Click on the picture to see the video.
As a citizen of the world I have had enough of Israeli tactics. Yes, they have torture camps. Yes they are abusing all human rights possible. And no I don't want to be politically correct this one time. This is outrageous and no amount of logic will convince me that Israel is not terribly, horribly wrong here.
Here's more: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/blog/2010/may/31/israel-troops-gaza-ships
Hemant, video is missing, you didn’t embed correctly :(, fix it!
Thank you for this article, it’s really time to stop all the Israeli crimes.
Somehow I can’t embed it. But if you now click on the picture, you can go to youtube and see it.
And yes, I think this time they’ve just gone too far.This is as criminal as any terrorist attack.
Hi Hemant,
Have you seen the article on the BBC website?
‘MORE THAN 10 PEOPLE’ have been killed after Israeli commandos (...) ‘CLASHED WITH’ some of the 600 ‘PROTESTERS’ on board.
I was quite flabbergasted
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/10195838.stm
They have just changed the ‘protesters’ to ‘people’.
I should have taken a printscreen.
The article says:
Israel’s deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon said his country “regrets any loss of life and did everything to avoid this outcome”.
He accused the convoy of a “premeditated and outrageous provocation”, describing the flotilla as an “armada of hate”.
So will the world accept the Israeli version? Or is it time to call them terrorists as well?
And if not, why not?
Following is a list of United Nations Security Council resolutions directly critical of Israel for violations of U.N. Security Council resolutions, the U.N. Charter, the Geneva Conventions, international terrorism, or other violations of international law.
Res. 57 (Sep. 18, 1948) – Expresses deep shock at the assassination of the U.N. Mediator in Palestine, Count Folke Bernadotte, by Zionist terrorists.
Res. 89 (Nov. 17, 1950) – Requests that attention be given to the expulsion of “thousands of Palestine Arabs” and calls upon concerned governments to take no further action “involving the transfer of persons across international frontiers or armistice lines”, and notes that Israel announced that it would withdraw to the armistice lines.
Res. 93 (May 18, 1951) – Finds that Israeli airstrikes on Syria on April 5, 1951 constitutes “a violation of the cease-fire”, and decides that Arab civilians expelled from the demilitarized zone by Israel should be allowed to return.
Res. 100 (Oct. 27, 1953) – Notes that Israel had said it would stop work it started in the demilitarized zone on September 2, 1953.
Res. 101 (Nov. 24, 1953) – Finds Israel’s attack on Qibya, Jordan on October 14-15, 1953 to be a violation of the cease-fire and “Expresses the strongest censure of that action”.
The list goes on here: http://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2010/01/27/rogue-state-israeli-violations-of-u-n-security-council-resolutions/
Is Israel not a terrorist state?
lovely research, Hermant
“Peculiar how Israel is always violently attacked but it’s only the ‘attackers’ who die” http://fwd4.me/R0h
Here’s a comment from Anvita. She isn’t able to post it:
Peculiar how Israel is always violently attacked but it’s only the ‘attackers’ who die” http://fwd4.me/R0h
Israel attacks Gaza aid fleet
Avital Leibovich, an Israeli military spokeswoman, confirmed that the attack took place in international waters, saying: “This happened in waters outside of Israeli territory, but we have the right to defend ourselves.”
Excuse me, I feel sick…
Questions from twitter:
Why isn’t Israel firing on a humanitarian aid ship worse than North Korea firing on a warship?
Just in: Why is the United States so quiet today? Where is Mr. Nobel Peace prize winner? #Gaza #FreedomFlotilla
I say now…ISRAEL: ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!
Israel has fascistic policy. All their state is built on the base of fascism and they are just continueing this policy by attacks like this one.
I don’t understand why they are doing things like this… they must know the international community will jump on it? But then again, that community won’t do anything.
Hemant, I wrote an answer to you:
http://development.thinkaboutit.eu/think3/post/a_force_more_powerful/
Clearly the fact that 10 people ended up dead is an unacceptable use of force, but what are your thoughts on the fact that as soon as the commandos landed they got attached with poles etc? Have you seen the video. The claim that they acted without provocation is clearly not true - why did the protestors immediately get violent?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0LulDJh4fWI
Not making a call here on the general rights and wrongs of Israel’s actions - just interested in your thoughts…
The ones who used clubs were stupid, the soldiers who shot non-violent activist with deadly ammunition were committing a crime.
Bottom line: The commandos boarded the boat in international waters. The activist were right and justified in using non-lethal force in self defense. Even the US agree with this in the UN resolution.
Dear Jodi, while Benno has pretty much put down what I also think, here is my own immature version of it.
I put myself in a ship on international waters.
The ship is carrying aid.
The ship gets attacked by terrorists, oh sorry, commandos.
Some of us panic and get hold of sticks. It’s a human tendency. But since it was the Palestinian supporters, taking sticks in panic may be a condemnable terrorist act.
