people expect at this point? They turned the whole thing into a rescue mission.

[Eurytus]

Eh... so what?

If someone attacks a soldier and one of his buddies sees this and shoots him in the back, what's wrong with that?

And if someone was stabbing me with a knife, I would definately put a bullet in his head.

P.S

Where is the international inquiry about all the bugs in this new forum?

Given that you'd excuse Israel anything I scarcely think your view is of any interest.

[The Progressive]

Statement from the Foregn ministry:

I wonder what will happen now.

Glad to see that Israel has capitulated and allowing the doom-cement and other humanitarian aids to enter Gaza.

The activists didn't die in vain, may their souls rest in peace.

[Ser Reptitious]

Eh... so what?

If someone attacks a soldier and one of his buddies sees this and shoots him in the back, what's wrong with that?

And if someone was stabbing me with a knife, I would definately put a bullet in his head.

Hmm, see, the proportional response would be to shoot them in some non-lethal area, such as the legs. The pain would bring them down and you'll be able to assert control over them (especially if you are a fully trained soldier).

[TrueMetis]

Are you kidding me? "Overpowering" Israeli soldiers with violence and holding them? In effect, kidnapping Israeli

soldiers?! What the heck kind of response do people expect at this point? They turned the whole thing into a rescue mission.

Um?

The standoff lasted about 10 minutes until the Israelis opened fire, he said: "One man got a direct hit to the head and another one was shot in the neck."

Abu Khalil said he saw some 40 wounded people, some with bullet wounds to the legs, apparently to disable them. Others had wounds to the eye, stomach and chest.

One activist used a loudhailer to tell the Israelis the four captive soldiers were well and would be released if they provided medical help for the wounded.

With an Israeli Arab lawmaker acting as mediator, the Israelis agreed to the request and the wounded were brought to the top deck where they were airlifted off the ship.

Abu Khalil said: "I'm happy and angry at the same time ... The most we had was a kitchen knife and sling shots." (Additional reporting by Alastair Macdonald in Jerusalem)

Great "rescue mission" they manage to kill some people and not rescue those that where captured.

[Yoadm]

All that matters is whether a particular source has its facts/numbers right.

Biased sources, at worst, produce faulty numbers, at best, twisted statistics. For instance, the Btselem claim, even if true, was easily twisted.

If you are simply looking to discredit my sources, you're welcome to actually bring some credible sources supporting your argumets to the table! I can't help but notice that I've been the one doing all the research so far!

I havent really made a specific claim, rather, found holes in yours. If there's something specific I said which you want backed up, present it and I gladly will.

Well, they pretty much had no choice but to give the Arabs of East Jerusalem residency back in 1967 when the whole world was watching closely. And of course even now they can't just kick them all out in large numbers. The uproar and associated risks would be too great. Much easier to chip away at the block gradually.

It doesnt matter why Israel gave them residency. The point is that it did so, which goes directly against the ethnic cleansing claim. Not only have they done it in 1967, but Arab Jerusalem residents have grown from 60,000 to 220,000 certified by the Israeli government. They keep giving residency. After oslo, they gave 100,000 more Palestinians Israeli citizenship. Whether this was done from the good of their hearts or due to cold political calculations, this wipes the floor over the claim of ethnic cleansing. There's discrimination in housing projects, certifications and infastructure, but that's not ethnic cleansing, not even close.

But the authorities in charge are smart enough to muddle their tracks enough so that it's easy enough for people such as yourself to maintain plausible deniability.

You mean the same authorities which, under them, the Arab population of Jerusalem has trippled? :rolleyes: Yeah they have managed to hide their insidious conspiracy from you pretty well!

Oh, and the economist article you posted says nothing of ethnic cleansing.

[Yoadm]

Hmm, see, the proportional response would be to shoot them in some non-lethal area, such as the legs. The pain would bring them down and you'll be able to assert control over them (especially if you are a fully trained soldier).

That's what happened in most cases, which is why there are four times as many wounded as dead. But in a melee when you have a lynch mob outnumbering you 10:1, there's hardly any time for calculated aiming. You shoot anyone that goes near you with a knife or a club.

[Eurytus]

That's what happened in most cases, which is why there are four times as many wounded as dead. But in a melee when you have a lynch mob outnumbering you 10:1, there's hardly any time for calculated aiming. You shoot anyone that goes near you with a knife or a club.

You don't manage to shoot someone twice between the eyes without aiming.

[Commodore]

Israel can try to shame its critics, but in the end, it's their very existence that is seen as illegitimate. It is the occupation of Palestine that is the original sin.

It doesn't matter how peaceful, democratic, fair they are, or how ruthless and violent their enemies are. They are in the wrong because they are there.

[Lightning Lord]

Glad to see that Israel has capitulated and allowing the doom-cement and other humanitarian aids to enter Gaza.

The activists didn't die in vain, may their souls rest in peace.

Gaza isn't getting the cement. It falls under the excluded "war materials." Construction materials are blocked. The food and medicine will be passed on. It's a nice way to keep people dependent. Give them the fish, but keep them from being able to get it themselves.

[CelticBrennus]

I saw some stuff today that Turkey will be escorting the next flotilla with their navy. I think Israel has been getting a little too used to beating up on the regions scrubs (and sometimes they cant even do that right...see Hizbollah), and forgot that there are other countries in the region who are as strong as they are. In fact the Turks have one of the largest armies in the world, and absent nukes, could probably smash the IDF (What, is Syria or Lebanon going to refuse passage?).

