Israel's latest atrocity, carried out in international waters, is yet another example of why it has lost the right to exist. Its bombing of Gaza the Xmas before last when it killed 1400 Gazans is a further example.

Israel has set itself above from the rest of the world community. It is now a law unto itself and ignores the laws which govern all other nations. It also ignores the opinions of all other nations.

Israel is an example of the danger of religious fanaticism. Just listen to Israeli leaders as they justify the murdering of aid activists. They are deranged. They can't see that what they have done is inhuman and illegitimate.

The fact that Israel has nukes and will use them to further its crazy, racist ambitions poses a huge danger to the rest of the world.

Israel must be stopped. Now!

HILARIOUS UNFETTERED UPROARIOUS LAUGHTER at the unashamed hypocrisy of Neve Gordon and David G :)

PIRACY ?
When a group of country shoppers TAKE CONTROL of a ship called Tampa....and direct the captain to sail at their command....it's not PIRACY ?

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

About half an hour after Rinnan had set sail toward Indonesia, a delegation of five asylum seekers visited the bridge to demand passage to Australian territory, specifically Christmas Island, or any western country.[5] The group was quite aggressive and agitated and Rinnan agreed to alter course for Christmas Island

Let's face it.. Left wing spin will be totally out of control on this thread.. par for the course. They will of course leave out any detail which might weaken their feeding frenzy, such as the weapons used by the people on the boat against the interdiction by Israelis.

THEY will also neglect to point out that this was a deliberate provocation.. that the ships COULD have taken the 'aid' to Egypt or to Ashdod and arranged to have it transhipped (as long as it was legal materials).

So... flail away you communists... we know your PC game..and 'Granny' does not fool us for a moment.. we know you just want to eat us.

Israel, since it's inception and the conquest of the Canaanites is under divine protection. Nothing changes this..from it's founding to the day of resurrection. Those who would try to undermine Israel should remember these divine words...to Abraham.

"Those who curse you...I will curse"

The author seems to assume, without any justification given, that Israel has (or has had) sovereignty over Gaza.

As I understand it Israel has _claimed_ sovereignty over the remainder of Palestine, but that's surely different from actually legally _having_ sovereignty.

Dearie me, someone is strutting about with a miraculous bulletproof vest, claiming divine protection.

Just in case that's not enough protection, there's Iron Dome. See:

http://www.medialens.org/index.php

May 20, 2010

"Last week, the BBC reported Barack Obama's request to Congress for $200 million in military aid to assist Israel's construction of a short-range rocket defence system, Iron Dome. The funding will be in addition to the $3 billion in military aid the US annually sends to Israel. A BBC online article explained:

"The system is designed to shoot down mortars and rockets from Gaza or Southern Lebanon with guided missiles." (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/8681919.stm)"

The MediaLens article goes on to suggest that the short travel time of such Palestinian rockets means a system such as Iron Dome is useless - not to mention overpriced.

Still, Iron Dome may be good enough protection for tinpot braggarts strutting about in the safety of their homes. I pity the poor Yanks who get to pay their tax dollars and their children's lives for a belligerent, incompetent Israeli government.

Why is Israel so bastardly aggressive, is because she was given the okay many years ago by Richard Nixon to go unlawfully militarily nuclear, despite warnings from Nixon's Minister of State, Henry Kissinger.

Certainly a large part of the above warnings has been the modern weakness of the UN, part of its original design being to prevent not only Israel becoming like a Red Backed Spider, but also Iran becoming openly aggressive.

Kissinger's prediction of a major war in the Middle East is thus becoming more and more dangerously possible

Algoreisrich, your comments suggest you are suffering from serious mental derangement. A similar derangement affects the Israelis.

You write as though you think you are God. Your attitude is one of arrogance and superiority when you address other commenters.

Your irrational rants are boring and rarely deal with the subject matter of the thread while the links you provide are rarely worth reading.

You are not funny or clever, just a serial nuisance, one that OLO could do well without!

Please take some time off. Get some counseling!

