Israeli opposition leader Livni says Gaza flotilla was Turkish provocation

[News_Editor]

Israeli opposition leader Livni says Gaza flotilla was Turkish provocation

2010-10-26 08:19:50 GMT+7 (ICT)

JERUSALEM, ISRAEL (BNO NEWS) -- An Israeli opposition leader on Monday testified before the Turkel Commission and said that the pro-Gaza flotilla raid was a Turkish provocation against Israel, the Haaretz newspaper reported.

"In the absence of a peace process, with Israel's policies toward the Palestinians unclear, Turkey was able to fill a political vacuum by engineering provocations," said Tzipi Livni, leader of the Opposition.

Livni testified before the Turkel Commission, headed by former Supreme Court Judge Jacob Turkel. Last May, nine Turkish activists were killed when Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) raided the flotilla that was heading towards the Gaza Strip, in violation of the Israeli blockade.

The raid on the Mavi Marmara ship strangled the relations between Israel and Turkey. Livni was the Israeli Foreign Minister in 2007 when the blockade was imposed into Gaza after Hamas militants seized power from the rival Palestinian faction Fatah.

Livni told the Commission that she considered some of the prohibitions were too harsh but denied involvement in imposing them. "I thought the ban on spaghetti is excessive, but it was the defense ministry and the Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories who made the decisions," she said.

On Sunday, IDF Chief of Staff Gabi Ashkenazi testified to the commission and stated that the fatalities aboard the Gaza flotilla were unavoidable. He said that Israeli commandos fired 308 live bullets to repel passengers who attacked them with lethal weapons, including a snatched Uzi machine pistol.

-- © BNO News All rights reserved 2010-10-26

[Pakboong]

another case of wifebeater's logic. "I warned her and she wouldn't stop; she got so out of control I became afraid for my life so I punched her a couple of times." Clearly her fault, she provoked me.

[Ulysses G.]

More like, a hooker and 50 male friends attacked me with metal pipe and knives and I was forced to defend myself.

A military blockade of a hostile entity - Hamas - is perfectly legal and is done fairly often all over the world.

[Pakboong]

More like, a hooker and 50 male friends attacked me with metal pipe and knives and I was forced to defend myself.

A military blockade of a hostile entity - Hamas - is perfectly legal and is done fairly often all over the world.

I was under the impression it happened in international waters which does not happen often.

The size of that knife nearly scared me right out of my chair. One of the dead was shot 4 times to include short range shots to the head. I know, self defense. Wife beater logic virtually never holds up in court so why should it here?

[Pakboong]

A copy of the UN findings should anybody be interested. I have not been able to find a copy of the Israeli investigation results.

http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrcouncil/docs/15session/A.HRC.15.21_en.pdf

[Ulysses G.]

The U.N is so impartial when it comes to Israel.

The BBC - who are usually hostile to Israel - did a documentary which pretty much exonerated them in this matter.

[Pakboong]

The U.N is so impartial when it comes to Israel.

The BBC - who are usually hostile to Israel - did a documentary which pretty much exonerated them in this matter.

Of particular interest were the communications between Israel and the UN council which are in the final annex.

[hobanse]

To fight brutal pirates is not forbidden

[Ulysses G.]

That is exaxctly why the radical Turks were stopped by a military blockade.

[Ulysses G.]

I was under the impression it happened in international waters which does not happen often.

The size of that knife nearly scared me right out of my chair.

Military blockades in international waters happen often enough.

If you are so brave about being attacked by knives, how about 30 mercenaries with 3 foot steel clubs?

[SergeiY]

another case of wifebeater's logic. "I warned her and she wouldn't stop; she got so out of control I became afraid for my life so I punched her a couple of times." Clearly her fault, she provoked me.

+1

[geriatrickid]

It is obvious that the Turkish government used the flotilla for political means. It is no coincidence that the incumbent Turkish government which was lagging in popularity right before an election needed an event to galvanize the population. What better way than to create some martyrs? The Turks could have easily diverted the aid to Egypt and unloaded there as is the case with other shipments or they could have unoaded at an Israeli port. The intent was to have a confrontation.

Interestingly enough, no one else has tried it again.

[Ulysses G.]

Interestingly enough, no one else has tried it again.

They probably don't want to face the consequences of trying to run a legitimate military blockade.

[A_Traveller]

Interestingly, in Netanyahu's evidence to the Turkel Committee, he claimed that 2 ships had tried to breach the blockade subsequently.

PM's Evidence Word Document Format See pages 19/20

Regards

[A_Traveller]

The legality of the blockade is questionable, it is ultimately an individual reading of a set of instruments, such as the San Remo Manual, the London Declaration, and 'customary law' e.g United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. Other equally qualified individuals [No not I] take the view that this reading is flawed.

