Israelis release Serbian cameraman

Hopefully both got a little lesson what is not kosher to do.
(Ataman, 2 June 2010 21:27)

Like what? Traveling on sea in international waters? The only things which are not "kosher" are your inappropriate comments...

what a lie unmik passports dosnt exist anymore they are no longer valid! only kosovo passport exist.get a life serbs!
(mijari, 2 June 2010, 16:25)

Don't care less, Kosovo passport or Serbian: if entering Israel that's what Ben Gurion airport in Tel Aviv or port of Haifa is for. For terrorists and their supporters the jail in Negev desert is for. Very generous and humanitarian move from Tel Aviv to release both that fast. Hopefully both got a little lesson what is not kosher to do.

first of all im glad this journalist got freed as having being detained in the first place was wrong. my other only comment overall that its amazing how yesterday on one of articles Pro-serb were referring to few albanian citizens as "terrorist" being on the ship. its great to see how free press is portrayed that there were people from all over the world, but yet you isolate and racist towards the other.

Ataman I think your comparison of the flotila with a missile is a little exaggerated. The main aim of the ship and of the large majority aboard was to deliver aid to those in the Gaza strip - not to bomb anybody.

One can argue over whether it is wrong to attack those that are illegally boarding you. But the counter argument used by the Israelis to say that they suffered an unprovoked attack is a joke.

Let me use an analogy; I go out at night into an area where I know I might be attacked, but I take a knife.

I am attacked and use the knife on my attacker as he attacks me with his fists. He then draws a gun and kills me.

But it is my fault for carrying the knife? Or perhaps he shouldn't have attacked me in the first place?

"The Israeli media also report that there was another person from Serbia among those detained – according to unofficial reports this person is from Kosovo, traveling on an UNMIK passport, and was offered assistance as well from Serbia's embassy in Israel."

UNMIK Travel documents stopped being issued in March 2008 and had an expiry date of 2 years, therefore the last few UNMIK travel documents will have expired in March 2010, therefore it would have been impossible for someone to travel with UNMIK travel documentation in May 2010 as they are no longer in circulation and all of them have expired. The last paragraph of the article cannot be true. The only explanation is that he must have been travelling with out-of-date UNMIK Documentation, which is very unlikely as UNMIK travel documentation was never widely accepted in the first place and because Cyprus wouldn't accept out-of-date documentation.

traveling on an UNMIK passport, and was offered assistance as well

what a lie unmik passports dosnt exist anymore they are no longer valid! only kosovo passport exist.get a life serbs!

what a lie unmik passports dosnt exist anymore they are no longer valid! only kosovo passport exist.get a life serbs!
(mijari, 2 June 2010, 16:25)
===============

Maybe they are still valid. Just because they don't issue them any more doesn't mean that they have become obsolete.
Passports usually last you for many years after issue.

Ataman what you mean by the flotila 'opened fire first'.

When somebody comes onto your property - to seize / impound your posessions, I consider that 'opening fire'.

If we are talking politics, the main aim was not provocation, but to break the Gaza blockade. It is a valid political method, comparable to the methods used by the Americans in the Cuban missile crisis, if the other strikes first they are responsible.

But even if we take the provocation viewpoint. It takes 2 to take part in provocation, one to provoke and the other to be provoked. I prefer intelligent responses without recorse for violence.

But there is also the issue itself. Don't you think that the blockade should be lifted? Do you see that this action increased chances of that happening?

Do you ever envisage means justifying the ends? I can quite imagine an individualist such as yourself in a world gone crazy would resort to unorthodox tactics too, or am I wrong?

Like what? Traveling on sea in international waters?
(JohnC., 2 June 2010 22:58)

You have the choice, what company you are with.
This "mission" was all but peaceful. And the logic of IDF was flawless: "preventive action".

Compare: an intercontinental missile is launched. For a while it is traveling in the space. Even if the space is like "international waters" the correct action from the target country to intercept that missile. This is what happened.

The two persons in question had the choice whom to be with and in what form of protest to participate. Their choice was wrong - luckily they got a little slap on the hand and got away cheap.

International law? It does say: the strongest dog does multiply. Wish for Serbia the same as for Israel: the more nuclear warheads in arsenal, the better.

-------

The only things which are not "kosher" are your inappropriate comments...
(JohnC., 2 June 2010 22:58)

Could be from your point of view. Unfortunately we learned that green-peacenik arguments are not that good in Auschwitz or Jasenovac.

Would my relatives have ППШ http://tinyurl.com/2694ulg at their disposal at the right time - their arguments would be stronger. ;-)

Ataman I think your comparison of the flotila with a missile is a little exaggerated.
(bganon, 3 June 2010 01:58)

Yes, of course. That's what polemics is for.

------

The main aim of the ship and of the large majority aboard was to deliver aid to those in the Gaza strip - not to bomb anybody.
(bganon, 3 June 2010 01:58)

That's where we disagree. IMO, the main aim was provocation - and they did not made it secret. Also the building materials carried on board were very likely for Hamas bunkers.

------

Let me use an analogy; I go out at night into an area where I know I might be attacked, but I take a knife.

