Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News: flotilla

Showing posts with label flotilla. Show all posts

Thursday, June 03, 2010

Anchorman disgusted by pro-Hamas bias on his station

What you’ re about to read is perfectly true. I came within a butterfly fart of firing this memo off to my boss this morning in a fit of real rage. But my wife, yet again, intervened.

“You’ve been whining like this for ten years. Just go get a new job,” she said.

“Don’t send that memo!”

She’s right.

I agreed not to push the send button, but only if she let me send the memo to The Daily Caller, minus the names. I hate writing anonymously. Readers who’ve criticized me for it are totally justified. One of these days I’ll reveal myself to readers of The Daily Caller, but until that new job comes, or I’m fired, which is increasingly likely, I don’t want to have to pull my kids out of college because of their father’s selfishness. Here’s the memo that I want to send but – under great duress – can’t.

Dear XXXX,

I’m writing for some clarification about how we are supposed to cover the Gaza flotilla story. If we, as a news organization, are supposed to be acting as a public relations arm of Hamas, or Hezbollah, both internationally recognized terrorist organizations, or if we are supposed to be jumping on the bandwagon of 1930’s style anti-Semitism that’s presently sweeping much of the world, then we are doing a fine job. If we are supposed to be acting as a news organization that covers the story objectively, then our coverage is a travesty and an embarrassment.

...In addition, remarkably, her piece made no mention – absolutely none — of the Israeli perspective in this story. For example:

The widely aired (though not here) video that clearly shows an IDF soldier being tossed over a railing, and others being beaten with sticks, was omitted.

The fact that bullet proof vests and night vision goggles were found among the “humanitarian aid” on the ship was omitted.

IDF video of confiscated knives and metal bars that were apparently used as weapons was omitted.

Information that Israeli soldiers were also wounded and injured was omitted.

Moreover, her piece included no background whatsoever on why Israel’s interception (“attack” as we called it ) of the flotilla would likely have passed muster in any court outside the thug-ridden United Nations.

Read the whole thing.

Local news typically doesn't have any experts on international affairs, so the media meme of Israel-as-aggressor becomes the easy narrative to cover stories that go beyond their own back yard. I saw Adam Shapiro on a local Fox station, answering the halfway decent question of whether he believes that Hamas should have the rights to import weapons, by saying "we are against all violence" - but the anchor didn't follow up to force a yes or no answer.

But Free Gaza and the other "humanitarian" groups of the flotilla are very clear that they want to see Gaza/Hamastan treated like a sovereign nation, which necessarily means the freedom for Hamas to import whatever weapons it desires. (Yesterday's interview with the Amnesty International official showed that this was pretty much their position as well. And this applies to the PA, too)

So we have an entire generation of people supposedly concerned about human rights who feel that the only moral thing that must be done is to have Israel just allow unlimited supplies - including weapons - into Gaza.

It might make them uncomfortable, but, hey, they aren't Hamas' targets.

UN Watch - a lonely voice against the world's hypocrites

Speech at the UN delivered by Hillel Neuer of UN Watch, 2 June 2010:

Mr. President, this debate turns on one question: Was the flotilla humanitarian, or not?

To answer this question, let us first examine the objective of the organizers, and then the means they used.

Evidence of the organizer’s objective can be found in the path they chose, and the path they rejected.

Israel, which in the past 18 months has delivered over 1 million tons of aid to Gaza, offered to receive the flotilla’s cargo in the nearby port of Ashdod, and, after inspection, to deliver it to Gaza. The organizers, however, rejected this offer. Because they wanted to create a political provocation; they were looking for a physical confrontation.

Mr. President, is this a humanitarian path?

Further evidence can be found in their state of mind, as demonstrated by their own words.

Before the ships sailed, supporters chanted “Intifada, Intifada,” and “Khaybar, Khaybar, O Jews, the army of Muhammed will return.” One of them declared that the aim of the flotilla was either of two “good things… achieving martyrdom or reaching Gaza.”

Mr. President, is this a humanitarian state of mind?

Let us also examine the means they used: metal bars, knives, axes, and even guns.

Mr. President, are these humanitarian means?

No. This operation was organized by an extremist group, the IHH, with extensive and documented ties to terrorist groups. Their objective and means had nothing to do with humanitarianism.

Now, seated around me here are representatives of some of the world’s leading humanitarian organizations, from the International Committee of the Red Cross, the UN Refugee Agency, and the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs. Let us ask them: Are these the ways of humanitarians?

No, Mr. President, the resolution that is before us today — introduced by such countries as Iran, Libya, Saudi Arabia and Sudan — is an insult to the world’s real humanitarians.

Thank you, Mr. President.

MJ Rosenberg's lies at HuffPo

When the Huffington Post publishes an article that seeks to expose "pro-Israel lies," you would think that they wouldn't want the article to be filled with lies itself.

But that's just what happened with MJ Rosenberg's latest post.

Just for starters:

The first thing you need to know about the Gaza flotilla disaster is that the intention of the activists on board the ships was to break the Israeli blockade. Delivering the embargoed goods was incidental.

