www.ditl.org

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100607/ap_ ... a_blockade

Egypt is backing out of the blockade.

The problem with going to the 1949 Mandate is that it provides no clarity. According to that: Gaza's only independence is their jurisdiction over their own settlements - and with Jordan's withdrawal from the West Bank, the Mandate has Israel as the only authority in that area. Yet Israeli activity is being called illegal that is both allowed and encouraged by the Mandate of 1949.

Monroe wrote:http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100607/ap_ ... a_blockade

Egypt is backing out of the blockade.

That's to be expected, now that it comes down to the short-and-curlies. Egypt has no stomach to actually contribute even some moral fiber, no matter how right they felt the blockade is.

Monroe wrote:
Why won't Israel release all of the footage if it did nothing wrong?

It was with a pistol no semi-auto fire there. That was my first guess as well. We don't know if it was an execution but it looks to be one from eyewitness accounts. If Israel would just release the dang footage we'd know one way or another. Right now though its a big question. And its an American citizen, we should be sure they killed him in self defense.

What do you mean a pistol with no semi-auto fire? Are you sure you know that that term means? Semi auto means every time you pull the trigger, it fires a bullet. You have to go back to the days of the wild west to find military pistols without that ability.

As for the footage. Even if it shows them doing "nothing wrong" it'll show them shooting people. And pointing weapons at people and shouting. Powerful imagry in any case. And certainly it'll be taken out of context. Remember that picture of the guy pointing a gun at Elián González, I bet you do. A number of governments like China and Russia have recently had epic wins from restricting such imagry, whereas Iran and Thailand have taken flack for the little that did manage to get out before they really clamped down on it.

If I were a freelance engineer I bet theres a market in satellite link jamming right now nearly worldwide.


Interesting bit from the Egypt article that I'd heard about elsewhere as well

Egypt will not transfer large cargo shipments or construction material because the border crossing is designed primarily for travelers, the security official said. One such convoy, organized by Egypt's Islamic opposition movement, the Muslim Brotherhood, was stopped Monday before it got close to the border.

And while it eases movement at the crossing in the border town of Rafah, Egypt is intensifying its efforts to stop a thriving smuggling trade through hundreds of tunnels under the border. Those passages have been Gaza's key economic lifeline but have also been a pathway for weapons.

Egypt late last year began building an underground, metal barrier to seal the smuggling tunnels, and the security official said Egypt hoped to finish that work in the next few months.

Long story short Egypt isn't maintaining the blockade....and yet it actually is because it seems to only be allowing in the things Israel already was. Really what's changed is that medical supplies and food are getting in faster. However I'm not sure if Israel was confiscating that stuff. I doubt they would. More likely they're stockpiling and rationing it.


@Mikey. What exactly is this mandate and who wrote it? Do you have a link?

...the Muslim Brotherhood...

Why does this sound like some comic book supervillain group to me?

Egypt late last year began building an underground, metal barrier...

Those pesky Mole People again!

The 1949 so-called "Arab Mandate" was authored in majority by Great Britain and was the creationary document for the West Bank, Gaza Strip, East Jerusalem, and the Golan Heights. I'm afraid I'm working off memory so I don't have a link.

Hmmm. Closest thing I can find at the 1949 Armistice Agreements, which I think might be what you're talking about. Interesting documents. Stating among other things stuff like

"2. The Armistice Demarcation Line is not to be construed in any sense as a political or territorial boundary, and is delineated without prejudice to rights, claims and positions of either Party to the Armistice as regards ultimate settlement of the Palestine question. "
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/arm01.asp

Looks like both the Arabs and Jews had a feeling that they'd eventually get the better of the other one, and made this agreement to stop the shooting. Obviousely Israel ultimately wound up on top.

The modern "illegal bit" stems from a slew of UN Resolutions. It looks like sometimes the US uses its veto power to keep resolutions off Israel. But sometimes will abstain from votes and will let stuff through. Things like
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nat ... lution_446

Which includes the text
"1. Determines that the policy and practices of Israel in establishing settlements in the Palestinian and other Arab territories occupied since 1967 have no legal validity and constitute a serious obstruction to achieving a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East;

2. Strongly deplores the failure of Israel to abide by Security Council resolutions 237 (1967) of 14 June 1967, 252 (1968) of 21 May 1968 and 298 (1971) of 25 September 1971 and the consensus statement by the President of the Security Council on 11 November 1976 2/ and General Assembly resolutions 2253 (ES-V) and 2254 (ES-V) of 4 and 14 July 1967, 32/5 of 28 October 1977 and 33/113 of 18 December 1978;

3. Calls once more upon Israel, as the occupying Power, to abide scrupulously by the 1949 Fourth Geneva Convention, to rescind its previous measures and to desist from taking any action which would result in changing the legal status and geographical nature and materially affecting the demographic composition of the Arab territories occupied since 1967, including Jerusalem, and, in particular, not to transfer parts of its own civilian population into the occupied Arab territories;"

sunnyside wrote: What do you mean a pistol with no semi-auto fire?

Yeah for some reason I was thinking three round burst. Don't ask, I guess I was just having a brain fart :p

As for the footage. Even if it shows them doing "nothing wrong" it'll show them shooting people. And pointing weapons at people and shouting. Powerful imagry in any case. And certainly it'll be taken out of context.

And the minute of film they released of people hitting the Israelis with bats might not be taken out of context? Show the whole thing from multiple view points. That's the most fair you can be because its not a singular small snap shot like what they're showing now. It'll show what really happened when there was gun fire and the captain pleading for the Israelis to hold their fire. All I'm saying is release the dozen or so tapes that Israeli confiscated. I don't trust their edited snap shot of the event.

So the "illegal occupation" bit comes from an arbitrary decision by the UN to just call them illegal, and isn't based on the actual language creating those areas. Nice. And since the Palestinian territories aren't states but territories administered by other nations, the Geneva Convention under which they would fall is Protocol II... which wasn't written until 1977.

Monroe wrote:And the minute of film they released of people hitting the Israelis with bats might not be taken out of context? Show the whole thing from multiple view points. That's the most fair you can be because its not a singular small snap shot like what they're showing now.

You know full well that neither side will ever do that.

Monroe wrote:...and the captain pleading for the Israelis to hold their fire.

And the Israelis being attacked and shot at with lethal force while only using non-lethal force themselves.

Monroe wrote:I don't trust their edited snap shot of the event.

I trust it a hell of a lot more than Erdogan's version, or that of the activists who staged the whole event.

Monroe wrote: And the minute of film they released of people hitting the Israelis with bats might not be taken out of context? Show the whole thing from multiple view points. That's the most fair you can be because its not a singular small snap shot like what they're showing now. It'll show what really happened when there was gun fire and the captain pleading for the Israelis to hold their fire. All I'm saying is release the dozen or so tapes that Israeli confiscated. I don't trust their edited snap shot of the event.

Neither Israel nor Cenk nor the protesters are interested in being "fair". They each want to show you what they want to be seen and pretend that's the whole story.

But Israel is the one that took all the cameras. It's really asking them to be stupid to give the protesters or their sympathisers the very thing they sought out to get in this endevor.

Mikey wrote:So the "illegal occupation" bit comes from an arbitrary decision by the UN to just call them illegal, and isn't based on the actual language creating those areas. Nice. And since the Palestinian territories aren't states but territories administered by other nations, the Geneva Convention under which they would fall is Protocol II... which wasn't written until 1977.
.

It would appear, judging by some comments when I was googling those, that the protocals were in large part created due to countries attempting to use loopholes to get around the conventions. Such as Israel's actions, or the increasingly popular trend of nations going to war but not actually calling it a war (for example I think the whole US Vietnam thing was never declared a war).

Also that's just one resolution I found. There are over a hundred of them. Most seeming to deal with specific actions Israel engaged in. But I note that the resolution I quoted cited previous resolutions. And it looks like nobody voted against it (with only the US and a few countries abstaining). Whatever case the Israelis made regarding the situation doesn't seem to have won over the international community.

Mikey wrote: You know full well that neither side will ever do that.

The people attacked are asking for it.

Monroe wrote:
And the Israelis being attacked and shot at with lethal force while only using non-lethal force themselves.

Aye, I want to see that on film.

Monroe wrote: I trust it a hell of a lot more than Erdogan's version, or that of the activists who staged the whole event.

But the activists are asking for all the footage. What's wrong with demanding the footage if Israel did nothing wrong? Its not like we're talking about one camera angle. There was a news crew onboard, the Israelis had several cameras, the ship's security cameras, and someone who was shot was holding a camera (which might have looked like a weapon, I can buy that). None of that footage has been released. We have one side who says Israelis were shooting people who surrendered and were laying on the deck and we have another side who released a minute of footage that doesn't show any shootings and a says they were shot at. Neither is conclusive which is the reason we need the entire tape to decide.

sunnyside wrote: But Israel is the one that took all the cameras. It's really asking them to be stupid to give the protesters or their sympathisers the very thing they sought out to get in this endevor.

But it would shut them up. Cenk, and most of the rest of the world would admit the activists did something wrong. Hopefully wikileaks gets their hands on it.

Monroe wrote:
But it would shut them up. Cenk, and most of the rest of the world would admit the activists did something wrong. Hopefully wikileaks gets their hands on it.

Ppfffffft. Sure. Ok, so Israel releases the tapes it has, none of which show somebody being executed. So case closed and Cenk withdraws his comments? Bull. He'd just be where he is now, without tape of it. The only way to disprove those claims is if there was a camera right on the person getting shot that showed exactly how they got shot. And the only way to prove no Israeli shot first is if there were, well you'd pretty much have to have cameras on all the commandos and choppersat all times in the lead up.

Unless you've got what's required for that, and that isn't likely, than all you're doing is handing out propaganda.

Indeed. The activists may be asking for all the footage, but that =/= releasing all the unedited footage. I'm sure the Israeli mucky-mucks want to get their mitts on all the footage as well. As Sunny said, "all the footage" =/= "a clear, uninterrupted picture of the entire happening." In addition, this whole thing was created as a publicity stunt by the "activists," so the seized footage will certainly be selectively filmed.

Hey wait a minute.

While the 1949 Armistices often don't define national borders, they do define which areas are to be Arab and Jew until things are decided otherwise, and that the appropriate militaries are supposed to be the ones in control of the various areas.

Israel siezed control of those areas during the six day war. So it seems like the conventions for war should be in full effect because military control was aquired during a war. Just because an area is contested does not relax the conventions.