I've always, and still do consider theses Critical Mass rallies as little better than any other protest that blockades a major thoroughfare. It's wrong and people should get arrested and fined at these things more regularly.

That said, this is utterly horrific. There is little difference between this and dispersing the crowd with a spray from a fully automatic weapon. However much I disagree with Critical Mass, this was terrible and nothing can even remotely justify it.

Your country has REAL problems! One party wants to blockade all progress the OTHER party tries to make in legislative matters, appointments for government posts etc. While a lunatic fringe attempts to de-rail the entire political system. Having only two valid parties means that the slightly leftward one only ever needs to be slightly to the left to pick up ALL of the left vote which, in turn means that there will never be a genuine contrast of political positions.

The so called, "news" media have almost entirely given up on actually reporting, mostly because their corporate owners have no interest in disturbing the status quo but also because Americans are so intellectually lazy they'd rather hear about which celebretard is off to jail now rather than face a few unpleasant truths about their society.

But by all means spend your energy on some crackpot conspiracy theories. The world is waiting for the US to fall from superpower status so they can get on with an agenda of social improvement without the constant obstructionism. Oh, and while you're going down the tubes, please take China with you.

maybe remove the safety blockade used for transportation?

>> ^NetRunner:
@<A rel="nofollow" class=profilelink title="member since May 3rd, 2010" href="http://videosift.com/member/Lawdeedaw">Lawdeedaw, you seem confused.
I'm opposed to escalating Afghanistan. I'm also opposed to people trying to make sweeping generalizations about Democrats based on a series of false premises and fallacious logic. People are entitled to their opinion on Obama and the decisions he's making as President. What they aren't entitled to is their own facts about what Obama has said or done.
If there's a candidate in 2012 who's a better fit to my values than Obama on the ballot with a credible shot at winning, I'll vote for 'em.
Ron Paul is vehemently opposed to what I believe on 9 out of 10 topics. Even so, I don't see why the remaining Paultards think Ron Paul's empty campaign promises will get followed through on any more than anyone else who's ever run for President, especially given that he's got no support for his platform within his own party.
I definitely don't understand why they think they're going to win support from anti-war Democrats with their messaging strategy. All the CFL ever does is call everything we try to achieve "tyranny", unless they happen to agree with us on a topic, then they just call us hypocrites because we don't all immediately disown the Democratic party and swear undying loyalty to Paul the minute he makes an empty promise on the topic.
It seems mostly like just crap he tells his supporters so they'll repeat his line of reasoning thinking they're engaging in some sort of open-minded bipartisan outreach, when what he's really doing is prepping them to get all hostile and defensive when said "outreach" inevitably gets rejected.


Fair enough. I was just pointing out that Bush did not even follow his own doctrine. Also, santions (Of the economic type) are a blockade of sorts and are at least an aggression.

Lastly, I was saying, in relation to Obama's approach to war, he is nearly identiacal to Bush. I say this not because his strategy is similar, rather, he follows the base of his party in the matter. If they said Home, he would bring them home. If they say Escalation, he escalates. If they say carpet bombs, he throws carpet bombs.

At least this is MO, not actual fact. Perhaps he is doing what is best for the war. Howdy knows.

>> ^theali:

@<a rel="nofollow" href="http://videosift.com/member/robbersdog49" title="member since May 22nd, 2007" class="profilelink">robbersdog49 Do you really categorize this as "snuff", are you for real?
Do you know how difficult it was to get ANY footage out of the flotilla, without the Israeli army confiscating it? The Israeli army has itself recorded hours of the incident and confiscated all the recorders they could find from the passengers. We see none of those recordings in custody of the Israeli army.
These people risked their life and brought attention to an illegal blockade, and all you can do is to "cry wolf" and close your eyes.
This happen in International waters and not in Israeli waters, as far as I am concerned, these are in line with actions of the Somali Pirates.


Firstly, I understand the situation, I don't need to know that someone died to know that it happened. You suggesting that without this footage I'd think they just shook hands is a straw man argument. It's just not logical.

Secondly, yes, if this video shows what it claims then it's snuff as clearly described by the rules of this site. The rules are clear:

"The presence of human fatality is acceptable and not considered "snuff" if presented as a limited portion of a lengthy educational, informative news report or documentary. Our definition of "snuff" does include but is not exclusive to any short clip in which a human fatality occurs whether or not any victims are actually visible on camera."

So, firstly the clip is just a short bit of footage and not part of a lengthy news report or documentary. There's surely no way you can deny this. The clip is only 22 seconds long. That just isn't lengthy. Secondly, even if the action isn't very clear you'll not that this is also provided for in the rules.

Yes, this is an important situation. Yes people should know about it. Yes, it's all very wrong. I agree with you about the political situation and about the actions of the Isreali troops. However, that doesn't give you carte blanche to ignore the rules of the site.

@robbersdog49 Do you really categorize this as "snuff", are you for real?

Do you know how difficult it was to get ANY footage out of the flotilla, without the Israeli army confiscating it? The Israeli army has itself recorded hours of the incident and confiscated all the recorders they could find from the passengers. We see none of those recordings in custody of the Israeli army.

These people risked their life and brought attention to an illegal blockade, and all you can do is to "cry wolf" and close your eyes.

This happen in International waters and not in Israeli waters, as far as I am concerned, these are in line with actions of the Somali Pirates.

