Israel attacks Aid Flotilla. At least 2 dead

Mr.Micro

gandalf wrote: »

http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2010/05/the_legal_posit.html

And here is a counter legal position from Craig Murray.

Craig Murray is a former British Ambassador. He is also a former Head of the Maritime Section of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. He negotiated the UK's current maritime boundaries with Ireland, Denmark (Faeroes), Belgium and France, and boundaries of the Channel Islands, Turks and Caicos and British Virgin Islands. He was alternate Head of the UK Delegation to the UN Preparatory Commission on the Law of the Sea. He was Head of the FCO Section of the Embargo Surveillance Centre, enforcing sanctions on Iraq, and directly responsible for clearance of Royal Navy boarding operations in the Persian Gulf.

I would say he knows a bit about maritime law

I note these 2 possibilities from Mr.Murray

There are therefore two clear legal possibilities.

Possibility one is that the Israeli commandos were acting on behalf of the government of Israel in killing the activists on the ships. In that case Israel is in a position of war with Turkey, and the act falls under international jurisdiction as a war crime.

Possibility two is that, if the killings were not authorised Israeli military action, they were acts of murder under Turkish jurisdiction. If Israel does not consider itself in a position of war with Turkey, then it must hand over the commandos involved for trial in Turkey under Turkish law.

Irlandese

Memnoch wrote: »

Please tell me your joking.

Not a bit of it.
Read up on privacy and control of data regs.
It will help you sleep.
Boker Tov !

Irlandese

sceptre wrote: »

Under what legislation now? Please support your claim of fact (as the forum charter explicitly allows me to request) with a reference to specific EU legislation regarding privacy that successfully illustrates your point, including how it applies to events like this, aboard a Comoros-registered boat sailing ex-Turkey in international waters boarded by an Israeli group. You'll note the lack of anything to do with the EU in there. Merely having a few (or a lot of) EU citizens on the boat doesn't make a difference. I'll take a legislation reference and a supporting quote from that reference please, an explanation of how it applies to what I've listed would be uber-cool too.

I am off to bed now but you should know that it is illegal to for instance set up a video camera on the wall outside your house and tape the public passing by and show the film to others. Different EU countries use different terms to describe the application of relevant privacy laws. Look them upif you like numbers. I prefer the simple facts. Sorry !

Clawdeeus

wes wrote: »

Yeah, it should be pointed out that the people on the floatilla said that the IDF killed people before boarding, and as such any attacks on the IDF were self defense. Also, the IDF had no right to be on the boat in the first place either, so either way the IDF were in the wrong.

I dont know if shooting two people, then rappelling one at a time from a helicoper into the waiting arms of the victims friends was what happened to be honest.

I dont want to lessen that there were many people on the boat trying to eleviate human suffering, and draw attention to what is (or is fast becoming) a humanitarian disaster, however it is becoming very clear that there were people on board looking for a confrontation (perhaps not of this magnitude.)

And just to clarify, this does not mean the Israelis were right to act in the way they did/do, the onus was on them to respect international law, and deal with the situation without bloodshed.

wes

Clawdeeus wrote: »

I dont know if shooting two people, then rappelling one at a time from a helicoper into the waiting arms of the victims friends was what happened to be honest.

Well, there are 2 sides to this, and we still don't have a clear picture either way.

Clawdeeus wrote: »

I dont want to lessen that there were many people on the boat trying to eleviate human suffering, and draw attention to what is (or is fast becoming) a humanitarian disaster, however it is becoming very clear that there were people on board looking for a confrontation (perhaps not of this magnitude.)

And just to clarify, this does not mean the Israelis were right to act in the way they did/do, the onus was on them to respect international law, and deal with the situation without bloodshed.

Yes, whether they were looking for one or not, actually doesn't matter. The IDF had no business attacking there boat, and the people on the boat has a right to defend themselves. I can't say exactly what happened either way to be fair, but the IDF are the ones who murdered people, and not the activists.

gandalf

Right I better get to bed myself.