Regards

[Pakboong]

the BBC investigation into the matter was conducted by one journalist. A guy named Bob Walker. His investigation is at the link below his findings are on the radio piece which is about 12 minutes.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/news/2010/06/100607_gaza_walker.shtml

[Ulysses G.]

Hard Core of Islamist Activists Seized Ship Long before Israel

This surprisingly candid BBC Panorama documentary lays out the events surrounding the Mavi Marmara Turkish Flotilla designed to break the Gaza blockade, and the Israeli seizure of the ship.

The facts are presented with compelling video evidence and they are quite damning, but not for Israel as the media onslaught portrayed. Rather for the organizers, Turkey, and the IHH (now designated a terrorist supporting entity by Germany).

We learn..

• The Organizers were prepared to break the siege at all costs, sanctioned violence.
• Islamists seized the Ship before Israel arrived.
• Islamists prepared for martyrdom, violence, and an assault on the IDF.
• Turkey was complicit.
• The so called AID was a farce, cover for a violent confrontation.
• The IHH set out to create a staged media disaster against Israel.
• Hundreds of passengers were used as pawns.
• Islamists sought to 1st lynch, then murder IDF troops.

Here is the video in 2 parts

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SXrzF0IOQYE&feature=player_embedded

<BR><BR>

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nfo91FQVr7M&feature=player_embedded

</P>

[Ulysses G.]

the BBC investigation into the matter was conducted by one journalist.

Isn't that a little silly? This radio "investigation" took place only a few days after the incident. The documentary above was put together after all the evidence was in.

Hard Core of Islamist Activists Seized Ship Long before Israel

http://hashmonean.com/2010/08/19/damning-bbc-documentary-reveals-shocking-truth-about-flotilla-video/

[Pakboong]

the BBC investigation into the matter was conducted by one journalist.

Isn't that a little silly? This radio "investigation" took place only a few days after the incident. The documentary above was put together after all the evidence was in.

Hard Core of Islamist Activists Seized Ship Long before Israel

http://hashmonean.com/2010/08/19/damning-bbc-documentary-reveals-shocking-truth-about-flotilla-video/

The BBC reference was yours, I would not have bothered had you not mentioned it twice. The view of the media is as suspect to me as apparently the view of the UN is to you.

The evidence I consider most conclusive was in the forensics. The opinions of both sides notwithstanding. One can look at the forensic references in the UN report without partiality.

Two lethal weapons were taken from the Israelis by the passengers, neither was fired at an Israeli, one was apparently thrown into the ocean and the other was unloaded in plain view and kept in evidence. Despite these weapons being controlled by the passengers, no Israeli was treated for gunshot wounds of any kind. The commission asked the Israelis for their evidence that Israeli soldiers had taken live fire. All request to the Israeli government were ignored as redundent. If lethal harm was intended, there would be evidence that the guns were fired and somebody was actually hit. There is evidence of neither.

The three Israeli soldiers who were taken hostage in the early stages of the incident were triaged by medical personnel and protected by the passengers who could have easily killed those 3 but did not. There were plenty of passengers who wanted to inflict more harm on the soldiers but they remained protected.

There is no doubt that the passengers hit Israeli soldiers with steel pipes, deck chairs, etc.. the injuries to the 3 Israelis were consistent with blunt force trauma and cuts below their vests. The key piece of information to me was even though several passengers had been killed, the 3 Israeli soldiers were protected from further injury by the passengers. The forensics regarding the Israel soldiers is in the UN report. But keep in mind, the Israelis did not cooperate in the UN investigation which resulted in the information on the 3 soldiers being taken from the medical personnel who treated them at the scene.

But read the forensics and forget about the story told by each side. The only videos left to see were taken by the Israelis, the key videos taken by the passengers were destroyed. So to look at the videos is a pointless exercise but, I have looked at them all. Nothing about the videos that disputes the forensics.

[Ulysses G.]

You seem to be very selective about what evidence you present or pay attention to. You acted as if the BBC radio piece by one guy was THE official BBC report, when it was nothing of the kind.

As far as injured soldiers being taken care of by some passengers. That should not be so surprising. It seems that there were actually a few real peace activists on board.

[Pakboong]

You seem to be very selective about what evidence you present or pay attention to. You acted as if the BBC radio piece by one guy was THE official BBC report, when it was nothing of the kind.

As far as injured soldiers being taken care of by some passengers. That should not be so surprising. It seems that there were actually a few real peace activists on board.

Should it matter that the chairman of BBC, Michael Grade happens to be Jewish?

[Ulysses G.]

That one again.

Didn't you just post a report by the BBC that tried to place blame on Israel for something that they were eventually exonerated for?

A lot of Jews are very left wing liberals who have no sympathy for Israel and the BBC has often been accused of an anti-Israel bias as well as a pro-Israel one.

