Flotilla raid 'regrettable' but legal, Israeli commission finds - Polidicks

[QUOTE]Jerusalem (CNN) -- Israel's deadly raid on an aid flotilla that attempted to run the blockade of Gaza was "regrettable" but legal under international law, an independent Israeli commission reported Sunday. The commission, led by retired judge Yaakov Turkel, found that Israeli commandos "acted professionally and in a measured manner in the face of unanticipated violence" when they seized the Gaza-bound aid ship Mavi Marmara. Members of the Turkish relief group IHH "were direct participants in hostilities" who attacked the Israeli troops, the commission reported. "The actions carried out by Israel on May 31, 2010, to enforce the naval blockade had the regrettable consequences of the loss of human life and physical injuries," the report concludes. "Nonetheless, and despite the limited number of uses of force for which we could not reach a conclusion, the actions taken were found to be legal pursuant to the rules of international law." Nine people were killed when Israeli forces boarded the Mavi Marmara and its accompanying convoy in international waters in May. Kevin Ovenden, a survivor of the raid, called Sunday's report a "whitewash" and a "sick joke." "It is simply unfeasible to claim that, for example, the two men shot immediately to the left and right of me were gunned down in some act of self-defense," Ovenden, a representative of the British aid group Viva Palestina, said in a written statement. "They were shot from above. No Israeli commando was in sight of us when the bullets rang out." The raid strained ties between Israel and Turkey, its strongest ally among Muslim nations, and triggered a wave of international condemnation of Israel and its policies toward Gaza. But the controversy led Israel to loosen its embargo on the territory, allowing more civilian goods and construction materials to flow in while still banning military equipment and weapons. In September, the U.N. Human Rights Council found Israeli forces "committed serious violations of international law" in the raid and suggested that six of the civilians deaths were "consistent with ... an arbitrary and summary execution." Israel called the report "as biased and as one-sided as the body that has produced it." Gaza is ruled by the Islamic militant group Hamas, which refuses to recognize Israel's right to exist and has been branded a terrorist organization by the United States and the European Union. The Turkel Commission found that the blockade "was lawful and complied with the rules of international law," but human rights groups have condemned the closure as an unlawful collective punishment of Palestinian civilians. The Israeli human rights group Gisha, which advocates for Palestinians, said the continued blockade still restricts Palestinian trade and movement "with no valid security justification." "Gisha expresses hope that Israel will cancel the many remaining restrictions that are not related to concrete security risks and will allow the free movement of people and goods into and out of Gaza, subject only to individual security checks," it said. And in a statement in response to Sunday's report, Turkey called the continuing blockade "devoid of legal basis and legitimacy." The Turkish commission that investigated the raid said it was "surprised, appalled and dismayed" by the Israeli findings. "While it had the possibility of intercepting the convoy carrying unarmed civilians without causing bloodshed, Israel opted for a course which made loss of life inevitable," the commission said in a written statement. And instead of rethinking their tactics when passengers began to resist, the Israelis decided "to attack with increased violence," it said. "The result is self-evident and requires no further explanation," the Turkish commissioners said. Israeli officials have said their boarding party was attacked with knives, metal poles and other objects. Sunday's report says two were shot, one in the knee and one in the stomach. The Turkel Commission found that of 133 cases where Israeli troops used force, 127 were in accordance with international law and no conclusions could be reached in the rest. Sunday's report was the first of two parts. The second will be presented later on in the year and will look into the decision-making process that led to the attack on the flotilla. Sarah Colborne, director of the Palestine Solidarity Campaign, who was on board the Mavi Marmara when the Israeli Defence Force attacked the boat, said: "However hard the Israeli Government attempt to rewrite history, they can't rewrite the truth. The facts are simple, the Mavi Marmara was carrying essential humanitarian aid like baby milk to the besieged people of Gaza. There were no guns or weapons on board the boat, we were in international waters, when over 300 bullets -- or one for every two people on board -- rained down on us, killing 9 people and injuring over 50. The actions of the Israeli Defence Force and the Israeli Government were by all international standards of law illegal as is their continued occupation of Gaza and the oppression of the Palestinian people." [/QUOTE] Source: [url]http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/meast/01/23/israel.flotilla.report/index.html?hpt=Sbin[/url]

Surprised?