[Galactus]

Israel can try to shame its critics, but in the end, it's their very existence that is seen as illegitimate. It is the occupation of Palestine that is the original sin.

It doesn't matter how peaceful, democratic, fair they are, or how ruthless and violent their enemies are. They are in the wrong because they are there.

Uh, well, yes?

A wrong is not a right because you did it to a bad man.

[Commodore]

Uh, well, yes?

A wrong is not a right because you did it to a bad man.

If you think any attempt by Israel to defend itself is immoral because it has no right to exist in the first place, at least be honest about it and say so.

As always, the Hammer nails it:

Gaza under Hamas is a self-declared enemy of Israel -- a declaration backed up by more than 4,000 rockets fired at Israeli civilian territory. Yet having pledged itself to unceasing belligerency, Hamas claims victimhood when Israel imposes a blockade to prevent Hamas from arming itself with still more rockets.

In World War II, with full international legality, the United States blockaded Germany and Japan. And during the October 1962 missile crisis, we blockaded ("quarantined") Cuba. Arms-bearing Russian ships headed to Cuba turned back because the Soviets knew that the U.S. Navy would either board them or sink them. Yet Israel is accused of international criminality for doing precisely what John Kennedy did: impose a naval blockade to prevent a hostile state from acquiring lethal weaponry.

Oh, but weren't the Gaza-bound ships on a mission of humanitarian relief? No. Otherwise they would have accepted Israel's offer to bring their supplies to an Israeli port, be inspected for military materiel and have the rest trucked by Israel into Gaza -- as every week 10,000 tons of food, medicine and other humanitarian supplies are sent by Israel to Gaza.

Why was the offer refused? Because, as organizer Greta Berlin admitted, the flotilla was not about humanitarian relief but about breaking the blockade, i.e., ending Israel's inspection regime, which would mean unlimited shipping into Gaza and thus the unlimited arming of Hamas.

Israel has already twice intercepted ships laden with Iranian arms destined for Hezbollah and Gaza. What country would allow that?...

Where possible (Sinai, for example) Israel has traded territory for peace. But where peace offers were refused, Israel retained the territory as a protective buffer zone. Thus Israel retained a small strip of southern Lebanon to protect the villages of northern Israel. And it took many losses in Gaza, rather than expose Israeli border towns to Palestinian terror attacks. It is for the same reason America wages a grinding war in Afghanistan: You fight them there, so you don't have to fight them here.

But under overwhelming outside pressure, Israel gave it up. The Israelis were told the occupations were not just illegal but at the root of the anti-Israel insurgencies -- and therefore withdrawal, by removing the cause, would bring peace.

Land for peace. Remember? Well, during the past decade, Israel gave the land -- evacuating South Lebanon in 2000 and Gaza in 2005. What did it get? An intensification of belligerency, heavy militarization of the enemy side, multiple kidnappings, cross-border attacks and, from Gaza, years of unrelenting rocket attack...

Ah, but that's the point. It's the point understood by the blockade-busting flotilla of useful idiots and terror sympathizers, by the Turkish front organization that funded it, by the automatic anti-Israel Third World chorus at the United Nations, and by the supine Europeans who've had quite enough of the Jewish problem.

What's left? Nothing. The whole point of this relentless international campaign is to deprive Israel of any legitimate form of self-defense. Why, just last week, the Obama administration joined the jackals, and reversed four decades of U.S. practice, by signing onto a consensus document that singles out Israel's possession of nuclear weapons -- thus de-legitimizing Israel's very last line of defense: deterrence.

The world is tired of these troublesome Jews, 6 million -- that number again -- hard by the Mediterranean, refusing every invitation to national suicide. For which they are relentlessly demonized, ghettoized and constrained from defending themselves, even as the more committed anti-Zionists -- Iranian in particular -- openly prepare a more final solution.

[Samalander]

Somedays, and I hope that it won't ever come, but if your country was defeated in war and your homeland surrounded by a brutal military blockage that is slowly starving your family and depriving them of basic necessities for life and shelter ...........

Starving?http://countercultureconservative.wordpress.com/tag/obesity-gaza-blockade-israel-starving-starvation-hunger-food-weapons-rockets-hamas/

Right...

Given that you'd excuse Israel anything I scarcely think your view is of any interest.

So all the pro-Israel boarders should just maybe leave this thread and stop raining on your parade?

[Eurytus]

So all the pro-Israel boarders should just maybe leave this thread and stop raining on your parade?

Pro, that says it all really doesn't it.

Some people judge situations on their individual merit. You view it like a sports fan views games involving his "team".

No wonder you can't display the merest own of empathy.

[Crazydog7]

If you think any attempt by Israel to defend itself is immoral because it has no right to exist in the first place, at least be honest about it and say so.

As always, the Hammer nails it:

Or if you think any bad thing the state of Israel does in order to defend itself are OK, at least be honest about it and say so. I'm not a damn fool might makes right, I just wish it wasn't the case.

For many Americans (fundamentalist Christians) the state of Israel can do no wrong, no matter how much wrong it does. Just as for many Americans the US military can do no wrong.

Yes, the flotilla was a publicity stunt designed to draw attention to the issue. Its a shame that people had to die, its even more tragic that eventually the world will shrug its shoulders and ignore the problem again.