 | By yankeeuxb
August 9, 2010 | Share |
Mark Steel: No guns? They must be terrorists
So it might seem these procedures are pointless, in which case it makes no difference that the Israelis have agreed to co-operate with a United Nations inquiry into the episode in which nine people died after the Israeli Defence Force went aboard the Mavi Marmara as it sailed towards Gaza.
But it seemed to matter to the Israelis, because until this week they insisted their own inquiry was sufficient, and that was already under way. One fact emerging from this process was that the victims, according to "Sgt S" who shot six of them, "were without a doubt terrorists". And he produced evidence to back this up, which was: "I could see the murderous rage in their eyes".
This matches the classic definition of a terrorist according to international law, as someone "with murderous rage in their eyes", and shows the key witness in any terrorist trial isn't the forensics expert or explosives analyst but an optician. If they're trained well enough they can shine a light at the iris and tell whether you're short-sighted, long-sighted, Hamas or Basque separatist.
But there was more. According to the Jersusalem Post the IDF told the inquiry that the group on the boat were "well-trained and likely ex-military" because "each squad of the mercenaries was equipped with a Motorola communication device, so they could pass information to one another". A Motorola communication device? So these so-called peace-activists were armed with mobile phones! It's a wonder the whole Middle East wasn't set alight. And to think Motorola and other sinister arms dealers such as Nokia and Orange go round trading in this deadly merchandise quite openly.
One possible difficulty in proving the optically murderous gang's intent could be that none of them had guns. But the IDF dealt with that by saying the "mercenaries" preferred to use "bats, metal bars and knives, since opening fire would have made it blatantly clear they were terrorists and not peace activists". So this was another cunning trick of the terrorists, to disguise the fact they were terrorists by not doing anything terrorist.
Even more blatantly, the inquiry was told the group did have guns on board, but "the mercenaries threw their weapons overboard after the commandos took control of the vessel". Because that's classic guerrilla training, to carry guns right up until the moment when the enemy arrives, and then throw them away. This is the strategy of all great military thinkers.
On and on this goes, with Prime Minister Netanyahu making it clear he agrees with it, himself calling the victims "mercenaries". Because these mercenaries were trying to get goods such as medicine to an area that's under a blockade, which is typical mercenary behaviour, except instead of gun-running, they were inhaler-running.
But bit by bit Israel is finding it has to answer for itself publicly, and the old excuses are not so easily accepted. From now on they'll have to put a bit more thought into their bollocks, which has got to be for the good.
Joshua18
9 August, 2010 - 15:33
Rate this:
In Europe, it used to be a sine qua non that Jews were not allowed to defend themselves, no matter what. Nothing better demonstrated that than the Holocaust when the vast majority of gentiles in Europe either collaborated with the Nazis in that genocide or remained supremely indifferent to the plight of the Jews. The Allies were no different and as far as the Jews of Europe were concerned nations like Britain and the U.S. might as well have been fighting under the Swastika as their respective flags. Today, as far as Israel is concerned, absolutely nothing has changed. No matter what methods Israel uses to defend herself against Islamofascist terror she will be attacked and deligitimized. One of the methods "anti-Zionists" (yes, we are well aware what they really are) use to further their ultimate goal of the destruction of Israel is to blatantly lie, often by deliberately ommiting salient details. There is no better example of this kind of Goebbels-like propaganda than this utterly shameless and despicable piece by Mark Steel. If you doubt me, simply read this piece by Mark Gardner of the Community Security Trust:
My Jewish Optician Might Shoot Me
"It is neither CST’s desire nor role to act as a public relations outlet for Israel.
However, when antisemitism arises, directly, because facts have been deliberately omitted from an anti-Israel article, we will say so.
Today’s Independent provides one very small example of this. In this instance, the anti-Israel criticism, with not a word about Jews, is provided by columnist and comedian, Mark Steel.
Steel’s article is a disgraceful perversion of a Jerusalem Post interview with Israeli commandoes from the Turkish flotilla clash. Steel claims that Israeli “Sgt S” said the six people he shot “were without a doubt terrorists”."
Follow the link to read the rest of the article:
http://thecst.org.uk/blog/?p=1813