“All I saw in Israel was cowards with guns”, page 17

reply to post by nenothtu

---

Thanks for the reasonable debate...

Truth is we dont know exactly what happened and maybe never will...

reply to post by Skellon

---

Agreed about the mini-uzi, which illustrates a personal failing of mine. I class mini-uzis right up there with Ingram MAC-10s and MC-11s - essentially, to my mind, a full auto pistol. I know that technically the full auto capability renders them as submachineguns, but I always see "pistol" when I look at one.

To me, they are far less useful than pistols (too heavy, and spray to wide), and less useful than even SMGs (too light, too uncontrollable).

Like I said, it's a personal failing. Yeah, it was there, but I saw "pistol" instead of SMG. It could account for some indiscrimate wounding if it was actually deployed, though. Might be something for the activists to hang their hat on.

Originally posted by virgom129
reply to post by nenothtu

---

Thanks for the reasonable debate...

Truth is we dont know exactly what happened and maybe never will...

Sure thing! I appreciate a reasonable debate as well. We're ALL after the same thing - the facts in the case. If I'm proven wrong in my assessment (and it HAS happened before), then I will publicly state as much, and adjust my views accordingly.

I've had to do that before, right here at ATS.

In the interim, all I ask is reasoned debate on known issues, rather than emotional ranting. This is a hard subject to keep emotion out of, as I'm finding out. However, the only way we will EVER arrive at an objective assessment is by putting emotion on the back burner, and evaluating what is known, and shown, on the basis of logic, and to a lesser extent experience.

I say 'to a lesser extent, experience', because everyone's experience will be different, and if that's all there is, it's a poor guide indeed.

reply to post by nenothtu

---

The crucial fact to this whole debate is,

who were the initial aggressors...

If the IDF landed peacfully then the activists had no reason to attack as they did...

If the IDF shot first, before landing, or threw grenades of any kind, then they should have expected resistance.Lets face it,even tear gas will cause panic..

reply to post by nenothtu

---

Hi nenothtu,

I do not see it as a failing, it is more of a technicallity.

As we know, SMG's use similar 9mm ammo to pistols and are therefore easily categorised as 'fully automatic' pistols.

If they were using these and were bursting in tight groups, this would also explain the 'excessive' ballistic wounds to the skull.

The only thing to contradict this is the sound of gunfire in the videos submitted is more akin to a single pistol being unloaded or multiple pistols being shot a few times in a short period of time.

Kind regards,

Skellon.

reply to post by virgom129

---

Hi virgom,

I would have to assume that 'crowd control' munitions were used first.

Concussion, tear gas, smoke as examples, otherwise dropping your troops into a crowd would be beyond stupid.

They needed to gain the initiative, the blackhawk could be seen and heard approaching, therefore they would, in my opinion, have deployed these crowd control munitions to gain the edge and protect their troops.

In my unbiased opinion, this should still not warrant the brutal attacks they received on landing.

They were either 'high on their own junk' and bravado, lacking in IQ or actually believed the hype of all Israeli soldiers being murderers.

I too agree with nenothtu, it is refreshing to have an intelligent discussion with someone who does not resort to name calling and accusations.


Skellon.

[edit on 11-6-2010 by Skellon]

reply to post by Skellon

---

In my unbiased opinion, this should still not warrant the brutal attacks they received on landing.

They were either 'high on their own junk' and bravado, lacking in IQ or actually believed the hype of all Israeli soldiers being murderers.


If that is your "unbiased" view I'd hate to see your biased one....

I'm trying to debate reasonably, I have not used words like "the antagonists" to refer to the IDF as you have with the activists...

You try to come across unbiased and have added some good points but,

you are definetly biased....It shows though in many of your statements..

You are entitled to that but dont pretend to be otherwise

reply to post by virgom129

---

I am sorry if you interpret it that way.

I have already stated that I am convinced from the footage provided that the IDF did not use live rounds first.

The options I gave were valid, all of them.



Skellon.

reply to post by Skellon

---

All opinions are valid in absence of facts...

I'm not complaing about your posts, just point out they are biased.

reply to post by nenothtu

---

Is there a reason you just reposted my post but added no comment??

I'm slow today

Originally posted by virgom129
reply to post by nenothtu

---

The crucial fact to this whole debate is,

who were the initial aggressors...

If the IDF landed peacfully then the activists had no reason to attack as they did...

If the IDF shot first, before landing, or threw grenades of any kind, then they should have expected resistance.Lets face it,even tear gas will cause panic..

I'm going to try to reconstruct that last post...

Tear gas will cause more than panic, it will cause disability. I was hit with CS once, and spent the next 20 minutes crying, choking, gasping, and puking. I was in no shape for counter-attack, as I was far more worried about my next breath, and whether or not it was coming.

That situation would have been reversed if I had a gas mask handy at the time. This is why I question the presence of gas masks aboard the Mavi Marmara in the quantities they appear to have been. It indicates to me a premeditation, that the activists on THAT ship (not necessarily the others) went into it spoiling for a fight. I say APPEARS, because I don't know what the normal compliment of gas masks and ballistic vests are aboard a freighter in the Med. It's possible that it's entirely normal, I suppose.

Then there is the fact that handrails were cut down and cut to length ahead of time. As I've said before, that's not a spur of the moment operation to be accomplished while under the pressure of an assault. That also indicates to me a certain premeditation on the part of the activists.

I'm not even mentioning the slingshots, which until recent activist video surface showing them in use, were alleged to have been planted by the IDF.

These are things that, to me, indicate the activists went in spoiling for a fight.

By contrast, the IDF went in with pepper-ball crowd control guns (same category as teargas grenades - nasty, but not life threatening). IDF video shows the commandos being snatched off of the fast ropes, beaten with pipes, and in one case being thrown over the deck. This would be before THOSE commandos fired any shots. Firing while sliding done a rope is a tricky business, with pretty poor results. Still no video of any shots fired prior to that.

Further, the IDF should be aware that Israel has been under close international scrutiny since before Operation Cast Lead. Going in hot and intentionally initiating a massacre would be met with severe resistance and rebuke internationally. One would think the IDF would be aware of that and plan accordingly. Bad press is one thing Israel DOESN'T need.

On to the video evidence presented thus far by the activists. While it has been widely CLAIMED this evidence 'proves' IDF went in hot, an actual viewing doesn't bear that contention out. All of the alleged gunshots I hear on the video are AFTER people have already been shot, and are being carried into a makeshift infirmary. Only one possible burst indicates any 'machine gun' fire, and it's not at all certain. It's cut off by the sound of a ship's klaxon (I note, however that it sounds like a pretty high rate of fire - like from a mini-uzi). None of the other 'shots' have anything approaching a full auto rate of fire, and so if they're shots at all, are likely pistols. Most sound more like sticks being slapped, but be advised that loud, sharp sounds are often truncated due to overload limiting qualities of most video equipment - so that is by no means conclusive on my part.

Now, logic dictates that if gunshot wounds are present, shots MUST have been fired previously. Why is there no video or audio of such shots prior in the activist video? What ELSE may have been on that video, which surely must have been filmed, for it to NOT be released?

I can't say that I buy it's "because the IDF confiscated it", since the activists themselves claim that the hour or so of video that HAS been released by them was uploaded via a redundant satellite link that the IDF didn't get jammed. Thats' what the ACTIVISTS (specifically Ms. Lee) had to say about it, so where is the rest?

So far, the preponderance of the evidence presented is weighed in favor of the IDF version of the story. If the activists expect to prove their version of the story, all they have to do is release the rest of the video.

This was not a perfect reconstruction of my post, but it will have to do.

Originally posted by virgom129
reply to post by nenothtu

---

Is there a reason you just reposted my post but added no comment??

I'm slow today

Yeah, my machine ate my response, and I had to reconstruct it.

Stupid internet connection!

reply to post by nenothtu

---

lol, technology suxs sometimes...

Thanks for the post..A few things I hadn't heard, the rails being cut etc.

I also thought she smuggled the media out.

Still, no one has shown any footage of before IDF dropped onto ship so I dont think anyone has a clear sequence of events,

Originally posted by virgom129
reply to post by nenothtu

---

lol, technology suxs sometimes...

Tell me about it!

Thanks for the post..A few things I hadn't heard, the rails being cut etc.

Yeah, early on there was a major malfunction about whether or not the angle grinders with cutoff wheels mounted would count as 'weapons'. While they COULD, I personally don't think they SHOULD. I can't imagine chasing an armed man around with a loaded angle grinder, wondering if I was going to run out of extension cord before he got his pistol unholstered.

It seems more logical to me that the angle grinders were used to cut the pipes, which were evident in abundance. They weren't weapons, they were used to MAKE weapons.

I also thought she smuggled the media out.

Conflicting stories, depending on who you hear it from. I take that account straight from her mouth, in her "DemocracyNOW" interview. It's posted earlier in this thread.

Still, no one has shown any footage of before IDF dropped onto ship so I dont think anyone has a clear sequence of events,

Au contraire, BOTH sides have posted video of the beginning, before the boarding, But I haven't been able to find any muzzle flashes in them which would indicate shots fired. The IDF video shows teargas and flashbang grenades, on deck, but no gunshots.

The activist video shows patrol boats, and a hovering helicopter, but the only 'shots' shown are from a slingshot, with some numbnuts firing a slingshot at the helicopter. Not a smooth move, to my mind. I have no idea what he hoped to accomplish by that. Still no gunshots shown, though.

They HAVE to be there, in order for gunshot wounds to be present. So WHERE is the video, from either side?

reply to post by virgom129

---

Also, I would refer you to another post of mine, in another thread, here for further assessment of the video claiming to have been showing the 'murder' of Furkan Dogan by the IDF. That one is in response to the claim that the weapon in question was a suppressed Ruger 10/22 .22 caliber rifle.

You can ignore the link to yet another post of mine within that response, as it just links back to THIS thread, where I assessed whether or not it was an FN FAL that was in use.

So far, I've been able to find nothing to indicate that the weapon was other than a paintball gun. Nasty bruises, but no real damage from one. Certainly, it should be able to be determined what caliber of weapon caused the wounds that killed him. The only thing I would add at this point is that, since the subject was hidden by the wall the entire time, there is no assurance that it even WAS the individual in question, but the story is suspect, because of the erroneous claims as to the type of weapon present. It smacks of unwarranted sensationalism, calculated to take advantage of the misfortune of that young man.

A .22 will certainly kill a man, but it won't make near the mess that a bona-fide assault rifle will. Should be an easy thing for a forensic scientist to determine.

There is, without doubt, a spin-war of propaganda going on, and all it would take to lay it to rest is that crucial bit of video between the helicopter arrival, and the bodies being carried to medical help.

[edit on 2010/6/11 by nenothtu]

reply to post by nenothtu

---

Hmmm, always amazes me that with so many cameras around, no one manages to get a good pic...

UFO's are a great example....

Anyways, my mind is still open on this subject till more is proven...

cheers mate

Originally posted by virgom129
reply to post by nenothtu

---

Hmmm, always amazes me that with so many cameras around, no one manages to get a good pic...

UFO's are a great example....

Anyways, my mind is still open on this subject till more is proven...

cheers mate

Indeed! And ALL of these cameras were supposed to be filming this specific event. The video/photos are undoubtedly there - so where's the evidence, either way?

All it would take is that one wee bit, that EVERYONE is leaving out. It's is for sure one of those things that make you go "hmmmm..."

Cheers right back, mate. It's been a pleasure discussing this with you!

reply to post by smurfy

---

Why should it only mean that?

The Mavi Marmara, unlike the other 5 ships, refused to turn away.

For 6 hours, between 10pm on the 30th to 4am on the 31st, the Israeli Navy requested that it turn away from its current course.

The Captain of the Mavi Marmara refused to comply. This was an act of defiance.

Therefore, at approx 4am, the Shayetet 13 were deployed to board the ship.

If the activists were truely 'peace activists' then they would have given up without resistance. The crowd control munitions would have been deployed to enable the commandos to get on deck with some safety, nobody would have come to any significant harm or lost their lives.

It would have been an unpleasant experience for them, but they would not be dead.

Skellon.




[edit on 12-6-2010 by Skellon]

Israel Uses a 13 Year Old Boy as a Human Shield
  Posted 15 days ago with 38 member flags

The Most Outrageous Hateful Rhetoric of All Time
  Posted 16 days ago with 37 member flags

Quotable Quotes from the Chosen Ones. Hate, Despise, Crush, Kill, Destroy...
  Posted 9 days ago with 37 member flags

Debate over a Nuclear Iran is just an Illusion- drop your preconceived opinions to see the reality
  Posted 1 days ago with 32 member flags

"Syrian rebels try to use prisoner for suicide bombing" video removed by BBC and NYT
  Posted 19 days ago with 27 member flags

‘US to Iran: In case of Israeli strike, don’t fire on our bases’
  Posted 8 days ago with 27 member flags

US Preparing for a Post-Israel Middle East?
  Posted 12 days ago with 26 member flags

Iran Bashing, Terrorism and Who Chose The Chosen People, Anyway?
  Posted 16 days ago with 21 member flags

Newest topics, updated in real-time:

Newest topics getting flags, in real-time:

Newest topics getting replies, in real-time: