Israel opens fire on Gaza aid flotilla; at least 10 dead, 60 wounded

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

I understand that. But in order to say that this particular action isn't justified, you need to have an alternative action that is considered justified.

 

What do you recommend instead of a blockade?

Well, a ceasefire like the 2008 one would be great. Rocket attacks decreased by 98%.

 

Sure, they continued, but Hamas was stamping down on them, and Israel committed its own share of truce violations as well. Negotiated peace can work, even if Hamas was quietly hoping Israel would vanish off the face of the Earth throughout.

 

Completely different scenario here.

 

For one, you're dealing with a full fledged country, and as such, actions are military. Israel does not have a war against the palestinians, but rather against terrorist groups. As it were, this particular time, the terrorist group is in control of the government, but Israel recognizes that it's not representing the entire palestinian people in their claims, desires and actions, and hence is at least attempting to avoid large scale damages.

Hamas was democratically elected.

 

In this case, there is little more to do than a blockade. There is food in Gaza, the problem is that the people can't buy it - the problem is shared between Israel and the palestinian authority. The fact that Israel should try to find better solutions is clear. I agree with that. I am simply saying that (a) it's not *only* Israel's problem to solve, and (b) that at the moment, I'm not sure there are any other viable solutions to be found other than a blockade.

And my point is that a blockade isn't a viable solution either. It is no more effective at stopping rockets than diplomatic means, especially considering the Egyptian tunnel system, and it has far more nasty side-effects. It merely entrenches Hamas in power, gives a new generation of Hamas leaders yet more reason to hate Israel (rather than coming to peace), and has made Gaza dependent on a smuggling economy conveniently controlled by Hamas.

 

Yes, (a) that doesn't seem to work, (b) they also resorted to other means like sanctions (which is not a physical blockade, but is a political blockade) and © Iran isn't in close proximity to be considered an *immediate* danger as Hammas is. We're not talking about a country thousand miles away, we're talking about a country 50 feet off the other side of the fence. That's immediate.

 

You don't escalate with Iran because you have a CHOICE. The danger they pose isn't immediate. But what do you think would happen if Iran started bombing the USA (and I'm not talking about US military bases in Iraq, I'm talking about actual cities in north america)? Do you really think the US will remain placid with political talks? If entire cities will have continous rocket attacks from Iran (even without a large death toll)?

Of course we'd attack in response to military action. But we wouldn't attack by starving most of Iran. Americans cry out in outrage if we kill a few innocent civilians; if a reporter showed up in Afghanistan and showed that troops were starving innocent Afghanis, heads would roll.

 

Yeah, Israelis tend to agree, and I do too. However, I shall repeat the point, that letting guns and explosives in (and we know for a fact that if we drop the blockade and not check ships, those *will* get in) is much worse consequence than the one suggested above.

 

You don't have to drop the blockade and not check ships. One solution proposed by the Economist is to have the UN manage aid and shipping into Gaza, so that ships can be impartially inspected but shipments can make it in.

 

But in the end, I think this article gives the reasons for the best solution:

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/jun/02/israel-force-impotent-hamas-idea

[swansont]

It should be simple for a girl like you!

 

louis wu, personal comments such as this are unacceptable, as they are a distraction and detract form the discussion. This is a thread about actions of countries and groups of people, not the individuals posting here.

[mooeypoo]

Well, a ceasefire like the 2008 one would be great. Rocket attacks decreased by 98%.

 

Sure, they continued, but Hamas was stamping down on them, and Israel committed its own share of truce violations as well. Negotiated peace can work, even if Hamas was quietly hoping Israel would vanish off the face of the Earth throughout.

And Israel is having talks. http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Peace%20Process/Guide%20to%20the%20Peace%20Process/Israel-Palestinian%20Negotiations

Look specifically at the final paragraph; there are indirect talks done as well as some attempts for talks. The situation is more complex because Hammas is holding a captive soldier without reason and without letting the Red Cross visit him or see him (as they SHOULD do according to the geneva convention).

 

Hamas was democratically elected.

