Boycotts of Israel are a protected form of free speech - LA Times

[Mahourai]

Because mistaking a state of the art US surveillance ship for random Egyptian shit is totally a believeable mistake Israeli pilots would make.

It's not like the Egyptian navy was using canoes in 1967. They had World War II-era destroyers, and the USS Liberty was a converted World War II-era ship frame.

[Shadowferal]

The Assault on the USS Liberty Still Covered Up After 26 Years

[KrazyK923]

Its pretty fucking pathetic that certain individuals can constantly post threads about SJW bullshit but threads about anti-SJW topics are banned immediately.

[Aeula]

It's sad that this is the effect that money in politics has. The politicians are willing to shut down the citizens' right to free speech over political gain. It's crazy that they're trying to quash a movement which wants equal rights for all citizens and an end to illegal settlements.

Oh the irony, considering you usually support politicians doing just that.

[Fandis]

Because mistaking a state of the art US surveillance ship for random Egyptian shit is totally a believeable mistake Israeli pilots would make. Especially when said ship is flying a US flag. But this is just conspiracy theory. The much more likely explanation is probably that all the Israeli pilots who attacked were shortsighted and forgot their glasses that day.

Yeah I'm sure it went like this at the Israeli army command's meeting: "we are in the middle of a war vs Egypt, but man, it's too easy and simply boring. Let's also attack the US, our main ally, that's also about 50 times as strong as ourselves. That'll sure give us some challenge - Yeah good idea, let's do it!"

Really, try employing some common sense

[AeneasBK]

Yeah I'm sure it went like this at the Israeli army command's meeting: "we are in the middle of a war vs Egypt, but man, it's too easy and simply boring. Let's also attack the US, our main ally, that's also about 50 times as strong as ourselves. That'll sure give us some challenge - Yeah good idea, let's do it!"

Really, try employing some common sense

WAsn't the boat in question a CIA spy boat. Maybe they just wanted a little privacy...

"Sure is nice having our own nation and all but shame the Americans are always peering over the fence. How about while we're sinking Egyptian boats we sink thier spyboat and pretend it was an accident in the heat of battle. Best bit is we won't even have to pay full cost unless America wants to admit how much hi-tech kit they had on board "

[Shadowferal]

Yeah I'm sure it went like this at the Israeli army command's meeting: "we are in the middle of a war vs Egypt, but man, it's too easy and simply boring. Let's also attack the US, our main ally, that's also about 50 times as strong as ourselves. That'll sure give us some challenge - Yeah good idea, let's do it!"

Really, try employing some common sense

Try employing it yourself. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Li...lved_questions
Attacking a US vessel and saying it was an accident was a lot easier to do after failing to blame Egypt.

[Flutterguy]

They said they'd withdraw funding from businesses that participate in the boycott. That's not an attack on free speech. They did the same thing to the Boy Scouts of America for their anti-gay stance.

[Bushtuckrman]

You are free to proudly proclaim your vitriolic bigotry and absolute ignorance, others are free to laugh in your face. Just don't go making threats about killing or terrorizing people and you'll be fine.

Enjoying the victim complex though, it suits you

lol u got banned. No I don't play the victim I am stating reality lol.

[Deleted]

Yeah I'm sure it went like this at the Israeli army command's meeting: "we are in the middle of a war vs Egypt, but man, it's too easy and simply boring. Let's also attack the US, our main ally, that's also about 50 times as strong as ourselves. That'll sure give us some challenge - Yeah good idea, let's do it!"

Really, try employing some common sense

The idea was not to go to war with USA. The idea was to blame the attack on Egypt and get USA into their war.

[Holas]

The idea was not to go to war with USA. The idea was to blame the attack on Egypt and get USA into their war.

I guess that's why Israeli forces came to the attacked ship (and were surprised they don't speak arabic), offered help and contacted US embassy to tell them the story. How low intellect one must have to believe this shit? Or is it when Jews involved than some would believe anything?

This law might actually HURT the Israeli companies...(even though its a good move in general)
I will explain:

There was a show not while ago on the boycotted Israeli companies and it found out that they were the most successful when compared to non-boycotted companies. It was because when BDS targets a company, nothing really changes at anti-Israeli people -they boycott most (not all as they don't want to return to be a cave man) already. However, when those names published then pro-Israeli buyers try to buy specifically from that company which made it very successful because the boycot....

[Shadowferal]

I guess that's why Israeli forces came to the attacked ship (and were surprised they don't speak arabic), offered help and contacted US embassy to tell them the story. How low intellect one must have to believe this shit? Or is it when Jews involved than some would believe anything?

How could anyone objectively reading the reports not believe?

From wiki link posted above:

Israeli offers of help: The Liberty's captain, several of the Liberty's crewmen and the Israelis stated that help was offered, but at different times. The Liberty's Deck Log, signed by the captain, has an entry at 15:03 stating: "One MTB returned to the ship and signalled, 'Do you need help.' Commanding officer directed that 'Negative' be sent in reply." The captain testified before the Court of Inquiry, on page 40 of recorded testimony: "One of the boats signaled by flashing light, in English, 'do you require assistance?' We had no means to communicate with the boat by light but hoisted code lima india. The signal intended to convey the fact that the ship was maneuvering with difficulty and that they should keep clear.". Ensign David G. Lucas, First Lieutenant and Gunnery Officer testified in the Court of Inquiry on page 17 that: "another patrol craft approached us from the starboard side and did manage to get clear of the smoke. The signalman took the message, 'do you need help?'". Harold Jessie Thompson, Chief Communications Technician testified in the court of inquiry on page 88 that: "When they were about 500 yards off, the torpedo boat turned astern and came up on the stern on the starboard side and flashed, 'do you need help?'". James Ennes, in his book about the attack, on pages 102 and 103, acknowledges the Israelis offered help, says it occurred at 16:30, and the offer was rejected. The Israel Defense Forces's History Report about the attack on page 19, and the Ram Ron report on page 9 both say that help was offered at 16:40 and the offer was rejected.

