Israel intercepts Gaza flotilla, says Hamas

Well at least they can make a movie with this: "Pirates of the Mediterranean"

donsutherland1 said:

Alexa,

I heard that report on the radio when driving to work. I'm still not sure what actually has been found. But if detonators were found, that would raise serious concerns. Once the results of inspections are available, I believe more will be known. For now, the conditional "if" applies.

Click to expand...

Indeed it does. I am only speaking about what is known.

donsutherland1 said:

As with the passengers on the sixth ship, I don't know what the full number was.

Click to expand...

600 is the number I have heard on more than one day.

donsutherland1 said:

I believe it will be possible to sort through them, determining who might have knowledge about the ship's cargo, who may have committed violence, etc. Of course, if others refuse to cooperate, that process will take longer. Those who were involved in the violence and those who might have knowledge about weapons should be detained. Afterward, if no weapons were found, then the latter group could be released. Those responsible for violence should be prosecuted.

Click to expand...

I think it is a pity Israel stopped the passengers from being able to transmit and film. that would have given more information.

As I said it is not just a methodical process, it is also a psychological one. My tv tells me Israel has already decided who these people are. I think this will colour the inquiry. I will be surprised if I am satisfied.

All enquiries need to look at the motivation of the people involved. Israel, and I suspect you also, despite your genuine desire for fairness, have already decided.

donsutherland1 said:

No, but perhaps you didn't see my initial post in this thread (Message #58) --snip--

Click to expand...

Oh I did see the post, I just have doubts that the IDF would prosecute jewish soldiers if they were found guilty.
The prior cases of Hib al-Heib and Taysir Hayb spring to mind. Hayb is a Bedouin Arab-Israeli and may have been hung out to dry. Hib al-Heib is Jewish and was cleared despite being reprimanded for changing his story (as did Taysir Hayb) and has since been promoted. Israel did pay James Miller's family £1.5million compensation however.

What I'm getting at is that laws of war weren't applied until external pressure by the families were brought to bear against Israel.

donsutherland1 said:

Israel's inspecting boats in international waters is not illegal nor is it without precedent. For example, the BBC reported:

A massive cocaine seizure by the Royal Navy off the Nicaraguan coast has dealt a "sledgehammer blow" to traffickers, the defence secretary said.

HMS Cumberland seized two tonnes of cocaine worth £200m after intercepting a speedboat during a routine patrol.

The caption under the photo accompanying the story clearly notes, "HMS Cumberland intercepted the speedboat in international waters."

Click to expand...

Us again, setting these damn precedents. If I remember correctly quite a bit of soul searching did go in as to whether to do this. These were though smuggling boats not Turkish or German.

Infinite Chaos said:

Amnesty International, Geneva Conventions - Switzerland has complained, the UN etc. Obviously as none of these are American, I don't believe you will accept they have no agenda. :roll:

Click to expand...

With the eye roll at the end here I can see that your mind on the subject is nearly as closed in support of Palestine, and the "Activists" as mine is in support of Israeli actions.

However, maybe we can have a conversation about this still.

1. Amnesty Intl. - "Amnesty International Issues Report Accusing Israel of War Crimes" - Amnesty International Issues Report Accusing Israel of War Crimes

So Amnesty Intl. believes that Israel is guilty of a war crime in even having this blockade. I'd say that is an agenda in denouncing what happened, no?


2. Geneva Conventions - Please cite article, and verse on where A] Israel is bound by this in this conflict? and B] what Israel did to break any obligation it has under this.

3. Switzerland, and the UN. The UN is decidedly anti Israel, has been for some time now, not a surprise. As far as the Swiss, aren't they supposed to be neutral? maybe they should sit down.

Source BBC

Source Gisha (Israeli Human Rights Group)

One of many articles at the BBC that quotes the UN on the amount of aid allowed in

Click to expand...

Still debatable. Some stories of journalists sympathetic to the left leaning causes have little bearing on actual fact these days, especially when they use terms like 'reliable sources' (Unnamed).

