Israel Attacks Aid Convoy - Many Deaths Reported

JB273968

I'm young, and generally try to avoid a concrete opinion on these types of topics cause quite frankly I do not trust any of these opinions/viewpoints/ or news story. None are objective,and ALL are written to lead you to a specific conclusion. Best you can do is inform yourself of as much as possible and try to hope something in it is real. In that same vain I have some questions...

I know once upon a time their was an annual free tibet concert, China still occupies Tibet, the Dalai Lama is still not home yet their is not global free tibet movement that generates the attention of the free gaza movement. Why is it that today Gaza garners more attention than Tibet?
Why have people not taken up the cause of the Kurds who have through colonial determing of boarders have been living divided from themselves dispered amongst five(?) nations often in the lower portion of society with nowhere to call home for themselves?
Cuba has been under blockade from the US for fifty years, is not collective punishment for voting the wrong way? (Or more accuratlly embracing a different style of economics and politics) Why don't people in Turkey or Ireland or anywhere else care more about that?
Lebanon has effectively been ruled by Syria for decades...where's the outrage?
When the IRA was terrorizing the U.K. was force not option to combat that? Were people outraged at the UK's right to defend itself?
Are people actively trying to help out in Chechnya against the will of Russia?
I'm pretty sure their are some Cypriots that think Turkey is occupying Cypress despite global recognition of its right to exist there. Is their not a slight double standard on the part of Turkey here?
Why when Israel builds a fence to protect its boarders from people that want to kill them (make no mistake that is the desired end goal) is it condemned, but when America builds a fence to keep out illegal immigrants and drugs (both of which play a huge role in Americas economy both good and buy), a blind eye is turned. Hypocracy? I dont know...
Why do neighboring Arab countries that love to use the Palestinian issue for their own personal gain not help out more directly with aid and facilitating a lasting and meaningful solution for Palestine/Israel?
Why is it that arms and weapons developed in Gaza and the West Bank by Israel for close quarter combat and urban warfare are not scrutinized or condemned by the dozens of countries that subsequently purchase the arms for their own means?
What about Somalia? or the Congo? or dozens of other places? Why does the world care so much for this issue, when their are so many that could if someone wanted them to generate the same buzz?

I truly hope I have not offended anyone here. It is not my intent. I am solely motivated here by my curiosity to peoples answers to some of these question because of the very global, eclectic, and seemingly well informed makeup of this forum.
Thanks in advance to anyone that wants to offer some ideas on this.

Byrnzie

JB273968 wrote:

I know once upon a time their was an annual free tibet concert, China still occupies Tibet, the Dalai Lama is still not home yet their is not global free tibet movement that generates the attention of the free gaza movement. Why is it that today Gaza garners more attention than Tibet?
Why have people not taken up the cause of the Kurds who have through colonial determing of boarders have been living divided from themselves dispered amongst five(?) nations often in the lower portion of society with nowhere to call home for themselves?
Cuba has been under blockade from the US for fifty years, is not collective punishment for voting the wrong way? (Or more accuratlly embracing a different style of economics and politics) Why don't people in Turkey or Ireland or anywhere else care more about that?
Lebanon has effectively been ruled by Syria for decades...where's the outrage?
When the IRA was terrorizing the U.K. was force not option to combat that? Were people outraged at the UK's right to defend itself?
Are people actively trying to help out in Chechnya against the will of Russia?
I'm pretty sure their are some Cypriots that think Turkey is occupying Cypress despite global recognition of its right to exist there. Is their not a slight double standard on the part of Turkey here?
Why when Israel builds a fence to protect its boarders from people that want to kill them (make no mistake that is the desired end goal) is it condemned, but when America builds a fence to keep out illegal immigrants and drugs (both of which play a huge role in Americas economy both good and buy), a blind eye is turned. Hypocracy? I dont know...

