Composition: The Turkel commission was composed of eight independent experts. Six experts were Israelis: judges, professors, and former military or intelligence officers. None were current employees of the Israeli government. Two experts were foreign observers: one an Irish Nobel Laureate and former first minister of Ireland, the other a retired Canadian general who previously investigated military action in Somalia and Rwanda.

Information: The Turkel commission spent seven months analyzing the flotilla incident. Sources of information included: testimony from several dozen witnesses including eyewitnesses to the events, senior government and military officials, several thousand pages of documents and several hundred video clips. The commission made a public invitation for anyone with relevant information to testify before it, including all flotilla participants.

Transparency: Almost all committee sessions were open to the public, except for those that touched on sensitive security matters. The foreign observers were present at all sessions, including the few closed sessions. The final report is available online in English. When printed the report comes close to 300 pages.

By contrast, a report previously issued by Turkey was completed in three weeks and the report itself was not made available to the public. The commission that produced the Turkish report was comprised entirely of current government officials of Turkey, but Turkey did not reveal their actual identities. It is unknown what sources of information the Turkish report used to develop its conclusions.

Main Messages

1.    The government established a public, independent, autonomous commission of inquiry, headed by a former Supreme Court justice and including jurists and world-renowned experts as well as international observers. This proves that Israel is a law-abiding nation that knows how to audit itself. Few countries would be willing to investigate itself in such a comprehensive, fundamental manner.

2.    The committee determined unequivocally that imposing and enforcing a blockade including in international waters was legal and justified.

3.    Despite the attempt by various parties to accuse Israel of war crimes, the findings prove that Israel stated the truth and acted in accordance with the law.

4.    The government and the IDF will study the report at length and learn the necessary lessons for the future.

5.    The security risk of weapons being brought into Gaza is high. Although Israel continues to ease conditions for the residents of Gaza, rockets and mortars continue to be fired at Israeli towns. Hamas is continuing to invest all its resources in arming itself with rockets and weapons.

6.    The government and security forces will continue to employ all actions necessary to protect the citizens of Israel.

7.    Let it be emphasized that Gaza is open to the entry of all types of goods and products. Any organization wishing to transfer products to Gaza can do so through the existing border crossings. There is no need for additional flotillas, which in fact comprise a provocation and have no connection to humanitarian aid.

Main Findings

1.  The marine blockade was imposed due to security needs and meets the requirements of international law.

• The commission reached the conclusion that the marine blockade was justified in light of the security concerns and was imposed in accordance with the rules of international law.

• The commission concluded that Israel is upholding its international humanitarian obligations in the situation of a naval blockade. This is evident, among other things, by the fact that vessels are allowed to pass into Ashdod Port to unload humanitarian equipment.

2.    The policy towards the Gaza Strip complies with international and humanitarian law.

• Israel’s effective control over the Gaza Strip ended when the disengagement was completed in 2005.

• Israel does not prevent the entry of supplies essential to the civilian population, and provides as much humanitarian and medical assistance as is necessary according to the rules of international law. Israel cooperates with the Palestinian Authority and the international community in these realms.

• The measures adopted by Israel do not constitute “collective punishment” of the Gazan population. There is nothing to indicate that Israel deliberately imposes restrictions, with the sole aim or out of principle, to prevent the population from receiving essential goods.

3.    The takeover of the Marmara was done in accordance with international law.

• According to international law, if it may be determined that a vessel is intentionally trying to breach a blockade, it is permitted to overtake it wherever it is located, even in international waters. Taking all the circumstances into consideration, the committee reached the conclusion that the takeover in international waters was legal.

• The possibility of stopping vessels, especially large ones, at high sea is extremely limited. Therefore, lowering soldiers from helicopters was an appropriate tactic that suits international law, and is consistent with the experience of other navies. It can potentially lower the risk of loss of life compared to other techniques.

• The instructions for opening fire were not to shoot except in the case of a real and immediate threat to life. The committee was convinced that these instructions were made clear to the troops participating in the event.

• A number of warnings were transmitted to the vessels, but the captain said he refused to stop and no attempt was made to change course.

• Let it be noted that no humanitarian equipment was found on board the Marmara.

