The Flotilla....IDF Actions Validated!

[Goober]

I expect the activist version of events is one sided, just like I expect the Israeli version of events to be one sided. Many people are only aware of the IDF version of events. In order to have a balanced viewpoint, people should consider both sides of the event , so I posted a link to a documentary made by one of the activists.

I am certain that the first video released by the IDF was highly edited and deliberately deceptive. The IDF released video does not show the events before the IDF soldiers were attacked or the subsequent events when the activists were killed. Without seeing all the evidence, its pretty hard to judge who did what to whom.

You have time and again stated the Israelis were lying- from day 1- Then they were cleared by the UN.

If you are looking for information which portrays Israel in the best possible light, try reading the news. My purpose is to post information not reported by the news or commented on by our political leaders.

The next time a major incident occurs involving Israel and one of their many adversaries, I recommend you evaluate the reporting. Did the news consult all sides equally? Does the report cast judgement? Does the report question the validity of Israeli claims.

If you had as much skepticism of our news and political leaders as you do of me, you might realize that our news and political leaders are not objective and are behaving like extensions of pro-Israel propaganda efforts.

So I'm not even saying you should believe what I wrote or my referenced links without skepticism. ON the contrary, I recommend you listen to all sides with equal levels of skepticism.

You have posted so called videos- articles etc that have time after time been shown to be shall we say - Bogus- While searching the underbelly of the Net for news- ensure the sources are credible.

 

[earth_as_one]

Baloney.

You can't see what the soldiers are kicking, but yeah, it is probably somebody. I guess they shouldn't attack them with knives, guns, and steel bars.

The "shooting" is farcical.............I am pretty familiar with every firearm used by any modern military, and THAT thing is none of them....no magazine, I have no idea what the soldier is doing with the weapon.....I strongly suspect it is a paintball gun....like the ones the guys had on the patrol boat in the former video that "proved" the Israelis fired first.

I can categorically tell you this....it is NOT any 9mm.

All the dead on the ship were killed with 9mm handguns.

The only long guns the Israelis had on board were paintball guns.

This vid is lies and BS.

Oh.....and the vid doesn't play, you need to search for it on youtube.

If I understand your rational, the IDF only .22 cal pistols, and since the firearm was obviously not a pistol it had to be a paintball or beanbag gun. The rifle is not a paintball gun:

(a) the stock is quite thin, indicating something with low recoil;
(b) there’s no large magazine visible (including a top-mounted paintball magazine, which is pretty easy to identify);
(c) the operator seems to be working a slide on the bottom of the weapon, and ejects at least one cartridge (indicating it’s not CO2 powered like a paintball gun);
(d) he works it four times at least, maybe five, while the weapon is pointing at the area they were kicking at before;
(e) the barrel is long and thin (could be the barrel itself or a sound suppressor); and
(f) he has a flashlight mounted on the left side of the receiver.

I'm pretty sure the IDF has more firearms in their arsenal than .22 cal handguns. Its possible the IDF used a silenced Ruger 10/22 .22-calibre bolt-action rifle with a modified stock.
http://www.btselem.org/firearms/20090301_use_of_ruger_rifle_in_demonstrations_prohibit

That said, its also possible the video is a fake, or deliberately manipulated and edited like the Israeli video.

I don't recall the news ever reporting more than the Israeli version of events. I think the activist version of events deserves as much consideration.... posting it here on this forum is a public service. If our MSM was fair and objective regarding this conflict and our leaders weren't supporting one side's war criminals, I wouldn't feel a need to fill the gap of missing information.

 

[Nuggler]

BINGO!!!!

They haven't yet figured this out.........flaming Islamists....I love it!

Sure; and now you tell'em.................jeez.8O

They propably had spies out everywhere trying to find an "in"...............an you and Petros let the chat outa the sac.

frig. who can ya trust

I think news media needs murder, meyhem, blood and guts to justify its existence. It's a sad state of affairs when feel-good won't sell a story

If it bleeds, it leads

 

[earth_as_one]

You have time and again stated the Israelis were lying- from day 1- Then they were cleared by the UN. .

I believe the term I used is deliberately deceptive. If the IDF wasn't deliberately deceptive, then they would have released all the video rather than a short edited version and left out the events before and after the IDF soldiers were attacked. Posting a few short scenes leaves out context. The fact that the IDF confiscated all that video and released so little leads me to believe the IDF has something to hide and has been deliberately deceptive.