As part of a parliament it later took over violently.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fatah%E2%80%93Hamas_conflict

 

And my point is that a blockade isn't a viable solution either.

Then what are you saying? That there aren't viable solutions?

 

"Not doing anything" isn't a viable solution because it directly causes harm to *BOTH* the palestinians and israelis.

 

Having a blockade isn't fun and it's not something anyone would like to see happening for a while, but since the actions at the moment are one-sided (because Hamas declares its desire to kill Israeli civilians) then Israel (and Egypt!) have little choice than to resort to one-sided action.

 

It is no more effective at stopping rockets than diplomatic means, especially considering the Egyptian tunnel system, and it has far more nasty side-effects. It merely entrenches Hamas in power, gives a new generation of Hamas leaders yet more reason to hate Israel (rather than coming to peace), and has made Gaza dependent on a smuggling economy conveniently controlled by Hamas.

No it isn't.. we've seen that it isn't. Hamas brings in explosives and rockets. It took advantage of the cease fires to rebuild its supplies and continue hostilities.

 

But anyways, Israel *IS* having talks with teh palestinians *along* with a blockade. The talks are just not going anywhere; the blame is on both sides, but the blockade is a means to protect against an *IMMEDIATE* threat to the Israelis, the Egyptians and the palestinians.

 

Hamas seems to value human life less (they're using civilians as human shields) and seems to care less for their own people's welfare; Israel tries to assist in projects of humanitarian aid and improvement of the Gazan economy, but quite frankly, when your delegates and builders are being shot when they enter, you stop sending builders and delegates.

 

Of course we'd attack in response to military action. But we wouldn't attack by starving most of Iran. Americans cry out in outrage if we kill a few innocent civilians; if a reporter showed up in Afghanistan and showed that troops were starving innocent Afghanis, heads would roll.

We're not starving Gaza, Cap'n.

 

With due respect, the condition in Gaza is not strictly Israel's fault, and it will *NOT* be solved by removing the blockade.

 

There is no food shortage in Gaza, there is FUNDS shortage. People can't feed their children because they have no money. All the while, the *rich* of Gaza (oh yes, those exist, I can bring you some videos and menus from the fancy restaurants in Gaza) are doing just fine. The problem is that since the beginning of the Intifada in 2000, people stopped coming into Israel to work. that was because since the intifada in 2000, palestinians workers started blowing themselves up in random civilian places. We would all love to solve this, but I think it's clear that this isn't a clear cut and easily solved situation. And it isn't solely in the hands of Israel, or Egypt, or this blockade.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7766509.stm

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/article727614.ece

 

The blockade isn't STOPPING shipments from getting into Gaza, it's about *INSPECTING* those shipments, as evidenced by the fact that aid DOES go into Gaza, and organizations like UNRWA are inside the city. However, there are *problems* with distributing the aid and food because of the inability (or lack of caring, who knows) of Hamas to take control. They are the government, but they leave their people to suffer, and Israel takes the entire blame for it.

 

So, yes, Israel should participate in finding a solution. That's not to say it's totally in Israel's hands to change it, and this own't be solved by a one-sided decision to stop the blockade. Either Hamas wants to help their own people - in which case a solution should be found by ALL sides to help doing that - or they don't, in which case no matter what anyone would do, starvation in Gaza will continue.

 

You don't have to drop the blockade and not check ships. One solution proposed by the Economist is to have the UN manage aid and shipping into Gaza, so that ships can be impartially inspected but shipments can make it in.

Excellent, that was offered, though, to the 6 flotilla ships, and they refused.

The offer was that the aid be checked by the UN either in Cairo or in Ashdod (because Gaza itself is controlled by Hamas, obviously the inspection can't be there).

 

The ships refused to allow for a UN inspection either. But I do agree this can be a valid solution, if we can trust the UN to inspect the shipments,but I gather some arrangement can be found to check by standards that fit all sides.

 

You will need to have the ships *accept this offer* though, otherwise it's no surprise they will be stopped.

