Israeli inquiry: Flotilla raid was legal

[ovarel]

With this attitude no wonder the Israelis promptly dispatched 9 of your kind to Poseidon.

no wonder you and your kinds are screwing cows...

 

[500]

You know it's not hard to imagine the SS recruits being trained by their superiors with similar persuasions of "it's just a few Jews, it's not like were going to kill them all".

No one was killed there because of his nationality.

Murder is murder

No. There are many different cases: planned murder, anger murder, unintentional murder, self defence murder, murder during war... Each case is different...

The maritime laws the IDF use as justification on boarding the Mavi Marmara applies to merchant vessels in times of war and under no circumstances are civilian vessels even if suspected of carrying armaments are allowed to be boarded/attacked in international waters.

Are you a law expert? I doubt. Judges in comission are experts.

P.S: Do you have a source regarding the murder of 20 Turkish men by Iranians?

welcome:

One Turkish villager killed on Iranian border - Hurriyet Daily News and Economic Review

 

[KS]

no wonder you and your kinds are screwing cows...

Screwing cows - ?? we worship them as Gods.

Too much **** on the tube is wreaking havoc on you...

Anyways I am going offtopic here....Good luck dealing with Israel

 

[Cerian]

Are you a law expert? I doubt. Judges in comission are experts.

They are hardly objective though, aren't they? Also, commissions report was too good for Israel, perfect even. There was also an article about credibility of Turkel commission on Haaretz.

 

[Archdemon]

You know it's not hard to imagine the SS recruits being trained by their superiors with similar persuasions of "it's just a few Jews, it's not like were going to kill them all".

Murder is murder and the fact is the IDF killed humanitarians at see in international waters. The IDF if they truly did have cause for concern could have easily disabled the ship and towed to someplace were they could have conducted an inspection once the flotilla entered Israeli national waters.

The maritime laws the IDF use as justification on boarding the Mavi Marmara applies to merchant vessels in times of war and under no circumstances are civilian vessels even if suspected of carrying armaments are allowed to be boarded/attacked in international waters.

P.S: Do you have a source regarding the murder of 20 Turkish men by Iranians?

Again and again it is not Israeli but international.

Under international maritime law, when a maritime blockade is in effect, no boats can enter the blockaded area. That includes both civilian and enemy vessels.

A state may take action to enforce a blockade. Any vessel that violates or attempts to violate a maritime blockade may be captured or even attacked under international law. The US Commander's Handbook on the Law of Naval Operations sets forth that a vessel is considered to be in attempt to breach a blockade from the time the vessel leaves its port with the intention of evading the blockade


---------- International Humanitarian Law - San Remo Manual 1994 -----------------


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;
(b) engage in belligerent acts on behalf of the enemy;
(c) act as auxiliaries to the enemy s armed forces;
(d) are incorporated into or assist the enemy s intelligence system;
(e) sail under convoy of enemy warships or military aircraft; or
(f) otherwise make an effective contribution to the enemy s military action, e.g., by carrying military materials, and it is not feasible for the attacking forces to first place passengers and crew in a place of safety. Unless circumstances do not permit, they are to be given a warning, so that they can re-route, off-load, or take other precautions.

 

[500]

They are hardly objective though, aren't they?

Are you objective? There were two very resectful foreign observes, who agreed with comission's conclusions.

 

[Cerian]

Are you objective? There were two very resectful foreign observes, who agreed with comission's conclusions.

It doesn't matter whether I'm objective or not, I'm just a simple citizen not someone who is on commission to deal with grand events. Anyways two sides sent their reports to UN, we will see what will be the outcome. Turkey already declared it would accept the outcome of UN mission.

 

[Archdemon]

It doesn't matter whether I'm objective or not, I'm just a simple citizen not someone who is on commission to deal with grand events. Anyways two sides sent their reports to UN, we will see what will be the outcome. Turkey already declared it would accept the outcome of UN mission.

It does matter for argument's sake! by saying this you just have portraited yourself as total idiot with zero credibility and respect to your own thought...

 

[Mehmet]

Again and again it is not Israeli but international.