Regarding the UN clearing the IDF's actions:

2 September 2011 – Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon today received the report of the independent panel of inquiry examining the May 2010 incident involving a flotilla headed for Gaza which found that Israel’s interception of the vessels was “excessive and unreasonable,” while the flotilla acted “recklessly” in attempting to breach the naval blockade. The four-member panel, headed by Geoffrey Palmer, the former New Zealand prime minister, was not designed to determine individual criminal responsibility.
Rather, it was tasked with making findings about the facts, circumstances and context of the 31 May incident, in which a convoy of humanitarian aid ships bound for Gaza after departing Turkey was intercepted by Israeli forces leading to the loss of life.
“The loss of life and injuries resulting from the use of force by Israeli forces during the take-over of the Mavi Marmara was unacceptable,” the panel stated, referring to one of the ships on which nine passengers were killed and many others seriously wounded.
It added that there was “significant mistreatment” of passengers by Israeli authorities after the take-over of the vessels had been completed through until their deportation, including physical mistreatment, harassment and intimidation, unjustified confiscation of belongings and the denial of timely consular assistance.
At the same time, the panel says that the Israeli naval blockade on Gaza was imposed as a “legitimate security measure” to prevent weapons from entering Gaza by sea and its implementation complied with the requirements of international law.
The flotilla acted “recklessly” in attempting to breach the naval blockade of Gaza, and that more could have been done to warn flotilla participants of the potential risks involved and to dissuade them from their actions, according to the report.
The panel makes a number of recommendations in its 105-page report, including that Israel should continue with its efforts to ease its restrictions on the movement of goods and people to and from Gaza, and that all humanitarian missions wishing to assist Gaza’s population should do so through established procedures.
“The events of 31 May 2010 should never have taken place as they did and strenuous efforts should be made to prevent the occurrence of such incidents in the future,” states the panel.
http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=39443

Basically the UN cleared the IDF of piracy.

Its always been my position that:

1) Israel has a right to impose an arms embargo against Gaza.
Israel has no right to interfere with international food and medical humanitarian aid. They have a right to inspect for contraband only.

2) The IDF has a right to defend themselves and Israel.
The IDF doen't have the right to mistreat and abuse people... even people they don't like. The other boats in the flotilla surrendered passively and those activists only acted non violently. Yet they were still harassed, beaten, denied timely consular access and their possessions were illegally confiscated.

Its possible that the activists on the Mavi Marmara knew how the IDF was treating the other activists who had already surrendered and had acted passively and non-violently. That knowledge may have been a factor which caused some of them to find weapons of opportunity and defend themselves. Perhaps if the IDF acted with restraint from the beginning, the few activists on the Mavi Marmara who acted violently might have acted differently.

 

[lone wolf]

Maybe they have a death ray

 

[Goober]

I believe the term I used is deliberately deceptive. If the IDF wasn't deliberately deceptive, then they would have released all the video rather than a short edited version and left out the events before and after the IDF soldiers were attacked. Posting a few short scenes leaves out context. The fact that the IDF confiscated all that video and released so little leads me to believe the IDF has something to hide and has been deliberately deceptive.

Regarding the UN clearing the IDF's actions:

2 September 2011 – Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon today received the report of the independent panel of inquiry examining the May 2010 incident involving a flotilla headed for Gaza which found that Israel’s interception of the vessels was “excessive and unreasonable,” while the flotilla acted “recklessly” in attempting to breach the naval blockade. The four-member panel, headed by Geoffrey Palmer, the former New Zealand prime minister, was not designed to determine individual criminal responsibility.
Rather, it was tasked with making findings about the facts, circumstances and context of the 31 May incident, in which a convoy of humanitarian aid ships bound for Gaza after departing Turkey was intercepted by Israeli forces leading to the loss of life.
“The loss of life and injuries resulting from the use of force by Israeli forces during the take-over of the Mavi Marmara was unacceptable,” the panel stated, referring to one of the ships on which nine passengers were killed and many others seriously wounded.
It added that there was “significant mistreatment” of passengers by Israeli authorities after the take-over of the vessels had been completed through until their deportation, including physical mistreatment, harassment and intimidation, unjustified confiscation of belongings and the denial of timely consular assistance.
At the same time, the panel says that the Israeli naval blockade on Gaza was imposed as a “legitimate security measure” to prevent weapons from entering Gaza by sea and its implementation complied with the requirements of international law.
The flotilla acted “recklessly” in attempting to breach the naval blockade of Gaza, and that more could have been done to warn flotilla participants of the potential risks involved and to dissuade them from their actions, according to the report.
The panel makes a number of recommendations in its 105-page report, including that Israel should continue with its efforts to ease its restrictions on the movement of goods and people to and from Gaza, and that all humanitarian missions wishing to assist Gaza’s population should do so through established procedures.
“The events of 31 May 2010 should never have taken place as they did and strenuous efforts should be made to prevent the occurrence of such incidents in the future,” states the panel.
UN chief receives report of panel of inquiry into Gaza flotilla incident

Basically the UN cleared the IDF of piracy.

Its always been my position that:

1) Israel has a right to impose an arms embargo against Gaza.
Israel has no right to interfere with international food and medical humanitarian aid. They have a right to inspect for contraband only.

2) The IDF has a right to defend themselves and Israel.
The IDF doen't have the right to mistreat and abuse people... even people they don't like. The other boats in the flotilla surrendered passively and those activists only acted non violently. Yet they were still harassed, beaten, denied timely consular access and their possessions were illegally confiscated.

Its possible that the activists on the Mavi Marmara knew how the IDF was treating the other activists who had already surrendered and had acted passively and non-violently. That knowledge may have been a factor which caused some of them to find weapons of opportunity and defend themselves. Perhaps if the IDF acted with restraint from the beginning, the few activists on the Mavi Marmara who acted violently might have acted differently.

As I mentioned you had the Israeli's judged, convicted and sentenced based upon you hatred for Israel. You presume this, that and a hell of a lot. But always end up convicting Israel. You comb the depths of the net for news and video that is easily discredited. In your reply to Colpy you are now an expert on firearms.

You stated for years the blockade was illegal - yet the legal community - International Law showed it was legal. Countries actively supporting,providing monies, equipment, arms, ships for those that wish to break a blockade like Turkey has done well that is considered an Act of War.

 

[CDNBear]

The rifle is not a paintball gun:

Yes it is.

(a) the stock is quite thin, indicating something with low recoil;

Well that would rule out anything but a CO2 powered weapon.

(b) there’s no large magazine visible (including a top-mounted paintball magazine, which is pretty easy to identify);

You mean like these?

Or the preferred pepper ball riot gun of most law enforcement...

(c) the operator seems to be working a slide on the bottom of the weapon, and ejects at least one cartridge (indicating it’s not CO2 powered like a paintball gun);

Actually, it looks more like he's inserting a fresh CO2 cartridge. Since I unfamiliar with any standard military issue ammunition that is silver...

(e) the barrel is long and thin (could be the barrel itself or a sound suppressor); and

No. But it is a good indication that it's a high powered CO2 pepperball gun. See image one.

(f) he has a flashlight mounted on the left side of the receiver.

So? So do a lot of painball guns. See images 2 and 3.

That said, its also possible the video is a fake, or deliberately manipulated and edited like the Israeli video.

More like purposely being reported as something it isn't.

I don't recall the news ever reporting more than the Israeli version of events. I think the activist version of events deserves as much consideration.... posting it here on this forum is a public service.

That's funny, since I first heard the IDF was using what appeared to be "Uzi's" on the CBC, CTV and an online news service.

If our MSM was fair and objective regarding this conflict and our leaders weren't supporting one side's war criminals, I wouldn't feel a need to fill the gap of missing information.

I think your perception is off.

 

[earth_as_one]

Yes I do research. If I write about something, I'd like to have an informed opinion.

So you tell me why you believe the IDF confiscated all the video and aren't releasing 99.9% of it? I can understand obscuring the identities of the IDF soldiers for security reasons... But if they have nothing to hide then they should have released all the video. Just releasing the parts where the activists behaved violently and not releasing the rest is obviously deliberately deceptive. But I have an open mind. Tell me why you think the IDF's version of events is the whole truth and nothing but the truth? Is that based on their history of always being honest?

 

[CDNBear]

So you tell me why you believe the IDF confiscated all the video and aren't releasing 99.9% of it?

If they confiscated all of it, how do you know exactly how much they have or haven't released?

 

[earth_as_one]

Its sort of like if someone breaks into your home and steals everything of value. Most people would have a pretty good idea of what they lost.

IN the same way, the reporters and other people on this flotilla know what the IDF illegally confiscated.

