Monday, 31 May 2010

Israeli pirates kill many in international waters

Israel's territorial waters extend to 12 miles from her pre-1967 coastline. Within these waters, under international law, she may seize, search and detain any vessel under any flag, including those making 'innocent passage', just passing through, if such vessels pose a threat.

To use a gang of heavily armed pirates to board and seize vessels under other flags, and to slaughter the civilians on board, in international waters, is a despicable and irresponsible criminal act under international law. Until recently, such pirates would have been liable to hang under English law.

Coming so soon after Israel's deployment of a gang of assassins using forged British passports, it is becoming clear that this rogue, failing state is posing the sort of international threat once posed by Libya.

I have strongly defended Israel's right to live in peace and security within her pre-1967 borders for as long as I can remember, but even I am now losing patience with this rogue state.

28 comments:

Anonymous said...

I didn't know you were an anti-Semite, R.

I'm joking but you know that's the inevitable response to any legitimate criticism of Israeli policies.

dickiebo said...

Soooooo! Galloway and his mates are winning people over! Well, well!

Quiet_Man said...

I wonder what you make of the Russians attacking a Somali boat in international waters and sinking it with the crew onboard.

MTG said...

Let us daydream of a Remembrance Day for every one of its victims and a criminal offence for anyone to deny Israel is a murderous State.

Quiet_Man said...

And let us not forget just which terrorist state lobs missiles over the Israeli border on a regular basis either.

Woodsy42 said...

If the Uk had a problem with terrorists - say someone like the IRA in the 70s - and an unfriendly foreign power - lets say someone like Libya - sent a boat that might have armaments to equip them - then I wonder if the Uk authorities would forcibly board it. Does the name Claudia ring any bells?
I have no patience with Israel's hard line, but neither do I have any sympathy with terrorist who randomly lob missiles at members of the public. What the hell did these idiots in boats think would happen when they set up the convoy?

Curmudgeon said...

I really think you have the boot on the wrong foot on this one. Ever so often, something rather nasty comes creeping out of the darker corners of your blog...

dickiebo said...

MTG; "..a criminal offence to deny that Israel is a murderous state.."
But, with your twisted logic, it's OK for these people to call for the complete destruction of Israel!
If the people of Gaza wish to live in peace, then they can. It is they who choose to fire indiscriminate missiles at their neighbour - then cry like babies when Israel retaliates.

Anonymous said...

@Quiet_Man

You do not think there is a difference between attacking a pirate ship that has been preying on international shipping and attacking an unarmed aid ship that belongs to an accredite charity located in a friendly state?

Of course you don't. For you, the Israelis can do no wrong while the Arabs are subhuman monkeys who must be destroyed.

Quiet_Man said...

Well anonymong, the Israelis were enforcing a blockade.

The Gaza Flotilla and the Maritime Blockade of Gaza
Legal Background – 31 May 2010

1. A maritime blockade is in effect off the coast of Gaza. Such blockade has been imposed, as Israel is currently in a state of armed conflict with the Hamas regime that controls Gaza, which has repeatedly bombed civilian targets in Israel with weapons that have been smuggled into Gaza via the sea.

2. Maritime blockades are a legitimate and recognized measure under international law that may be implemented as part of an armed conflict at sea.

3. A blockade may be imposed at sea, including in international waters, so long as it does not bar access to the ports and coasts of neutral States.

4. The naval manuals of several western countries, including the US and England recognize the maritime blockade as an effective naval measure and set forth the various criteria that make a blockade valid, including the requirement of give due notice of the existence of the blockade.

5. In this vein, it should be noted that Israel publicized the existence of the blockade and the precise coordinates of such by means of the accepted international professional maritime channels. Israel also provided appropriate notification to the affected governments and to the organizers of the Gaza protest flotilla. Moreover, in real time, the ships participating in the protest flotilla were warned repeatedly that a maritime blockade is in effect.

6. Here, it should be noted that under customary law, knowledge of the blockade may be presumed once a blockade has been declared and appropriate notification has been granted, as above.

7. 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.

8. 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.

9. Here we should note that the protesters indicated their clear intention to violate the blockade by means of written and oral statements. Moreover, the route of these vessels indicated their clear intention to violate the blockade in violation of international law.

10. Given the protesters explicit intention to violate the naval blockade, Israel exercised its right under international law to enforce the blockade. It should be noted that prior to undertaking enforcement measures, explicit warnings were relayed directly to the captains of the vessels, expressing Israel's intent to exercise its right to enforce the blockade.

11. Israel had attempted to take control of the vessels participating in the flotilla by peaceful means and in an orderly fashion in order to enforce the blockade. Given the large number of vessels participating in the flotilla, an operational decision was made to undertake measures to enforce the blockade a certain distance from the area of the blockade.

12. Israeli personnel attempting to enforce the blockade were met with violence by the protesters and acted in self defence to fend off such attacks.

Now whilst the deaths were regrettable, the action wasn't.

Of curse for you, the Palestinians can do no wrong while the Israelis are subhuman monkeys who must be destroyed.

Anonymous said...

I note that the Israelis had already made suggestions for the flotilla to take their "aid" into port from whence it would be delivered to Gaza.

Seems to me that this was a total setup to try and put the Israelis in a bad light.

And perhaps MTG has forgotten that Hamas and Hezbollah do not think Israel has any right to exist.

A disappointing blog, Raedwald.

Robert said...

This whole thing was a stunt to get Israel to react. They succeeded but it cost lives. I listened to an Irish Senator on the Radio 4 1pm news today.