An interesting day when we found out that an item labelled as a firebomb on the IDF's "Weapons of Mass Destruction" youtube channel turned out to be a used bottle of IV Saline Solution.

And where details of the autopsies showed that 3 of the victims received GSW's from close range to the back of the head.

halkar

Clawdeeus wrote: »

..
I dont want to lessen that there were many people on the boat trying to eleviate human suffering, and draw attention to what is (or is fast becoming) a humanitarian disaster, however it is becoming very clear that there were people on board looking for a confrontation (perhaps not of this magnitude.)
.

Turks are very proud and nationalistic people and they will defend their country to dead like many other nationalist would do. I do not believe any passenger on that ship were terrorists as Israeli PR trying to make them out to be. As soon as IDF start coming down their fight was not only for Palestinians or Gaza blockage but also for their country as the ship they were on was piece of their country and their land. The public outcry in Turkey is enormous as many consider this as attack to Turkey itself.

dlofnep

Autopsy results are back, it's pretty damning to say the least.

Nine Turkish activists killed in an Israeli raid on a Gaza-bound aid ship were shot a total of 30 times and five died of gunshot wounds to the head, Britain's Guardian newspaper reported on Friday.

Autopsy results showed the men were hit mostly with 9mm bullets, many fired at close range, the Guardian said, quoting Yalcin Buyuk, vice-chairman of the Turkish council of forensic medicine which carried out the autopsies on Friday.

Israeli commandos stormed a flotilla of aid ships planning to break the Israeli sea blockade of Gaza on Monday. The deaths, which all took place on one ship, the Mavi Marmara, drew widespread condemnation.

Israel said the marines who rappelled onto the Mavi Marmara fired in self-defense after activists attacked them with clubs and knives as well as two pistols snatched from the commandos.

The autopsy results showed that a 60-year-old man, Ibrahim Bilgen, was shot four times in the temple, chest, hip and back, the Guardian said.

A 19-year-old, named as Fulkan Dogan, who also has U.S. citizenship, was shot five times from less than 45 cm (18 inches) away, in the face, the back of the head, twice in the leg and once in the back, it said.

Two other men were shot four times. Five of those killed were shot either in the back of the head or in the back, the Guardian quoted Buyuk as saying.

In addition to those killed, 48 others suffered gunshot wounds and six activists were still missing, he added.

Full article: http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6536MF20100604

I had no idea that 48 other people besides those that died had suffered gunshot wounds. And 6 activists are missing? Missing where? Israel has a lot of explaining to do. A lot of explaining. Does anyone seriously believe that a 60 year old man was a threat to highly trained soldiers?

Johnboy1951

Some very odd reports whose accuracy one would be unsure of, but nevertheless ......

Israelis threw wounded activists overboard ...... a number more killed than are presently being reported ........ people missing ..... all very messy indeed, and it will take some time to find out if there is any truth in any of these reports ....... so they are being posted here because I have not seen them referenced previously (but I may be wrong)

http://www.todayszaman.com/tz-web/news-212103-100-israel-killed-more-than-9-threw-wounded-into-sea-witnesses-say.html

http://redactednews.blogspot.com/2010/06/gaza-freedom-flotilla-israelis-threw.html

Memnoch

On the issue of Charles Krauthammer, and those who are trying to use his opinions to support their defence of Israeli actions. There was a brilliant little piece on him by Jon Stewert on the Daily Show on June 2nd(shown here on june 3).

The important thing to note is this. Krathammer said, and I KID you NOT:

http://www.channel4.com/programmes/the-daily-show-with-jon-stewart/4od#3073648 (the quote below is from about 6:30 into the show)

"What is the humanitarian crisis that the flotilla was actually addressing, there is none. There is no one starving in Gaza."

Honestly, after a statement like that, if you take the views of a guy like that seriously, it just goes to show how little you know about... wait for it... anything.