I bet Israel is sure glad that Israel found in favor of Israel. I thought for sure that Israel was going to tear Israel a new one.

Of course Israel's investigation finds that Israel's actions are legal. Just like the Bush Administration's investigations found that torturing prisoners was legal.

I'm still waiting to find out whether or not the North Korean commission finds North Korea in the right for their artillery bombardment of Yeonpyeong.

Criminal investigating his own crime and finding out he’s OK. I love how they manage to keep a straight face when announcing it. [URL]http://www.facepunch.com/threads/1004880-United-Nations-Flotilla-Raid-Broke-Law?p=25002540&viewfull=1#post25002540[/URL]

GREATEST KOREA INVESTIGATION COMMISSION FOR THE PEOPLE, inspired by glorious works of GREAT LEADER, has found that the BASELESS ACCUSATION OF WESTERN SPIES were WRONG, and that GREAT LEADER did not kill any prisoners, but rather PRISONERS WERE SO HAPPY WHEN THEY SAW GREATNESS OF BEST KOREA THAT PRISONERS DECIDED TO STAY IN BEST KOREA FOREVER KJN, bringing you news on BEST KOREA

Next time I commit a crime, I hope the police department will let me lead the investigation.

Just out of curiosity, what law does actually apply to the flotilla?

You do realize that Israel isn't like, one person, right? It's not like the people in the Turkel commission were all like "WE MUST PROVE ISRAEL NOT GUILTY FOR ALL OF OUR GREATER GOOD". If they had found Israel guilty, the government would just have to say sorry to Turkey, pay reparations, and sentence those found guilty. This has already happened, several IDF soldiers were convicted of murder in the Gaza war, by Israel. If the officials in the Turkel commission were found to have ulterior motives, like if one of the soldiers is a family member or something, then the commission would be truly biased, but just because they're from the same country doesn't mean anything.

[QUOTE=BurnEmDown;27626698]You do realize that Israel isn't like, one person, right? It's not like the people in the Turkel commission were all like "WE MUST PROVE ISRAEL NOT GUILTY FOR ALL OF OUR GREATER GOOD". If they had found Israel guilty, the government would just have to say sorry to Turkey, pay reparations, and sentence those found guilty. This has already happened, several IDF soldiers were convicted of murder in the Gaza war, by Israel. If the officials in the Turkel commission were found to have ulterior motives, like if one of the soldiers is a family member or something, then the commission would be truly biased, but just because they're from the same country doesn't mean anything.[/QUOTE] *sigh*

So you think that an independent Israeli commission's findings cannot be trusted because they're Israeli. I wonder what you'd be saying if the commission found the IDF in the wrong? BED's completely right. Unlike other nations *cough* Iran *cough*, Israel tends to punish members of its own military establishment who commit crimes. I agree with the finding, personally.

I hope Tali van-Normandy is ok.

I mean next time they should just let the ships in without any hesitations what so ever. No.

