About that Gaza flotilla...

[Smoke]

What one calls a terrorist the other calls a freedom fighter. The British would be quite accurate to term the American revolutionaries as terrorists and the Americans would be quite right to term the revolutionaries as freedom fighters. You just stand from the opposite side. And these groups are always due to an external cause, in this case Israel.

The British would be quite right. The American revolutionaries were terrorists. It doesn't matter what side you're on. Terrorists are terrorists.

But if Hamas were to defeat Israel, the sufferings of the Palestinian people -- and especially the Christian Palestinians -- would be multiplied tenfold. They're not just terrorists, they're religious terrorists -- the worst kind.

 

[kai]

Kai: Please explain how the physical evidence collected by this investigation could have been affected by biases that may or may not have been there? I am under the impression that the corpse does not change according to one's beliefs and prejudices. I have no idea Abibi if its been affected by bias or not i have no idea of the actual circumstances of any of the deaths. we are at the very early stages of the investigation and i dont know enough to make any other comment other than sorrow that deaths occurred. All we have from the report is Mavi Marmara statements its like making a judgement with just the prosecution evidence in front of you before the trial has even started.

I also noted that the investigation called out the activists where they were wrong and identified their faults as one. I am glad they did, the should also come under scrutiny

This whole situation was comprised of both their faults, admittedly, but ultimately there is no excuse for premeditated violence, execution style killings, and beatings after the ship was secure. Do I wish that the activists hadn't resisted? Perhaps, but that would be denying them their entitled right of self defense.

Is it self defence to arm yourself and sail into a pre prepared confrontation?

 

[England my lionheart]

Hamas was a response to the corruption of the PLO led by Arafat.

And Arafat was a member of the MB and was related to the Nazi ally the Grand Mufti Al Husseini of Jerusalem thats why Arafat shortened his name Abd al-Rahman abd al-Bauf Arafat al-Qud al-Husseini to disguise the fact.

 

[YmirGF]

Is it self defence to knowingly sail into a pre prepared confrontation?

No, Kai. It is a provocation; an act of aggression. Like Bill, I would have been quite happy to see the vessels sunk.

 

[arimoff]

And Arafat was a member of the MB and was related to the Nazi ally the Grand Mufti Al Husseini of Jerusalem thats why Arafat shortened his name Abd al-Rahman abd al-Bauf Arafat al-Qud al-Husseini to disguise the fact.

By the way Arafat was not a Palestinian neither. He was the one who created such an idea as Palestinian people in 1967.

 

[England my lionheart]

By the way Arafat was not a Palestinian neither. He was the one who created such an idea as Palestinian people in 1967.

Sorry i should have mentioned that just like the Muslim Brotherhood he was born in Egypt

 

[arimoff]

That's your argument? We have about a million of those in America, children still starve... next.


Exchange rates
new Israeli shekels per US dollar - 4.482 (2004), 4.5541 (2003), 4.7378 (2002), 4.2057 (2001), 4.0773 (2000)
Exports $301,000,000.00 [157th of 189]
Exports > Commodities citrus, flowers, textiles
Exports to US $100,000.00 [212nd of 224]
GDP $768,000,000.00 [173rd of 203]
GDP (purchasing power parity) $5,034,000,000.00 [159th of 187]
GDP > Composition by sector > Agriculture 8% [80th of 146]
GDP > Composition by sector > Industry 13% [140th of 146]
GDP > Real growth rate -8% [169th of 198]
Human Development Index 0.729 [103rd of 178]
Imports $2,440,000,000.00 [117th of 185]
Inflation rate (consumer prices) 3.6% [99th of 192]
Population below poverty line 80% [1st of 46]
Trade balance with US -$100,000.00 [110th of 224]

NationMaster - Gaza Strip Economy statistics




That was a very poorly written opinion piece.

One shopping mall does not negate that fact that 80% of the population lives below the poverty line and/or are below the age of 20.

Excuse me but one or two or three shopping malls don't make a difference because how Israel is being described it sounds like there is none. It is easy to sit and cry like you have nothing to eat and blame your neighbor while he supplies you heat and energy. There is no starvation in Gaza, no body is dying of hunger, by a damn ticket and fly there see it for your self and then comeback and try to argue with me but I dought you will you are driven by other desires just like Palestinians are driven not by hunger but by hate for Jews.

 

[dust1n]

That's debatable, to say the least.

If America was to blockade Haiti from receiving humanitarian aid, they would receive the same outcry regardless if it was illegal or not, because the only thing that makes it legal or not is the only international governmental body that exists and declares things to be illegal or not.

SO it is not debatable as whether or not the action is internationally illegal, because the only body that declares things internationally illegal is the UN.

Oh wait...

