Flotilla raid 'regrettable' but legal, Israeli commission finds - Polidicks

It doesn't support it completely, they said that it's a valuable piece of information from the Israeli side which will help give a broader view of the event to the SC's commission, which will decide once and for all if the interception was indeed illegal, and maybe they'll say what they think of the blockade as well, although as far as I understand, they only want to investigate the interception.

Israel investigated if they fucked up and they found out that it was totally legal. Nice one Israel. Nice one

well i'm convinced! i mean, what possible reason could israel have to lie about this?

[QUOTE=Starpluck;27629454]You got it completely wrong. The Israeli-led findings were criticized and dismissed due to evident subjectiveness. The report takes the Israeli claims as fact, and uses the claims to make the decision accordingly and then it claims that it was legal under international law without any solid reasoning or facts, which is why it was dismissed. Having a former state employee apart of the commission doesn’t help their case either. You agreeing with this finding is irrelevant, it just shows you’re willing to agree with anything compatible with your views, despite if the evidence exists or not/or if it’s blatant bullshit. An impartial United Nations report was released a few months ago that concluded that the raid did violate international law with references where and how in the law as well as the blockade (Line 48: [URL]http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrcouncil/docs/15session/A.HRC.15.21_en.pdf[/URL]). Contrary to the Israeli led commission, in-depth forensic analysis (subsequent to interviews with the commandos, people on board and Israeli edited footage. The video cameras, CCTV and other recording equipment belong to the aid activists and the Mavi Marama were confiscated and destroyed by Israel) was taken place to confirm and reach a conclusion, rather than basing the whole report out of the Israeli POV and being with bias. [/QUOTE] Source that the Israeli report was biased. Also show me evidence relating to something OTHER than the legality of the blockade. I actually don't care whether the blockade was legal, I feel that Israeli forces acted appropriately under the circumstances. When a boat tries to ram through your blockade for the mere purpose of defying you, rather than actually transporting aid (if that was their true purpose, they'd have gone through official channels), you would board that boat. When initial incursions onto the boat are met with resistance, you'd try a different, more effective tactic - e.g. going by air with stun grenades. When you're then met by armed men trying to kill your soldiers, you act in self defence. Don't even try and bullshit your way through by pretending a collection of peace-loving protesters were gunned down - I've seen footage showing men patrolling the boat with staves BEFORE the boarding, and Israeli soldiers been thrown from decks. So much for self defence, hey.

Brilliant, incoming another 3 pages of burnemdown losing an argument welcome to itn 2010 all over again

[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;27647765]burnemdown losing an argument[/QUOTE] Hey, there's a first for everything :smug:

[QUOTE=BurnEmDown;27648224]Hey, there's a first for everything :smug:[/QUOTE] unless that thing is israel doing any wrong eh burnsthemdown eh eh??? heh heh am i right

This really is a useless discussion. Conflicting definitions, dismissing reports and legal grey areas all for the sake of a useless "legal" win. This isn't even proper debate, it's legal bullshit about laws with no-one to enforce them. Come on, you could at least try to argue if the actions of those involved were justified instead of saying it technically counts as piracy. This is just stupid.

