Turkey submits Mavi Marmara compensation bill

[Hossfly]

Any Attack on the High seas, (international water) is Piracy

Wrong read the International Maritime laws and see that this was a case of legal boarding and seizure because of suspicions the vessels were carrying illegal weapons, gun running and smuggling. All illegal acts that leave the vessels open to armed intervention. It was the passengers on the boat that attacked the boarding party with grenades, hand guns, knives, metal bars and furniture. Lets see what they do when they are dragged into court and sued, will Turkey forego the $20million it has been granted ?

There was no suspicion of illegal weapons.

You didn't watch the videos, did you. You have to watch the videos. You can't see them
very clearly with your hoof in your mouth.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Any Attack on the High seas, (international water) is Piracy

Wrong read the International Maritime laws and see that this was a case of legal boarding and seizure because of suspicions the vessels were carrying illegal weapons, gun running and smuggling. All illegal acts that leave the vessels open to armed intervention. It was the passengers on the boat that attacked the boarding party with grenades, hand guns, knives, metal bars and furniture. Lets see what they do when they are dragged into court and sued, will Turkey forego the $20million it has been granted ?

There was no suspicion of illegal weapons.

You didn't watch the videos, did you. You have to watch the videos. You can't see them
very clearly with your hoof in your mouth.

What videos?

 

[Hossfly]

Any Attack on the High seas, (international water) is Piracy

Wrong read the International Maritime laws and see that this was a case of legal boarding and seizure because of suspicions the vessels were carrying illegal weapons, gun running and smuggling. All illegal acts that leave the vessels open to armed intervention. It was the passengers on the boat that attacked the boarding party with grenades, hand guns, knives, metal bars and furniture. Lets see what they do when they are dragged into court and sued, will Turkey forego the $20million it has been granted ?

There was no suspicion of illegal weapons.

You didn't watch the videos, did you. You have to watch the videos. You can't see them
very clearly with your hoof in your mouth.

What videos?

The videos taken by the IDF and especially the videos taken by the passengers. There are threads with the videos already posted after the incident. Look 'em up. You had your chance to view them and didn't, just like nobody watches your stupid assed videos, so you'll have to search.

 

[toomuchtime_]

The International Criminal Court has asked its chief prosecutor to reopen an investigation into the interception of the Mavi Marmara, the ship on which nine human rights activists were killed in 2010 after it was stormed by the Israeli Defence Force during an attempt to break the blockade of the Gaza Strip.

In a damning assessment published last week, ICC judges condemned the decision by Gambian-born prosecutor Fatou Bensouda not to launch an inquiry into the deadly incident despite a “reasonable basis” to believe that war crimes were committed. The judges said Ms Bensouda’s decision was based on a “flawed” and “simplistic” conclusion containing several factual errors. They concluded the prosecutor “committed material errors in her determination of the gravity of the potential case” and urged her to reconsider her decision not to launch an investigation “as soon as possible”.
Senior IDF commanders and Israeli leaders may now ultimately face trial over the incident which occurred in international waters on 31 May 2010, and drew global condemnation. The judges said: “The prosecutor should have accepted that live fire may have been used prior to the boarding of the Mavi Marmara, and drawn the appropriate inferences. This fact … may reasonably suggest that there was, on the part of the IDF who carried out the identified crimes, a prior intention to attack and possibly kill passengers on board.”

A UN Human Rights Council (UNHCR) report into the raid concluded that the youngest victim – 18-year-old Furkan Dogan – had been shot five times, including once in the face while he was lying on his back.
Mavi Marmara: Judges call for new investigation into deaths of

People can rant and rave and sign petitions and letters, but it is the prosecutor's decision whether to proceed and she has ruled there is no basis on which to proceed. The governing body of the ICC could fire her, of course, and replace her with some stooge who will do their bidding, but to what end? Neither Israel nor the US recognizes the jurisdiction of the ICC over their citizens and both countries have in place policies that would allow amount of force necessary to protect their citizens from the court. Bensouda understands the ICC can only damage its already tarnished reputation by proceeding with this issue on purely political grounds as you suggest it should.

