Originally Posted by Idyllic

And it is right and moral to attempt to beat the life out of a man who is doing his job because you want to protect the "aid" on a ship, how is that right or moral, "aid" that could have been delivered another day, another way, without all this conflict and death, why the hostility, what were these "passive," "free Gaza," "humanitarian loving," "activist" trying to prove here. The soldiers being beaten in these images herewith were doing their jobs, simple as that, we may not like their jobs, they may not like their jobs, but to be killed over a shipload of "aid" that could have been delivered without all this death and drama had the "activist" simply gone to the port offered, why did they even attack the soldiers at all, unless there were ulterior motives involved here. Had the "activist" wished to be truly blameless then they should have just stood there and let the soldiers shot them, but then the "activists" knew that without provocation the soldiers would not have shot them, hell, they didn't even wait to find out, had the "activists" been truly passive and without malicious intent, then they could have legitimately cried foul when they were being shot for not beating the shit out of the soldiers, don't you think?