Boazy: << Israel, since it's inception and the conquest of the Canaanites is under divine protection. Nothing changes this..from it's founding to the day of resurrection. >>

If almost anybody else had typed that, I'd think they were taking the piss. Unfortunately, as David G points out, Israel behaves as if that mythical nonsense is true, by thumbing its nose at international law and human rights.

I mean, it's the "Promised Land", right? The Israelis are protected by their divine right to Palestine and are anwerable only to God.

Israeli’s actions in maintaining the blockade against Gaza and boarding the humanitarian flotilla were unconscionable.

However, in criticising Israeli actions Australia ignores actions of its own.

The Bougainville conflict is not at the forefront of Australian consciousness. Societal and environmental devastation caused by the Panguna mine sparked Bougainville’s flight for independence from Papua New Guinea. Patrol boats maintained by the Australian navy carried out the blockade of the island. Those boats which tried to run the blockade were machine gunned. The UN rapporteur issued a report on the blockade which caused many deaths due to the denial of medication to the people of Bougainville. Australia was condemned by the United Nations as blockades which prevent delivery of medical and other humanitarian aid are illegal.

Mercenary pilots on detached service from the Australian and New Zealand armed forces flew helicopters which helped PNG forces combat the Bougainvilleans.

Ordinarily it is against the law to recruit mercenaries on Australian soil. However, Lionel Bowen, the then attorney-general ruled that the Crimes Act would not apply in the PNG recruitment.

There was even a movie of the action. The following is part of a review.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bougainville_%E2%80%93_Our_Island_Our_Fight

“Bougainville – Our Island Our Fight is a 1998 documentary film. It was produced and directed by Wayne Coles-Janess.

The film focuses on an indigenous people who fight against a multinational mining company and government forces. The guerrillas hold the belief that they are fighting to defend their independence and the local environment on the island of Bougainville. This film is notable for its unique subject matter, as most Western media has not reported upon the Bougainville conflict.”

"Living with Rebels" by Rosemarie Gillespie tells the story of one brave woman who ran the blockade to bring supplies to the Bougainvilleans.

The big difference between the blockade of Bougainville and the blockade of Gaza is that press coverage of the blockade of Bougainville was almost non-existent, and most Australians are still unaware of the blockade.

As far as I can see the big similarity between the two blockades is that they both stink to high heaven.

David f, Good one mate. The red/green/getup/labour coalition have a lot of blood on their hands from East Timor to Papua, both West & East, plus poor old Bougainville.

But whenever somebody who can easily be identified as one of those evil, right wingers, allegedly misbehaves, they scream blue murder.

I agree with David G.
Algoreisrich needs to take some time off and seek counseling!

I am no apologist for the state of Israel.In fact I am totally opposed to their theft of Palestinian land and homes.
However, about this peace armada.Everyone is baying for blood just as I was till my son sat me down and pointed out a few poorly advertised facts.Letme go over a few salient features with my readers.
If this was nothing but an armada of boats bringing food and medical supplies for the people of gaza, what were the media crew and activists doing on board the flotilla? Each boat didnt need more than 4 crew.There was one large vessel with an entire sophisticated media unit with tv transmitter on board. The space they occupied could have been filled with much needed medical supplies or food parcels.
To me this smatters of hyprocisy and political manipulation. They knew that Israel would never allow passage for the flotilla and would be prepared to open fire if necessary.
Dont forget that Israel and Egypt had conferred and offered to grant access to Gaza by overland routes through check points .If merely bringing food and medical supplies was the honest intention of the activists why didnt they acceot the offer. No,they turned it down. Egyptstill has the Raffa crossing open.
It's blatantly obvious that the intention of the "peace" ( hah! LOL!!) activists was to politically embarrass Israel.
Each of the flotilla captains was warned by the Israel navy to pull out.Warnings that were deliberately unheeded. That alone invited direct military response. The Israeli commander erred by intercepting the flotilla in international waters. That constitues an act of piracy. I am still waiting for details to clarify if the interception was in international waters and why the Israeli action was so premature.
.When the Israeli rapelled down the ropes to board the boats they were attacked by "peaceful" means as was seen on tv. Whobegan the vbiolence? The peace activists, ironically.
Let's get a perspective on the story Truth is the real casualty here.

socratease

OK, here is the link to the footage showing the "peaceful protesters" initiating a vicious, unprovoked and obviously premeditated assault on Israeli troops, who had taken steps to prevent the illegal entry of the flotilla into Israeli territorial waters (Gaza & Hamas don't have Territorial Waters, Gaza isn't a State), despite being repeatedly told not to and warned of the consequences.