I think you're mistaken if you think criticism of Israel exceeds public recognition and outrage generated by these other issues. It's only really been since Israel's bombardment of Gaza in 2009 that the world has opened it's eyes to this issue. For the past 60 years there has been very little attention paid to it. 60 years is a long time to sit back and watch the brutalization of a people, and an ethnic cleansing, to take place. Either way, despite the recent attention paid to what's going on in Israel and the occupied territories what's changed? Nothing. The occupation continues, and the blockade of Gaza continues.

As for Tibet, Cuba, Chechnya, the Kurd's, e.t.c, I don't know why these causes haven't garnered much support. Maybe it's because the violence in these places has been few and far between. Maybe it's also because the oppresion and violence in these countries isn't directly supported and funded by our own governments and tax payers - the blockade of Cuba notwithstanding. When was the last time the U.S bombed the civilian population of Havana, and dropped white phosphorous on them?


Oh, and the fence built by Israel is illegal under international law. And it isn't being built to protect them from Palestinians wanting to kill them because if it was then it wouldn't be encircling Palestinian enclaves but would be running along the green line. It's not just keeping Palestinians out but it's enclosing them inside the borders of Israel. Simply put, it's just another tool in Israels ongoing land-grab.

Byrnzie

http://www.democracynow.org/2010/6/4/headlines#4

Israeli Military Retracts Claim Passengers "Al Qaeda Mercenaries"

The Israeli military...has been forced to retract its claim that passengers aboard the flotilla were agents of al-Qaeda. An Israel Defense Forces press release sent out two days after the assault says approximately forty flotilla passengers "are mercenaries belonging to the Al Qaeda terror organization." The independent journalist Max Blumenthal says both he and an Israeli colleague asked the Israeli military press office to substantiate its claim. No evidence was provided, and one day later the press released was modified. The original headline was changed from "Attackers of the IDF Soldiers Found to be Al Qaeda Mercenaries" to "Attackers of the IDF Soldiers Found Without Identification Papers." Commenting on the retraction, Blumenthal writes, "The more Israel’s claims about the flotilla’s terrorist links are challenged, the more they fall apart."

Byrnzie

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/ju ... commission


'...The Turkish prime minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan – who was the subject of fresh vitriol in the Israeli media today – had raised the idea of personally joining an aid ship to Gaza, according to Lebanese media reports. Turkey last week recalled its ambassador to Israel.

Israel's foreign minister, Avigdor Lieberman, today insisted that "it is inconceivable that we should apologise to the Turkish government". He hinted that Turkey was heading in the same direction as Iran, saying Iran had been a "good friend" to Israel in the 1970s. This was echoed by his deputy, Danny Ayalon, who said: "If they sever relations, it is clear they are switching sides in the direction of extremist Islam."

Of course, because anyone who opposes Israel's crimes must be an extremist Islamist.

rafie

dimitrispearljam wrote:

the irish ship was on the way to Gaza is under israel forces now,no blood ,no shooting,nothing..there was another way..the violance they use was unnesesarty..they did it cos was turkish ship..

D, the fact that it was a turkish ship has nothing to do with it. Turkey has been one of Israels most popular tourist destinations over the past few years. Almost every Israeli has been to Turkey at least once on some kind of vacation (myself included). The reason that there was violance on one ship as opposed to the other was the reaction of the participants. The Irish ship trully was filled with peacefull activists opposed to the blockade (totally legitimate) and co-opperated when the Israeli army addresed them notyfing them that they were to be boarded. The trukish convoy on the other hand was filled (not entirely of course) with people who had very different intentions. The response all boils down to the issue if there are peace activists or extremists on the ship.

rafie

Pepe Silvia wrote:

did i say it was the entire community?? no, i didn't.

Here is what you said:

Pepe Silvia wrote:

now, naturally there's nothing wrong with being 'religious' BUT this branch of the jewish faith doesn't believe in a Palestinian state, they believe their god gave all that land to them.

Pepe Silvia wrote:

are you saying some in the orthodox jewish community do not support colonization of the area??

