I think the Hamas offer was a 10 year cease fire for 1967 borders.
I don’t think that is their sole intent. much like getting cheap salt was gandhi’s sole intent.
What other groups?
Hamas was elected due to Fatah corruption, but I understand that the people are not happy with Hamas because they have confiscated their properties to erect military installations.
As to the teenager shot five times at close range, I’d empty my gun, too, at somebody trying to stab me.
HEAVY WEAPONS FOUND IN THE CARGO OF THE M/S. MAVI MARMARA FLOTILLA VESSEL.
This video shows that during the unloading of the Marmara boat in the port
of Ashdod, behind the bags of flour were boxes of heavy weapons and
ammunition: mortars, artillery shells, bazookas, without counting a trunk
where more than one million euros was found intended for Hamas. Clearly the Turkish AKP Islamist government is complicit in permitting this military cargo to be loaded on the ‘peaceful’ Free Gaza Flotilla. The French explains that the arms on display were hidden behind sacks of grain.
Have patience with this video. First there is a commercial for Pantene! But
wait until it’s over. <http://www.flix.co.il/tapuz/showVideo.asp?m=3423928>
<http://www.flix.co.il/tapuz/showVideo.asp?m=3423928>
In addition to hiding weapons meant to kill Israel civilians, the
“humanitarian aid” workers viciously attacked Israeli soldiers. Below, a
first hand account from Amir, an Israeli soldier who was there.
"Hello Uncle Erwin,
This is Amir writing you after reading what you sent to my father, Eitan. As
you know, it was my unit and my friends who were on the ship. My commander
was injured badly as a result of the “pacifists” violence. I want to tell
you how he was injured so you could tell the story. it shows just how
horrible and inhuman were the activists. My commander was the first soldier
that rappelled down from the helicopter to the ship. When he touched ground,
he got hit in the head with a pole and stabbed in the stomach with a knife.
When he drew out his secondary weapon-a handgun (his primary weapon was a
regular paintball gun: “Tippman 98 custom”) he was shot in the leg. He
managed to fire a single shot before he was tossed from the balcony by 4
Arab activists, to the lower deck (a 12 feet fall). He was then dragged by
other activists to a room in the lower deck were he was stripped down by 2
activists. They took off his vest, helmet and shirt, leaving him with only
his pants and shoes on. When they finished they took a knife and expanded
the wound he already had in his stomach. They cut his ab muscles
horizontally and by hand spilled his guts out. When they finished they
raised him up and walked him on the deck outside. He was conscious the whole
time. If you are asking yourself why they did all that, here comes the
reason. They wanted to show the soldiers their commander’s body so they will
be demoralized and scared. Luckily, when they walked him on the deck a
soldier saw him and managed to shoot the activist that was walking him down
the outside corridor. He shot him with a special non-lethal bullet that
didn’t kill him. My commander managed to jump from the deck to the water and
swim to an army rescue boat (his guts still out of his body, and now in
salty sea water). That was how he was saved. The activists that did this to
him are alive, now in Turkey, and treated as heroes.
I’m sorry if I described this with too many details, but I thought it was
necessary for the credibility. Please tell this story to anyone who will
listen. I think that these days you are one of Israel’s best spokesman.
Thanks uncle Erwin, Shabbat shalom!
Amir
It appears that the Reuters news agency may have deliberately cropped the Hurriyet
photo so as to remove the knife that the “peace activist” was holding.
If so, it wouldn’t be the first time Reuters had been caught altering photos
to make them less sympathetic to Israel. Reuters did so, for example, in the
2006 Hizbullah-Israel war.
See Reuters and AP photos from today here:
<Did Reuters Crop a Photo to Remove a Peace Activist's Weapon? - Little Green Footballs;
The Washington Post editorial:
My prior links didn’t work. Try these:
As to terrorists abroad, click on this link:
I wish people would get their facts straight :rolleyes:
Time after time the leaders of Hamas have offered a 10 YEAR hudna. It is NOT a few months. Each ceasefire which was agreed by Hamas was broken by Israel. The last one 6 months before the last Gaza War in 08/09 was broken by IDF attacks on Gaza.