After Monday's incident, Egypt has just opened the border to Gaza. Before that, I'd speculate that there was a lot of US pressure to support Israel.

Click to expand...

Ah so it was the US's fault....I see. It couldn't be this explanation of the Egyptian government or anything....

"Egypt maintains that it cannot open the Rafah crossing since opening the border would represent Egyptian recognition of the Hamas control of Gaza, undermine the legitimacy of the Palestinian Authority and consecrate the split between Gaza and the West Bank.[4]"

2007

Yes, but that "over reaction" by restricting the amount of food going into Israel shouldn't last 3 years...

Click to expand...

Do Hamas terrorists still fire rockets into Israel in that 3 years?


j-mac

TacticalEvilDan said:

What part of "they can't do it within international law because they've refused to be bound by international law" do you not understand?

Click to expand...

And this interpretation of international law is based on what? Furthermore; if a nation-state can't invoke international law then they certainly can't be bound by it either.

alexa said:

Us again, setting these damn precedents. If I remember correctly quite a bit of soul searching did go in as to whether to do this. These were though smuggling boats not Turkish or German.

Click to expand...

Alexa,

The UK isn't alone. From the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement's website:

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement special agents, working jointly with Caribbean Border Initiative (CCI) law enforcement officers, seized here today 1,930 kilograms of cocaine with a street value of approximately $58 million on board the Panamanian-flagged vessel M/V Megan Star...

As a result of the joint investigative efforts by CCI participants, a U.S. Coast Guard law enforcement detachment on board the USS Farragut Navy vessel intercepted the M/V Megan Star in international waters.

After successful coordination between officers of the USCG law enforcement detachment, Caribbean Corridor participating agencies, and the government of Panama, USCG personnel boarded the M/V Megan Star. The vessel was subsequently escorted to the Coast Guard base in San Juan for a more thorough inspection which revealed approximately 1,930 kilograms of cocaine hidden within different sections of the ship.

The bottom line is that international waters do not offer legal sanctuary from inspections/boarding. Moreover, there is past precedent for it.

As noted previously, the legality of the boarding is not in question. The events that transpired still need to be examined.

Infinite Chaos said:

Oh I did see the post, I just have doubts that the IDF would prosecute jewish soldiers if they were found guilty.
The prior cases of Hib al-Heib and Taysir Hayb spring to mind. Hayb is a Bedouin Arab-Israeli and may have been hung out to dry. Hib al-Heib is Jewish and was cleared despite being reprimanded for changing his story (as did Taysir Hayb) and has since been promoted. Israel did pay James Miller's family £1.5million compensation however.

What I'm getting at is that laws of war weren't applied until external pressure by the families were brought to bear against Israel.

Click to expand...

I believe when violations of the Laws of War take place, the necessary measures to hold the individuals responsible to account for the violations should be carried out. It should not matter what countries the soldiers are from. Hence, for example, I favored prosecution of those responsible for the abuses at Abu Ghraib.

j-mac said:

With the eye roll at the end here I can see that your mind on the subject is nearly as closed in support of Palestine, and the "Activists" as mine is in support of Israeli actions.

However, maybe we can have a conversation about this still.

Click to expand...

Hey, I'm guilty as charged. I'm sorry for the comment. I've seen far too many US posters ridicule the UN simply because it isn't a mouthpiece for US policy - forgetting that it's 1) an international body and 2) the US is quite happy having it there as it can exert some control. (there have been moves in the past to move it either to canada or even Switzerland or some other neutral.)

j-mac said:

1. Amnesty Intl. - "Amnesty International Issues Report Accusing Israel of War Crimes" - Amnesty International Issues Report Accusing Israel of War Crimes

So Amnesty Intl. believes that Israel is guilty of a war crime in even having this blockade. I'd say that is an agenda in denouncing what happened, no?

Click to expand...

