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.

 

URGENT – IMMEDIATE ATTENTION: Spirit of Rachel Corrie Ship Heading Towards Gaza Attacked By Israel

page: 6
55
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 17 2011 @ 06:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by edog11

You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.
FACT is that Israel is the one breaking international law by:
1.) Implementing and enforcing an ILLEGAL blockade.


There is nothing illegal about the blockade. Nothing. If you think otherwise, then cite the law that backs that statement. Anything else is just emotional rhetoric.



2.) Ignoring UN requests to cease their offensive on the Gazan people and to discontinue the blockade.


There is nothing in violation of International Law in ignoring the UN, or a UN "request".



3.) Being an occupying force in Gaza and slowly forcing the population into extremism and eventually death.


There is no "occupation" of Gaza by Israel. Israel and her forces are entirely outside of Gaza. Technically speaking, they only "occupy" Israel, not Gaza at all, and there is nothing illegal about that.



4.) Establishing ILLEGAL settlements on non-Israeli land.


I might give you that if you can demonstrate that it is the nation of Israel that is making the settlements, rather than individual settlers. Unfortunately, Gaza has differentiated itself from the West Bank on purpose, and so Gaza cannot use activities in the West Bank as any sort of justification for it's own problems. In other words, the West Bank issues are moot points in a discussion of Gaza.

The first step in defeating a "divide and conquer" strategy is not to allow yourself to get divided to begin with. "Palestine" fails that test.



5.) Destroying entire villages and either arresting or killing the villagers who resist and removing people from their own land.


Where?



6.) Illegally detaining thousands of Palestinians and Gazans without due process.


You might be able to make a case there, if you have actual detainee lists, and they pertain to Gaza, and you can demonstrate which laws have been violated pertaining to them. Whenever someone mentions "due process", I am immediately suspicious that they are attempting to apply US law to foreign lands. I've been to several places where "due process" has no bearing at all on local law, and an attempt to apply it would be laughed at - in between beatings. I'm not sure of Israeli law on the matter, and perhaps you can enlighten us as to how it applies.



7.) Denying Gazans basic needs such as medicine, food, water and by tactically and deliberately destroying critical infrastructure etc.


Gazans are not being denied food, medicine, or water. Such supplies as go through proper channels are allowed in, sans weapons. As far as I know, Israel supplies ALL of Gaza's power. In an attempt to strangle, that should be the FIRST thing cut off. Sort of makes the argument unsustainable.



8.) Harassing the(civilian) relief-vessels that are trying loosen the stranglehold that Israel has on Gaza by attacking them in international waters while having absolutely no authority to do so.


First, "civilian vessels" cease to become "civilian" when they commit to an act of war - i.e. blockade running. They are NOT trying to "loosen" any sort of strangle hold, or else they would submit the supplies in question through proper channels, so that they would actually reach their destination. They are committing acts of provocation, staging incidents, and nothing more. One can determine their intent by observing their actions pursuant to their goals.

ANY nation enforcing a blockade can intercept ANY WHERE between ports, and that includes "international" waters. Israel absolutely DOES have authority in the matter.

The entire argument there is spurious, has no basis in fact or law, is constructed entirely of emotional appeals, and appears completely intended to provoke a reaction, rather than approach a finding of fact.

Just like these "aid" flotillas.



I can go on....


As can I. I'm ready whenever you are.



If you would open your eyes, remove the bias to get your ass into neutral-mode and look at the facts, your conclusion WILL BE that Israel is committing nothing short of genocide and has been doing so for decades.


One could apply the same appeals to objectivity to your entire argument, but I'm pretty sure they would fall on deaf ears. The agenda you pursue is detailed above, along with counter arguments which are actually based in the facts you claim to want.




posted on May, 17 2011 @ 06:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by buster2010

Israel has not declared war so the blockade is illegal. But the attacks from Hamas will most likely happen until Israel gives back all the land it has stolen.