[quote]Source that the Israeli report was biased. Also show me evidence relating to something OTHER than the legality of the blockade. I actually don't care whether the blockade was legal, I feel that Israeli forces acted appropriately under the circumstances. When a boat tries to ram through your blockade for the mere purpose of defying you, rather than actually transporting aid (if that was their true purpose, they'd have gone through official channels), you would board that boat.[/quote] Well you should start caring whether the blockade is legal or not then. I do find it funny and a tad ironic how you suggest they should have used official channels to transport the aid to Gaza. The blockade does not constitute as an official channel then since it’s illegal and if Israel wants to imagine it as legal and right they can, but it wouldn’t qualify as an official channel. Israel is already in violation for enforcing an illegal blockade. The people delivering the aid do not want to be complicit with Israel’s blockade nor assist such a civilian intended blockade. Yet you claim they are just doing it to “defy them”. No not really, Israel’s illegal blockade consists of necessities and items essential for human survival. The ship’s aid contained said items, so, under Israel’s “righteous” blockade, these items will be DENIED. The flotilla has every right to refuse to recognize an illegal blockade, whether Israel likes it or not. [quote] When initial incursions onto the boat are met with resistance, you'd try a different, more effective tactic - e.g. going by air with stun grenades. When you're then met by armed men trying to kill your soldiers, you act in self defence. Don't even try and bullshit your way through by pretending a collection of peace-loving protesters were gunned down - I've seen footage showing men patrolling the boat with staves BEFORE the boarding, and Israeli soldiers been thrown from decks. So much for self defence, hey.[/quote] The footage you saw was edited, cherrypicked and taken out of context to make Israel seem in the right as optimal as possible. That’s why the Mission had to treat Israeli footage as cautious as possible, since Israel confiscated and destroyed all recording equipment that was present on the Flotilla. Because when the other side has no video proof since you destroyed them, and the video you portray to the world matches your account of what happened, the world will believe you. Thankfully, contradictory Israeli testimony and account of what happened required the Mission to forensically analysis the scene itself to confirm that the Israelis fired prior to boarding, provoking the aid activists to defend themselves in any way possible. One woman was also able to smuggle a video of what happened by hiding the video camera in her vagina. What happens when you get a taste of the video from the Flotilla? You see IDF soldiers being treated by these “oh ruthless aid activists” during the incursion. [IMG]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/7c/Idf_soldier_treated.png[/IMG] The only thing I’d applaud Israel for is, making the activists on board the ship look like heartless monsters by manipulating video accordingly.

[QUOTE=Starpluck;27649958]One woman was also able to smuggle a video of what happened by hiding the video camera in her vagina[/QUOTE] Must be pretty difficult filming from that angle.

[QUOTE=BurnEmDown;27650713]Must be pretty difficult filming from that angle.[/QUOTE] Heh, I meant she hid it in her vagina when the IDF began to confiscate the recording equipment.

[QUOTE=Dr_Funk;27647382]Source that the Israeli report was biased. Also show me evidence relating to something OTHER than the legality of the blockade. I actually don't care whether the blockade was legal, I feel that Israeli forces acted appropriately under the circumstances. When a boat tries to ram through your blockade for the mere purpose of defying you, rather than actually transporting aid (if that was their true purpose, they'd have gone through official channels), you would board that boat. When initial incursions onto the boat are met with resistance, you'd try a different, more effective tactic - e.g. going by air with stun grenades. When you're then met by armed men trying to kill your soldiers, you act in self defence. Don't even try and bullshit your way through by pretending a collection of peace-loving protesters were gunned down - I've seen footage showing men patrolling the boat with staves BEFORE the boarding, and Israeli soldiers been thrown from decks. So much for self defence, hey.[/QUOTE] So murdering unarmed people is self defence, legal and acting appropriately? [editline]26th January 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=BurnEmDown;27646740]Just gonna leave this here... [url]http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/u-s-israel-s-gaza-flotilla-report-is-credible-and-impartial-1.339064[/url][/QUOTE] The US government is the single largest contributer to Israel. You're suprised they support them? And you think it somehow has any merit?