In other words, the activists were like the civil rights demonstrators who sat down at segregated lunch counters throughout the South and refused to leave until they were served. Their goal was not really to get breakfast. It was to end segregation.

That fact is so obvious that it is hard to believe that the "pro-Israel" lobby is using it as an indictment.

The analogy to civil rights breakfasts is absurd. While it is true that when the activists speak amongst themselves they are very clear that they are not aid organizations nor humanitarian organizations - but rather one that supports terror and "resistance" - they presented themselves to the media as an aid flotilla, with 10,000 tons of humanitarian supplies that Gazans are lacking. These were pretty much all lies, with the exception of the cement (which, incidentally, Israel sent more of to Gaza last week than the entire flotilla was bringing.)

They were using the aid to gain respectability, because accurately calling themselves a political or resistance movement would not play well. If anything, the media's obsession with calling them "humanitarians" and "peace activists" shows how much their lies took hold in the press, quite contrary to his assertion that the media is now way too pro-Israel.

As for the Israeli argument that its soldiers were attacked, that is ridiculous. Israeli commandos were ordered to board a civilian ship in international waters and the government that sent them claims that the resisting passengers attacked them without provocation. This is like a carjacker complaining to the police that the driver bashed him with a crowbar that was under the seat. Neither carjackers nor hijackers should expect their victims to acquiesce peacefully.

Except that, under international law, Israel is perfectly within its legal rights to warn ships that are breaking a blockade. Even in international waters. The civilians on the ship have the legal right to attack the soldiers - but by doing so they are no longer considered civilians, but rather combatants, and the soldiers are allowed to fight back. People like Rosenberg love to throw out statements like these to imply that Israel's actions were obviously illegal, but it is just another lie. (And on the other five ships, the activists actually did keep their status as civilians - and no one was killed. Is Rosenberg saying that they were wrong to do so and they should have fought? That would be interesting.)

Rosenberg also conveniently ignores the role of IHH and its terror ties. I guess he realizes that he has no leg to stand on there, so better to ignore the fact that an organization that is known to have smuggled arms to, and recruited members for, terror groups is one of his heroic blockade-busters.

Hamas has repeatedly offered Israel an indefinite cease-fire in exchange for lifting the blockade. And, on a half dozen occasions, Israel accepted the deal but did not live up to its side of it.

Here he gives a link to an aid organization (a real one), but the link does not prove anything close to his claim. How many people assume that a link, like a footnote, actually proves something without checking it out?

The fact is that Israel did live up to its obligations during the cease fire, and the aid that went to Gaza was in exact inverse proportion to the rocket fire coming from Gaza during that weak truce.

In fact, the 2009 war began after Israel ignored its commitments under the Gaza cease-fire agreement, continued the blockade, and then provoked the resumption of attacks on Sderot through a series of targeted assassinations of Palestinians.

See above. Plus there was no "series of targeted assassinations" - in early November Israel killed a number of terrorists while they were building a tunnel into Israel for the purposes of kidnapping Israelis. Was Israel obligated to wait until someone was kidnapped before acting?

Even after the cease fire lapsed, Israel held off from real retaliation - and it was Hamas, not Israel, that started the Gaza war, with its declaration of Operation Oil Stain and its concurrent rocket barrage three days before Cast Lead.

Rosenberg's attempts to paint a rosy and moderate picture of Hamas is absurd and laughable. Its anti-semitic charter - which wants to see Rosenberg as dead as any Zionist - is still in force.

For a guy who is pretending to expose lies, Rosenberg sure seems to spout a lot of them himself.

A "peace activist" brags he wants to be a "shahid"/martyr

From the IDF YouTube channel:

In footage captured on the Gaza flotilla, a passenger describes how he has attempted in previous convoys to become a martyr and that "with god's luck" he will succeed on this flotilla. While the Gaza flotilla passengers had presented themselves as peace activists who would not act violently towards Israeli forces, this provides further evidence to the contrary.

It also proves that the motivations of people on the previous "humanitarian missions" was anything but humanitarian.

Correction on the cargo

I wrote that the aid from the flotilla fit in 28 Israeli trucks, and I estimated that this was less than 1500 tons, a far cry from the 10,000 tons that the flotilla organizers claimed.

Well, I was wrong - and I was right.

It turns out that this was only the first set of shipments. According to a COGAT briefing on Wednesday, there will be a total of 70-80 trucks of aid in the end, if Hamas agrees that Gaza actually needs the aid.

However, a commenter points out that because of the haphazard way that the flotilla aid was packed, each truck is almost certainly holding much less than it normally does when flatbeds use pallets. So instead of 25 tons per truck, it is probably closer to 10.

COGAT itself says that the total amount from the flotilla is about the same as one day's worth of aid from Israel, which would be less than 1500 tons anyway.

Either way, Free Gaza and their friends are once again proven to be liars.