[QUOTE=Dr_Funk;27627538]So you think that an independent Israeli commission's findings cannot be trusted because they're Israeli. I wonder what you'd be saying if the commission found the IDF in the wrong? BED's completely right. Unlike other nations *cough* Iran *cough*, Israel tends to punish members of its own military establishment who commit crimes. I agree with the finding, personally.[/QUOTE] You got it completely wrong. The Israeli-led findings were criticized and dismissed due to evident subjectiveness. The report takes the Israeli claims as fact, and uses the claims to make the decision accordingly and then it claims that it was legal under international law without any solid reasoning or facts, which is why it was dismissed. Having a former state employee apart of the commission doesn’t help their case either. You agreeing with this finding is irrelevant, it just shows you’re willing to agree with anything compatible with your views, despite if the evidence exists or not/or if it’s blatant bullshit. An impartial United Nations report was released a few months ago that concluded that the raid did violate international law with references where and how in the law as well as the blockade (Line 48: [URL]http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrcouncil/docs/15session/A.HRC.15.21_en.pdf[/URL]). Contrary to the Israeli led commission, in-depth forensic analysis (subsequent to interviews with the commandos, people on board and Israeli edited footage. The video cameras, CCTV and other recording equipment belong to the aid activists and the Mavi Marama were confiscated and destroyed by Israel) was taken place to confirm and reach a conclusion, rather than basing the whole report out of the Israeli POV and being with bias. Regarding your claim of Israel prosecuting its own soldiers. [URL]http://articles.cnn.com/2010-07-15/world/israel.convictions_1_b-tselem-soldier-omri-borberg?_s=PM:WORLD[/URL] (Two soldiers convicted of using human shields in Gaza) When you actually read the judges’ conclusion: the soldiers were under “difficult and dangerous conditions.” Preparing the stage to set the soldiers free when the judges’ get ready to announce their decisions at a later date. Just like last when Israel investigated the case of an Israeli Captain who emptied his rifle on a 10 year old girl. While he was found guilty of murder, just like the Israeli soldiers in the above case, and due to the extenuating circumstances of the killing it was ‘justified’ and the Israeli Captain was set free. In front of the world and press they claim they have a system of justice for their soldiers claiming they will be tried or sentenced, but in reality no one action is taken. Just like the father of Sabra and Shatilla Massacre, who became Israeli Prime Minister, he was not convicted. Or the Gaza war, where a false sense of justice was being spread about how Israel responded to the soldiers who used white phosphorus. [URL]http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article7010851.ece[/URL] The two officers disciplined yesterday were served a mild reprimand and had a “note” placed in their personal files noting their involvement. One defence official described the punishment as a “slap on the wrist.” Sometimes you have to read a bit further, when Israel claims that they punish/prosecute their soldiers.

Saw this thread. Opened it. Knew what to expect. [QUOTE=Used Car Salesman;27613611]Of course Israel's investigation finds that Israel's actions are legal. Just like the Bush Administration's investigations found that torturing prisoners was legal.[/QUOTE] It was very legal. You don't just run a military blockade and expect nothing to happen - do you think the US wouldn't do anything if they blockaded Cuba and a bunch of hostile "aid" worker passengers (who could very well be "something" else as far as the military is concerned) on a boat or two decided they'd just sail right through and disregard everyone? Technically speaking, it would've been legal to just sink all of the boats trying to run the blockade. Enough of the Israel hate. You may not "like" what they did. It may have been "wrong" to some holier-than-Israel do-gooders on this forum. The fact remains, though, that trying to run a military blockade and then violently resisting a routine and sensible weapons search is not a great way to avoid trouble and enter a contested area peacefully.

[QUOTE=Jenkem;27630128]It was very legal. You don't just run a military blockade and expect nothing to happen - do you think the US wouldn't do anything if they blockaded Cuba and a bunch of hostile "aid" worker passengers (who could very well be "something" else as far as the military is concerned) on a boat or two decided they'd just sail right through and disregard everyone? Technically speaking, it would've been legal to just sink all of the boats trying to run the blockade. Enough of the Israel hate. You may not "like" what they did. It may have been "wrong" to some holier-than-Israel do-gooders on this forum. The fact remains, though, that trying to run a military blockade and then violently resisting a routine and sensible weapons search is not a great way to avoid trouble and enter a contested area peacefully.[/QUOTE] You're giving a horrible comparison with Cuba which has no place in this topic. I assume by blockade you mean "ban Cubans from entering the U.S."? That's not remotely similar to the blockade like in Gaza, entirely different from what we're talking about and just a irrelevant analogy. Despite of all this, the part that gets me the most is: [quote]The fact remains, though, that trying to run a military blockade and then violently resisting a routine and sensible weapons search is not a great way to avoid trouble and enter a contested area peacefully. [/quote]Jenkem says that as if the Israelis never fired prior to boarding, and you have the audacity to say it's legal? (Not to mention the already-concluded U.N. investigation).

