Zionist piracy

[nirakar]

Anything controlled by any nation is part of that nation. I prefer common sense to legal games.

The West Bank and Gaza are Israeli prisons and the people who live there are Israeli citizens because there is no Palestinian state. Hamas and the Palestinian Authority are prison gangs.

Israel was and is imposing collective punishment on Gazans because Hamas is an unsanctioned prison gang that does not take orders from the prison guards.

Contrary to Israeli propaganda Israel does not allow a "free flow of humanitarian supplies" into Palestine via Israel. Imposing hardship on Gazanns in the form of reduced supplies is Israeli policy. This policy is separate from the Israeli policy of curtailing weapons to Gaza.

US prisons also restrict supplies of non-dangerous comforts to their prisoners.

The flotilla was attempting to bring things to improve the life of Gaza prisoners without the permission of the Israeli prison wardens. US prison guards might behave similarly if some people tried to bring US prisoners, food, medicine, pencils and building supplies.

Israel does not want to admit common sense is truth because to do so would be to admit that Israel is immoral and undemocratic.

Israel is not one of the 10 most immoral or undemocratic nations but Israel is in the middle of several important storylines and the really bad nations tend to be rather irrelevant to major media storylines.

Israel is morally ugly like the American colonists were ugly. But ugliness can be denied and people can make excuses for criminals. Israels defenders on this thread are once again choosing to deny reality because they can't handle reality.

 

[baftan]

I'd suggest you read up on what Israel is allowed and not allowed to do baftan.
Storming those ships, where those ships were, was illegal.

You say so... To whom, to someone who's been trying to submit resources from UN on the International Law issues since the beginning. Come on, honestly, have you ever heard Continental Shelf conventions before. I gave the related sites, go and check them out.

Read baftan... Read what? Read where? You ask me what do you want to know about what Israel is allowed and not allowed to I will get you the related articles, sources, agreements, conventions from International Law. I already told you once, neither Israel nor any other state has any exclusive rights to attack civilians. Yet, if such incident happens, International Law does not operate as domestic law; there is no sovereign body to dictate individual states to do or not to do anything. It's up to states to get together and establish some regulatory principles such as UN and its numerous sub-charters.

International Law does not work like domestic law. Modern International Law was started with 1648 Westphalia agreement and since then it has been slowly developing depending upon the experiences of states. There is no single sovereign that can impose its rules to everyone like normal states. International Law has a totally different nature on justice, legality and rights.
Get real for a moment...

Sarcasm escapes you, doesn't it?

If fantasies helps you, leave the sarcasm to me.

 

[baftan]

There are clear violations

Clear, yet unable to show them.

thus implications around "legality" which will be investigated in due course.

You wish.

As there were in Gaza, and as Goldstone meticulously documented.

If you get a weird enjoyment off comparing a ship incident with territorial dispute, this only proves your lack of interest to the issue.

Who enforces the Gaza blockade leading to human rights abuses that requires humanitarian interventions?

Israel.

Who boarded a civilian vessel by force of arms in international waters?

Israel.

Answer the questions, them we can explore the bigger picture.

I did, where is my bigger picture out of these answers?

You are less than articulate and I am struggling to follow. Please expand your position so I can understand what you are saying. Revenge seeking? Policy? What are you talking about?

You tell me, "Israel will definitely be punished" is your ultimate policy, not mine. Figure out what does "revenge seeking"...

Discredit what?

Something you are not able to see.

Again, I do not follow?

I wasn't expecting anyway.

I am confused. Please articulate your points and position.

What position?

 

[pjdude1219]

Yah, you know what thats right.

If we essentially boil it down into who's life is more important any sane person would pick the Israeli.

No the innocent person's life is worth more and that wouldn't be the Israeli. all life is equal.

If you want to boil it down into who's life is more valuable hoping in vain that you can terrify people into a moral dilemma it will not work.

No I let kind of heinious thinking to your kind. my religious and moral beliefs demand me to view all human life as equal.

There are 13 million Jews worldwide.

and most of them support the commiting of war crimes.

You tried to boil it down into which person is worth more.

No I didn't. I was making a sarcastic comment of how Israeli and zionist in general view it.

6.8 billion humans inhabit this world. The current Jewish population is around 13 million worldwide.

That means for every Jewish person there are 523.0769 other people (and I guess that ".0769" is maybe a pinky or something).

So.

So yah, populationwise as far as endangerment goes the life of a Jewish person is essentially more valuable than that of some random Gazan whose death would probably involve 20 kilos of C4 srapped to his own chest with love from Gaza.

bigoted bullshit.

The sick and twisted logic that you seem to have hammered into your skull is that Jewish people like to pick off poor little Gazan children and their moms for the fun of it.