Under international maritime law, when a maritime blockade is in effect, no boats can enter the blockaded area. That includes both civilian and enemy vessels.

A state may take action to enforce a blockade. Any vessel that violates or attempts to violate a maritime blockade may be captured or even attacked under international law. The US Commander's Handbook on the Law of Naval Operations sets forth that a vessel is considered to be in attempt to breach a blockade from the time the vessel leaves its port with the intention of evading the blockade


---------- International Humanitarian Law - San Remo Manual 1994 -----------------


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;
(b) engage in belligerent acts on behalf of the enemy;
(c) act as auxiliaries to the enemy s armed forces;
(d) are incorporated into or assist the enemy s intelligence system;
(e) sail under convoy of enemy warships or military aircraft; or
(f) otherwise make an effective contribution to the enemy s military action, e.g., by carrying military materials, and it is not feasible for the attacking forces to first place passengers and crew in a place of safety. Unless circumstances do not permit, they are to be given a warning, so that they can re-route, off-load, or take other precautions.

Here is the problem for Israel.

The Mavi Marmara is not considered a merchant vessel as it is not carrying cargo for commercial benefit either for itself or that of a client. The IHH organized as an humanitarian non profit business is a entity that does not in Turkey get taxed as a business but as a charity.

The Mavi Marmara is a civilian vessel and under international law civilian vessels even during times of war are not to be attacked by another nation.

Thank you for listing that segment from the book of international maritime law since it would take me ages to find it but you have proven my point of Israel breaking international law.

 

[Mehmet]

I disagree the lead ship the Mavi Marmara was known to be majority Turks on board and given the Davos walkout by Erdogan it can be assumed with reasonable justification that the Turks were deliberately targeted.

When I state murder I do not given the theme of my post deviate to areas of self defense and other forms of forced killings, indeed my statement of "murder is murder" is directly related to the IDF's cold blooded murder.

I could giver a counter argument to your statement of "judges on the commission being experts" as the UN body that condemned this attack and prior attacked the legality of the blockade itself are experts.

Keep in mind that they are on the UN itself and that they are like it or not qualified to be in such a position since they do represent the public face of their respective nation to the UN assembly and consequently to the world and that even if some members are biased the voting system ensured that outliers remain outliers and do not represent the majority consensus.

 

[500]

I disagree the lead ship the Mavi Marmara was known to be majority Turks on board and given the Davos walkout by Erdogan it can be assumed with reasonable justification that the Turks were deliberately targeted.

Its your conspiracy theory nothing more.

When I state murder I do not given the theme of my post deviate to areas of self defense and other forms of forced killings, indeed my statement of "murder is murder" is directly related to the IDF's cold blooded murder.

Landing with paintball guns is weirdest way of "cold blood murder".

I could giver a counter argument to your statement of "judges on the commission being experts" as the UN body that condemned this attack and prior attacked the legality of the blockade itself are experts.

Well this is one expert vs. another. You believe Lybia headed so called "human right council", I believe Turkel comission. Why? Because I know that courts in Israel are independent and many times decided against government, prosecuted ministers and so on and I know that "human right counsil" is biased joke.

 

[500]

Here is the problem for Israel.

The Mavi Marmara is not considered a merchant vessel as it is not carrying cargo for commercial benefit either for itself or that of a client. The IHH organized as an humanitarian non profit business is a entity that does not in Turkey get taxed as a business but as a charity.

The Mavi Marmara is a civilian vessel and under international law civilian vessels even during times of war are not to be attacked by another nation.

Thank you for listing that segment from the book of international maritime law since it would take me ages to find it but you have proven my point of Israel breaking international law.

Helsinki Principles on the Law of Maritime Neutrality:

5.2.10 Blockade

Blockade, i.e. the interdiction of all or certain maritime traffic coming from or going to a port or coast of a belligerent, is a legitimate method of naval warfare. In order to be valid, the blockade must be declared, notified to belligerent and neutral States, effective and applied impartially to ships of all States. A blockade may not bar access to neutral ports or coasts. Neutral vessels believed on reasonable and probable grounds to be breaching a blockade may be stopped and captured. If they, after prior warning, clearly resist capture, they may be attacked.