 

But in the end, I think this article gives the reasons for the best solution:

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/jun/02/israel-force-impotent-hamas-idea

 

I will read it further and respond after I do.

 

~moo

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

And Israel is having talks. http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Peace%20Process/Guide%20to%20the%20Peace%20Process/Israel-Palestinian%20Negotiations

Look specifically at the final paragraph; there are indirect talks done as well as some attempts for talks. The situation is more complex because Hammas is holding a captive soldier without reason and without letting the Red Cross visit him or see him (as they SHOULD do according to the geneva convention).

Indeed.

 

Having a blockade isn't fun and it's not something anyone would like to see happening for a while, but since the actions at the moment are one-sided (because Hamas declares its desire to kill Israeli civilians) then Israel (and Egypt!) have little choice than to resort to one-sided action.

 

No it isn't.. we've seen that it isn't. Hamas brings in explosives and rockets. It took advantage of the cease fires to rebuild its supplies and continue hostilities.

I believe I quoted earlier in this thread The Economist, which points out that Hamas hasn't fired any of the rockets launched this year.

 

But anyways, Israel *IS* having talks with teh palestinians *along* with a blockade. The talks are just not going anywhere; the blame is on both sides, but the blockade is a means to protect against an *IMMEDIATE* threat to the Israelis, the Egyptians and the palestinians.

My argument is that as a means to protect against an immediate threat, it's pretty crappy.

 

Hamas seems to value human life less (they're using civilians as human shields) and seems to care less for their own people's welfare; Israel tries to assist in projects of humanitarian aid and improvement of the Gazan economy, but quite frankly, when your delegates and builders are being shot when they enter, you stop sending builders and delegates.

And when your civilians are shot by the IDF, you start shooting builders and delegates. (I'm not trying to blame Israel. I think the conflict has gone on for so long that there's no way to tell who's at fault for what, because the actions all tie back into previous actions, which were caused by other things, blah blah blah. Blame all around.)

 

We're not starving Gaza, Cap'n.

 

With due respect, the condition in Gaza is not strictly Israel's fault, and it will *NOT* be solved by removing the blockade.

 

There is no food shortage in Gaza, there is FUNDS shortage. People can't feed their children because they have no money. All the while, the *rich* of Gaza (oh yes, those exist, I can bring you some videos and menus from the fancy restaurants in Gaza) are doing just fine. The problem is that since the beginning of the Intifada in 2000, people stopped coming into Israel to work. that was because since the intifada in 2000, palestinians workers started blowing themselves up in random civilian places. We would all love to solve this, but I think it's clear that this isn't a clear cut and easily solved situation. And it isn't solely in the hands of Israel, or Egypt, or this blockade.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7766509.stm

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/article727614.ece

These two articles are not relevant, because they were written before the Gaza War, in which Israel destroyed much of Gaza's infrastructure and made a large percentage of people homeless.

 

The blockade isn't STOPPING shipments from getting into Gaza, it's about *INSPECTING* those shipments, as evidenced by the fact that aid DOES go into Gaza, and organizations like UNRWA are inside the city. However, there are *problems* with distributing the aid and food because of the inability (or lack of caring, who knows) of Hamas to take control. They are the government, but they leave their people to suffer, and Israel takes the entire blame for it.

Yes, the blockade is indeed about stopping shipments. Construction materials are not allowed in. Some appliances were not allowed in. I believe I recall reading that chocolate was not allowed in. And the daily traffic in and out of Gaza is a tiny fraction of what it was before the blockade. Without imports and exports, Gaza cannot sustain an economy. They cannot, say, make a business manufacturing goods because they cannot export those goods.

 

Part of the 2008 ceasefire agreement was to increase the number of trucks allowed in and out of Gaza, but Israel never really held up on that side of the agreement, partly because of continuing Palestinian attacks on border posts.

 

Israel does inspect shipments, but it does also stop a large portion from ever getting in.

 

Excellent, that was offered, though, to the 6 flotilla ships, and they refused.

The offer was that the aid be checked by the UN either in Cairo or in Ashdod (because Gaza itself is controlled by Hamas, obviously the inspection can't be there).