Piracy does not enter into it (although I do adore the way the intellectually limited repeat the party line ad-nauseum)... Try and run a blockade conducted by one combatant to prevent illicit resupply of another, is a dumb move, one that is certain to provoke conflict. When an outcome is certain, that outcome was intended (QED).

Let's see what happens (and where the mouthpieces go) when there is an independent, judicial inquiry into the events at hand. Who did what to whom, whether the initial soldiers were beaten to the ground and then on it, whether they acted entirely properly in self-defence, or whether, as HAMAS would have us believe, the IDF members simply lost their cool and slaughtered passengers indiscriminately.

For once, this looks like it might still be on the boil when the FACTS come out... I've been looking forward to that for some time (I wonder how the cheap-politicians who backed them will react when they are made to look like the weak nonentities they are).

It still raises the serious concern, given Mr Rudd's knee-jerk comments, which compare rather badly with the comments of President Obama & Hilary Clinton, what would happen if the RAN or the Australian Army conducted an operation that was blown up in this fashion? Would they leave our own troops, who are conducting similar operations almost daily, hanging in the wind? I certainly couldn't say for sure they would not, can you?

There are many questions that need
answers to this incident.
Haaretz.com - had an excellent analysis
of the situation by Aluf Benn, 31 May 2010.
He stated that Israel needs a national
inquiry into the incident. "There is no
other fitting or proper way to clarify
the circumstances of the incident which
ended with many dead and a grave international
crisis..."

Blaming the organisers of the flotilla for
causing the deaths is inadequate. It's a
technique of shifting responsibility from
the government and the military. Decisions
taken by the government and the military
must be probed. The responsibility is theirs.
They did violate international maritime law
causing not only global outrage but death
and injuries. An independent inquiry needs
to be conducted.

Damn, I have to repost

Here is a link with all the pertinent information in one place...

http://www.aijac.org.au/?id=articles&_action=showArticleDetails&articleID=6836

For those who actually seek information and truth, I suggest you take it from all sides. For those of you who are incapable of rational discussion, logically, there is little point trying to reason with you.

Personally, I try to examine every issue before me, to see if I can ascertain where truth might lie. I admit, I am biased toward Israel, my Great-grandfather was well treated by Jews (and badly treated by Arabs) there in WWI (1st Light Horse Regt) and my Grandfather had similar stories about WWII (When the 2nd AIF drove through Lebanon & Syria against the vaunted French Foreign Legion).

Apart from that, I tend to eye hysterical, crap-journalism with some cynicism. It generally goes no deeper than the surface, which is blatant propaganda, the truth lies in the facts.

The cited videos, legal material and the rest are on the AIJAC site (nice collection, all in one place), if you cannot at least go there and look, then there is a serious issue - they have an interest (an obvious one) and saved me searching all night.

Find me videos/legal opinions to refute what they have and we'll discuss it further

Foxy, many, many people want an impartial, credible and independent inquiry (preferably judicial - like a Royal Commission) into the events that occurred, and the sequence thereof. I personally would love that, I suspect a few in the opposing camp would prefer the facts stay hidden.

When someone commits and act with a certain consequence, they intend that consequence, QED. Cui Bono- the benefit obviously goes, in the short-term, to the Palestinians. We have video & eyewitness footage of the incident showing "people" rappelling from a helicopter onto the deck, then being attacked with what look like bars/clubs.

This happens prior to the firing - you can tell by the extent of the crowd (crowd numbers decrease rapidly when people open fire).

The flotilla was organised and run by the IHH (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IHH_%28%C4%B0nsani_Yard%C4%B1m_Vakf%C4%B1%29) a group which is known to turn up wherever jihad activity occurs...

Yeah, I'd love to see the entire thing laid out into a sequential set of facts, who said and did what, when, where and to whom. Cold facts, and facts only.

