More or less, Toast.
I'm saying the commandoes resorted to excessive force and therefore self defense was a legitimate response by those on the vessel:
"
Furkan Doğan, a 19-year-old with dual Turkish and United States citizenship, was on the central area of the top deck filming with a small video camera when he was first hit with live fire.
"It appears that he was lying on the deck in a conscious, or semi-conscious, state for some time. In total Furkan received five bullet wounds, to the face, head, back thorax, left leg and foot. All of the entry wounds were on the back of his body, except for the face wound which entered to the right of his nose. According to forensic analysis, tattooing around the wound in his face indicates that the shot was delivered at point blank range."
If you want to read a short eyewitness account by a former US Marine and Gulf War I vet who was onboard the Mavi Marmara here it is:
"When I was asked, in the event of an Israeli attack on the Mavi Marmara, would I use the camera, or would I defend the ship?
"I enthusiastically committed to defence of the ship. Although I am also a huge supporter of non-violence, in fact I believe non-violence must always be the first option. Nonetheless I joined the defence of the Mavi Mamara understanding that violence could be used against us and that we may very well be compelled to use violence in self defence."
On Cowardice and Violence » Counterpunch: Tells the Facts, Names the Names
It's at least ironic that the Marine lived to tell his tale and Furkan did not.