Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
OK, but it was well known that there were no weapons on those ships.P F Tinmore, et al,
This is just subterfuge.
(COMMENT)The fact is that Israel attacked a civilian aid ship in international waters and killed people.
Another fact is that Israel knew that there were no weapons aboard to Gaza. There was no military necessity for the attack. The flotilla was no threat to Israel.
Israel killed people for no reason.
Israeli propaganda.
If you read the San Remo Manual section on Blockades, you will no doubt notice that there is no requirement to have foreknowledge of the flotilla (or individual vessels) carrying contraband to deny ships that "are believed on reasonable grounds to be carrying contraband or breaching a blockade....”
The State Sponsors of the Freedom Flotilla intentionally attempted to create a violent confrontation for the express purpose of challenging a blockade parameter for a media exploitation event.
This is not dissimilar to a vehicle attempting to run a roadblock in order to create the conditions for a "police brutality" media event in order to get the government to pay an out of court settlement.
READING FOR REFERENCE:
97. A blockade may be enforced and maintained by a combination of legitimate methods and means of warfare provided this combination does not result in acts inconsistent with the rules set out in this document.
98. Merchant vessels believed on reasonable grounds to be breaching a blockade may be captured. Merchant vessels which, after prior warning, clearly resist capture may be attacked.
Most Respectfully,
R
OK, but it was well known that there were no weapons on those ships.P F Tinmore, et al,
This is just subterfuge.
(COMMENT)The fact is that Israel attacked a civilian aid ship in international waters and killed people.
Another fact is that Israel knew that there were no weapons aboard to Gaza. There was no military necessity for the attack. The flotilla was no threat to Israel.
Israel killed people for no reason.
Israeli propaganda.
If you read the San Remo Manual section on Blockades, you will no doubt notice that there is no requirement to have foreknowledge of the flotilla (or individual vessels) carrying contraband to deny ships that "are believed on reasonable grounds to be carrying contraband or breaching a blockade....”
The State Sponsors of the Freedom Flotilla intentionally attempted to create a violent confrontation for the express purpose of challenging a blockade parameter for a media exploitation event.
This is not dissimilar to a vehicle attempting to run a roadblock in order to create the conditions for a "police brutality" media event in order to get the government to pay an out of court settlement.
READING FOR REFERENCE:
97. A blockade may be enforced and maintained by a combination of legitimate methods and means of warfare provided this combination does not result in acts inconsistent with the rules set out in this document.
98. Merchant vessels believed on reasonable grounds to be breaching a blockade may be captured. Merchant vessels which, after prior warning, clearly resist capture may be attacked.
Most Respectfully,
R
So Israel attacked and killed unarmed civilians in international waters when they knew that there were no weapons aboard. It was all humanitarian aid.
Spin that all you want.
The fact is that Israel attacked a civilian aid ship in international waters and killed people.
Another fact is that Israel knew that there were no weapons aboard to Gaza. There was no military necessity for the attack. The flotilla was no threat to Israel.
Israel killed people for no reason.
Everybody.OK, but it was well known that there were no weapons on those ships.P F Tinmore, et al,
This is just subterfuge.
(COMMENT)The fact is that Israel attacked a civilian aid ship in international waters and killed people.
Another fact is that Israel knew that there were no weapons aboard to Gaza. There was no military necessity for the attack. The flotilla was no threat to Israel.
Israel killed people for no reason.
Israeli propaganda.
If you read the San Remo Manual section on Blockades, you will no doubt notice that there is no requirement to have foreknowledge of the flotilla (or individual vessels) carrying contraband to deny ships that "are believed on reasonable grounds to be carrying contraband or breaching a blockade....”
The State Sponsors of the Freedom Flotilla intentionally attempted to create a violent confrontation for the express purpose of challenging a blockade parameter for a media exploitation event.
This is not dissimilar to a vehicle attempting to run a roadblock in order to create the conditions for a "police brutality" media event in order to get the government to pay an out of court settlement.