No formal "Declaration of War" is required. This avenue has already been explored at ATS, and frankly I see the fact that some people still cite a non-existent "law" as nothing short of an emotional appeal, entirely devoid of a factual basis. I can only conclude that they already know that, and are hoping against hope that no one else does.

Hamas controls GAZA. They have no dog in the fight for the West Bank - that's on Fatah. Israel has not stolen any land from Gaza or Hamas. Quite the contrary, they GAVE Gaza TO Hamas.



posted on May, 17 2011 @ 06:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by randomname
when it comes to israel the united states won't defend it's own citizens. i believe that they can sink a private american vessel in international waters carrying relief, kill 9 amercian citizens and the united states won't even issue a condemnation.


Nor should they. When you determine to run a blockade, you know the chances you take. Just ask any smuggler. I don't believe the US is in the habit of defending citizens who violate international law.



posted on May, 17 2011 @ 06:53 PM
link   
What in the world is all this ILLEGAL blockade trash you people keep throwing around?!?! Who's leagallity is this based on, the Untied Nations?


Maybe the muslims are the ones saying its illegal.


What weak pansy excuses I am hearing in defense for the weapon ships in bound for Gaza, WHICH belongs to Israel since Egypt attacked Israel in 1967 and got wooped. Thus the WHOLE Sinai peninsula was Israel's until they caved to international pressure and gave the land back to weak Egypt.

No one knows there history...at all. Sad.



posted on May, 17 2011 @ 06:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by nenothtu


Hamas controls GAZA. They have no dog in the fight for the West Bank - that's on Fatah. Israel has not stolen any land from Gaza or Hamas. Quite the contrary, they GAVE Gaza TO Hamas.




Thank God someone knows their history, if only a little.



posted on May, 17 2011 @ 06:58 PM
link   
Destroy the MUSLIMS GOOD!



posted on May, 17 2011 @ 07:00 PM
link   

edit on 17-5-2011 by TheLogicalist because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 17 2011 @ 07:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack

Why should Israel be allowed to get any weapon it asks for and not Palestine??
If you were really serious then you'd disarm BOTH sides,not just one....


You'll need to define what you mean by "Palestine" in order to get a proper contextual response. Do you mean Gaza, which is under discussion here, or the West Bank, which is not? They are two separate entities with two separate governments, neither subsidiary to the other. That alone makes them two separate "nations".

Right now, there IS no "Palestine" to receive weapons. Arguably, the West Bank may have the better claim to the title, but they're not under discussion here. To conflate the two is like saying that the US and Australia are the same country, despite the fact of a physical separation and independent governance, because we have a language and a culture in common.



posted on May, 17 2011 @ 07:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by SpeachM1litant
reply to post by Misterlondon
 


Let's discuss the legality of this attack.



Under the U.N. Convention of the Law of the Sea a coastal state has a "territorial sea" of 12 nautical miles from the coast over which it is sovereign. Ships of other states are allowed "innocent passage" through such waters.

www.reuters.com...

The boat was is international waters, hence it was illegal to enforce the blockade against it.


Negative. The operative phrase there is "innocent passage". Blockade running is not "innocent passage", it is a hostile act, and illegal in itself.



posted on May, 17 2011 @ 07:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack

If Israel has NOT declared war or has not admitted to being the occupying force then they can NOT legally impose a blockade..


There is no requirement for a formal declaration of war, and likewise one blockades hostile ports, not one's OWN ports, which would be the case in the event of an "occupation", so the requirement for "occupation" doesn't stand up to the smell test, either. It makes no sense in any objective analysis.



I can buy land in the US but I'm pretty sure they'd be pissed if the Australian military came with me and secured my borders plus an exclusion zone of land which I didn't own..
As for uninhabited land, again they'd be pissed if I decided to settle parts of Nevada etc..


Au contraire, mon frere! You're welcome to come settle any parts of Nevada you can hold, that aren't otherwise occupied. There's a nice strip of land along the southern border that I'll throw in practically for free, just to sweeten the deal!