 

Fortunately, most international humanitarian aid agencies would be less interested in making a political point and more interested in just getting the aid in. The flotillans want unfettered access directly to Gaza, but if that's not possible, some agreement that allows pre-blockade levels of shipment while still getting routine inspection would be great. But tricky.

 

But nobody can rely on inspection to keep the weapons out of the hands of Hamas forever, and it will not solve the underlying problem. I think we can agree that restrictions and inspections should be a temporary measure until a peace agreement can be worked out.

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/report-erdogan-considering-visiting-gaza-to-break-blockade-1.294326

 

Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan is weighing the possibility of traveling to the Gaza Strip in order to "break the Israeli blockade," the Lebanese newspaper al-Mustaqbal reported on Saturday, according to Army Radio.

 

Can't see how that could go badly...

[louis wu]

Originally Posted by louis wu View Post

 

It should be simple for a girl like you!

 

louis wu, personal comments such as this are unacceptable, as they are a distraction and detract form the discussion. This is a thread about actions of countries and groups of people, not the individuals posting here.

 

Well I do not wish to be offensive.

 

However I do feel that this comment was a simple and inoffensive joke which mooeypoo got.

 

Is is possible that this is moderation with too heavy a hand? Too much moderation will stifle discussion, and surely a little levity is welcome at times.

 

If mooeypoo indicates that she was offended by the remark I will apologise at once.

[mooeypoo]

Well I do not wish to be offensive.

 

However I do feel that this comment was a simple and inoffensive joke which mooeypoo got.

Please don't use it anymore, then. Offensive or inoffensive, it's irrelevant.

Let's all judge our claims rather than our personalities.

 

~moo

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

But nobody can rely on inspection to keep the weapons out of the hands of Hamas forever, and it will not solve the underlying problem. I think we can agree that restrictions and inspections should be a temporary measure until a peace agreement can be worked out.

I agree with all your post, Cap'n, specially with the above. I disagree with the claim that the blockade doesn't work at all - I think it does - but I also think that Israel should work towards finding a better solution. My whole point, though, was that it isn't as simple as others seemed to have put it.

 

This situation is frustrating - I wish there was a solution but it's often hard to think or imagine one available. On the other hand, putting the blame solely on one side (or majorly on one side, or just looking at the blame that is on the one side) is not helpful in finding a solution to this situation, and if nothing else, I have a personal vested interest in having peace in this area. Real peace. The type that lasts forever.

 

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/report-erdogan-considering-visiting-gaza-to-break-blockade-1.294326

 

Can't see how that could go badly...

 

I hope very much that this would not happen. It could have quite horrible political repercussions.

 

~moo

[padren]

Yes, the blockade is indeed about stopping shipments. Construction materials are not allowed in. Some appliances were not allowed in. I believe I recall reading that chocolate was not allowed in. And the daily traffic in and out of Gaza is a tiny fraction of what it was before the blockade. Without imports and exports, Gaza cannot sustain an economy. They cannot, say, make a business manufacturing goods because they cannot export those goods.

 

That is a different measure:

1) "Israel is starving Gaza with the blockade due to not letting shipments in"

2) "They do, but they have to go through inspections first is all"

3) "Yes, but they do block aid because construction material isn't allowed in"

 

That's an argument that "Gaza isn't being allowed to rebuild" which is a fair issue to discuss, but that is not the same one as "Gaza isn't allowed to get food."

[mooeypoo]

This is interesting, a communication between the 7th ship that arrived this morning ("Rachel Corrie") and the IDF: (transcript here: http://idfspokesperson.com/2010/06/05/radio-exchange-between-israeli-navy-and-7th-flotilla-ship-regarding-transfer-of-aid-to-gaza-5-june-2010/)

0pU5HPudACE

 

The Irish government has arranged with Israel that the ship sails to Ashdod port and the cargo be checked by a third party. The ship itself, though, requested permission to continue straight to Gaza. As you can hear, the request was denied, but the two sides tried to reach some sort of compromise.