4.    The soldiers took action only after they were violently attached by the ship’s passengers, and their action complies with the rules of international law.

• As preparations were being made for the flotilla, the organizers emphasized the need to refrain as much as possible from using force. The IDF did not anticipate that the flotilla participants would not be innocent civilians but rather direct participants in hostilities. The instructions for opening fire reflected this view and were mainly suited to a law enforcement operation.

• The soldiers started trying to board the Marmara from Morena dinghies, but encountered violent, fierce resistance; it was then decided to drop from helicopters.

• The soldiers were violently attacked with shots, knives, clubs, hammers, blows and more. Nine soldiers were injured during the attack, including from live bullets, and others from stabbings. Three soldiers were seized and dragged to the ship’s hold.

• The committee found that the IDF soldiers behaved professionally on the whole upon encountering ferocious violence that they had not anticipated. Most of the events in which the soldiers used force, including shooting into the center of the mass of their attackers, are consistent with international law. In a few isolated cases the committee did not have enough information to draw a conclusion.

5.    Conduct of the passengers

• The passengers aboard the Marmara may be divided into two groups: peace activists, who boarded the ship in Antalya following a security inspection, and a “hard core” of 40 IHH activists who boarded in Istanbul without any security inspection and behaved as a separate group. They were joined by 60 other activists who participated in the violent events.

• When the ship’s captain ordered the passengers to return to their places below deck, the IHH activists remained on deck, put on life jackets and armed themselves with axes, chains, knives, hammers, and so forth. They demonstrated a high level of organization and violence.

• The committee was convinced that the IHH activists used live weapons. Their intention was to breach the marine blockade and thereby provide Hamas with an advantage in its armed struggle against the State of Israel.

• The committee has determined that the status of the members of the violent group is that of direct participants in hostilities (DHP), who do not enjoy the protections granted to civilians.

• Out of nine killed, four were identified as IHH activists. The other four were identified as activists of Turkish Islamic organizations. The other casualty is not known to have belonged to any organization. The relatives of some of the dead men testified that they wanted to die as shahids; some of them even left a letter stating their last will and testament.

6.    Handling of the passengers

• After the takeover was completed, the stage of treating the wounded began. Eighteen doctors, six paramedics, and 70 combat medics and one senior physician were involved in this event. Some of the wounded resisted the administration of medical treatment but none died of their wounds after medical treatment commenced.

• The passengers were given water and food, and taken to the restroom whenever they asked.

• Some of the passengers were handcuffed, especially those who were feared likely to try and attack or disturb the order. Searches revealed knives and a great deal of money, as well as one of the soldiers’ pistols, cold weapons, material belonging to the Hamas movement, and more.

• The committee found that the actions taken to handle the flotilla participants as soon as the ship arrived at Ashdod port were legal and in accordance with international law.

In 2007  Palestinian terrorist attacked the Lebanese army which in response  struck back withdeadly force  aimed at a refugee camp, almost 500 and 6 U.N. Personnel died. The world was silent, no investigation comittees, no coments from world leaders. 

“Whether it is from Turkey, Ireland or Cyprus, those that participate in these flotillas reek of hypocrisy. There are currently 100 armed conflicts and dozens of territorial disputes around the world. There have been millions of people killed and hundreds of millions live in abject poverty without access to basic staples. And yet hundreds of high-minded “humanitarian activists” are spending millions of dollars to reach Gaza and hand money to Hamas that will never reach the innocent civilians of Gaza”

Read more in The Wall Street Journal

The Eiland Commission was set up to investigate the behavior of the military during the preparation and takeover of the  Gaza Flotillas. The military commission’s head, retired Major General Giora Eiland, handed in the 150-page Eliand Commission report on the 12th of July to the Chief of Staff Leiutenant General Gaby Ashkenazi. The official summary found that  the  actions of soldiers who killed 9 IHH members was justified in the circumstances, despite some failings in planning, intelligence and co-ordination. The report also cites the lack of anticipation of armed resistance by the IHH operatives as a serious failing, and praised the commandos who rappelled onto the main ship from helicopters saying that they “operated properly, with professionalism, bravery and resourcefulness”.