No they could be forgiven if that were the case or dismissed as simply sick or evil. but they kill palestinians no out of fun but for to profit from their deaths.

Have you ever asked yourself once why exactly they got into that situation?

because they wanted other people's land

Do you think if rather than try to invade Israel on it's independance they had brought their diplomats to start relations and to congragulate Israel that they would be in such a sh***y situation?

they didn't Israel invaded them.

you provoked the bull now your getting the horns.

So you agree Israel deserves the shit it gets from those it attacked?

You dont get the right to cry and whine like a child because you started it.

Sure you do Israelis do it all the time.

We are ending it.

true but you also started it like the thugs you are.

 

[baftan]

Israel did not sign the Law of the Sea Convention, so any laws it states

Wrong. More than signing, Israel ratified the Convention on the Continental Shelf in 1961. Here is your source:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convention_on_the_Continental_Shelf

..Israel is not held responsible to.

This agreement does not impose responsibility, it is mostly designed to give rights.

This idea of "international law" is silly.

Is it because the makers of it (states) are silly?

Turkey didn't sign it either

Yes, didn't sign the Continental Shelf one. Yet it's irrelevant. Because even if it did, continental shelf areas of these two country wouldn't clash with one another because of the geographical distance.

 

[GeoffP]

Psyching themselves to fight Jewish people?

No, seriously, are you for real? So the Jews on those ships were psyching themselves to fight themselves?

Are you for real? You know that the singers were Jewish? How do you know this? No, really: how do you know? Crystal ball? Did you even look at the link I posted? Will you go back and look at it now, or continue to feign ignorance of it? I'm right on my tippy-toes with the not knowing.

They were headed into Gaza. Now, unless something drastic occured prior to their ships being stormed illegally, I wasn't aware that Israel and Jews had settled in Gaza. So pray tell, what Jewish people were they psyching themselves to fight? The soldiers who were about to storm their ships fully armed? The soldiers who were jamming their communications?

Ah, you begin to grasp.

When you start saying 'but.. but.. they were singing anti Jewish songs' before they were boarded.. I'm sorry, but what kind of response did you expect to get?

A sensible one? Councillor, are you familiar with the term premeditation?

Now, it beggars belief that a group of armed commandos can be over-run so easily by people with plastic deck chairs and a few iron sticks and some knives (of which I've seen no evidence yet)...

And the vid links I posted just didn't register at all? You thought the Israeli commandos were rapelling into a garden party? You are unfamiliar with the term "mob"?

I'm sorry, but what did the Israelis expect? They were surprised by the reception they received on those ships? What did they expect when they aggressively buzzed those ships and jammed their communications and then boarded them illegally in the dead of night with guns blazing?

Interesting. Did you see guns blazing on the second link I posted? I didn't. (It's below.) It's night vision, I think; surely a blazing series of muzzle flashes should show up as a series of blazing muzzle flashes. Could you point out where that was? "A few iron sticks". My god.

Right, so you think Israel was correct in storming those ships as they did?

I'm sorry: did I say this? I think it's reasonable to inspect them, sure: but never you mind what I've said, Bells. Storytelling requires so much more.

Tell me, if you're on a ship and you see armed commandos storming it, you'd go and hug them?

I think I'd hesitate in trying to yank them off their rappel lines and attack them the moment their boots hit the deck. Maybe that's not such a good idea, I'd probably say to myself. Then again, if I'd spend all day prior working myself up into a frothing hate, maybe I wouldn't. Maybe I'd only see red. Maybe I'd want to "martyr" myself, like the woman on the first vid I posted.

But there seems to be a tiny discrepancy between the way you describe the fight first - "how could itty bitty malnourished Palestinian children hit people with bars made of soft, gentle iron?" - and how you describe it immediately after - "what would you do, cowardly Geoff, if Israeli hasbara commandos infected with rabies and spraying rotary cannons from each hand descended on your ship and started attacking you for no reason, after you tried to gently reason with them using soft iron bars and breakaway deck chairs"? Like Tiassa sometimes says: genuine is genuine. I've reposted my link so there can be no avoidance of what happened during the rappel in.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0LulDJh4fWI

In your defense, maybe the bars were only slightly iron. Maybe the passengers just thought the commandos were anaemic.

Cower like the coward you are?

:bravo: Feeble. Unlike anyone you know, I've actually been in dangerous occupations.

There were children on those ships Geoff. There were religious activists, there were politicians, observers from human rights groups, peace activists from all religious persuasions, from all walks of life. But what do you say? Well they attacked the people who stormed their ships and they were singing anti-Jewish songs.. I'm sorry, does that absolve Israel's illegal act? No.