Flotilla Fools' narrative falls apart - legal issues

Reuters asks some international law experts whether Israel acted legally, and on all aspects of the operation, they agree that Israel was on solid legal ground:

CAN ISRAEL IMPOSE A NAVAL BLOCKADE ON GAZA?

Yes it can, according to the law of blockade which was derived from customary international law and codified in the 1909 Declaration of London. It was updated in 1994 in a legally recognized document called the "San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea."

Under some of the key rules, a blockade must be declared and notified to all belligerents and neutral states, access to neutral ports cannot be blocked, and an area can only be blockaded which is under enemy control.

"On the basis that Hamas is the ruling entity of Gaza and Israel is in the midst of an armed struggle against that ruling entity, the blockade is legal," said Philip Roche, partner in the shipping disputes and risk management team with law firm Norton Rose.

WHAT ARE INTERNATIONAL WATERS?

Under the U.N. Convention of the Law of the Sea a coastal state has a "territorial sea" of 12 nautical miles from the coast over which it is sovereign. Ships of other states are allowed "innocent passage" through such waters.

There is a further 12 nautical mile zone called the "contiguous zone" over which a state may take action to protect itself or its laws.

"However, strictly beyond the 12 nautical miles limit the seas are the "high seas" or international waters," Roche said.

The Israeli navy said on Monday the Gaza bound flotilla was intercepted 120 km (75 miles) west of Israel. The Turkish captain of one of the vessels told an Istanbul news conference after returning home from Israeli detention they were 68 miles outside Israeli territorial waters.

Under the law of a blockade, intercepting a vessel could apply globally so long as a ship is bound for a "belligerent" territory, legal experts say.

CAN ISRAEL USE FORCE WHEN INTERCEPTING SHIPS?

Under international law it can use force when boarding a ship.

"If force is disproportionate it would be a violation of the key tenets of the use of force," said Commander James Kraska, professor of international law at the U.S. Naval War College.

Israeli authorities said marines who boarded the Turkish vessel Mavi Marmara opened fire in self-defense after activists clubbed and stabbed them and snatched some of their weapons.

Legal experts say proportional force does not mean that guns cannot be used by forces when being attacked with knives.

"But there has got to be a relationship between the threat and response," Kraska said.

The use of force may also have other repercussions.

"While the full facts need to emerge from a credible and transparent investigation, from what is known now, it appears that Israel acted within its legal rights," said J. Peter Pham, a strategic adviser to U.S. and European governments.

OPPONENTS HAVE CALLED ISRAEL'S RAID "PIRACY." WAS IT?

No, as under international law it was considered a state action.

"Whether what Israel did is right or wrong, it is not an act of piracy. Piracy deals with private conduct particularly with a pecuniary or financial interest," Kraska said.

So every single argument by the Free Gaza folks about how illegal Israel's actions were are complete and utter lies.

Like pretty much everything else they say.

(h/t Omri)

Free Gaza's nutcase Greta Berlin on CNN-I soon

CNN International has a feature called Connect the World where people can post questions to be answered by newsmakers.

Tonight (or this afternoon, for the US) Greta Berlin will be on the show, along with Israeli government spokesperson Mark Regev.

I asked two questions:

Does the Free Gaza movement fully support the IHH, your Turkish partners who used the iron bars, chains and stun grenades and which has been linked to arms smuggling and support for violent jihadist movements? If not, are you willing to make a statement dissociating Free Gaza from the IHH and their activities?

You wrote in an email to the Free Gaza mailing list yesterday that Israel informed the US and UK that the flotilla had nuclear weapons. Do you stand by that statement?

Someone let me know if my questions are asked.

She is truly crazy, and hopefully Regev can wipe the floor with her.The show will be broadcast at 4 PM New York time, 2100 London time.)

Another anecdote from the Daniel Pipes blog from when Pipes spoke at UCLA a few years ago and Berlin screamed at him during his talk....

I was looking for a seat at the UCLA Daniel Pipes event, and lo and behold, the only seats available were next to Greta Berlin, her buddy Karen Palley and another WIB overaged activist. When I tried to get into the row, Ms. Greta blocked the aisle with her legs so I could not get through (we have had several run in's at protests et al). I asked her politely to please move her legs so I could sit down. She refused. I finally had to tell her this was a public space and I had the right to sit down and would not be intimidated by her. I also told her that I hated sitting next to her, as she felt about sitting next to me. She acted like a child, instead of the 65 plus year old bitch that she is. I knew they had something up and when their T shirts had written on the front "LI" and "ES" on the back. "Lies, get it??? I did not until they disrupted the speakers and were rude and juvenile. They are a bunch of old women .... Sorry, but that is a fact.

Latest IDF video - IHH preparing to fight

Showing the peaceful IHH preparations to meet the IDF - preparing their iron rods, slingshots, broken glass bottles....

I love that the best video showing that the "peace protestors" weren't peaceful comes from the protestors' own cameras!