[img]http://filesmelt.com/dl/take_cover.jpg[/img] [img]http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_amtU1POy0iU/R0_od5TamLI/AAAAAAAABPU/3Fxd0tkwth0/s1600-R/20soldierstf2.jpg[/img] [b]DUCK AND COVER[/B]

[QUOTE=Starpluck;27630271]You're giving a horrible comparison with Cuba which has no place in this topic. I assume by blockade you mean "ban Cubans from entering the U.S."? That's not remotely similar to the blockade like in Gaza, entirely different from what we're talking about and just a irrelevant analogy. Despite of all this, the part that gets me the most is: Jenkem says that as if the Israelis never fired prior to boarding, and you have the audacity to say it's legal? (Not to mention the already-concluded U.N. investigation).[/QUOTE] You referenced the UN, as if they've ever been useful. Can you name any potential conflict they've effectively stopped? Anything out of that horrible excuse of an organization is usually comparable to oven-roasted fecal matter. I'm not even going to finish this argument now - you've already proved that you never read my post with objectivity in mind, because it had nothing to do with blocking Cuban refugees.

[QUOTE=Jenkem;27630128]Saw this thread. Opened it. Knew what to expect. It was very legal. You don't just run a military blockade and expect nothing to happen - do you think the US wouldn't do anything if they blockaded Cuba and a bunch of hostile "aid" worker passengers (who could very well be "something" else as far as the military is concerned) on a boat or two decided they'd just sail right through and disregard everyone? Technically speaking, it would've been legal to just sink all of the boats trying to run the blockade. Enough of the Israel hate. You may not "like" what they did. It may have been "wrong" to some holier-than-Israel do-gooders on this forum. The fact remains, though, that trying to run a military blockade and then violently resisting a routine and sensible weapons search is not a great way to avoid trouble and enter a contested area peacefully.[/QUOTE] Man who's opinion should I trust more, Jenkem or The UN? Hmmm decisions

[QUOTE=Badal;27624496]Next time I commit a crime, I hope the police department will let me lead the investigation.[/QUOTE] My spree killing was regrettable but legal

[QUOTE=Jenkem;27630396]You referenced the UN, as if they've ever been useful. Can you name any potential conflict they've effectively stopped?[/QUOTE] Armed conflicts the United Nations prevented is irrelevant to intentional law and investigations carried out by them. [quote]Anything out of that horrible excuse of an organization is usually comparable to oven-roasted fecal matter. I'm not even going to finish this argument now - you've already proved that you never read my post with objectivity in mind, because it had nothing to do with blocking Cuban refugees.[/quote]You were being pretty vague. Do explain Jenkem, what did you mean by "The U.S. blockading Cuba, then Cubans coming to the U.S." if it not meant Cuban refugees entering the U.S.?

[QUOTE=Jenkem;27630128]Saw this thread. Opened it. Knew what to expect. It was very legal. You don't just run a military blockade and expect nothing to happen - do you think the US wouldn't do anything if they blockaded Cuba and a bunch of hostile "aid" worker passengers (who could very well be "something" else as far as the military is concerned) on a boat or two decided they'd just sail right through and disregard everyone? Technically speaking, it would've been legal to just sink all of the boats trying to run the blockade.[/quote] United States Foreign policy has nothing to do with this. You're generalising as a whole. When commandos board your ship hostilely and start shooting, what's going to be your first thought? routine inspection? no, you're probably going to try and defend yourself. Not only that, it's also in international waters. The blockade and boarding of the ship are two very illegal acts. [quote]Enough of the Israel hate.[/quote] When Israel stops slaughtering innocent people and saying it was perfectly fine to do so - then we'll stop dissenting. [quote]You may not "like" what they did. It may have been "wrong" to some holier-than-Israel do-gooders on this forum. The fact remains, though, that trying to run a military blockade and then violently resisting a routine and sensible weapons search is not a great way to avoid trouble and enter a contested area peacefully.[/QUOTE] You probably think a swat raid on a house for a parole violator is justified. well, in this case, a SWAT team that fires a full load of bullets into a house before going in. [editline]24th January 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Dr_Funk;27627538]So you think that an independent Israeli commission's findings cannot be trusted because they're Israeli.[/quote] Yes, it's basic logic. As someone said earlier, it's like the Bush administration finding torture to be justified. [quote]I wonder what you'd be saying if the commission found the IDF in the wrong? BED's completely right. Unlike other nations *cough* Iran *cough*, Israel tends to punish members of its own military establishment who commit crimes. [/quote] No, actually. They get slaps on the wrists. Hell, even the guy who unloaded a full magazine into a child got a slap on the wrist. And the officers who ordered the strike on the Gaza hospital and killed many people. [quote]I agree with the finding, personally.[/QUOTE] Of course you would, it paints a pretty picture for Israel.

