Gaza sent a ship ? ... They have ships ... ?

Israel ( not jews .. ) is at fault here .. only those with false patriotic blinds do not see it .. :2 cents:

you do realize you have to be 18+ to use this webmaster board dont you?

http://www.un.org/Depts/los/conventi...UNCLOS-TOC.htm

Note part II, article 19,
__________________________________________________ _____

"Article19

Meaning of innocent passage

1. Passage is innocent so long as it is not prejudicial to the peace, good order or security of the coastal State. Such passage shall take place in conformity with this Convention and with other rules of international law.

2. Passage of a foreign ship shall be considered to be prejudicial to the peace, good order or security of the coastal State if in the territorial sea it engages in any of the following activities:

(a) any threat or use of force against the sovereignty, territorial integrity or political independence of the coastal State, or in any other manner in violation of the principles of international law embodied in the Charter of the United Nations;

(b) any exercise or practice with weapons of any kind;

(c) any act aimed at collecting information to the prejudice of the defence or security of the coastal State;

(d) any act of propaganda aimed at affecting the defence or security of the coastal State;

(e) the launching, landing or taking on board of any aircraft;

(f) the launching, landing or taking on board of any military device;

(g) the loading or unloading of any commodity, currency or person contrary to the customs, fiscal, immigration or sanitary laws and regulations of the coastal State;

(h) any act of wilful and serious pollution contrary to this Convention;

(i) any fishing activities;

(j) the carrying out of research or survey activities;

(k) any act aimed at interfering with any systems of communication or any other facilities or installations of the coastal State;

(l) any other activity not having a direct bearing on passage."

__________________________________________________ _______________________

as well as article 110 and 111:

__________________________________________________ _________________________

"Article110

Right of visit

1. Except where acts of interference derive from powers conferred by treaty, a warship which encounters on the high seas a foreign ship, other than a ship entitled to complete immunity in accordance with articles 95 and 96, is not justified in boarding it unless there is reasonable ground for suspecting that:

(a) the ship is engaged in piracy;

(b) the ship is engaged in the slave trade;

(c) the ship is engaged in unauthorized broadcasting and the flag State of the warship has jurisdiction under article 109;

(d) the ship is without nationality; or

(e) though flying a foreign flag or refusing to show its flag, the ship is, in reality, of the same nationality as the warship.

2. In the cases provided for in paragraph 1, the warship may proceed to verify the ship's right to fly its flag. To this end, it may send a boat under the command of an officer to the suspected ship. If suspicion remains after the documents have been checked, it may proceed to a further examination on board the ship, which must be carried out with all possible consideration.

3. If the suspicions prove to be unfounded, and provided that the ship boarded has not committed any act justifying them, it shall be compensated for any loss or damage that may have been sustained.

4. These provisions apply mutatis mutandis to military aircraft.

5. These provisions also apply to any other duly authorized ships or aircraft clearly marked and identifiable as being on government service.

Article111

Right of hot pursuit

1. The hot pursuit of a foreign ship may be undertaken when the competent authorities of the coastal State have good reason to believe that the ship has violated the laws and regulations of that State. Such pursuit must be commenced when the foreign ship or one of its boats is within the internal waters, the archipelagic waters, the territorial sea or the contiguous zone of the pursuing State, and may only be continued outside the territorial sea or the contiguous zone if the pursuit has not been interrupted. It is not necessary that, at the time when the foreign ship within the territorial sea or the contiguous zone receives the order to stop, the ship giving the order should likewise be within the territorial sea or the contiguous zone. If the foreign ship is within a contiguous zone, as defined in article 33, the pursuit may only be undertaken if there has been a violation of the rights for the protection of which the zone was established.

2. The right of hot pursuit shall apply mutatis mutandis to violations in the exclusive economic zone or on the continental shelf, including safety zones around continental shelf installations, of the laws and regulations of the coastal State applicable in accordance with this Convention to the exclusive economic zone or the continental shelf, including such safety zones.

3. The right of hot pursuit ceases as soon as the ship pursued enters the territorial sea of its own State or of a third State.

4. Hot pursuit is not deemed to have begun unless the pursuing ship has satisfied itself by such practicable means as may be available that the ship pursued or one of its boats or other craft working as a team and using the ship pursued as a mother ship is within the limits of the territorial sea, or, as the case may be, within the contiguous zone or the exclusive economic zone or above the continental shelf. The pursuit may only be commenced after a visual or auditory signal to stop has been given at a distance which enables it to be seen or heard by the foreign ship.