Only in America would Murder be considered "on purely political grounds", (you suggested it, not I)

Only a fool or a bigot would call what happened murder.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Any Attack on the High seas, (international water) is Piracy

Wrong read the International Maritime laws and see that this was a case of legal boarding and seizure because of suspicions the vessels were carrying illegal weapons, gun running and smuggling. All illegal acts that leave the vessels open to armed intervention. It was the passengers on the boat that attacked the boarding party with grenades, hand guns, knives, metal bars and furniture. Lets see what they do when they are dragged into court and sued, will Turkey forego the $20million it has been granted ?

There was no suspicion of illegal weapons.

You didn't watch the videos, did you. You have to watch the videos. You can't see them
very clearly with your hoof in your mouth.

What videos?

The videos taken by the IDF and especially the videos taken by the passengers. There are threads with the videos already posted after the incident. Look 'em up. You had your chance to view them and didn't, just like nobody watches your stupid assed videos, so you'll have to search.

Do you mean Israel's propaganda videos? Yes, I have seen them.

 

[Hossfly]

Wrong read the International Maritime laws and see that this was a case of legal boarding and seizure because of suspicions the vessels were carrying illegal weapons, gun running and smuggling. All illegal acts that leave the vessels open to armed intervention. It was the passengers on the boat that attacked the boarding party with grenades, hand guns, knives, metal bars and furniture. Lets see what they do when they are dragged into court and sued, will Turkey forego the $20million it has been granted ?

There was no suspicion of illegal weapons.

You didn't watch the videos, did you. You have to watch the videos. You can't see them
very clearly with your hoof in your mouth.

What videos?

The videos taken by the IDF and especially the videos taken by the passengers. There are threads with the videos already posted after the incident. Look 'em up. You had your chance to view them and didn't, just like nobody watches your stupid assed videos, so you'll have to search.

Do you mean Israel's propaganda videos? Yes, I have seen them.

WTF is propaganda about the passengers attacking the boarders and being filmed? Jesus, but you're thickheaded.

 

[fanger]

Israel attacked at Coordinates: 32°38′28″N 33°34′02″E / 32.64113°N 33.56727°E
GeoHack - Gaza flotilla raid
International water's

 

[P F Tinmore]

There was no suspicion of illegal weapons.

You didn't watch the videos, did you. You have to watch the videos. You can't see them
very clearly with your hoof in your mouth.

What videos?

The videos taken by the IDF and especially the videos taken by the passengers. There are threads with the videos already posted after the incident. Look 'em up. You had your chance to view them and didn't, just like nobody watches your stupid assed videos, so you'll have to search.

Do you mean Israel's propaganda videos? Yes, I have seen them.

WTF is propaganda about the passengers attacking the boarders and being filmed? Jesus, but you're thickheaded.

Uhhh, it was the boarders who were attacking.

Israel always has to "defend itself" from the people it is attacking.

 

[Hossfly]

Israel attacked at Coordinates: 32°38′28″N 33°34′02″E / 32.64113°N 33.56727°E
GeoHack - Gaza flotilla raid
International water's

The matter was settled, Sherlock,

 

[Hossfly]

You didn't watch the videos, did you. You have to watch the videos. You can't see them
very clearly with your hoof in your mouth.

What videos?

The videos taken by the IDF and especially the videos taken by the passengers. There are threads with the videos already posted after the incident. Look 'em up. You had your chance to view them and didn't, just like nobody watches your stupid assed videos, so you'll have to search.

Do you mean Israel's propaganda videos? Yes, I have seen them.

WTF is propaganda about the passengers attacking the boarders and being filmed? Jesus, but you're thickheaded.

Uhhh, it was the boarders who were attacking.

Israel always has to "defend itself" from the people it is attacking.

 

[RoccoR]

fanger, et al,

Yes, I guess you did not read the excerpt from the San Remo Manual.

