http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704535004575349031510961398.htmlWSJ said:The U.S. is trying to mediate a continuing clash between two of its key allies in the region over who should accept primary guilt—Israel, or the Istanbul-based charity known as IHH, the Humanitarian Relief Foundation. Turkey says it will cut ties with Israel if it doesn't accept an international investigation of the deaths or issue an official apology. Mr. Netanyahu has declined.
Israel says the IHH is a jihadi front with links to Hamas, which Israel lists as a terrorist organization. It says the group set out with the flotilla in late May with the specific goal of forcing a confrontation that would trigger international pressure on Israel to end its blockade of the Gaza strip.
While the video footage shows that on every verifiable point, the IDF has spoken the truth, while the initial claims from IHH and its supporters are shown to be complete..lies.In the five weeks since Israeli commandos boarded a Gaza-bound aid flotilla on May 31, sparking a clash that left nine dead, an accumulation of video footage, witness testimony and reports has fleshed out a narrative that shows both sides fueled the bloodshed.
That's been my impression since the beginning, until I read the last paragraph of the WSJ article, describing two ISF soldiers kicking someone apparently lying on the deck, one then firing "several shots toward the ground from his rifle at point-blank range."arildno said:While the video footage shows that on every verifiable point, the IDF has spoken the truth, while the initial claims from IHH and its supporters are shown to be complete..lies.
This may or may not be true in this specific case, I have no idea. While Turkish governments have harassed independent forensic experts by bringing lawsuits against them, there is reason to think that in most cases justice has prevailed: http://sites.nationalacademies.org/PGA/humanrights/PGA_051791arildno said:1. A Turkish forensic report is of minimal value, since the doctors would have been killed by their atrocious government if they made a report that clearly contradicted what the Official Version was supposed to look like.
I googled it; it is available here: http://www.richardsilverstein.com/tikun_olam/2010/06/10/idf-executed-mavi-marmara-victims/2. Furethermore, and crucial:
Where is this video of the to IDF soldiers purportedly emptying their rifles behind some obstacle?
I haven't seen it anywhere.
The WSJ article is about a flotilla, or a group of ships, that was organized to protest the Israeli blockade of Gaza. It highlights the clashes and tensions that occurred between the flotilla activists and Israeli forces.
The flotilla was significant because it brought attention to the ongoing conflict in Gaza and the humanitarian crisis caused by the blockade. It also sparked debates about international law, the use of force, and the role of activism in addressing political issues.
The main arguments presented in the WSJ article were that the flotilla activists were seeking to provoke a confrontation with Israeli forces, that Israel has a right to defend its borders, and that the flotilla was ultimately unsuccessful in breaking the blockade.
The controversy surrounding the WSJ article revolves around its portrayal of the flotilla activists as aggressors and its criticism of their actions. Some argue that the article neglects to mention the humanitarian issues in Gaza and the violence used by Israeli forces in response.
The role of media in covering political events like the flotilla is to provide accurate and unbiased reporting, presenting multiple perspectives and allowing readers to form their own opinions. It is important for media outlets to fact-check and provide context to avoid perpetuating biases or misinformation.