[QUOTE=Starpluck;27649958]Well you should start caring whether the blockade is legal or not then. I do find it funny and a tad ironic how you suggest they should have used official channels to transport the aid to Gaza. The blockade does not constitute as an official channel then since it’s illegal and if Israel wants to imagine it as legal and right they can, but it wouldn’t qualify as an official channel. Israel is already in violation for enforcing an illegal blockade. The people delivering the aid do not want to be complicit with Israel’s blockade nor assist such a civilian intended blockade. Yet you claim they are just doing it to “defy them”. No not really, Israel’s illegal blockade consists of necessities and items essential for human survival. The ship’s aid contained said items, so, under Israel’s “righteous” blockade, these items will be DENIED. The flotilla has every right to refuse to recognize an illegal blockade, whether Israel likes it or not. The footage you saw was edited, cherrypicked and taken out of context to make Israel seem in the right as optimal as possible. That’s why the Mission had to treat Israeli footage as cautious as possible, since Israel confiscated and destroyed all recording equipment that was present on the Flotilla. Because when the other side has no video proof since you destroyed them, and the video you portray to the world matches your account of what happened, the world will believe you. Thankfully, contradictory Israeli testimony and account of what happened required the Mission to forensically analysis the scene itself to confirm that the Israelis fired prior to boarding, provoking the aid activists to defend themselves in any way possible. One woman was also able to smuggle a video of what happened by hiding the video camera in her vagina. What happens when you get a taste of the video from the Flotilla? You see IDF soldiers being treated by these “oh ruthless aid activists” during the incursion. [img_thumb]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/7c/Idf_soldier_treated.png[/img_thumb] The only thing I’d applaud Israel for is, making the activists on board the ship look like heartless monsters by manipulating video accordingly.[/QUOTE] Because yes, there was a realistic possibility that they could just float through the blockade with their goods and no-one would stop them. Nah, and they knew it. If they'd actually cared about getting the goods to the Palestinians, they would have taken the route which would practically work - by going through official channels, regardless of whether those channels should be official or not. There was absolutely no way supplies would be running through the blockade, and they knew that. The reason this flotilla happened was as a protest and to cause a confrontation with Israel - the aid was obviously just a weak excuse. How is this seen? By the fact that armed men from a group with strong links to terrorist organisations was patrolling the boat's deck, and from the fact that Israeli boarding attempts by speedboat were viciously repelled - hence the following use of stun-grenades. Now, if the group had actually wanted to get the supplies through to Gaza, they would have allowed Israeli troops to board the first time - not because it was technically legal, but it was the quickest realistic means to their desired end. The troops would have then checked the cargo, found it completely humanitarian goods, and, in the face of this and a collection of peaceful activists, been severely hampered in justifying stopping the boats. However, that's not what happened. This wasn't an aid supply, this was an attempt to antagonize Israel and play the martyr from the consequences. The footage I saw was of the boat an hour BEFORE the raid - complete with armed men patrolling the decks, which blows the concept of self-defence out of the water. I'd also like to see hard evidence that the Israeli troops fired PRIOR to landing troops on the boat, rather than after.

[QUOTE=Dr_Funk;27647382]Source that the Israeli report was biased. Also show me evidence relating to something OTHER than the legality of the blockade. I actually don't care whether the blockade was legal, I feel that Israeli forces acted appropriately under the circumstances. When a boat tries to ram through your blockade for the mere purpose of defying you, rather than actually transporting aid [b](if that was their true purpose, they'd have gone through official channels)[/b], you would board that boat. When initial incursions onto the boat are met with resistance, you'd try a different, more effective tactic - e.g. going by air with stun grenades. When you're then met by armed men trying to kill your soldiers, you act in self defence. Don't even try and bullshit your way through by pretending a collection of peace-loving protesters were gunned down - I've seen footage showing men patrolling the boat with staves BEFORE the boarding, and Israeli soldiers been thrown from decks. So much for self defence, hey.[/QUOTE] the official channels are absolute bullshit, they take way to fucking long and deny perfectly legitimate supplies

this is a crock of shit

[QUOTE=Lazor;27663212]the official channels are absolute bullshit, they take way to fucking long and deny perfectly legitimate supplies[/QUOTE] They're much better than delivering supplies by boat. The flotilla was planned for about two years and the amount of money invested in it could have bought more than double the supplies it held, if they would have just shipped the supplies to Israel to deliver them to Gaza. Not only would they have arrived much sooner (if you count all the time it took for them to prepare the flotilla) but they could have brought much more supplies for the same amount of money invested.

Funny how that "humanitarian aid" flotilla was funded nearly directly by Hamas. This isn't news anyway and didn't need a thread. [editline]26th January 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=BurnEmDown;27667683]They're much better than delivering supplies by boat. The flotilla was planned for about two years and the amount of money invested in it could have bought more than double the supplies it held, if they would have just shipped the supplies to Israel to deliver them to Gaza. Not only would they have arrived much sooner (if you count all the time it took for them to prepare the flotilla) but they could have brought much more supplies for the same amount of money invested.[/QUOTE] Yeah, what was proposed by Israel is that they would stop off in a neutral country (Egypt) where they would be checked, and then go from there. They refused (something to hide, bros?).

[QUOTE=BradB;27668196]Yeah, what was proposed by Israel is that they would stop off in a neutral country (Egypt) where they would be checked, and then go from there. They refused (something to hide, bros?).[/QUOTE] Some will say that the point of it was to break the blockade symbolically, and they are half right. It was a massive publicity stunt and while it worked for a bit, seemingly only people who hated Israel in the first place remember.

Oh look, Gaza has just recently screwed with Egypt now too and as a result they are dead-set not letting any aid convoys through their border anymore. Tip top job, guys. [url]http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2010/01/201019125026677911.html[/url]