Former US Marine Attacked By Israeli Commandos

[jillian]

After seeing passengers shot at close range they tried to grab the weapons to stop the killing. Kenneth Nichols O'Keefe was later beaten by the Israelis.

A US war veteran said yesterday he confronted Israeli commandos when they raided a Gaza-bound aid ship which he had boarded as a peace activist, Anatolia news agency reported.

Kenneth Nichols O'Keefe, his face bruised and still stained with blood, flew to Istanbul from Tel Aviv, on his way to Ireland, the report said.
"We overpowered three Israeli commandos. They looked at us... They thought we would kill them, but we let them go," O'Keefe said, adding he took the weapon of one of the soldiers and emptied it, according to Anatolia.

The ex-marine said he saw five people being killed on board the Mavi Marmara.

YouTube - Passengers grabbed Israeli weapons to stop the killing

So? Since when was it a bright thing to get between an Israeli Commando and their target? If those "former Marine" peaceniks took any weapons it was because the Israeli's gave them up.

Just the usual faux outrage and sensationlist crap from the anti Jewish, pro murdering thug terrorist crowd.

Targets? Just the usual faux outrage and sensationlist crap from the pro Jewish, pro religious, thug terrorist crowd.

[/QUOTE]

no. he had it right. just more jew-bashing from the terrorist supporters.

 

[P F Tinmore]

seems neither side can see their own faults

REAL easy to see the difference between the side that uses terrorism against noncombatants as a strategy to wiping an established religion, race and nation from the face of the Earth, and the legitimate military of a nation chasing those criminals down.

Do you mean like when Israel sent its troops out to attack Palestinian civilians driving out 300,00 of them before the start of the 1948 war.

Is that the terrorism you are talking about?

 

[Shai]

Hard to argue with that...

...not that I think you are right, but if you cannot imagine anything but white or black... it is hard to discribe the concept of shades and colours...

Damn shame!

I do.

If anything the Israelis were much too restrained.

No other country would have put up with that shit. They boarded the ship to save civilians from being killed, rather than fire and sink the ship when she refused to stop, and go to Tel Aviv.

And obviously since Hamas refused to even take the aid, it was never about aid anyway.

It's a pure propoganda attack.

I can guarantee Israel is NOT happy with the outcome of their action - they do NOT want to kill civilians.
Underline: Good point. You will find the shades and colours between the Hamas betreyal of the population of Palestine and the poorley executed action taken by Israel forces.

Most likley the blockade will open up. Weapons smuggled in. Fired on Israel. Civilians killed. Israel strike back. Civilians killed. Next round. Same game.

Yes.

Look what happen there: Photo Galleries Hürriyet Daily News and Economic Review, Bringing you Turkish Daily News
http://www.haaretz.com/news/diploma...d-photos-of-beaten-israeli-commandos-1.294443

 

[PatekPhilippe]

seems neither side can see their own faults

REAL easy to see the difference between the side that uses terrorism against noncombatants as a strategy to wiping an established religion, race and nation from the face of the Earth, and the legitimate military of a nation chasing those criminals down.

Do you mean like when Israel sent its troops out to attack Palestinian civilians driving out 300,00 of them before the start of the 1948 war.

Is that the terrorism you are talking about?

You mean right after the Palestinians REJECTED UN Resolution 181...giving the Palestinians the homeland they now so desparately want...and then commenced a terrorist campaign against Israel that's lasted to this day?

You terrorist appeasers/coddlers can fuck off.

 

[CMike]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2KUcv452KbU]YouTube - FLOTILLA: We Con the World[/ame]

 

[Gunny]

The media made a hero out of the grandaddy of all terrorist, Yassir Arafat, gave him a Nobel peace prize. Israel had little choice but deal with Fatah as the government of Palestine. The Pali's voted Hamas power AFTER Israel allowed the Pali's to return.

So to answer your question, yes, Israel DID allow a terrorist organization because Arafat was willing to negotiate and no else represented the Pali's as legitimate government on the world stage.

It is black and white. Right vs wrong, and rather obviously so. Simple math: when the Pali's aren't shooting at Israel, Israel isn't shooting at Pali's. The reverse is not true.

There's a good guy and a bad guy here, one right and one wrong, one criminal one not. It's no more complicated than that and calling "shades of gray" does nothing but marginalize the actions on both sides.

Exactly. The olive branch was directed to the Palistinian people. Not Arafat, not Fatah and most certainly not Hamas.

It is strange, most of what you say I can agree with. You have a good insight to the mechanics in work. But you cannot possibly see anything else than exactly one good and one bad guy?

I can. But I guess we have a different opinions here. I also doesn't think shades marginalize anything.

The olive branch was extended to the official representative of the Pali's. That was Arafat and Fatah. Then the people voted Hamas into power to represent them. You vote for a criminal to represent you, don't cry when you suffer consequences for their actions.

