Civilian Aid Ship Deaths

[BoneDog]

Lumping Israel together with South Africa and Nazis steps way over the rhetorical line.

Hamas, ruling Gaza since a coup in which Fatah fighters were thrown from rooftops, has a charter blaming Jews for starting both World Wars. Moreover, to them, renouncing any part of Palestine means renouncing part of the religion.” No two-state solution here then!! “Peaceful solutions and international conferences, are in contradiction to the principles of the Islamic Resistance Movement…There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad.”

Lumping the regime in Israel in with apartheid or nazis might step over the line in some peoples eyes but to many people they are the same thing judging by the end results.

As for Hamas, England would have groups like them if our families were kicked out of their land and homes 60 years ago and were still being kicked out nowadays. We would still be fighting the people who took our land so it's only natural.

I'm not saying they are right or wrong, they are just an end result of years of war and occupation and it would be the same in any country around the globe if the same situation happens.

[l444ry]

Lumping the regime in Israel in with apartheid or nazis might step over the line in some peoples eyes but to many people they are the same thing judging by the end results.

As for Hamas, England would have groups like them if our families were kicked out of their land and homes 60 years ago and were still being kicked out nowadays. We would still be fighting the people who took our land so it's only natural.

I'm not saying they are right or wrong, they are just an end result of years of war and occupation and it would be the same in any country around the globe if the same situation happens.

The Association between Naziism and Arab Antisemitism.

[BoneDog]

The Association between Naziism and Arab Antisemitism.

There were also many zionist Jews who were helping Hitler too for obvious pre-planned reasons.

Many Palestinians hated that Al Huseini guy cos he was a puppet who did zionist work on occasions. He was responsible for killing many Palestinians who were on the right scent so it is obvious which group he belonged to.

[Thracian]

Playing Devil's advocate here but Israel has not broken any international law.

A maritime blockade is in effect off the coast of Gaza. Such a blockade has been imposed, as Israel is currently in a state of armed conflict with the Hamas regime that controls Gaza, which has repeatedly bombed civilian targets in Israel with weapons that have been smuggled into Gaza via the sea.

The protesters indicated their clear intention to violate the blockade by means of written and oral statements. Moreover, the route of these vessels indicated their clear intention to violate the blockade in violation of international law.

Given the protesters explicit intention to violate the naval blockade, Israel exercised its right under international law to enforce the blockade. Prior to undertaking enforcement measures, explicit warnings were given directly to the captains of the vessels, expressing Israel's intent to exercise its right to enforce the blockade.

Israeli personnel attempting to enforce the blockade were met with violence by the protesters and acted in self-defence to fend off such attacks.

Most people should wait for the dust to settle and the full story of this awful tragedy to emerge. It's almost certain to be less straightforward than the "Israel-murders-harmless-aid-workers" narrative that's currently doing the rounds.

The only considered comment I've read on the subject thus far. Funny how so many of the aid ship passengers seemed to have rmakeshift weapons of various kinds, probably from the time they left port, which would be a premeditated decision. Why would that be if their mission was purely humanitarian? Their action was clearly designed to provoke and that's what happened.

Compared with Tony Blairs's excuse for waging a seriously questionable war in terms of legality this, unfortunate but legal action would doubtless have passed without bloodshed had the aid ship provocateurs responded to warnings instead of creating a situation where they ended up with totally unnecessary bloodshed on their hands and consciences. But the provocateurs have made martyrs and will doubtless play on that for all it's worth with the likely consequence of yet more bloodshed.

As for the apparent glee concerning the gradual isolation of Israel I cannot imagine anything more senseless or dangerous.

[breadandcheese]

OK shall we just say 1 million since 1948 (even though I think it's more)? I don't mean just the people who have been shot or bombed, I'm talking about the people who have died from preventable illness/injuries and other reasons.

From what I can gather UN data says that since 1967 avoidable mortality in the Occupied Palestinian Territories totals 300,000 and the under 5 infant mortality is around 183,000 (of which 90% has been avoidable).

I'm not trying to slander anyone.

You're not trying to slander anyone but you are succesfully doing so.

You cannot just pick a figure out of the air. You don't explain how you got to 2 million killed since 1948, which I've clearly shown is such an exaggeration, that it actually puts a question mark against your credibility in pretty much any discussion relating to politics. So deciding on a figure of 1 million, based on nothing is equally ridiculous and amounts, particularly because it is another exaggeration of epic proportions. To try and justify it as talking about those killed not by Israelis, but those who died from preventable illness and other reasons is extremely weak and lacking.

You don't even say what your source is for your original 2 million dead. In other discussions on politics, you always make a big play about how you research things and always question official sources. Might I suggest that the rearch you do from Press TV, Youtube, etc, is not reliable, as evident from your 2 million figure, now revised down to 1 million (which still equates to approx 16,129 dead palestinians per year. Again, in context, 2008 was an extremely bad year for fatalaties, due to the Gaza War. In this war approx 1,400 palestinians died, which is only 8.7% of the total required per year to reach the 1 million figure. Again, this was a bad year for fatalities).

There's nothing wrong with retracting a statement if you get it wrong/make something up. At the moment, any fact, figure or statement you make, I've got to question your credibility.

[Zingari]

You're not trying to slander anyone but you are succesfully doing so.

You cannot just pick a figure out of the air. You don't explain how you got to 2 million killed since 1948, which I've clearly shown is such an exaggeration, that it actually puts a question mark against your credibility in pretty much any discussion relating to politics. So deciding on a figure of 1 million, based on nothing is equally ridiculous and amounts, particularly because it is another exaggeration of epic proportions. To try and justify it as talking about those killed not by Israelis, but those who died from preventable illness and other reasons is extremely weak and lacking.

You don't even say what your source is for your original 2 million dead. In other discussions on politics, you always make a big play about how you research things and always question official sources. Might I suggest that the rearch you do from Press TV, Youtube, etc, is not reliable, as evident from your 2 million figure, now revised down to 1 million (which still equates to approx 16,129 dead palestinians per year. Again, in context, 2008 was an extremely bad year for fatalaties, due to the Gaza War. In this war approx 1,400 palestinians died, which is only 8.7% of the total required per year to reach the 1 million figure. Again, this was a bad year for fatalities).

There's nothing wrong with retracting a statement if you get it wrong/make something up. At the moment, any fact, figure or statement you make, I've got to question your credibility.

I've really no idea about the amount of deaths of Palestinians in the conflict ( whether direct or indirect ) but the 2 million figure is banded around quite a lot

http://desertpeace.wordpress.com/2008/01/17/the-accidental-holocaust/

[breadandcheese]

I've really no idea about the amount of deaths of Palestinians in the conflict ( whether direct or indirect ) but the 2 million figure is banded around quite a lot

http://desertpeace.wordpress.com/2008/01/17/the-accidental-holocaust/

So we now have a source and it is a website who's credentials of impartiality can be questioned as it is a blog. it cites yahoo as it's source for 2 million for which I've found the link below.

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20070910103032AAzYbHI

So the source is some random person answering a question on yahoo. Hardly reliable, so it is a slanderous figure bandied around.

I think a retraction on 2 million is needed as it is a complete fabrication and overexaggeration.

Taking the Palestinian Centre for Human Rights figures for deaths since 2000 when the second intifada started, you get approx 6,500 killed. Using this as a ten year peiod and projecting this back over 60 years, you get an estimate of approx 40,000 killed. Now this is not an insignificant figure and shows why a two state solution is a necessity, but it's far short of 2 million. Admittedly, this is an estimate, and I have no data to show whether the ten years from 2000-2010 are typical of the years from 1948-2000, but it is the only information I can find to create an estimate.

Figures from Palestinian Centre for Human Rights:

http://www.pchrgaza.org/portal/en/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=3044:statistics-related-to-the-al-aqsa-second-intifada-&catid=55:statistics&Itemid=29

.

[Zingari]

So we now have a source and it is a website who's credentials of impartiality can be questioned as it is a blog. it cites yahoo as it's source for 2 million for which I've found the link below.

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20070910103032AAzYbHI

So the source is some random person answering a question on yahoo. Hardly reliable, so it is a slanderous figure bandied around.

I think a retraction on 2 million is needed as it is a complete fabrication and overexaggeration.

Taking the Palestinian Centre for Human Rights figures for deaths since 2000 when the second intifada started, you get approx 6,500 killed. Using this as a ten year peiod and projecting this back over 60 years, you get an estimate of approx 40,000 killed. Now this is not an insignificant figure and shows why a two state solution is a necessity, but it's far short of 2 million. Admittedly, this is an estimate, and I have no data to show whether the ten years from 2000-2010 are typical of the years from 1948-2000, but it is the only information I can find to create an estimate.

Figures from Palestinian Centre for Human Rights:

http://www.pchrgaza.org/portal/en/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=3044:statistics-related-to-the-al-aqsa-second-intifada-&catid=55:statistics&Itemid=29

.

Yes I agree , and I would probably agree that it is a gross exaggeration , although I really do not know and I doubt if there is any truly reliable source .

But I was just saying that the figure of 1 to 2 million is often used as a guestimate for Palestinian deaths since 1948 . merely so you know that it is not a figure plucked out of the air ( not by El Empty anyway , but very possibly by someone else )

[breadandcheese]

Yes I agree , and I would probably agree that it is a gross exaggeration , although I really do not know and I doubt if there is any truly reliable source .

But I was just saying that the figure of 1 to 2 million is often used as a guestimate for Palestinian deaths since 1948 . merely so you know that it is not a figure plucked out of the air ( not by El Empty anyway , but very possibly by someone else )

I know you don't agree with the number but I think it's more important than ever to challenge the figures given. The fact the figure of 2 million is even spoken about as a possible shows the power of rumours and exaggeration. Hence a retraction of that figure is necessary.

In an issue like this, it's hard enough to establish the true facts, without using figures that are false. However, I think when it comes to death tolls in recent years, there are organisations that can provide reliable figures, like B'tselem (Israeli), Palestinian Human Rights Centre (Palestinian), etc. (The only debate on figures now seems to come as to whether those killed were civilians or terrorists). So you can use these figures to estimate deathtolls stretching back over 60 years (although it should be known they are only estimates based on the death toll from 2000-2010 and projected over the 60 year period, hence approx 40,000 killed).

[Zingari]

I know you don't agree with the number but I think it's more important than ever to challenge the figures given. The fact the figure of 2 million is even spoken about as a possible shows the power of rumours and exaggeration. Hence a retraction of that figure is necessary.

In an issue like this, it's hard enough to establish the true facts, without using figures that are false. However, I think when it comes to death tolls in recent years, there are organisations that can provide reliable figures, like B'tselem (Israeli), Palestinian Human Rights Centre (Palestinian), etc. (The only debate on figures now seems to come as to whether those killed were civilians or terrorists). So you can use these figures to estimate deathtolls stretching back over 60 years (although it should be known they are only estimates based on the death toll from 2000-2010 and projected over the 60 year period, hence approx 40,000 killed).

yes , it's often stated that the first casualty of war is the truth ,

i take your point , but as i said before , i really have not got a clue as to what the actual figures are as any source is bound to be accused of being tendentious .

[BoneDog]

Funny how so many of the aid ship passengers seemed to have rmakeshift weapons of various kinds, probably from the time they left port, which would be a premeditated decision. Why would that be if their mission was purely humanitarian? Their action was clearly designed to provoke and that's what happened.

Compared with Tony Blairs's excuse for waging a seriously questionable war in terms of legality this, unfortunate but legal action would doubtless have passed without bloodshed had the aid ship provocateurs responded to warnings instead of creating a situation where they ended up with totally unnecessary bloodshed on their hands and consciences. But the provocateurs have made martyrs and will doubtless play on that for all it's worth with the likely consequence of yet more bloodshed.

So do we now have suicide humanitarians aswell as suicide bombers?

The didn't have weapons, they had plastic chairs and couple of boxes of axe handles for construction.Sticks basically. I would imagine their were a few kitchen knives on the boat aswell as they had a kitchen. The Israeilis fired on the ship before they boarded and people were shot before they boarded so attacking back would be natural for some people. Do you think that the aid people thought that their sticks would harm commandos with guns and body armour? I don't.

The boats were fully inspected at port before they set sail.

This was a premeditated attack, but not by the aid ship people, by the Israeili government.

One day people in our part of the world might need aid because of military action so I hope that the same doesn't happen to people who would be trying to help us.

[BoneDog]

You're not trying to slander anyone but you are succesfully doing so.

You cannot just pick a figure out of the air. You don't explain how you got to 2 million killed since 1948, which I've clearly shown is such an exaggeration, that it actually puts a question mark against your credibility in pretty much any discussion relating to politics. So deciding on a figure of 1 million, based on nothing is equally ridiculous and amounts, particularly because it is another exaggeration of epic proportions. To try and justify it as talking about those killed not by Israelis, but those who died from preventable illness and other reasons is extremely weak and lacking.

You don't even say what your source is for your original 2 million dead. In other discussions on politics, you always make a big play about how you research things and always question official sources. Might I suggest that the rearch you do from Press TV, Youtube, etc, is not reliable, as evident from your 2 million figure, now revised down to 1 million (which still equates to approx 16,129 dead palestinians per year. Again, in context, 2008 was an extremely bad year for fatalaties, due to the Gaza War. In this war approx 1,400 palestinians died, which is only 8.7% of the total required per year to reach the 1 million figure. Again, this was a bad year for fatalities).

There's nothing wrong with retracting a statement if you get it wrong/make something up. At the moment, any fact, figure or statement you make, I've got to question your credibility.

Who am I slandering when I say that the plight of the Palestinians is as bad as those who suffered under apartheid? It is truth. I suggest you have a read of Noam Chomsky's 'Understanding Power'. I think that parts of that book explain it better than I could.

OK maybe 2 million is an exaggeration. The number is certainly near the 1 million mark if not above. It is very hard to find any figures about this, I've had a good look around with no success. You mention the 1400 killed in the recent war but that is only deaths from bombs and guns. You forget that many more die every day due to withheld medical equipment and medicines. Every year since 1948 thousands have died because of not having the correct medical equipment/medicine in the camps they were sent to.

You say that the people who died from preventable illness/injury were not killed by the state of Israel! They died because of the action of the state, and still are to this day. I could list 100 youngsters who have died recently because of not being allowed treatment . You are the one being slanderous and insensitive if you believe that the blockade is not responsible for their deaths.

These are about the only quotes I could find online:

"Palestinian non-violent excess deaths from food and medical deprivation (Sep 2000- Dec 2008; UNICEF data-derived) = 35, 360"

"Palestinian non-violent excess deaths from food and medical deprivation by Israelis (post-1967) = about 300,000"

"The post 1967 under 5 infant deaths in the Occupied Palestinian Territory total 200,000 (80% avoidable and due to occupier non-provision of life-sustaining requisites unequivocally demanded of occupiers by Articles 55 and 56 of the Geneva Convention Relative to the Protection of Civlian Persons in Time of War. Comparative UNICEF data indicate that 2,400 under 5 year old infants die avoidably each year."

Deaths from direct violence 2000-2008 :

"Israelis killed by Palestinians = 1,176"

"Palestinians killed by Israelis = 4,826"

[Alexikokopops]

OK maybe 2 million is an exaggeration. The number is certainly near the 1 million mark if not above. It is very hard to find any figures about this, I've had a good look around with no success. You mention the 1400 killed in the recent war but that is only deaths from bombs and guns. You forget that many more die every day due to withheld medical equipment and medicines. Every year since 1948 thousands have died because of not having the correct medical equipment/medicine in the camps they were sent to.

So how are you so certain that it's over 1 million when there's absolutely no figures anywhere that come close to backing this up?

[breadandcheese]

Who am I slandering when I say that the plight of the Palestinians is as bad as those who suffered under apartheid? It is truth. I suggest you have a read of Noam Chomsky's 'Understanding Power'. I think that parts of that book explain it better than I could.

OK maybe 2 million is an exaggeration. The number is certainly near the 1 million mark if not above. It is very hard to find any figures about this, I've had a good look around with no success. You mention the 1400 killed in the recent war but that is only deaths from bombs and guns. You forget that many more die every day due to withheld medical equipment and medicines. Every year since 1948 thousands have died because of not having the correct medical equipment/medicine in the camps they were sent to.

You say that the people who died from preventable illness/injury were not killed by the state of Israel! They died because of the action of the state, and still are to this day. I could list 100 youngsters who have died recently because of not being allowed treatment . You are the one being slanderous and insensitive if you believe that the blockade is not responsible for their deaths.

These are about the only quotes I could find online:

"Palestinian non-violent excess deaths from food and medical deprivation (Sep 2000- Dec 2008; UNICEF data-derived) = 35, 360"

"Palestinian non-violent excess deaths from food and medical deprivation by Israelis (post-1967) = about 300,000"

"The post 1967 under 5 infant deaths in the Occupied Palestinian Territory total 200,000 (80% avoidable and due to occupier non-provision of life-sustaining requisites unequivocally demanded of occupiers by Articles 55 and 56 of the Geneva Convention Relative to the Protection of Civlian Persons in Time of War. Comparative UNICEF data indicate that 2,400 under 5 year old infants die avoidably each year."

Deaths from direct violence 2000-2008 :

"Israelis killed by Palestinians = 1,176"

"Palestinians killed by Israelis = 4,826"

You have pretty much proved my point, but at least you have now retracted the 2 million statement, although you still maintain a fictional figure of 1 million if not above. This is a slander, exagerration and based on no fact other than your own imagination. The figures you have given below from UNICEF show this.

If you take the data (although it does seem to conflict, but that is understandable as it is surely going to be estimations) of about 300,000 from post 1967 (when the occupation began), with my estimate of those actually killed in conflict with Israel, then this comes to 340,000. So please explain why you believe the figure is over 1 million, or are you just throwing fictitious figures about and over-exaggerating?

[FoxyPV]

Article

The nine victims

Cengiz Alquyz, 42

Four gunshot wounds: back of head, right side of face, back, left leg

Ibrahim Bilgen, 60

Four gunshot wounds: right chest, back, right hip, right temple

Cegdet Kiliclar, 38

One gunshot wound: middle of forehead

Furkan Dogan

Five gunshot wounds: nose, back, back of head, left leg, left ankle

Sahri Yaldiz

Four gunshot wounds: left chest, left leg, right leg twice

Aliheyder Bengi

Six gunshot wounds: left chest, belly, right arm, right leg, left hand twice

Cetin Topcuoglu

Three gunshot wounds: back of head, left side, right belly

Cengiz Songur

One gunshot wound: front of neck

Necdet Yildirim

Two gunshot wounds: right shoulder, left back

[Guest Bilo]

Unpleasant reading.

Just shows how trigger happy the commandos were when they landed on board. As you rightly say as well, why not shoot to incapacitate rather than shoot to kill as any weaponry the activists might have had would have looked like peashooters and butter knives next to what the IDF had.

[breadandcheese]

Unpleasant reading.

Just shows how trigger happy the commandos were when they landed on board. As you rightly say as well, why not shoot to incapacitate rather than shoot to kill as any weaponry the activists might have had would have looked like peashooters and butter knives next to what the IDF had.

I think that's harsh on the commandos. A soldier in this situation is only entitled to shoot if he feels his life is threatened. The footage shows the commandos landing heavily outnumbered into a lynchmob (according to the Israeli Forces carrying some kind of paintball gun for crowd dispersal and a small handgun) so their life was in danger. On this basis they were right to draw their handguns and fire. This should not be seen as support for Israeli actions, but more as a criticism of the senior generals who planned the operation and put soldiers in a position where they had no choice but to fire. I guess my criticism is at the Israeli generals rather than the soldiers.

(Although I still do not believe the humanitarians were lillywhite in this. There was certainly an element who were prepared for violence).

[Guest Bilo]

I think that's harsh on the commandos. A soldier in this situation is only entitled to shoot if he feels his life is threatened. The footage shows the commandos landing heavily outnumbered into a lynchmob (according to the Israeli Forces carrying some kind of paintball gun for crowd dispersal and a small handgun) so their life was in danger. On this basis they were right to draw their handguns and fire. This should not be seen as support for Israeli actions, but more as a criticism of the senior generals who planned the operation and put soldiers in a position where they had no choice but to fire. I guess my criticism is at the Israeli generals rather than the soldiers.

(Although I still do not believe the humanitarians were lillywhite in this. There was certainly an element who were prepared for violence).

There was an element of the humanitarians who clearly fancied a scrap but the whole Israeli operation was clearly horribly botched at all levels. For one, they were horribly outnumbered and the mission was badly planned, and secondly it does appear from the autopsies conducted that the commandos panicked and responded heavy handedly. The generals who planned the operation are of course primarily to blame though and have the most to answer for, but the commandos who stormed the ship could have behaved with more restraint it appears.

[FoxyPV]

why not shoot to incapacitate rather than shoot to kill .

I was wondering this too.

but more as a criticism of the senior generals who planned the operation and put soldiers in a position where they had no choice but to fire. I guess my criticism is at the Israeli generals rather than the soldiers.

There has been talk of this on the web (sorry I don't have a link) and I believe the soldiers were hung out to dry, although I do think they were heavy handed.

This story is just getting started as there is plenty of mileage left in it.