Israel Hijacks Aid cargo, executes hostages - Pak journo, Talat Hussain taken hostage

[Unbeliever]

the circumstance leading to the occupants picking up bats is not clear. Did you ever thought about that? Did Israel release full footage leading to the so called riot? How can you come to the conclusion that whole incident was provoked by Turkish/Palestine side?

I didn't come to any conclusions, I said it is also one possible scenario. You did read my post didn't you? Because there you can read, that yes "I thought about that".
And I concur, there are many unanswered question. I said so myself. I won't repeat myself again for you though.

..those people were violent from the start.
..they could have resisted after some aggression from Israel first.

Yes, either one or a combination of both is possible. My main point for the moment (not to you specifically) is: "calm down and wait until all the facts come in."

Some people (as evident from the hundreds of replies) got carried away, some because of anti-zionism that sometimes masks anti-semitism. Usama himself is apparently on a propaganda mission on the internets

You seem like a sensible guy though Pakz, so I suppose you can see what I mean right?

 

[Meengla]

You have to ask yourself how much of the whole incident was purposely provoked by the Palestinian/Turkish side (or a violent subset). Why were there dozens of armed(with knife, clubs and the like), aggressive young extremists among the peaceful helpers on a supposedly purely humanitarian-aid ship?
The extreme reaction by Turkey also supports that hunch.

Quite apparent you have also bought into the propaganda from Israelis. A few quick notes:
There were young kids on board as well. There were quite a few women and western nationals. There were--get this--even a Holocaust survivor AND an Irish Nobel Peace prize winner. The participants could not have imagined Israelis would be STUPID enough to launch an operation. But the operation was launched in the dark after, undoubtedly, trying to psychologically intimidate the passengers. Then the coward commandoes landed. What would the the passengers do? Let them land in the INTERNATIONAL water and try to take over the ship?! I wish the participants had more than just kitchen knives and had actually done some damage to these racist pirates known as the IDF.

Here...since you are not going to trust a Pakistani blog of impartiality, go ahead and read the Comments at the NYTimes. They are no Muslims but look!

Israel Faces Pressure on Gaza After Raid - Readers' Comments - NYTimes.com

Israeli is so rightly accused and isolated that other than some brainwashed Zionists and hateful Indians support for Israel hardly exists. Here is an excerpt from the above link:

Paul
Long Isalnd
June 1st, 2010
9:52 am
I am shocked at the continued, seemingly endless carnage in the Israel-Palestine conflict. As a Jewish-American I clearly remember my pride at Israel's founding and singing the Hatikvah. But, Israel has clearly lost its way. Its right-wing, pro-settler, pro-ultr-orthodox government forgets that its creation was due to the generosity and sympathy of the world community after WWII. As such it owes, but has ceased to acknowledge, the profound debt, obligation and responsibility it has to be a model, moral world citizen. It has long since given up the moral high-ground. The latest atrocity of the Gaza ghetto it has created makes or should make that clear to the world.

At this point, I can see no other alternative than the world community insisting on the immediate implementation of the two state solution using (with slight modifications) the 1967 borders. The consequences of a unified UN proclamation to that effect, if ignored, would be complete and total economic and political isolation.

All I can say is, "Enough!"

 

[adir]

 

[gurjot]

i think they are basic cutters ,in ship they are usually found

 

[Pakz]

I didn't come to any conclusions, I said it is also one possible scenario. You did read my post didn't you? Because there you can read, that yes "I thought about that".
And I concur, there are many unanswered question. I said so myself. I won't repeat myself again for you though.



Yes, either one or a combination of both is possible. My main point for the moment (not to you specifically) is: "calm down and wait until all the facts come in."

Some people (as evident from the hundreds of replies) got carried away, some because of anti-zionism that sometimes masks anti-semitism. Usama himself is apparently on a propaganda mission on the internets

You seem like a sensible guy though Pakz, so I suppose you can see what I mean right?

Unbeliever, I got the impression in your previous post that you are defending Israel use of lethal force because the people on flotilla provoked violence first. At least you acknowledge that this is just a speculation. Correct?

