Israel..wouldn't we do the same?

[ajstoneservices]

nah, you added 2+2 and made 5 as usual...

I like that little extra, it all adds up

Ah, so your post was 'pointless' - how many of yours does that make...

Still considerably less than yours




Edit: whats with the quotes

 

[securespark]

The Israelis did not board with the intention of killing people did they?

Did they? I don't know, do you?

Ok, they may have decided to kill people on one of the vessels however implausible.

or did they open fire once it became clear they were likely to be killed.

Likely to be killed?

You did watch the video? you have read they asked for permission to open fire?.

if the blockade is legal the crew and passengers were legally obliged to comply with orders given them by Israel.

IF. But what has that to do with them boarding the boat in international waters?

Not been reading this thread then? If the blockade is legal then the Israelis can board any vessel anywhere attempting to break the blockade.

We will havbe to agree to disagree. But I still maintain that their whole approach to this was utterly utterly heavy-handed. They shouldn't have even been on the boat, let alone with firearms shooting to kill.

 

[ajstoneservices]

But yet again, Israel has reacted to calculated provocation with crude and excessive force and found itself in the dock at the court of world public opinion. The real winners are the proclaimed victims – not victims at all except those killed, mostly Turkish citizens. The losers are the ostensibly powerful: Israel. Suckered again, guys ...

All thanks to ellel taken from here
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/blog/2010/jun/02/gaza-flotilla-attack-michael-white

 

[ellal]

All thanks to ellel taken from here
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/blog/2010/jun/02/gaza-flotilla-attack-michael-white[/QUOTE]
Not my username, or my link - didn't you notice...

Your point is (again...)?

 

[ajstoneservices]

All thanks to ellel taken from here
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/blog/2010/jun/02/gaza-flotilla-attack-michael-white[/QUOTE]
Not my username, or my link - didn't you notice...

Your point is (again...)?

I didn't think you'd notice that little slip
The link came as a result of one of yours, hence the thanks.

 

[ellal]

The link came as a result of one of yours, hence the thanks.

1. can't you find your own links?
2. can't you find anything better to quote than a ruminating blog?

So here's something a bit more substantial as to why the blockade is being challenged...

Linky

 

[ajstoneservices]

Anything that keeps me away from the paperwork I'm supposed to be doing
is a welcome distraction

BTW. Don't post a link if you don't want it read

 

[skitzee2k]

The link came as a result of one of yours, hence the thanks.

1. can't you find your own links?
2. can't you find anything better to quote than a ruminating blog?

So here's something a bit more substantial as to why the blockade is being challenged...

Linky

...where is it....anyone seen it? anyone....The smallest violin in the world?

Oh here it is, *plays romeo and juliet theme while imagining Terrorist supporters going without Xboxes. *

 

[ellal]

...where is it....anyone seen it? anyone....The smallest violin in the world?

Oh here it is, *plays romeo and juliet theme while imagining Terrorist supporters going without Xboxes. *

You really are quite disturbed aren't you...

But btw... where is that link to prove your 'undisputed' account claim?

When you learn to back up any of the b*llshit you've been spouting, let us know and maybe someone will take notice...

but then there's no danger of that is there...

 

[ellal]

Anything that keeps me away from the paperwork I'm supposed to be doing
is a welcome distraction

True...

 

[skitzee2k]

I am desperately seeking the news article that said about the order of ships, but that doesn't seem to be the focus in the articles anymore.

Aside from that comment what else is it that you don't believe?

And yeah, if you can't see the irony in people worrying about the safety of terrorist supporters, you probably would see me as disturbed.

 

[skitzee2k]

not the original one but
http://www.vancouversun.com/news/TIMELINE+Main+events+Gaza+flotilla+affair/3097848/story.html

Five of the six ships are commandeered swiftly with few injuries, although activists voice outrage at their treatment.

But on the Mavi Marmara, things go wrong.

This would suggest to me that the other ships didn't only comply after seeing what happened to the Mavi like you suggested.

those in the other ships saw the Israeli thugs/terrorists in action first

 

[ellal]

I am desperately seeking the news article that said about the order of ships, but that doesn't seem to be the focus in the articles anymore.

Yeah, yeah - heard that all before If it ever existed, why didn't you post it since it was apparently a critical point according to you? But It won't have been removed so soon, so may I suggest you look through your browser history since if you've seen it online, it will be there...

Aside from that comment what else is it that you don't believe?

Do you really need to ask?



But then do you know what the Israeli's are probably doing right now?

They have the ships out of view, and have imprisoned the people who were on board.

Before they've started to let them go, they will have been confiscating/destroying every camera card, film footage, phone, and any video/audio evidence. They'll be removing any incriminating evidence, and maybe planting a few items...Then they'll invite a very limited investigation into the matter, which will give a vague conclusion, and the murderers will get away with it again..

A bit like what the Met does/tries to do really....

 

[ellal]

This would suggest to me that the other ships didn't only comply after seeing what happened to the Mavi like you suggested.

1. it actually says nothing of the sort, you are just supposing it does, as you've 'suggested' here...
2. where is the 'undisputed' claim - I've showed you dissenting versions, so how is this article 'undisputed'?

When you've found that 'original' article that states that all parties agree on the timeline, then I'll retract...

Until then (and it won't happen) stop spouting bullsh*t...

 

[joe-90]

This would suggest to me that the other ships didn't only comply after seeing what happened to the Mavi like you suggested.

1. it actually says nothing of the sort, you are just supposing it does, as you've 'suggested' here...
2. where is the 'undisputed' claim - I've showed you dissenting versions, so how is this article 'undisputed'?

When you've found that 'original' article that states that all parties agree on the timeline, then I'll retract...

Until then (and it won't happen) stop spouting bullsh*t...

Are you Jewish?