UN report on Gaza Flottila is Released

[Shryke]

Here's the link: http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrcouncil/docs/15session/A.HRC.15.21_en.pdf

Some summaries:

1)

The Mission does not find it plausible that soldiers were holding their weapons and firing as they descended on the rope. However, it has concluded that live ammunition was used from the helicopter onto the top deck prior to the descent of the soldiers.

2)

The Mission has found no evidence to suggest that any of the passengers used firearms or that any firearms were taken on board the ship. Despite requests, the Mission has not received any medical records or other substantiated information from the Israeli authorities regarding any firearm injuries sustained by soldiers participating in the raid. Doctors examined the three soldiers taken below decks and no firearm injuries were noted. Further, the Mission finds that the Israeli accounts so inconsistent and contradictory with regard to evidence of alleged firearms injuries to Israeli soldiers that it has to reject it.

3)

Israeli soldiers continued shooting at passengers who had already been wounded, with live ammunition, soft baton charges (beanbags) and plastic bullets. Forensic analysis demonstrates that two of the passengers killed on the top deck received wounds compatible with being shot at close range while lying on the ground

According to forensic analysis, tattooing around the wound in his face indicates that the shot was delivered at point blank range. Furthermore, the trajectory of the wound, from bottom to top, together with a vital abrasion to the left shoulder that could be consistent with the bullet exit point, is compatible with the shot being received while he was lying on the ground on his back. The other wounds were not the result of firing in contact, near contact or close range, but it is not otherwise possible to determine the exact firing range. The wounds to the leg and foot were most likely received in a standing position.

4)

During the shootings on the bridge deck and as it became apparent that a large number of passengers had become injured, Bulent Yildirim, the President of IHH and one of principal organisers of the flotilla, removed his white shirt which was then used as a white flag to indicate a surrender. This does not appear to have had any effect and live firing continued on the ship.

And so forth.

[potsherds]

I'm shocked to discover that the Israeli military officially bungled an operation on an aid flotilla, posing no military threat, attempting to traverse an illegal blockade. Wait. No I'm not.

[Shryke]

Ooh, found another good one:

The mission’s attention has been drawn to several allegations regarding misuse of

items confiscated by the Israeli authorities, including laptop computers, credit cards and

mobile telephones. On 20 August 2010 it was reported in the Israeli media that “at least

four” Israeli soldiers had been detained on suspicion of stealing and selling laptops

belonging to passengers that were on board the flotilla.84 Furthermore, at least four

passengers have stated that their personal items, including credit cards and mobile

telephones, have been subsequently used in Israel. There is an account of a particular

witness, a journalist, who was on board the Sfendoni and alleged that his credit card was used to purchase items in Israel, both while he was detained at the Beersheva prison and after he had been released.85 There is another specific account where more than $1,000 was spent on a confiscated credit card in Israel.86

[Galactus]

The last one is almost adorable. Soldiers stealing like magpies? Why am I not surprised...

[lokisnow]

Why do you hate the Jews?

[Shryke]

Why do you hate the Jews?

Yentl

[Stalker]

Ooh, found another good one:

Some soldiers engaging in petty crime (and being unskilled enough to get caught) is hardly news. It's not like this doesn't happen in other armed forces.

One could expect them to choose a situation that would be less scrutinised, but these individuals are rarely the ones that look at the big picture.

[mormont]

Some soldiers engaging in petty crime (and being unskilled enough to get caught) is hardly news. It's not like this doesn't happen in other armed forces.

Half right. This sort of thing does indeed happen in other armed forces - and when it does, it is certainly news, and it's rightly condemned. As it should be here.

[Former Lord of Winterfell]

Some soldiers engaging in petty crime (and being unskilled enough to get caught) is hardly news. It's not like this doesn't happen in other armed forces.

One could expect them to choose a situation that would be less scrutinised, but these individuals are rarely the ones that look at the big picture.

I'd suggest reading the entire report, including what the Mission used as its sources of information. Or at least, skipping down to where it talks about the preparations on the ship prior to the actual assault, including the prior attempts to board that ship and what happened when the Israelis boarded other aid ships in the flotilla.

[Chanur]

There's a video out there of the Israeli soldiers executing that Turkish American.

Executing. That's Taliban shit.

Unfortunately, I'm not surprised the Israels internal review was less that accurate.

Yes we would never be a party to something like that. I mean it is not like we gave Saddam the go ahead to murder thousands of Kurds to please the Turks when they joined the U.N. or anything. Oh wait.

[Hereward]

Yes we would never be a party to something like that. I mean it is not like we gave Saddam the go ahead to murder thousands of Kurds to please the Turks when they joined the U.N. or anything. Oh wait.

Turkey joined the UN in 1947. What on Earth are you talking about?

[Former Lord of Winterfell]

What are you trying to say? That the UN report has faulty sources?

I can't say the sources are faulty, but they are incomplete. They admit up front they didn't have all the Israeli statements and evidence because Israel didn't cooperate. If they had testimony that was not contradicted by other available evidence, they found it credible. That doesn't mean it was factually correct, though, and the findings should be reviewed with that fact in mind. I was thinking specifically about the alleged stealing, to tell you truth.

I mean, it's right there. They killed that kid. They

. No amount of lead pipes justifies doing that, FLOW.

I would agree that shooting someone who is wounded on the ground and not resisting is inexcusable. But to be honest, I've watched that video and can't determine exactly what happened. There's an arrow pointing and a narrator, but it is just not visually clear to me.

But I will say this -- based on what I read, I do not think firing live rounds from the helicopter was necessarily wrong. I'd like to see the Israeli video but I can understand why they didn't cooperate in the investigation.

