The "Humanitarians" brought not only food to Gaza, but violence and hatred against Israel.

Con, Readers. My final round: I have read the whole debate a few times, and I noticed it went a bit off its main topic during round 4. Therefore I will not discuss in this finale: Whether terrorists houses are destroyed rightly or not (maybe we can debate this as a topic sometime), Whether the Hezbollah attacked Israel rightly or not (relating to your round 4 post), Whether Rabbis who compare Palestinians to Amalekites are insane (I had difficulties understanding how is this related to anything, but my opinion is that they are). What I am going to refer to is the following: 1) Final rebuttals: Again, why was it legitimise to get on the ships and carry pistols 2) Main point and conclusion. 1) a) For the legitimacy of seizing the ships, I hereby remind you that by the international law, a country may declare and enforce a naval blockade over an entity it is in a war state with. The enforcement may happen in international waters. (Pro Round 2 Section 1) The Con failed to contradict this statement and attempted to diminish its importance. Not that only, he also repeated using an argument which is based on the wrong assumption as if seizing the ships was illegal. ("they went into international waters […] This is the making of an illegal attack in Open Waters…") An example could be United States declaring and enforcing a naval blockade over Cuba, as a part of its embargo over it: http://en.wikipedia.org... . b) Relating to your pistol argument. You repeatedly insist not to understand that the pistols were not carried for attacking. You said: "you're trying to justify the gun by showing it is not as bad as other guns". The unit that carried out the seizing of the ships is trained for combat and usually is armed with combat guns such as M-16, Galil, Ak-47, etc. The fact that they came with paintballs and pistols clearly shows that they came for a police-like mission and not a combat mission. (Police patrolmen use a club for their job, but carry a hidden pistol for self protection as well. They obviously don't mean to shoot people on the street, but if someone risks their lives they may refer to the pistol.) Therefore the distinction between a pistol and a combat gun is very relevant here. As an alternative for IDF's operation Con suggested the following (Round 2): "The Israeli army and navy could have simply barred the ships – as in, put one of their ships in the way" - Naval experts explain that this is not doable, if this is attempted the ships would probably collide causing damage and significantly risking the lives of the 600, mostly civilians. All Israel operations were targeted at not doing this, not harming innocents. 2) Back to the main argument: "The Humanitarians brought not only food to Gaza, but violence and hatred against Israel. " Con said: "Israel are preventing the other 3 quarters from getting through because they are either weapons, or things that can be made into weapons? May I point out again – ‘required aid'" - and may I point out – ‘what required aid!?' Dear readers, Hamas will not let the content of the ship get into Gaza strip! For several times Israel has tried delivering the goods but HAMAS DID NOT ACCEPT IT. http://www.guardian.co.uk... (6/3/2010) (Hamas claimed it did not accept the supplies because Israel did not release the activists. Israel released the activists and paid for their flight tickets back home the day before this article was published: http://www.dw-world.de... ) This proves that the aid itself is NOT important to the people in Gaza and that the aim of the flotilla was publicity and not humanitarian aid. Hamas did a much better public relations job then Israel. In fact, it was so much better that for the first 8 hours the Internet was full with dozens of videos and information by Hamas's side of the story (numbers such as 20, 30 and even 40 deaths were published in the media. It was also claimed that the sheikh Ra'id Salah was Injured or killed. That is, off course a lie, that was aimed to steer the Arab world's public opinion.) I said the flotilla convoy brought also violence. We all agree violence was involved, let me prove it was brought by the passengers: Watch the following video which was taped by the security camera and shows the preparations of the Flotilla rioters. http://www.youtube.com... It is now known that the group of men on the upper deck who confronted the IDF soldiers (and suffered most causalities) were well trained and paid for this ‘mission': http://www.israelnationalnews.com... – the paragraph starting with "Global jihadists were deeply involved…") Hatred against Israel was the result of this convoy, broadcasted in all online videos and websites. It published a clear message against Israel, putting it in a very dark light, and increasing the world hatred against it. Now for the summarize and conclusion: The flotilla convoy gathered supplies (and a group of jihadists) for the Gaza people, and sailed on its way to an area under a naval blockade. When they approached the Gaza shore territory, Israel navy contacted them and requested them to respect the legal blockade and to have their cargo inspected in Ashdod. They refused to do so, and by that forced IDF to stop them by getting on the ships. This was planned as you could see them preparing for the confrontation, in which violence was used against the soldiers on the Mavi Marmara and after serious life threating actions taken by the passenger's side, the soldiers used their pistol to defend themselves and killed 9 armed activists. The ships were then taken to Ashdod port, they were inspected and their cargo was delivered to Gaza. Well, actually it was'nt, because Hamas didn't want it. Wait, what?! HAMAS REFUSED TO TAKE IT. Yes, that's right. This cargo included nothing in shortage in Gaza, and Hamas turned it back. Meanwhile the media team on the ship published countless videos and pictures (some edited and hide the weapons the activists held - http://news.walla.co.il... ) all over the world. Wait, again – what?! A media team..? Exactly what for..? well I guess filming a movie in Gaza or taking pictures of whales was not the plan, this media team was set to capture the events on the ship, and show the world how the IDF stops them. When you try to feed the poor, it's important to buy advanced cameras and set a media team. After the pictures and videos arrived everywhere, presenting Israel as some pirate group, people started asking questions and getting mad at what they saw, and why wouldn't they? This information was aimed for this. Israel had a big mistake letting this information be published for so long without any explanation. That's why I'm doing this debate, to explain to you that the information you received or the things you heard, not only represent only one side of this story, but are also likely to be false or exaggerated. This is why, I claim that convoy was mostly a provocation, its target was getting sympathy and using it against Israel, and some might even say the plan was to cancel the blockade and then smuggle more weapons into Gaza and attack Israel. The "Humanitarians" Brought not only food to Gaza, but also violence and hatred against Israel. I call you to free Gaza, from Hamas, and urge you to vote Pro. Thank you Con for taking this up and conducting a most interesting debate, and thank you readers, I hope I affected you. Raz.