London Declaration concerning the Laws of Naval War 1909:

Art. 20. A vessel which has broken blockade outwards, or which has attempted to break blockade inwards, is liable to capture so long as she is pursued by a ship of the blockading force. If the pursuit is abandoned, or if the blockade is raised, her capture can no longer be effected.

Art. 21. A vessel found guilty of breach of blockade is liable to condemnation. The cargo is also condemned, unless it is proved that at the time of the shipment of the goods the shipper neither knew nor could have known of the intention to break the blockade.

 

[Archdemon]

I disagree the lead ship the Mavi Marmara was known to be majority Turks on board and given the Davos walkout by Erdogan it can be assumed with reasonable justification that the Turks were deliberately targeted.

When I state murder I do not given the theme of my post deviate to areas of self defense and other forms of forced killings, indeed my statement of "murder is murder" is directly related to the IDF's cold blooded murder.

I could giver a counter argument to your statement of "judges on the commission being experts" as the UN body that condemned this attack and prior attacked the legality of the blockade itself are experts.




Keep in mind that they are on the UN itself and that they are like it or not qualified to be in such a position since they do represent the public face of their respective nation to the UN assembly and consequently to the world and that even if some members are biased the voting system ensured that outliers remain outliers and do not represent the majority consensus.

SECTION V : DEFINITIONS

13. For the purposes of this document:

(a) international humanitarian law means international rules, established by treaties or custom, which limit the right of parties to a conflict to use the methods or means of warfare of their choice, or which protect States not party to the conflict or persons and objects that are, or may be, affected by the conflict;
(b) attack means an act of violence, whether in offence or in defence;
(c) collateral casualties or collateral damage means the loss of life of, or injury to, civilians or other protected persons, and damage to or the destruction of the natural environment or objects that are not in themselves military objectives;
(d) neutral means any State not party to the conflict;
(e) hospital ships, coastal rescue craft and other medical transports means vessels that are protected under the Second Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I of 1977;
(f) medical aircraft means an aircraft that is protected under the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and Additional Protocol I of 1977;
(g) warship means a ship belonging to the armed forces of a State bearing the external marks distinguishing the character and nationality of such a ship, under the command of an officer duly commissioned by the government of that State and whose name appears in the appropriate service list or its equivalent, and manned by a crew which is under regular armed forces discipline;
(h) auxiliary vessel means a vessel, other than a warship, that is owned by or under the exclusive control of the armed forces of a State and used for the time being on government non-commercial service;
(i) merchant vessel means a vessel, other than a warship, an auxiliary vessel, or a State vessel such as a customs or police vessel, that is engaged in commercial or private service;
(j) military aircraft means an aircraft operated by commissioned units of the armed forces of a State having the military marks of that State, commanded by a member of the armed forces and manned by a crew subject to regular armed forces discipline;
(k) auxiliary aircraft means an aircraft, other than a military aircraft, that is owned by or under the exclusive control of the armed forces of a State and used for the time being on government non-commercial service;
(l) civil aircraft means an aircraft other than a military, auxiliary, or State aircraft such as a customs or police aircraft, that is engaged in commercial or private service;
(m) civil airliner means a civil aircraft that is clearly marked and engaged in carrying civilian passengers in scheduled or non-scheduled services along Air Traffic Service routes.


IHH is a private organization which is not recognized by UN as humanitarian aid organization! thus not protected under the Geneva Convention of 1949!

 

[Mehmet]

It is not a conspiracy when it was readily apparent the lead ship was Turkish also supported by the fact that they were broadcasting to the Internet the ship, it's mission and cargo it was carrying.

Replying to your quote of paint ball guns is interesting since I did not know that paint ball guns can be used in such a lethal manner, would be logical to assume these were not paint ball guns. Again look at the video released by Democracy Now to see that the IDF was shooting at the Mavi Marmara before they descended on it.

 

[Mehmet]

These laws would be available for the defense of the IDF and no one would be able to deny it, however it had been prior to the Mavi Marmara incident found that the blockade of Gaza is illegal as it applies collective punishment on civilians which under international law is completely unacceptable.