That is exactly what I am saying. There are plenty of orthodox jews here that are left wing as far as politics goes and believe that the palestinans should have there own state. You are basing your comments on the writings of extremists that make up a minority (although a very vocal one) of that community.

badbrains

SIGNATURE
Planning on popping my PJ cherry at bilbao in July

Must be nice to come and go as you please ey rafie? Have a great time pooping your pearl jam cherry in Bilbao. Maybe you can ask pearl jam why they've never played israel. And yes, I know there's 2 "P's" in popping rafi-E.

dimitrispearljam

rafie wrote:

dimitrispearljam wrote:

the irish ship was on the way to Gaza is under israel forces now,no blood ,no shooting,nothing..there was another way..the violance they use was unnesesarty..they did it cos was turkish ship..

D, the fact that it was a turkish ship has nothing to do with it. Turkey has been one of Israels most popular tourist destinations over the past few years. Almost every Israeli has been to Turkey at least once on some kind of vacation (myself included). The reason that there was violance on one ship as opposed to the other was the reaction of the participants. The Irish ship trully was filled with peacefull activists opposed to the blockade (totally legitimate) and co-opperated when the Israeli army addresed them notyfing them that they were to be boarded. The trukish convoy on the other hand was filled (not entirely of course) with people who had very different intentions. The response all boils down to the issue if there are peace activists or extremists on the ship.

and alot of turkish come to Greece,number one destination of Greeks is Kostantinoulpoli
but we are not the best friends...
again ,i told u my opinion..i know from experience..someone order shoot to kill..he must go to justice..
he is a murderer.im not talking about the whole israel,and ofcourse not of the people in your country
i post in the past here in the forum,that israel isnt the only evil in the world,so many countries,attact other with no reason..this happen last week..was a BIG mistake..and they one made the mistake must pay..
i see u going to bilbao,we can meet and have fun..but the only conversation will be around pearl jam-women-drinks..the 3 inportant things in life..

polaris_x

rafie wrote:

D, the fact that it was a turkish ship has nothing to do with it. Turkey has been one of Israels most popular tourist destinations over the past few years. Almost every Israeli has been to Turkey at least once on some kind of vacation (myself included). The reason that there was violance on one ship as opposed to the other was the reaction of the participants. The Irish ship trully was filled with peacefull activists opposed to the blockade (totally legitimate) and co-opperated when the Israeli army addresed them notyfing them that they were to be boarded. The trukish convoy on the other hand was filled (not entirely of course) with people who had very different intentions. The response all boils down to the issue if there are peace activists or extremists on the ship.

the military has admitted there were no weapons on board ... what kind of reaction warrants the need for highly trained military personnel with high tech armor and weaponry to kill 9 civilians? ... you want to know the big difference between the two boars?

the way the military boarded them ... on the turkish boat - you come in the darkness with guns firing (all the activists released have said so much) from military helicopters ... on the irish boat - you come on water in broad daylight ...

you want people to question their sources of information ... maybe you should too ...

Pepe Silvia

rafie wrote:

dimitrispearljam wrote:

the irish ship was on the way to Gaza is under israel forces now,no blood ,no shooting,nothing..there was another way..the violance they use was unnesesarty..they did it cos was turkish ship..

D, the fact that it was a turkish ship has nothing to do with it. Turkey has been one of Israels most popular tourist destinations over the past few years. Almost every Israeli has been to Turkey at least once on some kind of vacation (myself included). The reason that there was violance on one ship as opposed to the other was the reaction of the participants. The Irish ship trully was filled with peacefull activists opposed to the blockade (totally legitimate) and co-opperated when the Israeli army addresed them notyfing them that they were to be boarded. The trukish convoy on the other hand was filled (not entirely of course) with people who had very different intentions. The response all boils down to the issue if there are peace activists or extremists on the ship.

then why did a member of the israeli knesset that was on the boat say israel opened fire BEFORE they boarded the vessel??

Pepe Silvia

rafie wrote:

Pepe Silvia wrote:

did i say it was the entire community?? no, i didn't.

Here is what you said:

Pepe Silvia wrote:

now, naturally there's nothing wrong with being 'religious' BUT this branch of the jewish faith doesn't believe in a Palestinian state, they believe their god gave all that land to them.