5. The right of hot pursuit may be exercised only by warships or military aircraft, or other ships or aircraft clearly marked and identifiable as being on government service and authorized to that effect.

6. Where hot pursuit is effected by an aircraft:

(a) the provisions of paragraphs 1 to 4 shall apply mutatis mutandis;

(b) the aircraft giving the order to stop must itself actively pursue the ship until a ship or another aircraft of the coastal State, summoned by the aircraft, arrives to take over the pursuit, unless the aircraft is itself able to arrest the ship. It does not suffice to justify an arrest outside the territorial sea that the ship was merely sighted by the aircraft as an offender or suspected offender, if it was not both ordered to stop and pursued by the aircraft itself or other aircraft or ships which continue the pursuit without interruption.

7. The release of a ship arrested within the jurisdiction of a State and escorted to a port of that State for the purposes of an inquiry before the competent authorities may not be claimed solely on the ground that the ship, in the course of its voyage, was escorted across a portion of the exclusive economic zone or the high seas, if the circumstances rendered this necessary.

8. Where a ship has been stopped or arrested outside the territorial sea in circumstances which do not justify the exercise of the right of hot pursuit, it shall be compensated for any loss or damage that may have been thereby sustained."

__________________________________________________ _________________________________________________


Also note, that, in addition there was another area regarding the so called EEZ, which pushes out the limit to 200 miles and has been used many times in international tribunals to show soveronty outside the previous 12 mile limit.

Note Article 73:

:Article73

Enforcement of laws and regulations of the coastal State

1. The coastal State may, in the exercise of its sovereign rights to explore, exploit, conserve and manage the living resources in the exclusive economic zone, take such measures, including boarding, inspection, arrest and judicial proceedings, as may be necessary to ensure compliance with the laws and regulations adopted by it in conformity with this Convention.

2. Arrested vessels and their crews shall be promptly released upon the posting of reasonable bond or other security.

3. Coastal State penalties for violations of fisheries laws and regulations in the exclusive economic zone may not include imprisonment, in the absence of agreements to the contrary by the States concerned, or any other form of corporal punishment.

4. In cases of arrest or detention of foreign vessels the coastal State shall promptly notify the flag State, through appropriate channels, of the action taken and of any penalties subsequently imposed."

__________________________________________________ _______________________________________


(I'm studying for my masters license, vessels up to 100 tons. Just for the fun of it, I have no intention of becoming a commercial captain!)


:winkwink:


.:2 cents:

I would LOVE to see what would happen to people on board a ship if the Turkish Navy came on board to inspect them and they attacked the sailors with knives and iron pipes....

From what I've seen of the well-earned pride of the Turkish Navy, (a darn good Navy, by the way), they would be some shootin' sailors and I wouldn't blame them!




.

.. and highlighted it ... unless you claim the flottilla was in " territorial sea ", it is not relevant.

You mean like in the middle of the night, dropping from choppers , wearing mask and armed with assault weapons , while surrounded by watercrafts with more masked men ?

What would Israelis do ?

Look at a map.... It was only 36 miles off of the israeli coast. Well within the 200 miles established by the EEZ conventions.

Relevant.


And by the way, US coast guard vessels and have stopped vessels over 2000 miles offshore... and I can give you a link for that also.


:2 cents:.

They had been ordered to stop for boarding and inspection by radio and loudspeaker many times.... which is why the other boats in the flotilla stopped... were boarded and inspected, and no one was hurt.


.

I think its retarded to compare anything the US does to anything israel does to prove a point. They are both under the control of the same forces.

Again , wrong :

Exclusive economic zone
An exclusive economic zone extends from the outer limit of the territorial sea to a maximum of 200 nautical miles (370.4 km) from the territorial sea baseline, thus it includes the contiguous zone.[3] A coastal nation has control of all economic resources within its exclusive economic zone, including fishing, mining, oil exploration, and any pollution of those resources. However, it cannot prohibit passage or loitering above, on, or under the surface of the sea that is in compliance with the laws and regulations adopted by the coastal State in accordance with the provisions of the UN Convention, within that portion of its exclusive economic zone beyond its territorial sea. Before 1982, coastal nations arbitrarily extended their territorial waters in an effort to control activities which are now regulated by the exclusive economic zone, such as offshore oil exploration or fishing rights (see Cod Wars). Indeed, the exclusive economic zone is still popularly, though erroneously, called a coastal nation's territorial waters.