 

Cap'n, I have to say I was happy to hear the IDF side stating that all the cement in the shipment will go to Gaza - this was part of what we discussed before, and it seems they are making a big exception, which is good to see/hear.

 

The ship was boarded quietly, and escorted to Ashdod port where the cargo is going to go through the inspection and continue to Gaza.

 

You can see a video and pictures of the activists disembarking the ship here: http://idfspokesperson.com/2010/06/05/photos-of-passengers-disembarking-from-ship-at-ashdod-port-5-june-2010/

 

It appears these things can be solved without resorting to violence, if both sides agree to talk.

 

~moo

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

Indeed, and I'm happy with how it was handled. Also:

 

http://www.jpost.com/Israel/Article.aspx?id=177570

 

The defense establishment is considering allowing future aid ships to sail into the Gaza Strip after their crews first agree to dock in Ashdod Port and undergo a military inspection to ensure that they are not carrying weaponry, officials said Saturday night.

 

The idea was one of several being “floated around” as Israel searches for a new policy to handle future flotillas in the wake of the international criticism it has been facing since Monday’s takeover of the Mavi Marmara. Commandos from the navy’s Flotilla 13 – known as the Shayetet – came under attack from a group of mercenaries aboard the ship and killed nine of them.

 

Good to see they're willing to open things up a bit.

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

That is a different measure:

1) "Israel is starving Gaza with the blockade due to not letting shipments in"

2) "They do, but they have to go through inspections first is all"

3) "Yes, but they do block aid because construction material isn't allowed in"

 

That's an argument that "Gaza isn't being allowed to rebuild" which is a fair issue to discuss, but that is not the same one as "Gaza isn't allowed to get food."

 

I think both 1 and 3 are true. Gaza's economy is in the crapper, so its residents have to survive on below-poverty-line levels of food. And they don't let construction materials in.

 

At least until they made the exception for the latest ship; that was nice of them.

[mooeypoo]

Indeed, and I'm happy with how it was handled. Also:

 

http://www.jpost.com/Israel/Article.aspx?id=177570

 

 

 

Good to see they're willing to open things up a bit.

I have a feeling this is also due to very harsh criticism from inside Israel as well. The Citizens, while seeing the point of stopping the flotilla in principle, are - in general - not very happy about how it was handled. Israel is a democracy, and inside-pressure still affects the government. I'm not sure which was bigger effect here - the inside one or the outside one, but either way, the resulting intention to change the way Israel deals with these ships is most welcome.

 

I think both 1 and 3 are true. Gaza's economy is in the crapper, so its residents have to survive on below-poverty-line levels of food. And they don't let construction materials in.

 

At least until they made the exception for the latest ship; that was nice of them.

 

Yeah but the point is that the reasons for 1 and 3 are different and the way to deal with 1 and 3 are different, so they should probably be two different arguments. They both need to be dealt with and fixed, but I don't know if it's useful to combine the two when the reasons are different.

 

~moo

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

Cap'n, I have to say I was happy to hear the IDF side stating that all the cement in the shipment will go to Gaza - this was part of what we discussed before, and it seems they are making a big exception, which is good to see/hear.

Hmm. Now I'm confused:

 

Israel has offered to inspect the cargo – consisting of wheelchairs, medical supplies and cement – and send everything except the cement to Gaza overland.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/israel-seizes-second-aid-ship-as-protests-grow-1992671.html

 

Someone got mixed up somewhere?

[mooeypoo]

Hmm. Now I'm confused:

 

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/israel-seizes-second-aid-ship-as-protests-grow-1992671.html

 

Someone got mixed up somewhere?

I don't know. I will try to check this out.

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

More eyewitness accounts, claiming the Israelis opened fire before landing on the ship:

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/the-hijacking-of-the-truth-film-evidence-destroyed-1992517.html

 

Mr Elshayyal, a reporter for the Arab channel al-Jazeera, was standing to one side of the ship and had a view of the front and back of the vessel when the fighting started. By his account, soldiers fired down on the protesters from the helicopters before an Israeli soldier had even set foot on the ship. A man next to him was shot through the top of his head, dying instantly.