READING FOR REFERENCE:
97. A blockade may be enforced and maintained by a combination of legitimate methods and means of warfare provided this combination does not result in acts inconsistent with the rules set out in this document.
98. Merchant vessels believed on reasonable grounds to be breaching a blockade may be captured. Merchant vessels which, after prior warning, clearly resist capture may be attacked.
Most Respectfully,
R
So Israel attacked and killed unarmed civilians in international waters when they knew that there were no weapons aboard. It was all humanitarian aid.
Spin that all you want.
Who was it "well known" by?
The entire flotilla scam was an intentional effort to spark a confrontation.
(COMMENT)Everybody.The entire flotilla scam was an intentional effort to spark a confrontation.
This doesn't change my post any.P F Tinmore, et al,
Whether there was contraband onboard the Flotilla (or not) makes no difference. The Flotilla gave every indication that they intended to violate the "blockade."
CONDITIONS OF EXEMPTION
48. Vessels listed in paragraph 47 are exempt from attack only if they:
CLASSES OF VESSELS EXEMPT FROM ATTACK
47. The following classes of enemy vessels are exempt from attack:
(a) hospital ships;There is plenty of video in the public domain that clearly indicate that the Freedom Flotilla of Six was not engaged in the framework of innocent passage. By the San Remo Manual, the administration of the blockade MUST "effective" and an obvious fact. If the Israeli Defense Force (IDF) Navy had not intercepted the Freedom Flotilla of Six, then it would have been contrary to the proper maintenance of the blockade. And it was obvious that the Freedom Flotilla did not follow the direction of the IDF Navy when commanded "Heave to and prepare to be Boarded!"
(b) small craft used for coastal rescue operations and other medical transports;
(c) vessels granted safe conduct by agreement between the belligerent parties including:
(i) cartel vessels, e.g., vessels designated for and engaged in the transport of prisoners of war;(d) vessels engaged in transporting cultural property under special protection;
(ii) vessels engaged in humanitarian missions, including vessels carrying supplies indispensable to the survival of the civilian population, and vessels engaged in relief actions and rescue operations;
(e) passenger vessels when engaged only in carrying civilian passengers;
(f) vessels charged with religious, non-military scientifc or philanthropic missions, vessels collecting scientific data of likely military applications are not protected;
(g) small coastal fishing vessels and small boats engaged in local coastal trade, but they are subject to the regulations of a belligerent naval commander operating in the area and to inspection;
(h) vessels designated or adapted exclusively for responding to pollution incidents in the marine environment;
(i) vessels which have surrendered;
(j) life rafts and life boats.
None of the vessels in the Freedom Flotilla of Six, were innocently employed in their normal role; as required by paragraph Paragraph 48a. The MV Mavi Marmara was a Comoros-flagged and registered passenger Cruise Ship. The MV Mavi Marmara did not submit to boarding and inspection (Paragraph 48b) when it was interdicted attempting to run the naval blockade. AND, in accordance with Paragraph 48c, the Freedom Flotilla intentionally hampered the movement of IDF and obey orders to stop or move out of the way when required.
(COMMENT)Everybody.The entire flotilla scam was an intentional effort to spark a confrontation.
Again, we should understand that it was the intentional. The MV Mavi Marmara and the accompanying ships in the Freedom Flotilla of Six with 400+ anti-Israeli Activist, engaged the IDF Navy to incite a conflict of a level as to make the confrontation a news media worthy event. See the NEW York Times Article:
Days of Planning Led to Flotilla’s Hour of ChaosRemembering that the Flotilla could have avoided the confrontation and subsequence injuries and death of, although not the Blood Bath the News Media makes it out to be, is evidence that the the pro-Palestinian activists behind the flotilla wanted a Blood Bath. Videos show the pro-Palestinians attacking the IDF Boarding Party with lethal (but crude) weapons.
