Israel's behaviour
 
Notifications
Clear all

Israel's behaviour

75 Posts
18 Users
0 Reactions
14.9 K Views
(@cactuschris)
Posts: 959
Noble Member
Topic starter
 

Many years ago I found myself in some of the most beautiful areas in the UK, and at the same time realised the lack of care and suffering that the 'stock animals' were exposed to in order to provide me with meat.
I gave up eating animals there and then and will never return.
As a protest it carried no weight, it had zero effect on the meat or fish industry.
It affected my life enormously for the better.

I've watched Gaza with the 1400 killed in apalling circumstances, and now another 9 killed by the same people. Never again will I buy or have any dealings with anything from Isreal - never.
I will never vote again for any party that behaves like our past and current parties that support these people - never.

My personal withdrawal will make no difference to Israel, or our political system. I know that.
It will make a difference to me - I welcome that.

It costs nothing to behave well.

love
chris


 
Posted : 03/06/2010 12:34 pm
(@scott)
Posts: 467
Reputable Member
 

It costs nothing to behave well.

love
chris

It seems to me that it costs a great deal to behave well. Otherwise, states like the U.S. and UK would be better liked in the world and not so easily go to war...


 
Posted : 03/06/2010 3:24 pm
Healistic
(@healistic)
Posts: 1801
Noble Member
 

I've watched Gaza with the 1400 killed in apalling circumstances, and now another 9 killed by the same people. Never again will I buy or have any dealings with anything from Isreal - never.

There are two sides to every coin, personally I can understand why Israel needed to check the ship.


 
Posted : 04/06/2010 7:16 am
(@sue-de-nymme)
Posts: 154
Estimable Member
 

Checking a vessel on arrival in a port is a normal action of Customs and Excise. Boarding a vessel with armed forces, and taking over command, in international waters is an act of Piracy.

Sue.


 
Posted : 04/06/2010 7:34 am
Healistic
(@healistic)
Posts: 1801
Noble Member
 

Checking a vessel on arrival in a port is a normal action of Customs and Excise. Boarding a vessel with armed forces, and taking over command, in international waters is an act of Piracy.

Sue.

Or an act of Protection.

Bearing in mind some reported past incidents.


 
Posted : 04/06/2010 7:47 am
(@cactuschris)
Posts: 959
Noble Member
Topic starter
 

"I took off my shirt and waved it, as a white flag. We thought they would stop after seeing the white flag, but they continued killing people," Yildirim said.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3898960,00.html

They could not unload anything without the ports getting it off the boats - what might be there that could not be found on docking - cement - one of the most dangerous subversive weapons known.
Anyway - another ship approaches, not the last I think, one by one countries will turn against these people.

chris


 
Posted : 04/06/2010 8:10 am
Healistic
(@healistic)
Posts: 1801
Noble Member
 

"I took off my shirt and waved it, as a white flag. We thought they would stop after seeing the white flag, but they continued killing people," Yildirim said.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3898960,00.html

They could not unload anything without the ports getting it off the boats - what might be there that could not be found on docking - cement - one of the most dangerous subversive weapons known.
Anyway - another ship approaches, not the last I think, one by one countries will turn against these people.

chris

From the same link?

This was the only boat where our soldiers met with armed resistance and there is ample footage to prove this. The ship's security cameras showed footage of the activists preparing weapons and donning protective gear even before a single soldier landed. Since they - the activists - never thought to dismantle the cameras, we took them and found the proof. What more do you want?


 
Posted : 04/06/2010 8:38 am
Bannick
(@bannick)
Posts: 3140
Famed Member
 

Just to balance this out a bit, I can't find the full article I'm looking for but a couple of video links:
[DLMURL] http://technorati.com/videos/youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DgYjkLUcbJWo [/DLMURL]

There are reams of video clips of the soldiers boarding the ship with paintball guns (used to disperse crowds), with their sidearms holstered, then being beaten with iron bars. In the clip/article I can't find the link to now, the first shots were fired by the activists who had taken the sidearms from the soldiers they had beaten.

With regard to being in international waters, they had been asked countless times to change course, it's an act of protection when a vessel is nearing a countries waters and ignoring warnings. Hardly piracy.

While I far from condone Israel's actions, as Healistic has said, there are two sides to every story.