 

"What I saw were shots being fired from the helicopter above and moments later from below – from the ships," Mr Elshayyal said. "As far as I am concerned, it's a lie to say they only started shooting on deck."

 

At least two other eyewitnesses saw soldiers firing from above the ships before they landed on the Marmara's deck. It is possible that this is what prompted the fierce resistance to the soldiers when they dropped down. Several passengers recount how organisers urged their peers to stop hitting the soldiers, aware of how it would harm their claim to be peaceful protesters.

 

Others on the ship claim they raised a white flag, but say that it was ignored. They also used a loudspeaker to reiterate their message of surrender and requested that the injured be taken off the ship to get medical assistance. Again, they were ignored.

 

Another story, in which an eyewitness tells how the IDF mistreated the captured protesters:

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/kidnapped-by-israel-and-abandoned-by-britain-1992518.html

 

There was a Malaysian man sitting in front of me to the right. His hands were tied behind his back, but his hands had gone blue. He pleaded with the soldiers to release him or to loosen his cuffs, but they kept saying no. After the fourth time of pleading with the guy, the soldier went up to him and said "OK" and then tightened it. The man gave out a huge scream, a spine-chilling scream I will never forget. It was only when the superior came later, three hours later, that he was released.

 

Screw-ups all around, it seems.

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

I find myself wishing that Wikileaks would miraculously end up with all the video footage from the IDF and from the protester's cameras.

[toastywombel]

So this is a story of a group of people who lived in Randomia (a fictional country). These are simple people who have lived in Randomia for thousands of years. They have developed a culture, way of life, government.

 

But after a long war that was waged across the globe, a war the people of Randomia were not really involved in, the winners of the war decided to take some people who suffered in the war and give them land controlled by Randomia. The winners then force the Randomians to move and leave their homes.

 

Is it justified for the Randomians to be mad? How would you feel if China came to the United States, kicked everyone you know and you out of your home in New York and said it belongs to the Mohican's. Then to rub it in, China gives aid and advanced military weapons to the Mohican's, while you are left to fend for yourself.

 

Just some questions to put this whole thing into perspective.

[mooeypoo]

So this is a story of a group of people who lived in Randomia (a fictional country). These are simple people who have lived in Randomia for thousands of years. They have developed a culture, way of life, government.

 

But after a long war that was waged across the globe, a war the people of Randomia were not really involved in, the winners of the war decided to take some people who suffered in the war and give them land controlled by Randomia. The winners then force the Randomians to move and leave their homes.

 

Is it justified for the Randomians to be mad? How would you feel if China came to the United States, kicked everyone you know and you out of your home in New York and said it belongs to the Mohican's. Then to rub it in, China gives aid and advanced military weapons to the Mohican's, while you are left to fend for yourself.

 

Just some questions to put this whole thing into perspective.

 

If that's supposed to be a comparison to the Israeli-Palestinian history, it's not very accurate and doesn't quite fit the historical facts of the area.

 

That said, I'm not entirely sure how this is connected specifically to the flotilla events? Go back into any country's history and you will find the current inhabitants probably took it by force, at some point. Either biblical times or during the recolonization of the new world. That might be a historical discussion, but I'm not sure how that helps us with the current discussion about this *current* event with the so-called peace flotilla and Israel's response to them..

 

~moo

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

This is getting ridiculous:

 

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2010/06/201066132951286979.html

 

Israel's prime minister has claimed that a group of activists intent on violence secretly boarded the Turkish ship Mavi Marmara, avoiding security checks, and attacked Israeli troops during last week's deadly raid.

 

Binyamin Netanyahu made the accusations during a cabinet meeting on Sunday but provided no evidence to back them up.

 

Also, Egypt has excellent timing:

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/africa/10247437.stm

 

A court in Cairo has upheld a ruling urging the government to consider stripping Egyptian men who are married to Israeli women of their citizenship.

 

[...]