The term bad guys and goods in the singular form is figurative, but then, you know that.

Play semantics with someone else. People playing your game of semantics are what has marginalized the topic from both sides by trying to present one side, the other or both as something they are not.

 

[Gunny]

There's a there good guy are and a a bad guy lot here, one of right and innocent one wrong people , one criminal getting one not. hurt It's no it more complicated is than that and calling "shades of gray" not does nothing but marginalize the actions on ok both sides.

Modifying quotes to alter their meaning is against the rules on this board. Please refrain from doing so in the future.

 

[Shogun]

REAL easy to see the difference between the side that uses terrorism against noncombatants as a strategy to wiping an established religion, race and nation from the face of the Earth, and the legitimate military of a nation chasing those criminals down.

Do you mean like when Israel sent its troops out to attack Palestinian civilians driving out 300,00 of them before the start of the 1948 war.

Is that the terrorism you are talking about?

You mean right after the Palestinians REJECTED UN Resolution 181...giving the Palestinians the homeland they now so desparately want...and then commenced a terrorist campaign against Israel that's lasted to this day?

You terrorist appeasers/coddlers can fuck off.

yea.. gee.. who WOULDN'T reject a UN resolution that offers to carve up your nation for the sake of creating a jewish bastion of hatred and ethnic purity?




Let's carve YOUR state up for the sake of a Kurdish homeland and see how many of your stupid fucking friends and family react in kind to such a threat. Thank god there is no word for hating kurds, eh fucknut?

 

[PatekPhilippe]

I see you got your talking ponts from the DailyKOS this morning....great debating skills you worthless piece of shit.

 

[Gunny]

seems neither side can see their own faults

REAL easy to see the difference between the side that uses terrorism against noncombatants as a strategy to wiping an established religion, race and nation from the face of the Earth, and the legitimate military of a nation chasing those criminals down.

Do you mean like when Israel sent its troops out to attack Palestinian civilians driving out 300,00 of them before the start of the 1948 war.

Is that the terrorism you are talking about?

You mean like when the Euro - powers and US gave Palestine, a British Mandate having been part of the Ottoman Empire that lost in a WWI, back to the people that were driven out by the Romans to start with?

Are you referring to Transjordan Arabs who have tried to claim Palestinian as an ethnicity? They can and could have gone ANYWHERE in the Arab world. Too bad they lost, and they lost by the rules of THEIR day, not ours. You people always trying to condemn the actions of others using today's rules when they were playing by the rules of their day and time need to try again.

Let me guess, you're one of those people who think we should "give everything back" to beginning of time until each human being occupies the exact say spot on Earth.

That was then, this is now. This saga has been kept along by Arab/Muslim hatred and intolerance. Period.

 

[CMike]

This is defintely a case of good vs evil. Israel has been the good, trying to work with them to get the aid to the people in Gaza, and the arab terorrists on the boat were the evil, who planned to ambush the Israelis as they came on board.

The only mistakes that Israel made were tactical. They didn't prepare for being ambushed by mercernies on the ship. I am not a tactical expert on how to handle this type of situation.

However, based on morality, it's black & white.

 

[edthecynic]

Former US Marine Attacked By Israeli Commandos

Probably one of the mercernies.

Too bad they didn't shoot and kill him for attacking the soliders.

Again the America-hating CON$ervoFascist scum shamelessly admit their craving for the slaughter of Americans!!!

 

[CMike]

 

[Coyote]

seems neither side can see their own faults

REAL easy to see the difference between the side that uses terrorism against noncombatants as a strategy to wiping an established religion, race and nation from the face of the Earth, and the legitimate military of a nation chasing those criminals down.

The distinction between the two sides in this matter is extremely blurred according to a recently released historical documents and books (based on them) written "new historians" - Benny Morris and Ilan Pappe for example.

I am no longer convinced there is a significant difference.

 

[CMike]

I am very convinced that there is a very clear difference.

One is good, and one is evil.

 

[Shogun]

if anyone has ANY questions about hateful jews just take a gander at Cmike's posts during the last month. Clearly, "chosen" doesn't imply an inability to ironically hate.

 

[Coyote]

I am very convinced that there is a very clear difference.

One is good, and one is evil.

When is ethnic cleansing ever good?

 

[CMike]

I am very convinced that there is a very clear difference.

One is good, and one is evil.

When is ethnic cleansing ever good?

You mean the Turk's cleaning of the Armenians and the Kurds?

 

[Shogun]

I am very convinced that there is a very clear difference.

One is good, and one is evil.

When is ethnic cleansing ever good?

the answer that Cmike will give you, of course, is "when jews do it".

 

[Coyote]

I am very convinced that there is a very clear difference.

One is good, and one is evil.

When is ethnic cleansing ever good?

You mean the Turk's cleaning of the Armenians and the Kurds?

That would be one example but that is not what I meant, unless you're trying to deflect rather than discuss the issue?