|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Purgatory: Aiding the suffering in Gaza deligitimises Israel -- WTF?
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
Well, maybe the dictionary's definitions are all abnormal. "Aggressive" is defined in terms of the noun "aggression" which M-W, at least, defines as follows:
1 : a forceful action or procedure (as an unprovoked attack) especially when intended to dominate or master
2 : the practice of making attacks or encroachments; especially : unprovoked violation by one country of the territorial integrity of another
3 : hostile, injurious, or destructive behavior or outlook especially when caused by frustration
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nicolemr
Shipmate
# 28
|
Posted
I don't see anything there that would qualify establishing a blockade of a hostile entity as an aggressive act.
--------------------
On pilgrimage in the endless realms of Cyberia, currently traveling by ship. Now with live journal!
Posts: 11803 | From: New York City "The City Carries On" | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Nicolemrw:
As I said, I don't care if you think running the blockade is justified or not. It's aggressive. Justified aggression or unjustified aggression is still aggression.
Therefore in this situation the aggression was started by the blockade runners.
Does that make Gandhi's salt marches acts of aggression, or MLK's Selma marches acts of aggression?
Peacefully breaking a blockade is not an act of aggression, although aggression may be used against the protestors. These people are (usually) grown ups, and they know what they're doing. Credit them with some self-awareness of the trouble they're going to get into.
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
And to double post - when my late father-in-law gun-ran for the International Brigades in the Spanish Civil War, they got shelled by Franco. They didn't expect any less, because they were gun-running.
See the difference?
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Nicolemrw:
I don't see anything there that would qualify establishing a blockade of a hostile entity as an aggressive act.
It's not forceful? we've seen it is. It's not intended to dominate? REALLY? It's not hostile, injurious or destructive? I'll bet it seems that way to people without homes and insufficient food and medical supplies. You seem to have bought a theory and are fighting a vigorous rearguard action against the facts.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
New Yorker
Shipmate
# 9898
|
Posted
These humanitarians are not so nice after all.
quote:
Yet the Turkish group that funded and ran the boat the Mavi Marmara, where the confrontation occurred is documented as having ties to terrorists, was named in federal court papers as playing a role in the failed millennium bomb plot and is named in a C.I.A. report in 1996 as having links to terrorist groups.
See the story here.
Posts: 3193 | From: New York City | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nicolemr
Shipmate
# 28
|
Posted
quote:
Does that make Gandhi's salt marches acts of aggression, or MLK's Selma marches acts of aggression?
Um, of course they were aggressive. As in the opposite of passive. Being passive would have meant accepting the status quo and not attempting to act at all.
Justified aggression, and non-violent, but still aggressive.
--------------------
On pilgrimage in the endless realms of Cyberia, currently traveling by ship. Now with live journal!
Posts: 11803 | From: New York City "The City Carries On" | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
The opposite of passive is active, not aggressive.
New Yorker, do you have a better source than Fox Noise?
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
To me the issue is not about how honourable the intentions of the blockade-busters were. The issue is whether states should be wandering round in international waters taking unilateral, pre-emptive and disproportionate action against anyone they decide represents a threat.
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Nicolemrw:
Justified aggression, and non-violent, but still aggressive.
Non-violent aggression.
A little bit of me just died... ![[Ultra confused]](graemlins/confused2.gif)
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
quote:
Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
Nor do I care if Iran gets a nuclear weapon. They'll never use it. Using it will get them blown back into the dark ages and they are smart enough to know that. Why expend so much energy keeping them from it?
/off topic
Duh. Because they'll accidentally 'lose one' for someone else to find. Proving for certain (for values of certain that involve reducing Tehran to ashes) it was an Iranian bomb that rips the guts out of a major city will be then next to impossible. That's why.
You really think a nation that found evidence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq want "find evidence" it was an Iranian bomb?
quote:
originally posted by PaulBC:
There will be those who say that Israel has a God given right to exist . I am not one of them . Israel was born out of the ashes of the Holocaust the 6 million would be ashamed to see Jewish soldiers acting like the people who killed them.
Equating Gaza with the holocaust is absurd. Where are the gas chambers? There are 1.2 million people in Gaza that are alive. This is after the Israelis have effectively controlled Gaza and the West Bank for over forty years. If the Israelis were trying to commit genocide...they would have done it already. Oh surely the Europeans and the UN wouldn't stand by and watch it happen. Yeah, ask the Bosnians and Rwandans what the Europeans and UN will stand by and let happen. If the Palestinians were acting like the Jews in Pre-World War II Europe, there wouldn't be any problem at all. Your last sentence assumes there are no holocaust survivors left alive. There are. Oddly, most of them don't see the connection with how they were treated and how the Palestinians are treated...because there isn't.