Not sure what you're getting at - however Amnesty's position is based on the Geneva conventions regarding "collective punishment."

j-mac said:

-- 2. Geneva Conventions - Please cite article, and verse on where A] Israel is bound by this in this conflict? and B] what Israel did to break any obligation it has under this

3. Switzerland, and the UN. The UN is decidedly anti Israel, has been for some time now, not a surprise. As far as the Swiss, aren't they supposed to be neutral? maybe they should sit down.

Click to expand...

Because they disagree with populist US and Israeli positions? (ignore my sarcasm - couldn't resist). Anyhow - here's the article on Switzerland. Forgive me tying the two requests together - however the simple fact that Switzerland made the call shows that experts on the convention there have studied and satisfied themselves. If you really truly want the actual context - fine - I'll waste half an hour os so getting it for you.

j-mac said:

-- Still debatable. Some stories of journalists sympathetic to the left leaning causes have little bearing on actual fact these days, especially when they use terms like 'reliable sources' (Unnamed).

Click to expand...

The link isn't to a journalist - it's the story about the Israeli human rights agency taking the Israeli Govt to court.

j-mac said:

-- Ah so it was the US's fault....I see. It couldn't be this explanation of the Egyptian government or anything....

Click to expand...

I really don't wish to rehash the history of US involvement in Israeli-Egyptian affairs...

j-mac said:

-- "Egypt maintains that it cannot open the Rafah crossing since opening the border would represent Egyptian recognition of the Hamas control of Gaza, undermine the legitimacy of the Palestinian Authority and consecrate the split between Gaza and the West Bank.[4]"

2007

Click to expand...

And if you read my ealier links - the BBC reports that Egypt has now lifted the blockade.

j-mac said:

-- Do Hamas terrorists still fire rockets into Israel in that 3 years?


j-mac

Click to expand...

That is no justification of or for "collective punishment"

donsutherland1 said:

I believe when violations of the Laws of War take place, the necessary measures to hold the individuals responsible to account for the violations should be carried out. It should not matter what countries the soldiers are from. Hence, for example, I favored prosecution of those responsible for the abuses at Abu Ghraib.

Click to expand...

As do I Don, we shall wait and see if there are charges brought against any Jewish commanders / commandos and whether they are held responsible. In the same vein - those protestors on the ship who may be found guilty should equally be held responsible. I do have a little more faith that guilty protestors will be punished though - less faith that any Israelis (if found guilty) would be punished.

Infinite Chaos said:

That is no justification of or for "collective punishment"

Click to expand...

What should Israel do? Live with it?


j-mac

donsutherland1 said:

I believe when violations of the Laws of War take place, the necessary measures to hold the individuals responsible to account for the violations should be carried out. It should not matter what countries the soldiers are from. Hence, for example, I favored prosecution of those responsible for the abuses at Abu Ghraib.

Click to expand...

This thread is the perfect example of why I do not believe in international law. Enforcement of these supposed international laws is strictly a political affair in which there are no impartial parties to constitute a fair court.

j-mac said:

What should Israel do? Live with it?


j-mac

Click to expand...

According to many that is the attitude.

There is a new article out this morning giving the soldier's side of the story:

Activists on board a six-ship flotilla carrying aid to the Gaza Strip tried to lynch the Israel Navy commandos who boarded their Turkish-flagged boat early Monday, Israel Defense Forces sources told Haaretz on Monday afternoon. At least nine people were killed and several more were wounded in the fighting that erupted aboard one of the ships.

The IDF confirmed that at least seven Navy commandos had been wounded, two of them seriously, in a fight which apparently broke out after activists tried to seize their weapons.

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diploma...flotilla-activists-tried-to-lynch-us-1.293089

Infinite Chaos said:

That is no justification of or for "collective punishment"

Click to expand...

If Gaza is being used as a staging area for attacks against Israel, it is enemy territory and Israel is justified in cutting off supply routes in and out of enemy territory.

j-mac said:

What should Israel do? Live with it?


j-mac

Click to expand...

Israel has signed up to the accords if I recall correctly, that binds the state to adhere to the standards agreed: however recent history shows that Israel does not apply the conventions. The bulldozing of Palestinian homes so it could occupy territory is against the conventions but that doesn't stop Israel. BBC link

Further, Gisha have gone through the legality or otherwise of the blockade of Gaza here in more detail than I ever could but Israel continues to do it.

And here, you'll find the Geneva (Fourth Convention). Bulldozing Palestinian homes is against article 49 and deliberately punishing other people for crimes they did not personally commit is article 33.

It's a good and informative read.

**********EDIT***forgot to attach link to Fourth Convention)***EDIT**********

Korimyr the Rat said:

If Gaza is being used as a staging area for attacks against Israel, it is enemy territory and Israel is justified in cutting off supply routes in and out of enemy territory.

Click to expand...

Absoltuely correct. And the more we discover about these people who tried to run the blockade the more it looks like it was a delibrate setup to provoke a response.

Korimyr the Rat said:

If Gaza is being used as a staging area for attacks against Israel, it is enemy territory and Israel is justified in cutting off supply routes in and out of enemy territory.

Click to expand...

Israel is not justified - Israel signed up to the Geneva Convention. That doesn't prevent Israel ignoring the obligation as it has done before - but then the end result is aid flotillas like this which resulted in the incident on Monday. I partially agree your previous point that international laws and conventions cannot be enforced - however over the long term Israel has now ended up with only the US to whitewash its actions. Financially, that will cost Israel in getting supplies from other nations and the US in having to donate and pay for even more to ensure Israel has goods and can survive.

Korimyr the Rat said:

If Gaza is being used as a staging area for attacks against Israel, it is enemy territory and Israel is justified in cutting off supply routes in and out of enemy territory.

Click to expand...

They should just not be surprised then when it's used as a staging area to attack Israel.

Infinite Chaos said:

Israel has signed up to the accords if I recall correctly, that binds the state to adhere to the standards agreed: however recent history shows that Israel does not apply the conventions. The bulldozing of Palestinian homes so it could occupy territory is against the conventions but that doesn't stop Israel. BBC link

Further, Gisha have gone through the legality or otherwise of the blockade of Gaza here in more detail than I ever could but Israel continues to do it.

And here, you'll find the Geneva (Fourth Convention). Bulldozing Palestinian homes is against article 49 and deliberately punishing other people for crimes they did not personally commit is article 33.

It's a good and informative read.

Click to expand...

Very misleading.
The destruction of Israeli-Arabs' houses by the Israeli state is the same as the destruction of Israeli-Jews' houses by the Israeli state, it is done because the buildings are illegal and nothing more.
That one opposes the first and not the other points at either hatred, hypocrisy or both. That one opposes any of the two at all shows that he opposes basic laws that are acceptable everywhere.
Build your house illegally and it'd be destroyed, whether you live in East Jerusalem or in Amsterdam.

Secondly, the only basis that is being made by those who claim that the blockade is illegal is that Israel's intention is to punish the Palestinian population and not Hamas.
Such basis is false since Israel has said a time after time that their intention is to cripple Hamas, so the blockade isn't illegal.
That folks claim it is points at a political agenda and nothing more.

Infinite Chaos said:

Israel has signed up to the accords if I recall correctly, that binds the state to adhere to the standards agreed: however recent history shows that Israel does not apply the conventions. The bulldozing of Palestinian homes so it could occupy territory is against the conventions but that doesn't stop Israel. BBC link




Further, Gisha have gone through the legality or otherwise of the blockade of Gaza here in more detail than I ever could but Israel continues to do it.

And here, you'll find the Geneva (Fourth Convention). Bulldozing Palestinian homes is against article 49 and deliberately punishing other people for crimes they did not personally commit is article 33.

It's a good and informative read.

Click to expand...

Again, how much land should Israel have to give up for peace? All of it? how many rockets that kill civilians should Israel endure?


j-mac

Ikari said:

They should just not be surprised then when it's used as a staging area to attack Israel.

Click to expand...

No one was surprised, the blockade only came several years after the beginning of the rocket attacks on Israeli civilians by Hamas from the Gaza strip.

Laila said:

Seems to me Israel has pretty much scored an own goal with this fiasco.
I almost feel sorry for Israel, it just cannot get a break.

Killing civilians on ships under the flag of a NATO member and done in IW? I don't recall the last time I've seen a country so utterly devoted to ensuring its isolation from the world.

Click to expand...

What do you propose that Israel should have done instead?
It was a lose-lose situation, either you let a ship into Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip without inspecting its cargo, or you do what Israel did and board the ship.
The non-innocent civilians' deaths are the result of the fact that no one has even assumed that a bunch of peaceful activists would be packing weapons and lynch the soldiers, that were equipped with paintball guns.

Zyphlin said:

If people want to ignore me because this is slightly lazy on my part, be my guest. However was on a mini-vacation for 4 days and missed a lot of posts and saw this and am immedietely interested. I don't like making any kind of massive judgement until most of the facts are pretty much laid out there, and even an initial one I want to get a general idea. However this is a good 500 pages long already with much of it concerning discussions mostly back and forth between a few people. Anyone mind giving a little sum up of what is known thus far and what the opposition and support are generally saying?

My mind always boggles with the Israel stuff as its so amazingly nuanced and so passionate on every side, its hard to get a good grip on it.

Click to expand...

6 ships which consisted of three cargo ships and three passenger ships from Cyprus entered International Waters (about 40 miles out to sea) on route to Israel carrying humanitarian aid to Gaza. One of the ships was provided by a group called IHH, legal in Turkey but accused by Israel of having ties with Al Qaeda and Hamas.

Israel's navy intercepted and went aboard the ships. That is all fact but what happened next is disputed. Israel claims that when they went on board, they were attacked by the activists and it's soldiers had to defend themselves. The activists claim that Israeli's soldiers started shooting when they got on board with no provocation - However video evidence shows the activists were wielding things such as bats and metal bars contradicting claims that Israel attacked for no reason. At least 10 people died, and 30 were wounded as a result.

The consequences of the raid has still not been determined although I doubt anyone can dispute Turkish/Israel relations just got another knocking. I wouldn't be surprised if this was the final nail in the coffin.
Turkey has recalled the ambassador and because the ships were sailing under the Turkish flag and that many of the individuals on board were Turkish citizens, as a NATO member. NATO is going to convene for a response.
So far about 7 countries have summoned their Israeli ambassador and UN has condemned.

If I missed anything, feel free to correct me. That is the gist of it tho.

Djoop said:

I think you put a lot of people on the most partisan pro-Israeli side by stating this, to me it's pretty obvious Israel has little chance of an impartial investigation done by the UN. That doesn't mean no investigation is necessary, that just means I prefer an objective party.

Click to expand...

Then who do suggest would be more impartial than the UN? Whilst the UN may have passed many, many resolutions that the Israelis have failed to adhere to (perceived as Israel-critical bias?) they have failed repeatedly to enforce them (pro-Israeli bias?). There is no such thing as an objective party, just one that attempts to behave in an impartial manner.

Apocalypse said:

Very misleading.

Click to expand...

Of course it's misleading - the International Committee of the Red Cross, UN bodies, and the International Court of Justice have all said it was illegal and against the conventions and the Israeli Supreme Court has said it is legal under those same conventions.

Apocalypse said:

Secondly, the only basis that is being made by those who claim that the blockade is illegal is that Israel's intention is to punish the Palestinian population and not Hamas.
Such basis is false since Israel has said a time after time that their intention is to cripple Hamas, so the blockade isn't illegal.
That folks claim it is points at a political agenda and nothing more.

Click to expand...

have you read the Gisha refutation of the claim of the usage of the word "blockade?"

"Collective punishment" is far more truthful.