Excellent first post there

[QUOTE=Jenkem;27630396]You referenced the UN, as if they've ever been useful. Can you name any potential conflict they've effectively stopped? Anything out of that horrible excuse of an organization is usually comparable to oven-roasted fecal matter. I'm not even going to finish this argument now - you've already proved that you never read my post with objectivity in mind, because it had nothing to do with blocking Cuban refugees.[/QUOTE] The 'usefulness' of the UN has nothing to do with their validity. Many, many potential conflicts are settled through the UN council. There are thousands of countries all wanting to kill each other (not only militarily, economically and socially). so they go to the UN. Tension is not rare, Jenkem. Just because you don't hear about it all over the news as well as hearing about other conflicts, doesn't mean the UN never does anything. [editline]24th January 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Lambeth;27630852]Excellent first post there[/QUOTE] Danke

[QUOTE=Soviet Bread;27630830]United States Foreign policy has nothing to do with this. You're generalising as a whole. When commandos board your ship hostilely and start shooting, what's going to be your first thought? routine inspection? no, you're probably going to try and defend yourself.[/quote] Except the soldiers informed the ship multiple times that they were going to board them for a routine check-up and that if they don't resist none of them would be harmed, that was true for the first 5 ships who were boarded, it could have been for the 6th, but the crew resisted the soldiers forcefully. Also, the international waters part is bullshit. According to the law, it doesn't matter if it's in international waters or not, it could even be in the port from where the ship is leaving, what matters is the blockade and the way the power that is enforcing the blockade takes control of the ship.

Have a source for that? The soldiers, if informed, screwed up royally. You don't start firing at a ship and board it with armed commandos for a "rountine" inspection. And you should probaby understand how international law works before commenting. International waters has everything to do with it. forcefully boarding a ship in international waters is piracy. The blockade is also illegal.

Is Israel trying to get the dick of the year award fifty times in a row now?

[QUOTE=BurnEmDown;27631048]Except the soldiers informed the ship multiple times that they were going to board them for a routine check-up and that if they don't resist none of them would be harmed, that was true for the first 5 ships who were boarded, it could have been for the 6th, but the crew resisted the soldiers forcefully. Also, the international waters part is bullshit. According to the law, it doesn't matter if it's in international waters or not, it could even be in the port from where the ship is leaving, what matters is the blockade and the way the power that is enforcing the blockade takes control of the ship.[/QUOTE] Nobody recognizes the blockade as legal though. [editline]24th January 2011[/editline] Even the US wants it outta there

[QUOTE=Soviet Bread;27631080]Have a source for that? The soldiers, if informed, screwed up royally. You don't start firing at a ship and board it with armed commandos for a "rountine" inspection. And you should probaby understand how international law works before commenting. International waters has everything to do with it. forcefully boarding a ship in international waters is piracy. The blockade is also illegal.[/QUOTE] Is there any proof that the soldiers shot on the ship before boarding? And international law regarding blockades is clear about how it's a-OK to board a ship who is planning to bypass a blockade, even in international water and any kind of water, it could be a neutral nation's water, or the water of the ship's home country, it doesn't matter.