 

Anti-Israeli sentiment is high in the country in the aftermath of Israeli raids on Gaza aid ships - but the long-scheduled court decision was not connected.

[mooeypoo]

This is getting ridiculous:

 

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2010/06/201066132951286979.html

Yes,here's another source http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3899584,00.html

 

I will try to see if there's any proof to this, or at least why Netanyahu claims this.

[jackson33]

Well, it's the history of the Israel State, that formed my positive opinions on this action and an opposition to Palestinians and the current government of Gaza. At least back to WWII and the UN, which to me gives them the authority for much of action and policy of today, even if the UN has changed its own policy. I'm personally not Jewish, or do I practice any religion, but legally, morally and under the Worlds then authority, were granted (important) *accepted* the UN's mandates for Statehood. The Palestinians would not...

 

As for moo's and CR discussion, I'm getting confused. An embargo is intended to disrupt a countries ability to govern or another way to influence the politics. In the case of the several attempts to get this embargo lifted, the use of militants or if you prefer activist/protestors, the idea is to allow free flow of anything into Gaza, which by definition means supplies to the terrorist, those that support terrorist and the government that may in fact be the terrorist, even if democratically elected. It should be known, realized and accepted, elections have consequences, which citizens of Gaza now can evaluate for themselves. moo, I need to point out that in the US, Jewish folks have traditionally voted about 60-40% in favor of the Democrats, but did vote nearly 80-20% (78) for Obama and that vote if taken would not have been, think from memory a poll suggest 65% opposed to Obama Israel policy. It's now down to being a propaganda war and without a strong US policy, it cannot be won by Israel, attested to by your hour by hour testimony, oops better add IMO.

[padren]

This is getting ridiculous:

 

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2010/06/201066132951286979.html

 

It seems pretty plausible to me. Without solid evidence we can't say "so that's what happened" but at the same time neither side has solid evidence of their view of events, so it's not like he has the burden of proof to overturn the Flotilla's account, as neither account has been settled.

 

I would say the reason it seems plausible is:

 

1) Ships 1-5 did behave as protesters would be expected, and there was no loss of life or injury

2) Ship #7 did behave as protesters would be expected, and there was no loss of life or injury

3) Ship #6, the only one to encounter an anomaly only had one element that was different than all the others: the people on that ship. I'm not so sure with #7, but 1-5 and #6 were all handled by the same IDF people enforcing the blockade.

 

Therefore, the most likely anomaly responsible is the one element anomalous to that encounter: the people on board.

 

Secondarily: I have no idea how Israel could have benefited from this exchange. Clearly Gaza has but just what would be Israel's motivation? The only plausible scenario where the IDF fired on the protesters before being placed in harms way themselves would be due to some catastrophic error - followed by a cover-up. This is plausible but again, given how anomalous this one case was, it seems less so than the others. I think only time and evidence can really settle it.

[Double K]

Paul McGeogh was an Australian journalist aboard one of the ships in the flotilla.

 

When they were boarded, he and another journalist stated to the soldiers who they were, showed their credentials, and yet were treated as terrorists.

They were tazered, had their cameras etc taken from them and evidence/footage destroyed.

 

You can read Mr. McGeogh's account here:

http://www.smh.com.au/world/prayers-tear-gas-and-terror-20100603-x7ew.html?autostart=1

"Some of the people caught the first commando before he touched the deck – a few started to hit him, but a lot of people moved in to shelter him with their bodies," the cameraman said. "Another soldier with a bleeding nose was brought in ... a few people threw punches, but not as many as I would have expected."

 

Matthias Gardel, a leader of the Swedish Palestinian support group, confirmed the soldiers had been beaten, but insisted those involved were unarmed and in keeping with the ship's non-violent charter, the soldiers' weapons were thrown overboard.

 

Soon after the soldiers had been treated, injured and dead from among the boat's passengers were brought in. Stojiljkovic said: "Some were not badly wounded, but then a guy was brought in with a point-blank shot between his eyes – he was dead and I was told that another person was killed in the same way."

