Actions can have consequences

Turkey has seen the evil that is done by the zionists. Read up on Armenia and what they did there.
Bravo to Turkey. Finally a country with the courage and moral fortitude to expose the evil that our country refuses to see.
I just hope the 'diplomatic activity is not held in Canada. We still have to pay for the G8/20. This could involve all of NATO and that could be the end of that warmongering group of killers.

Here is an interesting analysis of the legal situation by Craig Murray, whom people may remember as the British ambassador to Uzbekistan who was recalled for charging that the Karimov government practised torture.

A word on the legal position, which is very plain. To attack a foreign flagged vessel in international waters is illegal. It is not piracy, as the Israeli vessels carried a military commission. It is rather an act of illegal warfare.

Because the incident took place on the high seas does not mean however that international law is the only applicable law. The Law of the Sea is quite plain that, when an incident takes place
on a ship on the high seas (outside anybody's territorial waters) the applicable law is that of the flag state of the ship on which the incident occurred. In legal terms, the Turkish ship was Turkish territory.

There are therefore two clear legal possibilities.

Possibility one is that the Israeli commandos were acting on behalf of the government of Israel in killing the activists on the ships. In that case Israel is in a position of war with Turkey, and the act falls under international jurisdiction as a war crime.

Possibility two is that, if the killings were not authorised Israeli military action, they were acts of murder under Turkish jurisdiction. If Israel does not consider itself in a position of war with Turkey, then it must hand over the commandos involved for trial in Turkey under Turkish law.

In brief, if Israel and Turkey are not at war, then it is Turkish law which is applicable to what happened on the ship. It is for Turkey, not Israel, to carry out any inquiry or investigation into events and to initiate any prosecutions. Israel is obliged to hand over indicted personnel for prosecution.

"Israel is obliged to hand over indicted personnel for prosecution."

No it isn't.

No state is "obliged" to hand over its nationals for prosecution by a foreign state, unless there exists an Extradition Treaty between the two countries.

Normally, countries do not sign Extradition Treaties unless the requesting state can show that its trials adhere to minimum international standards.

Typically, Extradition Treaties also require that a judge of the country where the fugitive resides also confirm that a legally probative case against the accused exists.

Even then, the Minister of Justice or similar official normally retains discretion to refuse extradition.

http://www.rense.com/general91/outc.htm
The Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper who has several times attacked Iran over its nuclear program has simply expressed his regret over the deaths and injuries which "occurred", shrugging off to the responsibility of the atrocious perpetrator and the architect of the massacre. "Canada deeply regrets the loss of life and the injuries suffered. We are currently looking for more information in order to shed light on what exactly happened." The ridiculous statement of the Canadian Premier reads. Canada is still looking for information about what has happened! Maybe the Israel Defense Force can answer the questions well! "They had not coordinated with us as to the shipping of humanitarian aids into Gaza, so we shot them killed in the morning."

This is the part mentioning brave Canada in the article I posted above.
Sadly, no matter what the law is, israel is above the law as we see in the response of our 'great leaders'.

Just heard on the CBC that Israel is now claiming that it's troops were 'provoked' into shooting.

Hummmm ..... the nature of provocation here is called into question here .... does not dropping armed personnel into a vessel from an helicopter just about define a provocation?

provocation is in the eye of the beholder. The spin is making me dizzy. The words are straight out of 1984--black is white, up is down, war is peace and on and on--and we are supposed to swallow the lies without question.

Some official Israeli commentators (as well as various pro-Israel commentators echoing them) have been claiming that it is legal for a country to seize or attack a vessel which is "breaching a blockade". This is no doubt true as far as it goes--however, a "blockade", as defined in the laws to which they refer, is "the interdiction of all or certain maritime traffic coming from or going to a port or coast of a belligerent, is a legitimate method of naval warfare."

So, for the blockade of Gaza to be something applicable, Israel would have to be at war with Gaza. Is Israel claiming to be at war with Gaza? Gaza isn't a state and it is in any case under occupation by Israel. If Israel is in fact at war with Gaza, a whole host of illegalities about Israel's actions become clear and the UN should be intervening. It's yet another case where Israel only manages to continue doing the stuff they do by refusing to define what they consider their relationship to the rest of the world to be. A relevant example would be their refusal to define borders for Israel.
It's illegal for Israel to be doing what they do to Gaza if they're at war. It's illegal for them to be doing what they do if they're occupying Gaza. It's illegal for them to be doing what they do if they claim Gaza as part of their country. So they busily contrive to claim a little of one, a little of another depending on what's useful to them at the moment.

Incidentally, if they are in fact at war with Gaza, then all the people they've been denouncing as terrorists all this time are in fact not terrorists but resistance fighters. Is that the way they want it?

Maybe slightly OT - but is there a difference between what Israel is doing to Gaza and what was done to Iraq by Clinton and crew in teh 90's?

Starving/abusing people seems to be the order of the day. How many children died because of the lack of simple and (almost) universally available drugs - yet they were not allowed into the country. Millions is the number I have heard - but, to echo V. Masse (but in a more humane context) "one is too many."

Thanks PLG - as always, a very rational explaination. :)

croghan27--there is no difference--but then why should there be? The same people control the US government as control israel. They never change their actions, jsut their victims.