Now, my point is that Israel has NO right to storm into a Humanitarian Aid ship with respected journalists and other well-known figures without any pretext. It is acknowledged that the ship was in International waters. The shipped was checked for weapons before hand by Turkish authorities and was certified for not possessing any weapons.

Now about what took place when IDF soldiers came on board is not clear because the full footage is not released by Israel.

However, the accounts of people on board says otherwise.

Check this video I posted before, it shows the viewpoint of a person on board the ship

if you are not biased in your views, then you should look at the whole picture, not some bits of snap shots provided by Israel.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Israel's flotilla raid revives questions of international law​

By Colum Lynch
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, June 1, 2010; 5:57 PM

UNITED NATIONS -- In the two days following its commando raid on an aid flotilla to the Gaza Strip, Israel has been accused by Turkey and several other governments of behaving like an outlaw state, and engaging in acts of piracy and banditry on the high seas.

But has Israel broken any laws?

International law experts differ over the legality of the Israel action, with some asserting that the raid constituted a clear cut violation of the Law of the Sea, while others maintain that Israel can board foreign vessels in international waters as part of a naval blockade in a time of armed conflict. But scholars on both sides of the debate agree that Israel is required by law to respond with the proportional use of force in the face of violent resistance.

The debate has drawn attention to a three-year-long blockade of Gaza by Israel and Egypt, which has sharply restricted the import of construction materials and other necessities into Gaza. Israel has come under intensive international pressure, including from the United States, to ease the blockade to allow greater flow of goods into Gaza.

Anthony D'Amato, a professor of international law at Northwestern University School of Law is among those who believes the raid was illegal. "That's what freedom of the seas are all about. This is very clear, for a change. I know a lot of prominent Israeli attorneys and I'd be flabbergasted if any of them disagreed with me on this," he said.

But others see the incident differently.

"The Israeli blockade itself against Gaza itself is not illegal, and it's okay for Israeli ships to operate in international waters to enforce it," said Allen Weiner, former State Department lawyer and legal counselor at the American Embassy in the Hague, and now a professor at Stanford Law School. Beyond that, he said, Israel has a legal obligation to allow humanitarian goods into Gaza and to exercise proportionality in the use of force.

Israel maintains that it was clearly within its rights to stop the aid flotilla, saying any state has the right to blockade another state in the midst of an armed conflict.

"We were acting totally within our legal rights. The international law is very clear on this issue," said Mark Regev, spokesman for Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu. "If you have a declared blockade, publicly declared, legally declared, publicized as international law requires, and someone is trying to break that blockade and though you have warned them . . . you are entitled to intercept even on the high seas, even in international waters."

Regev cited a provision in the San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflict at Sea, which states that merchant vessels flying the flag of neutral states outside neutral waters can be intercepted if they "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."

But D'Amato said the document applies to a situation in which the laws of war between states are in force. He said the laws of war do not apply in the conflict between Israel and Hamas, which isn't even a state. He said the law of the Geneva Conventions would apply.

Human rights organizations, governments and U.N. officials have criticized Israel's enforcement of the blockade as cruel, if not necessarily illegal.

The influential rights advocacy group Human Rights Watch says that Israel is within its right to "control the content and delivery of humanitarian aid, such as to ensure that consignments do not include weapons." But the group said "Israel's continuing blockade of the Gaza Strip, a measure that is depriving its population of food, fuel, and basic services, constitutes a form of collective punishment in violation of article 33 of the Fourth Geneva Convention."

Pro-Palestinian advocates have portrayed Israel's activities as illegal, comparing them to President George W. Bush's preemption doctrine. "Israel is now claiming a new international law, invented just for this purpose: the preventive 'right' to capture any naval vessel in international waters if the ship was about to violate a blockade," Phyllis Bennis, a fellow at the Institute for Policy Studies. "That one just about matches George Bush's claim of a preventive 'right' to attack Iraq in 2003 because Baghdad might someday create weapons the U.S. might not like and might use them to threaten some country the U.S. does like."

Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu said that Israel remains in defiance of U.N. resolutions requiring it to end the blockage. He cited Security Council Resolution 1860, which "calls for the unimpeded provision and distribution throughout Gaza of humanitarian assistance, including of food, fuel and medical treatment."

But the resolution also "welcomes the initiatives aimed at creating and opening humanitarian corridors and other mechanism for the sustained delivery of humanitarian aid." And Israel maintains that it has been faithfully implementing the resolution by establishing border crossing routes for the delivery of humanitarian assistance.

To resolve the crisis, Davutoglu said Israel must make a "clear and formal apology," accept an independent investigation, release all passengers immediately, return the bodies of all dead passengers and lift what he called the "siege of Gaza." If these demands are not quickly met, he said that Turkey will demand further action from the U.N. Security Council.

He added that Turkey will also bring the matter before NATO. "Citizens of member states were attacked by a country that was not a member of NATO," he said. "We think that should be discussed in NATO."

Staff writer Janine Zacharia in Jerusalem contributed to this report.

washingtonpost.com

 

[EyelessInGaza]

Do you think that the above is enough to defend a retaliation that resulted in the killing of perhaps 9 people, not by poorly trained police or militia, but by elite Israeli commandos?

I have long been a supporter of Israel my friend, but in this matter I stand on the other side.

 

[Meengla]

@EyelessInGaza,
I commend your courage.
This guys @Idir seems incredibly naive to think that showing these 'weapons' will convince anyone that the Flotilla was armed. WTH?! A giant ship carrying 600+ people is likely to have some sharp objects.

I think I too am about getting done with this. Nice try by the Megaphone brigade but, sorry, you have completely failed to convince anyone here. Heck, as my link above for the NYTimes shows, even Americans are not buying your crap.

Finally, a word to our Iranian, Turkish and Arab friends here: It is true that a few Indians have more balanced opinions--and being part of a Pakistani blogspace the pressure to conform can be a factor, sadly--most Indian bloggers even here sound not just anti-Pakistan, but anti-Islam. Now, you could be a non-Muslim Iranian like @Nina but you can still see that the blind hatred shown by the Indian bloggers.

 

[EyelessInGaza]

Meengla - there's no courage involved my friend. I am trying to see the facts, work on the facts alone and the facts that I see, unless someone can show me other facts, take me to an inescapable conclusion.

 

[adir]

Meengla - there's no courage involved my friend. I am trying to see the facts, work on the facts alone and the facts that I see, unless someone can show me other facts, take me to an inescapable conclusion.

did you soo the video?

 

[Machoman]

This is amazing it's palastine land and Israel has to give permission. What a joke. They are not less then hitler I say.

 

[EyelessInGaza]

did you soo the video?

I did, adir. A few times.

It seemed to show Israeli soldiers being assaulted by people on the ship.

That does not justify 9 lives.

Your soldiers are elites; they are supposed to be better.

No debate can rationalize this away.

 

[Jigs]

I did, adir. A few times.

It seemed to show Israeli soldiers being assaulted by people on the ship.

That does not justify 9 lives.

Your soldiers are elites; they are supposed to be better.

No debate can rationalize this away.

Also they raided that ship in international waters. That is Illegal. It is like me coming into someones home with guns and when they attack i shoot them in self defense and kill him because he attacked me. That is utterly retarded.

 

[Jigs]

PM Speaks.

 

[EyelessInGaza]

Also they raided that ship in international waters. That is Illegal. It is like me coming into someones home with guns and when they attack i shoot them in self defense and kill him because he attacked me. That is utterly retarded.

I think there are counter arguments to that; that a nation at war can, on the high seas, intercept a vessel that it thinks is inimical to its interests. Not sure about the exact convention or even if it applies.

However, no argument can counter the end result - armed elite soldiers killing 9 or more men some of whom, from all aspects, were carrying knifes, rods and slingshots.

And we're not even sure whether the men killed were armed.