You are not stupid .. you know what the EEZ is for ....

Now, do you support a country abusing the purpose of the zone ?

And as asked by another poster , has Israel ever did anything wrong in your eyes ?

I too have a friend in the Coast Guard. This is what he does, day in, and day out. They stop ships and search them. It seems to comes as a surprise that countries stop ships 200 miles off their coast, but it's something that happens all the time. It's like getting a speeding ticket.

That's a bunch of hogwash right there.

If an Israeli ship comes within 200 miles of any other country, it legally can be searched. It's not open to discussion. This happens a dozen times a day off the coast of any large country with a modern navy. It's a simple matter of maritime law enforcement.

As for the Geneva Convention, well, you need to do a lot more reading there. Not all countries automatically accept all protocols of the Geneva Convention. Ironically, Israel does not accept the fourth Geneva Convention and how it applies to the occupied territory. The United States also does not ratified two of the protocols.

You need you read a book called "Bravo Two Zero". It's about British paratroopers caught behind lines in Iraq. Seems the Geneva Convention didn't apply at all when this guy got captured and had his teeth beat out of him.

Or.... Direct from the UN:

http://www.un.org/Depts/los/conventi...clos/part5.htm

Article73
Enforcement of laws and regulations of the coastal State
1. The coastal State may, in the exercise of its sovereign rights to explore, exploit, conserve and manage the living resources in the exclusive economic zone, take such measures, including boarding, inspection, arrest and judicial proceedings, as may be necessary to ensure compliance with the laws and regulations adopted by it in conformity with this Convention.

Where the FUCK is this open to discussion? This is something that every "large" nation with a modern Navy does on a daily basis.

To tackle your next question, has Israel ever done anything wrong in my eyes? They sure have. The are aggressive, powerful, and not overly concerned about the law. They do what they want when they want, and try to gloss over everything. They attacked US warship to cover up war crimes; They've pursued Nazis across the globe, and you can even say Israel invented terrorism.

Their intention here is not a two party state; Their intention is to push out the Palestinians, plain and simple. They've been doing it for sixty years.

I'm currently reading a book called "The Iron Cage" by Rashid Khalidi which is about the Palestinian attempts at statehood. The very first page of the book has a map of British Mandate compared to Israel today. Israel has grown and at the same time it's pushing out anyone who isn't Jewish.

the geneva convention is hogwash ?

just because you say so does not make it fact , try reading the actual law not what's spit out on the board as fact. You cannot board a ship delivering aid , or keep a population from recieving aid to punish others.


aid ships do not get boarded by armed commandos all the time, rarely if ever does it happen and never does it result in the death of 9 unarmed people.



gee i wonder why . Would be hard to run the concentration camp called gaza if they follow internationally recognized law.




after i read it will i feel murdering unarmed civilians bringing in aid is ok ?

You can board and inspect ANY ship within those 200 miles... Just because, when challenged, that ship SAYS that all they have is aid, doesn't matter. They don't have to take the captains word for it. I have posted the law... look it up yourself.

Every time the coast guard boards a large vessel, they are wearing bullet proof vests, carrying M16s, and they are covered by automatic 50cal machine guns from the zodiac, as well as 20mm cannon and a sometimes a 5inch gun from the cutter. and YES, THIS HAPPENS EVERY DAY. You obviously don't have the slightest idea what you are talking about. I suggest you call a coast guard station and ask them if what I'm telling you is true.

Stop twisting the facts.... the people on that ship were not unarmed, and they attacked the boarding crew. If you do that to the US coast guard, you will be shot dead. In fact, if you fail to stop your vessel when hailed and told to do so, they will fire on your ship.

Stop making stupid statements and simply call a coast guard station and ASK THEM


jeeez!:Oh crap.

the only fact in this thread is a bunch of people sitting in luxury homes arguing about some shitholes in the middle east LOL

let satan sort em out, i miss when americans cared more about america and not shithole countries over seas, we left that side of the sea because it sucks ass so we formed our own country, youd think you guys care more about america, but naaaah, care more about foreign relations than your own country.

just sit back, check your stats and be glad you live in america, you got it made.

