Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Israel Navy Attacks International Boat in Gaza

page: 1
80
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
+57 more 
posted on Jul, 15 2011 @ 10:35 AM
link   

Israel Navy Attacks International Boat in Gaza


www.turkishweekly.net

Israeli naval forces attacked an international third party monitor on Wednesday in Gazan territorial waters.

Civil Peace Service Gaza works as part of a non-violent initiative to monitor human rights abuses in Gaza.

Israeli forces fired at the CPS Gaza monitoring boat, the Oliva, with water cannons on Wednesday at 12.05 p.m local time, a statement by the organization said.
(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
www.salem-news.com




posted on Jul, 15 2011 @ 10:35 AM
link   
Not much in about this yet but thought I should post it to let everyone know. The second link I provided leads to a news site that claims there were 2 Americans on board.

Not only are they attacking fishermen and activists who provide aid, but now they are also attacking international monitors. Israeli warplanes have also been bombing Gaza over the last few days. I wonder if it is a sign that Israel plans on escalating matters in the region. We shall see...

www.turkishweekly.net
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Jul, 15 2011 @ 10:39 AM
link   
Perhaps it's time for anew distraction which serves the immediate political needs of the masters of public sentiment.

I hope no one was hurt, but I can only assume no one is calling 'water cannons' lethal force.



posted on Jul, 15 2011 @ 10:45 AM
link   
God help Gaza. Gaza is the ultimate modern example of oppression of a people by a government, and its terrifying.

"Gaza strip was gettin bombed, Obama didn't say poo. Thats why didn't vote for him, next one either" Lupe
edit on 7/15/2011 by Mirthful Me because: Censor circumvention.



posted on Jul, 15 2011 @ 10:48 AM
link   
Its the equvilant of a global pillow fight. Water Cannons? Sounds like they were NOT attempting to cause bodily harm but rather drive them away.



posted on Jul, 15 2011 @ 10:52 AM
link   
Water cannons?

Someone, quick, get a sample of that water!


Seriously, this is encouraging news if true, the Israelis are bowing to international pressure and using non-lethal force, seem they have finally realized that the world will not sit by and watch as they murder people arbitrarily anymore.




posted on Jul, 15 2011 @ 10:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by DerbyCityLights
Its the equvilant of a global pillow fight. Water Cannons? Sounds like they were NOT attempting to cause bodily harm but rather drive them away.

At least this time, I guess they got to much bad press when they just opened fire on the innocent civilians trying to give humanitarian aid. But just because they chose a non-lethal method doesnt mean its OK, that aid could have saved lives. This topic makes me cringe.



posted on Jul, 15 2011 @ 10:54 AM
link   
Yet the united states is still butt buddies with Israel and the MSM will never report this, cuz Israel is on our side ya know?



posted on Jul, 15 2011 @ 10:58 AM
link   
reply to post by DerbyCityLights
 


I understand the point you are trying to make, but regardless of the severity of force used it is Gazan territorial waters. They had no business harassing those ships. Have you ever been on a boat that is getting sprayed with a water cannon on the ocean? I doubt it is a pleasant experience. LOL what is wrong with some of you people!



posted on Jul, 15 2011 @ 11:20 AM
link   
Only fools without an understanding of history will think that the state of Israel will last forever.

The modern day state of Israel will run its course, like any other regime recorded in human history.



posted on Jul, 15 2011 @ 11:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by DerbyCityLights
Its the equvilant of a global pillow fight. Water Cannons? Sounds like they were NOT attempting to cause bodily harm but rather drive them away.


Someone has never been shot by a high powered water cannon.... Stuff will rip your skin right off if you're close enough. Otherwise it'll send you tumbling like a pebble in the wind. Broken bones anyone?
edit on 15-7-2011 by BiGGz because: it-if



posted on Jul, 15 2011 @ 12:30 PM
link   
If those vessels are trying to penetrate a legal blockade, Israel is within her rights to sink those vessels and take any survivors into custody.



posted on Jul, 15 2011 @ 12:39 PM
link   
reply to post by sonofliberty1776
 


It's a known fact that the blockade is illegal. Not that I put much weight in the U.N., but even a U.N. Committee has deemed the blockade of Gaza illegal. Many other countries openly announce their disagreement with the blockade. What are your thoughts on that?



posted on Jul, 15 2011 @ 12:41 PM
link   
A reliable source recently informed me that all Mossad agents have now been equiped with water pistols. Meanwhile army are hurredly carrying out new training for their latest weapon, the Super soaker Nerf.

www.hasbro.com...



posted on Jul, 15 2011 @ 12:42 PM
link   
reply to post by CREAM
 


And whats wrong with forwarding that aid through the accepted channels?? Ie; send it to the port of Ashdod in Israel, or Al Arish in Egypt, where it will be brought by trucks into the Gaza strip.

Either way they get the aid. Isnt that the important thing? Why provoke Israel for?? Its insulting. Israel doesnt want so called "peace acitivists" to make a mockery of their sovereignty; and by refusing to listen to their warnings to continue to try to breach the bloackade deserves much more in my opinion than a water cannon attack.

Theres a COMPLETELY valid and logical reason for why the blockade exists. Hamas is a terrorist organization elected by the people of Gaza - to essentially kill Israelis. To counter this organization and its amoral tactics, Israel has enforced a maritime blockade which prevents them from getting their much desired weapons/ammunition from overseas.

Its completely logical. For some sick reason, liberals dont give a #. Its better that Hamas get their weapons/ammunition, kill Israelis, and then blame Israel for their "disproportionate' response.