Some Free Gaza freakazoids have even moved away from their meme of non-violent protest, which they lost badly, now to "justified violence." Yvonne Ridley, who had gone on Free Gaza trips in the past, invokes an anti-piracy convention that has nothing to do with this situation and says (on an Iranian site)

Under international maritime law you are legally entitled to resist unlawful capture, abduction and detention.

What those on board the Freedom Flotilla did was perfectly legal. I believe they acted with great courage in the face of heavily armed IDF commandos, while others might have thought their actions reckless.

So much for non-violent resistance - that argument has gone out the window.

Of course, the argument is circular - she defines the Israeli actions as "unlawful" initially and then uses the Rome Convention, which says that unlawful actions are illegal, to prove that it was unlawful!

But the important part is that the Free Gaza folks are being forced to abandon their lies earlier than they had in previous adventures because of a much better factual response by Israel.

Hamas refusing aid from flotilla (UPDATED)

The IDF just tweeted, and confirmed by email, that Haams has refused the shipments of flotilla aid through the Kerem Shalom crossing into Gaza.

The IDF spokesperson added, "Why? You'll have to ask [Hamas.]"

Nothing on the Al Qassam site about this yet.

I guess that Hamas wanted something more explosive than toys and paper.

UPDATE: From Xinhua:

Hamas authorities on Tuesday refused to receive aid and supplies to the Gaza Strip through Israel, stressing that Israel must first free pro-Palestinian campaigners who were onboard an aid flotilla.

Israel can send aid that Gaza flotilla had carried to the coastal enclave "only if the shipments are complete and when Israel release all activists who were onboard the ships, Ziad Al- Zaza, Hamas' Minister of Economy, told Xinhua.

"The priority is to release the detained activists," Al-Zaza added.

On Monday, the Israeli navy stopped five of the vessels that were en route to Gaza to defy a three-year-old Israeli blockade, killing nine international activists and forcing the ships that carried 10,000 tons of aid into its sea ports.

Today, Israel allowed part of the aid, which originally included construction materials and medical supplies, to Gaza through one of its land crossing points, but Hamas refused to let that shipment in, witnesses told Xinhua.

Hamas obviously doesn't think much of the tons of aid that the world sent to it. Maybe Israel should donate it instead to poor Arabs in Egypt or the Sudan? It would be fun to hear the "human rights' activists object to that....

AP now says "tens of thousands of tons of aid"

AP's Rizek Abdel Jawad writes, as factual background information:

The pro-Palestinian flotilla had been headed to Gaza with tens of thousands of tons of aid that Israel bans from Gaza.

Not even the Free Gaza liars claimed "tens of thousands of tons of aid"- they first claimed 5000 tons, then 10,000 tons, and then we discovered yesterday that the actual figure was probably closer to 1000 tons - in what can only be characterized as a knowing lie on the part of the flotilla fraudsters.

Not only that, but AP's claim that all this aid was of items that Israel bans from Gaza is equally false, as all the items besides cement are materials that Gaza has plenty of.

(h/t CAMERA blog)

Here are more "peace activists!"

MEMRI finds out more about many of the so-called "peace activists" on the anti-Israel flotilla:

In Friday sermons, Muslim Brotherhood General Guide Muhammad Badi' expressed support for Hamas, frequently reiterating harsh statements in favor of jihad and of the armed struggle in Palestine, Iraq, and Afghanistan.

The Egyptian flotilla delegation included two members of the Muslim Brotherhood bloc in the Egyptian parliament: Muhammad Al-Baltaji and Hazem Farouq.

Al-Baltaji, who is deputy secretary-general of the Muslim Brotherhood parliamentary bloc in Egypt, said at a March 2010 conference, "A nation that excels at dying will be blessed by Allah with a life of dignity and with eternal paradise." He also said that his movement "will never recognize Israel and will never abandon the resistance," and that "resistance is the only road map that can save Jerusalem, restore the Arab honor, and prevent Palestine from becoming a second Andalusia.

The Lebanese flotilla delegation, with six members, was headed by attorney Dr. Hani Suleiman, who also participated in a February 2009 Gaza flotilla. He was pro-bono attorney to Japanese terrorist Kozo Okamoto. In 2006, he signed a communiqué supporting armed resistance in Palestine, Lebanon, and Iraq.

The Jordanian flotilla delegation included Muslim Brotherhood in Jordan activists such as delegation head Wael Al-Saka, a veteran Muslim Brotherhood member, and Salam Al-Falahat, who was general guide of the Muslim Brotherhood in Jordan from 2006 to 2008. In an interview last year, Al-Falahat said: "We in the Muslim Brotherhood in Jordan see Palestine as part of the Islamic and Arab land that must not be relinquished – on the contrary, defending it is a national and jurisprudential obligation... We see Hamas movement in Palestine as standing at the head of the project of the Arab and Islamic liberation for which the Muslim Brotherhood calls... The Muslim Brotherhood supports Hamas and every Arab resistance movement in the region that works for liberation."