Pepe Silvia wrote:

are you saying some in the orthodox jewish community do not support colonization of the area??

That is exactly what I am saying. There are plenty of orthodox jews here that are left wing as far as politics goes and believe that the palestinans should have there own state. You are basing your comments on the writings of extremists that make up a minority (although a very vocal one) of that community.

so, you have nothing to say about the 2 articles i posted? one of a teacher at a school in an illegal settlement that says it is ok to murder babies or speak badly of israel, the other from an orthodox jew that says many orthodox jews are racist and bigots and are one of the biggest obstacle to peace?

of course it's not 100% across the board, stop trying to deflect from the point that MANY orthodox jews are racist bigots

JB273968

Byrnzie wrote:

JB273968 wrote:

I know once upon a time their was an annual free tibet concert, China still occupies Tibet, the Dalai Lama is still not home yet their is not global free tibet movement that generates the attention of the free gaza movement. Why is it that today Gaza garners more attention than Tibet?
Why have people not taken up the cause of the Kurds who have through colonial determing of boarders have been living divided from themselves dispered amongst five(?) nations often in the lower portion of society with nowhere to call home for themselves?
Cuba has been under blockade from the US for fifty years, is not collective punishment for voting the wrong way? (Or more accuratlly embracing a different style of economics and politics) Why don't people in Turkey or Ireland or anywhere else care more about that?
Lebanon has effectively been ruled by Syria for decades...where's the outrage?
When the IRA was terrorizing the U.K. was force not option to combat that? Were people outraged at the UK's right to defend itself?
Are people actively trying to help out in Chechnya against the will of Russia?
I'm pretty sure their are some Cypriots that think Turkey is occupying Cypress despite global recognition of its right to exist there. Is their not a slight double standard on the part of Turkey here?
Why when Israel builds a fence to protect its boarders from people that want to kill them (make no mistake that is the desired end goal) is it condemned, but when America builds a fence to keep out illegal immigrants and drugs (both of which play a huge role in Americas economy both good and buy), a blind eye is turned. Hypocracy? I dont know...

I think you're mistaken if you think criticism of Israel exceeds public recognition and outrage generated by these other issues. It's only really been since Israel's bombardment of Gaza in 2009 that the world has opened it's eyes to this issue. For the past 60 years there has been very little attention paid to it. 60 years is a long time to sit back and watch the brutalization of a people, and an ethnic cleansing, to take place. Either way, despite the recent attention paid to what's going on in Israel and the occupied territories what's changed? Nothing. The occupation continues, and the blockade of Gaza continues.

As for Tibet, Cuba, Chechnya, the Kurd's, e.t.c, I don't know why these causes haven't garnered much support. Maybe it's because the violence in these places has been few and far between. Maybe it's also because the oppresion and violence in these countries isn't directly supported and funded by our own governments and tax payers - the blockade of Cuba notwithstanding. When was the last time the U.S bombed the civilian population of Havana, and dropped white phosphorous on them?


Oh, and the fence built by Israel is illegal under international law. And it isn't being built to protect them from Palestinians wanting to kill them because if it was then it wouldn't be encircling Palestinian enclaves but would be running along the green line. It's not just keeping Palestinians out but it's enclosing them inside the borders of Israel. Simply put, it's just another tool in Israels ongoing land-grab.

Thats for answering/contributing, gave me some thinking points.

Byrnzie

Feeling the Hate In Jerusalem:

http://www.tu.tv/videos/feeling-the-hat ... -on-eve-of

TriumphantAngel

I love me some Kucinich,

Dennis Kucinich's letter that he circulated to colleagues regarding the Mavi Marmara disgrace.

June 2, 2010

The Honorable Barack Obama
President of the United States
The White House
Washington, DC 20500

Dear Mr. President,

Israeli commandos, acting at the direction of the State of Israel, attacked and seized a Turkish ship in international waters, in the Mediterranean Sea.