To be honest, I don't really even care if you come over and settle New York or California. I won't be visiting you there, but you're still welcome to either one! Come on over - we can be neighbors, and trade barbs and beers over the back fence!



posted on May, 17 2011 @ 07:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by DONTBEIGNORANT

why is Israel the only nation that does not have to sign the nuclear proliferation act with the UN but we all know they are nuclear armed?



Because NO nation HAS to sign ANY treaty to which they don't want to be a party or bound by. That's like saying that you HAVE to sign a contract with the power company whether you want their services or not. You can always fire up your own generator, and they've got no say in the matter, nor does anyone else who DID elect to sign a treaty with the power company.



posted on May, 17 2011 @ 07:59 PM
link   
reply to post by dubiousone
 


I'm "heartless", too, but savvy enough to know that if I pit my one-and-only frail body against a bulldozer, that several thousand pound steel bulldozer is gonna win. The gene pool could probably do with a few less imbeciles who think otherwise, so Darwin award it is!



posted on May, 17 2011 @ 08:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by HighMaintenance
Well I don't think the Irish government is going to be doing much about it (MV Rachel Corrie is an Irish ship MV Rachel Corrie) as they're far to busy with the royal visit, so good luck to them on that. No news in Ireland about this either, it's all Queen this, traffic disruptions that....


First of all...Can you provide a link which says the "MV Rachel Corrie" ship was engineered and manufactured in Ireland, hence making it an Irish vessel? Because according to wikipidea; Rachel corrie was an american citizen (Born in Washington). So why would a ship be built by Ireland in her name??? :p: Edit: linke provided already, but didn't work for me.

Well what do you expect them (us the Iish) to do about it? This is NONE of OUR business. As some people have already said, it was on "International" waters...So:

A) whcich "International" waters did ths occur on?

And B) Who gives Israel the right to open fire on waters that aren't thiers?

I think this is a sad and pathetic, petty attack from the Israelis on innocent palestinian ships. Don't get me wrong, like I said, This is NONE of OUR business, but I can't help but relate to the palestinians.

PS: I am supporter of the land of Israel; as it WAS thier land in the first place, IE, The land of Zion.

I have VERY conflicting views on this topic and world! Is it a wonder why?

FFS why can't we all live in peace? Where's that One World Government when you need it?
edit on 17-5-2011 by Chipkin9 because: (no reason given)

edit on 17-5-2011 by Chipkin9 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 17 2011 @ 08:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by nenothtu

Originally posted by DONTBEIGNORANT

why is Israel the only nation that does not have to sign the nuclear proliferation act with the UN but we all know they are nuclear armed?



Because NO nation HAS to sign ANY treaty to which they don't want to be a party or bound by. That's like saying that you HAVE to sign a contract with the power company whether you want their services or not. You can always fire up your own generator, and they've got no say in the matter, nor does anyone else who DID elect to sign a treaty with the power company.



But if you don't comply, sanctions will be placed on your head (Country). Like Iran and North Korea. So what I think the guy you replied to means is, Why is it ok for Israel and the US to have nuclear weapons in thier possession, without facing any sanctions?

Is it a "Do as I say, and not what I do, thing"?



posted on May, 17 2011 @ 08:29 PM
link   
reply to post by srsen
 


May they share the same fate as the real rachel corrie.

sink baby sink.



posted on May, 17 2011 @ 08:36 PM
link   
For all of you "RC" people.

Look who the players are that are involved in this.

Whadya know? Many are also with the "peaceful" revolution in Egypt.

commies and nut job islamists.


The darkly funny part is, we are having our troops HELP the same folks that are trying to kill them in other places.

Go figure.

Hmmm. Kinda like when we were bombing Kosovo. helping the muzzies take over.

One should always be careful whom they allow to their bed. They may not wake up one morning. If they do, they may not like what was left with them.



posted on May, 17 2011 @ 08:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Chipkin9

Originally posted by HighMaintenance
Well I don't think the Irish government is going to be doing much about it (MV Rachel Corrie is an Irish ship MV Rachel Corrie) as they're far to busy with the royal visit, so good luck to them on that. No news in Ireland about this either, it's all Queen this, traffic disruptions that....


First of all...Can you provide a link which says the "MV Rachel Corrie" ship was engineered and manufactured in Ireland, hence making it an Irish vessel? Because according to wikipidea; Rachel corrie was an american citizen (Born in Washington). So why would a ship be built by Ireland in her name??? :p: Edit: linke provided already, but didn't work for me.


The "MV Rachel Corrie" is an Irish-registered vessel that was part of the flotilla last year. The "Spirit of Rachel Corrie" is actually a Malaysian-registered vessel that was previously known as the "MV Finch" and so now it can be seen that we are talking about two completely different boats. American citizen with an Irish ship and a Malaysian ship named after her, why? She was an activist.


A) which "International" waters did ths occur on?

And B) Who gives Israel the right to open fire on waters that aren't thiers?


Well, person who doesn't know how to research naval law, the "international" waters in question is the Mediterranean which does allow safe passage of ships carrying humanitarian aid. However this matter is complicated by the fact that the ship's government would have to send an escort military vessel guaranteeing the absence of contraband on board the aid ship. The ship claiming to carry humanitarian aid can only breach a blockade legally by consenting to search and inspection of the ship's cargo by one of the belligerent sides. Since the ship clearly did not heed the request to an inspection or visit, the Israeli navy had the legal prerogative to use military action.



posted on May, 17 2011 @ 09:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Blackmarketeer
 


I know that many here believe that Israel has stolen land yada yada yada,. I you would only take time to look at the 6 day war and the Yon Kipper war you will see that the land was taken in an armed conflict just like we took the southwest US in a war with Mexico. Except we ended up buying the land. So all this BS about stolen land land is just that BS. Study history and what has happened to Israel and how they have had to fight every day from being wiped out by the Arabs in that area is remarkable. Read the agreement that have been forced on Israel and se e how the other side has broken everyone of the agreements. By all right Israel took the Gaza strip from Egypt in 67 and have given it back to a point by peace accords which has not brought Her any peace at all with daily shelling from that area.



posted on May, 17 2011 @ 09:15 PM
link   
With so many others making great points here I'm not sure I will be adding much, if anything. But the reality is that Israel has good reasons to blockade the ships. They are trying to stop things from getting into Gaza that can be used as weapons or can be used to attack Israel. It is real sad that even concrete can be used. They block that because it is being used to make tunnels into Israel. If the people in Gaza would not use terror as a weapon Israel would not care what they get in shipping. The issues in the region are so complex. In reality about every other person in the Mid East consider the Palestinians as second class citizens. If they where not a thorn in the side of Israel then they would be kicked by the rest of the other nations in the area.



posted on May, 17 2011 @ 09:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Chipkin9

But if you don't comply, sanctions will be placed on your head (Country). Like Iran and North Korea. So what I think the guy you replied to means is, Why is it ok for Israel and the US to have nuclear weapons in thier possession, without facing any sanctions?

Is it a "Do as I say, and not what I do, thing"?


Negative. Sanctions are for nations that breach an agreement they made. Iran and North Korea are signatories (although NK has since tried to back out), so a breach by them will result in sanctions, as has happened. India, Israel, and Pakistan are not signatories of the NPT, and North Korea has withdrawn from it, after signing it originally.

Israel is NOT a signatory, never was, and so not subject to punitive measures to force them to comply with an agreement they never agreed to. as with my power company contract analogy, you cannot be forced by the power company to comply with a contract that you don't have with them, and have not contracted to.

The US IS a signatory of the NPT, and I believe they are in compliance with the terms of it, although I'm open to being shown where they are not. The terms do not include an absence of pre-existing nukes, but rather the regulation of them, and creation of new ones by countries that were not previously in possession.

It's not a "do as I say, not as I do" proposition, it's a "live up to agreements you've made" proposition.



new topics

top topics



 
55
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join