A correspondent sent me the following this morning and I responded around 10AM. I haven’t posted it till now since I awaited his permission. But I haven’t updated it since.
His statements in bold, my comments in response. I think it’s a good example of the kinds of varying responses that different people have to the same news. The question is, when reliable information finally does come out, will those who jumped to the wrong conclusion change their minds.
I am not enjoying this any more than you are and I appreciate you having returned my e-mail. But you tell me what you think I should believe given the following:
- That Israeli assault troops illegally boarded peaceful vessels either in international waters or in Gazan territorial waters (which Israel claims is not under occupation).
that’s one way of stating it. Israel’s blockade is of an enemy “state” which has sworn its destruction. the IDF boarded vessels filled with people singing songs about previous massacres of Jews (by Muhammad), organized by two groups with extensive ties to global jihad and its tactics of terror. these folk announced their intention to run the blockade from international waters – that was a declaration of hostile intent – and were duly intercepted. You can fight battles on the high seas.
- That these troops then opened fire with live ammunition.
they were attacked. do you really think the israelis came on board shooting away? how wd that help? if you believe this, then you enter the same bizarro world of the fotillistas in which they are liberating the poor Gazans from the Nazis.
- That maybe ten (Haaretz) or sixteen (Al Jazeera) people have been murdered on the high seas and more than 30 wounded.
murdered is a very loaded verb. are you sure they didn’t attack the israelis who boarded? in which case it’s not murder.
- That while this is less than a quarter of the deaths at Sharpeville it could be four times the number at Kent State, and this incident will always be linked with those other two in infamy.
you’re comparing this with peaceful demonstrations (altho kent state may have had a shooter from behind the students). this may not be an appropriate comparison. you’re jumping ahead of yourself, and it doesn’t sound to me like this pains you. you’re jumping on the “lethal narrative” here without even knowing the full story.
- That “Trade and Industry Minister Benjamin Ben-Eliezer voiced regret Monday morning for deaths aboard the Gaza-bound ships. “The images are certainly not pleasant. I can only voice regret at all the fatalities,” Ben-Eliezer told Army Radio. (That is quite an admission from somebody from this govenment.).
why? that israelis regret having to kill people. that hardly is an admission that they came down guns blazing. this is just what happened with Al Durah. The IDF expressed regret that the boy had died, esp if they killed him by accident, and people jumped on that as an admission of guilt. I’d hate to have you on my jury – especially if I were innocent.
That Netanyahu is reported to be considering flying home from Canada instead of meeting with Obama tomorrow where he was due to be treated warmly as a friend. The coward!
i’m not sure how you get coward from this. is it that you think he’s running away from a dressing down from Obama (which you’d like to see happen?)
That Israel has screwed this up big time in a way I never thought even they were capable of. Believe me Richard I never wished for anything like this. But I won’t be the only person this morning who is pretty bloody angry.
i don’t understand these regrets on your part. you seem eager to believe the worst and then claim it pains you. why don’t you calm your anger, and find out what happened. it may be that the “peace activists” were nothing of the sort and you’re swallowing the typical “lethal narrative.”
But feel free to tell me what you believe.
i’m not sure yet, but i’m willing to bet my guesses right now are closer than yours to the real situation.