The law doesn't not say "you can board all ships accept ships carrying aid". It says:

1. The coastal State may, in the exercise of its sovereign rights to explore, exploit, conserve and manage the living resources in the exclusive economic zone, take such measures, including boarding, inspection, arrest and judicial proceedings, as may be necessary to ensure compliance with the laws and regulations adopted by it in conformity with this Convention.

Any country can board any ship off of it's coast for any fucking reason at any time. It's not open to discussion. This is the law, it happens hundreds of times a day. Period.

As for killing the "innocent civilians", well, once you fail to obey the orders of a Navy warship all bets are off. They refused to stop, violating international law, were boarded under force, attacked, and the Israeli navy opened fire. Don't be stupid, don't be ignorant; When someone is pointing a loaded gun at you, you back the fuck down.

Years ago in Phoenix there was a shooting a few blocks from where I lived at a drive in pharmacy. A woman came up to the drive through window trying to buy narcotics illegally, and the police were called. A motorcycle cop was dispatched. As he approached her car she took off, nearly hitting him, and hitting his motorcycle. He opened up fire, and if I remember correctly killed her. There was also a child in the car. I failed to understand the issue here - if a police officer approaches you while your committing a crime and you attack the police officer, well, all fucking bets are off.

Break the law (International law) and then refuse obey direct orders from law enforcement (the Israeli navy) and then attack them when they board you under force? At that point you get what you deserve.

Lame and very stupid.

Mike,
How come you did not reply to this?
Have they ever?

there has always been a question. why is that?

Of course they have. I assumed it was rhetorical, since I don't know of any country, group or issue which I don't have at least one reservation about.



.

Actually, I think I'm addressing a salient point. If the Israelis were simply gunning down innocent aid workers that were just standing around peacefully, (as people here wish to portray this incident), then they would have done so on all 6 ships, would they not?


.

Can we hear one please.

If and why.
They took on a largest one.
They did. None of the boats were able to go thru.
Or you think the other 5 just turned around because they felt like it?

the funny thing is nobody has portrayed it as you suggest except yourself.

What we all understand and you seem to be missing is that murder is bad , and we generally try to avoid murder not instigate it.

If you jump into a pack of lions , you will likely have to defend yourself. A smarter person would not jump into the pack of lions to begin with. lions generally want nothing to do with humans .

if it makes you feel better to believe that then feel free, you and i both know you are full of shit.


i'm pretty sure we have figured out you support murder by now
they had no right to stop them stopping them violated the law.
great analogy i am glad you used it. Any smart person would realise the lady in the car with her child was not intending to run over a cop, more than likely she thought she was being robbed. Yet another situation you feel comfortable with killing someone that is basically unarmed for comitting a crime that doesn't really affect us.
you mean the one israel breaks all the time ?
lol the israeli navy is not law enforcement, keep dreaming.

we understand you like the killing of gentiles, regular people try to avoid killing not instigate it. good for you for supporting murder though , i'm sure it will do you well through life.

[QUOTE=sperbonzo;17232772]I would LOVE to see what would happen to people on board a ship if the Turkish Navy came on board to inspect them and they attacked the sailors with knives and iron pipes....

From what I've seen of the well-earned pride of the Turkish Navy, (a darn good Navy, by the way), they would be some shootin' sailors and I wouldn't blame them!




.[/QUOTEj




Thank You, i know our army is good, but i don't think bunch of professional commandos would be desperate as this against a group of civilians with iron pipes and knives :2 cents:

2 that jump to mind are The Lavon Affair, and the 1982 Lebanon war.



.

What happened on the ships is the least of Israel's recent violations of international law.

So international law no longer applies and the host country can never ever stop boats off our coast? The drug dealers would love that shit.

You say she was unarmed, I saw she was driving a two thousand pound guided missile that she intentionally used to assault a law enforcement officer investigating a crime. He had the right to defend himself.

You say they were "innocent civilians" and "aid workers" and I say there were twenty young men beating the crap out of people with lead pipes. Not sure what planet you live on, but if twenty men with lead pipes start beating the shit out of people at the local mall someone is going to shot.

I never said Israel is innocent. They aren't. But they do have the legal right to stop any ship off their coast, just like any other country has.

Why not?