The IDF also recently declassified a detailed video timeline of the raid. The video timeline, embedded with recorded video footage, outlines in detail the original takeover plan, as well and how the IDF reacted to the events as they unfolded. Clear video footage is shown of the commandos being beaten as they boarded the Turkish Mavi Marmara ferry, as well as the further attacks that occurred to soldiers  once on board. It also demonstrated the great effort that the IDF took to avoid using life fire, only using it  in clear life-threatening situations.

The video also explains in detail how the IDF commander discovered that 3 of their soldiers were missing,  their abduction by violent demonstrators, as well as the non-lethal fire used to secure the abducted soldiers.

The declassified video can be viewed below.

Availability of information

Israeli officials have confirmed to talkgaza.com that they were unofficially referring journalists to the danish institute studies piece, the US virginia court document and the declassified 1996 CIA document several days prior to the arrival of the flotilla. Journalists have confirmed to us that this public document was also being circulated to them by the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs at least 5 days before the incident.

A number of journalists were also referred by various official sources to the few news articles that did discuss IHH days before the incident. Not particularly much attention seems to have been payed to it by the mainstream media. IHH’s involvement in the Flotilla was very public and the information on them was equally public. The real question seems to be, why were the media so caught up in their framing of this as an aid convoy and bashing Israel that no one in the independent mainstream media did a proper background check into IHH? A simple Google search would have been enough, and indeed this is that was done by those who did start talking about IHH early on.

The timing of the official statement

Official statements are obviously not made before an incidents occurs. As the information was available, officials tried to point journalists to it, and the invovlement of IHH in the Flotilla was widely advertised by IHH itself. Any journalists doing their job properly would have had ample opportunity to find and write about this connection before the incident or in its immediate aftermath. The fact that it was only Israel’s official statement that forced the media to consider IHH, raises important questions about the role of the media and their distrust of government and Israel when compared to their trust and use of statements, without qualification, from groups like the Flotilla organisers. This issue also arose in videos the Israeli government released which were published by news media with captions stating they could not be independently verified. When major news organizations accept video footage from the public and then use it without disclaimer, such bias is cause for concern.

The ballad

It moves from the detailed level, where the narrative of the Israeli soldiers, surrounded and under attack was almost entirely wiped out, to the double standard applied to Israel as a whole as attention is diverted from far more pressing international matters such as Sudan and North Korea. The song expresses the frustration Israelis feel, treated unfairly by the world, surrounded by hostility, and with even well meaning friends failing to see and appreciate the existential threat Israel and her citizens face.

The also includes a shout out to Gilad, the kidnapped Israeli solider Gilad Shalit who on June 25th 2010 will have spent four years in captivity. He has been denied even the those basic rights demanded by the 4th Geneva convention. The Flotilla itself refused to ensure a letter form his parents would reach him, instead offering to hand such a letter to the Red Cross, a pointless exercise as Hamas have denied the Red Cross access to Gilad Shalit  (in violation of international law).

The song’s chorus highlights Israel’s stubborn refusal to join the collective craziness, its refusal to bow to terrorism, and ultimately its refusal to fall. It echos the classic protests songs of the past, and shows the defiance of a small country, surrounded by hostility, fighting for its very survival. In capturing the Israeli feeling in response to the hypocrisy driven by the media and countries like Iran, the song perhaps explains why further attempts to bully Israel, rather than start responding to Israel’s concerns and problems like Shalit’s captivity, are like to be catastrophic.

Lyrics: Guy “Ruff” Gabriel, Shai “SHI 360″ Haddad
Music, production, mix and mastering: Avishay “Evish” Sapir
Credit to http://www.youtube.com/democast for some of the shots.

Lyrics:
Chorus x 2:
When the world’s gone lost
We’re gonna help you find the way
Too much drama in my eyes that I can’t hide
When the world’s gone lost
I don’t plan to fall with it

Verse 1 – Ruff:
I’m on the wrong side of the map, activists with knifes got me trapped
Surrounded by hostility, trying not to react
Flotillas of hatred, ‫we’re‬ caught in the matrix
I’m trying to survive, they’re pulling the same tricks
This international hypocrisy won’t get us far
One-sided media puts us behind bars
Nations with no minorities, judging ‫with no‬ authority
They’re gonna tell me how to deal with what’s in front of me
What about Sudan and North Korea? Could they care less?!
They wanna boycott us, they’re gonna share less
We’re lying on the fence for the rest of the world
Provide a buffer zone ‫while‬ overseas they get us sold
I know my people can be divided at times
Got too many opinions with too much shit on our minds
You can hate us now, we ain’t gonna fight it
You’re only making us stronger and more united