So there.
Did the guys who took up sticks be considered as provocation to use gun power? Hell, no.
By what twist of logic?
If Iran had done the same what Israel has done, the US would be bombing Iran.
This world is clearly not rational.
That’s what I think.
@Stefan, I will answer you on your page. Thanks for writing.
@ Hemant - like I said, there is no defense for killing the protestors - afterall they were trained commandos and surely could have brought it under control without killing 10 people. Also, they failed to include the remainder of the video which showed what happened when they opened fire.
Nevertheless, I don’t think it was a matter of the protestors picking up a couple of sticks that happened to be lying around. They obviously had armed themselves ready to attack the soldiers when they got onto the ship. And had they not jumped straight onto them would things have progressed differently?
My point is that as with most things to do with the Israel/Palestine issue it’s not black and white. Israel seems to react with unnecessary force, but the Palestinians have done their fair share of damage as well. Perhaps it should be less about condemning Israel and Israeli’s as a whole, and more about condemning the violent actions of those directly involved in the conflict?
Were they only Palestinians on the ship?
Were there not people from around the world?
Were there only ‘Islamists’? As Stefan would say.
The reports keep coming in. The Israeli commandos opened fire before boarding the ship: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jun/01/gaza-flotilla-eyewitness-accounts-gunfire
No this issue isn’t black or white. But THIS issue is quite simple really:
Israeli commandos attacked a ship carrying aid.
No the people on the ship were not armed.
Israelis killed more than 10 people on the ship.
Now what other shades do we see in THIS particular incident?
We can discuss the Palestine-Israel problem till kingdom comes (of whichever religion
My take is simple: We need a ceasefire of mistrust. And that isn’t coming.
Why? As I said, what if Iran had attacked a ship like this? Would they not be bombed, invaded and turned to dust by now?
Why is Israel so damn sacred?
Also, you say:
They obviously had armed themselves ready to attack the soldiers when they got onto the ship. And had they not jumped straight onto them would things have progressed differently?
These were International Waters. What business did Israel have in attacking a relief ship in international waters. How are we missing this point?
Hemant, I didn’t say they were ‘only Islamists’, so be fair and don’t insinuate. The fighting broke out on only one of the ships of a whole flotilla, the Mavi Marmara, which is the only ship that was under the order of the IHH (İnsani Yardım Vakfı) which is an Islamist organisation and accused since the 90s of ties to terrorist groups, not only by the “little and the big Satan” but also France, and that collectes money for Hamas, so they are players in this game, not innocent bystanders.
I nowhere said I know exactly what happened, I simply dislike the tone you started the discussion in: it’s definitely not productive. Did you ever ask yourself what you actually know about the dynamics of the whole region? It’s easy to shout paroles, and repeat all kinds of propaganda, pro- or anti-Israel, it’s very difficult to really change something. That’s all I try to say. is this so difficult to understand?
Iran btw. abducted several times foreign citizens on the high seas, nothing much happened, other than ransom was paid or some other games played. Don’t pretend that they are somekind of victims, they are ruthless.
And why do you say Israel is ‘sacred’? Every country condemned those actions. And just like UN sanctions on North Korea or Sudan do not happen because of China, there will be none on Israel because of the USA. The problem is here not somekind of evil conspiracy but rather the structure of the UN. If you don’t like Israel than boycott it’s products, sign petitions, organise demonstrations etc., but don’t pretend they are special just because you don’t know about other conflicts.
We might remember that anything the Israeli army does in Gaza, or in waters belionging to Gaza, is illegal, as is also the bockade. That is from a purely juridical point of view.
One could of course argue that Israel has a right to defend itself wherever it finds necessary, but then we should also agree Israel has been acting counterproductively since decades.
The supression of the first, second and third intifada crushed PLO, and gave rise to Hamas. In stead of helping Hamas’ political opponents, Israel has been continously undermining secular palestinian movement, building a wall on the west bank, continuing settling, and occupying east Jerusalem. What exactly does Netanyahu think that Abbas could offer Palestinians as an alternative to Hamas?
The war and blockade against Gaza have resulted in:
a) immense human suffering
b) free rein for an increasingly authoritarian Hamas
c) a new wave of Al Qaida linked islamistic movements
Of course Hamas should recognisse Israel’s right to exist, but do they have anything else than that recognition they could offer at a negotiation table? Why not start in the other end, with a Israeli excuse for the happenings in Shabra and Shatila, and a denouncement of Ariel Sharon as the war criminal he is/was.
You can see my short article here http://development.thinkaboutit.eu/think3/post/oops_israel_committed_a_crime…_again . And pay attention to video that I posted.
It does appear that as more news comes out that they fired before boarding… It’s hard to imagine they could attack an aid ship!
Dear Stefan in you reply on your page you said: Do those Islamists attacking the entering naval forces didn’t know exactly what they were doing?