Yes, you are correct, it was in international waters under the criteria of the Barcelona Convention (For the Protection of the Mediterranean).

The San Remo Manual (non-binding document) applies because it was a consequence of the Hostile Arab Palestinians declaring the legitimacy of the Jihad and Armed Struggle. Wherein, “an armed conflict exists whenever a protracted period of armed conflict between governmental authorities (Israel) and organized armed groups (the dozen or so Armed Palestinians Groups).

Israel attacked at Coordinates: 32°38′28″N 33°34′02″E / 32.64113°N 33.56727°E
GeoHack - Gaza flotilla raid
International water's

(POINT of ORDER)

The attempt to run the blockade was a planned and calculated propaganda effort. The purpose was to accomplish exactly what happened. It is the planned and organized exploitation of humanitarian law for political purposes in or to achieve political ends. This is the definition of terrorism and it places the UN Human Rights Commission involvement in question as to its material support.

(COMMENT)

But, the Admiralty Rules for operations outside Hostile Fire Zones (Manual on International Maritime Law: The Law of the Sea or the Convention and Final Act of UNCLOS) do not apply to enforced exclusion zones under the rules of International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea; and are not the same as trade barriers such as embargoes, which are less restrictive blockades. The key is in Section II Methods of Warfare - Blockade, Paragraph 95: A blockade must be effective. The question whether a blockade is effective is a question of fact. In wartime, once the blockade has been openly declared and notified to all belligerents and neutral States (a published Notice to Mariners), upon approach, the vessels ignoring a proper challenge are in peril. The exceptions noted.

Your application of the "International Waters" as a single criteria is a vastly oversimplified answer to much more complex issues.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Phoenall]

Any Attack on the High seas, (international water) is Piracy

Wrong read the International Maritime laws and see that this was a case of legal boarding and seizure because of suspicions the vessels were carrying illegal weapons, gun running and smuggling. All illegal acts that leave the vessels open to armed intervention. It was the passengers on the boat that attacked the boarding party with grenades, hand guns, knives, metal bars and furniture. Lets see what they do when they are dragged into court and sued, will Turkey forego the $20million it has been granted ?

There was no suspicion of illegal weapons.

Read the reports again as that is what was found on one of the other boats, iranian weapons destined for hamas

 

[Phoenall]

The International Criminal Court has asked its chief prosecutor to reopen an investigation into the interception of the Mavi Marmara, the ship on which nine human rights activists were killed in 2010 after it was stormed by the Israeli Defence Force during an attempt to break the blockade of the Gaza Strip.

In a damning assessment published last week, ICC judges condemned the decision by Gambian-born prosecutor Fatou Bensouda not to launch an inquiry into the deadly incident despite a “reasonable basis” to believe that war crimes were committed. The judges said Ms Bensouda’s decision was based on a “flawed” and “simplistic” conclusion containing several factual errors. They concluded the prosecutor “committed material errors in her determination of the gravity of the potential case” and urged her to reconsider her decision not to launch an investigation “as soon as possible”.
Senior IDF commanders and Israeli leaders may now ultimately face trial over the incident which occurred in international waters on 31 May 2010, and drew global condemnation. The judges said: “The prosecutor should have accepted that live fire may have been used prior to the boarding of the Mavi Marmara, and drawn the appropriate inferences. This fact … may reasonably suggest that there was, on the part of the IDF who carried out the identified crimes, a prior intention to attack and possibly kill passengers on board.”

A UN Human Rights Council (UNHCR) report into the raid concluded that the youngest victim – 18-year-old Furkan Dogan – had been shot five times, including once in the face while he was lying on his back.
Mavi Marmara: Judges call for new investigation into deaths of

People can rant and rave and sign petitions and letters, but it is the prosecutor's decision whether to proceed and she has ruled there is no basis on which to proceed. The governing body of the ICC could fire her, of course, and replace her with some stooge who will do their bidding, but to what end? Neither Israel nor the US recognizes the jurisdiction of the ICC over their citizens and both countries have in place policies that would allow amount of force necessary to protect their citizens from the court. Bensouda understands the ICC can only damage its already tarnished reputation by proceeding with this issue on purely political grounds as you suggest it should.

