IDF Releases Photos of 'Weapons'(A.K.A. Common Items) From Raided Freedom Flotilla Ship - Polidicks

[QUOTE=BurnEmDown;22299311]No, it's called assuming, and won't be accepted in a court of law. A man is innocent until proven by 100% that he isn't, the same goes for companies and states and whatever.[/QUOTE] Uh, no not really. If that were true absolutely no one would ever be convicted of anything.

[QUOTE=Broseph_;22299281]His life wouldn't be threatened if he did not do a illegal action.[/QUOTE] Doesn't matter, they were still a risk to their life. Also the troops obviously didn't do this on their own accord, they followed orders. If anyone is to blame it's their commanders, but the activists who attacked them aren't clear of all charges.

imagine if swat, unwarranted, broke into a house, started tearing the place up, and pushing the inhabitants around and accusing them of possessing illegal goods, and then when they fought back to get swat out of the house, ended up shot dead. and then later justified it with pictures of cutlery and furniture

[QUOTE=Mr. Scorpio;22299341]Uh, no not really. If that were true absolutely no one would ever be convicted of anything.[/QUOTE] Anyway, this isn't enough to prove the IDF did shoot them first. We are all just assuming here and we need to wait until the investigation shows once and for all who did what wrong and then we can discuss this. [editline]02:24PM[/editline] [QUOTE=abcpea;22299360]imagine if swat, unwarranted, broke into a house, started tearing the place up, and pushing the inhabitants around and accusing them of possessing illegal goods, and then when they fought back to get swat out of the house, ended up shot dead. and then later justified it with pictures of cutlery and furniture[/QUOTE] If he was in danger of dying and would have killed them, he would be clear of this charge, but would still be convicted over breaking into their house.

[QUOTE=BurnEmDown;22299311]A man is innocent until proven by 100% that he isn't, the same goes for companies and states and whatever.[/QUOTE] This has nothing to do with the discussion, but: If you think this is true, you are dreaming. This is how it should be, but its not how it is. There are tons of innocent people in jail, and there were tons of innocent people executed. Just saying. I don't take part in this whole discussion about who did what. Is it now clear if this was international waters or not?

Well I might have exaggerated a bit, but my point is that you can't just "put 2 and 2 together" and say "this proves it!!!", because it doesn't.

[QUOTE=BurnEmDown;22299481]Well I might have exaggerated a bit, but my point is that you can't just "put 2 and 2 together" and say "this proves it!!!", because it doesn't.[/QUOTE] It's a very strong indication of it. The fact that you have a complete double standard for evidence is what pisses me off.

They shot them. Yeah. Shot them with a fuckin' SLR

Cameras. WOW Such DANGEROUS weapons..We can't let them document what horrible things we do SHOOT EM

[QUOTE=codenamecueball;22299534]They shot them. Yeah. Shot them with a fuckin' SLR[/QUOTE] "Sir, 12 megapixels" "My lord"

This actually looks pretty damn lethal. I mean look at it. I think they were planning to blind the rappelling soldiers with the cameras flash, then build a makeshift gallows out of all the construction equipment. Then sharpen pungi sticks from those rods and suspend all the goddamn IDF soldiers above them. Fuckin A.

[img_thumb]http://idfspokesperson.files.wordpress.com/2010/06/10.jpg[/img_thumb] They were going to stab [B]every single Israeli. [/B]

[QUOTE=combine487;22299678]This actually looks pretty damn lethal. I mean look at it. I think they were planning to blind the rappelling soldiers with the cameras flash, then build a makeshift gallows out of all the construction equipment. Then sharpen pungi sticks from those rods and suspend all the goddamn IDF soldiers above them. Fuckin A.[/QUOTE] I still think wheelchair SCUD ramp is more viable.

[QUOTE=Hoffa1337;22299685]I still think wheelchair SCUD ramp is more viable.[/QUOTE] Nonsense. Everyone knows they were planning to make nukes out of the wheelchair engines. You people just want Hamas to nuke Israel.

[QUOTE=Hoffa1337;22299685]I still think wheelchair SCUD ramp is more viable.[/QUOTE] Wait a second. Maybe the BOAT was the SCUD missile. Create a ramp in the middle of the ocean just inside the blockade and launch the boat right into the Israeli doom fortress headquarters... Of course! It all makes sense now!

[QUOTE=BurnEmDown;22299115]You guys clearly don't understand. It's not the weapons that were suspected to have been given to the Hamas, it's the items used against the commandos boarding the ship. You can clearly see in this video: [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z2duPV9MQIc[/media] That the commandos were lynched by a big mob, they had to use lethal weapons to protect themselves, or they would have died.[/QUOTE] They were being illegally boarded by hostile soldiers. This is Israel's fault.

[QUOTE=codenamecueball;22299534]They shot them. Yeah. Shot them with a fuckin' SLR[/QUOTE] Ahem... [IMG]http://www.rifleman.org.uk/HARC-MCRRS/Images/FN_L1A1_L12A1_RHS.gif[/IMG]

What if this was Americans in stead of Israeli? Wouldn't most of the comments here be "Those fucking civilians deserved it. What if they had attacked someone with this stuff?" Anyways, this was not justified.