>> ^mongoosemonk:
I'll write the sequel - Lies Judge Napolitano Has Told You. Free speech was saved when the DC Circuit struck down net neutrality? Seriously? Does he think Roosevelt should have kept his no foreign wars promise after Pearl Harbor? What a moron.


Did we not put sanctions Japan before that attack? Not justifying the attack, just pointing out that blockades, sanctions, carpet bombings, etcetera are acts of war...

@gwiz665 The Gaza Blockade is illegal and the flotilla attack was done in International waters. Because the blockade of Gaza itself violates international law, Israel committed an illegal act of war attacking the convoy, regardless of who attacked whom first.

>> ^gwiz665:

@<a rel="nofollow" href="http://videosift.com/member/Pprt" title="member since April 8th, 2008" class="profilelink">Pprt If they are breaking a military blockade, then they are pretty close to soldiers, wouldn't you say?
I'm having some trouble with the timing of the things - it looks like they were shot before the IDF got there, which is weird. It's a great big mess down there, but the people on the flotilla could have expected something like this, when they break the blockade, even if their intentions may be good and honorable.

Colbert isn't going to do an aggressive interview... it isn't his style. He's much more subtle about his jabs than Stewart.

He did, in his own way, comment on the silliness of a blockade preventing food delivery to stop rocket attacks. He could have gone into the real reasons for the food blockade, but he seemed content to point out the poor logic of the statement.

I loved the comment about Palestinians going back where they came from since it was pretty much a restatement of what Helen said.

@Pprt If they are breaking a military blockade, then they are pretty close to soldiers, wouldn't you say?

I'm having some trouble with the timing of the things - it looks like they were shot before the IDF got there, which is weird. It's a great big mess down there, but the people on the flotilla could have expected something like this, when they break the blockade, even if their intentions may be good and honorable.

>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:

Since 2001 there have been 34 deaths from Palestinian rocket attacks plus injuries and damage. Why artificially limit the rocket fatalities only to ones linked to Hamas? Who knows how many splinter groups of Palestinian militants are involved? It is ridiculous to suggest that Isreal could only blockade 'Hamas' and not all the others.
The peace process has to start with the Muslim world. The Palestinians and all Arab states & religious leaders must acknowledge Isreal as a legitimate state with the right to exist. They must condemn all violence and imprison or execute any of their people who commit acts of terror. They must stop praising the actions of violent militants. They must stop supporting terror groups with arms and material. They must stop teaching their children to hate others. Until these things happen then the Muslim world has no reasonable grounds on which to expect Isreal to ease up on their efforts to provide security to their citizens by any means necessary.


i think you took that out of the the AIPAC brochure verbatim.
yeah..palestine should just sit down,shut the fuck up and ignore the 8 ft dildo rammed up their ass and anyone who doesn't?..kill em.
HAMAS is a violent terrorist group.and?your point is?
they are also the democratically elected leadership,who just happen to not be too american friendly.
and if we are going to be sticklers on definitions..america is ALSO a terrorist nation,by definition.
your solution ignores 100 years of history,human rights violations and violent atrocities perpetrated by isreal.

how about we go back to kindergarten since we are using such banal and un-imaginative choices...
play nice with the other kids and SHARE, otherwise we are taking all your toys away.

Since 2001 there have been 34 deaths from Palestinian rocket attacks plus injuries and damage. Why artificially limit the rocket fatalities only to ones linked to Hamas? Who knows how many splinter groups of Palestinian militants are involved? It is ridiculous to suggest that Isreal could only blockade 'Hamas' and not all the others.

The peace process has to start with the Muslim world. The Palestinians and all Arab states & religious leaders must acknowledge Isreal as a legitimate state with the right to exist. They must condemn all violence and imprison or execute any of their people who commit acts of terror. They must stop praising the actions of violent militants. They must stop supporting terror groups with arms and material. They must stop teaching their children to hate others. Until these things happen then the Muslim world has no reasonable grounds on which to expect Isreal to ease up on their efforts to provide security to their citizens by any means necessary.

Interesting fact that highlights the extreme overreaction that has caused Israel to lose most/all of its allies: there were more protesters killed in the floatilla headed to Gaza than have been killed by Hamas rocket attacks in the last 10 years (the reason for the blockade). There comes a point when common sense should take over and you go "wait a minute..."

Yes. No holy sites for you.. Hands off the holy sites and walls. No, I don't think that would go down well. I think the answer to that would be war. The answer to everything is war first there.>> ^gwiz665:

So like children. "I want it" "no, I want it"
If you can't share, we're going to nuke the damn place, then none of you can have it!
And by "we" I mean, the US. So I can protest them at the same time. It's called "having your cake and eating it too".
>> ^geo321:
That would be great. Give them their own islands thousands of miles apart. But both the Palestinains and the Israelis want those holy sites. As did just about every neighbor.>> ^gwiz665:
If no one can agree on who's piece of land it is, why don't we move them all out and leave it barren and uninhabited?
If you can't play well with your toy, I'm taking it from you.

So like children. "I want it" "no, I want it"

If you can't share, we're going to nuke the damn place, then none of you can have it!

And by "we" I mean, the US. So I can protest them at the same time. It's called "having your cake and eating it too".

>> ^geo321:

That would be great. Give them their own islands thousands of miles apart. But both the Palestinains and the Israelis want those holy sites. As did just about every neighbor.>> ^gwiz665:
If no one can agree on who's piece of land it is, why don't we move them all out and leave it barren and uninhabited?
If you can't play well with your toy, I'm taking it from you.