Merged Israel Attacks Palestinian Aid Flotilla, According To Reports

[bigjelmapro]

Since there's a 2nd thread regarding this issue that hasn't been merged, as of yet, I'm posting the reasoning and justification behind boarding this ship (and only ship that had such a response from its passengers I might add) from the other thread. Sorry in advance to the re-post:

As in the other thread regarding this matter, the intention of the flotilla was to enter the exclusion zone set 20 miles off the coast of Gaza and break the blockade. These intentions were clearly provided by the heads of this flotilla prior to them leaving Cyprus and as a response by the flotilla after repeated warnings were given by the IDF. The flotilla was given extensive warning not to enter this zone and were given this even prior to leaving Cyprus that they would be turned back.

Additionally, neutral or hostile ships are not immune from being boarded if outside this exclusion zone, which to the extreme goes that enemy ships are not excluded from actually being attacked if outside this zone either. The IDF circumvented the humanitarian angle by not only providing humanitarian aid via the many land crossings into Gaza, but as has been previously done, divert the humanitarian aid from previous flortillas via the same Ashdod port.

More specifically, Israel abided by the clauses of properly warning and declaring this exclusion zone as according to the San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea, 12 June 1994

So no, not a blanket statement and not above the law.

At this point we can also have the posters cease with the failed attempts as painting this boarding as a form of piracy.

*Edit And I love the added accusations of disproportionate response, terrorism. A good deal of these people on this main ship had an obvious deathwish: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_PzifNN0Ysg. Any more failed allegations of infractions of international law, etc. you want to go through?

 

[PhantomWolf]

No, it's not irrelevant that it was in international waters.

Well good, we agree on one thing.

It is strange how confident you are about what happened when all we have are IDF supplied videos, some chaotic satellite broadcasts and the witnesses locked up, incommunicado, in prison.

Perhaps you need to watch them again, the IDF has released three videos from different angles, and the Activists one from a fourth angle. All show the same thing, the IDF first commando getting attacked as soon as he reaches the deck. With four videos all with the same scene in them, showing the exact same thing, it doesn't take a genius to figure it out.

Israel routinely blames its disproportionate hyperviolence on its victims. No change there.

So you think that when confronted with people shooting at them, stabbing them, beating them with pipes, firing marbles at them from sling shots, throwing stun grenades and fire bombs, and attempting (and succeeding) to throw them off of the side of the top deck, the Israelis weren't entitled to use the force required to stop the attack to defend themselves?

 

[JihadJane]

I'd note here that US boarding parties in the Gulf and off Somalia are authorised to use deadly force if attacked while boarding, and have done so when required, even killing people who have resisted boarding. Why are Israeli forces to be denyed the same right to self defence when they conduct boarding operations during a blockade against a state they are at war with?

There are plenty of other ways of stopping a civilian aid convoy than a nighttime military assault, dropping "elite" killer commandos, into a large crowd of the very people they have a history of murdering with impunity.

What harm would it have done simply to have let the ships dock in Gaza and unload their aid, anyway?

 

[bigjelmapro]

Since when have Israelis murdered anybody, especially in this regard, Turkish people, with impunity?

This non-lethal method had been used previously with good result without casualties. I personally would have reassessed the situation when dealing with these IHH fanatics (those who organized this blockade).

Its a naval blockade. Either join and read the thread and the main talking points or cease asking redundant questions....

 

[PhantomWolf]

More specifically, Israel abided by the clauses of properly warning and declaring this exclusion zone as according to the San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea, 12 June 1994

In particular:

SECTION V : NEUTRAL MERCHANT VESSELS AND CIVIL AIRCRAFT

Neutral merchant vessels

67. Merchant vessels flying the flag of neutral States may not be attacked unless they:

(a) are believed on reasonable grounds to be carrying contraband or breaching a blockade, and after prior warning they intentionally and clearly refuse to stop, or intentionally and clearly resist visit, search or capture;

 

[Information Analyst]

That link is hilarious. It's a blockade because we say its a blockade.

Funny that that page only went up yesterday. They were obviously in a hurry, given the shoddiness of some of the text, e.g.: "The naval manuals of several western countries, including the US and England [sic]...."