Only in America would Murder be considered "on purely political grounds", (you suggested it, not I)

Any lawyer worthy of the name would just produce the videos taken by the pallywood journo's onboard and show that the Israeli's were defending against armed resistance and terrorist violence. Then the civil court would overturn its decision to award damages and give them to the Jews instead.

 

[Meathead]

A bill concerning an approval of procedural arrangements between Turkey and Israel for payment of compensation to Mavi Marmara victims was submitted to the Turkish Parliamentary Speaker's Office in Ankara Wednesday, the office said.

According to the agreement between the two countries, Israel will pay $20 million to Turkey as compensation to families of the victims.

Diplomatic ties between the two countries were suspended after Israeli troops stormed the Gaza-bound Mavi Marmara aid ship in international waters in May 2010, killing 10 Turkish activists.

In the aftermath of the attack, Turkey demanded a formal apology from Israel, compensation for the families of those killed, and the lifting of Israel’s Gaza blockade.

In 2013, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu voiced regret for the attack.

Ankara struck a deal with Tel Aviv government in June after a six-year hiatus over the Mavi Marmara incident.
According to the bill, Israel will send the money within 25 working days after the agreement comes into force.

The agreement will come into force when both sides report that they have completed their domestic law procedures.
Turkey submits Mavi Marmara compensation bill - World Bulletin

$2,000,000 per murdered activist

That money and whatever else Turkey wins should be funneled into an account for compensation to Armenians for Turkey's genocide.

 

[Phoenall]

The International Criminal Court has asked its chief prosecutor to reopen an investigation into the interception of the Mavi Marmara, the ship on which nine human rights activists were killed in 2010 after it was stormed by the Israeli Defence Force during an attempt to break the blockade of the Gaza Strip.

In a damning assessment published last week, ICC judges condemned the decision by Gambian-born prosecutor Fatou Bensouda not to launch an inquiry into the deadly incident despite a “reasonable basis” to believe that war crimes were committed. The judges said Ms Bensouda’s decision was based on a “flawed” and “simplistic” conclusion containing several factual errors. They concluded the prosecutor “committed material errors in her determination of the gravity of the potential case” and urged her to reconsider her decision not to launch an investigation “as soon as possible”.
Senior IDF commanders and Israeli leaders may now ultimately face trial over the incident which occurred in international waters on 31 May 2010, and drew global condemnation. The judges said: “The prosecutor should have accepted that live fire may have been used prior to the boarding of the Mavi Marmara, and drawn the appropriate inferences. This fact … may reasonably suggest that there was, on the part of the IDF who carried out the identified crimes, a prior intention to attack and possibly kill passengers on board.”

A UN Human Rights Council (UNHCR) report into the raid concluded that the youngest victim – 18-year-old Furkan Dogan – had been shot five times, including once in the face while he was lying on his back.
Mavi Marmara: Judges call for new investigation into deaths of

People can rant and rave and sign petitions and letters, but it is the prosecutor's decision whether to proceed and she has ruled there is no basis on which to proceed. The governing body of the ICC could fire her, of course, and replace her with some stooge who will do their bidding, but to what end? Neither Israel nor the US recognizes the jurisdiction of the ICC over their citizens and both countries have in place policies that would allow amount of force necessary to protect their citizens from the court. Bensouda understands the ICC can only damage its already tarnished reputation by proceeding with this issue on purely political grounds as you suggest it should.

Only in America would Murder be considered "on purely political grounds", (you suggested it, not I)

Any lawyer worthy of the name would just produce the videos taken by the pallywood journo's onboard and show that the Israeli's were defending against armed resistance and terrorist violence. Then the civil court would overturn its decision to award damages and give them to the Jews instead.

Wrong read the International Maritime laws and see that this was a case of legal boarding and seizure because of suspicions the vessels were carrying illegal weapons, gun running and smuggling. All illegal acts that leave the vessels open to armed intervention. It was the passengers on the boat that attacked the boarding party with grenades, hand guns, knives, metal bars and furniture. Lets see what they do when they are dragged into court and sued, will Turkey forego the $20million it has been granted ?

There was no suspicion of illegal weapons.

You didn't watch the videos, did you. You have to watch the videos. You can't see them
very clearly with your hoof in your mouth.

What videos?

The videos taken by the IDF and especially the videos taken by the passengers. There are threads with the videos already posted after the incident. Look 'em up. You had your chance to view them and didn't, just like nobody watches your stupid assed videos, so you'll have to search.

Do you mean Israel's propaganda videos? Yes, I have seen them.

So the pallywood journo's video's are now Israeli propaganda ?

 

[Phoenall]

You didn't watch the videos, did you. You have to watch the videos. You can't see them
very clearly with your hoof in your mouth.

What videos?

The videos taken by the IDF and especially the videos taken by the passengers. There are threads with the videos already posted after the incident. Look 'em up. You had your chance to view them and didn't, just like nobody watches your stupid assed videos, so you'll have to search.

Do you mean Israel's propaganda videos? Yes, I have seen them.

WTF is propaganda about the passengers attacking the boarders and being filmed? Jesus, but you're thickheaded.

Uhhh, it was the boarders who were attacking.

Israel always has to "defend itself" from the people it is attacking.

Look again as they were legally boarding the vessels under maritime law, in the process they saved thousands of lives when they destroyed tons of out of date medicines. The sum total of "aid" on the Mavi was no bigger than a a standard size freezer.

Yes Israel is always defending itself and you have not one shown were they were the attackers

 

[fanger]

fanger, et al,

Yes, I guess you did not read the excerpt from the San Remo Manual.

Yes, you are correct, it was in international waters under the criteria of the Barcelona Convention (For the Protection of the Mediterranean).


Your application of the "International Waters" as a single criteria is a vastly oversimplified answer to much more complex issues.

Most Respectfully,
R

Israel didn't want to go to trial over the point of Law

 

[P F Tinmore]

The International Criminal Court has asked its chief prosecutor to reopen an investigation into the interception of the Mavi Marmara, the ship on which nine human rights activists were killed in 2010 after it was stormed by the Israeli Defence Force during an attempt to break the blockade of the Gaza Strip.

In a damning assessment published last week, ICC judges condemned the decision by Gambian-born prosecutor Fatou Bensouda not to launch an inquiry into the deadly incident despite a “reasonable basis” to believe that war crimes were committed. The judges said Ms Bensouda’s decision was based on a “flawed” and “simplistic” conclusion containing several factual errors. They concluded the prosecutor “committed material errors in her determination of the gravity of the potential case” and urged her to reconsider her decision not to launch an investigation “as soon as possible”.
Senior IDF commanders and Israeli leaders may now ultimately face trial over the incident which occurred in international waters on 31 May 2010, and drew global condemnation. The judges said: “The prosecutor should have accepted that live fire may have been used prior to the boarding of the Mavi Marmara, and drawn the appropriate inferences. This fact … may reasonably suggest that there was, on the part of the IDF who carried out the identified crimes, a prior intention to attack and possibly kill passengers on board.”

A UN Human Rights Council (UNHCR) report into the raid concluded that the youngest victim – 18-year-old Furkan Dogan – had been shot five times, including once in the face while he was lying on his back.
Mavi Marmara: Judges call for new investigation into deaths of

People can rant and rave and sign petitions and letters, but it is the prosecutor's decision whether to proceed and she has ruled there is no basis on which to proceed. The governing body of the ICC could fire her, of course, and replace her with some stooge who will do their bidding, but to what end? Neither Israel nor the US recognizes the jurisdiction of the ICC over their citizens and both countries have in place policies that would allow amount of force necessary to protect their citizens from the court. Bensouda understands the ICC can only damage its already tarnished reputation by proceeding with this issue on purely political grounds as you suggest it should.