Chorus:
When the world’s gone lost
We’re gonna help you find the way
Too much drama in my eyes that I can’t hide
When the world’s gone lost
I don’t plan to fall with it

Verse 2 – SHI 360:
‏But I‪’‬m already home and the media distorts your vision
‏Got blind followers here in full submission
‏Provocateurs,‬ they just wanna instigate
‏And create the image you love to hate
‏You can talk about humanitarian aid
‏Politically affiliated IHH
‏Guess who’s more popular? Erodgan
‏Fuck left and right‪,‬ we should all stand as one
‏You really thought we were gonna let ‪’e‬m in?
‏When yesterday they tried to bring Karine
‏A – was that aid or to arm Jihad?
‏Wanna talk about aid‪?‬ What about Gilad‪?‬
‏Because the horse is trojan, doors not open
‏I gotta do whatever to protect my home and
‏I‪’‬m a peace dealer,  my flow killa
‏But no peace came at me on the flotilla

Chorus x 2:
When the world’s gone lost
We’re gonna help you find the way
Too much drama in my eyes that I can’t hide
When the world’s gone lost
I don’t plan to fall with it

The Song: Only Israel

• A Danish Institute for International Studies report in 2006 said IHH was one of many “charitable front groups that provide support to Al-Qaida” and the global jihad.
• A French intelligence report shows that IHH transferred money, “caches of firearms, knives and pre-fabricated explosives” to Muslim fighters in various countries.
• A 1996 examination of IHH telephone records revealed repeated calls to al Qaeda and Algerian terrorists operating in Europe.
  
• In 1996 the U.S. government identified IHH connections to extremist groups in Iran and Algeria.
• In December 1997, Turkish authorities initiated a domestic criminal investigation of IHH, and a search of IHH’s Istanbul bureau which uncovered a large assortment of firearms, explosives, bomb-making instructions, and a “jihad flag.”
• A US Court case in 2003 cites expert testimony that, “The IHH is… a type of cover-up in order to obtain forged documents and also to obtain different forms of infiltration for Mujahideen in combat. And also to go and gather these Mujahideens. And finally, one of the last responsibilities that they had was also to be implicated or involved in weapons trafficking.”

IHH has declared it will send further flotillas to run the blockade.

The Wall Street Journal has reported that “Members of… IHH, distinguished themselves from other activists involved in the aid mission by a willingness to fight… The nine activists known to have been killed in the clash on board the IHH-owned Mavi Marmara were members of or volunteers for the group”.

The Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center (an NGO) has three reports on the incident. In the first they note that  “During the voyage the passengers of the Mavi Marmara, especially the hard core of IHH operatives, were indoctrinated by senior figures… [before the incident] in addition to organizing and preparing weapons, the operatives on the upper deck shouted battle cries to incite those who were expected to take part in the premeditated violent confrontation with the IDF.”

In their second report they note that “…the activists on board the Mavi Marmara publicly  expressed their readiness to die on board the ship as shaheeds (martyrs for the sake of Allah). Their statements provided additional proof that some of the passengers, especially the hard core of IHH operatives, had prepared for a violent confrontation with the IDF forces (one operative described it as preparing for battle).”

The third report is about IHH itself, they note that “in practice, besides its legitimate humanitarian activities, IHH supports radical Islamic terrorist networks. In recent years it has prominently supported Hamas (through the Union of Good [a listed terrorist organization])… in the past IHH provided logistical support and funding to global jihad networks.”

