Iran condemns 'Israeli spy' to death

[Sofiyya 1,687]

Sorry, I like to deal in reality. You seem to have deviated from reality from the onset of this, or any thread that either shows Israel in a positive light, or shows any Muslim in a negative one. Israel is no angel in this conflict, nor should it be treated as one. But for you to call it a terrorist group, on par with Hamas is absurd.

Your major point in any of these threads is to personally attack me. Otherwise, you make no other contribution to address.

[The_Dude 1,142]

What is the normal penalty for espionage, in any country? Sure, we don't do the executions these days but that's hardly unusual. Mati Hari ring a bell? What's your take on civilian deaths?

You should ask Johnathan Pollard that question.

[IR5FORMUMSIE 850]

Sorry, I like to deal in reality. You seem to have deviated from reality from the onset of this, or any thread that either shows Israel in a positive light, or shows any Muslim in a negative one. Israel is no angel in this conflict, nor should it be treated as one. But for you to call it a terrorist group, on par with Hamas is absurd.

Cardinal Richelieu famously opined,"treason is only a matter of dates." Today's Hamas is yesterday's Irgun, it all depends on your P.O.V. Now I have a real problem with killing people, especially civilians, and I have little faith in the Iranian justice system.

[IR5FORMUMSIE 850]

You should ask Johnathan Pollard that question.

I know (why WAS he spying for Israel in the first place?) and Aldrich Ames and Boyce and Lee but that's now, and it wasn't so long ago that the Rosenbergs paid the ultimate price (for what it's worth I believe that they were innocent).

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

What is the normal penalty for espionage, in any country? Sure, we don't do the executions these days but that's hardly unusual. Mati Hari ring a bell? What's your take on civilian deaths?

That is true. I doubt he received a fair trial, but then I wasn't there.

On the civilian front - they are regretful but not always preventable. People in large numbers can end up hurting each other even when a police force is not present. (Black Friday in the US is an example of this)

Israel should probably follow the US lead regarding blockades (referring to North Korea, IE demand the right to board but do not board by force.)

On the topic of the 5 rounds, it may have been in self defense or it may not have. 5 rounds seems like alot but really not when fired from a sub machine gun with a 3 round burst fire.

[IR5FORMUMSIE 850]

That is true. I doubt he received a fair trial, but then I wasn't there.

On the civilian front - they are regretful but not always preventable. People in large numbers can end up hurting each other even when a police force is not present. (Black Friday in the US is an example of this)

Israel should probably follow the US lead regarding blockades (referring to North Korea, IE demand the right to board but do not board by force.)

On the topic of the 5 rounds, it may have been in self defense or it may not have. 5 rounds seems like alot but really not when fired from a sub machine gun with a 3 round burst fire.

I guess it might be argued that it's similar to the FISA court but the penalty was a bit harsher. Five rounds, I suppose it depends on whether the soldier was freaking out or what he was told before be boarded the vessel. Under the felony murder rule it wouldn't make a difference.

[mawilson 2,133]

No, you should be on a peaceful protest flotilla so you can get shot in the head.

There's no such thing as a "peaceful flotilla". Any flotilla sailing towards the

Gaza Strip is an intentional violation of Israeli law and is a deliberate act of

provocation.

[The_Dude 1,142]

Your major point in any of these threads is to personally attack me. Otherwise, you make no other contribution to address.

So, asking you to be honest and post something truthful is personally attacking you? Nice to see your perspective on this.

[sandinista! 1,816]

There's no such thing as a "peaceful flotilla". Any flotilla sailing towards the

Gaza Strip is an intentional violation of Israeli law and is a deliberate act of

provocation.

Well so was sitting at a white lunch counter if you were a black man in Mississippi 50 years ago, protesting Jim Crow. What is yr point?

[IR5FORMUMSIE 850]

There's no such thing as a "peaceful flotilla". Any flotilla sailing towards the

Gaza Strip is an intentional violation of Israeli law and is a deliberate act of

provocation.

Protesting on behalf of the people of Gaza is illegal, because Bibi says so. Unarmed civilians are upholding international law but that is an act of provocation. The penalty for anyone violating Israeli law by protesting is summary execution by machine gun or bulldozer. Gotcha.