[QUOTE=Carne;22299778]What if this was Americans in stead of Israeli? Wouldn't most of the comments here be "Those fucking civilians deserved it. What if they had attacked someone with this stuff?" Anyways, this was not justified.[/QUOTE] What fantasy are you living in? Something almost exactly like this happened like two months ago and everyone was pissed off as shit.

[QUOTE=Carne;22299778]What if this was Americans in stead of Israeli? Wouldn't most of the comments here be "Those fucking civilians deserved it. What if they had attacked someone with this stuff?" Anyways, this was not justified.[/QUOTE] No then America would have been the hot topic of the week.

[QUOTE=Carne;22299778]What if this was Americans in stead of Israeli? Wouldn't most of the comments here be "Those fucking civilians deserved it. What if they had attacked someone with this stuff?" Anyways, this was not justified.[/QUOTE] Europe, Russia and the Arabs would be condemning it, meanwhile depending on what letter is next to the name of the President, ether MSNBC or Fox News would be ripping on him hard.

That is one big pile of expensive equipment.

They attacked a civilian ship on international waters with military force, take every single military personnel that was part of this attack to court marshal, those civilians had every right to defend themselves on international waters, the soldiers could just as well have been disguised pirates.

[QUOTE=Adius Shadow;22299895]That is one big pile of expensive equipment.[/QUOTE] Really tempted to make a very stupid religious joke there... Also, them camera lenses are heavy. ._. You imagine what kind of damage it can do? If I was on a ship, and on international waters, and someone shot on me and injured people. I'd probably go down swinging sticks and stuff too.

What the fuck, they threw in their L series glass without a lens cap. Not only did they kill people, they're destroying valuable equipment afterwards?

[QUOTE=Adius Shadow;22299895]That is one big pile of expensive equipment.[/QUOTE] Yeah that is a lot of moneys worth right there. I would be pissed if the IDF impounded and ruined my $10,000 worth of camera equipment and stole the SD cards. [editline]01:23PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Kagrenak;22300097]What the fuck, they threw in their L series glass without a lens cap. Not only did they kill people, they're destroying valuable equipment afterwards?[/QUOTE] Yeah being a amateur photographer, I threw a little bit up in my mouth when I saw that picture.

They did not accuse them of carrying illegal weapons. They wanted to inspect the ship, as they do with anything that comes into gaza. The weapons found in this video were not smuggled weapons. They are weapons that the mob attacked the IDF soldiers with. [editline]12:28PM[/editline] [QUOTE=sp00ks;22299739]They were being illegally boarded by hostile soldiers. This is Israel's fault.[/QUOTE] GOD DAMMIT HOW MANY TIMES DO I HAVE TO REPEAT THIS The San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea was adopted in June 1994 after a series of round tables of naval and legal experts convened. In paragraph 67 it permits belligerents to attack merchant vessels flying the flag of neutral States outside of neutral waters if they "are believed on reasonable grounds to be carrying contraband or breaching a blockade, and after prior warning they intentionally and clearly refuse to stop, or intentionally and clearly resist visit, search or capture". Paragraph 146 permits the capture of neutral merchant vessels outside neutral waters if they are engaged in any of the activities referred to in paragraph 67. definition of neutral waters-Neutral waters consist of the internal waters, territorial sea, and, where applicable, the archipelagic waters, of neutral States.

[QUOTE=Glorbo;22300186]GOD DAMMIT HOW MANY TIMES DO I HAVE TO REPEAT THIS The San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea was adopted in June 1994 after a series of round tables of naval and legal experts convened. In paragraph 67 it permits belligerents to attack merchant vessels flying the flag of neutral States outside of neutral waters if they "are believed on reasonable grounds to be carrying contraband or breaching a blockade, and after prior warning they intentionally and clearly refuse to stop, or intentionally and clearly resist visit, search or capture". Paragraph 146 permits the capture of neutral merchant vessels outside neutral waters if they are engaged in any of the activities referred to in paragraph 67. definition of neutral waters-Neutral waters consist of the internal waters, territorial sea, and, where applicable, the archipelagic waters, of neutral States.[/QUOTE] The problem is that [b]the blockade is not internationally recognised as legal[/b]. It holds no legal weight.

[QUOTE=NoDachi;22300275]The problem is that [B]the blockade is not internationally recognised as legal[/B]. It holds no legal weight.[/QUOTE] He finally understood; I think. [QUOTE=starpluck;22300512]Interesting how you ignored my response, and decided to re-post what you said instead.[QUOTE=starpluck;22298016]Once again “The San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea” is only applicable for LEGAL blockades. I realize English may not be your first language, but this is going too far.[/QUOTE][/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Glorbo;22300534]sorry man, I missed a lot in this thread. im taking a break for now.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=BurnEmDown;22299160]You guys are just trolls. [editline]02:08PM[/editline] No proof the IDF shot first.[/QUOTE] So, if I boarded your ship with guns, you wouldn't try to defend it? And consider that we're in international waters.