By SABRINA TAVERNISE and ETHAN BRONNER NYT JUNE 4, 2010
The Planned pro-Palestinian activists activity that led the flotilla to the confrontation, constituted a depraved indifference, the defendant's conduct must be 'so wanton, so deficient in a moral sense of concern, so lacking in regard for the life or lives of others, and so blameworthy as to warrant the same criminal liability as that which the law imposes upon a person who intentionally causes a crime.
Most Respectfully,
R
as the attack was in International Water's Israel shot it's self in both feet, leaving them without a foot to stand onThis doesn't change my post any.
Israel attacked and killed unarmed civilians shooting itself in the foot.
Israel didn't want to go to trial over the point of Lawfanger, et al,
Yes, I guess you did not read the excerpt from the San Remo Manual.
Yes, you are correct, it was in international waters under the criteria of the Barcelona Convention (For the Protection of the Mediterranean).
Your application of the "International Waters" as a single criteria is a vastly oversimplified answer to much more complex issues.
Most Respectfully,
R
The fact is that Israel attacked a civilian aid ship in international waters and killed people.Only in America would Murder be considered "on purely political grounds", (you suggested it, not I)People can rant and rave and sign petitions and letters, but it is the prosecutor's decision whether to proceed and she has ruled there is no basis on which to proceed. The governing body of the ICC could fire her, of course, and replace her with some stooge who will do their bidding, but to what end? Neither Israel nor the US recognizes the jurisdiction of the ICC over their citizens and both countries have in place policies that would allow amount of force necessary to protect their citizens from the court. Bensouda understands the ICC can only damage its already tarnished reputation by proceeding with this issue on purely political grounds as you suggest it should.The International Criminal Court has asked its chief prosecutor to reopen an investigation into the interception of the Mavi Marmara, the ship on which nine human rights activists were killed in 2010 after it was stormed by the Israeli Defence Force during an attempt to break the blockade of the Gaza Strip.
In a damning assessment published last week, ICC judges condemned the decision by Gambian-born prosecutor Fatou Bensouda not to launch an inquiry into the deadly incident despite a “reasonable basis” to believe that war crimes were committed. The judges said Ms Bensouda’s decision was based on a “flawed” and “simplistic” conclusion containing several factual errors. They concluded the prosecutor “committed material errors in her determination of the gravity of the potential case” and urged her to reconsider her decision not to launch an investigation “as soon as possible”.
Senior IDF commanders and Israeli leaders may now ultimately face trial over the incident which occurred in international waters on 31 May 2010, and drew global condemnation. The judges said: “The prosecutor should have accepted that live fire may have been used prior to the boarding of the Mavi Marmara, and drawn the appropriate inferences. This fact … may reasonably suggest that there was, on the part of the IDF who carried out the identified crimes, a prior intention to attack and possibly kill passengers on board.”
A UN Human Rights Council (UNHCR) report into the raid concluded that the youngest victim – 18-year-old Furkan Dogan – had been shot five times, including once in the face while he was lying on his back.
Mavi Marmara: Judges call for new investigation into deaths of
Any lawyer worthy of the name would just produce the videos taken by the pallywood journo's onboard and show that the Israeli's were defending against armed resistance and terrorist violence. Then the civil court would overturn its decision to award damages and give them to the Jews instead.Do you mean Israel's propaganda videos? Yes, I have seen them.The videos taken by the IDF and especially the videos taken by the passengers. There are threads with the videos already posted after the incident. Look 'em up. You had your chance to view them and didn't, just like nobody watches your stupid assed videos, so you'll have to search.What videos?You didn't watch the videos, did you. You have to watch the videos. You can't see them
very clearly with your hoof in your mouth.
So the pallywood journo's video's are now Israeli propaganda ?
Another fact is that Israel knew that there were no weapons aboard to Gaza. There was no military necessity for the attack. The flotilla was no threat to Israel.
Israel killed people for no reason.
Israeli propaganda.