The BBC has some good material at http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/ -- it's worth a look to try to sort out the accusations and counter-accusations.

A book claims it's Israels "Promised Land". A book they wrote themselves. Hmmm

The same "Rule book" they used to legitimise the (illegal) blockade also states it is the right of any individual or group to defend themselves from external attack or occupation while in international waters.

Sir Ivor

"Those who curse you, I will curse"

Think of that when the next bad thing happens to you :)

SOCRATEASE...

you have it in a nutshell mate. But don't waste your time trying to 'persuade' the Marxists here.. they are rather untouchable with rational argument.

A minor point though.

You said:

I am no apologist for the state of Israel.In fact I am totally opposed to their theft of Palestinian land and homes.

If someone came along and intimidated you off your farm.. gave you an 'offer you could not refuse' and ended up on your place with you off in some dingy digs scrounging to survive..then some gallant person came along and showed you away of getting your land back... and ridding it of those scum who pushed you out....would you not be attracted to the idea of rectifying a crime against you ?

Of course.

When it comes to history, we all have our convenient starting points.
For the Palestinians and our resident Marxists..it's 1948 "Israeli Theft of 'Palestinian' Land."

For the Jew...it is around 1400 bc and continues on now.. one long sometimes interrupted history of Jewish occupation of a divinely promised land.

I cannot and will never call "Isreal" ..."Palestinian" land.

I will make you very fruitful; I will make nations of you, and kings will come from you. 7 I will establish my covenant as an everlasting covenant between me and you and your descendants after you for the generations to come, to be your God and the God of your descendants after you. 8 The whole land of Canaan, where you are now an alien, I will give as an everlasting possession to you and your descendants after you; and I will be their God." (Gen 17:6ff)

HAMAS CHARTER Part 3 Article 11
http://middleeast.about.com/od/palestinepalestinians/a/me080106b_2.htm

This is the status [of the land] in Islamic Shari’a, and it is similar to all lands conquered by Islam by force, and made thereby Waqf lands upon their conquest, for all generations of Muslims until the Day of Resurrection.

Notice the admission 'Conquered by force'?

ALGOREisRICH (HEisALSOSEPARATINGFOMTIPPERGORE)

My guess is that God is on both our sides, or neither. You may think of that next time you get a parking ticket.

You may also wish to hatch out into the post-tribal world, and replace your magical, childish fear and vengeance fantasies with the reality confronted and negotiated by the Good Samaritan, in an old parable about loving your neighbour.

And I think it's worth a reminder that the fellow who told this tale, of courageous and practical mercy shown in spite of cultural prejudices and taboos, was a Rabbi.

<< "Those who curse you, I will curse" >>

Sheer mumbo jumbo.

Polycarp
The problem is with A wiki mentality like yours is that facts are nice but only part of the the calculation.
A bigger part is *Context*. However, they can be used like statistics to IMPOSE any context that a zealot may dream up in their fevered brow.

True wisdom comes when facts + reality + proportion determine the context.

If one doesn't the result is similar to translating the lyrics of a song into Japanese by an on line translator then back again by the same method. The result is a lot of words, facts that bear no cogent linkages ....a ridiculous rant

The result is text that doesn't make sense.

To all the delusionals:
"We need to always remember that we aren't North America or Western Europe, we live in the Middle East, in a place where there is no mercy for the weak and there aren't second chances for those who don't defend themselves."
Barak (No, not Obama)

Sir Ivor

Who's side is God on ? :)

I was stirring a bit... God so loved the WORLD....that He gave His only Son...that whosoEVER believes in Him will not perish but have everlasting life" John 3:16

That rather explains the current state of affairs.

Unfortunately when discussing Israel though.. it can get a bit one sided..."Israel BAD...Palestinians GOOD"

The Mumbo Jumbo that mr Morgan asserts is a bit deeper than that.
At the time it was uttered..and during the life of the Israelite Theocracy.. it absolutely applied. Israel itself was punished at times because of disobedience to the Covenant.

As for the present time, we should just be aware that for the religious Jew.. the New Testament does not exist.... so.. his mindset will still be as I said, -validly or not living in the Genesis language.