In Islam a 10 year hudna is all a Muslim is allowed to offer to a non Muslim aggressor, BUT it can be renewed.
We don’t want a hudna, we want peace - real peace between nations. If they are unwilling to even consider the possibility, why bother talking to them?
Try telling your leaders that, if they’ll listen. Israel wants peace on her terms, or not at all.
I’d like to ask why this comment is not tolerated.
Because I am totally confused why this would get a warning.
I am being serious here. I have no idea why?
I am genuinely mystified by this.
IDF admits it ‘doctored’ video.
This is the one Mark Regev said on various interviews here showed the Marmara terrorists shouting anti Israel slogans and even went as far as telling the viewers to go and watch it.
Clearly lying until they could sustain the deception no longer.
Sickening!
An article by Aron Heller of the AP in today’s local paper stated that Netanyahu’s office released a statement saying he discussed the international criticism with world leaders, including Veep Joe Biden, the president of France, and the premier of Canada. Released videos showed a crowd of men attacking several naval commandos as they landed on a ship from a helicopter, beating the soldiers with clubs and other objects and hurling one soldier overboard. The military displayed pictures of knives, slingshos and metal rods confiscated from the “activists,” and video seized from security cameras - and reporters - on board the ship show a group of young men brandishing clubs and other weapons ahead of the arrival of the soldiers. The use of video confiscate from journalists drew sharp criticism from the Foreign Press Association in Israel, which demanded the military stop using the footage.
On Sunay, the Turkish daily Hurriyet showed new pictures taken by unidentified people of wounded Israeli commandos, including some with bloodied faces.
PM him or start a thread in ATMB…that’s what that forum is for. I’d take the PM route, personally, that way it’s not part of a public discussion and will avoid any embarrassment…
-XT
See this post from early in this thread:
I’ve asked tomndebb if he agrees the post deserved a warning. But my reading was the comparison was inflammatory, and frankly ridiculous and not applicable to the situation: seeing as how Hitler was dead after the war, he wasn’t making any demands about investigations into the SS. You could have made a point about the conflicts of interest in Israel investigating itself without dragging the Nazis into it as an out-of-place slam on the country.
Like xtisme said, if you have other questions send me a private message or start a thread in the About This Message Board forum. Please don’t expect me to reply further until I’ve talked with tomndebb.
Yediot Ahronot’s senior military analyst, Alex Fishman provided the
following Q&A relating to the commando operation that
took over the Mavi Marmara.
Q: Why weren’t chains or ropes used to jam the propellers of the ship?
A: It wouldn’t work. Any method that requires sending frogmen near
propellers that are running is unacceptably dangerous.
Q: Why were ships simply placed to block the boat?
A: A boat can’t block another ship. The only way a ship can effectively
stop another one is by ramming it.
Q: Why not ram the boat?
A: You need to hit it with a heavier ship. The Mavi Mamara might have sunk
if hit.
Q: Why not wait until the boat is within the 20 miles of Gaza so not in
international waters?
A: A contingent of (AL: according to the Palestinian news agency Maan 100
vessels) vessels were going to try to reach the boat if it reached the
area – including boats that could have been loaded with explosives that
would blow up near Israeli boats.
For Immediate Release
IDF Spokesperson June 6th, 2010
21:30
Specific Flotilla Passengers are Active terror Operatives linked to
Al-Qaeda, Hamas, and other Organizations
The following passengers on board the Mavi Marmara are known to be involved
in terrorist activity. The Mavi Marmara attempted to break the maritime
closure on the Gaza Strip on Monday, May 31st 2010, and was boarded by
Israel Navy forces.
Fatimah Mahmadi (born 1979), is a United States resident of Iranian origin,
and an active member of the organization “Viva Palestine”, she attempted to
smuggle forbidden electronic components into the Gaza Strip.
Ken O’Keefe (Born 1969), an American and British citizen, is a radical
anti-Israel activist and operative of the Hamas Terror organization. He
attempted to enter the Gaza Strip in order to form and train a commando unit
for the Palestinian terror organization.
Hassan Iynasi (born 1982), a Turkish citizen and activist in a Turkish
charity organization, is known of providing financial support to the
Palestinian Islamic Jihad Terror organization.
Hussein Urosh, a Turkish citizen and activist in the IHH organization, was
on his way to the Gaza Strip in order to assist in smuggling Al-Qaeda
operatives via Turkey into the Strip.
Ahmad Umimon (born 1959), is a French citizen of Moroccan origin, and an
operative of the Hamas Terrorist organization.
From: imra@netvision.net.il
To: imra@imra.org.il
Subject: Israel obeyed international law: Legally,
the Gaza flotilla conflict is an open-and-shut case
Israel obeyed international law: Legally, the Gaza flotilla conflict is an
open-and-shut case
By Alan Dershowitz Wednesday, June 2nd 2010, 4:00 AM
www.nydailynews.com/opinions/2010/06/02/2010-06-02_israel_obeyed_international_law_legally_the_gaza_flotilla_conflict_is_an_openand.html#ixzz0pnmBy88E
Although the wisdom of Israel’s actions in stopping the Gaza flotilla is
open to question, the legality of its actions is not. What Israel did was
entirely consistent with both international and domestic law. In order to
understand why, the complex events at sea must be deconstructed.
First, there is the Israeli blockade of Gaza. Recall that when Israel ended
its occupation of Gaza, it did not impose a blockade. Indeed, it left behind
agricultural facilities in the hope that the newly liberated Gaza Strip
would become a peaceful and productive area.
Instead, Hamas seized control over Gaza and engaged in acts of warfare
against Israel. These acts of warfare featured anti-personnel rockets,
nearly 10,000 of them, directed at Israeli civilians. This was not only an
act of warfare, it was a war crime. Israel responded to the rockets by
declaring a blockade, the purpose of which was to assure that no rockets or
other material that could be used for making war against Israeli civilians
were permitted into Gaza.
Israel allowed humanitarian aid through its checkpoints. Egypt as well
participated in the blockade. There was never a humanitarian crisis in Gaza,
merely a shortage of certain goods that would end if the rocket attacks
ended.
The legality of blockades as a response to acts of war is not subject to
serious doubt. When the United States blockaded Cuba during the missile
crisis, the State Department issued an opinion declaring the blockade to be
lawful. This despite the fact that Cuba had not engaged in any act of
belligerence against the United States. Other nations have similarly
enforced naval blockades to assure their own security.
The second issue is whether it is lawful to enforce a legal blockade in
international waters. Again, law and practice are clear. If there is no
doubt that the offending ships have made a firm determination to break the
blockade, then the blockade may be enforced before the offending ships cross
the line into domestic waters. Again the United States and other Western
countries have frequently boarded ships at high sea in order to assure their
security.
Third, were those onboard the ship simply innocent noncombatants? The act of
breaking a military siege is itself a military act. And let there be no
mistake about the purpose of this flotilla; it was decidedly not to provide
humanitarian aid to the residents of Gaza, but rather to break the entirely
lawful Israeli military blockade. The proof lies in the fact that both
Israel and Egypt offered to have all the food, medicine and other
humanitarian goods sent to Gaza, if the boats agreed to land in an Israeli
or Egyptian port. That humanitarian offer was soundly rejected by the
leaders of the flotilla, who publicly announced: “This mission is not about
delivering humanitarian supplies, it’s about breaking Israel’s siege on 1.5
million Palestinians.”
It is a close question whether “civilians” who agree to participate in the
breaking of a military blockade have become combatants. They are certainly
something different from pure innocents, and perhaps they are also somewhat
different from pure armed combatants.
Finally, we come to the issue of the right of self-defense engaged in by
Israeli soldiers who were attacked by activists on the boat. There can be
little doubt that the moment any person on the boat picked up a weapon and
began to attack Israeli soldiers, they lost their status as innocent
civilians.
Even if that were not the case, under ordinary civilian rules of
self-defense, every Israeli soldier had the right to protect himself and his
colleagues from attack by knife- and pipe-wielding assailants. Lest there be
any doubt that Israeli soldiers were under attack, simply view the online
video and watch the so-called peaceful activists pummel Israeli soldiers
with metal rods.
Every individual has the right to repel such attacks by the use of lethal
force. That was especially true in this case, when the soldiers were so
outnumbered on the deck of the ship. Recall that Israel’s rules of
engagement required its soldiers to fire only paintballs unless their lives
were in danger.