I say # the international community,. They clearly dont have Israel/Jewish interests in mind.
edit on 15-7-2011 by dontreally because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 15 2011 @ 12:43 PM
link   
reply to post by HologramDenier
 


lol



posted on Jul, 15 2011 @ 12:44 PM
link   
reply to post by sk0rpi0n
 


Or a better way to phrase it would be that the Jews will once again be forced to leave the area they've been associated with for over 2000 years by brutal regimes while others swoop in behind and claim the land as their own.
edit on 15-7-2011 by kro32 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 15 2011 @ 12:53 PM
link   
reply to post by kro32
 


LOL hologram!

Come on guys, please try to keep it on topic.



posted on Jul, 15 2011 @ 01:00 PM
link   
The blockade is completely legal since Israel is in an armed conflict with Hamas which is the governing body of Gaza. Imposed economic hardship on civilian populations is not a singular occurrence in the world today. Witness, for example, the economic difficulties for civilian populations as the result of sanctions that have been imposed on other problematic regimes, such as those in North Korea, Syria, Cuba, and Iraq as a means of applying economic pressure on them and during the course of which typically goods that are not vital are not transferred to the countries, including obviously items that would help them militarily. A naval blockade implementing sanctions in fact is a recognized and accepted military tool. For example, a blockade called Operation Sharp Guard was imposed for three years in the mid-1990's by NATO and Western European Union naval forces on the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, during which they queried some 74,000 vessels and boarded and inspected at sea about 6,000 of them, while directing for inspection to port more than 1,400 ships. Coalition naval forces engaged in the maritime interception operation to enforce the Iraq embargo had by the year 2000 challenged almost 30,000 merchant vessels, boarded about 13,000 ships, and directed to coalition ports for further investigation some 750. A blockade, designated as a "quarantine" was also imposed in 1962 by the United States against Cuba, and during the first year of the mid-twentieth century Algerian crisis French naval vessels on the high seas visited and searched almost 5,000 ships that were suspected of transporting war materiel to Algeria. Allied Powers imposed blockades against Axis and Central powers during the two World Wars as well. During World War One, British naval vessels, for instance, were credited with intercepting and detaining thousands of merchant ships suspected of transporting cargo bound for the enemy, and the Allied naval blockade of Germany was widely considered to have been responsible for the deaths due to starvation of around three-quarters of a million German civilians.
The actions of the Israel navy against the flotilla on the high seas were conducted pursuant to long-standing principles of the law of armed conflict at sea. These principles allow Israel to impose on the high seas a naval blockade of territory controlled by the enemy in order to prevent the entrance of ships, without regard to the type of cargo that the ships are carrying, to prohibit commerce with the enemy, even if the cargo is bound for civilians, and to search on the high seas for contraband which consists of goods destined for enemy controlled territory and that "may be susceptible for use in armed conflict." Flotilla vessels therefore could be visited and searched on the high seas if they were reasonably suspected of breaching or attempting to breach the blockade or of carrying contraband, but they could also be visited and searched on the high seas if they were reasonably suspected of violating regulations set up by Israel within the immediate naval operations area or of engaging in belligerent acts on the enemy's behalf or of making an effective contribution to the military action of the enemy; Israel could exercise control on the high seas over flotilla vessels located in the immediate vicinity of naval operations and ships that did not comply with orders given them by Israel in this regard could be presumed to have hostile intent or enemy character and therefore could be treated as if they were enemy ships; flotilla vessels that were reasonably believed to be breaching or that were attempting to breach the blockade or that were carrying contraband, or that were violating regulations established by Israel within the immediate naval operations area or that were engaged in belligerent acts on the enemy's behalf or that were making an effective contribution to the military action of the enemy, could be captured on the high seas; and flotilla vessels could be attacked on the high seas, like military objectives, if they engaged in belligerent acts on the enemy's behalf or made an effective contribution to the military action of the enemy, or if they were reasonably believed to be breaching the blockade or to be carrying contraband, after they had been given prior warning and when they clearly and intentionally refused to stop or resisted visit, search or capture.

According to the laws of armed conflict at sea:

The following activities may render merchant vessels military objectives:

(a) engaging in belligerent acts on behalf of the enemy, e.g., laying mines, minesweeping, cutting undersea cables and pipelines, engaging in visit and search of neutral merchant vessels or attacking other merchant vessels;

(b) acting as an auxiliary to an enemy's armed forces, e.g., carrying troops or replenishing warships;

(c) being incorporated into or assisting the enemy's intelligence gathering system, e.g., engaging in reconnaissance, early warning, surveillance, or command, control and communications missions;

(d) sailing under convoy of enemy warships or military aircraft;

(e) refusing an order to stop or actively resisting visit, search or capture;

(f) being armed to an extent that they could inflict damage to a warship; this excludes light individual weapons for the defense of personnel, e.g., against pirates, and purely deflective systems such as chaff; or

(g) otherwise making an effective contribution to military action, e.g., carrying military materials.

Thus, you can see that the aid flotilla must either allow inspection and/or diversion or may be treated as an enemy vessel.



posted on Jul, 15 2011 @ 01:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by CREAM

Originally posted by DerbyCityLights
Its the equvilant of a global pillow fight. Water Cannons? Sounds like they were NOT attempting to cause bodily harm but rather drive them away.

At least this time, I guess they got to much bad press when they just opened fire on the innocent civilians trying to give humanitarian aid. But just because they chose a non-lethal method doesnt mean its OK, that aid could have saved lives. This topic makes me cringe.


It's akin to a LEO tasering someone repeatedly while handcuffed. Just my two cents.






top topics



 
80
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join