Israeli forces attack humanitarian convoy in intl. waters

[Eleas]

Just to make myself clear - I wasn't questioning the motivation of the people on board those ships.
I'm sure that the majority of them really wanted to help the impoverished Gazans.

What I was having doubts about was the honesty of the organizers of this flotilla.
Specifically, if they really cared about the well-being of the Palestinians, I'm sure they wouldn't have loaded their ship with expired medicines.

Allright, noted. If there's a quote to that effect around, I'd be quite interested in seeing it.

[MagnusTheReD]

Just to make myself clear - I wasn't questioning the motivation of the people on board those ships.
I'm sure that the majority of them really wanted to help the impoverished Gazans.

What I was having doubts about was the honesty of the organizers of this flotilla.
Specifically, if they really cared about the well-being of the Palestinians, I'm sure they wouldn't have loaded their ship with expired medicines.

Allright, noted. If there's a quote to that effect around, I'd be quite interested in seeing it.

About the expired medicine, you mean?
Here, in the article about Hamas refusing the cargo into Gaza - fourth paragraph beneath the pic.

[Eleas]

Just to make myself clear - I wasn't questioning the motivation of the people on board those ships.
I'm sure that the majority of them really wanted to help the impoverished Gazans.

What I was having doubts about was the honesty of the organizers of this flotilla.
Specifically, if they really cared about the well-being of the Palestinians, I'm sure they wouldn't have loaded their ship with expired medicines.

Allright, noted. If there's a quote to that effect around, I'd be quite interested in seeing it.

About the expired medicine, you mean?
Here, in the article about Hamas refusing the cargo into Gaza - fourth paragraph beneath the pic.

Yes indeed. Sorry, I should have specified.

Reading the article, I note that the operative phrase was "some of it reportedly having expired," and only after the reported damage as a result of poor categorization. That is not evidence of any sinister motive to me - it indicates that the cargo as a whole had been thrown together in a somewhat disorganized fashion, and that some of the medicine could have been donated, improperly packaged for the journey, or lost as a result of breach in storage.

[Ritterin Sophia]

Why?

Because you aired your opinion without justifying it.

Are you accusing me of bias?

Yes.

On what grounds, if you don't mind?

Your location.

Besides, it's my fucking opinion - why would you take it in face value?

'Just my opinion' has never been a valid answer on SDN before in regards to false perceptions that affect the lives of other people.

That's not the reason Schatten cited.
Specifically, I wanted to know why does he see fit to dismiss me solely on the basis of my place of origin.
At least that's how it appeared to me...

Is it not obvious? You stated how you perceive them, with no justification as to why. As this involves your country and your people, you are biased and without justification for these perceptions they are fallacious.

IIRC, at some point they simply admitted that their primary goal was not to relieve the suffering Gazans, but to grab some media attention.
So forgive me that I don't get my panties in a twist when I hear about all those "relief" workers rushing to the rescue with half their medicine cargo expired...

So wait, you're basing your perception off of something you claim to have heard at one point?

[MagnusTheReD]

Because you aired your opinion without justifying it.

Am I not entitled to an opinion of my own?
If you wanted me to explain myself, you could have just asked, rather than jumping with accusations right away.

Besides, it's not like I came out of the blue and started screaming "THE FUCKERS ARE ALL CORRUPT" for no apparent reason - we had this discussion going for over thirty pages now, all kinds of fucked up shit have been surfacing on this issue, from both sides. I just figured I can voice my opinion without having to spell out the reasoning behind my stance every time I open my mouth.

As this involves your country and your people, you are biased

How can I be biased towards my side when I voiced the very same concerns regarding my own people as well?

So wait, you're basing your perception off of something you claim to have heard at one point?

Yes, among other things.
Also on the fact that the organizers seemingly took little effort to ensure their relief cargo arrives in any viable condition.
And those shady characters on board, who had no IDs on them, but did have improvised weapons and large sums of cash on themselves.
And that guy who was trying to become a martyr for several aid sails to Gaza.

I'd tell you all of that, if only you ever bothered to ask...

[Ritterin Sophia]

Am I not entitled to an opinion of my own?

You are, just don't expect us to accept your opinion just because, it has to be validated by something or it becomes a bad opinion.

If you wanted me to explain myself, you could have just asked, rather than jumping with accusations right away.

We could've avoided this entirely had you given your reasons to begin with.

Besides, it's not like I came out of the blue and started screaming "THE FUCKERS ARE ALL CORRUPT" for no apparent reason - we had this discussion going for over thirty pages now, all kinds of fucked up shit have been surfacing on this issue, from both sides. I just figured I can voice my opinion without having to spell out the reasoning behind my stance every time I open my mouth.

You claimed the Gazan Aid groups didn't actually care about Gaza, just publicity, they are not exclusive to the other and in fact both support the other. Yet you claimed that all they cared was getting 15 minutes of fame, because of some nebulous and nefarious reason.

How can I be biased towards my side when I voiced the very same concerns regarding my own people as well?

Like?

Yes, among other things.
Also on the fact that the organizers seemingly took little effort to ensure their relief cargo arrives in any viable condition.

So wait you mean being left for days outside of the conditions they are supposed to be in ruins perishable aid supplies? Who'd have guessed?

And those shady characters on board, who had no IDs on them, but did have improvised weapons and large sums of cash on themselves.

I notice a lack of a source?

And that guy who was trying to become a martyr for several aid sails to Gaza.

And again.

I'd tell you all of that, if only you ever bothered to ask...

You should be forthcoming with your sources and reasoning. I'm pretty sure the rules say you have to justify and source what you say, is it wrong of me to expect you to source what you say?

[MKSheppard]

Rumors are arising that the sixth ship in the flotilla (the one that was boarded by the commandoes) had no humanitarian aid at all on it -- it just had a bunch of assholes on it; and the assholes' personal belongings plus money (like 2 million).

[open_sketchbook]

Your sources. Cite them.

[Stark]

Rumors are arising that the sixth ship in the flotilla (the one that was boarded by the commandoes) had no humanitarian aid at all on it -- it just had a bunch of assholes on it; and the assholes' personal belongings plus money (like 2 million).

I guess that's wh the IDF spent so long lying about weapons, etc. They're actually psychic and boarded he EVIL BOAT but left all the TRUE GOOD BOATS alone.
L

[MKSheppard]

Your sources. Cite them.

link

Gaza ship: building materials, cement, iron – The ship has not been fully unloaded.

Sofi ship: building materials, iron

Defne Y ship: clothing, humanitarian aid (roughly 40 trucks worth), and games, building materials, wheelchairs.

The "Marmara": carried only passengers and their personal belongings. Many passengers carried large sums of money on their body. There was no Humanitarian aid on this ship.

The other two ships did not carry humanitarian aid as well

The humanitarian aid on all the ships was not packaged and not placed on the ship in an organized way, as one would expect from an organized humanitarian aid cargo. Everything was in individual units thrown on to a pile on the ships. This was not only unsafe, but it also caused a lot of damage to the objects, since the weight crushed a lot of things and since a lot of the things were just thrown on board.

There's also an interesting thing about electric scooters and batteries:

In regards to the story about the electric wheel-chairs, Hamas claims that Israel took out all the wheel-chair batteries so that they can't be used by the people. The spokesman said that first of all, Hamas can't know what Israel is doing because they are not allowing the aid into the Strip. Secondly, one needs to take out the batteries from the wheel chairs because if they are stored for a long time in the heat with the batteries, the batteries get ruined. He then took the journalists to the inside storage space, which is kept cool. There all the batteries were neatly placed in boxes all lined up. He said that the minute they will get a green light from Gaza, Israel can transfer everything into the Strip. Then the batteries will be transferred together with the chairs.

The batteries for the electric wheel chairs are gel batteries. Hamas says that Israel does not allow the entry of batteries into the Gaza Strip. Asked what the problem is with batteries the spokesman said the problem is not with gel but with liquid batteries. This is because 1 liter of this battery liquid can produce 50 kilos of nitroglycerin which is an active ingredient in the manufacture of explosives, specifically dynamite.

[Serafina]

Wait - so the ships carried products the people need, but not in an orderly fashion - therefore it's not humanitarian aid?

Seriously - what the fuck kind of argument is that?
Why does it matter if the ship was not loaded efficiently?
Why does it matter if one ship in a flotilla was dedicated to passengers?
And how the hell do you define "humantitarian aid" anyway?

[Stark]

It's pretty easy to ban all kinds of modern technology if you criteria is 'might be able to be kinda turned into some kind of weapon'. But hey, they Israelis would never lie, misrepresent their intentions or act out of simple brutality, right?

OH WAIT THEY JUST DID LOL

[bobalot]

Wait - so the ships carried products the people need, but not in an orderly fashion - therefore it's not humanitarian aid?

Seriously - what the fuck kind of argument is that?
Why does it matter if the ship was not loaded efficiently?
Why does it matter if one ship in a flotilla was dedicated to passengers?
And how the hell do you define "humantitarian aid" anyway?

The Israelis and their apologists should just do themselves a favour and admit the approach they took was ill conceived and shut up. Their increasingly retarded excuses make them look even more stupid.

"They didn't carry their goods in an orderly and efficient manner!" - They clearly deserved to be massacred in international waters for this outrageous sloppiness.

[Twigler]

I think you're missing the point of that "bad packing" comment. They want to cover their asses in case Hamas gets the cameras out and shows the world how the Israelis damaged the aid after they took it off the ships. There wouldn't be any other reason to bitch about the bad packing of the aid convoy otherwise since it has no relevance.

The "Marmara": carried only passengers and their personal belongings. Many passengers carried large sums of money on their body. There was no Humanitarian aid on this ship.

Israel restricts the import of cash to the Gaza strip (in fact most countries do, but this is a lot stricter), so in a way the cash would have been humanitarian aid to help the Palestinians buy stuff. Of course this could also be used by Israel to claim this cash would be used to buy weaponry, but it's pretty common practice to send money to poorer relatives all over the world.

[MagnusTheReD]

You are, just don't expect us to accept your opinion just because, it has to be validated by something or it becomes a bad opinion.

What the fuck is a bad opinion?
And since when did you become the arbiter who decides which opinions are good and which are bad?
It's my personal, subjective opinion - my gut feeling tells me not to trust those people.
And if you think I owe you an explanation as to why I feel the way I do, I got bad news for you...

We could've avoided this entirely had you given your reasons to begin with.

And again - I don't owe you an explanation of my personal, subjective convictions.

You claimed the Gazan Aid groups didn't actually care about Gaza, just publicity, they are not exclusive to the other and in fact both support the other.

I expressed an opinion, not stated it as a fact.
Do you, or do you not, see a difference between the two?

Besides, I said the ORGANIZERS of the flotilla - by that I mean the heads of the "Free Gaza" and IHH organizations, not the entirety of both groups with all it's members.

Yet you claimed that all they cared was getting 15 minutes of fame, because of some nebulous and nefarious reason.

I said I think that the well-being of the Gazan people was not on the list of priorities of whoever paid for this stunt.

How can I be biased towards my side when I voiced the very same concerns regarding my own people as well?

Like?

Did you even read my post before quoting it?
Or did you just spot a phrase you don't agree with, and immediately proceeded with retarded accusations without ever bothering to understand what I actually wrote?

So wait you mean being left for days outside of the conditions they are supposed to be in ruins perishable aid supplies? Who'd have guessed?

What? Left where?
What the hell are talking about?

And those shady characters on board, who had no IDs on them, but did have improvised weapons and large sums of cash on themselves.

I notice a lack of a source?

Yes, I was basing my opinion on stuff I heard and saw on tv and radio.
Here, a reference, if you insist.

And that guy who was trying to become a martyr for several aid sails to Gaza.

And again.

I take it you didn't read the other thread?
Here

You should be forthcoming with your sources and reasoning.

Yes, if I was making a statement. Which I wasn't - I specifically said I bet, which means I'm guessing.

I'm pretty sure the rules say you have to justify and source what you say, is it wrong of me to expect you to source what you say?

The rules say I need to justify my claims, not opinions.

[MagnusTheReD]

Wait - so the ships carried products the people need, but not in an orderly fashion - therefore it's not humanitarian aid?

Who said it's not humanitarian aid?
Shep's source listed the cargo each ship carried - the 40 trucks of supplies on the bulk carrier is specifically listed as "humanitarian aid".

Seriously - what the fuck kind of argument is that?

It's an argument in favor of the claim that relieving the impoverished Gazans wasn't the first on the list of priorities of the people who organized the flotilla.

Why does it matter if the ship was not loaded efficiently?

Because if you want to actually "relieve" the suffering of the people, you usually take some precautions that your cargo doesn't get ruined while being delivered.

"They didn't carry their goods in an orderly and efficient manner!" - They clearly deserved to be massacred in international waters for this outrageous sloppiness.

Who ever said that?
Where such a thing was even implied?
Because it's a strawman - we already discussed the circumstances of the takeover, and the current argument concerns the motives behind the organization of the flotilla, not the validity of the boarding action.

[Rye]

Rumors are arising that the sixth ship in the flotilla (the one that was boarded by the commandoes) had no humanitarian aid at all on it -- it just had a bunch of assholes on it; and the assholes' personal belongings plus money (like 2 million).

I hear labour and money can be donated to charitable causes now?

[Serafina]

Who said it's not humanitarian aid?
Shep's source listed the cargo each ship carried - the 40 trucks of supplies on the bulk carrier is specifically listed as "humanitarian aid".

As written by Rye:

Rumors are arising that the sixth ship in the flotilla (the one that was boarded by the commandoes) had no humanitarian aid at all on it -- it just had a bunch of assholes on it; and the assholes' personal belongings plus money (like 2 million).

Shep did it.

It's an argument in favor of the claim that relieving the impoverished Gazans wasn't the first on the list of priorities of the people who organized the flotilla.

Because....why?
Honestly - why?
All it says that some ships were dedicated to passengers - gee, what a surpise, using a ferry for passenger - and that they were not loaded efficiently.
So because they prefered ferries instead of cargo ships for passengers and were no professional logistics company, they did not intend to help Gaza?
What deranged kind of logic is that??

Because if you want to actually "relieve" the suffering of the people, you usually take some precautions that your cargo doesn't get ruined while being delivered.

Ooor you are simply no expert in loading a ship
I guess MagnusTheRed needs humanitarian aid now, too - he seems to be short on tinfoil.

Who ever said that?
Where such a thing was even implied?
Because it's a strawman - we already discussed the circumstances of the takeover, and the current argument concerns the motives behind the organization of the flotilla, not the validity of the boarding action.

Hmm, let's see - a known Israel-apologist and warmonger (Shep) posts this - is it really that large a step to draw that conclusion?

[Ritterin Sophia]

What the fuck is a bad opinion?
And since when did you become the arbiter who decides which opinions are good and which are bad?
It's my personal, subjective opinion - my gut feeling tells me not to trust those people.
And if you think I owe you an explanation as to why I feel the way I do, I got bad news for you...

A bad opinion is one that is made on false information.

And again - I don't owe you an explanation of my personal, subjective convictions.

You do when you state it as fact on SDN.

I expressed an opinion, not stated it as a fact.
Do you, or do you not, see a difference between the two?

You put your opinion out there as if you felt it was right with no justification, why is your opinion right?

Besides, I said the ORGANIZERS of the flotilla - by that I mean the heads of the "Free Gaza" and IHH organizations, not the entirety of both groups with all it's members.

So no source?

I said I think that the well-being of the Gazan people was not on the list of priorities of whoever paid for this stunt.

Then what was?

Did you even read my post before quoting it?
Or did you just spot a phrase you don't agree with, and immediately proceeded with retarded accusations without ever bothering to understand what I actually wrote?

In other words: I argued with Israel, I just don't want to show where.

What? Left where?
What the hell are talking about?

When you impound aid it is left for days outside of where it's needed.

Yes, I was basing my opinion on stuff I heard and saw on tv and radio.
Here, a reference, if you insist.

Totally trusting an Israeli source.

I take it you didn't read the other thread?
Here

I take it you don't get the impact of martyrdom.

Yes, if I was making a statement. Which I wasn't - I specifically said I bet, which means I'm guessing.

No you didn't, you stated it as fact and then backpedalled to opinion. You still need to give justification for your opinion or you can simply be ignored.

The rules say I need to justify my claims, not opinions.

Only in subjective matters, this is objective.

[Omeganian]

It's an argument in favor of the claim that relieving the impoverished Gazans wasn't the first on the list of priorities of the people who organized the flotilla.

Because....why?
Honestly - why?
All it says that some ships were dedicated to passengers - gee, what a surpise, using a ferry for passenger - and that they were not loaded efficiently.
So because they prefered ferries instead of cargo ships for passengers and were no professional logistics company, they did not intend to help Gaza?
What deranged kind of logic is that??

A simple one. If you struggle to deliver cargo, then the main defense efforts are concentrated on protecting said cargo. As a results, you have about 95% of the defense related incidents aboard the freighters carrying said cargo. The real life situation was reversed; 95% of the problems arose on the one ship which wasn't a freighter.

[MKSheppard]

When you impound aid it is left for days outside of where it's needed.

The aid isn't really even needed at all.


Gaza Imports, 2009


Gaza Imports, 2010 to June 3

In 2009; 110,800~ tons of wheat were imported into Gaza; at a population of 1.5 million; that's 147~ lbs of wheat per capita.

By comparison, US consumption of wheat per capita in 2008 was 137~ pounds.

LINK to USDA

This of course, completely discounts the fact that Gazans grow their own food -- why else would 170,000 tons of animal feed be imported in 2009; and 68,600 tons this year to date -- or the fact that 13,300~ tons of 'input to agriculture' got imported in 2009; and so far we're on track for 9,000~ tons.

[Coyote]

Basically, the 500 or so passengers are seen as motivated more by personal aggrandizement and the desire to be heroes than by any real concern for the Palestinian people.

Look at it this way: you have a place that is supposed to be malnourished and starving, and has a skyrocketing unemployment rate.

So what is the logic in importing 500 mouths to feed in an area already saturated with people who are unemployed to start with? Gaza doesn't need the warm bodies for work, they have plenty; and they certainly don't need 500 locusts consuming scarce chow. 500 people is 1500 meals per day, even if they're just going to be there for a few days to... offload ships? While unemployed Gazans sit and watch? Where's the logic in that?

Especially if for any number of reasons, they are unable to leave later. They'll have seriously compounded Gaza's problems if they end up getting stuck there.

[Illuminatus Primus]

If we have any concept of belief in Palestinian self-determination, it is not up to us or the Israelis to decide how much grain Gazans "need". Furthermore, its already been established the blockade serves to quash Gazan economic independence and development, and protect hostage markets for Israeli producers.

Also @ the simplistic "total amount of grain" divided by "the number of people" determinant of adequate food supplies. I never knew Shep was an idealistic communist that held the theory of egalitarianism. Clearly, there can be enough raw foodstuffs but still malnutrition. In fact, its almost always the case in all famines.

[Thanas]

Basically, the 500 or so passengers are seen as motivated more by personal aggrandizement and the desire to be heroes than by any real concern for the Palestinian people.

Really? Or maybe the organization would rather prefer have their own goods unloaded and looked after people they trust, instead of starving Palaestinians? Or do you also decry that the US sends along personnel whenever they deploy humanitarian aid to an unstable country as more mouths to feed? If you were the organization, why would you not want to send your guys along?

[Illuminatus Primus]

Basically, the 500 or so passengers are seen as motivated more by personal aggrandizement and the desire to be heroes than by any real concern for the Palestinian people.

Really? Or maybe the organization would rather prefer have their own goods unloaded and looked after people they trust, instead of starving Palaestinians? Or do you also decry that the US sends along personnel whenever they deploy humanitarian aid to an unstable country as more mouths to feed? If you were the organization, why would you not want to send your guys along?

Nevermind that the U.S. dallied about after the Haitian disaster waiting for adequate 'security' to be in place. Assholes! More mouths to feed. There's no reason to do anything but dump shit on the wharf.