ReliefWeb » Document » Report of the international fact-finding mission to investigate violations of international law, including international humanitarian and human rights law, resulting from the Israeli attacks on the flotilla of ships carrying hu

They did declare it illegal.

So how is it debatable?

But any way you look at it, there is a blockade. Whether people like or not.
As far as I'm concerned, if you run a blockade, you take your chances.
It wouldn't have bothered me if they'd sunk the ship, and considering all the uproar, they might as well have.

I imagine if the same American/Israeli/Turkish/& European activists had been going to Sudan, Yemen, or Burma but 9 of them died because those countries blockaded entrance to humanitarian aid, that the sentiments would be much different.

But hey, what could a population that is 80% impoverished and 50% children possibly need humanitarian aid for.

 

[dust1n]

No, Kai. It is a provocation; an act of aggression. Like Bill, I would have been quite happy to see the vessels sunk.

It's not an act of self defense, but it certainly isn't an act of aggression, by any definition of the word.

 

[England my lionheart]

Here are some more interesting snippets,Amin Abou Rashed one of the Flotillas organisers is the Muslim Brotherhood leader in Holland and a pro Hamas activist,the Dutch Government froze the funds from his Al Aqsa groups because it was feared they were being used to fund Terrorist acts.

Jamal Elshayyal the reporter for Al Jazeera on board also has links to the MB (these Guys get everywhere) it is said there were others on board from the Turkish MB.

I think the Flotilla incident was almost a coup for the MB except that many can see through the smoke screen,when you look past the headlines and hold off the knee jerk reaction the facts can tell a different story IMO.

 

[Smoke]

If America was to blockade Haiti from receiving humanitarian aid, they would receive the same outcry regardless if it was illegal or not, because the only thing that makes it legal or not is the only international governmental body that exists and declares things to be illegal or not.

The United Nations has no legislative or judicial authority.

 

[kai]

The blockades legality is indeed debatable


Q&A: Is Israel's naval blockade of Gaza legal?

Q&A: Is Israel's naval blockade of Gaza legal? | Reuters

 

[dust1n]

The blockades legality is indeed debatable


Q&A: Is Israel's naval blockade of Gaza legal?

Q&A: Is Israel's naval blockade of Gaza legal? | Reuters

(Reuters) - Israel has said it will continue a naval blockade of the Gaza Strip despite growing global pressure to lift the siege after a navy raid on a Turkish ferry carrying aid killed nine activists this week.


What is the legality of the blockade and did Israel's intervention breach international law? Below are some questions and answers on the issue:
CAN ISRAEL IMPOSE A NAVAL BLOCKADE ON GAZA?


Yes it can, according to the law of blockade which was derived from customary international law and codified in the 1909 Declaration of London. It was updated in 1994 in a legally recognized document called the "San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea."


Under some of the key rules, a blockade must be declared and notified to all belligerents and neutral states, access to neutral ports cannot be blocked, and an area can only be blockaded which is under enemy control.


"On the basis that Hamas is the ruling entity of Gaza and Israel is in the midst of an armed struggle against that ruling entity, the blockade is legal," said Philip Roche, partner in the shipping disputes and risk management team with law firm Norton Rose.

Sorry, but Hamas and Israel are not currently in an armed struggle and they weren't at the time of the flotilla incident, so the the basis is incorrect for Roche's reasoning, which means the blockade is not legalized by the law provided.

 

[dust1n]

The United Nations has no legislative or judicial authority.

True, but the United Nations declared it to be illegal and it is the only system in place to make such declarations. Without the United Nations, there is no such thing as international law, even if the current one has no enforcement policies and the laws only have power because countries voluntarily follow them (or will be crushed by NATO, one of the two).

So if it is debatable, it is only because the legality of something is contingent on the validation of the institution that declares things illegal or not.

But the report specifically shows evidence of Israeli commandos breaking the Geneva Convention. Whether the Geneva Convention legitimately holds weight is based solely on whether we choose to follow it or not.

 

[LuisDantas]

True, but the United Nations declared it to be illegal and it is the only system in place to make such declarations. Without the United Nations, there is no such thing as international law, even if the current one has no enforcement policies and the laws only have power because countries voluntarily follow them (or will be crushed by NATO, one of the two).

So if it is debatable, it is only because the legality of something is contingent on the validation of the institution that declares things illegal or not.

But the report specifically shows evidence of Israeli commandos breaking the Geneva Convention. Whether the Geneva Convention legitimately holds weight is based solely on whether we choose to follow it or not.

Well said. Although I would say that the UNO does have legislative and judicial authority.

It just turns out that, like any other such authority, it only exists to the extent that its subjects recognize it. And unfortunately these days it means that it might as well not have any.