Normally I don't get into debates with people having a tenuous command of English. But you also don't understand context and premeditation. Which is kind of sad for a lawyer, I guess.

Oh I'm well aware that Israel was acting outside of its territorial boundaries, attacking ships registered to other countries, ships it knew were carrying aid and peace activists and journalists. So what does that tell you?

That your case is completely unproven and that you may well have a fallacious comprehension of sea law?

And as to be expected, as Israel attempts to flood the world media with its excuses, they have also seen fit to ban all the passengers from having outside contact..

Yes, the two vids I posted were so nebulous and deceptive. Darn those Israeli al Jazeera newsmen!

But at the end of the day, Israel has done tremendous damage to itself with this attack. Up to 19 peace activists dead on an aid ship? If this keeps up, they will end up destroying themselves as the world pulls its support. They have damaged themselves more than any 'terrorist' organisation or suicide bomber could ever do.

Oh, possibly so. And it occurs to me that that was a partial objective.

 

[Bells]

You say so... To whom, to someone who's been trying to submit resources from UN on the International Law issues since the beginning. Come on, honestly, have you ever heard Continental Shelf conventions before. I gave the related sites, go and check them out.

Read baftan... Read what? Read where? You ask me what do you want to know about what Israel is allowed and not allowed to I will get you the related articles, sources, agreements, conventions from International Law. I already told you once, neither Israel nor any other state has any exclusive rights to attack civilians. Yet, if such incident happens, International Law does not operate as domestic law; there is no sovereign body to dictate individual states to do or not to do anything. It's up to states to get together and establish some regulatory principles such as UN and its numerous sub-charters.

International Law does not work like domestic law. Modern International Law was started with 1648 Westphalia agreement and since then it has been slowly developing depending upon the experiences of states. There is no single sovereign that can impose its rules to everyone like normal states. International Law has a totally different nature on justice, legality and rights.
Get real for a moment...

Are you aware of what the 'Exclusive Economic Zone' entails under International Law? Or more to the point, what rights Israel has under the "Zone"? I'll give you a hint, it applies to exploration and natural resources, such as fishing and oil and gas exploration and research. Now unless those ships were illegally fishing, which we all know, they were not, Israel's actions were in fact illegal. Those ships in the flotilla posed no threats to Israel's rights in the EEZ. I would strongly suggest that you read Part V of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. It is quite enlightening in regards to what rights Israel, as a State, has in enforcing an embargo and controlling the seas in the EEZ.

If fantasies helps you, leave the sarcasm to me.

I would rather not. Yours is lacking.

 

[GeoffP]

Israel is morally ugly like the American colonists were ugly. But ugliness can be denied and people can make excuses for criminals. Israels defenders on this thread are once again choosing to deny reality because they can't handle reality.

Mmmm, yes and no, nirakar. The siege on Gaza is deplorable, but in this specific incident, it seems that the Israelis were indeed attacked by the mob. Whether they had a legal right to be there at all is another issue; but in the specifics of this case, both sides may close their eyes to the facts.

 

[StrawDog]

Clear, yet unable to show them.



You wish.



If you get a weird enjoyment off comparing a ship incident with territorial dispute, this only proves your lack of interest to the issue.


Israel.

Israel.

I did, where is my bigger picture out of these answers?



You tell me, "Israel will definitely be punished" is your ultimate policy, not mine. Figure out what does "revenge seeking"...


Something you are not able to see.


I wasn't expecting anyway.


What position?

Hmm. Calm down and elucidate your arguments. You are bordering on the abstract. I am not psychic. :m:

 

[GeoffP]

Actually, one earlier poster on this thread raised another point: Is Israel in fact signatory to the Sea Convention? Anyone know?

 

[GeoffP]

I am proud to present actual progress on the issue under discussion. I recognize that this may be a new experience for most of us (myself included ), but instead of being scared and confused by the absence of indignant caterwauling, let us all stare blinkily into the light of illumination, for I have answered an actual question:

Countries that have not signed — (20) Andorra, Azerbaijan, Ecuador, Eritrea, Israel, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Peru, San Marino, Syria, Tajikistan, Timor-Leste, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Vatican City, Venezuela, Taiwan, Sahrawi Republic.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Convention_on_the_Law_of_the_Sea

So, in point of fact, neither Israel nor Turkey have signed the Convention on the Law of the Sea. What flag were the ships flying? Turkish?

 

[GeoffP]

So what sea law does Israel use? I think Baftan mentioned an Economic Zone, but Bells says this is natural resources only, which sounds right. So what sea law does Israel use besides this one?

 

[nirakar]

As far as international waters go, 160 nations that signed and ratified the the Law of the Sea Treaty would say that beyond 24 nautical miles from shore is international waters except for in the context of fishing rights and mineral rights which which extend to 200 nautical miles.

The USA is not signed but did not ratify the law. Israel and Turkey and some other nations did not sign the Law of the Sea Treaty. If Gaza was not part of Israel it too would have some territorial waters.

More complications: The British Gas deal in what would be Gaza's territorial waters is a moral and legal mess.

 

[Norsefire]

I of course do not know the exact circumstances of these reported deaths, but I do know Palestinians generally haven't a clue what non-violent protest means.

Non-violent protests often do not work. While I do applaud the likes of Gandhi for their efforts, the truth is that an evil regime like that of Israel's can only be reformed with blood and iron.

 

[pjdude1219]

Check out where the incident happened. It wasn't off Spanish or Tunisian coast. It was within Israel Exclusive Economic Zone.

actually given the constraints of the meditarien it may not have been with in the Israeli EEZ(Israel doesn't have a contaigious zone)

 

[GeoffP]

As far as international waters go, 160 nations that signed and ratified the the Law of the Sea Treaty would say that beyond 24 nautical miles from shore is international waters except for in the context of fishing rights and mineral rights which which extend to 200 nautical miles.

The USA is not signed but did not ratify the law. Israel and Turkey and some other nations did not sign the Law of the Sea Treaty. If Gaza was not part of Israel it too would have some territorial waters.

More complications: The British Gas deal in what would be Gaza's territorial waters is a moral and legal mess.

Ugh. Excellent.

 

[pjdude1219]

I never understand what this "illegal" means. Illegal according to who?

Israel did not sign the Law of the Sea Convention, so any laws it states...Israel is not held responsible to. This idea of "international law" is silly. Btw, Turkey didn't sign it either

actually the law doesn't always work that way. when it becomes part of the general law and is applied widespread even a nation not a signatory to it is bound by it.

 

[CheskiChips]

Wrong. More than signing, Israel ratified the Convention on the Continental Shelf in 1961. Here is your source:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convention_on_the_Continental_Shelf


This agreement does not impose responsibility, it is mostly designed to give rights.



Is it because the makers of it (states) are silly?



Yes, didn't sign the Continental Shelf one. Yet it's irrelevant. Because even if it did, continental shelf areas of these two country wouldn't clash with one another because of the geographical distance.

Continental Shelf ownership defines land/water rights....the laws of the defined international law are what I had stated..
Law of the Sea
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Convention_on_the_Law_of_the_Sea

Neither Turkey or Israel signed it.

 

[pjdude1219]

Anything controlled by any nation is part of that nation. I prefer common sense to legal games.

The West Bank and Gaza are Israeli prisons and the people who live there are Israeli citizens because there is no Palestinian state. Hamas and the Palestinian Authority are prison gangs.

Israel was and is imposing collective punishment on Gazans because Hamas is an unsanctioned prison gang that does not take orders from the prison guards.

Contrary to Israeli propaganda Israel does not allow a "free flow of humanitarian supplies" into Palestine via Israel. Imposing hardship on Gazanns in the form of reduced supplies is Israeli policy. This policy is separate from the Israeli policy of curtailing weapons to Gaza.

US prisons also restrict supplies of non-dangerous comforts to their prisoners.

The flotilla was attempting to bring things to improve the life of Gaza prisoners without the permission of the Israeli prison wardens. US prison guards might behave similarly if some people tried to bring US prisoners, food, medicine, pencils and building supplies.

Israel does not want to admit common sense is truth because to do so would be to admit that Israel is immoral and undemocratic.

Israel is not one of the 10 most immoral or undemocratic nations but Israel is in the middle of several important storylines and the really bad nations tend to be rather irrelevant to major media storylines.

Israel is morally ugly like the American colonists were ugly. But ugliness can be denied and people can make excuses for criminals. Israels defenders on this thread are once again choosing to deny reality because they can't handle reality.

the people in gaza are not Israeli citizens

 

[pjdude1219]

Are you aware of what the 'Exclusive Economic Zone' entails under International Law? Or more to the point, what rights Israel has under the "Zone"? I'll give you a hint, it applies to exploration and natural resources, such as fishing and oil and gas exploration and research. Now unless those ships were illegally fishing, which we all know, they were not, Israel's actions were in fact illegal. Those ships in the flotilla posed no threats to Israel's rights in the EEZ. I would strongly suggest that you read Part V of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. It is quite enlightening in regards to what rights Israel, as a State, has in enforcing an embargo and controlling the seas in the EEZ.



I would rather not. Yours is lacking.

Israel could have only legally intercepted those ships(well assuming they didn't try and cause a violent conflict like they did here) out 12 nautical miles from the baseline