Would any country in the world deny its soldiers the right of self-defense
under comparable circumstances?
Israel’s critics fail to pinpoint precisely what Israel did that allegedly
violates international law. Some have wrongly focused on the blockade
itself. Others have erroneously pointed to the location of the boarding in
international waters. Most have simply pointed to the deaths of so-called
peace activists, though these deaths appear to be the result of lawful acts
of self-defense.
There can be little doubt that the mission was a failure, as judged by its
results. It is important, however, to distinguish between faulty policies
and alleged violations of international law. Only the latter would warrant
international intervention, and the case has simply not been made that
Israel violated international law.
Not according to your own cite.
Hang on when did Hitler die?
I thought that there was no proof? Am I wrong?
Wasn’t there plenty stories about him escaping.
So if they had caught him, after the war he could have insisted because he was clearly mad, that he be allowed to investigate himself, the SS, his policies. If he did not die then that was a possibility. As I said I am not aware of his date of death or grave.
Would the Jews in Auchwitz have been happy with that investigation?
Would the rest of the world? The allies?
I doubt it just as no one would accept North Korea’s findings in the torpedo incident if they were allowed to investigate themselves.
I was demonstrating how lucicrous it would be.
If you insist Hitler died then there is no use me arguing that with you. Please delete the post in that case.
Sometimes you have to accept that peoples minds work in different ways, grammar gets jumbled, and language can often be misunderstood especially when the language is not a mother tongue.
April 30, 1945. Yes, there’s plenty of proof, including numerous other people in the bunker who heard him shoot himself and a few who helped burn his body and the body of Eva Braun. (He also poisoned himself with cyande. He’d had a capsule tested on his dog.) Everybody down there with him knew what he was going to do. He’d married Eva the day before and I think he’d updated his will. The Russians later found the bodies, burned them again, and I think they dumped them in a river nearby. Not all of this was known at the time, and there were a lot of rumors he escaped and wound up in South America, where a bunch of other Nazis really did go. Some of those rumors survive because it’s hard to kill a rumor and people love a good story. But at this point it’s been established very thoroughly that he killed himself in the bunker so the Soviets wouldn’t get their hands on him. Wikipedia has a lengthy summary.
I did not think this was going to be an issue in this thread. 
All of that having been said, I understand what you’re saying about a conflict of interest in the investigation. It’s an obvious objection and it’s a reasonable one. It just doesn’t have anything to do with Nazis.
Cut him some slack. Godwin’s Law is unknown in the Arab world.
What’s Plan B? Wipe them out? Leave no male children to grow and seek vengeance? That’s the Old School way, after all.
If Israel had lost, say, the Six Day War, would you expect Israelis just to roll over and play dead, lick the hand of their enemies, convert to Islam, what? So what do you expect the Palestinians to do?
I’m not offering you something easy, I’m offering you something hard, frustrating, and difficult. I’m suggesting that you offer the hand of peace, have it slapped aside, and offer it again. I’m suggesting that you take a blow, and do not return it, because sooner or later, somebody has to, somebody has to take the last blow.
And I think only Israel can do that, I think only Israel is civilized, powerful and intelligent enough to do what must be done. The alternative is that all the rest of the civilzed world remains at risk until peace can be found. Remember Bismarck’s famous remark, that WWI would start over “some damn fool thing in the Balkans”. Some damn fool thing in the Middle East may kill millions of innocent people. Tomorrow. The day after.
Work for peace, and be prepared for the worst. They will call you coward, they will call you traitor, friends will turn away, ashamed of you. And your enemies will not think any the better of you, they will see you as weak, see you as an opportunity. Beat the drums of war, and they will rush to your side, and cheer you. Preach peace, and they will scorn you. But which is the path of the righteous man?
But there is a Palestinian man who’s heart hungers for peace as yours. Reach out to him. Embrace him, he is your brother. Bind his wounds, care for his children as if they were your own.
Is that easy for me to say, ten thousand miles away? Yes. I am not an Israeli, I am not a Palestinian. I can only speak the truth, as feeble as that is, and hope for the best.
But what is Plan B, if not this?