U.S. rescue attempts: At least two rescue attempts were launched from U.S. aircraft carriers nearby but were recalled, according to the Liberty's senior Naval Security Group officer, Lieutenant Commander David Lewis. Lewis made an audio recording and later wrote about a meeting 6th Fleet Rear Admiral Lawrence Geis requested in his cabins: "He told me that since I was the senior Liberty survivor on board he wanted to tell me in confidence what had actually transpired. He told me that upon receipt of our SOS, aircraft were launched to come to our assistance and then Washington was notified. He said that the Secretary of Defense (Robert McNamara) had ordered that the aircraft be returned to the carrier, which was done. RADM Geis then said that he speculated that Washington may have suspected that the aircraft carried nuclear weapons so he put together another flight of conventional aircraft that had no capability of carrying nuclear weapons. These he launched to assist us and again notified Washington of his actions. Again McNamara ordered the aircraft recalled. He requested confirmation of the order being unable to believe that Washington would let us sink. This time President Johnson ordered the recall with the comment that he did not care if every man drowned and the ship sank, but that he would not embarrass his allies. This is, to the best of my ability, what I recall transpiring 30 years ago."

------------------------

[Belize]

ITT: no shit sherfuck.

Next thread on Gen-OT: "Scientist discover air is needed to breathe and live"

[Deleted]

I don't think trying to legally prohibit boycotts is "SJW bullshit," but maybe that's just me.

Lol how do you actually legally prohibit boycott? Its down to personal choice.

- - - Updated - - -

They said they'd withdraw funding from businesses that participate in the boycott. That's not an attack on free speech. They did the same thing to the Boy Scouts of America for their anti-gay stance.

Why does the USA feels like protecting the interests of another country so vehemently?

[Deleted]

Its hilarious you think it is illegally settled. It has always been the Jews land. It has been taken from them many times but now they have it back. To even think that marauder who raped and pillaged and stole the land have any rational claim to it is lunacy.

Ah, yes, all land is owned by the original owner - Which time line are we talking?
Does the Earth belong to Homo Erectus?

- - - Updated - - -

Actions have consequences... You are absolutely free to say anything you want, and you are free to boycott who you wish, but you cant piss and cry if there are consequences for your actions... Others are just as free to say what they want about YOU and to boycott YOU.

Yes but state sanction to legitimate speech is unconstitutional.

[nextormento]

Anything short of a "hostile workplace environment for a Jewish employee" kind of claim is bound to be rejected.

- - - Updated - - -

The Palestinians have a legitimate claim to that land that needs to be recognized and honored.

What's the source of legitimacy for this claim?.

[Rooflesstoofless]

Boycotting something you don't agree with is protected speech, plain and simple.

"Do you want some iced cream?"
"No thanks, I don't really care for how the dairy industry treats their cows."
"Anti-bovine! To the gallows with you!"

- - - Updated - - -

Why does the USA feels like protecting the interests of another country so vehemently?

Lobbying.

/10char

[oxymoronic]

And the ignore list grows!

wait you dont think they are a problem? at all? are you bored???

- - - Updated - - -

No, see, I'm well aware of the history, which is why I anticipated this ridiculous response. They aren't entitled to land they hadn't known for centuries, especially not at the expense of the people who have been living there. That's not how any of this works. The creation of the modern state of Israel was a really stupid move and happened because European countries couldn't be bothered to deal with all of the displaced and destitute Jewish people after Hitler & co. got done wrecking shit.

so what is the cut off date? 1 year? 10 years? 100years? 1000years? u tell us boss.

- - - Updated - - -

And the jews have a claim?

considering it was given to them and the people that gave it had the power to do so. what else more do you need?

- - - Updated - - -

nahhh I've seen blacks get away with a lot more especially against gays and trans people without the sjw reprisal to make them number 2, nobody can beat muslim though. They can literally rape en masse and commit the most heinous gay hate crime on western soil without the progressives blaming their ideology despite all evidence and statistics to the contrary. I'll probably even get infracted for this comment lol

think it matters where you live, in america the black is way stronger than the muslim in terms of shit they get away with. i mean look, dude fights with the cops reaches for his gun and gets himself killed... and blacks and liberal whites want to call him a victim... lol what kind of shit is that???

[Theodarzna]

Modern Western morals in which you can't just target groups of particular ethnicities and forcibly remove them from their homes to be replaced by your own people? I mean if we want to get weird about this, the legitimacy will quickly crumble, but under an approach of common sense morality, which people seem to love most of the rest of the time, I think it's quite clear.

I'm of the opinion they largely forfeited that claim after the 47 war; a State was offered to them and they chose to gamble on a big war to take the whole kit and kaboodle, they did loose and their should be consequences for what happened in 47.

[Lost Zero]

Any attempt to use anti-discrimination laws to shield the state of Israel from criticism is unwarranted and unacceptable. It exists as state, the same as any other, and must be open to criticism, the same as any other. It cannot be allowed to use, either directly or by others on its behalf, its largely Jewish identity as a shield to hide behind.

Unfortunately - this. Unless they are advocating something illegal - it's not nice, but not something illegal.