The blockade IS illegal no matter what Israel claims Info & news - Opinion / Analysis Thursday, 23 June 2011 12:59

An expert legal opinion on International Maritime Law and the Gaza blockade

Ambassador Craig Murray is a former Alternate Head of the UK Delegation to the United Nations Preparatory Commission on the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. He was deputy head of the teams which negotiated the UK's maritime boundaries with France, Germany, Denmark (Faeroe Islands) and Ireland.

As Head of the Maritime Section of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, he was responsible for giving real time political and legal clearance to Royal Navy boarding operations in the Persian Gulf following the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, in enforcement of the UN authorised blockade against Iraqi weapons shipments.

Ambassador Craig Murray is therefore an internationally recognised authority on maritime jurisdiction and naval boarding issues.

His analysis of the Israeli blockade of Gaza and the right of the Gaza flotilla to sail

"The legal position is plain. A vessel outwith the territorial waters (12 mile limit) of a coastal state is on the high seas under the sole jurisdiction of the flag state of the vessel. The ship has a positive right of passage on the high seas. The coastal state can regulate economic activity exploiting the resources of the seas and continental shelf up to 200 miles, the extent of the continental shelf, or the agreed boundary, but there is no indication of fishing, oil drilling or analagous economic activity in this case. The vessel is entitled to free passage."

"This right of free passage is guaranteed by the UN Convention on the Law of the Seas, to which the United States is a full party. Any incident which takes place upon a US flagged ship on the High Seas is subject to United States legal jurisdiction. A ship is entitled to look to its flag state for protection from attack on the High Seas."

"Israel has declared a blockade on Gaza and justified previous fatal attacks on neutral civilian vessels on the High Seas in terms of enforcing that embargo, under the legal cover given by the San Remo Manual of International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea."

"There are however fundamental flaws in this line of argument. It falls completely on one fact alone. San Remo only applies to blockade in times of armed conflict. Israel is not currently engaged in an armed conflict, and presumably does not wish to be. San Remo does not confer any right to impose a permanent blockade outwith times of armed conflict, and in fact specifically excludes as illegal a general blockade on an entire population."

"It should not be denied that Israel suffers from sporadic terrorist attacks emanating from Gaza.

However this does not come close to reaching the bar of armed conflict that would trigger the right to impose a limited naval blockade in terms of San Remo. To make a comparison, in the 1970's and 1980's the United Kingdom suffered continued terrorist attack from the Irish Republican Army, with much more murderous impact causing many more deaths than anything Israel has suffered in recent years from Gaza. However nobody would seek to argue that the UK would have had the right to mount a general naval blockade of the Republic of Ireland in the 1970's and 1980's, even though the Republic was undoubtedly the base for much IRA supply and operations. Justifications of Israeli naval action against neutral civilian ships by San Remo is based on special pleading and an impossibly strained definition of the term "armed conflict".

For more information Craig Murray can be reached at craigmurray1710@btinternet.com

My link

[mawilson 2,133]

Well so was sitting at a white lunch counter if you were a black man in Mississippi 50 years ago, protesting Jim Crow. What is yr point?

My point is, feel free to be brave but don't complain when you get shot in the head.

[mawilson 2,133]

Protesting on behalf of the people of Gaza is illegal, because Bibi says so. Unarmed civilians are upholding international law but that is an act of provocation. The penalty for anyone violating Israeli law by protesting is summary execution by machine gun or bulldozer. Gotcha.

You think it's a fuсking game? Israel's laws are a fuсking joke to you and you can just break them when you feel like it?

Well it's not a game - Israel is very serious about its security. If you fuсk the system, the system will fuсk you back and Furkan Durkan and anybody else who gets in the way.

[scandal 951]

Today's Hamas is yesterday's Irgun, it all depends on your P.O.V.

Ohrrly. Does it now.

The penalty for anyone violating Israeli law by protesting is summary execution by machine gun or bulldozer. Gotcha.

Ohrrly. Is it now.

[Ban Hammer 13,554]

i have a difficult time feeling sympathy for someone who intentionally stands in front of a bulldozer - it's almost darwin at work.

[mawilson 2,133]

i have a difficult time feeling sympathy for someone who intentionally stands in front of a bulldozer - it's almost darwin at work.

Seriously, their top speed is like 10 or 15 miles per hour. It's not like you can't run away from a bulldozer.