--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican't
Shipmate
# 15292
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
Imposing a blockade is an act of aggression. Therefore the aggression was started by Israel.
And, er, Egypt. As I understand it, they have blockaded the Egyptian-Gazan border.
I'm not an international lawyer (and anyone who claims that they are probably aren't, since there are so few of them) but the San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea appears to be applicable here.
Article 67 states:
67. Merchant vessels flying the flag of neutral States may not be attacked unless they:
(a) 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;
(b) engage in belligerent acts on behalf of the enemy;
(c) act as auxiliaries to the enemy s armed forces;
(d) are incorporated into or assist the enemy s intelligence system;
(e) sail under convoy of enemy warships or military aircraft; or
(f) otherwise make an effective contribution to the enemy s military action, e.g., by carrying military materials, and it is not feasible for the attacking forces to first place passengers and crew in a place of safety. Unless circumstances do not permit, they are to be given a warning, so that they can re-route, off-load, or take other precautions.
There are other applicable sections, but a reading of this suggests to me that the stopping and boarding of the ship was entirely justified under international law. There are wider questions, I suppose, of whether the blockade is legal (it's justifiable to some extent, in my view) and whether there is a state of war between Israel and the terrorist groups in the Gaza strip.
Posts: 3613 | From: London, England | Registered: Nov 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
Equating Gaza with the holocaust is absurd.
Agree. Not all terrorism is genocidal. It is shameful, however.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Nicolemrw:
And actually, thinking about it, no, I don't think you can claim maintaining a blockade or embargo is aggressive per se. Do you seriously maintain that we have been constantly maintaining an aggressive relationship towards Cuba, for instance? Unfriendly, unjustified, hostile, even, but not aggressive. Not by any normal meaning of the word aggressive.
If you mean a shooting war, then no. If you mean denial of basic humanitarian supplies, such as medicines, medical supplies, and food, then yes. By now, though it is more obvious that the USA policy toward Cuba panders toward a vote bloc in the south USA, with promises of recovery of property etc. Don't think Cuba has anything to do with bombs and missles since the early 1960s. Hamas seems to have an ongoing involvement with these. Hence Israel's fear, and mismanaged intervention.
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
Your last sentence assumes there are no holocaust survivors left alive. There are. Oddly, most of them don't see the connection with how they were treated and how the Palestinians are treated...because there isn't.
There was at least one holocaust survivor on the blockade running ships.
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
And notice I said most not all...
--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Saul the Apostle
Shipmate
# 13808
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican't:
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
Imposing a blockade is an act of aggression. Therefore the aggression was started by Israel.
And, er, Egypt. As I understand it, they have blockaded the Egyptian-Gazan border.
I'm not an international lawyer (and anyone who claims that they are probably aren't, since there are so few of them) but the San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea appears to be applicable here.
Article 67 states:
67. Merchant vessels flying the flag of neutral States may not be attacked unless they:
(a) 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;
(b) engage in belligerent acts on behalf of the enemy;
(c) act as auxiliaries to the enemy s armed forces;
(d) are incorporated into or assist the enemy s intelligence system;
(e) sail under convoy of enemy warships or military aircraft; or
(f) otherwise make an effective contribution to the enemy s military action, e.g., by carrying military materials, and it is not feasible for the attacking forces to first place passengers and crew in a place of safety. Unless circumstances do not permit, they are to be given a warning, so that they can re-route, off-load, or take other precautions.
There are other applicable sections, but a reading of this suggests to me that the stopping and boarding of the ship was entirely justified under international law. There are wider questions, I suppose, of whether the blockade is legal (it's justifiable to some extent, in my view) and whether there is a state of war between Israel and the terrorist groups in the Gaza strip.
This is true and the Royal Navy routinely stops ships under this treaty regularly. So it is unfair to judge Israel as somehow an outlaw in that respect. Many nations use this agreement.
Try to imagine that the Isle of Wight had a terror state government and was lobbing rockets at Portsmouth and Southampton. Would we Brits sit idly by and be regularly blitzed by the Isle of Wight terrorists? Would we nothing ''The Sun'' would be saying let 'em have it and we back our brave boys etc etc etc.