This doesn't change my post any.P F Tinmore, et al,
Whether there was contraband onboard the Flotilla (or not) makes no difference. The Flotilla gave every indication that they intended to violate the "blockade."
CONDITIONS OF EXEMPTION
48. Vessels listed in paragraph 47 are exempt from attack only if they:
CLASSES OF VESSELS EXEMPT FROM ATTACK
47. The following classes of enemy vessels are exempt from attack:
(a) hospital ships;There is plenty of video in the public domain that clearly indicate that the Freedom Flotilla of Six was not engaged in the framework of innocent passage. By the San Remo Manual, the administration of the blockade MUST "effective" and an obvious fact. If the Israeli Defense Force (IDF) Navy had not intercepted the Freedom Flotilla of Six, then it would have been contrary to the proper maintenance of the blockade. And it was obvious that the Freedom Flotilla did not follow the direction of the IDF Navy when commanded "Heave to and prepare to be Boarded!"
(b) small craft used for coastal rescue operations and other medical transports;
(c) vessels granted safe conduct by agreement between the belligerent parties including:
(i) cartel vessels, e.g., vessels designated for and engaged in the transport of prisoners of war;(d) vessels engaged in transporting cultural property under special protection;
(ii) vessels engaged in humanitarian missions, including vessels carrying supplies indispensable to the survival of the civilian population, and vessels engaged in relief actions and rescue operations;
(e) passenger vessels when engaged only in carrying civilian passengers;
(f) vessels charged with religious, non-military scientifc or philanthropic missions, vessels collecting scientific data of likely military applications are not protected;
(g) small coastal fishing vessels and small boats engaged in local coastal trade, but they are subject to the regulations of a belligerent naval commander operating in the area and to inspection;
(h) vessels designated or adapted exclusively for responding to pollution incidents in the marine environment;
(i) vessels which have surrendered;
(j) life rafts and life boats.
None of the vessels in the Freedom Flotilla of Six, were innocently employed in their normal role; as required by paragraph Paragraph 48a. The MV Mavi Marmara was a Comoros-flagged and registered passenger Cruise Ship. The MV Mavi Marmara did not submit to boarding and inspection (Paragraph 48b) when it was interdicted attempting to run the naval blockade. AND, in accordance with Paragraph 48c, the Freedom Flotilla intentionally hampered the movement of IDF and obey orders to stop or move out of the way when required.
(COMMENT)Everybody.The entire flotilla scam was an intentional effort to spark a confrontation.
Again, we should understand that it was the intentional. The MV Mavi Marmara and the accompanying ships in the Freedom Flotilla of Six with 400+ anti-Israeli Activist, engaged the IDF Navy to incite a conflict of a level as to make the confrontation a news media worthy event. See the NEW York Times Article:
Days of Planning Led to Flotilla’s Hour of ChaosRemembering that the Flotilla could have avoided the confrontation and subsequence injuries and death of, although not the Blood Bath the News Media makes it out to be, is evidence that the the pro-Palestinian activists behind the flotilla wanted a Blood Bath. Videos show the pro-Palestinians attacking the IDF Boarding Party with lethal (but crude) weapons.
By SABRINA TAVERNISE and ETHAN BRONNER NYT JUNE 4, 2010
The Planned pro-Palestinian activists activity that led the flotilla to the confrontation, constituted a depraved indifference, the defendant's conduct must be 'so wanton, so deficient in a moral sense of concern, so lacking in regard for the life or lives of others, and so blameworthy as to warrant the same criminal liability as that which the law imposes upon a person who intentionally causes a crime.
Most Respectfully,
R
Israel attacked and killed unarmed civilians shooting itself in the foot.
as the attack was in International Water's Israel shot it's self in both feet, leaving them without a foot to stand onThis doesn't change my post any.
Israel attacked and killed unarmed civilians shooting itself in the foot.
And having no alternative than to settle out of Court for $20,000.000.00
OK, but it was well known that there were no weapons on those ships.P F Tinmore, et al,
This is just subterfuge.
(COMMENT)The fact is that Israel attacked a civilian aid ship in international waters and killed people.
Another fact is that Israel knew that there were no weapons aboard to Gaza. There was no military necessity for the attack. The flotilla was no threat to Israel.
Israel killed people for no reason.
Israeli propaganda.
If you read the San Remo Manual section on Blockades, you will no doubt notice that there is no requirement to have foreknowledge of the flotilla (or individual vessels) carrying contraband to deny ships that "are believed on reasonable grounds to be carrying contraband or breaching a blockade....”
The State Sponsors of the Freedom Flotilla intentionally attempted to create a violent confrontation for the express purpose of challenging a blockade parameter for a media exploitation event.
This is not dissimilar to a vehicle attempting to run a roadblock in order to create the conditions for a "police brutality" media event in order to get the government to pay an out of court settlement.
READING FOR REFERENCE:
97. A blockade may be enforced and maintained by a combination of legitimate methods and means of warfare provided this combination does not result in acts inconsistent with the rules set out in this document.
98. Merchant vessels believed on reasonable grounds to be breaching a blockade may be captured. Merchant vessels which, after prior warning, clearly resist capture may be attacked.
Most Respectfully,
R
So Israel attacked and killed unarmed civilians in international waters when they knew that there were no weapons aboard. It was all humanitarian aid.
Spin that all you want.
(COMMENT)This doesn't change my post any.
Israel attacked and killed unarmed civilians shooting itself in the foot.
If I had been in charge of the operation, when the activists attacked the boarding party, I would have withdrawn the boarders and sunk both ships and ended any controversy. That would have sent a message to future blockade runners. Notice that even the actions taken have precluded any further attempts. But they will try again.This doesn't change my post any.P F Tinmore, et al,
Whether there was contraband onboard the Flotilla (or not) makes no difference. The Flotilla gave every indication that they intended to violate the "blockade."
CONDITIONS OF EXEMPTION
48. Vessels listed in paragraph 47 are exempt from attack only if they:
CLASSES OF VESSELS EXEMPT FROM ATTACK
47. The following classes of enemy vessels are exempt from attack:
(a) hospital ships;There is plenty of video in the public domain that clearly indicate that the Freedom Flotilla of Six was not engaged in the framework of innocent passage. By the San Remo Manual, the administration of the blockade MUST "effective" and an obvious fact. If the Israeli Defense Force (IDF) Navy had not intercepted the Freedom Flotilla of Six, then it would have been contrary to the proper maintenance of the blockade. And it was obvious that the Freedom Flotilla did not follow the direction of the IDF Navy when commanded "Heave to and prepare to be Boarded!"
(b) small craft used for coastal rescue operations and other medical transports;
(c) vessels granted safe conduct by agreement between the belligerent parties including:
(i) cartel vessels, e.g., vessels designated for and engaged in the transport of prisoners of war;(d) vessels engaged in transporting cultural property under special protection;
(ii) vessels engaged in humanitarian missions, including vessels carrying supplies indispensable to the survival of the civilian population, and vessels engaged in relief actions and rescue operations;
(e) passenger vessels when engaged only in carrying civilian passengers;
(f) vessels charged with religious, non-military scientifc or philanthropic missions, vessels collecting scientific data of likely military applications are not protected;
(g) small coastal fishing vessels and small boats engaged in local coastal trade, but they are subject to the regulations of a belligerent naval commander operating in the area and to inspection;
(h) vessels designated or adapted exclusively for responding to pollution incidents in the marine environment;
(i) vessels which have surrendered;
(j) life rafts and life boats.
None of the vessels in the Freedom Flotilla of Six, were innocently employed in their normal role; as required by paragraph Paragraph 48a. The MV Mavi Marmara was a Comoros-flagged and registered passenger Cruise Ship. The MV Mavi Marmara did not submit to boarding and inspection (Paragraph 48b) when it was interdicted attempting to run the naval blockade. AND, in accordance with Paragraph 48c, the Freedom Flotilla intentionally hampered the movement of IDF and obey orders to stop or move out of the way when required.
(COMMENT)Everybody.The entire flotilla scam was an intentional effort to spark a confrontation.
Again, we should understand that it was the intentional. The MV Mavi Marmara and the accompanying ships in the Freedom Flotilla of Six with 400+ anti-Israeli Activist, engaged the IDF Navy to incite a conflict of a level as to make the confrontation a news media worthy event. See the NEW York Times Article:
Days of Planning Led to Flotilla’s Hour of ChaosRemembering that the Flotilla could have avoided the confrontation and subsequence injuries and death of, although not the Blood Bath the News Media makes it out to be, is evidence that the the pro-Palestinian activists behind the flotilla wanted a Blood Bath. Videos show the pro-Palestinians attacking the IDF Boarding Party with lethal (but crude) weapons.
By SABRINA TAVERNISE and ETHAN BRONNER NYT JUNE 4, 2010
The Planned pro-Palestinian activists activity that led the flotilla to the confrontation, constituted a depraved indifference, the defendant's conduct must be 'so wanton, so deficient in a moral sense of concern, so lacking in regard for the life or lives of others, and so blameworthy as to warrant the same criminal liability as that which the law imposes upon a person who intentionally causes a crime.
Most Respectfully,
R
Israel attacked and killed unarmed civilians shooting itself in the foot.
look at the videos shot by the passengers that show the terrorists were armed with deadly weapons including machete's, kitchen knives, butchers knives, ceremonial knives, metal bars, metal poles, heavy furniture, hand guns and grenades. The IDF boarded with paint ball guns used to tag those on board using violence to resist a legal command for stop and search of a vessel openly attempting to breach a legal blockade.
ONCE AGAIN YOU DENY THE JEWS THE RIGHT TO BE PROTECTED BY INTERNATIONAL LAWS BECAUSE IT RESULTED IN DEAD MUSLIMS ENGAGING IN TERRORISM. TRY LOOKING AT THE PASSENGERS VIDEDOS
And this changes my post how?P F Tinmore, et al,
Now this is 100% wrong. There is both video by the media and the IDF that show the militant Islamic Activist directly attacking the Boarding Party deadly [non-Small Arms and Light Weapons (SALW)] with lethal instruments.
It should be understood that the Government of the Turkish Republic know of the terrorist connect the Humanitarian Relief Foundation (IHH), has with both Hamas and al-Qaeda. In 2014 the Millî İstihbarat Teşkilatı (Turk National Intelligence) (MIT) had infiltrated and smugglers and arms dealers, providing (what the IHH thought were) stolen trucks. In the Joint Operation with the Turkish Military, the MIT intercepted an IHH weapons convoy on the Turkish-Syrian border. There were 23 people were arrested by Turkish police. Included in the arrested group of smugglers was one of the Militant Activist that were on the MV Mavi Marmara.
IHH is a humanitarian aid organization founded in 1995 that is said to have ties to the International Red Cross; holds special consultative status with the UN Economic, Social, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO); and operates in more than 100 countries.
At the time of the Freedom Flotilla of Six confrontation along the blockade border the IHH was already known to have a radical Islamic orientation and close association with the extremist Islamic brotherhood; already observed providing material support to Hamas.
IHH is not a State Department-designated terrorist group. It is a subordinate activity of the Saudi-based, Hamas-created umbrella group known as the Union of Good which is a US designated as a terrorist organization. The estranged legal separation leads many to speculate that IHH has been penetrated by one or more Allied Counterterrorism/Counterintelligence (CT/CI) Activities.
(COMMENT)This doesn't change my post any.
Israel attacked and killed unarmed civilians shooting itself in the foot.
None of the injured or killed IHH activists were "unarmed." They were just not carrying SALW.
As can be readily seen, the IHH Activists aboard the MV Mavi Marmara had planned and prepared for a direct confrontation before they even left port. The IHH Activists were set-up to attack the IDF Naval Commandos used in the boarding party. The IHH Activists were armed with iron rods, knives, broken glass bottles, and sling shots. Where possible IHH Activists attempted to acquire the IDF side arms from disabled commandos. Te IHH Activists also used gas masks, night vision goggles, and life vests during the confrontation.
Most Respectfully,
R
And this changes my post how?P F Tinmore, et al,
Now this is 100% wrong. There is both video by the media and the IDF that show the militant Islamic Activist directly attacking the Boarding Party deadly [non-Small Arms and Light Weapons (SALW)] with lethal instruments.
It should be understood that the Government of the Turkish Republic know of the terrorist connect the Humanitarian Relief Foundation (IHH), has with both Hamas and al-Qaeda. In 2014 the Millî İstihbarat Teşkilatı (Turk National Intelligence) (MIT) had infiltrated and smugglers and arms dealers, providing (what the IHH thought were) stolen trucks. In the Joint Operation with the Turkish Military, the MIT intercepted an IHH weapons convoy on the Turkish-Syrian border. There were 23 people were arrested by Turkish police. Included in the arrested group of smugglers was one of the Militant Activist that were on the MV Mavi Marmara.
IHH is a humanitarian aid organization founded in 1995 that is said to have ties to the International Red Cross; holds special consultative status with the UN Economic, Social, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO); and operates in more than 100 countries.
At the time of the Freedom Flotilla of Six confrontation along the blockade border the IHH was already known to have a radical Islamic orientation and close association with the extremist Islamic brotherhood; already observed providing material support to Hamas.
IHH is not a State Department-designated terrorist group. It is a subordinate activity of the Saudi-based, Hamas-created umbrella group known as the Union of Good which is a US designated as a terrorist organization. The estranged legal separation leads many to speculate that IHH has been penetrated by one or more Allied Counterterrorism/Counterintelligence (CT/CI) Activities.
(COMMENT)This doesn't change my post any.
Israel attacked and killed unarmed civilians shooting itself in the foot.
None of the injured or killed IHH activists were "unarmed." They were just not carrying SALW.
As can be readily seen, the IHH Activists aboard the MV Mavi Marmara had planned and prepared for a direct confrontation before they even left port. The IHH Activists were set-up to attack the IDF Naval Commandos used in the boarding party. The IHH Activists were armed with iron rods, knives, broken glass bottles, and sling shots. Where possible IHH Activists attempted to acquire the IDF side arms from disabled commandos. Te IHH Activists also used gas masks, night vision goggles, and life vests during the confrontation.
Most Respectfully,
R
John Ging UNRWA said:“We recommend the world send ships to the shores of Gaza, and we believe that Israel would not stop these vessels because the sea is open, and many human rights organizations have been successful in previous similar steps, and proved that breaking the siege on Gaza is possible.”
SOURCE: Turkish Aid Convoy, Sails Away today…
(COMMENT)If I had been in charge of the operation, when the activists attacked the boarding party, I would have withdrawn the boarders and sunk both ships and ended any controversy. That would have sent a message to future blockade runners. Notice that even the actions taken have precluded any further attempts. But they will try again.
I was thinking about this a few minutes ago and I would modify my suggestion of sinking the ships to instead saying put about 100 .50 cal rounds from bow to stern at the waterline. That would give the blockade runners time to get to a dry dock at a neutral port.Hossfly, et al,
Yes, well there were probably a number of reasons the Naval Commandos did not avail themselves of that option.
John Ging UNRWA said:“We recommend the world send ships to the shores of Gaza, and we believe that Israel would not stop these vessels because the sea is open, and many human rights organizations have been successful in previous similar steps, and proved that breaking the siege on Gaza is possible.”
