Are Israel's "Friends" Trying To Destroy It?

[bloodyminded]

What you write is largely uninteresting and derivative.

You love it, and can't stop following me around.

Correct...to continue to mock you...or not.

You need Canadians for your sense of relevance..

A person without a country must convince themself of this.

Your country is now Canada.

...and as always....a shrinking sexual reference always punctuates your retreat.

Don't forget to support the troops!

Edited June 9, 2010 by bloodyminded

[Danpearl]

These are perilous times for Israel. The current Turkish aid ship affair is not coming down well with the world media and Israel is losing the fight on this frontier. Everyone seems to forget that it is a loaded and complex situation. Put in the shoes of the Israeli government I am quite sure that all would act in the same way. In addition to this – the world media seems quite content to ignore footage of Israeli soldiers showing restraint while being attacked with axes and metal rods and being thrown off deck by so called “peaceful humanitarian activists”. Fanatics who have no connection to this conflict whatsoever other than there inherent bias of Israel are being interviewed constantly on networks such as Sky News and CNN, portraying Israel as a militant oppressing state, and it’s soldiers as violent uncontrolled killers. Many countries and groups are talking of banning Israeli made products. It is time to act! We understand the situation is not black and white, we know that Israel is in fact the minority here and the only democratic country in a hostile un democratic region, we see that this affair is nothing but a provocation intended to lose Israel favor with the world. Support Israel by streaming money in to the country and buying Israeli made, joining pro Israel FB groups and wearing pro Israel shirts.

Basically making your voice heard in any way possible so we can win this media war. And here is an Israeli T shirt sight with pro Israel shirts I have found:

http://www.israeli-t.com/Israel-t-shirts/Israel-Fans-t-shirts/Support-Israel-T-Shirt-2331

Dannie

[Bonam]

Basically making your voice heard in any way possible so we can win this media war. And here is an Israeli T shirt sight with pro Israel shirts I have found:

http://www.israeli-t.com/Israel-t-shirts/Israel-Fans-t-shirts/Support-Israel-T-Shirt-2331

Dannie

Unfortunately, wearing such a T-shirt in some Western cities these days would just make you a target for the many hostile Muslim youth that have recently been imported.

[Bob]

To naomiglover and BCMan:

Both of you are parroting the false argument that is popular online that the American government, and by extension its foreign policy is "controlled" by AIPAC and other interests groups (i.e. "rich Jewish businessmen" and "Christian Zionists"). Perhaps you feel that your position is strengthened (or maybe it was even created) by the book "The Israel Lobby". More outrageously, naomiglover suggests that AIPAC can determine who does and who does not become the President of the USA!

Although it's unfortunate that this silly argument pops up so often regarding the Israeli-Arab conflict and the American-Israeli relationship, I'll try to address just a few of the major problems with this argument.

To suggest that the White House calls AIPAC before it makes a decision on any Israeli-Arab conflict issue before taking a position is absurd. Do you think Obama calls AIPAC for permission to take a particular position on any given issue regarding Israel/Palestine? To suggest that AIPAC calls the shots on American foreign policy is rejected by many prominent folks who are on the inside of American diplomacy and foreign policy. Aaron David Miller, Dennis Ross, and Peter Gergen are just a few of former insiders who reject this suggestion. I'll trust them when they say that no decision regarding Israeli-Arab peace, small or large, was ever made based on consultation with AIPAC or some other lobby/interest group. Considering they've all retired from public service and are now free from most (if not all) political considerations, they're trustworthy. At the very least, they're much more trustworthy that Mearsheimer, Walt, or all of their fans who perpetuate this myth of control exerted by the "Jewish lobby" over the American government.

BCMan - You are wrong to suggest that most Americans "hate" AIPAC. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'll assume that by extension of this statement you're suggesting that the majority of Americans hate their country's support of Israel (at the government and grass-roots levels). No poll supports your position. It's been said before, but just because some random person online says something doesn't make it true. For better or for worse, poll after poll shows strong American public support for Israel in many ways.

There's an element of the chicken-and-egg concept going on here that you two (and countless other anti-Israel persons) are confused about. You assert that AIPAC and other related lobby/interest groups shape American public opinion, which is perhaps somewhat true. More importantly, however, is that AIPAC exists more as a consequence of strong American support for its cause. AIPAC isn't a lobby funded by corporate profits, like industrial lobbies, but a purely grassroots lobby. You think Exxon or Wal-Mart make contributions to AIPAC? How can a grassroots lobby be prominent without grassroots support? Put simply, AIPAC is the product of American support for Israel much more than it is the generator of American support for Israel. Ironically, AIPAC wishes nothing more than to be as powerful as its opponents claim it is, and AIPAC benefits from the false perception held among many that it is all-powerful - as politicians who buy into the falsehood of AIPAC's ability to make or break political careers will feel pressured to pander to AIPAC, whether or not they or their constituents sincerely desire those positions.

I could go on much more, as the endless list of false arguments and "evidence" of AIPAC's influence and power can mostly be refuted (Dershowitz, and several others, have trashed "The Israel Lobby", refuting the book and a point-by-point basis), but I've said my peace. The bottom line is that the argument about a small group of influential ideologues (i.e. the Jews, or "the Zionists" - a euphemism for Jews) seems to be an argument made by anti-Israel folks and organizations to excuse their own inadequacies in shaping American public opinion and American foreign policy. It's easier to blame someone else for your own shortcomings and the weaknesses of your own positions.

Edited June 12, 2010 by Bob

[dre]

These are perilous times for Israel. The current Turkish aid ship affair is not coming down well with the world media and Israel is losing the fight on this frontier. Everyone seems to forget that it is a loaded and complex situation. Put in the shoes of the Israeli government I am quite sure that all would act in the same way. In addition to this – the world media seems quite content to ignore footage of Israeli soldiers showing restraint while being attacked with axes and metal rods and being thrown off deck by so called “peaceful humanitarian activists”. Fanatics who have no connection to this conflict whatsoever other than there inherent bias of Israel are being interviewed constantly on networks such as Sky News and CNN, portraying Israel as a militant oppressing state, and it’s soldiers as violent uncontrolled killers. Many countries and groups are talking of banning Israeli made products. It is time to act! We understand the situation is not black and white, we know that Israel is in fact the minority here and the only democratic country in a hostile un democratic region, we see that this affair is nothing but a provocation intended to lose Israel favor with the world. Support Israel by streaming money in to the country and buying Israeli made, joining pro Israel FB groups and wearing pro Israel shirts.

Basically making your voice heard in any way possible so we can win this media war. And here is an Israeli T shirt sight with pro Israel shirts I have found:

http://www.israeli-t.com/Israel-t-shirts/Israel-Fans-t-shirts/Support-Israel-T-Shirt-2331

Dannie

So you signed up here just to sell teeshirts?

[dre]

To naomiglover and BCMan:

Both of you are parroting the false argument that is popular online that the American government, and by extension its foreign policy is "controlled" by AIPAC and other interests groups (i.e. "rich Jewish businessmen" and "Christian Zionists"). Perhaps you feel that your position is strengthened (or maybe it was even created) by the book "The Israel Lobby". More outrageously, naomiglover suggests that AIPAC can determine who does and who does not become the President of the USA!

Although it's unfortunate that this silly argument pops up so often regarding the Israeli-Arab conflict and the American-Israeli relationship, I'll try to address just a few of the major problems with this argument.

To suggest that the White House calls AIPAC before it makes a decision on any Israeli-Arab conflict issue before taking a position is absurd. Do you think Obama calls AIPAC for permission to take a particular position on any given issue regarding Israel/Palestine? To suggest that AIPAC calls the shots on American foreign policy is rejected by many prominent folks who are on the inside of American diplomacy and foreign policy. Aaron David Miller, Dennis Ross, and Peter Gergen are just a few of former insiders who reject this suggestion. I'll trust them when they say that no decision regarding Israeli-Arab peace, small or large, was ever made based on consultation with AIPAC or some other lobby/interest group. Considering they've all retired from public service and are now free from most (if not all) political considerations, they're trustworthy. At the very least, they're much more trustworthy that Mearsheimer, Walt, or all of their fans who perpetuate this myth of control exerted by the "Jewish lobby" over the American government.

BCMan - You are wrong to suggest that most Americans "hate" AIPAC. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'll assume that by extension of this statement you're suggesting that the majority of Americans hate their country's support of Israel (at the government and grass-roots levels). No poll supports your position. It's been said before, but just because some random person online says something doesn't make it true. For better or for worse, poll after poll shows strong American public support for Israel in many ways.

There's an element of the chicken-and-egg concept going on here that you two (and countless other anti-Israel persons) are confused about. You assert that AIPAC and other related lobby/interest groups shape American public opinion, which is perhaps somewhat true. More importantly, however, is that AIPAC exists more as a consequence of strong American support for its cause. AIPAC isn't a lobby funded by corporate profits, like industrial lobbies, but a purely grassroots lobby. You think Exxon or Wal-Mart make contributions to AIPAC? How can a grassroots lobby be prominent without grassroots support? Put simply, AIPAC is the product of American support for Israel much more than it is the generator of American support for Israel. Ironically, AIPAC wishes nothing more than to be as powerful as its opponents claim it is, and AIPAC benefits from the false perception held among many that it is all-powerful - as politicians who buy into the falsehood of AIPAC's ability to make or break political careers will feel pressured to pander to AIPAC, whether or not they or their constituents sincerely desire those positions.

I could go on much more, as the endless list of false arguments and "evidence" of AIPAC's influence and power can mostly be refuted (Dershowitz, and several others, have trashed "The Israel Lobby", refuting the book and a point-by-point basis), but I've said my peace. The bottom line is that the argument about a small group of influential ideologues (i.e. the Jews, or "the Zionists" - a euphemism for Jews) seems to be an argument made by anti-Israel folks and organizations to excuse their own inadequacies in shaping American public opinion and American foreign policy. It's easier to blame someone else for your own shortcomings and the weaknesses of your own positions.

Americans support for Israel is based mostly on the prevalence of an extremely one-sided view of the history of the ME conflict. If you talk to some of these folks and actually listen to what they believe its no wonder they support Israel.

You gotta take Americans support with a grain of salt though... Remember 80% of these people wanted to invade Iraq because they believed there was huge stockpiles of WMDs.

[Oleg Bach]

Some one sure is going out of their way to generate anti-Jewish feelings in the world - I am sure that it is not the average Jew - looks like they are setting them up again...history might be repeating itself - The Jews take the fall and the bad guys walk - as per usual..having mentioned that - perhaps the average Jew should have a revolution and get rid of the people that run their nation - who do not have the best interests of Israel on their minds.

[Bob]

It's misleading to suggest that the USA's contribution of $3 billion per year to Israel is simply a handout without any tangible benefit. Take military R+D, for example, of course much of this R+D is shared with the USA. Let's not forget that Israel has a serious military R+D industry, and its contributions in this industry do directly benefit the USA.

More broadly, as a matter of goodwill, this grant to Israel can be used as a carrot or stick, and of course will have some influence on Israel. I don't know specifics, but I imagine Israel shares intelligence with the USA regarding common threats, as well as maintenance of military infrastructure that might be used by the USA in the event of its needs.

Is America getting good value for this contribution? That's not for me to say, but America's relationship with Israel, including the grants from America to Israel, is both moral/ideological and practical. That's not to say that if Obama was serious about prioritizing the Israeli-Arab conflict (and I don't think he is), he could lean more heavily on Israel to get particular concessions (as well as the PA) using the annual grants as both a carrot and stick - although he needs congressional approval to make changes to this. Anyways, it's complicated!

Edited June 12, 2010 by Bob

[Oleg Bach]

AMERICAN tax payers are duped though emotion and mislead righteousness - they send money to Israel - Israel buys arms for the military industrial complex...those who have vested interests in weapons sales make big buck - and the rest of AMERICA gets stiffed - sounds like money laundering to me.

[dre]

It's misleading to suggest that the USA's contribution of $3 billion per year to Israel is simply a handout without any tangible benefit. Take military R+D, for example, of course much of this R+D is shared with the USA. Let's not forget that Israel has a serious military R+D industry, and its contributions in this industry do directly benefit the USA.

More broadly, as a matter of goodwill, this grant to Israel can be used as a carrot or stick, and of course will have some influence on Israel. I don't know specifics, but I imagine Israel shares intelligence with the USA regarding common threats, as well as maintenance of military infrastructure that might be used by the USA in the event of its needs.

Is America getting good value for this contribution? That's not for me to say, but America's relationship with Israel, including the grants from America to Israel, is both moral/ideological and practical.

Actually aid to Israel is structured in a way that makes it very hard to use as a "carrot or stick". Thats why generally whenever the US asks for something they are told to go fuck themselves. "Stop building illegal settlements so we can work on a peace agreement"... "NO. FUCK YOU". Thats generally how it seems to go.

[Oleg Bach]

Arrogance

[Bob]

Actually aid to Israel is structured in a way that makes it very hard to use as a "carrot or stick". Thats why generally whenever the US asks for something they are told to go fuck themselves. "Stop building illegal settlements so we can work on a peace agreement"... "NO. FUCK YOU". Thats generally how it seems to go.

It's hardly that simple. You're trying to tie down the progress or halts of the peace process to Israel's settlement policies, while ignoring all other variables. It's clear you're either uninformed and/or incapable of being objective. It's clear that you know very little about this conflict, and perhaps more tragic - that you have very little desire to learn about it in an honest manner.

[dre]

It's hardly that simple. You're trying to tie down the progress or halts of the peace process to Israel's settlement policies, while ignoring all other variables. It's clear you're either uninformed and/or incapable of being objective. It's clear that you know very little about this conflict, and perhaps more tragic - that you have very little desire to learn about it in an honest manner.

Actually Iv forgotten more than you know, and its clear that youre left with nothing but to attack me as a poster instead of talking about the issue at hand.

Why dont you give me a list of the major concessions the US has been able to obtain from Israel with the "influence" all those welfare checks buy them?

The reality is that aid to Israel is procured in up to ten year terms. Obama couldnt use that aid as a stick even if he wanted to.

Edited June 12, 2010 by dre

[Bob]

Actually Iv forgotten more than you know, and its clear that youre left with nothing but to attack me as a poster instead of talking about the issue at hand.

Why dont you give me a list of the major concessions the US has been able to obtain from Israel with the "influence" all those welfare checks buy them?

Look, you haven't even read a book about this issue and you're talking way above your head. If you really are interested in the peace process and the negotiations, successes and failures, that have been achieved between Israel and the Palestinians and Arabs with American involvement, there are many books available for you to read. You can start with Aaron David Miller's book 'The Much Too Promised Land' and Dennis Ross's 'The Missing Peace'. Both are insider accounts of the negotiations that took place.

According the Miller, there have been three major successes - in 1956, 1975, and 1991. All involving the threatening/application of sanctions. Anyways, I won't elaborate further. If you're genuinely interested in learning about American influence on the Israeli-Arab conflict, its successes and failures, then those two books are a good place to start. Michael Oren's "Power, Faith, and Fantasy" is also a good book, going back much further and examining the history of the American involvement in the area, going back pre-Israel to the contemporary American-Israeli relationships. Like all things, this relationships has its strengths as well as weaknesses.

[dre]

Look, you haven't even read a book about this issue and you're talking way above your head. If you really are interested in the peace process and the negotiations, successes and failures, that have been achieved between Israel and the Palestinians and Arabs with American involvement, there are many books available for you to read. You can start with Aaron David Miller's book 'The Much Too Promised Land' and Dennis Ross's 'The Missing Peace'. Both are insider accounts of the negotiations that took place.

According the Miller, there have been three major successes - in 1956, 1975, and 1991. All involving the threatening/application of sanctions. Anyways, I won't elaborate further. If you're genuinely interested in learning about American influence on the Israeli-Arab conflict, its successes and failures, then those two books are a good place to start. Michael Oren's "Power, Faith, and Fantasy" is also a good book, going back much further and examining the history of the American involvement in the area, going back pre-Israel to the contemporary American-Israeli relationships. Like all things, this relationships has its strengths as well as weaknesses.

Look, you haven't even read a book about this issue and you're talking way above your head

More idiotic bullshit. Why dont you read up on how US aid is structured then explain to me how the US administration can use it as a stick.

Obama urges Israel to help loosen aid flow to Gaza

My guess is he wont get much help with this, but who knows.

Edited June 12, 2010 by dre

[Bonam]

Look, you haven't even read a book about this issue and you're talking way above your head. If you really are interested in the peace process and the negotiations, successes and failures, that have been achieved between Israel and the Palestinians and Arabs with American involvement, there are many books available for you to read. You can start with Aaron David Miller's book 'The Much Too Promised Land' and Dennis Ross's 'The Missing Peace'. Both are insider accounts of the negotiations that took place.

Don't bother, dre is not interested.

[Bob]

More idiotic bullshit. Why dont you read up on how US aid is structured then explain to me how the US administration can use it as a stick.

Obama urges Israel to help loosen aid flow to Gaza

My guess is he wont get much help with this, but who knows.

It's already happened. Israel has loosened the blockade's restrictions and is in negotiations with Turkey over possible EU/Turkish oversight of border crossings between Israel/Gaza to facilitate the transfer of goods. Israel can be persuaded to do things differently through various means. Obviously the political process and negotiations are complicated, a complexity you don't seem to want to understand. Perhaps you're incapable of understanding? Politics isn't for everyone...

It's clear to me that you're not here to have a serious discussion, and also clear that you have little to contribute to this forum - obviously you don't know anything about these issues. I won't waste anymore of your time or my own.

[dre]

It's clear to me that you're not here to have a serious discussion, and also clear that you have little to contribute to this forum - obviously you don't know anything about these issues. I won't waste anymore of your time or my own.

Sweet! Third post in a row about me.

[bush_cheney2004]

....You gotta take Americans support with a grain of salt though... Remember 80% of these people wanted to invade Iraq because they believed there was huge stockpiles of WMDs.

Wrong...it was pretty much the same as support for Israel....a much longer term perspective that says Saddam should have been deposed back in 1991. Ding dong...Saddam is dead.

[bloodyminded]

In addition to this – the world media seems quite content to ignore footage of Israeli soldiers showing restraint while being attacked with axes and metal rods and being thrown off deck by so called “peaceful humanitarian activists”.

You know, simply stating the literal opposite of the truth doesn't make it accurate.

The very first footage that everybody saw was this exact situation, provided by the IDF.

However, other, perhaps competing footage, taken by the activists, has been almost totally unavailable...because Israel will not release it.

Why? Well, I dunno....maybe "security reasons." (?????)

[Bob]

You know, simply stating the literal opposite of the truth doesn't make it accurate.

The very first footage that everybody saw was this exact situation, provided by the IDF.

However, other, perhaps competing footage, taken by the activists, has been almost totally unavailable...because Israel will not release it.

Why? Well, I dunno....maybe "security reasons." (?????)

What in the world are you talking about? "Competing footage"? The IDF videos show quite a bit of what happened and give those us out here in the real world a lot of context. Let's not pretend these "activists" don't have a serious credibility issue. Go read about "Free Gaza"'s political positions on this conflict - entirely one-sided. Do you think they care about Israeli needs and concerns? They do everything they can to propagandize this conflict into demonizing Israel. Let's also not pretend that the IDF videos don't do quite a bit to show us what really happened.

Imagine if a group of people behaved that way when trying to enter Canada or the USA, not complying with authorities. How about if a group of individuals didn't adhere to military instructions in warzones like Afghanistan or Iraq? How would you expect border security or the military to respond? Let's not pretend that Gaza and Israel are in a state of belligerence. Clearly Gaza isn't a part of Israel, but Israel's security requires a blockade of Gaza to reduce the likelihood of weapons entering the territory which have been used against Israel many thousands of times over many decades and killed hundreds of Israelis - Hamas' seizing of power didn't do anything to paint a rosier picture of this circumstance.

[bloodyminded]

What in the world are you talking about? "Competing footage"? The IDF videos show quite a bit of what happened and give those us out here in the real world a lot of context. Let's not pretend these "activists" don't have a serious credibility issue. Go read about "Free Gaza"'s political positions on this conflict - entirely one-sided. Do you think they care about Israeli needs and concerns? They do everything they can to propagandize this conflict into demonizing Israel. Let's also not pretend that the IDF videos don't do quite a bit to show us what really happened.

Imagine if a group of people behaved that way when trying to enter Canada or the USA, not complying with authorities. How about if a group of individuals didn't adhere to military instructions in warzones like Afghanistan or Iraq? How would you expect border security or the military to respond? Let's not pretend that Gaza and Israel are in a state of belligerence. Clearly Gaza isn't a part of Israel, but Israel's security requires a blockade of Gaza to reduce the likelihood of weapons entering the territory which have been used against Israel many thousands of times over many decades and killed hundreds of Israelis - Hamas' seizing of power didn't do anything to paint a rosier picture of this circumstance.

What I'm saying--and it's not a matter of opinion, but an incontestable truth--is that there is a lot of footage confiscated by the Israelis, and that we haven't seen any of it.

Why? What's the problem? You evade the question entirely, pushing the matter back on to the people on the flotilla; but the fact is--as you know full well, but seem unwilling to think about, much less discuss--is that there is confiscated footage, that we aren't allowed to see...even though Israel was totally in the right, totally justified in its actions...and everything officials say is the golden truth.

Such sycophancy is far beneath you.

And what makes you so faithful that the IDF are masters of objectivity?

I'm afraid I don't believe your post to be serious in intent.

Edited June 14, 2010 by bloodyminded

[Bob]

What I'm saying--and it's not a matter of opinion, but an incontestable truth--is that there is a lot of footage confiscated by the Israelis, and that we haven't seen any of it.

Why? What's the problem? You evade the question entirely, pushing the matter back on to the people on the flotilla; but the fact is--as you know full well, but seem unwilling to think about, much less discuss--is that there is confiscated footage, that we aren't allowed to see...even though Israel was totally in the right, totally justified in its actions...and everything officials say is the golden truth.

Such sycophancy is far beneath you.

And what makes you so faithful that the IDF are masters of objectivity?

I'm afraid I don't believe your post to be serious in intent.

There's plenty of footage on YouTube available for you to see which was shot by "activists" on the boats, including the Mavi Marmara. None of it contradicts the IDF position. How could you possibly contradict video, anyways? As I've already said, the IDF videos give us quite a bit of context into what happened. What are you expecting to see, video footage showing something else? If you have a video camera and I have a video camera and we shoot the same thing, do you think your camera will show something different than my own?

Let's not pretend we don't know the type of people that go on these 'activist' tours. Let's also not pretend that there wasn't a preparation for violence among the passengers of the Mavi Marmara in anticipation of the IDF arrival on the ship resulting from the ship's non-compliance with instructions from the Israeli navy. They were psyching themselves up and making prayers for the violent altercation "against the Jews) they planned from the start. Forget about the fact that Israeli soldiers were stabbed and shot as part of the vicious attack. This is all documented - interviews with the and other people present on the Mavi Marmara. This matter isn't one of controversy.

If we want to examining Israeli acts that deserve criticism we should look at Israeli government duplicity regarding expansionism/settlement building. How about the double standards when dealing with Arab protesters and Jewish protesters (guess which group gets dealt with more harshly...)? This story is a fabricated controversy entirely contrived by Israel's enemies. The "Free Gaza" and "Freedom Flotilla" is a one-sided, anti-Israel, anti-semitic collective of people. Pure and simple. They do not advance any positive cause or message.

[bloodyminded]

There's plenty of footage on YouTube available for you to see which was shot by "activists" on the boats, including the Mavi Marmara. None of it contradicts the IDF position. How could you possibly contradict video, anyways? As I've already said, the IDF videos give us quite a bit of context into what happened. What are you expecting to see, video footage showing something else? If you have a video camera and I have a video camera and we shoot the same thing, do you think your camera will show something different than my own?

You've got to be kidding. The antiquated notion of "film as truth" is not taken seriously any more.

How can you say that the IDF video gives us "context," when by definition we don't know what wasn't filmed?

Finally, I note that you have entirely ommitted one of the most crucial components of this argument: the confiscation of video footage.

Perhaps if I bold the text you will deign to tackle the important question:

If the Navy acted properly, what's the problem with allowing this footage? What (good) reason is there for withholding it?

Let's not pretend we don't know the type of people that go on these 'activist' tours.

Yeah...among them, Holocaust survivors, MP's, and principled activists. (And yes...as astonishing as it might appear to the conspiracy therorists, lots of activists and critics of Israel are decent, principled people acting on their consciences. Did you really not know this?)

Forget about the fact that Israeli soldiers were stabbed and shot as part of the vicious attack.

Yes, the protesters were so vicious and brutal towards the peace-loving military that nine of the protesters were killed...four or five of them shot in the back, presumably as they were attacking the IDF Gandhis with their lethal buttocks.

This is all documented - interviews with the and other people present on the Mavi Marmara. This matter isn't one of controversy.

You're now claiming, with a straight face, that the people present on the Mavi Marmara aren't telling stories of an unwarranted Israeli attack, of Israeli brutality?

You're not denying or disagreeing with their claims...you're saying the claims themselves do not exist, so that there's "no controversy"?

How far down the rabbit hole do you expect us to go on this?

Because now you're just making shit up as a propaganda exercise.

This story is a fabricated controversy entirely contrived by Israel's enemies. The "Free Gaza" and "Freedom Flotilla" is a one-sided, anti-Israel, anti-semitic collective of people. Pure and simple. They do not advance any positive cause or message.

Well, Israeli officials initially agrees with your assessment--saying that all the protesters were aligned with al Queda, and so on.

You must have missed the memo: that Israeli officials have now retracted this, after being demonstrated liars.

OK, so...."Pure and simple" they are a bunch of anti-semites. Oh, sure, why not? Why not attempt the purely dishonest use of political correctness to attempt to shut down debate, to say "Case Closed"....because Bob deems it so?

Well, gues what: to so promiscuously use the attack mode of "anti-semite" is not only dishonest...it's cowardly. It whines: "stop criticizing us!" and posits this demand as sober debate.

It also defaces the true victims of anti-semitism, so it's disgusting.

Edited June 15, 2010 by bloodyminded

[Bob]

You've got to be kidding. The antiquated notion of "film as truth" is not taken seriously any more.

How can you say that the IDF video gives us "context," when by definition we don't know what wasn't filmed?

Finally, I note that you have entirely ommitted one of the most crucial components of this argument: the confiscation of video footage.

Perhaps if I bold the text you will deign to tackle the important question:

If the Navy acted properly, what's the problem with allowing this footage? What (good) reason is there for withholding it?