No offense intended.

For the record ALGOREisRICH, the word "Jew" was a collective term for a "citizen of Judea". It included Hebrews but was not an exclusive term to describe them alone.

Also, most of the Hebrew population had migrated westward by the time you/they claim to have somehow exclusively occupied it.

Like the 40-years in the wilderness and the alleged exodus out of Egypt, it's just romanticised myth with no basis in historical fact.

God is on whatever side god chooses... That is irrelevant. Facts are all that count. This article starts with a misleading premise, that the ships were boarded in international waters. The Ships were boarded ONLY when they were crossing into Israeli Territorial Waters (and at the last minute at that), having announced their intention to flout Israeli Marshall Law. Look at any of the pertinent laws (Helsinki, Hague, whatever, nobody is entitled to remain a neutral while running a blockade).

For those who think the response was disproportionate, have you ever been hit by an iron bar after being clubbed to the ground? Have you ever seen it happen? It is an assault with a deadly weapon. What do you think would be the result if, during a patrol, an ADF platoon was separated and one or two were isolated and assaulted in this manner? I'll give you a hint, it wouldn't involve paintguns and would sound suspiciously like a minimi (at least).

These thugs coopted respected peace activists and then used them as a front, to pursue their real goal, violent armed conflict. Which they initiated on one vessel only (the other 5 were stopped without any violence whatever), where a group who had reportedly expressed a desire for martyrdom decided to attack the first soldiers down the rope with a variety of deadly weapons.

I'm not pushing a point of view, I am expressing the facts as they have begun to come to light. I really do hope this is kept at the front of the papers long enough to blow up in the faces of the murderous scum who planned it. I suspect that finally, it is going to and an awful lot of very intelligent, very respected and very decent people are going to be left very visibly wearing egg on their face(s).

From a propaganda coup to a propaganda nightmare. Hamas has blocked the aid (http://edition.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/meast/06/02/israel.palestinians.aid/index.html?iref=obinsite), the footage clearly shows who initiated the violence (http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/opinion/boatloads-of-bloody-minded-pacifists/story-e6frezz0-1225874166305) and the world is waking up. Watch & wait, this has only just begun.

Well, Custard, it will be interesting to hear your assertions spinning along on the Larger Gramophone.

For an indirect response to your links, try this story at
http://www.redress.cc/palestine/jcook20100604

“Mad dog” diplomacy: a cornered Israel is baring its teeth
By Jonathan Cook in Nazareth
4 June 2010

which ends with:

" ... Israel’s supporters have characterized the Goldstone report and the related legal campaigns against Israel as examples of “lawfare”, implying that those who uphold international law are waging a new kind of war of attrition on behalf of terror groups like Hamas and Hizbullah.

These trends are likely only to deepen in the coming months and years, making Israel an ever greater pariah in the eyes of much of the world. The mad dog is baring his teeth, and it is high time the international community decided how to deal with him."

Plainly, Jonathan Cook is not an Unbiased Journalist. It's a shame H.S. Thompson couldn't join the party, and see him straight.

For myself, and hopefully for Israelis and others in the mid-east and elsewhere (eg the global region), I can only wish that Israel will one day get a government and bureaucracy that deploys its military with a bit better judgement than was used by our current Australian administration and bureaucracy, on the Home Insulation Scheme.

ALGORE is RICH:

No offence taken.

AS I said on another thread, a few minutes thought on what war actually is might be useful.

It is generally considered that there is a war like status between
Gaza and Israel.
Israel should to clarify matters declare a state of war with Gaza.

Baby Boomers and those younger do not seem to realise the nature of
war at sea.
In a war, blockade runners are likely to be torpedoed without notice.
If Israel had sunk the ships with all on board there is plenty of
precedence to support their action.

As much as you all are appalled at that, that is the way it is
so live with it !

Different times, Bazz.

These days, I expect it's hard for young people to believe that Churchill said the troops at El Alamein would fight to the last man.
Civilians and soldiers alike are treated more carefully, wherever the cameras are pointed. And so it should be, IMHO. More restraint is generally shown these days, even it when it isn't showtime.