SOURCE: Turkish Aid Convoy, Sails Away today…
This is a case wherein an official UN Agency was attempting to incite a confrontation. Although it is not surprising, since the UNRWA has been known to lend material support to HAMAS.
(COMMENT)If I had been in charge of the operation, when the activists attacked the boarding party, I would have withdrawn the boarders and sunk both ships and ended any controversy. That would have sent a message to future blockade runners. Notice that even the actions taken have precluded any further attempts. But they will try again.
The attack option might have been viable at some point; but, there was not --- what we would call, an opportune moment for the armed interventions.
Once a cruise ship begins to sink, there is a grave potential for a catastrophe.
ONE POSSIBLE THOUGHT PROCESS
• The MV Mari Marmara was purchased (≈ $800K) by the Humanitarian Relief Foundation (IHH) in 2010, just prior to the 22 May, 2010, Freedom Flotilla of Six Ships; and the Mavi Marmara was relative new (16 years old). The manifest indicated that there were ≈ 600 passengers and 10K Tons of supplies. Under the conditions that prevailed at the time, and to avoid the accusation of "depraved indifference" and the "gross disregard for life," the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea, 1974 (SOLAS) would have demanded that the IDF Navy have at the ready satisfactory Maritime Search and Rescue (1979 SAR) assets for immediate recovery and medical treatment; before warning then sinking the ship.
Given the number of hostile and radicalizes Pro-Palestinian that raised deadly arms against the IDF Boarding Party, a > 2% fatal casualty figure is quite remarkable.
Most Respectfully,
R
(COMMENT)I was thinking about this a few minutes ago and I would modify my suggestion of sinking the ships to instead saying put about 100 .50 cal rounds from bow to stern at the waterline. That would give the blockade runners time to get to a dry dock at a neutral port.
And this changes my post how?P F Tinmore, et al,
Now this is 100% wrong. There is both video by the media and the IDF that show the militant Islamic Activist directly attacking the Boarding Party deadly [non-Small Arms and Light Weapons (SALW)] with lethal instruments.
It should be understood that the Government of the Turkish Republic know of the terrorist connect the Humanitarian Relief Foundation (IHH), has with both Hamas and al-Qaeda. In 2014 the Millî İstihbarat Teşkilatı (Turk National Intelligence) (MIT) had infiltrated and smugglers and arms dealers, providing (what the IHH thought were) stolen trucks. In the Joint Operation with the Turkish Military, the MIT intercepted an IHH weapons convoy on the Turkish-Syrian border. There were 23 people were arrested by Turkish police. Included in the arrested group of smugglers was one of the Militant Activist that were on the MV Mavi Marmara.
IHH is a humanitarian aid organization founded in 1995 that is said to have ties to the International Red Cross; holds special consultative status with the UN Economic, Social, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO); and operates in more than 100 countries.
At the time of the Freedom Flotilla of Six confrontation along the blockade border the IHH was already known to have a radical Islamic orientation and close association with the extremist Islamic brotherhood; already observed providing material support to Hamas.
IHH is not a State Department-designated terrorist group. It is a subordinate activity of the Saudi-based, Hamas-created umbrella group known as the Union of Good which is a US designated as a terrorist organization. The estranged legal separation leads many to speculate that IHH has been penetrated by one or more Allied Counterterrorism/Counterintelligence (CT/CI) Activities.
(COMMENT)This doesn't change my post any.
Israel attacked and killed unarmed civilians shooting itself in the foot.
None of the injured or killed IHH activists were "unarmed." They were just not carrying SALW.
As can be readily seen, the IHH Activists aboard the MV Mavi Marmara had planned and prepared for a direct confrontation before they even left port. The IHH Activists were set-up to attack the IDF Naval Commandos used in the boarding party. The IHH Activists were armed with iron rods, knives, broken glass bottles, and sling shots. Where possible IHH Activists attempted to acquire the IDF side arms from disabled commandos. Te IHH Activists also used gas masks, night vision goggles, and life vests during the confrontation.
Most Respectfully,
R