At least nine were killed in the incident aboard the Mavi Marmara. Hundreds of civilians were taken into custody and goods were confiscated. Since the United States considers Israel our most important ally in the region, whose survival is a primary concern, it is incumbent upon the Commander in Chief to call Israel to an accounting for its conduct in planning and executing the deadly military attack in international waters upon a peaceful flotilla carrying citizens from over 50 countries.

The State of Israel's conduct, attacking a Turkish ship in international waters, constitutes an act of belligerence against Turkey, which at one time Israel considered an important ally. It also undermines United States’ troops efforts in Iraq, since your administration's efforts to achieve stability in the region and to withdraw troops from Iraq has depended upon Turkey's cooperation through use of its air bases.
In its violent commando raid on the Mavi Marmara, the government of Israel showed no concern as to how its conduct may affect the lives of defenseless, innocent people, its friends and allies, and in particular the United States. The United States must remind Israel as well as all of our other friends and allies:


It is not acceptable to repeatedly violate international law.


It is not acceptable to shoot and kill innocent civilians.

It is not acceptable to commit an act of aggression against another U.S. ally.


It is not acceptable to continue a blockade which denies humanitarian relief.


It is not acceptable to heighten tensions in a region while the United States continues to put so much blood and treasure on the line.


The State of Israel's action necessitates that the United States, which is Israel's partner in the region, begin to redefine its relationship and to establish such boundaries and conditions which are sufficient for mutual respect and cooperation.


It is incumbent upon Israeli officials to bring forth the truth about the planning for and the attack upon the Mavi Marmara.


No one questions the right of Israel to defend its border, but that defense does not extend to shooting innocent civilians anywhere in the world, anytime it pleases.


Israel must account for our support, for the lives of our soldiers, for the investment of billions from our taxpayers. Israel owes the United States more than reckless, pre-meditated violence waged against innocent people.

The attack on the Mavi Marmara requires consequences for the Netanyahu Administration and for the State of Israel. Those consequences must be dealt by the United States. They must be diplomatic and they must be financial. The U.S. can begin by calling for an independent international inquiry of the Mavi Marmara incident. The integrity of such inquiry necessitates that it not be led by the nation whose conduct is under scrutiny. If our nation fails to act in any substantive way, the United States licenses the violence and we are complicit in it and our own citizens will be forced to pay the consequences.


We the undersigned deeply regret the loss of life. We are also fully aware of the dangers to world security which exist in the region, which is why the United States has been unstinting it its defense of Israel. We have a right to expect that Israel not add to those dangers with military conduct which all people of good will know is neither defensible nor moral. There must be consequences for such conduct. We await your response.

Sincerely,

Pepe Silvia

the israeli ambassador to the us was on cnn today...here are some of his comments

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/ ... om.02.html

BLITZER: A lot of people understand that and appreciate it. What they don't understand, there are some of the lists of prohibited items that Israel won't allow into Gaza. I'll give you an example. The economist reported things like ginger, nutmeg, canned fruit, dried fruit, fresh meats, seeds, and nuts and they go on, musical instruments, newspapers, wood for construction. Is that true that Israel won't allow these kinds of materials into Gaza?

OREN: The important thing here is that Gaza is getting all these materials through other means, through tunnels under the Egyptian border. We assure that there is no shortage of food or medicine in Gaza. We have 100 trucks a day, at least, going over our border, carrying food and medicine. There's no shortage of either of these things.

BLITZER: But are these things prohibited from going through?

OREN: You know, Wolf, I don't have a list in front of me. I hear also things from Hamas and Gaza, from the free Gaza movement. The fact of the matter is our commitment is to assuring this food and humanitarian aid, you know -- Gaza strip is a hostile entity to us, and I don't see where the United States during World War II felt a great need to supply, you know, chocolate to the German people, either.

BLITZER: What do you think of this European Union proposal that they would take over inspecting these ships going into Gaza. They would make sure there's no security threat to Israel. No weapons or missiles or rockets or missions (ph) or anything like that. They would do the job, and Israel would no longer have to deal with these ships coming, and the EU would check the ships?