 

[bigjelmapro]

In particular:....

Yeah, I just realized that I forgot to post the most important part.

Might as well post the rest of it though, since its applicable when dealing with the IHH:

http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/385ec08...cable to Armed Conflicts at Sea, 12 June 1994

SECTION VI : CAPTURE OF NEUTRAL MERCHANT VESSELS AND GOODS

146. Neutral merchant vessels are subject to capture outside neutral waters if they are engaged in any of the activities referred to in paragraph 67 or if it is determined as a result of visit and search or by other means, that they:

(a) are carrying contraband;
(b) are on a voyage especially undertaken with a view to the transport of individual passengers who are embodied in the armed forces of the enemy;
(c) are operating directly under enemy control, orders, charter, employment or direction;
(d) present irregular or fraudulent documents, lack necessary documents, or destroy, deface or conceal documents;
(e) are violating regulations established by a belligerent within the immediate area of naval operations; or
(f) are breaching or attempting to breach a blockade.

Capture of a neutral merchant vessel is exercised by taking such vessel as prize for adjudication.

 

[PhantomWolf]

There are plenty of other ways of stopping a civilian aid convoy than a nighttime military assault, dropping "elite" killer commandos, into a large crowd of the very people they have a history of murdering with impunity.

Israeli commandos have a history of killing Turks? News to me.

The fact is that the flotilla called itself peaceful, five of the six ships were, and were dealt with effectively and without causalty. The only place there were causalties was on the ship where the large crowd attacked those commandos with weapons as they boarded.

So again, do you think that when confronted with people shooting at them, stabbing them, beating them with pipes, firing marbles at them from sling shots, throwing stun grenades and fire bombs, and attempting (and succeeding) to throw them off of the side of the top deck, the Israelis weren't entitled to use the force required to stop the attack to defend themselves?

What harm would it have done simply to have let the ships dock in Gaza and unload their aid, anyway?

You don't get the meaning of blockade do you? Of course I could also ask, what would have been the harm of sailing to Ashdod, then having the cargo checked for prohibited items before being sent over the border?

 

[JihadJane]

Perhaps you need to watch them again, the IDF has released three videos from different angles, and the Activists one from a fourth angle. All show the same thing, the IDF first commando getting attacked as soon as he reaches the deck. With four videos all with the same scene in them, showing the exact same thing, it doesn't take a genius to figure it out.

Do you know what had happened before the videos start or what was happening elsewhere on the vessel?


Furthermore, the activists had every right to repel a lawless act of piracy. From all angles the IDF appears to have acted with remarkable stupidity and incompetence.

So you think that when confronted with people shooting at them, stabbing them, beating them with pipes, firing marbles at them from sling shots, throwing stun grenades and fire bombs, and attempting (and succeeding) to throw them off of the side of the top deck, the Israelis weren't entitled to use the force required to stop the attack to defend themselves?

Do riot police kill people as a first response to rioters? Israeli forces are very experienced in responding non-lethally to enraged activists and have plenty of equipment with which to do it. Why send in hyped-up, trained-to-kill commandos?

Despite the helpfully provided IDF videos , we don't know for sure what happened except that the Israelis attacked the civilian boat with armed, armored, military commandos and that, understandably, these extremely dangerous killers were resisted with whatever was to hand.

Police throughout the world blame protestors' sticks and stones for violence provoked by the police' own violent assaults . The Israelis are 100% responsible for everything that happened on that boat. Their aggressive assault was illegal not to mention completely botched. They had no right to board the vessel in international waters.

The Israeli blockage of Gaza has also been declared illegal.

 

[The Fool]

I'd note here that US boarding parties in the Gulf and off Somalia are authorised to use deadly force if attacked while boarding, and have done so when required, even killing people who have resisted boarding. Why are Israeli forces to be denyed the same right to self defence when they conduct boarding operations during a blockade against a state they are at war with?

There are so many people proclaiming Palestinian statehood in this thread there may be hope..

which state are Israel at war with again?


don't ever forget....Stand firm, hold fast...stay the course. This blockade has to be worth it....it just has to be.