This is beyond stupid... as I've already said, if you and I record the same thing, what sort of discrepancy are you expecting to see between our two recording? Much of the context of the Mavi Marmara hostilities is plain to see on the IDF footage. Do you think that the footage claimed to have been seized by the IDF which was shot by the violent extremists on the Mavi Marmara will show IDF soldiers boarding the vessel and NOT being viciously attacked (their safety and lives clearly at risk - two were even shot, several other stabbed)? There is no debate that the soldiers did what they were supposed to do and were met with much more vicious resistance than they expected - their safety and lives were at risk, and they did what they had to do. To even question this, to me, is beyond sick. Basically, you want these nineteen-year-old soldiers to die before they can defend themselves. The IDF videos shows us what types of people clashed with the IDF on the Mavi Marmara, and these people can certainly not be described as "peace activists".

Yeah...among them, Holocaust survivors, MP's, and principled activists. (And yes...as astonishing as it might appear to the conspiracy therorists, lots of activists and critics of Israel are decent, principled people acting on their consciences. Did you really not know this?)

I think there was one Holocaust survivor. There are plenty of moronic and hate-filled MPs, out there. As astonishing as it might be to you, most anti-Israel "activists" are hate-filled anti-semites. I know these people, I've spend more time interacting with them and studying them than I care to admit.

Yes, the protesters were so vicious and brutal towards the peace-loving military that nine of the protesters were killed...four or five of them shot in the back, presumably as they were attacking the IDF Gandhis with their lethal buttocks.

The Mavi Marmara didn't comply with IDF instructions to turn the ship towards Ashdod. If you don't comply, you're being openly hostile in a hostile theatre - do you not realize that Israel and Gaza are in the midst of hostilities with a very fragile cease-fire?

Being shot in the back, if true, means nothing. If a person is violently attacking your team, and you're behind him, you may shoot him the back. Spare me your amateur-hour forensic analysis.

Please also spare me your suggestion that the IDF doesn't conduct itself in a very moral manner. Your sarcastic "Ghandi" comment is insulting. Let's not compare the discipline and code of conduct followed by the IDF with the amorality of the Mavi Marmara agitators. To suggest that these are two "equal sides" is preposterous.

You're now claiming, with a straight face, that the people present on the Mavi Marmara aren't telling stories of an unwarranted Israeli attack, of Israeli brutality?

You're not denying or disagreeing with their claims...you're saying the claims themselves do not exist, so that there's "no controversy"?

As expected, some from the ship are lying about the events as they unfolded. Others, though, confirm the IDF account of what happened - for example rejecting the lies that the IDF was firing live ammunition from the helicopters prior to boarding the vessel.

Well, Israeli officials initially agrees with your assessment--saying that all the protesters were aligned with al Queda, and so on.

You must have missed the memo: that Israeli officials have now retracted this, after being demonstrated liars.

I haven't seen the reports indicating the the Israeli government suggested they were all Al-Qaeda, let alone the subsequent retraction. I've followed this story carefully, though, and it's clear that this entire incident was planned out - violent struggle, throwing weapons overboard, group prayers before "battling the Jews", and desires for martyrdom. They got what they wanted, and they duped a bunch of morons into buying their propaganda bullshit.

OK, so...."Pure and simple" they are a bunch of anti-semites. Oh, sure, why not? Why not attempt the purely dishonest use of political correctness to attempt to shut down debate, to say "Case Closed"....because Bob deems it so?

Well, gues what: to so promiscuously use the attack mode of "anti-semite" is not only dishonest...it's cowardly. It whines: "stop criticizing us!" and posits this demand as sober debate.

It also defaces the true victims of anti-semitism, so it's disgusting.

Pretending that the violent folks aboard the Mavi Marmara who viciously attacked the young IDF soldiers aren't anti-semitic doesn't make it so. Spare me your feigned outrage, I know what anti-semitism is. It's not even that subtle - for example, look to the "go back to Auschwitz" comment from the Mavi Marmara in response to Israeli navy instructions to the ship to turn to Ashdod.

Edited June 15, 2010 by Bob