OREN: Wolf, we're open to suggestions that would help facilitate the blockade better. We had some bad experience with international supervision of rocket shipments to Hezbollah and Lebanon.

BLITZER: United Nations operation, but this would be an EU operation. Are you more comfortable with the EU taking charge?

OREN: Again, we'll be open to suggestions. Our past experience has been that in Lebanon in 2006, Hezbollah had 12,000 rockets. Now, it has 42,000 rockets. There were European observers along the Gaza border when Gaza border crossings were open. Hamas shot at them, and the Europeans ran away. Keep in mind, this is Hamas that fired 10,000 rockets into the state of Israel. It's the Hamas that has sworn to destroy the state of Israel.

BLITZER: Israel is going to have its own independent investigation of what happened with the flotilla the other day. Will you allow international observers to participate in your investigation?

OREN: The investigation will be an Israeli investigation. Israel is a democracy. It has the right and the duty to investigation itself, just as the United States investigates incidents that happened with American forces in Afghanistan and Iraq. But the Israeli government is considering some type of international component in that investigation.

BLITZER: You rejected a United Nations investigation. You won't cooperate with the United Nations as far as an investigation of the flotilla?

OREN: We're not going to have an international panel of journalists sitting in judgment on Israel's action that cannot possibly be a balanced panel. And, again, as a democracy, it's part of our sovereign right and duty to investigate ourselves.

Byrnzie

OREN: Gaza strip is a hostile entity to us, and I don't see where the United States during World War II felt a great need to supply, you know, chocolate to the German people, either.


The United States also didn't turn Germany into a giant prison. The German economy was also self-sufficient, up to the end of the war.


OREN: Again, we'll be open to suggestions. Our past experience has been that in Lebanon in 2006, Hezbollah had 12,000 rockets. Now, it has 42,000 rockets. There were European observers along the Gaza border when Gaza border crossings were open. Hamas shot at them, and the Europeans ran away.

I'd like to see some proof of this. It sounds like bullshit to me.

OREN: We're not going to have an international panel of journalists sitting in judgment on Israel's action that cannot possibly be a balanced panel. And, again, as a democracy, it's part of our sovereign right and duty to investigate ourselves.

I wonder if North Korea will use this as a legal precedent the next time they decide to sink a South Korean Naval Vessel?

Pepe Silvia

i liked how he didn't say the items were banned just that they still had access to them by other means

here's a press conference with the scots that were aboard the flotilla

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ziF7vV61GB8

the one guy claims the commandos came on the boat shooting and they tazed an 83 year old man

yosi

redrock wrote:

rafie wrote:

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

yes because shooting in the back implies that the victim was running away from the person with the gun, or the victim was engaged with an enemy and an ally of that enemy snuck up behind them and shot them in the back or blew their face off via entrance wound from the back of the head. either way it is cowardace of the highest order, sponsored by the israeli military and government....

Why is this an act of cowardice in your opinion? If you saw a friend being attacked by several people and you wanted to help him, what would you do? Kindly walk up and tap one of them on the shoulder asking him politely to stop? If I was your friend I would hope you would do everything you can to get them off me.

Point blank shooting in the back of the head or the back.... enough said.

Don't try to find excuses. If these supposedly highly trained elite forces wished to disable a 'foe' by sneaking up on him whilst he is otherwised engaged, it is easily done for them without having to kill. Assuming that this is a scenario, which I'm not so sure about.

Murders. That's what these were. Not defense, murder.

Israel is not credible. An international enquiry is essential. Israel cannot be trusted with their own internal one.

This whole argument simply no longer makes sense. A 9mm round means that the shots were fired from a sidearm. As Rafie has repeatedly stated clearly, and as you can see in the video, the soldiers who boarded the ship were carrying paintball guns as their primary weapons, and evidently were also armed with personal sidearms. If you just think rationally for a second, if the commandos had intended to board the ships and start killing people why would they have the paintball guns rather than rifles with live ammo? The use of sidearms is a pretty clear indication that the soldiers felt themselves to be in danger when they resorted to live ammunition.