Wibbs

Irlandese wrote: »

To answer the question, Israel pays for everything in Gaza

Truer words you've rarely spoken. Israel and the Israeli people will be paying for this muppetry along with the Gazians for a long time to come.

and is not at war with Gaza,

In which case the boarding was illegal as is the blockade. No amount of goal post shifting by yourself or others can change that fact.

only defending a sovereign country from terrorist attacks.

Who defends or defended other sovereign nations form Israels attacks? Who defended ethnic groups within Israel from wholesale ethnic cleansing as defined by any dictionary you care to reference?

BTW have you had a little perusal of the items Israel restricts in their "aid"? Fresh fruit veg and meat/fish plus the means to grow or catch their own. And thats just the start. Spices are banned FFS. Full list? Ok


* sage
* cardamom
* cumin
* coriander
* ginger
* jam
* halva
* vinegar
* nutmeg
* chocolate
* fruit preserves
* seeds and nuts
* biscuits and sweets
* potato chips
* gas for soft drinks
* dried fruit
* fresh meat
* plaster
* tar
* wood for construction
* cement
* iron
* glucose
* industrial salt
* plastic/glass/metal containers
* industrial margarine
* tarpaulin sheets for huts
* fabric (for clothing)
* flavor and smell enhancers
* fishing rods
* various fishing nets
* buoys
* ropes for fishing
* nylon nets for greenhouses
* hatcheries and spare parts for hatcheries
* spare parts for tractors
* dairies for cowsheds
* irrigation pipe systems
* ropes to tie greenhouses
* planters for saplings
* heaters for chicken farms
* musical instruments
* size A4 paper
* writing implements
* notebooks
* newspapers
* toys
* razors
* sewing machines and spare parts
* heaters
* horses
* donkeys
* goats
* cattle
* chicks

Brilliant and ironic. Israel has created a 21st century ghetto. Genius.

Hopefully this current fcukup will shine a light on the utter insanity present in Israels handling of Gaza. The UN, The red cross, amnesty international, the EU, even your best mates the US have all had a WTF? moment over the Gaza siege/blockade.

Irlandese wrote: »

I am off to bed now but you should know that it is illegal to for instance set up a video camera on the wall outside your house and tape the public passing by and show the film to others. Different EU countries use different terms to describe the application of relevant privacy laws. Look them upif you like numbers. I prefer the simple facts. Sorry !

Hmmm well slight problem with your "facts". Numero uno, Israel is not a part of the EU so the EU's laws hardly apply. Indeed international laws hardly apply as Israel as a nation has the worst record of any nation in the ME for ignoring them. Indeed Israel beats North Korea to the top spot in the UN charts. Number one with a bullet.

As for boker tov, maybe lila tov might be better at this stage of the evening or better yet chalamot paz(sp?)/sweet dreams because at this stage the defences for this action are becoming more dream like by the minute. With respect, you, bamboze or the apologists on both sides are not dealing with some bunch of hick Arkansas youtubers here. The goal post shifting and general BS wont fly without a response and counter argument. No nazis under the bed, nor "gee it was written in a link it must be true as I cant place Israel on a map". Plus we've had 40 odd years of listening to similar BS on our own island and have mostly come out the other side, so both angles from outside on this matter need to up their game.

Manic Moran

I would say he knows a bit about maritime law

Here's the thing though, that both sides have quoted experts in maritime law to support their positions.

This is not unusual. Two very qualified people can read the same piece of legislation, and in all good faith, come out with dramatically different conclusions. That's why you end up with a bunch of civil suits for the courts to sort out. And even then, the learned Judges whose job it is to figure out which of the viewpoints are accurate don't always agree, which is why you end up with dissenting opinions and split courts.

The final answer is that the issue has not yet been ruled upon by an adjudicating body, and the actions may or may not have been legal. Definitive statements, even by lawyers, that they are or are not are simply personal opinions.