There are a whole range of double standards here aren't there?
Have you ever wondered why you never seen any reportage of the blood or gore from Afghanistan like what was seen in Vietnam in the 70s? Its because there is a very very effective moratorium on open reporting.
Do you ever see the after effects of a rogue drone missile that blows Afghan women and kids up? No you don't because it is all censored.
Before we in the West get all high and bloody might about Israel, lets remember the blood on our hands from Iraq and Afghanistan.
Saul
[ 01. June 2010, 20:49: Message edited by: Saul the Apostle ]
--------------------
"I cannot forecast to you the action of Russia. It is a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma; but perhaps there is a key. That key is Russian national interest."
Posts: 1772 | From: unsure | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican't:
I'm not an international lawyer (and anyone who claims that they are probably aren't, since there are so few of them) but the San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea appears to be applicable here.
IANAIL either, but does this qualify as an "armed conflict at sea"? If not, TessaB's chunk of UN Law of the Sea, which seems to say more or less the opposite, might apply, might it not?
[ 01. June 2010, 20:52: Message edited by: Eutychus ]
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dumpling Jeff
Shipmate
# 12766
|
Posted
A blockade is an exception to the high seas rule. It is set forth in some (multilateral) treaty somewhere. There are plenty of limits, but unless they were more than 200 miles out, it's probably "legal" (although international law is more a set of standards and treaties than a legal code).
But it is an aggressive action. It is a (some?) casus belli by the blockaded country against the blockaded country. Technically that's Israel against Israel since Gaza isn't a country.
But the people of Gaza are more than justified in considering this an act of war.
Running the blockade is likewise an aggressive act. If done by a foreign power it would also be an act of war. Run by a bunch of peaceful protestors the situation is less clear. I doubt there's well established precedence. Israel could certainly detain the protestors and seize anything they considered war material.
But run by violent protestors/gun runners they can be shot out of hand.
So the question is, how violent were they? It seems to come down to a he said/she said situation. The video clearly shows protestors trying to kill the boarding marines as they landed. Some protestors say the Israelis fired before they landed.
It might come down to who one trusts, since both sides regularly lie for their own benefit. It is something the Israelis would do. It is something the Palestinians would do. Who can say? It's a toss up to me.
This is why we need to avoid unnecessary conflicts. We are not and should not be the world's police. We should only intervene when vital U.S. interests are at stake. They are not at stake in Israel.
--------------------
"There merely seems to be something rather glib in defending the police without question one moment and calling the Crusades-- or war in general-- bad the next. The second may be an extension of the first." - Alogon
Posts: 2572 | From: Nomad | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Saul the Apostle:
Before we in the West get all high and bloody might about Israel, lets remember the blood on our hands from Iraq and Afghanistan.
Oh, can the irrelevant ad hominems.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
JoannaP
Shipmate
# 4493
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by New Yorker:
These humanitarians are not so nice after all.
quote:
Yet the Turkish group that funded and ran the boat the Mavi Marmara, where the confrontation occurred is documented as having ties to terrorists, was named in federal court papers as playing a role in the failed millennium bomb plot and is named in a C.I.A. report in 1996 as having links to terrorist groups.
See the story here.
This is the Israeli report referred to by Fox. I particularly like paragraph 13:
quote:
We do not have updated information about current IHH links with global jihad elements, however, its activities in the past may indicate its nature.
What this document does not mention is that IHH still has consultative status at the UN Economic and Social Council.
It is scary but I agree with the chap quoted at the end of the Fox piece and can only conclude that the relevant US officials did and do not believe that the evidence linking IHH to al-Qaida is sound enough to justify proscribing it.
--------------------
"Freedom for the pike is death for the minnow." R. H. Tawney (quoted by Isaiah Berlin)
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." Benjamin Franklin
Posts: 1877 | From: England | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
And notice I said most not all...
I noticed. I was just wondering how you managed to co-opt the opinion of 'most' of the holocaust survivors when they are by necessity all pretty old and one of them has clearly made the effort to turn out, knowing the likely consequences.
Maybe you should do them the courtesy of asking them what they think next time, rather than assuming they agree with you.
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
quote:
This animal is very bad; when you attack it, it defends itself.
Unfortunately for those who would like simple solutions this is true of both sides here. They both feel threatened. So they both defend themselves. They are entitled to do so.
And who really doesn't believe the boat was deliberately coat trailing?
