RAW Video: Israelis were attacked by Flotilla Mob

[The Rabbi]

This entire fiasco has nothing to do with "humanitarian aid". Nothing. It is a purposeful attempt to break the blockade and spew propaganda. Nothing more. Whatever happens to the "activists" is too damn bad. Bad choices have consequences.

And its just not feasible that people might want to break the blockade for humanitarian reasons, eh?

Man this thread sure does bring out the stupid in you people.

It's feasible. It just isn't the case here, where you have terrorist orgs launching a ship filled with terrorists and transporting goods used in terrorist attacks.
But nice try, troll.

 

[The Rabbi]

And yet you've continued to ignore the quote I keep posting.

And why might that be, you dishonest piece of shit?

and LMFAO. You think that Israel could nuke Japan because a Japanese merchant ship was intending to break the blockade?



Way to hugely fail. Fuck but you are stupid.

He's addressed it numerous times. You keep proving only that you are an ugly smelly troll.

Oh? Please provide links to exactly where he addressed it.

Your very own post, dickwad. Try reading the whole thing, not just your golden words.

 

[Nik]

He's addressed it numerous times. You keep proving only that you are an ugly smelly troll.

Oh? Please provide links to exactly where he addressed it.

Your very own post, dickwad. Try reading the whole thing, not just your golden words.

Are you really this fucking stupid?

Nowhere in my post does he address the quote. He makes his own point, which I have repeatedly explained is incorrect, but he refuses to address that "As a general rule, all acts of hostility in neutral jurisdiction are forbidden. This includes both visit and search and capture or destruction"

 

[Nik]

This entire fiasco has nothing to do with "humanitarian aid". Nothing. It is a purposeful attempt to break the blockade and spew propaganda. Nothing more. Whatever happens to the "activists" is too damn bad. Bad choices have consequences.

And its just not feasible that people might want to break the blockade for humanitarian reasons, eh?

Man this thread sure does bring out the stupid in you people.

It's feasible. It just isn't the case here, where you have terrorist orgs launching a ship filled with terrorists and transporting goods used in terrorist attacks.
But nice try, troll.

Wow. Way to make some shit up there.

Terrorist organizations? No. Sorry, but fail.

As for goods used in terrorist attacks? Right...all those wheelchairs will be disassembled and made into bombs, eh?

 

[The Rabbi]

And its just not feasible that people might want to break the blockade for humanitarian reasons, eh?

Man this thread sure does bring out the stupid in you people.

It's feasible. It just isn't the case here, where you have terrorist orgs launching a ship filled with terrorists and transporting goods used in terrorist attacks.
But nice try, troll.

Wow. Way to make some shit up there.

Terrorist organizations? No. Sorry, but fail.

As for goods used in terrorist attacks? Right...all those wheelchairs will be disassembled and made into bombs, eh?

Nah, they aren't terrorists, just misunderstood.
Troll
IHH (?nsani Yard?m Vakf?) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Nik]

It's feasible. It just isn't the case here, where you have terrorist orgs launching a ship filled with terrorists and transporting goods used in terrorist attacks.
But nice try, troll.

Wow. Way to make some shit up there.

Terrorist organizations? No. Sorry, but fail.

As for goods used in terrorist attacks? Right...all those wheelchairs will be disassembled and made into bombs, eh?

Nah, they aren't terrorists, just misunderstood.
Troll
IHH (?nsani Yard?m Vakf?) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Oh, well, if Israel says it, it must be true. So IHH must be on the terrorist watch list of the US right? Oh...no...guess they aren't. Well on the UN at least? Nope....not there either. Instead there are just "allegations" of "links".

So you go from allegations of links to terrorists to them actually being terrorists. Nice jump there.

 

[The Rabbi]

They're terrorists. Please provide links saying they arent.

 

[CurveLight]

They're terrorists. Please provide links saying they arent.

Your favorite hobby is to wear a clear rain suit sucking a donkey's dick in Juarez, Mexico. Please provide links proving you don't suck donkey dicks. Bitch.

 

[CurveLight]

They're terrorists. Please provide links saying they arent.

Nor does any of that mention that it was illegal to bust the troops heads when they invaded the ship.

Paragraph 632

Law of Naval Warfare NWIP 10-2

The flotilla had a legal obligation to allow the IDF to board and inspect the cargo.

That's nice but it did not address my post.

Yes it proves it was illegal for the passengers to resist the inspection.

 

[CurveLight]

THE LAW THAT MENTIONS IT BEING IMMATERIAL DOES NOT MENTIONS SEARCHING SHIPS YOU STUPID FUCKING IDIOT.

Again. Since you are so fucking dense.

Keep in mind, this is from the document YOU cited.

As a general rule, all acts of hostility in neutral jurisdiction are forbidden. This includes both visit and search and capture or destruction

Do you know what forbidden means? IT MEANS NOT ALLOWED.

Christ, are you fucking drunk or something?

Pay close attention you idiot twat rot:

"The liability of a blockade runner to capture begins and terminates with her voyage or flight."

Do you know what that means? Of course not.

Oh....and what was that stoopid question you asked about nukes? The answer is yes....nukes could be used you dumb bitch.

And yet you've continued to ignore the quote I keep posting.

And why might that be, you dishonest piece of shit?

and LMFAO. You think that Israel could nuke Japan because a Japanese merchant ship was intending to break the blockade?



Way to hugely fail. Fuck but you are stupid.

I haven't ignored your attempted deflection and have pointed out it does not negate the blockade laws you dumbfuck.

As for nukes....look at paragraph 613 you dumbfuck. There are no laws prohibiting use of nukes in an armed conflict.

You keep ignoring:

Pay close attention you idiot twat rot:

"The liability of a blockade runner to capture begins and terminates with her voyage or flight."

Do you know what that means? Of course not.

 

[CurveLight]

This entire fiasco has nothing to do with "humanitarian aid". Nothing. It is a purposeful attempt to break the blockade and spew propaganda. Nothing more. Whatever happens to the "activists" is too damn bad. Bad choices have consequences.

And its just not feasible that people might want to break the blockade for humanitarian reasons, eh?

Man this thread sure does bring out the stupid in you people.

It's feasible. It just isn't the case here, where you have terrorist orgs launching a ship filled with terrorists and transporting goods used in terrorist attacks.
But nice try, troll.

You're ignoring many aspects and nothing found on the ships have strictly military applications.

I really think more people would benefit if they independently sought out information instead of taking such a global warming approach.

 

[CurveLight]

Oh? Please provide links to exactly where he addressed it.

Your very own post, dickwad. Try reading the whole thing, not just your golden words.

Are you really this fucking stupid?

Nowhere in my post does he address the quote. He makes his own point, which I have repeatedly explained is incorrect, but he refuses to address that "As a general rule, all acts of hostility in neutral jurisdiction are forbidden. This includes both visit and search and capture or destruction"

Myself and others have explained what "As a general rule" means and you keep ignoring it. It basically means two nations in conflict cannot use a neutral nation as a battleground to launch attacks. This is why we bribed Turkey to use their country to attack Iraq but Turkey turned down so the bribe so we could not launch attacks from that country.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Oh? And exactly what are the exceptions to that rule?

And we are talking about a hypothetical attack in Japanese territorial waters you stupid fuck.

Try to keep up.

I am keeping up. As I said, "As a general rule" implies there are exceptions, yet you keep repeating it like it proves that attacks are never allowed. In other words, you are using the wrong argument in an attempt to make your point.

 

[P F Tinmore]

They're terrorists. Please provide links saying they arent.

Paragraph 632

Law of Naval Warfare NWIP 10-2

The flotilla had a legal obligation to allow the IDF to board and inspect the cargo.

That's nice but it did not address my post.

Yes it proves it was illegal for the passengers to resist the inspection.

This was not an inspection. It was a capture and seize.

 

[CurveLight]

They're terrorists. Please provide links saying they arent.

That's nice but it did not address my post.

Yes it proves it was illegal for the passengers to resist the inspection.

This was not an inspection. It was a capture and seize.

They have the legal right to do a capture and seize as well.

 

[skookerasbil]

People are tiring of this crap. Next time............bring a big ass torpedo and ask questions later. Any time you can put a few of these religious k00ks on the bottom of the sea its a win-win for civlization!!!

"See ya!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

 

[P F Tinmore]

Yes it proves it was illegal for the passengers to resist the inspection.

This was not an inspection. It was a capture and seize.

They have the legal right to do a capture and seize as well.

There are different classes of ships, military, commercial, etc. but aid ships were not mentioned. However, there were three classes exempt from seizure or destroy: religious, scientific, and philanthropic. I wonder if aid could be classified as philanthropic?

 

[CurveLight]

This was not an inspection. It was a capture and seize.

They have the legal right to do a capture and seize as well.

There are different classes of ships, military, commercial, etc. but aid ships were not mentioned. However, there were three classes exempt from seizure or destroy: religious, scientific, and philanthropic. I wonder if aid could be classified as philanthropic?

They are clearly of political origin and a blockade applies to all ships civilian and military. There is no legal argument from the blockade side and the activists were wrong to resist inspection.