Also in the delegation was Jordanian publicist and journalist Muhammad Abu Ghanima, a former head of the Muslim Brotherhood in Jordan's information bureau and a member of the movement's political bureau. Abu Ghanima writes frequent articles praising Hamas and condemning the Palestinian Authority. In one, he vehemently attacked Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, calling on the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt to topple his regime even at the cost of thousands of martyrs.

Sound peaceful so far?

Prominent activists in the Yemeni flotilla delegation were three MPs from the Al-Islah party, an Islamist party that is close to the Muslim Brotherhood. One, Sheikh Muhammad Al-Hazmi, was photographed on the deck of the Mavi Marmara brandishing his large curved dagger.

Another Yemeni MP in the flotilla, Hazza' Al-Maswari, also from the Al-Islah party, previously expressed vehement anti-American sentiment. In 2004, he objected to a Yemeni program for dialogue with prisoners from Al-Qaeda aimed at tempering their views, declaring recently at Friday prayers: "We cannot tell militants 'don't terrorize Americans' or 'don't attack their interests.'

Among the prominent flotilla activists from Kuwait were Salafist MP Walid Al-Tabtabai, who is known to support armed resistance in Palestine and in Iraq. He said: "We think that the armed resistance in Iraq is legitimate resistance. Every resistance directed against anyone who occupies it is legitimate..."

Another prominent Kuwaiti activist in the flotilla was Dr. Osama Al-Kandari, a Hadith lecturer at the College of Basic Education. In February 2009, he signed a communiqué expressing support for Hamas and for jihad in Palestine against the "Jewish enemies."

Another passenger on the Mavi Marmara was Bishop Hilarion Capucci, who in the 1970s was convicted and imprisoned in Israel for smuggling weapons from Lebanon to the PLO, but afterwards was freed at the request of the Vatican.

There's more. Read the whole thing.

Dutch "peace activist" was Hamas leader

The Dutch newspaper "De Telegraaf" notes that one of the Dutch members on board the anti-Israel flotilla, Amin Abou Rashed was associated with Hamas:

"Rashed is the leader of Hamas in the Netherlands," said one intelligence source. "He went under an alias, Amin Abou Ibrahim, in several intelligence reports. He worked for the notorious Dutch al-Aqsa Foundation, which was suspected of fundraising for the terrorist organization Hamas....[He was also connected to the] Holy Land Foundation, a charitable organization notorious in America for funding Hamas.

For how long will the world press refer to these people as "humanitarians?"

(h/t Suzanne)

Freaks of Gaza:"Israel told UK, US that flotilla had nukes"

The Free Gaza movement is reeling a bit from Israel's effective use of video to counter their absurd lies (that there was no violent resistance on the ship, for example.) The fact that their own people took the most damning video has got to hurt.

Their co-founder, Greta Berlin, just sent out a mailing to the list where she makes a really bizarre claim to the long list of FG lies:

As Israel's hysteria mounts, "they now claim “self defense” in attacking ships in international waters today, killing 9. Israel informed the US and Britain that the convoy was ferrying stolen nuclear weapons that would be used for a terrorist attack on Israel.

Really? Israel told its two closest allies that the ships contained nuclear weapons, a conjecture so absurd that it would lose its credibility forever if it turns out not to be true?

What journalist or diplomat broke this story?

Why, it was from the rabidly anti-Israel website "Veterans Today," written by Gordon Duff. Duff,a card-carrying conspiracy theorist, spins a rambling, bizarre tail of lost nuclear weapons. Anyway, he claims, without citing any sources, that Netanyahu informed UK and US officials that the flotilla was carrying nuclear weapons stolen from South Africa. But the kicker is that he says Israel stole the nukes themselves! (I guess Israel doesn't have the ability to build its own.)

The head of Free Gaza is so livid in her hate for Israel that she believes Duff's story completely - and is using it as proof to shore up her defense of the fact that Free Gaza was associated with the IHH terror network during this flotilla.

Greta Berlin, by the way, may have a real problem with Jews herself. While I cannot confirm the authenticity of this email, someone claiming to be her ex-stepdaughter wrote to Daniel Pipes a few years back:

Having read about the incident at UCLA I must admit that I was appalled by Ms. Berlin's behavior, but not at all surprised. I should know, she is after all my ex-stepmother...

After reading your article, I went on to research some of the links that your site provided and found it rather difficult to comprehend some of the titles that are now associated with Ms. Berlin's name. The title of "Peace Activist" is the one I find particularly hypocritical.

On numerous occasions I heard Greta launch the insults "the god damned Israelis, and those F****** Jews" at the dinner table in front of my father (a Jew) and the few Israeli friends and relatives who ventured to visit. Additionally, any rational debate attempted by anyone with an opposing view to Greta's, was immediately terminated with the responses: "Shut up" or "You don't know what the hell you're talking about." The rebuttal usually presented in screaming form.

These comments in juxtaposition to her role as "Peace Activist" I find hard to rectify. It prompts me to ask what should be an obvious question; "At what point did terms of hate and bigotry become synonymous with Peace?"