 
Posted : 04/06/2010 9:04 am
(@cactuschris)
Posts: 959
Noble Member
Topic starter
 

Hi Bannick,
I would agree if the act occured within Israel's territorial waters - it did not. People were hurt, attacked and the ships boarded, the people were arrested and the contents of the ships impounded.
Here is a definition from
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/piracy

1. a. Robbery committed at sea.
b. A similar act of robbery, as the hijacking of an airplane.

I think this fits the bill. It will never be tested because the US will veto any attempt to bring Israel to have it tried in an international court.

chris


 
Posted : 04/06/2010 12:15 pm
Healistic
(@healistic)
Posts: 1801
Noble Member
 

Hi Bannick,
I would agree if the act occured within Israel's territorial waters - it did not. People were hurt, attacked and the ships boarded, the people were arrested and the contents of the ships impounded.
Here is a definition from
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/piracy

1. a. Robbery committed at sea.
b. A similar act of robbery, as the hijacking of an airplane.

I think this fits the bill. It will never be tested because the US will veto any attempt to bring Israel to have it tried in an international court.

chris

I think you may find that Piracy is committed by a private person or persons. A Privateer I believe is when a private person or persons are chartered by a government or state to carry out an act of piracy.
So IMO it does not fit the bill.


 
Posted : 04/06/2010 4:46 pm
(@purelightreiki)
Posts: 357
Reputable Member
 

The people of Gaza have been denied the most basic provisions for many years now. The people of Palestine have been denied basic human rights like medical care, running water or education for decades now.


 
Posted : 04/06/2010 4:49 pm
Healistic
(@healistic)
Posts: 1801
Noble Member
 

The people of Gaza have been denied the most basic provisions for many years now. The people of Palestine have been denied basic human rights like medical care, running water or education for decades now.

Perhaps if they agreed to peace and destroyed their rockets and guns who knows that may well change.


 
Posted : 04/06/2010 4:58 pm
(@purelightreiki)
Posts: 357
Reputable Member
 

Perhaps if Israel showed them some humanity and didnt have preganant women give birth at checkpoints in the dust and heat- who knows what couldnt be achieved
There are as you say 2 sides to everything


 
Posted : 04/06/2010 5:36 pm
Bannick
(@bannick)
Posts: 3140
Famed Member
 

Hi Bannick,
I would agree if the act occured within Israel's territorial waters - it did not. People were hurt, attacked and the ships boarded, the people were arrested and the contents of the ships impounded.
Here is a definition from
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/piracy

1. a. Robbery committed at sea.
b. A similar act of robbery, as the hijacking of an airplane.

I think this fits the bill. It will never be tested because the US will veto any attempt to bring Israel to have it tried in an international court.

chris

As Healistic pointed out, this definition doesn't fit the act. You've actually disproved your own point by posting it.

If a vessel deemed to be a threat was on course for Britain, it would be engaged outside of our waters and as a citizen, I would certainly hope so. As I previously stated, I don't condone Israel's actions in this instance but I do find it understandable. If you look at the organisation(s) these activists/aid workers were from, you can see why their flotilla was engaged (terrorists would be a better term for many of them).

I'm commenting on this event singularly, if we start discussing all of the acts on both sides of this conflict, this will be the longest thread ever on HP! At the end of the day, both sides have committed atrocities (remember the women and children who died in the Cafe bombing?), the only differences are that the Israelis are better equipped and are supported by the West due to them being seen as an ally/foothold in a part of the world where there are so many potential terrorists and enemy nations, and Mossad is one of the most advanced intelligence agencies in the world and share critical information with the west on terrorist activity.


 
Posted : 04/06/2010 9:14 pm
(@purelightreiki)
Posts: 357
Reputable Member
 

Results revealed that a 60yearold man, Ibrahim Bilgen, was shot four times in the temple, chest, hip and back. A 19-year-old who also has US citizenship, was shot 5 times from less that 45cm, in the face, in the back of the head, twice in the leg and once in the back. Two other men were shot four times, and five of the victims were shot either in the back of the head or in the back.

The Guardian

On the recent flotilla incident:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jun/04/gaza-flotilla-activists-autopsy-results


 
Posted : 04/06/2010 10:51 pm
Page 1 / 5
Share: