It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Israel fires warning shots at aid ship

page: 3
11
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 9 2011 @ 09:40 AM
link   
reply to post by Master_007
 


Let me see now.....

so it is alleged the IDF commit war crimes.........

but all of you are silent when the US Military commit war crimes in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya

and not a peep out of any of you when Arab nations commit war crimes!

Let's count shall we?

In the past year how many Palestinians did the IDF kill?

In the past year how many Arabs did Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, Bahrain, Iranian and Libyan Police & Military kill?

How many Libyans have NATO killed to date?

In the past year how many people did the US Military kill in Iraq and Afghanistan?

Which country did the most killing????




posted on Jul, 9 2011 @ 06:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by bluemirage5
reply to post by backinblack
 


This is about the flotillas and Israel firing warning shots on a boat trying to illegally cross Israeli waters just as the Indonesians illegally try to cross Australian waters!

Oh hang on.....but the British don't have a peace treaty with the Aboriginals......


No one crossed Israeli waters..

I'd suggest you study an atlas..



posted on Jul, 9 2011 @ 06:43 PM
link   

Which country did the most killing????


Probably the Zionist controlled US..

And to say I have not condemned their actions is an ignorant lie..

But in the conflict being discussed in this thread then the Israeli's have killed more Palestinians than Palestinians have killed Israelis..



posted on Jul, 9 2011 @ 10:32 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jul, 9 2011 @ 10:47 PM
link   
reply to post by backinblack
 


Actually no. he's asking you to believe everything that Israel says the UN says. The Palmer report found the blockade illegal. and "A source in Jerusalem" is lying out their ass.



posted on Jul, 9 2011 @ 10:49 PM
link   
reply to post by bluemirage5
 


Really? You think we're silent about this stuff?

Know what it's called when you force yourself to be ignorant, in spite of gross amounts of evidence to the contrary? It's called stupidity. And friend, you are most definitely forcing yourself to remain ignorant.



posted on Jul, 9 2011 @ 10:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheWalkingFox
reply to post by backinblack
 


Actually no. he's asking you to believe everything that Israel says the UN says. The Palmer report found the blockade illegal. and "A source in Jerusalem" is lying out their ass.


Source ?
Second line../*



posted on Jul, 9 2011 @ 10:59 PM
link   
reply to post by gravitational
 


Ah. My mistake (and yours) - the Palmer report is the "fact finding" report about the butchery of 9 Turks in International waters by Israel. Not the UN's word on the legality of the blockade.

For that we turn to Navi Pillay, UN Human rights director, and her 2009 report on the conflict in Gaza, which did conclude the blockade was illegal, on grounds of collective punishments violating the Universal Declaration of Human rights.

My bad, I got my reports confused; what's your excuse?



posted on Jul, 9 2011 @ 11:21 PM
link   
reply to post by TheWalkingFox
 


Another genius...
The Palmer's commission dealt with the legality of the IDF actions on international waters.

Here is what I think of Navi Pillay and HRC

blog.unwatch.org...



posted on Jul, 10 2011 @ 02:00 AM
link   
The "Court Of Popular Opinion" clearly believes Israel acted illegally..

I'd believe THAT court before any Government,UN or Israeli organized investigation..



posted on Jul, 10 2011 @ 02:02 AM
link   
reply to post by gravitational
 


You were selective of the information, only showing a tiny proportion and completely evading any reference to criticism of Israel.

When and where did I call you a Nazi. To me recollection I am certain I said "I would not go as far to call you a Nazi". This is another one of your usual tactics. Ad hominem attacks and making up complete BS.

Site the international law which states that under these circumstances the blockade is legal. I think you will find it far more difficult than you expected.

Instead of constantly making stupid assertions and accusation, prove to me and ATS where I have twisted realities and stop claiming I have ugly biased mantras, you are simply being hypocritical. To suggest you, yourself are unbiased would be absolute hogwash as you are Zionist thus you have far more vested interests in this particular subject.

edit on 10-7-2011 by SpeachM1litant because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 10 2011 @ 02:09 AM
link   
reply to post by TheWalkingFox
 


Yeah I think you ARE silent about this stuff because I barely see any of it through any of these threads. Why is that?

And you call me ignorant?

I do my research well and I'm meticulous with facts when I want to post them.

Where are yours?



posted on Jul, 10 2011 @ 02:26 AM
link   
reply to post by SpeachM1litant
 


Will you make up your mind.
First you request a reference to Casus Belli and the international law, now you wish for reference to naval blocked laws, ALL of which were talked about gazillion times over the past year. Do your own research, will you?

I cited Palmer's conclusion based on International law as a response to BIB holding his breath. I do not, by no means, have any respect to the body called UN. An international body that have or had members like Sudan or Lybia sitting in human rights committees or security council. To me, or anyone honest enough to acknowledge how corrupt the UN has become, the UN is a farce.



posted on Jul, 10 2011 @ 02:31 AM
link   

I cited Palmer's conclusion based on International law as a response to BIB holding his breath.


Oddly I haven't seen any reference to ACTUAL laws mentioned..

I must have missed that post.



posted on Jul, 10 2011 @ 02:34 AM
link   
reply to post by gravitational
 


No doubt the UN has its issues and I have my own criticism of the UN, however it is the only forum the Earth really has for international dialogue, thus I respect it as an institution as necassary and credible in its conclusions (well most of them). Look at the world before the UN and the world after. So according to you- Israel is not bound by the UN Charter or any UN resolutions even though it CHOSES to be a member-state of the UN? I'm glad your not a lawyer- you'd never win a case.

I ask for references to a casus belli and international law in another thread so your comment in regards to this is irrelevant (although you do have a tendency to use my comments from other threads in order to divert the argument). If you are going to use international law or maritme blockade laws as a reference for your argument then actually REFERNCE them or don't use them as a basis for your argument what so ever. Its like me saying Israel is in violation of a UN security council resolution yet being unable to tell you which one. Idiocy.



posted on Jul, 10 2011 @ 04:01 AM
link   
reply to post by SpeachM1litant
 


As I said, the reference material is right here in this forum.
Some are in my own posts written since the last flotilla indecent accrued.
If you think you can exhaust me by going back and forth, saying the same things over and over like a parrot, doing the research for you, think again.

BIB, you didn't miss it, you just skipped it. As usual.



posted on Jul, 10 2011 @ 04:04 AM
link   
reply to post by gravitational
 



BIB, you didn't miss it, you just skipped it. As usual.


No mate, you have quoted NO laws..
Maybe you tried the San Reno Treaty but we all know that is NOT law and is NON BINDING..

Try again..



posted on Jul, 10 2011 @ 06:09 AM
link   
reply to post by backinblack
 


Sigh....
it's San Remo.
Someone here must admire your evasive maneuvers, since you keep using it.



posted on Jul, 10 2011 @ 06:12 AM
link   
reply to post by backinblack
 


By the way;

"The San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea was adopted in June 1994 by the International Institute of Humanitarian Law after a series of round table discussions by naval and legal experts. It is "the only comprehensive international instrument that has been drafted on the law of naval warfare since 1913."

en.wikipedia.org...

nice try though.



posted on Jul, 10 2011 @ 08:44 PM
link   
reply to post by gravitational
 


I have read through this whole thread and everyone of your posts in this thread. At no point did you reference international law. You did quote wikipedia which itself did not reference international law (I looked through all there 12-15 references on casus belli).

Oh and also I am glad you don't even read your sources. It makes it all the more easier for me to make you look like an idiot. See you claim that the San Remo Manual is binding and you reference a loose and broad sentence from your wikipedia to support your argument. Yet your own source (wiki) states



The manual is a legally recognized document [2], but is not binding.

en.wikipedia.org...

So no... The San Remo manual is not binding. No wonder it is called a MANUAL.
edit on 10-7-2011 by SpeachM1litant because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join