And how much would sinking a boatload of civilians look like, say, setting off a car bomb in an Iraqi or Pakistani marketplace, or derailing a passenger train in India? I wonder if there are humourless bomb-makers mumbling to themselves about how folks are going to get what's coming to them, unless - - - - ?

Sydney Morning Herald reporter Paul McGeough's account of the Mavi Marmari boarding:

http://www.smh.com.au/world/prayers-tear-gas-and-terror-20100603-x7ew.html

Yes indeed Sir Vivor,
Certainly in different times the ships would have been sunk by aircraft.
That they took the risk of actually boarding the ships is an indication
of those different times.
What the people who ran those ships have done is to up the anti.
The next time there is strong risk that they will not place their
servicemen at risk and will sink the ships.
They might allow those on board to enter the lifeboats but I suspect
that they will be too stubborn and challenge the Israelis to sink
the ships.

They will then complain that the Israelis committed a war crime.
Anyone want to put bets on it ?

A few more (secondhand) details of the Hamas refusal to allow aid across the border into Gaza. The aid may be seen as a bargaining chip to assure cotinuing publicity until all on the manifests of the interdicted ships are accounted for.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/04/world/middleeast/04flotilla.html?th&emc=th

" ... the Hamas authorities were not allowing supplies from the ships to enter Gaza on Thursday, said Maj. Guy Inbar, a spokesman for the Israeli authority responsible for the crossings. About 30 truckloads had been unloaded from the ships, he said.

Ahmed al-Kurd, the minister of social affairs in the Hamas government, said that first, “Israel has to release all hostages,” referring to the flotilla activists.

In addition, Mr. Kurd said that it was up to Turkey to decide on “the mechanism to distribute or to handle the aid,” whether through international or Turkish organizations, and that the aid must arrive complete."

More proof of Jewish perfidy:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FOGG_osOoVg&feature=player_embedded

Neve Gordon's piece is generally clear and worthy of thought. Some additional comments are:

1. He speaks of Israel giving up its soverignty over the Gaza. Strictly speaking he is wrong. It is an Occupied Territory as a result of the Six Day War. Unlike Jerusalem, israel enver incorporated this territory into Israel. In addition, the international community never accepted it as Israeli territory. Note the terms of Resolution 242.

2. Gordon speaks of a country relinquishing sovereignty and that is unique. The Australian excision of its offshore islands as aprt of its response to refugees is similiar!

3. In addition to Gordon's comments about Lieberman's defense of a moral Israeli army, I would add there must be a consideration of "disproportionate force". The more we know about what occurred, the less it appears that the army acted in an appropriate way.

4. Lieberman also argues it was legal according to the San Remo Convention. That presumes that Israel is either the sovereign government over Israel and is at war with, perhaps, Turkey, or it is not the governing country of Gaza and is at war with a state called Palestine. It appears that its argument is tying itself into knots.

5. Finally, when considering the "lesser evil", is delivering humanitarian aid through a blockade a greater or lesser eveil that the use of deadly force?

Your point 5.
Delivering humanitarian aid is not the point, it is what could be in
the cargo that the Israelis would not want delivered to Hamas.
Previous shipments that were seized included armaments and rockets.
They are probably concerned particularly about more sophisticated
rockets than the ones being made in Gaza.

If you were them would you allow cargos from Islamic countries, or
indeed any country to enter uninspected ?
Please answer that question.

The Barbary Pirates never looked like this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FOGG_osOoVg&feature=player_embedded

This boarding of MV Rachel Corrie is bad.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/06/05/2919241.htm

But there's worse:

At this juncture Shiri Maimon sings her rendition of "Hatikva" (the Israeli National Anthem):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ian_NCV4aCM&feature=player_embedded

This is again a bitter criticism of Israel, that Western outpost of the Middle East that never ceases to puzzle or horrify.

For balance, I present a representative from Israel's worst enemy and custodian of the Islamic Bomb, Pakistan, sung in Urdu and (sort of) English (and within the bounds of relevance and genderless good taste):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UZmubKmFPKY&feature=player_embedded

Pete
( my callsign http://gentleseas.blogspot.com/2010/05/nuclear-weapons-for-australia-ongoing.html :)