If you're going to go on a demo, make sure you choose to do it somewhere nice, somewhere that doesn't regard itself as entitled to shoot you. I.e. don't demonstrate in Tiananmen Square. Don't demonstrate in Moscow. Don't demonstrate in Tehran. And don't demonstrate in Israel. You'll get hurt.
Demonstrating is passive aggression. For it not to end it tears, you have to demonstrate somewhere that recognises it as an accepted form of political dialogue. Otherwise you may end up a martyr in your own eyes but there is no reason why those you are demonstrating against regard you as one?
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
If you're going to go on a demo, make sure you choose to do it somewhere nice, somewhere that doesn't regard itself as entitled to shoot you. I.e. don't demonstrate in Tiananmen Square. Don't demonstrate in Moscow. Don't demonstrate in Tehran. And don't demonstrate in Israel. You'll get hurt.
If that were adopted as a universal M.O., India would still belong to Britain. Maybe you want that.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
How many holocaust survivors you think Paul BC asked? You give me one holocaust survivor who supports the Palestinians. I'll give you one holocaust survivor and Nobel Laureate who supports Israel...Elie Wiesel.
I guess we can give continue an exchange of names. However, the history of Israel would suggest that most holocaust survivors support the Israeli position. At what point do you think they stopped?
--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican't
Shipmate
# 15292
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
If you're going to go on a demo, make sure you choose to do it somewhere nice, somewhere that doesn't regard itself as entitled to shoot you. I.e. don't demonstrate in Tiananmen Square. Don't demonstrate in Moscow. Don't demonstrate in Tehran. And don't demonstrate in Israel. You'll get hurt.
If that were adopted as a universal M.O., India would still belong to Britain. Maybe you want that.
I do, but that's a different fantasy for a different thread.
The point Enoch makes is a reasonable one, though. My instinct are very pro-Arab, but it seems clear to me that these people were after a confrontation (one of them told a journalist beforehand that the voyage would end in either martyrdom or by reaching Gaza). There appear to be some Islamic extremists on board and the others are probably Useful Idiots.
The fact that this ship didn't stop (when the others did) suggests to me that some or all of the people on board were spoiling for a fight. They got one.
Posts: 3613 | From: London, England | Registered: Nov 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Saul the Apostle
Shipmate
# 13808
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
quote:
Originally posted by Saul the Apostle:
Before we in the West get all high and bloody might about Israel, lets remember the blood on our hands from Iraq and Afghanistan.
Oh, can the irrelevant ad hominems.
I won't can them....the emotional utter cant spoken by the press and the ''humanitarians'' is utter drivel for the most part. Simply my argument is for us Brits that to take any 'moral high ground' with Israel is purile and utterly hypocritical.
Think about it logically if you can do so.
We bomb illiterate Afghan civilians to shit, and because they don't have access to the media and they are very poor and uninfluential, we just carry on doing it. Our own media don't report it and even though I admire the BBC, they won't or can't report what WE are really doing in Afghanistan.
If we saw the results of these all too regular drone missile cock ups it would make annoyed of tunbridge Wells really get uppity.
So when wee William Hague gets on his soapbox it strikes me as hypocritical...its a modern superior pseudo-colonialism IMO. The poor Afghans are worth nothing but shit; the media don't/can't/won't report what really is happening so lets sweep it under the carpet.
Inconvenient truth eh?
Saul
--------------------
"I cannot forecast to you the action of Russia. It is a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma; but perhaps there is a key. That key is Russian national interest."
Posts: 1772 | From: unsure | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
Therefore Israel can do what it wants without international censure. It doesn't make sense. If the devil says it's raining that doesn't make the sun shine.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
Does it make you feel better that most people in the United States supporting the war also support Israel? We are consistent. ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
I'm not. I supported the War in Afghanistan but not in Iraq. It is time bring the soldiers home from Afghanistan. On the other hand, I usually support Israel. In this case, they shouldn't have stopped them in international waters. They should have known violence was a possibility and prepared to respond to it with non-lethal means.
--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
otyetsfoma
Shipmate
# 12898
|
Posted
Your trade embargo on Cuba cannot be compared to the blockade of Gaza. Palestinians are suffering severe hardships, Cuba is able to trade with the rest of the world except USA. And Americans who want Havana cigars just have to cross borders to north or south to buy them.
Posts: 842 | From: Edgware UK | Registered: Aug 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
If that were adopted as a universal M.O., India would still belong to Britain. Maybe you want that.
