1960’s style video of Mavi Marmara “peace activists” (The ‘Elder of Ziyon’ video)

As Elder noted, “this is something to link to every time an Israel-hater says that ‘Israel killed nine peace activists in cold blood’ on the Mavi Marmara.”

3 replies »

  1. Did you hurt yourself when you fell into the elephant trap of your own making?

    No they weren’t. Their actions were DISPROPORTIONATE (I am sure you are up to speed with what that means – you’ve probably used it, wholly inappropriately, in respect of Israel’s conduct during Cast Lead)

    They were asked to turn back or to be towed into port peacefully. They refused.

    Israel’s blockade is legally valid under international law, as it meets the following criteria:

    o The blockade was publicly declared prior to its imposition, which occurred on January 3, 2009.

    o The blockade has been, effective in preventing all non-humanitarian vessels from entering the blockaded area.

    o The blockade has been applied impartially to all vessels.

    o The blockade has not adversely affected access to neutral states.

    o The blockade has permitted humanitarian assistance into the blockaded area.

    Israel’s blockade of the Gaza Strip was instituted as a direct response to ongoing acts of terrorism carried out from the territory, including over 10,000 rockets fired at Israeli civilians from 2002 to the present. Therefore, it was clearly not imposed for “the sole purpose of starving the civilian population or denying it other objects essential for its survival,” which would have been unlawful under international law as set forth in the San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea.

    The San Remo Manual provides that merchant vessels may be attacked when 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.” Furthermore, the Manual provides that “Merchant vessels believed on reasonable grounds to be breaching a blockade may be captured. Merchant vessels which, after prior warning, clearly resist capture may be attacked.” The Mavi Marmara publicly indicated, and in fact broadcast its intent to breach the blockade and clearly resisted capture through physical violence.

    · The San Remo Manual specifies that, “[a]s an alternative to visit and search, a neutral merchant vessel may, with its consent, be diverted from its declared destination.” Similarly, “If visit and search at sea is impossible or unsafe, a belligerent warship or military aircraft may divert a merchant vessel to an appropriate area or port in order to exercise the right of visit and search.” The Mavi Marmara is anomalous among the ships in the Gaza Flotilla in that it was the only ship that refused to be diverted to the Israeli port of Ashdod for safe inspection.

    · Israel had reasonable cause to suspect that ships in the flotilla might be attempting to smuggle weapons via Gaza’s port. Previously, the Iranian vessel Karine A was intercepted by Israel in 2002 while en route to Gaza and found to be carrying 50 tons of weaponry,[8] while the Gaza-bound Monchegorsk was impounded in Cyprus in 2009 after Iranian weapons were found on board.

    All of which means that, as usual, you are talking bollocks, aren’t you, but thanks for giving me the chance to set matters straight, with the applicable law, for anyone who might happen here and think that you may actually be talking sense, but be open-minded enough to accept other information.

    And finally, for your delectation and delights, I give you (and those passers by) a small, sharp reminder of how the intelligent in the world perceived the conduct of the thugs on the Mavi Marmara. Enjoy!