I am attacked and use the knife on my attacker as he attacks me with his fists. He then draws a gun and kills me.

But it is my fault for carrying the knife? Or perhaps he shouldn't have attacked me in the first place?
(bganon, 3 June 2010 01:58)

This is factually incorrect: the "victims" opened the fire on IDF first. Darwin law: who is stupid enough to open the fire on IDF in the hope, they are lesser prepared... well, he will obviously suffer the fate of dinosaurs and that's precisely what happened.

Otherwise try to walk along the "open" Hungarian - Austrian Schengen border and if an officer approaches you to check the papers yell some obscenity at him and shot a rifle in his direction. The result will be as "Darwinian" as the above.

Ataman what you mean by the flotila 'opened fire first'.
(bganon, 3 June 2010 19:36)

They fired rifles while IDF climbed the ship. The unspoken rule of war is you do not fire while your opponent has both hands busy. Same as if the pilot bails out of burning airplane. His opponents would try to find him on the ground - but never fire at the parachute.

This kind of war conduct is lowest of the low.

----

When somebody comes onto your property - to seize / impound your posessions, I consider that 'opening fire'.
(bganon, 3 June 2010 19:36)

It is a hostile action - but not aimed at maiming or killing. In retrospect, IDF was 100% correct - precisely the action of the enemy did prove it.

----

If we are talking politics, the main aim was not provocation, but to break the Gaza blockade. It is a valid political method, comparable to the methods used by the Americans in the Cuban missile crisis, if the other strikes first they are responsible.
(bganon, 3 June 2010 19:36)

Please read again what they said about readiness to become martyrs.

----

But even if we take the provocation viewpoint. It takes 2 to take part in provocation, one to provoke and the other to be provoked. I prefer intelligent responses without recorse for violence.
(bganon, 3 June 2010 19:36)

What response is intelligent to anyone who desires to become a martyr?

----

But there is also the issue itself. Don't you think that the blockade should be lifted? Do you see that this action increased chances of that happening?
(bganon, 3 June 2010 19:36)

I don't think that this action helped a tiny bit - just the opposite. It was part of new Turkish political game. I do not know details about the blockade. It could be justified, or maybe not. Blockades rarely do any good - but much depends on the implementation. This is of secondary importance.

----

Do you ever envisage means justifying the ends? I can quite imagine an individualist such as yourself in a world gone crazy would resort to unorthodox tactics too, or am I wrong?
(bganon, 3 June 2010 19:36)

No, means do not justify the ends. Bombing of Dresden did not justify the ending of WW-II, neither did Hiroshima or Nagasaki. And the world is always crazy, at least since mankind is out there.

what a lie unmik passports dosnt exist anymore they are no longer valid! only kosovo passport exist.get a life serbs!
(mijari, 2 June 2010, 16:25)

Don't care less, Kosovo passport or Serbian: if entering Israel that's what Ben Gurion airport in Tel Aviv or port of Haifa is for. For terrorists and their supporters the jail in Negev desert is for. Very generous and humanitarian move from Tel Aviv to release both that fast. Hopefully both got a little lesson what is not kosher to do.

Like what? Traveling on sea in international waters?
(JohnC., 2 June 2010 22:58)

You have the choice, what company you are with.
This "mission" was all but peaceful. And the logic of IDF was flawless: "preventive action".

Compare: an intercontinental missile is launched. For a while it is traveling in the space. Even if the space is like "international waters" the correct action from the target country to intercept that missile. This is what happened.

The two persons in question had the choice whom to be with and in what form of protest to participate. Their choice was wrong - luckily they got a little slap on the hand and got away cheap.

International law? It does say: the strongest dog does multiply. Wish for Serbia the same as for Israel: the more nuclear warheads in arsenal, the better.

-------

The only things which are not "kosher" are your inappropriate comments...
(JohnC., 2 June 2010 22:58)

Could be from your point of view. Unfortunately we learned that green-peacenik arguments are not that good in Auschwitz or Jasenovac.

Would my relatives have ППШ http://tinyurl.com/2694ulg at their disposal at the right time - their arguments would be stronger. ;-)

first of all im glad this journalist got freed as having being detained in the first place was wrong. my other only comment overall that its amazing how yesterday on one of articles Pro-serb were referring to few albanian citizens as "terrorist" being on the ship. its great to see how free press is portrayed that there were people from all over the world, but yet you isolate and racist towards the other.

Ataman I think your comparison of the flotila with a missile is a little exaggerated.
(bganon, 3 June 2010 01:58)

Yes, of course. That's what polemics is for.

------

The main aim of the ship and of the large majority aboard was to deliver aid to those in the Gaza strip - not to bomb anybody.
(bganon, 3 June 2010 01:58)

That's where we disagree. IMO, the main aim was provocation - and they did not made it secret. Also the building materials carried on board were very likely for Hamas bunkers.

------

Let me use an analogy; I go out at night into an area where I know I might be attacked, but I take a knife.

I am attacked and use the knife on my attacker as he attacks me with his fists. He then draws a gun and kills me.