Mousethief, you're not quite getting my point. The salt protests did work for Gandhi because he was protesting against an empire which was squeamish about these things, and which had a culture that recognised demonstration as part of the language of political dialogue. It wouldn't have worked if India's political masters had been Imperial Japan, which would just have mown them down and thought no more about it.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
Consistent in supporting attacks on innocents. I supported neither war and do not support Israel's right to treat the Palestinians the way they have for the last 62 years (well, before that they weren't Israel but it still wasn't pretty).
Say wasn't 1998 the 50th year of Israel? The year of jubilee when all lands return to their original owners? ![[Two face]](graemlins/scot_twoface.gif)
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
Enoch, so basically you're saying Britain in the 1950s had a conscience, but Israel in the 2010s does not.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican't
Shipmate
# 15292
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
Enoch, so basically you're saying Britain in the 1950s had a conscience, but Israel in the 2010s does not.
Must have had one, since India became independent in 1947.
Posts: 3613 | From: London, England | Registered: Nov 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
romanlion
editorial comment
# 10325
|
Posted
The news showed the toys, clothes, and wheelchairs piled high on the deck of that ship this afternoon.
They also said that two more ships were in route with intentions on running the blockade.
Should be interesting.
--------------------
"You can't get rich in politics unless you're a crook" - Harry S. Truman
Posts: 1486 | From: White Rose City | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican't:
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
Enoch, so basically you're saying Britain in the 1950s had a conscience, but Israel in the 2010s does not.
Must have had one, since India became independent in 1947.
I blame American high school history education. Improperly so-called.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
orfeo - are you equally suspicious of the presence of journalists on civil rights marches in the southern USA in the 1960s, in Northern Ireland in the 1970s, in the Eastern bloc in the 1980s or in China in the 1990s?
No, but that has much more to do with the fact that back then I would have accepted journalists were journalists. In recent years, 'journalists' seem to have become increasingly replaced by 'employees of news corporations desperate to fill every second of every day with sensational footage that will grabe the fleeting attention of the masses'.
Heck, why stick with employees? A car crash halfway around the world becomes news IF THERE'S FOOTAGE OF IT from someone's mobile phone.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
I'd like to add to my last response, that the mode of transport is significant here. Journalists turning up to a march or protest on land, once it's started or once people are observed beginning to gather, is one thing. Journalists already being on board a boat as it travels towards a confrontation is quite another. To already be there, they had to already know there was going to be something worth reporting on. They were travelling with the event before there WAS an event.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
Yes. And?
This was going to be news whatever. And any journo worth their salt is going to have a heads-up about events that might be newsworthy, so they're not surprised by them (OMG! The Queen is opening parliament! Quick, get a camera crew together, we might just make it in time to see her leave!).
You're looking for a conspiracy. There isn't one - just reporters doing their job.
As for the mobile phone thing - a protestor's best weapon is now a video camera that streams live to the internet. It's the 21st century, orfeo. We don't have to wait for the gentleman from the Times to come along and decide whether it's news or not.
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
Except this wasn't presented as a protest, was it?
It was presented as an aid convoy. And the primary reason for my suspicions is that it looks rather like an aid convoy that was designed to fail to deliver aid.
If it had actually been presented as a protest against the blockade, my reaction to it might be completely different. But it wasn't. So I really wish you would stop bringing up analogies with protesters.
[ 01. June 2010, 23:58: Message edited by: orfeo ]
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
pjkirk
Shipmate
# 10997
|
Posted
On All Things Considered (US public radio new show) tonight, they spoke with one of the flotilla members and a reporter from Haaretz newspaper in Israel, both of which had a couple interesting things to say.
Link for audio: http://www.npr.org/templates/archives/archive.php?thingId=2
First, the flotilla was dedicated to a peaceful trip, and even when moving between boats, people were searched for weapons.
Second, from the reporter, apparently this is the typical way that Israel stops boats of any sort. Not the usual US Coastguard pulling alongside that I (and I'm sure many others) would have expected. This works very well against a professional crew of 10 to 20 sailors, but on the one boat alone, there were 600 passengers. I still think the method was atrocious, but it may have been as much cock-up by Israel than anything else.
I'm ashamed to see that the UN statement about this today was heavily watered down under pressure from the US. Not surprised, but the endless support of Israel is definitely a deep black mark on this nation.
One good thing to come out of this so far, is that Egypt is opening the border to Gaza for a few days. Normally it is open for one day per year. Hopefully it will remain open. Link to article which also goes into the "state of affairs" w/in the flotilla
What disturbs me the most about the entire situation is that Israel, but all appearances, is simply talking out their ass about wanting peace. Every appropriate Palestinian government has been undermined at every step by Israel, and they have reneged on every agreement. It is for this reason that I cannot believe any word from them anymore.
--------------------
Dear God, I would like to file a bug report -- Randall Munroe (http://xkcd.com/258/)
Posts: 1177 | From: Swinging on a hammock, chatting with Bokonon | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by pjkirk:
Second, from the reporter, apparently this is the typical way that Israel stops boats of any sort. Not the usual US Coastguard pulling alongside that I (and I'm sure many others) would have expected.
Sadly, this would be in keeping with Israeli actions in general. They seem to be stuck in this cycle of over-the-top machismo. I suspect it plays very well to the folks back home, though.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
New Yorker
Shipmate
# 9898
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
New Yorker, do you have a better source than Fox Noise?
Sorry, that's one of the few sources I trust. And you should trust Fox News, too. It's the best and least biased of all main stream media outlets.
Posts: 3193 | From: New York City | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Amanda B. Reckondwythe
Dressed for Church
# 5521
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by New Yorker:
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
New Yorker, do you have a better source than Fox Noise?
Sorry, that's one of the few sources I trust. And you should trust Fox News, too. It's the best and least biased of all main stream media outlets.
Good Lord! And J. Edgar Hoover wore Golda Meier's underwear . . . oh, wait!
--------------------
"I take prayer too seriously to use it as an excuse for avoiding work and responsibility." -- The Revd Martin Luther King Jr.
Posts: 10542 | From: The Great Southwest | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
pjkirk
Shipmate
# 10997
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:
Originally posted by pjkirk:
Second, from the reporter, apparently this is the typical way that Israel stops boats of any sort. Not the usual US Coastguard pulling alongside that I (and I'm sure many others) would have expected.
Sadly, this would be in keeping with Israeli actions in general. They seem to be stuck in this cycle of over-the-top machismo. I suspect it plays very well to the folks back home, though.
From what I've heard, it plays very very well.
And New Yorker - ![[Killing me]](graemlins/killingme.gif)
--------------------
Dear God, I would like to file a bug report -- Randall Munroe (http://xkcd.com/258/)
Posts: 1177 | From: Swinging on a hammock, chatting with Bokonon | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
This explains so-o-o-o much.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
Frankly, being on anything like the same side of a debate as someone who considers Fox News particularly trustworthy is making me very, very frightened.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
They must be reliable. They say everything that New Yorker agrees with.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Wesley J
Silly Shipmate
# 6075
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
Sadly, this would be in keeping with Israeli actions in general. They seem to be stuck in this cycle of over-the-top machismo. I suspect it plays very well to the folks back home, though.
Yes. What I find worrying regarding the marines' action is how, once again, an Israeli military intervention has gone horribly wrong, as consistent intelligence (in more than one way) was obviously missing.
The same happened when they tried to get rid of Hisbollah by invading Lebanon in 2006, 'pacify' Gaza in 2008-9, and now this. None worked out.
They seem to have one of the best armies in the world, well-trained and well-equipped - but have been unable to manage any significant intervention in the past few years without serious glitches. And I really wonder how they're supposed to counter any serious outside attack, which I imagine could well happen at some point, and in the current state of utter confusion of intelligence and leadership.
Are the Israeli defence forces in a state of dissolution - perhaps due to increasing disillusion amongst its members? Looks like it to me. And isn't looking good.
--------------------
Be it as it may: Wesley J will stay. --- Euthanasia, that sounds good. An alpine neutral neighbourhood. Then back to Britain, all dressed in wood. Things were gonna get worse. (John Cooper Clarke)
Posts: 7354 | From: The Isles of Silly | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
pjkirk
Shipmate
# 10997
|
Posted
It's hard to use intelligence wisely when you top your superiority complex with batshit paranoia of everybody in the region.
And from what I've read, the IDF is essentially being taken over by the most militant right-wing factions of the country (settlers, etc - they're the ones who stay in after their conscription)
--------------------
Dear God, I would like to file a bug report -- Randall Munroe (http://xkcd.com/258/)
Posts: 1177 | From: Swinging on a hammock, chatting with Bokonon | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Printer-friendly view