[mooeypoo]

Israel has offered to inspect the cargo – consisting of wheelchairs, medical supplies and cement – and send everything except the cement to Gaza overland.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/israel-seizes-second-aid-ship-as-protests-grow-1992671.html

 

Someone got mixed up somewhere?

As promised, there is an answer with an official response from COGAT:

The most recent ship carrying supplies to Gaza docked at the port of Ashdod on Saturday, bringing the total number of aid-carrying vessels to seven in the last week. Israel is delivering the goods aboard the ships using the same channels which 100 trucks full of aid enter Gaza daily.

 

Due to the fact that the thousands of tons of aid, including cement, must first be offloaded onto trucks from the boats, not all of the aid has been delivered yet. This process, which includes screening goods for weapons, takes time. The maximum capacity for a truck is roughly 25 tons, so while only 45 trucks have been prepped and loaded, it is still a great amount of aid.

 

Unfortunately, Hamas is currently refusing entry to trucks which are waiting at the Kerem Shalom border crossing. As Hamas has a history of hijacking aid, it is vital that Israel is assured that construction materials are going to be used for peaceful, civilian purposes. To that end, we are working with the humanitarian organizations in Gaza that can insure that all cement, construction materials, and other aid will go to humanitarian projects.

 

The rumors that Israel is not letting in cement are categorically false.

Our goal is to make sure the aid is distributed to the people. While distribution would normally be the role of the government, the “government” of Gaza is a terrorist organization whose declared mission is the destruction of the State of Israel. While we will not let Hamas build bunkers and military sites, we will also not allow the people of Gaza to go without adequate supplies. With our partners in the international community, we will make sure that the goods are distributed to the people of Gaza.

 

We are working as hard as we can to offload all supplies and send them to Gaza. Please stay tuned for future updates.

(emphasis mine)

 

Source: http://www.israelpolitik.org/2010/06/07/status-update-aid-prepped-for-delivery-to-gazans/

 

So, all aid will get into Gaza, it just takes time to unload 7 fairly large ships onto trucks. And, Hamas is apparently stopping the shipments into the strip. I hope that the humanitarian organizations will take control here - the cement will be sent to their hands, if they state they are able to control it.

 

~moo

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

It seems pretty plausible to me. Without solid evidence we can't say "so that's what happened" but at the same time neither side has solid evidence of their view of events, so it's not like he has the burden of proof to overturn the Flotilla's account, as neither account has been settled.

But why is the IDF saying this instead of the protesters? It'd be a brilliant excuse for the violence -- "that wasn't us!" Instead, they've said that Israel fired first as their excuse.

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

So, all aid will get into Gaza, it just takes time to unload 7 fairly large ships onto trucks. And, Hamas is apparently stopping the shipments into the strip. I hope that the humanitarian organizations will take control here - the cement will be sent to their hands, if they state they are able to control it.

 

Awesome, thanks for digging that up. We'll see in the coming weeks how well this goes -- if Hamas lets things in, how the aid organizations handle it, and if any further flotilla incidents (I believe Iran wants in on the action now) change things.

[John Cuthber]

I guess that in this day and age plenty of people had video cameras.

What happened to those recordings? I have read that the Israeli forces destroyed it, but, obviously I can't confirm that.

I can't help wondering if they would have destroyed videos footage that exonerated them.

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

The accounts from journalists that I've read have said that the recordings were confiscated by the IDF, as well as their cameras, computers, etc. Henning Mankell (Swedish novelist) also says they stole his socks.

[mooeypoo]

Some of those photos are published online, here is an example: http://fotogaleri.hurriyet.com.tr/GaleriDetay.aspx?cid=36575&p=1&rid=2

 

The IDF screws up, but they didn't destroy photos. BTW, if they had any reason to destroy any of the photos, it would be those that are published, since the faces of the soldiers are published - something the IDF is extremely opposed to, specially soldiers in elite units.

 

So, although all the items in the people's bags were temporarily confiscated while checks were done, it seems the IDF's claims that they returned them is true.

 

~moo