He sounded just like one of Lenin's useful idiots.

It is quite clear that Hamas will never accept Israel's right to exist and this stand off in Gaza will be escalated by them probably with the help of Iran.

You are entitled to your opinion but I think this blog is in poor taste.Israel has a right to defend itself.

Guthrum said...

The Zionist apologists have been receiving the 'line' and have been crawling all over the blogs tonight.

On their logic they are entitled to attack ships in the Channel if they think they are threat to Israel.

They enjoy the US veto, and therefore behave like spoilt brats demanding attention all of the time

dickiebo said...

I think that Mr Libertarian aka Guthrum, has it a bit screwed! It is not the 'spoilt brats' of Israel who are trying to get attention, now is it? They did a job. It is the flotsam and jetsam on the 'flotilla' who are craving attention, methinks.

Anonymous said...

This whole thing was a stunt to get Israel to react.

Indeed. What could be more provocative than sailing a ship full of food, medicine and electric wheelchairs into Gaza?

One question: if Iran had done the same thing to a ship, would you be pissing your pants quite so badly in your efforts to excuse it?

Anonymous said...

Israel has a right to defend itself.

And I'm sure every Israeli citizen sleeps more soundly tonight knowing that they're being defended from Turkish charities distributing food, medicine and medical equipment.

MTG said...

I am sure Quiet man is sincere.

Perhaps for the sins of Israel he will consider fasting and ta'anit dibur.

Anonymous said...

It's good top be able to see peaceful protest in action:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gYjkLUcbJWo&feature=player_embedded#!

Anonymous said...

I believe Israel was given provication as all the facts are weighed, the "thugs" are from the other side, I guess they thought that Israel had lost some "hart"
or was getting worn down over the years SURPRIZE !

JuliaM said...

"What could be more provocative than sailing a ship full of food, medicine and electric wheelchairs into Gaza."

I wasn't aware that the cargo manifest was common knowledge, or that everyone had agreed that that was all it was carrying, either...

Weekend Yachtsman said...

Slightly OT, but as a yachtsman who might one day venture into pirate-threatened waters (the way things are going, that definition could soon include the English Channel and the coasts of Brittany), I am delighted that the Russians are taking a hard line with these scum.

Would that the once-proud RN might grow a pair too.

dickiebo said...

For those who are screaming about 'attacking a ship in international waters..'; Who declared a blockade for 200 miles around the Falkland Islands?
Of course it's a proper thing to do under the circumstances.

Henry Crun said...

If the cargo was as harmless as some suggest, then why were the Israelis attacked once onboard.

If the intention was to embarrass the Israelis, then surely the sensible thing would have been to allow the Israelis to search the cargo just for them to see that all that is onboard was medical supplies, food and electric wheelchairs (oh so useful in the sandy streets of Gaza city ).

Another annony said...

If these loons try the same thing again, next time the Israelis will be waiting with a much bigger force to do the job properly. Agree with some above - if the cargo on this ship was innocent, as most/all of the others appear to have been, the reaction can only suggest they had something to hide. What? We shall no doubt be told once the ship is unloaded in Israel. Hamas will get no sympathy internationally until it stops the militants lobbing rockets indiscriminately over the border.

English Pensioner said...

For once I strongly disagree with what you say.
A blockade is a perfectly respectable way of waging war against an enemy and indeed is, and has been, employed by many countries world wide (Iran, N.Korea). It is usually employed to ensure minimal casualties as compared with other methods of dealing with the problem and in past times was often employed by the Royal Navy.

If these ships were merely carrying innocent aid, why were there so many people on board?
If there were no arms on board, why were they not prepared to let the ships be searched?
If you were being bombarded on a daily basis by rockets, would you not try to stop the source of the rockets?
In my view they were deliberate provocation by so-called peace activists.
The next stage will be for Israel to display the arms that they found on board, and for everyone else to claim they were planted.

And remember Hammas has declared war on Israel; by any International laws, Israel is permitted to defend itself and prevent anyone bringing succour to their enemies. Stopping ships on the high seas to prevent this is surly reasonable; if they are innocent, they may not like it, but normally would accept it.

One thing that I have learnt over the years is never to believe anything an "activist" says, and even more so if the "activist" is being reported by the BBC!

Weekend Yachtsman said...

Reading around this story a bit, and taking nobody's word as pure fact, it does look as if things may not be just as simple as they appeared at first glance.

Just sayin', is all.

Anonymous said...

Egypt also blockades Gaza for the same reason that Israel does. The Hamas leadership is a wicked dictatorship that has killed more Palestinians than has Israel. Egypt wants to stem the flow of weapons into Gaza just as much as Israel.
If the aid ships had gone to Ashdod to be searched, as requested, the bloodshed would have been avoided.
The aid convoy was not about aid. It was about provoking Israel and getting a propagande coup, courtesy of the useful idiots in the BBC. Even SKY have been following the BBC line. I am waiting for the BBC to mention the Egyptian blockade.

FrankS said...

autonomousmind mind seems to sum it up pretty well.

http://autonomousmind.wordpress.com/2010/06/01/egypt-shows-hamas-is-the-problem-in-gaza/

Those 600 or so authors, and other "intelectuals" on a relief boat...hmmm.

I cannot help but draw parallels between these media supporters and the American fund raising support (Noraid I believe)for the IRA whose indirect monetary aid for terrorist arms extended and expanded the bloodshed in Northern Ireland.