 

[Colpy]

If I understand your rational, the IDF only .22 cal pistols, and since the firearm was obviously not a pistol it had to be a paintball or beanbag gun. The rifle is not a paintball gun:

(a) the stock is quite thin, indicating something with low recoil;
(b) there’s no large magazine visible (including a top-mounted paintball magazine, which is pretty easy to identify);
(c) the operator seems to be working a slide on the bottom of the weapon, and ejects at least one cartridge (indicating it’s not CO2 powered like a paintball gun);
(d) he works it four times at least, maybe five, while the weapon is pointing at the area they were kicking at before;
(e) the barrel is long and thin (could be the barrel itself or a sound suppressor); and
(f) he has a flashlight mounted on the left side of the receiver.

I'm pretty sure the IDF has more firearms in their arsenal than .22 cal handguns. Its possible the IDF used a silenced Ruger 10/22 .22-calibre bolt-action rifle with a modified stock.
1 March 2009: B'Tselem demands that judge advocate general prohibit use of Ruger rifle to disperse demonstrators | B'Tselem

That said, its also possible the video is a fake, or deliberately manipulated and edited like the Israeli video.

I don't recall the news ever reporting more than the Israeli version of events. I think the activist version of events deserves as much consideration.... posting it here on this forum is a public service. If our MSM was fair and objective regarding this conflict and our leaders weren't supporting one side's war criminals, I wouldn't feel a need to fill the gap of missing information.

The IDF carry 9mm pistols, not .22 cal......

A Ruger 10/22, of which I own one and have fired many, is NOT a bolt-action (it is semi-automatic)......and the item in question is most definitely NOT a Ruger 10/22, nor any of its variants

The fatalities on the Mavi were NOT killed with .22 caliber weapons. They were killed with 9mms.

 

[earth_as_one]

According to wiki, the activists were shot with a variety of lethal weapons.

...eight of the nine killed had died of 9mm gunshot wounds, with one death from an unnamed atypical round. Five had gunshot wounds to the head and at least four were shot from both back and front.[13][19] According to the UNHRC report, six were the victims of "summary executions", including two shot after they were severely injured.[121]
Gaza flotilla raid - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The exact details of who did what to whom are somewhat fuzzy.

If the IDF never violated any laws and only defended themselves, then all that confiscated video footage proving the IDF behaved properly would have been released by now. The fact that they are withholding all that video indicates they aren't proud of the contents. The fact that the IDF has only released highly edited snippets indicates they are being deliberately deceptive.

The IDF has no right to unnecessarily assault people. But they are allowed to defend themselves and Israel by all means necessary.

When people resist by non-lethal means, the IDF should not respond with lethal force. IN the long term that encourages activists to escalate to violent and/or lethal means of resistance. I would agree that the IDF is 100% justified to meet lethal force with lethal force.

In the case of the Mavi Mara, some activists used lethal means to resist. Tying a helicopter off to the ship was a lethal form of resistance. When the IDF commandos came down, the activists used potentially lethal forms of resistance (knives, iron bars, sticks with nails and so on). The activists escalated the conflict first and therefore I do not blame IDF soldiers for using lethal means to defend themselves.

But once the activists were subdued and they were no longer a threat, the IDF had no right to continue to assault (or execute as claimed by the activists) subdued activists.

I suspect since the IDF is not releasing all the video, because not all the activists were killed during the struggle. Not releasing the video probably means that some activists were executed after they were subdued. But that's unproven.

Regardless, the existing evidence supports activist claims that many were unnecessarily assaulted and beaten... not just on the Mavi Marmara, but on the other ships where the activists did not offer "violent" resistance. People were tasered, had their heads stomped on and arms broken. Only a few activists on the Mavi Marmara took part in the assault on the IDF soldiers. The majority did not participate and hid below deck. Yet most passengers on the Mavi Marmara were harassed, beaten and subjected to degrading treatment, including those who risked their lives to give IDF soldiers first aid.

 

[Goober]

Its sort of like if someone breaks into your home and steals everything of value. Most people would have a pretty good idea of what they lost.

IN the same way, the reporters and other people on this flotilla know what the IDF illegally confiscated.

Most people have no idea of the contents of their house in the event of fire or break in. Poor analogy.

So where does this information come from that Israel withheld 99.9 % of the video?

Link and proof please.

 

[CDNBear]

Link and proof please.

Ditto.

 

[Goober]

According to wiki, the activists were shot with a variety of lethal weapons.
.

http://www.un.org/News/dh/infocus/middle_east/Gaza_Flotilla_Panel_Report.pdf

Wiki is not a credible site. Have to do better.