I may have got the meaning wrong, but it looked to me that you were saying that Islamists attacked the entering naval forces.
I don’t claim to understand the dynamics of the whole region. But here is what happened:
1. They were international waters.
2. Israel attacked those ships on international waters.
3. They opened fire before entering those ships.
In that light, all other arguments don’t really hold water now do they?
It’s not about disliking Israel. Or any other country. As a citizen of the world I do have a right to be angry about an extreme act of high-handedness. You know why? Because when a country acts like that the effect is on the world.
When terrorist attacks happen, all the dark skinned people in the world are looked at with suspicion. Isn’t that true?
ANd what Israel just proved is that terrorism doesn’t belong to a religion. It belongs in the category of ‘stupid and inhuman’.
So the world may well declare Israel a terrorist state (as prominent people are now demanding).
And then look and work towards how to handle the menace of terrorism.
This attacking of the ship was a terrorist act. And this is exactly what I said. My tone, which you disliked was the tone of disbelief, anger and pain.
But maybe those things have no value.
Here’s what i said:
As a citizen of the world I have had enough of Israeli tactics. Yes they have concentration camps in Gaza. Yes they are abusing all human rights possible. And no I don’t want to be politically correct this one time. This is outrageous and no amount of logic will convince me that Israel is not terribly, horribly wrong here.
I stand by what I said.
@Hemant
>all other arguments don’t really hold water now do they?
My thought was that the Israeli overreaction was anticipated, don’t pretend I’m trying to defend Israel here, I’m trying to make a point about how to deal with this kind of issue. It’s not covered by what you said, and point 3 btw. is not so clear yet: You might rejoice in the spectacle of the propaganda war were you are fed (and self-select) the news you want to hear and that fuel your rage (that’s by the way the same for the pro-Israel side, they believe what they want too). I don’t like it to have my emotions manipulated like that, so I don’t even pretend to know what exactly happened.
About the anger, disbelief and pain, yes I do feel the same, I think everybody does. I tried to tell you that the answer lies in overcoming it and looking clearly at the issues at hand, not in rejoicing in it. I obviously failed, I’m sorry.
And no, I don’t know anybody that ‘looks at brown people with suspicion’ when a terrorist attack happens, I don’t do in any case, I don’t even think ‘brown people’ is a category. If you have a problem with my dislike for Islamist groups like Hamas or the IHH, that I hold accountable for their role in the mess that the people in Israel and Palestine are in and for their role in making this an unsolvable ‘cosmic conflict’, than please say so clearly without implying I’m somekind of racist for doing so, thank you.
The talk about ‘concentration camp Gaza’ or ‘terrorist state’ is swearword-propaganda for idiots who don’t know and don’t care what the words concentration camp actually mean and that are blind to what happens in the rest of the world because their hate, anger, fear consumed them. Those kind of people are not interested in any solution to this conflict but just enjoy raging to the latest news item and the snuff-porn of cruelty propaganda. They are the internet equivalent to the Fox-news watchers.
Hemant, I thought better of you than that.
Dearest Stefan
First let me apologize if you took any of my comments personally. I never intended that to happen. I was merely making some points which I observed.
As I also mentioned on you post, I think your post was really thoughtful. And we may disagree but I completely get and understand what you have said.
You say: My thought was that the Israeli overreaction was anticipated..
Maybe. I don’t think we will ever come to know. Considering the amount of information noise we are hearing.
About Hamas / Islamists etc. All I wanted to say was a terrorist act doesn’t come with a religion attached to it. In this case, I thought, Israel’s act was a terrorist act.
Please don’t read my thought more than that. I had no intention, or hold no malice towards anyone. Seriously.
About browns etc. I think it’s a counter-productive point and I shouldn’t have brought it up in this topic. We can discuss that some other time. I think it confuses the debate and takes it into a tangent.
So, dear Stefan I was never, and still not making any personal attacks or comments.
But what you think of me is entirely up to you. It’s very easy to classify people. More difficult to understand them. And I don’t believe in the rule: Either you are with us, or against us.
I am sure, neither do you.
Fox news watchers…I don’t think you are calling me that, are you?
Dear Hemant,
I might have gotten carried away, it’s not that I enjoy hearing about this or all those other conflicts. I’ve to admit it strains on my nerves, esp. because I think that just with a little less fanaticism in those issues and a little more goodwill those conflicts (and not just the Middle East one) could be solved to the great benefit of all.
I’m glad anyway I could make my point clear and I think that even though we probably still disagree in many things esp. concerning the rhetoric, we both learned something in the process - I did for sure.
I agree btw. 100% with you that “a terrorist act doesn’t come with a religion attached to it”.
And yes, ‘Fox news watcher’ is quite harsh, nobody wants to be called like that… I take it back but hope you’ll think about it the next time you get enraged over a news item