Ironically, the UNO and its predecessor were key to the very existence of the same Israel that disdains it now.

 

[croak]

And Arafat was a member of the MB and was related to the Nazi ally the Grand Mufti Al Husseini of Jerusalem thats why Arafat shortened his name Abd al-Rahman abd al-Bauf Arafat al-Qud al-Husseini to disguise the fact.

Maybe because it was a really long name? You missed his first name and committed a few transliteration errors, by the way. Not to mention (emphasis mine):

Arafat's original full name was Mohammed Abdel Rahman Abdel Raouf Arafat al-Qudwa al-Husseini. Mohammed Abdel Rahman was his first name; Abdel Raouf was his father's name and Arafat his grandfather's. Al-Qudwa was the name of his tribe and al-Husseini was that of the clan to which the al-Qudwas belonged. It should be noted that Arafat's clan, al-Husseini was based in Gaza and should not be confused with the well-known, but unrelated, al-Husayni clan of Jerusalem.[6]

Since Arafat was raised in Cairo, the tradition of dropping the Mohammed or Ahmad portion of one's first name was common; notable Egyptians such as Anwar Sadat and Hosni Mubarak did so. However, Arafat dropped also the Abdel Rahman and Abdel Raouf parts of his name as well. During the early 1950s, Arafat adopted the name Yasser, and in the early years of Arafat's guerrilla career, he assumed the nom de guerre of Abu Ammar. Both names are related to Ammar ibn Yasir, one of Muhammad's early companions. Although he dropped most of his inherited names, he retained Arafat due to its significance in Islam.[6]

Yasser Arafat - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

On the MB claim:

During the 1948 Arab–Israeli War, Arafat left the University and, along with other Arabs, sought to enter Palestine to join Arab forces fighting against Israeli troops. However, instead of joining the ranks of the Palestinian fedayeen, Arafat fought alongside the Muslim Brotherhood, although he did not join the organization.

Yasser Arafat - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Please double-check your facts before presenting them as such.

By the way Arafat was not a Palestinian neither. He was the one who created such an idea as Palestinian people in 1967.

Just because he was born in Cairo does not mean he was not Palestinian. I wasn't born in Lebanon, but because my parents are Lebanese, I am Lebanese. I'm not sure if it works that way everywhere, though.

So, by your assertion, documents of my relatives who lived and worked in Palestine refer to a non-existant state? Interesting. I suppose Lebanon only really existed after independence, then, because apparently being under mandate doesn't quite qualify.

 

[croak]

Excuse me but one or two or three shopping malls don't make a difference because how Israel is being described it sounds like there is none. It is easy to sit and cry like you have nothing to eat and blame your neighbor while he supplies you heat and energy. There is no starvation in Gaza, no body is dying of hunger, by a damn ticket and fly there see it for your self and then comeback and try to argue with me but I dought you will you are driven by other desires just like Palestinians are driven not by hunger but by hate for Jews.

Have you bought a ticket and seen for yourself? I would think you have, to make such bold assertions. I mean, people starve in every country around the world, and yet Gaza is some haven from starvation.

And could you, for once, stop generalizing all Palestinians? Most Palestinians, like all people, are driven to fill their bellies and the bellies of their children, first and foremost. They put up with the status quo and go on as best they can. Of course there are some that want Jews obliterated from the face of the Earth, just like others say the same of Arabs, Muslims, Christians, Han Chinese, Americans, capitalists, meat eaters... take your pick. People can hate, and hate strongly, but the violent racists and terrorists of the world are not in the majority. If they were, history would have turned out much differently, and not for the better.

 

[Smoke]

True, but the United Nations declared it to be illegal and it is the only system in place to make such declarations.

On the contrary, the fact that the UN has no legislative or judicial authority means that it is not a system "in place to make such declarations."

Without the United Nations, there is no such thing as international law

International law is based on a complex collection of international conventions and treaties, which is why it's not always as clear-cut as you make out.

 

[England my lionheart]

Yassers Mother was related to the Grand Mufti Amin Al Husseini,he was at the very least affiliated to the MB and he was born in Egypt

 

[croak]

Yassers Mother was related to the Grand Mufti Amin Al Husseini,he was at the very least affiliated to the MB and he was born in Egypt

I can find no evidence that she was related to him, and even if she was, that has no bearing on his name, since tribal membership is passed down paternally. As far as being affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood, sure, he fought alongside them and had friends who were members: that appears to be the extent of his affiliation. Lastly, I did say he was born in Cairo, i.e. the capital of Egypt, but that does not automatically take away Palestinian citizenship, from what I understand. Plenty of Palestinians are born in Lebanese refugee camps, but are not considered Lebanese (that is a complicated situation, though).

Anything else?