Anyway, this particular ship, unlike the others, said it was going to fight anyone who tried to board it. The soldiers made numerous attempts to board without firing that were repulsed, and the soldiers were about to rappel onto a deck full of people armed with metal rods, knives, etc.. You can get killed doing that, and I don't think that militarily, that's a risk you should have to take. Just because the other side chooses to fight with knives doesn't mean you can't use guns. If they fired to create a space in which their guys could land without being overwhelmed immediately, I can understand that.

The other thing is that there were wounds at close range. That can happen if the troops approach someone who is cowering in a corner and just kill them, or if the troops are being swarmed aggressively by people and they are trying to fight them off without being overborne. One is justified, the other isn't.

[Shryke]

I'd suggest reading the entire report, including what the Mission used as its sources of information. Or at least, skipping down to where it talks about the preparations on the ship prior to the actual assault, including the prior attempts to board that ship and what happened when the Israelis boarded other aid ships in the flotilla.

I'm not sure what you are referring to here.

The Israelis tear-gassed/smoked/etc the boat and then tried to board from zodiacs. Their ladders were pushed off and they were hosed and had stuff thrown at them (including chairs and plates apparently). They gave up on that approach.

Then they tear-gas/smoked/etc again and tried to land from a helicopter. The first ladder was tied off so the Israelis couldn't use it, but the second one wasn't and that's how they were boarded. And while the soldiers descending didn't fire, someone in the helicopter fired live ammunition down that the boat prior to the descent.

And then the shit really hit the fan and people ended up shot execution style.

But I will say this -- based on what I read, I do not think firing live rounds from the helicopter was necessarily wrong.

Wait, so you think shooting at unarmed civilians wasn't necessarily wrong?

[Former Lord of Winterfell]

I'm not sure what you are referring to here.

The Israelis tear-gassed/smoked/etc the boat and then tried to board from zodiacs. Their ladders were pushed off and they were hosed and had stuff thrown at them (including chairs and plates apparently). They gave up on that approach.

Then they tear-gas/smoked/etc again and tried to land from a helicopter. The first ladder was tied off so the Israelis couldn't use it, but the second one wasn't and that's how they were boarded. And while the soldiers descending didn't fire, someone in the helicopter fired live ammunition down that the boat prior to the descent.

That's exactly what I'm referring to.

And then the shit really hit the fan and people ended up shot execution style.

That, I think, is in dispute.

Wait, so you think shooting at unarmed civilians wasn't necessarily wrong?

I don't think it has been established convincingly that they were unarmed. Just that they were not armed with firearms. Rappelling into a group of people armed with knives and metal bars can be hazardous to your health. However, even if they were unarmed, but the soldiers rappelling were unable to defend themselves upon reaching the deck due to the agitated crowd, I don't see why they should have to take the risk of being overpowered, disarmed, and potentially killed. There seems to be a "fair fight" mentality that I don't think makes sense.

If you're going to oppose violently an effort to board a ship by overpowering the soldiers in question, you should expect to get shot.

[Shryke]

That, I think, is in dispute.

Uh no. This is the thing in LEAST dispute. The forensic evidence has been fairly clear on this for awhile now. Several people (at least 2 afaik) were shot from point blank range while they were on the ground.

I don't think it has been established convincingly that they were unarmed. Just that they were not armed with firearms. Rappelling into a group of people armed with knives and metal bars can be hazardous to your health. However, even if they were unarmed, but the soldiers rappelling were unable to defend themselves upon reaching the deck due to the agitated crowd, I don't see why they should have to take the risk of being overpowered, disarmed, and potentially killed. There seems to be a "fair fight" mentality that I don't think makes sense.

If you're going to oppose violently an effort to board a ship by overpowering the soldiers in question, you should expect to get shot.

So yes then, you think it was ok to disperse a crowd of civilians with live ammunition. You're a peach. We should employ you in riot control.

[mormont]

That, I think, is in dispute.

Well, the Israelis have chosen not to dispute it when offered the chance to do so. So currently, it isn't.

Rappelling into a group of people armed with knives and metal bars can be hazardous to your health.

Indeed. And the report points out that therefore, the IDF ought to have reconsidered the whole idea of rappelling onto the deck at this point. It also points out that even if they decided to continue, they had several non-lethal options to deal with this problem: instead, these were deployed in addition to live fire, rather than being tried first.

Look, there is just no way to spin this one. If even 1% of the evidence the committee found credible is actually true, the IDF made serious systemic errors in their handling of this incident that no professional armed force should be excused for making.

There seems to be a "fair fight" mentality that I don't think makes sense.

This 'mentality' is international law, surely? Use of excessive force is prohibited.

[Chanur]

Turkey joined the UN in 1947. What on Earth are you talking about?

Obviously I was talking about them joining the Security Council in the 2009-2010 seat. Sorry I did not think I had to connect the dots for you.

[Hereward]

Obviously I was talking about them joining the Security Council in the 2009-2010 seat. Sorry I did not think I had to connect the dots for you.

Well clearly you do as Saddam was dead by then and Iraq had been under the full control of the US and its allies for 6 years. Now, would you like a crayon?

[The WaterDancer Knight]

Obviously I was talking about them joining the Security Council in the 2009-2010 seat. Sorry I did not think I had to connect the dots for you.

If I remember correctly, Saddam gassed Kurds in 1988. In 2009-2010 he has been dead for a few years. Remember his trial and him being hanged ? So please would you connect the dots for us ? Because I have no idea what you were talking about ?

[snake]

No doubt Jeff thinks that Kent State was justified as well. Sad really.