Not just dealing with stateless Arabs now, lots of other Nations citizens, lots of other Nations vessels. But hey....the plan just has to succeed if you stick to it long enough eh?


Here's a suggestion. Israel announces that from now on any vessel, truck, wheelbarrow or horse cart that wants to go to Gaza allows Israeli inspection and if it does not contain weapons it may enter...see, Im still wondering if the Likud plan to keep Pasta and stuffed toys out of Gaza is achieving its goal......whats that goal again?

 

[a_unique_person]

Since there's a 2nd thread regarding this issue that hasn't been merged, as of yet, I'm posting the reasoning and justification behind boarding this ship (and only ship that had such a response from its passengers I might add) from the other thread. Sorry in advance to the re-post:

As in the other thread regarding this matter, the intention of the flotilla was to enter the exclusion zone set 20 miles off the coast of Gaza and break the blockade. These intentions were clearly provided by the heads of this flotilla prior to them leaving Cyprus and as a response by the flotilla after repeated warnings were given by the IDF. The flotilla was given extensive warning not to enter this zone and were given this even prior to leaving Cyprus that they would be turned back.

Additionally, neutral or hostile ships are not immune from being boarded if outside this exclusion zone, which to the extreme goes that enemy ships are not excluded from actually being attacked if outside this zone either. The IDF circumvented the humanitarian angle by not only providing humanitarian aid via the many land crossings into Gaza, but as has been previously done, divert the humanitarian aid from previous flortillas via the same Ashdod port.

More specifically, Israel abided by the clauses of properly warning and declaring this exclusion zone as according to the San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea, 12 June 1994

By what law is the exclusion zone created?

 

[Cleon]

Weird. Not too long ago some people wouldn't accept that a place called Palestine existed. Suddenly it's a sovereign state n' stuff, and nobody bothered to tell the Palestinians.

I also get the impression that the Israelis could open a Department of Kitten Raping and Puppy Torture, and certain posters would still be arguing that not only was it legal, but also the only rational and moral thing to do.

 

[richardm]

What would you do if someone entered your premises in the dead of night carrying what looked like a weapon? Would you defend yourself?

This happens quite often: think of it in terms of a police raid on a suspect's house. They not infrequently smash down doors at 4 am and charge in shouting "Police!" at the top of their lungs. If it was your door and you pulled a knife and went for them, or if you you grabbed a gun off one of them and started shooting, they would be liable to react rather aggressively and nobody would be in the least bit surprised.

On the subject of international waters and whether Israel has the right to board vessels there; according to a lawyer specialising in maritime law who appeared on BBC Radio 4 last night they are indeed within their rights. They can raise a blockade if they want, and they can prevent ships from breaking that blockade; in fact if they want the blockade to be considered maintained legally, they are obliged to prevent ships from breaking it.

The International Waters bit doesn't apparently make any difference if the blockading country believes that a vessel is going to break the blockade, and since it was the flotilla's proud boast that this is what they intended to do it was clear that this was the intention. In actual fact, the only time Israel would be on a sticky wicket legally would be if they boarded the vessel in another country's territorial waters.

Edit: I am not a lawyer, I just listened to one on the radio.

Edit again: Link is here - sorry, can't point you to an exact time, but the lawyer is in the first part of the programme.

 

[Pardalis]

Yes, isn't that oddly suspicious? It's almost as if people around the world knew in advance at approximately what date the ships were to approach the target area, and that the Israeli might try to stop them in some way. I am not usually a paranoid person, but something about this makes me believe that this whole convoy was actually planned beforehand, and not something that just suddenly materialised off the Cypriot shore!

That's an interesting thought, but I wasn't really thinking that these protests were intentionally planned in advance.

I was more thinking about how quickly some people react to anything happening in that region, while other regions of the world where similar injustices happen all the time (Sudan, Pakistan, Sri Lanka to name a few) hardly anyone bothers to get out to protest. But Palestine it's almost instantaneous.

I too was clueless as to what happened until 4pm, when I got back from work. How did all these people get organized so quickly in a few hours of the raid on a work day? Maybe it has to do with the new social medias, but even with those it's awfully quick.