Dec 07 2009 -In an interview with this newspaper last week, UN human rights commissioner Navi Pillay from South Africa referred to “propaganda which portrayed the [UN Human Rights] council as biased and a venue for bashing Israel”. Propaganda? Not really. The human rights council in Geneva, dominated by vanguards in human rights such as Libya, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, is almost obsessed with Israel’s alleged misconduct. Yet it overlooks, or downplays, crimes committed by Hamas and other terrorist groups. The council’s one-sided resolution on the Goldstone report speaks volumes. Irish Times

The Goldstone report -Richard Goldstone seems to use interviews to chip away at the legitimacy of his own work. He told the Forward that nothing he uncovered in Gaza is credible enough to be admissible in court. Commentary magazine, Haaretz

June 17 2010  – U.N. Equates the “Nakba” to the Holocaust – The Atlantic

June 29 2009 -In May, the UN came out with a report accusing Israel of “negligence or recklessness” in the Gaza war.  UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said he would seek compensation from Israel for damages numbering at $11 million to UN facilities.  Led by Ian Martin, former head of human rights group Amnesty International, the UN inquiry cited that Israel was at fault for nine incidents of damage to UN property. Front page magazine

JULY 14, 1999 – The treatment of Israel by the United Nations -prepared testimony of Ambassador Morris B. Abram before the House Committee on International Relations  UNWatch

14 June 2010 – UN Watch Testimony“Agenda Item 7: Human rights situation in
Palestine & other occupied Arab territories” Delivered by Hillel Neuer, UNWatch

December 5, 2007 -Forsaking Israel -The 2007 U.N Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People follows past National review online

April 22, 2008 -  No Room at the U.N. Inn Durban II is going to make Durban I look like a picnic. Three quarters of the entire opening day was spent on one subject — an Iranian-driven attempt to deny participatory rights or accreditation to the nongovernmental organization called the Canadian Council for Israel and Jewish Advocacy. Their crime? Algeria was concerned about Jewish money, or “their sources of funding.” The Palestinian observer complained the NGO supported Israeli settlements and no NGO supporting an illegal activity could be involved in Durban II. With Libya acting as the meeting’s chair, Iran as a vice chair, and Cuba as rapporteur, nobody thought to mention the criminals sitting on the Preparatory Committee (or PrepCom) itself. NATIONAL REVIEW ONLINE

The committee will include three members and two international observers and will tackle the legality of the blockade of Gaza and the legality of the navy’s actions. The committee will also try to determine whether investigations of claims of war crimes and breaches of international law conform to the Western standards. Haaretz

The Turkel committee is due to meet on Wednesday for the first time. In this first meeting the committee members will be able to meet one another  for the first time and discus their desired work method. Haaretz

In a statement the White house spokesman said  that “Israel has a military justice system that meets international standards and is capable of conducting a serious and credible investigation,” . Haaretz

The members of the committee are:

Chairman, Jacob Turkel, 75 – He is a former Israeli Supreme Court justice, retired from the bench in 2005, and still sits on a military court appeals panel. Turkel is an expert in civil law, and was described as conservative. Haaretz

Shabtai Rosenne, 93 -Prof. Shabtai Rosenne was born in England. He was awarded the 1960 Israel Prize for Jurisprudence and the 2004 Hague Prize for International Law.He served as a legal adviser in the Foreign Ministry  of Israel from 1948-1967. Prof. Rosenne represented Israel in many international conferences and the Israeli government in cases before the International Court of Justice. Rosenne is a highly respected figure in international law and marine law.

Amos Horev, 86 – Maj. Gen. (res. ) Amos Horev joined the Haganah at age 14 and in 1941 was one of the first to join the Palmach. During the War of Independence he served in a number of command positions.Between 1954  and 1966 he was the head of the IDF’s Armaments Division. Horev was also the Technion’s president for a decade and continues to serve in senior advisory roles for the defense establishment.

Observer, David Trimble, 65 (Northern Ireland)  – David Trimble won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1998 for his role in the peace agreement in Northern Ireland. He served in the British parliament for 15 years and since 2006 has served in the Upper House. In 1995 he became the leader of the UUP and agreed to join the talks which led to the disarming of the IRA and its entering mainstream politics in Northern Ireland. ynet

Observer Ken Watkin, 56 (Canada)- Watkin served as legal adviser to the Canadian Navy, which is expected to come in handy in the current case. He also has a deep knowledge of combat against non-state actors and terrorists, and therefore expected to understand Israel’s position. Watkin who retired from the Canadian army two months ago, served for four years as JAG.

 read more in the article in the Haaretz