In the United States, the US Navy is not tasked with enforcing US law and is in fact restricted from it. However, this is one of the reasons we have the Coast Guard. At the same time, all US Navy warships patrolling the US coast has a number of Coast Guard members on board just for their very reason.

I don't know what the laws are with Israel and it's maritime law enforcement.


At the end of the, it's international law for any host country to be able to stop any ship off it's coast for any reason. Everyone is so stunned that this is allowed to happen but it's simple law enforcement.

I will repost this since you refuse to acknowledge it.

You can board and inspect ANY ship within those 200 miles... Just because, when challenged, that ship SAYS that all they have is aid, doesn't matter. They don't have to take the captains word for it. I have posted the law... look it up yourself.

Every time the coast guard boards a large vessel, they are wearing bullet proof vests, carrying M16s, and they are covered by automatic 50cal machine guns from the zodiac, as well as 20mm cannon and a sometimes a 5inch gun from the cutter. and YES, THIS HAPPENS EVERY DAY. You obviously don't have the slightest idea what you are talking about. I suggest you call a coast guard station and ask them if what I'm telling you is true.

Stop twisting the facts.... the people on that ship were not unarmed, and they attacked the boarding crew. If you do that to the US coast guard, you will be shot dead. In fact, if you fail to stop your vessel when hailed and told to do so, they will fire on your ship.

Stop making stupid statements and simply call a coast guard station and ASK THEM


jeeez!.

.

No shit?
Are you telling me that planting bombs is not good?

besides israel quoting iternational law when they are in possesion of weapons of mass destruction and illegal nuclear weapons is quite a laugh.

yes actually it does. because it is against the law to prevent people from getting aid , especially when doing it to punish a leadership. i realise israel like to pick and choose the international laws it decides to follow but sorry that's not how the game is played. You cant ignore laws when they apply to you and enforce laws when they apply to non-jews.

I posted the law go read it. israel did not let the ships continue thus it was an illegal action.



if it happens every day you should be able to provide me with ANY ONE coast guard armed boarding in international waters of an aid ship. Please provide some facts like i have to bolster your fairy tale .

the funny thing about laws is there are more than 1.

It is against the law to murder , it is lawfull to kill in self defense. Sometimes 1 law trumps another.

In this situation it may be lawful under certain conditions for a ship to be armed boarded, it is not lawfull to stop humanitarian aid.



common sense would say not to drive in front of the car, not murder for murders sake.


common sense would say , stay away from the men with bats NOT let's go shoot them.

Not sure what planet you live on, but if twenty men with lead pipes start beating the shit out of 20 guys shootting them in the face with paintballs from helicopters we would all be smoking way too much weed because these things don't happen in civilized countries for a reason.
ding ding, ever wonder why ?

ding ding ever wonder why..
cept for the whole murdering of nine people part .

There's an idiot that doesn't know how to separate facts and form a logical conclusion.:winkwink:

Israel thought it was good a few years ago when they honored the guys as heroes.

Noone in congress said a word lol. We're fucked.

http://www.ynetnews.com/Ext/Comp/Art...5838,00.html#n

When is the western world going to WAKE THE FUCK UP and realize Israel is the real threat to the western way of living and not the muslim world. it is just insane to me how brainwashed people are by the media in the western world. they somehow believe media is not filtered here and we get the "real" info.

So what was the point of you asking me if I had ever disapproved of Israel, and to name something that I did not approve of? Did you have a point? I also named the 1982 Lebanon war... did you want to comment on that? The point of my answer was two examples of many things that I did not approve of Israel doing....


.... and BTW, that same condition applies to my view of EVERY SINGLE COUNTRY IN THE HISTORY OF THIS PLANET.


In fact, I would be interested to hear if you think that you can name ANY COUNTRY ON THE PLANET that has not committed an atrocity of some kind at some time in their history.


(This isn't really a fair question, since I'm quite passionate about history and I'm already pretty sure that there isn't one)...but please.... go ahead and try. I would be fascinated to hear your choices.



.



.

Actually Atlantis, I have no doubt that if a Pro-Kurdish "aid convoy" refused to stop to be inspected by the Turkish navy, and then attacked the boarding party with knives and pipes... The Turkish Navy would use force.

Do YOU doubt that? Do you think that the Turkish Navy would allow a Pro-Kurdish convoy through without boarding and inspection, simply on their word that it was only aid?


.


.