How has Israel acted unilaterally? Hamas declared war on Israel, Israel responded with a blockade to prevent arms reaching Hamas. Israel was forced to enforce the blockade, inside Israeli waters, whereupon the 'activists' on one of the six vessels embarked on a violent, unprovoked, premeditated attack on the boarding party. Any other navy would have stood off and sunk them. Grow up

The evidence is stacking up, even the Guardian is stating that the Flotilla was a crock of s-it, which was intended to provoke a violent response by breaking the laws of Israel. Hamas has not allowed the aid through, which demonstrates how vital it really must be...

This is a propaganda stunt, which worked a little too well... It exceeded their expectations and capacity to deal with, now watch the splashback as people realise they were fooled.

The language of reporting plays a
big part in how people are going
to perceive what is really happening.
For example, if "Jewish settlement"
changes to being called a "Jewish
neighbourhood," perception changes
from an illegally occupied land to
one of legitimacy.

Same, if Israeli violence is
described as "retaliation," the
term "retaliation" suggests a defensive
stance undertaken in response to
someone else's aggression. It also lays
responsibility for the cycle of violence
at the doorstep of the party being
"retaliated" against, since they
presumably initiated the conflict.

The result of these encroaching dishonesties
is the inability of some readerships to
understand the realities of settlment
expansion or the killing of civilians when
"targeted killings" occur.

These inherent bias against the Palestinians
and Israel's attempts to ensure that the
picture presented is of fighting a battle
inflicted opon them, rather than of their
own choosing, is critical to how the world
views the conflict.

The time has come for accountability, not
excuses.

Most assuredly, I have been calling for a full, impartial and credible, preferably Judicial investigation (Not the UN, we both know why) into what happened, the EXACT sequence of events, the precise time that everything happened, etc.

I personally have made no secret of the fact that I feel that this is a set-up, into which a lot of high profile, highly respected people have been co-opted, which at heart is nothing more than a propaganda stunt.

You obviously feel that the opposite is true and that is your right.

But I think that provided we BOTH want to get to the facts at the base of the entire event, we can work in a degree of harmony? I mean, both of us worship the truth over hysterical posturing, do we not?

There is certainly two sides to this, as there always is, and the truth will, while almost certainly favoring one side over the other, be somewhere between the subjective "truth" being pushed by both parties.

Can we agree to at least recognise that we BOTH want precisely the same thing? An impartial, Judicial Inquiry, conducted by someone trusted by both sides? I mean, even Al Jazeera is beginning to cast doubt over the entirety of the claims from the flotilla, so too is the Guardian Newspaper in the UK... That says something, because they very rarely criticise Arabs in this situation.

There is something here that smells awfully bad, I'd like to see the facts, identified as facts, not propaganda, laid out in the cold, hard light of reality (as only a Judicial Enquiry can do).

That they were in International waters is not relevant.
They were intent on sailing to a blockaded port.
That is all that in the end matters.

Piracy does not fit these circumstances.
Piracy is an act of theft action by criminals, not an action by a state.

>Israel does not have the right to act unilaterally.
It does in its own defence.

Unloading at the Gaza port may have exposed the Israeli or UN
officials to attack and UN officials may not have been acceptable.

Well they made the offer of the Israeli port and if the cargo was so
important, why didn't they accept the offer ?

Did they put their pride before those in dire need ?

Foxy,
You quoted somebody the other day as an expert.
What was his name again?
That's right, Charles Krauthammer.
This is what your expert, Charles Krauthammer had to say on this issue:
"The fundamental deception here is the use of the word humanitarian."
"There is no-one starving in Gaza."
"Israelis allow food and medicine everyday overland into Gaza."
"This was not about humanitarian aid."
"It was about breaking the blockade (to enable weapons to be taken into Gaza)."
"Egypt blockades Gaza from the west (but no-one has any problems with that)."
"Gaza is run by Hamas, a terror entity."
Please listen to the experts, Foxy.
Especially the one's whose expert status we can both agree upon,
otherwise the system starts to breakdown.

If this was a peaceable flotilla; why were the Israeli soldiers set upon with bars etc by a group of thugs? Why did these peace lovers initiate violence? Watch the footage of the boarding.