Do you think Israel receives fair and equitable treatment from the UN Human Rights -Office of the Commissioner?

UN independent experts criticize conclusion in Palmer Report that Gaza blockade is legal - UNHCHR press release (13 September 2011)

International law
Israel, as a State Party to many of the international human rights conventions, continues to bear responsibility for implementing its human rights obligations in the Occupied Palestinian Territory. The International Court of Justice, United Nations human rights treaty bodies and special procedures, and successive High Commissioners for Human Rights have consistently confirmed that international human rights law and international humanitarian law apply concurrently in all of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.

Mr. Richard Falk, Special rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the occupied Palestinian territory, stressed that “The Palmer report was aimed at political reconciliation between Israel and Turkey. It is unfortunate that in the report politics should trump the law.” Mr. Falk continued, “the most questionable move of the Palmer Panel was to separate the naval blockade from the overall closure of Gaza to a normal supply of humanitarian supplies, including supplies needed for medical operations and sanitation. The flotilla incident was about the effort to circumvent this aspect of Israeli policies, and the organizers posed no objection to inspection carried out to prevent weapons from entering Gaza.”

http://blog.unwatch.org/index.php/category/richard-falk/

http://blog.unwatch.org/index.php/2...un-chief-richard-falk-lashes-out-at-un-watch/

28 January 2011
Statement by Richard Falk, on recent personal attacks

GENEVA – UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Palestinian territories occupied since 1967, Mr. Richard Falk, on Friday flatly denied recent allegations by a lobby group that “he had endorsed the conspiracy theory that the 9/11 terrorist attacks were orchestrated by the U.S. Government and not Al Qaeda terrorists,” and expressed surprise and regret at the ensuing strong personal attacks made on his integrity.

“The pro-Israel group, UN Watch, that created this mess deliberately distorted comments I made, in my personal capacity, on my blog,” Falk said. “Not only that, they then deliberately connected it to my UN mandate on the Palestinian territories, and on that basis started calling for me to be fired from that position.”


http://blog.unwatch.org/index.php/2...falk-in-un-debate-for-911-inside-job-remarks/

Mr. Falk, why does your report fail to address the terrorism perpetrated by Hamas and other Palestinian terror organizations? The only reference to Hamas is in paragraph 18, where its members are described as victims.

We note that on March 9, 2010, the Palestinian news agency Ma’an quoted you as saying that the Palestinian Authority formally asked you to resign, citing the fact, as you put it, “that I’m a partisan of Hamas.”

We are concerned that your justifications for Hamas are integrally related to a broader pattern and practice in your work when it comes to terrorism, conflicting with the applicable Code of Conduct.

 

[earth_as_one]

My opinion is more or less the same as the conclusions drawn by the UN Report:

1) There was “significant mistreatment” of passengers by Israeli authorities after the take-over of the vessels had been completed through until their deportation, including physical mistreatment, harassment and intimidation, unjustified confiscation of belongings and the denial of timely consular assistance.

2) The Israeli naval blockade on Gaza was imposed as a “legitimate security measure” to prevent weapons from entering Gaza by sea and its implementation complied with the requirements of international law.


3) The flotilla acted “recklessly” in attempting to breach the naval blockade of Gaza, and that more could have been done to warn flotilla participants of the potential risks involved and to dissuade them from their actions, according to the report.



I agree with the above conclusions.


I disagree with Israel's blockade/interference of international humanitarian aid. Israel can only inspect food and medical aid for contraband.


I agree that Israel had the right to board these ships and force them to an Israeli controlled port so they could be inspected for contraband. Once the flotilla was screened, they should be sent on their way to Gaza, with no stops in between. If these two groups were less adversarial, Israel could also have their agents inspect the flotilla before departure and then escort the flotilla directly to Gaza.

 

[Goober]

My opinion is more or less the same as the conclusions drawn by the UN Report:

1) There was “significant mistreatment” of passengers by Israeli authorities after the take-over of the vessels had been completed through until their deportation, including physical mistreatment, harassment and intimidation, unjustified confiscation of belongings and the denial of timely consular assistance.

2) The Israeli naval blockade on Gaza was imposed as a “legitimate security measure” to prevent weapons from entering Gaza by sea and its implementation complied with the requirements of international law.


3) The flotilla acted “recklessly” in attempting to breach the naval blockade of Gaza, and that more could have been done to warn flotilla participants of the potential risks involved and to dissuade them from their actions, according to the report.