But it is my fault for carrying the knife? Or perhaps he shouldn't have attacked me in the first place?
(bganon, 3 June 2010 01:58)

This is factually incorrect: the "victims" opened the fire on IDF first. Darwin law: who is stupid enough to open the fire on IDF in the hope, they are lesser prepared... well, he will obviously suffer the fate of dinosaurs and that's precisely what happened.

Otherwise try to walk along the "open" Hungarian - Austrian Schengen border and if an officer approaches you to check the papers yell some obscenity at him and shot a rifle in his direction. The result will be as "Darwinian" as the above.

traveling on an UNMIK passport, and was offered assistance as well

what a lie unmik passports dosnt exist anymore they are no longer valid! only kosovo passport exist.get a life serbs!

what a lie unmik passports dosnt exist anymore they are no longer valid! only kosovo passport exist.get a life serbs!
(mijari, 2 June 2010, 16:25)
===============

Maybe they are still valid. Just because they don't issue them any more doesn't mean that they have become obsolete.
Passports usually last you for many years after issue.

Hopefully both got a little lesson what is not kosher to do.
(Ataman, 2 June 2010 21:27)

Like what? Traveling on sea in international waters? The only things which are not "kosher" are your inappropriate comments...

"The Israeli media also report that there was another person from Serbia among those detained – according to unofficial reports this person is from Kosovo, traveling on an UNMIK passport, and was offered assistance as well from Serbia's embassy in Israel."

UNMIK Travel documents stopped being issued in March 2008 and had an expiry date of 2 years, therefore the last few UNMIK travel documents will have expired in March 2010, therefore it would have been impossible for someone to travel with UNMIK travel documentation in May 2010 as they are no longer in circulation and all of them have expired. The last paragraph of the article cannot be true. The only explanation is that he must have been travelling with out-of-date UNMIK Documentation, which is very unlikely as UNMIK travel documentation was never widely accepted in the first place and because Cyprus wouldn't accept out-of-date documentation.

Ataman I think your comparison of the flotila with a missile is a little exaggerated. The main aim of the ship and of the large majority aboard was to deliver aid to those in the Gaza strip - not to bomb anybody.

One can argue over whether it is wrong to attack those that are illegally boarding you. But the counter argument used by the Israelis to say that they suffered an unprovoked attack is a joke.

Let me use an analogy; I go out at night into an area where I know I might be attacked, but I take a knife.

I am attacked and use the knife on my attacker as he attacks me with his fists. He then draws a gun and kills me.

But it is my fault for carrying the knife? Or perhaps he shouldn't have attacked me in the first place?

Ataman what you mean by the flotila 'opened fire first'.

When somebody comes onto your property - to seize / impound your posessions, I consider that 'opening fire'.

If we are talking politics, the main aim was not provocation, but to break the Gaza blockade. It is a valid political method, comparable to the methods used by the Americans in the Cuban missile crisis, if the other strikes first they are responsible.

But even if we take the provocation viewpoint. It takes 2 to take part in provocation, one to provoke and the other to be provoked. I prefer intelligent responses without recorse for violence.

But there is also the issue itself. Don't you think that the blockade should be lifted? Do you see that this action increased chances of that happening?

Do you ever envisage means justifying the ends? I can quite imagine an individualist such as yourself in a world gone crazy would resort to unorthodox tactics too, or am I wrong?

Ataman what you mean by the flotila 'opened fire first'.
(bganon, 3 June 2010 19:36)

They fired rifles while IDF climbed the ship. The unspoken rule of war is you do not fire while your opponent has both hands busy. Same as if the pilot bails out of burning airplane. His opponents would try to find him on the ground - but never fire at the parachute.

This kind of war conduct is lowest of the low.

----

When somebody comes onto your property - to seize / impound your posessions, I consider that 'opening fire'.
(bganon, 3 June 2010 19:36)

It is a hostile action - but not aimed at maiming or killing. In retrospect, IDF was 100% correct - precisely the action of the enemy did prove it.

----

If we are talking politics, the main aim was not provocation, but to break the Gaza blockade. It is a valid political method, comparable to the methods used by the Americans in the Cuban missile crisis, if the other strikes first they are responsible.
(bganon, 3 June 2010 19:36)

Please read again what they said about readiness to become martyrs.

----

But even if we take the provocation viewpoint. It takes 2 to take part in provocation, one to provoke and the other to be provoked. I prefer intelligent responses without recorse for violence.
(bganon, 3 June 2010 19:36)

What response is intelligent to anyone who desires to become a martyr?

----

But there is also the issue itself. Don't you think that the blockade should be lifted? Do you see that this action increased chances of that happening?
(bganon, 3 June 2010 19:36)

I don't think that this action helped a tiny bit - just the opposite. It was part of new Turkish political game. I do not know details about the blockade. It could be justified, or maybe not. Blockades rarely do any good - but much depends on the implementation. This is of secondary importance.

----

Do you ever envisage means justifying the ends? I can quite imagine an individualist such as yourself in a world gone crazy would resort to unorthodox tactics too, or am I wrong?
(bganon, 3 June 2010 19:36)

No, means do not justify the ends. Bombing of Dresden did not justify the ending of WW-II, neither did Hiroshima or Nagasaki. And the world is always crazy, at least since mankind is out there.