 

[JihadJane]

Israeli commandos have a history of killing Turks? News to me.

They have a history of killing peace activists and anyone who resists their occupation.

The fact is that the flotilla called itself peaceful, five of the six ships were, and were dealt with effectively and without causalty. The only place there were causalties was on the ship where the large crowd attacked those commandos with weapons as they boarded.

We don't know that this was the activists' first experience of the pirates' violent aggression. The activists had every right to defend themselves from piracy in International Waters.

So again, do you think that when confronted with people shooting at them, stabbing them, beating them with pipes, firing marbles at them from sling shots, throwing stun grenades and fire bombs, and attempting (and succeeding) to throw them off of the side of the top deck, the Israelis weren't entitled to use the force required to stop the attack to defend themselves?

Maybe they should have climbed straight back up their ropes and reconsidered their extremely foolish plan.

The surrounding sea was thick with military hardware, the assault was being closely observed. Didn't they have any back -up?

As I posted above, Israel is perfectly capable and very experienced at defending itself from angry groups without resorting to lethal force.

You don't get the meaning of blockade do you? Of course I could also ask, what would have been the harm of sailing to Ashdod, then having the cargo checked for prohibited items before being sent over the border?

The Israelis do not have a good record of distributing aid delivered in this manner! It usually sits for months being "processed" until it is useless to anyone.

What harm would it have done to let the boats dock peacefully and unload their cargoes for distribution directly to those in dire need?

 

[Kotatsu]

I don't really get what you're getting at here....

I am just sharing in Pardalis' heartfelt astonishment that something as big as this could be kept a secret to the world until -- out of nowhere -- there is suddenly a fleet of ships, the boarding of and murder aboard which have now caused an assortment of people across the world to spontaneously engage in outrage, despite having had no previous knowledge about the whole event.

I attended a protest and solidarity manifestation here in town yesterday, to which more than 4000 people came to show their outrage and support. Where did all this people get their prior knowledge of this event from, which allowed them to organise protests and manifestations of solidarity with very short notice? As I said, it's almost as if these protesters I met yesterday at the protest actually knew about the existence of this fleet before it encountered the Israeli forces.

I agree with Pardalis that this seems bafflingly suspicious.

 

[Thunder]

They were carrying paintball guns as primary weapons and pistols as backup. They were ordered not to open fire with the pistols unless authorized.

this appears to be a lie.

 

[DC]

.....
*Edit And I love the added accusations of disproportionate response, terrorism. A good deal of these people on this main ship had an obvious deathwish: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_PzifNN0Ysg. Any more failed allegations of infractions of international law, etc. you want to go through?

in the video there is one person saying something in that direction.
and you conclude, a good deal of them ?

 

[TragicMonkey]

It always astonishes me that people can accuse Israel of being the height of absolute evil, but not notice the ridiculous restraint it displays. If it were really that nasty, it could have simply sunk all the boats from the air, or mined the approach to Gaza and let them discover that for themselves. Instead it warned them in advance they would be boarded, then did so, risking the lives of its own soldiers. But then, if Israel were as evil as its enemies claim, there wouldn't be a Gaza or anyone in it to begin with.

 

[JihadJane]

That's an interesting thought, but I wasn't really thinking that these protests were intentionally planned in advance.

I was more thinking about how quickly some people react to anything happening in that region, while other regions of the world where similar injustices happen all the time (Sudan, Pakistan, Sri Lanka to name a few) hardly anyone bothers to get out to protest. But Palestine it's almost instantaneous.

I too was clueless as to what happened until 4pm, when I got back from work. How did all these people get organized so quickly in a few hours of the raid on a work day? Maybe it has to do with the new social medias, but even with those it's awfully quick.

All one had to do to feel outraged enough to go out on to the streets was read a good old-fashioned news report. The places where people gather to protest are traditional ones. No-one needs to be told where to go

Maybe the difference between you and the protestors is that they care about what this dangerous, US-enabled, nuclear-armed rogue state does in the most volatile region of the world and you don't.