Only in America would Murder be considered "on purely political grounds", (you suggested it, not I)

Any lawyer worthy of the name would just produce the videos taken by the pallywood journo's onboard and show that the Israeli's were defending against armed resistance and terrorist violence. Then the civil court would overturn its decision to award damages and give them to the Jews instead.

There was no suspicion of illegal weapons.

You didn't watch the videos, did you. You have to watch the videos. You can't see them
very clearly with your hoof in your mouth.

What videos?

The videos taken by the IDF and especially the videos taken by the passengers. There are threads with the videos already posted after the incident. Look 'em up. You had your chance to view them and didn't, just like nobody watches your stupid assed videos, so you'll have to search.

Do you mean Israel's propaganda videos? Yes, I have seen them.

So the pallywood journo's video's are now Israeli propaganda ?

The fact is that Israel attacked a civilian aid ship in international waters and killed people.

Another fact is that Israel knew that there were no weapons aboard to Gaza. There was no military necessity for the attack. The flotilla was no threat to Israel.

Israel killed people for no reason.

Israeli propaganda.

 

[RoccoR]

fanger, et al,

I agree --- this is a distinct possibility; but, understanding the "why" for the action and the consequence is difficult. Remember: Islamic "Blood-Money" payments, or "diyya" are very similar to Western Damage Settlements. This is a form of "legal" extortion (in lieu of a capital sentence, imprisonment, or corporal punishment) to prevent; alternative means of justice or compensation.

This is very similar to the current negotiations that the US is involved. The US held a cargo plane carrying $400 million dollars in cash bound for Iran until several American detainees were released, raising fresh allegations that a ransom was paid for them.

Yes, I guess you did not read the excerpt from the San Remo Manual.

Yes, you are correct, it was in international waters under the criteria of the Barcelona Convention (For the Protection of the Mediterranean).

Your application of the "International Waters" as a single criteria is a vastly oversimplified answer to much more complex issues.

Israel didn't want to go to trial over the point of Law

(COMMENT)

The in-court settlements to to be much higher damages awards (more money based on sympathy garnered by one side or the other) than what the defendant negotiated to settle of the case. Trail outcomes are much more difficult to predict; with no guarantee from a sympathetic court. Trials are notoriously unpredictable.

Key evidence might be excluded technically excluded, presentations might come across as unreliable, and inconsistent in the claimants testimony might come out, etc. The modern negotiation techniques are designed to take the uncertainly out of the legal process. But international system is not fool proof. No legal system is.

If Israel did not want to go to court, it is because they may have had more to lose (by risk assessment) in the uncertainty of a trail than the stability of a prejudicial international community that has been poisoned by the perpetual victim the claimants present themselves to be.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

This is just subterfuge.

The fact is that Israel attacked a civilian aid ship in international waters and killed people.

Another fact is that Israel knew that there were no weapons aboard to Gaza. There was no military necessity for the attack. The flotilla was no threat to Israel.

Israel killed people for no reason.

Israeli propaganda.

(COMMENT)

If you read the San Remo Manual section on Blockades, you will no doubt notice that there is no requirement to have foreknowledge of the flotilla (or individual vessels) carrying contraband to deny ships that "are believed on reasonable grounds to be carrying contraband or breaching a blockade....”

The State Sponsors of the Freedom Flotilla intentionally attempted to create a violent confrontation for the express purpose of challenging a blockade parameter for a media exploitation event.

This is not dissimilar to a vehicle attempting to run a roadblock in order to create the conditions for a "police brutality" media event in order to get the government to pay an out of court settlement.

READING FOR REFERENCE:

97. A blockade may be enforced and maintained by a combination of legitimate methods and means of warfare provided this combination does not result in acts inconsistent with the rules set out in this document.

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.
​

Most Respectfully,
R