I agree with the above conclusions.


I disagree with Israel's blockade/interference of international humanitarian aid. Israel can only inspect food and medical aid for contraband.


I agree that Israel had the right to board these ships and force them to an Israeli controlled port so they could be inspected for contraband. Once the flotilla was screened, they should be sent on their way to Gaza, with no stops in between. If these two groups were less adversarial, Israel could also have their agents inspect the flotilla before departure and then escort the flotilla directly to Gaza.

They could have shipped the aid to Israel and 9 people would still be alive- That was not the point of IHH and of the Turkish Govt.They were both complicit in attempting to run a legal blockade- They are both complicit in the deaths of these people- But Turkey only blames Israel- If you go looking for a fight and get injured you then complain-
Just another example of how Israel is targeted by many people- but these self same people turn a blind eye to Terror groups.

 

[CDNBear]

I disagree with Israel's blockade/interference of international humanitarian aid.

Israel doesn't block humanitarian aid, so long as it is from a recognized aid organization.

 

[earth_as_one]

Recognized by who? Israel? That's a joke. Israel even interferes with medical supplies sent into Gaza by the World Health Organization. Here's their statement:

Right to Health compromised by blockade
The Gaza blockade has affected the functioning and development of the health care system in a number
of ways. Health care has been hindered by restrictions on importation of medical supplies, equipment
and spare parts; limitations on movement of patients and health staff; interruptions of power supply and
impurities of water supply; insecurity and the permit regime limiting access of Palestinians to health
services as well as of the professional development of staff.

The Right to Health is comprised of four essential, inter-related elements: availability, accessibility,
acceptability and quality of facilities, goods and services.

Humanitarian access out of Gaza for critically ill
Erez checkpoint is not open 24 hours, 7 days per week, despite the fact that it serves 1.6 million people as
the main humanitarian access route for the critically ill. The partial operating hours mean that patients
may not exit Gaza for treatment after 2:30 pm, or on Fridays after 12:30 pm or on Saturdays. Exceptional
access for critically ill patients requires considerable time for coordination with Israeli officials and can
delay emergency treatment by at least two hours.

Ambulance transfers out of Gaza require special Israeli coordination. If the transfer occurs outside regular
Erez opening hours, the required Israeli procedures are lengthy and unpredictable. They take a minimum
of 5 hours. This is not compatible with a patient’s rights to unimpeded humanitarian access.

Shortages of Essential Medicines and Disposables
June 2012, the Ministry of Health (MoH) in Gaza central pharmacy stores report 42% of essential
medications are at zero stock, with an additional 13% at low levels sufficient for less than 3 months. The
MoH can no longer supply patients with drugs for severely debilitating chronic diseases such as multiple
sclerosis or first-line antibiotics at primary health clinic level. At hospital level, shortages have affected
oncology treatment, surgeries and dialysis.
Chronic drug and disposable shortages have been reported in Gaza since 2006, caused primarily by
political divisions between the West Bank and Gaza and exacerbated by the blockade on Gaza. More
recently shortages have increased due to financial shortfalls in the Palestinian Authority budget. Patients
now frequently purchase many medications from private pharmacies or seek donations from charities.
Patients with life-threatening diseases or chronic disease who need maintenance medications, and poor
and elderly patients, are especially affected and may risk disease complications by foregoing treatment.
The need to obtain prior Israeli approval for importing drugs and medical supplies into Gaza mean receipt
is delayed by several months. The MoH is not permitted to send medical equipment for repair, nor to
return expired or surplus medical material


Attack on Gaza, December 27, 2008 – January 18, 2009
At least 1,300 persons were killed in the 22 days of sustained Israeli attacks on Gaza at end 2008 and
January 2009. Patients with conflict-related injuries requiring specialized care outside Gaza were
evacuated exclusively through the Rafah border crossing into Egypt. During the Israeli attacks 15 out of 27
hospitals (56%) and 43 of 134 primary health care (PHC) clinics in Gaza were damaged (27 MoH, 7 UNRWA
and 9 NGO clinics). One damaged health facility is still under repair, work slowed as a result of the
difficulties obtaining building materials.

http://www.emro.who.int/images/stor..._Gaza_Blockade_and_Health_6_14_2012_FINAL.pdf

 

[Goober]

Most people have no idea of the contents of their house in the event of fire or break in. Poor analogy.

So where does this information come from that Israel withheld 99.9 % of the video?

Link and proof please.

EAO - BUMP- Answer please.