NTM

Sand

Israel is at war, where its civillians are deliberately targeted by the hostile force. Israel institutes a naval blockade of its enemies. Israels take the unprecedented step of supplying humanitarian aid to the civillians of its enemies. In this, Israel is vastly more friendly to Palestinians than Hamas is.

Independant, ad-hoc, non-sovereign forces deliberately and provocatively attempt to breach the blockade, rejecting compromises to supply civillian aid through Israeli or Eggytian ports.

Since when is instituting a naval blockade against a hostile force against international law?

youcrazyjesus!

Sand wrote: »

Israel is at war, where its civillians are deliberately targeted by the hostile force. Israel institutes a naval blockade of its enemies. Israels take the unprecedented step of supplying humanitarian aid to the civillians of its enemies. In this, Israel is vastly more friendly to Palestinians than Hamas is.

Independant, ad-hoc, non-sovereign forces deliberately and provocatively attempt to breach the blockade, rejecting compromises to supply civillian aid through Israeli or Eggytian ports.

Since when is instituting a naval blockade against a hostile force against international law?

When the war is a direct result of you occupying their land illegally, that's when.

youcrazyjesus!

Executions.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/world/2010/0605/1224271913186.html

digme

Sand wrote: »

Israel is at war, where its civillians are deliberately targeted by the hostile force. Israel institutes a naval blockade of its enemies. Israels take the unprecedented step of supplying humanitarian aid to the civillians of its enemies. In this, Israel is vastly more friendly to Palestinians than Hamas is.

Independant, ad-hoc, non-sovereign forces deliberately and provocatively attempt to breach the blockade, rejecting compromises to supply civillian aid through Israeli or Eggytian ports.

Since when is instituting a naval blockade against a hostile force against international law?

who is the blow in ?

digme

youcrazyjesus! wrote: »

Executions.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/world/2010/0605/1224271913186.html

the truth hurts,4 bullets into the head is sick.

Sand

who is the blow in ?

Depends on how far you go back, but whats the relevance to the question?

Naval blockade is a time honoured facet of warfare.

Israel goes vastly far and beyond the standards of naval blockade by providing civillian aid to a population that supports and encourages attacks on Israeli civillians.

Some ad-hoc, non-sovereign, fanatical forces feel they ought to breach the blockade against military aid to Hamas, they feel empowered to use violence to do so. Its sad, I feel bad for their families that impressionable young people were taken in by irresponsible leadership, but those people were serving a cause that would see rockets falling upon unarmed Israeli women and children. Its sad, but the Israeli government have a mandate to prevent that happening. If the activists attempt to lynch armed Israeli soldiers, theyre going to lose.

kiffer

sand: are they officially at war?

Sand

@kiffer

sand: are they officially at war?

Honestly, does it matter? Was the USA and North Vietnam ever officially at war? Are North Korea and South Korea officially at war now?

Hamas fire rockets at Israel, Israel shoots back. Or vice versa as suits your politics. It doesnt matter. Theres a conflict. A naval blockade is normal practise in wars where one power has the ability to enforce it. Israel does, feel free to row into their blockade singing "Kumbaya my lord, kumbaya!"

But if you want to actually bring relief to Palestinian civllians without supporting Hamas then bring aid to Israeli or, if you dont trust them, Egyptian ports, where it can be inspected and brought to Palestinian civillians.

sceptre

Number of posts from an idiotic exchange deleted - adding nothing yet taking something from the universe.

/mod

sceptre

Irlandese wrote: »

I am off to bed now but you should know that it is illegal to for instance set up a video camera on the wall outside your house and tape the public passing by and show the film to others. Different EU countries use different terms to describe the application of relevant privacy laws. Look them upif you like numbers. I prefer the simple facts. Sorry !

Public note: this in no way satisfies my request for a reference to:

sceptre wrote:

specific EU legislation regarding privacy that successfully illustrates your point, including how it applies to events like this, aboard a Comoros-registered boat sailing ex-Turkey in international waters boarded by an Israeli group. You'll note the lack of anything to do with the EU in there.