As for people being shot at close range and in the back, what do you expect? This wasn't the Napoleonic wars, with soldiers marching up to each other in the middle of open fields. This was a full on melee on the deck of a ship in the pitch black. You have commandos who perceive their lives to be in danger, surrounded on all sides by assailants. I've never been in combat, but I've spoken with friends who have been. They invariably talk about the fog of war, how in combat you very often only have a very sketchy idea of what is going on around you (and one would imagine that in the middle of this mess that would be all the more true). Seriously, what could anyone expect would happen in this situation? If you try to attack a commando, and the guy thinks that you mean to kill him, he's going to kill you on the spot. These guys don't joke around. We're talking about a situation which is quite literally kill or be killed. At the point where the soldiers felt their lives were at risk they did exactly what they were trained to do. They killed the people that they thought were aiming to kill them. It's a harsh thing to say, but frankly I have no sympathy for these guys. They knowingly provoked the Israelis (that was their stated aim after all), and then attacked armed commandos. What the hell did they think was going to happen?! Actions have consequences. As blunt and harsh as it is to say, if you don't want to get shot, you probably shouldn't try to beat a bunch of soldiers with a metal rod, or stab them with a freaking knife.

Pepe Silvia

yosi wrote:

This whole argument simply no longer makes sense. A 9mm round means that the shots were fired from a sidearm. As Rafie has repeatedly stated clearly, and as you can see in the video, the soldiers who boarded the ship were carrying paintball guns as their primary weapons, and evidently were also armed with personal sidearms. If you just think rationally for a second, if the commandos had intended to board the ships and start killing people why would they have the paintball guns rather than rifles with live ammo? The use of sidearms is a pretty clear indication that the soldiers felt themselves to be in danger when they resorted to live ammunition.

As for people being shot at close range and in the back, what do you expect? This wasn't the Napoleonic wars, with soldiers marching up to each other in the middle of open fields. This was a full on melee on the deck of a ship in the pitch black. You have commandos who perceive their lives to be in danger, surrounded on all sides by assailants. I've never been in combat, but I've spoken with friends who have been. They invariably talk about the fog of war, how in combat you very often only have a very sketchy idea of what is going on around you (and one would imagine that in the middle of this mess that would be all the more true). Seriously, what could anyone expect would happen in this situation? If you try to attack a commando, and the guy thinks that you mean to kill him, he's going to kill you on the spot. These guys don't joke around. We're talking about a situation which is quite literally kill or be killed. At the point where the soldiers felt their lives were at risk they did exactly what they were trained to do. They killed the people that they thought were aiming to kill them. It's a harsh thing to say, but frankly I have no sympathy for these guys. They knowingly provoked the Israelis (that was their stated aim after all), and then attacked armed commandos. What the hell did they think was going to happen?! Actions have consequences. As blunt and harsh as it is to say, if you don't want to get shot, you probably shouldn't try to beat a bunch of soldiers with a metal rod, or stab them with a freaking knife.

submachine guns like uzi's use 9mm rounds. even if it was a handgun one guy was shot twice in the legs, once in the back, once in the face and once in the back of the head from less than 1 1/2ft away, you don't feel that is a bit excessive? or tazering an 83 year old man? also, people aboard the flotilla, including a member of the israeli knesset, say the commandos started shooting before they got on the boat and as they boarded. some say they were hit with the but of an assault rifle.

a vessel in international waters flying the flag of a sovereign country, which is an ally and fellow member of NATO, had their communications and radar jammed and were forcibly boarded and taken over. how is that legal again? and how is the blockade legal again? collective punishment isn't legal.



how can you really justify that level of force over humanitarian aid??? i know israel is used to taking land that doesn't belong to them but are they taking over international waters now, too?

Pepe Silvia

yosi, why won't israel return the cameras and other items to the people of the flotilla?

why won't israel release the ENTIRE video of the operation instead of short <1 min videos making them seem like the poor victims (as the forcibly boarded an ally's boat in international waters)