I was always under the strange impression that the road to peace laid in the arms of those who were tolerant, compassionate, and vehement in their will to understand and to promote understanding. God help us all if this is the role model that we hold up as an embodiment of those ideals!

Sincerely,
Ava E. Berlin

Flotilla fraudsters lied about their cargo

I don't have all the details yet, but the IDF has described the goods that were on the ships:

Twenty-four hours after the last ship of the Gaza aid flotilla entered the Ashdod Port under the watchful eye of the Israeli Navy, all of the equipment on board was examined Tuesday and the majority of it was loaded onto trucks headed to the Kerem Shalom border crossing.

In a statement to reporters at the port on Tuesday, Colonel Moshe Levi, commander of the IDF’s Gaza Strip Coordination and Liaison Administration (CLA), said that none of the equipment found on board the three cargo ships was in shortage in Gaza.

“We have been working non-stop for the last twenty-four hours examining the cargo holds of the three large cargo ships and I can say with great assurance, that none of the equipment on board is needed in Gaza. The equipment that we found is all equipment that we have regularly allowed into the strip over the past year,” said Levi. “This proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that the whole premise of the voyage was for propaganda and provocation and not for humanitarian purposes.”

Among the equipment that the IDF agreed to show reporters were medical supplies, including electric vehicles for handicapped people, wheelchairs, stretchers, hospital beds and boxes of medicine. They also showed crates full of dry food products and children’s toys.

And how much cargo was on board?

Levi said that eight trucks full of equipment had already crossed into Gaza and that 20 additional trucks would be transferred throughout the night and the following day.

This didn't include the concrete, though:

According to Levi, the soldiers also found construction equipment, including sacks of concrete and metal rods. He said that Israel did not allow those products to enter into the Gaza strip for fear that they would be used to construct fortifications for terrorists and for weapons manufacture.

Assuming that the article is accurate and the majority of the cargo is being transported on 28 trucks, we can calculate roughly how much cargo was on board.

On the average week, Israel has been sending some 600 truckloads of goods to Gaza, with about 14,000 tons. That means that each truck holds roughly 25 tons or so.

Multiply that by 28and we get a grand total of 700 tons of goods. This 700 tons is the majority of the cargo. meaning that we know that there is less than 1500 tons of cargo, probably closer to 1000.

(The "Rachel Corrie" ship from Free Gaza is still en route to break the blockade, and it is said to have some 500 tons of cement.)

So, as I confidently predicted, the "human rights" frauds have lied about the amount of goods that they were bringing, by an order of magnitude.

Expert reitrates IHH's clear ties to terror

From Evan Kohlmann at the Counterterrorism Blog:

When I first published a research paper four years ago with the Danish Institute for International Studies (DIIS) on the Turkish Muslim charitable group Insani Yardim Vakfi (IHH), I didn't imagine it would get much of a response outside the academic conference in which it was presented in Copenhagen. However, as a result of this weekend's tragic Israeli raid on an IHH-sponsored flotilla of vessels attempting to break the ongoing blockade on Gaza, the group has suddenly jumped into the headlines, and has become a focus of intense debate over the intentions of the flotilla organizers and the controversial killing of at least 9 would-be participants by Israeli commandos.

Though my DIIS paper made no mention of IHH's activities in Gaza or in support of suffering Palestinian refugees, some of those angered by the Israeli flotilla raid have instead turned their emotional animus on past critics of IHH, such as myself. While I certainly can't speak with any authority on what took place on the Gaza flotilla boats, I'm rather mystified why the flotilla killings--whether right or wrong--would have any bearing on the factual question of whether the IHH has engaged in illicit financing and episodic support to extremist groups. The evidence in this regard is fairly weighty, and much of it comes directly from the Turkish government -- not the United States, nor the Israelis.

On December 5, 1997, Turkish police raided the IHH headquarters office in Istanbul and arrested its principal leaders. Following their preliminary inquiry, on April 27, 1998, Turkish investigators launched a formal legal case against the IHH. According to a report produced by French counterterrorism magistrates, the inquiry was spurred by the sale of an AK-47 assault rifle to an IHH leader by "a member of the illegal organization VASAT." Turkish police reported seizing a series of disturbing items from the IHH in Turkey, including an explosive device, two sticks of dynamite, bomb making instructions, and a "jihad flag." The French magistrates report noted that:

"It appears that the detained members of IHH were going to fight in Afghanistan, Bosnia, and Chechnya... The essential goal of this Association was to illegally arm its membership for overthrowing democratic, secular, and constitutional order present in Turkey and replacing it with an Islamic state founded on the Shariah. Under the cover of this organization known under the name of IHH, [IHH leaders] acted to recruit veteran soldiers in anticipation of the coming holy war. In particular, some men were sent into war zones in Muslim countries in order to acquire combat experience. On the spot, the formation of a military unit was assured. In addition, towards the purpose of obtaining political support from these countries, financial aid was transferred [from IHH], as well as caches of firearms, knives, and pre-fabricated explosives."
An official review of the phone records from the IHH's office in Istanbul revealed two calls to the Bosnian Mujahideen Brigade unit headquarters in Zenica, five phone calls to a member of the Algerian Armed Islamic Group (GIA) based in London, and at least one call to Anwar Shaaban's notorious Islamic Cultural Institute in Milan, Italy. The IHH's connections to international terrorism have even surfaced in sworn witness testimony in the U.S. federal court system. During the trial of attempted Millenium bomber Ahmed Ressam, noted French counterterrorism magistrate Jean-Louis Bruguiere took the stand and testified that IHH had played “[a]n important role” in Ressam's bomb plot targeting LAX. Under repeated questioning, Bruguiere insisted that “[t]here’s a rather close relation”: "The IHH is an NGO, but it was kind of a type of cover-up… in order to obtain forged documents and also to obtain different forms of infiltration for Mujahideen in combat. And also to go and gather[recruit] these Mujahideens. And finally, one of the last responsibilities that they had was also to be implicated or involved in weapons trafficking."

None of this information is considered sensitive or secret, nor is it particularly difficult to come by. Turkish government officials have openly acknowledged as much in major Western media outlets. In August 1999, the governor of Istanbul was interviewed in the Washington Post after he personally ordered local IHH bank accounts frozen because of suspected criminal activity. He explained at the time, "All legal institutions may have some illegal connections. This might be the case here. If they don't like it, they can appeal in court."

To his credit, the former Istanbul governor here underscores another critical point. Contemporary terror finance networks are most effectively curtailed using accepted legal sanctions and transnational cooperation between regional allies. Incidents such as the deadly Gaza flotilla raid ultimately undermine the battle against illicit financing, and weaken shared international resolve to punish those who manipulate humanitarian relief as a cover to fund terrorism. The Israeli government must be more mindful in the future of the wider political repercussions its attempts at punitive actions can have, whether technically justified or not. Those repercussions impact not only the state of Israel, but also carry implicit costs for the United States and its European allies.

(h/t Barry Simon)

Latest videos about the flotilla

New stuff that came out recently:

The IDF released (almost unusable) video and audio from during the operation where the soldiers hear and react to gunshots from the "peace activists." I'm still trying to find out more details on their arsenal (no pictures have been released) but at at least one soldier was injured from a gunshot.

UPDATE: It appears that two guns were taken from soldiers as they were being beaten, and their clips were emptied in the course of the fighting (from the IDF spokesperson via email)

Free Gaza, whenever they were asked why they do not cooperate with Israel to get the aid to Gaza, would answer that they "knew" that the IDF would not allow their aid to get there.

Here is at least some of the aid from the ships heading to Gaza:

Here is an Israeli sailor describing first hand what occurred:

Suzanne notices an Al Jazeera video where an Egyptian "legal expert" explains why the world is legally obligated to provide Hamas with weapons:

More on international law /blockades

Richard (I believe it is Richard Landes from the Augean Stables blog) points out more parts of the San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea that seem relevant, and that show that Israel has complied with international law to the letter.

Paragraph 47 lists ships that are exempt from attack. Presuambly, the flotilla organizers consider themselves to fit under sub-paragraph (c)(ii):

(c) vessels granted safe conduct by agreement between the belligerent parties including:

(ii) vessels engaged in humanitarian missions, including vessels carrying supplies indispensable to the survival of the civilian population, and vessels engaged in relief actions and rescue operations;

The flotilla does not meet the minimum requirement because it was not granted permission by the other party of the blockade, Israel.

Even if it had been, the next paragraph mentions a major exception:

48. Vessels listed in paragraph 47 are exempt from attack only if they: (a) are innocently employed in their normal role;
(b) submit to identification and inspection when required; and
(c) do not intentionally hamper the movement of combatants and obey orders to stop or move out of the way when required.

In addition, such actions in international waters are legal:

96. "The force maintaining the blockade may be stationed at a distance determined by military requirements."

More relevant sections:

98. "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."

103. "If the civilian population of the blockaded territory is inadequately provided with food and other objects essential for its survival, the blockading party must provide for free passage of such foodstuffs and other essential supplies, subject to: (a) the right to prescribe the technical arrangements, including search, under which such passage is permitted; and (b) the condition that the distribution of such supplies shall be made under the local supervision of a Protecting Power or a humanitarian organization which offers guarantees of impartiality, such as the International Committee of the Red Cross."

Israel does all of these things. Last week, Israel delivered more cement to Gaza than the flotilla wanted to provide - but Israel gave the cement to UNRWA under strict conditions and ensuring that they are used only for the purposes they are earmarked for.