Your claim was of course that it would be illegal for the full videos to be released under EU privacy legislation. A claim of fact which you were asked to back up. Most people recognise that there's a difference between "inside the EU" and "outside the EU". Your "answer" fails to recognise that and hence doesn't verify in any way your claim of fact, even being generous enough to regard the equivalent of "er, countries have it" as an actual effort to comply with the forum charter-mandated request for supporting information to back up your claim, which it wasn't. This isn't the "make stuff up" board, you haven't even made an effort to back up your wacky claim.

opinion guy

Sand wrote: »

@kiffer
Honestly, does it matter? Was the USA and North Vietnam ever officially at war? Are North Korea and South Korea officially at war now?

Its my understanding that north and south korea have remained officially at war was since the Korean war

BlaasForRafa

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

Some very odd reports whose accuracy one would be unsure of, but nevertheless ......

Israelis threw wounded activists overboard ...... a number more killed than are presently being reported ........ people missing ..... all very messy indeed, and it will take some time to find out if there is any truth in any of these reports ....... so they are being posted here because I have not seen them referenced previously (but I may be wrong)

http://www.todayszaman.com/tz-web/news-212103-100-israel-killed-more-than-9-threw-wounded-into-sea-witnesses-say.html

http://redactednews.blogspot.com/2010/06/gaza-freedom-flotilla-israelis-threw.html

Theres some absolutely ludicrous stuff in those links you posted

“They even shot those who surrendered. Many of our friends saw this. They told me that there were handcuffed people who were shot.” All activists stated that Israeli helicopters sprayed cold seawater onto the ship for three hours.

Theres a lot of hyperbole coming from the returning activists whether turkish or irish. I severely doubt that anyone was shot while handcuffed, thats just being said to make the Israelis look more "evil"

And I'd like to know exactly what kind of helicopter can spray cold seawater onto anything. I've never heard of a helicopter being equiped with pumps that could do that. I know the Israelis have some CH-53s for fighting fires but they just dump water down in one go, not pump it for 3 hours or whatever these people are trying to say.

Johnboy1951

I most certainly am not going to try to 'defend' any of what is in there, no more than I would try to defend what the IDF have said.
It very well may be that these reports are what every one seems to have been waiting for .... activist reports which seem ridiculous in the extreme.

It does maybe help to explain something that has been bothering me though ....... on the video clip released by the IDF of the fight on board, about 50 secs or so in, there is a shot of the chopper, and what seems like two plumes of smoke descending from either side of the chopper.

Maybe that oddity is explained by the chopper pumping/dropping water on those below.

After that I guess each of the claims would have to be treated in the same way each Israeli claim was taken and possibly debunked by reason and/or evidence to the contrary.

It seems to be forgotten now, but Israel was the one claiming ~19 deaths aboard the boat, yet only 9 of those are accounted for presently.
Yes I know the figures have been 'adjusted' as more info was becoming available. I still find it 'passing-strange' that the trained military force present at the event got such a simple fact as a head-count so wrong (apparently).

Anyway I found the linked to articles 'interesting' from a couple of angles ......

regards.

IrishTonyO

Sand wrote: »

Israel is at war, where its civillians are deliberately targeted by the hostile force. Israel institutes a naval blockade of its enemies. Israels take the unprecedented step of supplying humanitarian aid to the civillians of its enemies. In this, Israel is vastly more friendly to Palestinians than Hamas is.

Independant, ad-hoc, non-sovereign forces deliberately and provocatively attempt to breach the blockade, rejecting compromises to supply civillian aid through Israeli or Eggytian ports.