The Daily Telegraph said ,"In its international and domestic news reporting, the [bBC] corporation has consistently come across as naïve and partial, rather than sensitive and unbiased. Its reporting of Israel and Palestine, in particular, tends to underplay the hate-filled Islamist ideology that inspires Hamas and other factions, while never giving Israel the benefit of the doubt."

I don't think that Mr.Grade is falsifying the news on Israel's behalf.

[A_Traveller]

Please note the German Terrorism designation is not for the same organisation which put the flotilla together. There was an original organisation which was founded as a Turkish-German grouping, in @ '92 but the group disbanded/split in @ '96 and the Turkish IHH was founded subsequently.

Regards

PS to quote Haaretz's English web edition

Despite sharing the name, the German IHH has no connection to the Turkish group that organized the flotilla to break the naval blockade of Gaza that left nine people dead.

Haaretz Report

[Pakboong]

That one again.

Didn't you just post a report by the BBC that tried to place blame on Israel for something that they were eventually exonerated for?

A lot of Jews are very left wing liberals who have no sympathy for Israel and the BBC has often been accused of an anti-Israel bias as well as a pro-Israel one.

The Daily Telegraph said ,"In its international and domestic news reporting, the [bBC] corporation has consistently come across as naïve and partial, rather than sensitive and unbiased. Its reporting of Israel and Palestine, in particular, tends to underplay the hate-filled Islamist ideology that inspires Hamas and other factions, while never giving Israel the benefit of the doubt."

I don't think that Mr.Grade is falsifying the news on Israel's behalf.

I only posted BBC because you listed it as a reference. I would have used your link if you would have provided it so I had to find it myself and that is what I found with a BBC search on the subject. I had never read nor had I heard of a BBC investigation. Why would I be interested in a BBC investigation?

If you prefer an opinion of an organization with a Jew in control of it over one that does not have a Jew in control has to matter to some degree. It is not "that one again", it is just relevant. By you having indicated "favorable to Israel" as a qualifier it is a logical conclusion for any thinking individual. A gentile naturally assumes that in something this unusual and extreme, a Jew is likely in control of anything that is favorable to Israel making an impartial investigation difficult. Not a big secret. Just the way it is. I am not making a point that I know Mr. Grade as I don't nor do I know the chairman of the UN council. There is simply an unusual consistency to this kind of thing which is well outside random chance.

The link below is a BBC admission to bias. Not Israel but an admission that they are both capable and willing.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-411846/We-biased-admit-stars-BBC-News.html

[A_Traveller]

Just noticed this, from the above dialogue, so: Michael Grade is not chairman of the BBC. He was chair of the Board of Governors until 2006, when he moved to ITV, a commercial, as opposed to public service broadcaster. The Governors was in the process of being replaced by the BBC Trust, which occurred in 2007. The present chair [a 3 day a week post] is Sir Michael Lyons, who announced in September that he would not be seeking a second term, therefore leaving the post in April 2011. The day to day management is vested in the position of Director General, a post held by Mark Thompson since 2004.

Regards

[hammered]

Bunch of dudes in uniforms, who routinely kill women and children in what is basically a huge concentration camp deprived of basic necessities, board a ship trying to bring basic necessities to the oppressed in international waters and kill people.

Just imagine if it were Iranians doing the boarding and killing and you can see a double standard not that the western press is going to highlight it. Bit like nobody in the west said a thing when Israel, a country that has attacked several neighbours, developed nukes but when Iran, a country that has not invaded any of its neighbours, faced everything up to and including being bombed for having the temerity to develop a nuclear reactor. You are either a darling of the west when you can oppress, kill, torture, destroy and invade with no sanction or you arent when you suffer.

This may not be a popular opinion but it is basically the one seen by hundreds of millions of Muslims (and a bunch of other non Muslims). Harsh realities of the world.

[Ulysses G.]

The link below is a BBC admission to bias. Not Israel but an admission that they are both capable and willing.

The article says that they are biased in favor of Islam.

As far as your insistence that gentiles do not feel that a Jew can be impartial about Israel, that is only true of certain gentiles.

[Ulysses G.]

board a ship trying to bring basic necessities...

The Turkish mercenaries were offered the chance to dock at an Israeli port and have the UN bring any necessities on the ship to the Palestinians and they refused. Their purpose was to provoke a violent confrontation and they got it.

[SergeiY]

board a ship trying to bring basic necessities...

The Turkish mercenaries were offered the chance to dock at an Israeli port and have the UN bring any necessities on the ship to the Palestinians and they refused. Their purpose was to provoke a violent confrontation and they got it.

Do you think murder is funny?

[Ulysses G.]

It was self defense, but who said it was "funny"?