Also, see Julian Ku, about the absurd claims of "piracy":

Let’s go to the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea, Article 101:

Piracy consists of any of the following acts:

(a) any illegal acts of violence or detention, or any act of depredation, committed for private ends by the crew or the passengers of a private ship or a private aircraft, and directed:

(i) on the high seas, against another ship or aircraft, or against persons or property on board such ship or aircraft;

(ii) against a ship, aircraft, persons or property in a place outside the jurisdiction of any State;

(b) any act of voluntary participation in the operation of a ship or of an aircraft with knowledge of facts making it a pirate ship or aircraft;

(emphasis added). I don’t think even the Gaza flotilla defenders claim that the IDF raid was “committed for private ends.” (Just the opposite, actually). And, in general, piracy cannot be committed by a national ship, only by private ships or by national ships that have been taken over by their crews.

So can we drop the stupid piracy meme? There are some very hard legal issues here: Is Israel’s naval blockade legal? (Probably). If so, was the boarding in international waters legal? (Maybe). And even if so, did the IDF use disproportionate force? (I have no idea). This last question is really the key issue here, and it is also the one that is never going to be resolved with any certainty given that it is dependent on neutral factual determinations that will never happen here.

One of the "peace activists"

Commenter Jed points out an Al Watan article on what appears to be the only Syrian aboard the flotilla, a woman named Shatha Barakat.

Her husband Ayman describes how he was born in Gaza and she wanted to use the flotilla as an opportunity to visit his family home. She was also working on a drama about the life of terrorist leader Sheikh Yassin.

Ayman was worried for his wife in Israeli hands. "She is not the conciliatory type. She is a tough woman from Syria, and she cherished a dream of striking a blow against Israel."

"What was Israel thinking?"

Stephen Walt, of Walt/Mearsheimer fame, unsurprisingly uses the commando raid on a terrorist-aligned ship as more ammunition to sever the US/Israeli alliance.

Notwithstanding his factual errors (saying that enforcing a legal blockade in international waters is illegal, for example) he asks a basic question that has not been adequately answered yet by the Israeli government:

My first question when I heard the news was: "What could Israel's leaders have been thinking?" How could they possibly believe that a deadly assault against a humanitarian mission in international waters would play to their advantage?

Notwithstanding his inflammatory spin (it was obviously not intended to be a deadly assault, the deaths are directly attributable to deadly force being employed by the "humanitarian mission," and it was not a humanitarian mission to begin with but a political one) the basic question remains. And the question makes sense - if you assume that PR is the uppermost consideration for Israelis.

However, this was not a PR game. This decision to enforce a blockade on Hamas is essential and lifesaving.

Back in 2002, Israel intercepted the Karine A ship filled with weapons meant for Palestinian Arab terrorists. At the time Israel still had troops on the ground in Gaza, but the way that the weapons were going to be smuggled was through small inflatable canisters released by Egyptian and perhaps Lebanese "fishing boats."

In other words, the sea is the best way to smuggle in large quantities of arms meant to destroy or terrorize Israel.

This was not the only time that Iran attempted to smuggle weapons to Hamas or Hezbollah by sea. An Iranian arms ship was destroyed, probably by Israel, off the coast of Sudan last year.

In early 2009, the Cypriot navy intercepted an arms shipment from Iran meant for Hamas.

And late last year, in an event that the world has forgotten with astonishing speed, the Francop vessel filled 500 tons of weapons meant for Hezbollah, disguised as civilian cargo, was intercepted.

In other words, the Israeli blockade is the only way to prevent Iran or Syria from illegally shipping in mass quantities of the next generation of weapons to Hamas.

This is not about PR - it is about a real need for defense. The "humanitarian aid" workers will say publicly when asked that they believe that Hamas has the absolute right to acquire whatever weapons it desires - and to use them.

The Francop episode also underlines how easy it is to hide weaponry as innocent commercial goods.

From a public relations perspective, Israel was doomed at the start, something that the flotilla organizers gloated about. The decision to stop any direct shipping lanes from the world to Hamas is not a PR decision but a sound defense decision, one that must be upheld in order to save lives.

The priority of the world should be how to get a terrorist group out of power in Gaza so that a blockade is not necessary. Somehow, that is no longer a priority for anyone except Israel.

As soon as Israel allows Hamas to have its own independent means moving goods in and out of Gaza, Gaza turns into the same heavily armed Iranian satellite state that southern Lebanon has turned into - under the noses of thousands of UNIFIL observers.

Sorry, but Israel is not going to outsource its defense given what happened to Lebanon. PR is important, but stopping Iran from establishing a beachhead in Gaza to surround Israel from the north and the south is a bit more important.

It just so happens that a slow-moving commercial vessel filled with cement and consumer goods, headed towards a place whose government extols suicide terror as the ultimate goal, is the best delivery mechanism for an Iranian atomic bomb.

(h/t J. E. Dyer)

Video of weapons found aboard terror ship

From the IDF:

The iron bars, Molotov cocktail and dagger are especially interesting.

No doubt the anti-Israel terror-supporting "peace" activists would say that most of the knives are ordinary kitchen knives. Yet we have seen them used against people.

UPDATE: A reader sends me in audio, played on Israel Army radio today, of Israel's radio warnings and the terror flotilla's responses. I have not verified it.

"Jihad, Jihad, Jihad"