Since when is instituting a naval blockade against a hostile force against international law?

if Israel is at war then Hamas are not terrorist and the rockets fired are not terrorism but acts of war, but Israel does not want this so it sAYS IT IS NOT AT WAR

gandalf

Sand wrote: »

Israel is at war, where its civillians are deliberately targeted by the hostile force. Israel institutes a naval blockade of its enemies. Israels take the unprecedented step of supplying humanitarian aid to the civillians of its enemies. In this, Israel is vastly more friendly to Palestinians than Hamas is.

Independant, ad-hoc, non-sovereign forces deliberately and provocatively attempt to breach the blockade, rejecting compromises to supply civillian aid through Israeli or Eggytian ports.

Since when is instituting a naval blockade against a hostile force against international law?

But they aren't at War Sand. We have Israelis saying as much here. They are involved in a struggle against a terrorist organisation but they are not at war with Gaza. That means they are involved in an illegal blockade. It means they have no right to enforce it in International Waters, it means they are responsible for the deaths of those people, the injuries to others (both soldiers and activists) and kidnapping of over 600 people and holding of them in a country they did not plan on visiting.

As for the offer to compromise and route the aid via an alternative port. Have you not read the ridiculous list of prescribed items that the Israelis will not allow through. Can you put your hand on your heart and swear that you believe Israel will let the full manifest of cargo through to Gaza. I for one can't and wouldn't.

gandalf

Interesting development cited in that Irish Times article linked to earlier.

They also requested that fresh insurance coverage be arranged to replace a €25,000 policy, which was withdrawn, reportedly due to Israeli pressure on the issuing firm.

As it is illegal to ply in international waters without insurance, Greta Berlin, co-founder of the FGM, dubbed this move “another kind of sabotage”.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/world/2010/0605/1224271913186.html

My god they are trying every trick in the book.

dlofnep

Sand wrote: »

Israel goes vastly far and beyond the standards of naval blockade by providing civillian aid to a population that supports and encourages attacks on Israeli civillians.

It's the least that they could do after completely destroying the infrastructure of Gaza. But even at that, Israel does not let in sufficient aid. That is why they are attempting to break the blockade.

People have been left homeless, and have been forced to live in makeshift housing (tents basically) after Israel's bombing campaign. Israel has blocked concrete from entering Gaza, which would allow the Palestinian people rebuild their homes.

Now, as for the legality of the blockade - not only is it illegal, but it's also a crime against humanity according to the Goldstone report. But to be honest - The legality of it isn't the most important thing for me. Right now - the most important thing is that Israel has blocked sufficient aid supplies from reaching an impoverished people, who live in an open-air prison. This is why activists wish to break the blockade.

Irlandese

sceptre wrote: »

Public note: this in no way satisfies my request for a reference to:



Your claim was of course that it would be illegal for the full videos to be released under EU privacy legislation. A claim of fact which you were asked to back up. Most people recognise that there's a difference between "inside the EU" and "outside the EU". Your "answer" fails to recognise that and hence doesn't verify in any way your claim of fact, even being generous enough to regard the equivalent of "er, countries have it" as an actual effort to comply with the forum charter-mandated request for supporting information to back up your claim, which it wasn't. This isn't the "make stuff up" board, you haven't even made an effort to back up your wacky claim.

Sorry, friend, you are all at sea here.
The responses were specifically to someone's question re WHY Israel would edit
the tapes. That was a very quick yet straightforward reply that still holds,
despite your commentary. The EU ref was to remind people living in the EU, which includes Ireland, of the very strict laws that apply there with regard to video filming. It was a bit tongue in cheek of course, but made a serious point re the legal ramifications of taking and showing public film generally. Maybe the point was too theoretical for tastes here? You prefer the kind of visceral, angry anti-Israeli stuff that we can read in some of the back posts?
Giving it just a little more time, before I am off to work, I add the following.
Such films need to be edited to remove shots of faces of personnel involved in future operations where their identity being discovered would put operations or their own safety at risk.
Maybe time for a little less heat and a little more light ? just a polite suggestion...........
sheyihiye lecha yom na'im