It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
From 1993 to 2005, Hamas carried out many suicide bombings in Israel, killing many Israeli civilians. A 2007 study of Palestinian suicide bombings during the second intifada (September 2000 through August 2005) found that 39.9 percent of the suicide attacks were carried out by Hamas
Originally posted by JohnnyElohim
In fact, if you read the above very carefully, you'll find this snippet:
103. If the civilian population of the blockaded territory is inadequately provided with food and other objects essential for its survival, the blockading party must provide for free passage of such foodstuffs and other essential supplies, subject to:
(a) the right to prescribe the technical arrangements, including search, under which such passage is permitted; and
(b) the condition that the distribution of such supplies shall be made under the local supervision of a Protecting Power or a humanitarian organization which offers guarantees of impartiality, such as the International Committee of the Red Cross.
Which indicates that the blockading belligerent must allow passage of the vessel after applying reasonable conditions (i.e., search). It does not say that the blockading belligerent may confiscate the goods and deliver them on it's own.
103. If the civilian population of the blockaded territory is inadequately provided with food and other objects essential for its survival
The document below is a detailed breakdown of humanitarian aid to the Gaza Strip in 2009-2010. The statistics include the amount of trucks and tons of aid imported in each year, as well as what goods were imported into the Strip.
2009: 30,894 trucks and 738,576 tons of aid imported into Gaza
2010 (as of June 3rd): 11,972 trucks and 287,110 tons of aid imported into Gaza
Originally posted by makeitso
Partially correct.
The San Remo manual does address acceptable methods of blockades by sea in general, and the Gaza blockade appears to be in compliance with these rules.
Originally posted by lee anoma
Only the UN, as well as various humanitarian groups say it isn't.
So again, if the blockade isn't legal neither is enforcing it.
- Lee
Originally posted by makeitso
That appears to be incorrect.
The manual says; "The parties to an armed conflict".
Not "Two States at war".
That also appears to be incorrect.
The manual states that it is prohibited if; "it has the sole purpose of starving the civilian population"
That does not appear to be the sole purpose of the Gaza blockade.
'The idea is to put the Palestinians on a diet, but not to make them die of hunger,
- Dov Weisglass, adviser to then-Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert
Gaza on brink of implosion as aid cut-off starts to bite - Salon.com
...insufficient food and medicine is reaching Gazans, producing a further deterioration of the mental and physical health of the entire civilian population since Israel launched Operation Cast Lead against the territory,
The rapporteur noted that building materials necessary to repair the damage resulting from the heavy bombardment and artillery assaults could not enter Gaza. He also blamed the blockade for continued breakdowns of the electricity and sanitation systems due to the Israeli refusal to let spare parts needed for repair get through the crossings. U.N. Report - U.N.org
(b) the damage to the civilian population is, or may be expected to be, excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated from the blockade.
103. If the civilian population of the blockaded territory is inadequately provided with food and other objects essential for its survival, the blockading party must provide for free passage of such foodstuffs and other essential supplies, subject to:
That also appears to be incorrect.
Article 33 says that; Collective penalties are prohibited.
By collective punishment, the drafters of the Geneva Conventions had in mind the reprisal killings of World Wars I and World War II. In the First World War, Germans executed Belgian villagers in mass retribution for resistance activity. In World War II, Nazis carried out a form of collective punishment to suppress resistance. Entire villages or towns or districts were held responsible for any resistance activity that took place there. The conventions, to counter this, reiterated the principle of individual responsibility.
No protected person may be punished for an offence he or she has not personally committed.
Additionally, United Nations Security Council Resolution 1860 does not address or have the words "collective punishment" in it.
Stressing that the situation in Gaza was not sustainable, the Council re‑emphasized the importance of the full implementation of resolutions 1850 (2008) and 1860 (2009). In that context, it reiterates its grave concern at the humanitarian situation in Gaza and stresses the need for sustained and regular flow of goods and people to Gaza as well as unimpeded provision and distribution of humanitarian assistance throughout Gaza.
Security Council Condemns Acts Resulting in Civilian Deaths during Israeli Operation
This can also be deduced by reading the statement of the U.N. Security Council on the matter. It does not claim that any law was broken. As high profile as this was, we can be sure if it thought a law had been broken, they would have written that in their statement.
Originally posted by makeitso
Originally posted by lee anoma
Only the UN, as well as various humanitarian groups say it isn't.
So again, if the blockade isn't legal neither is enforcing it.
- Lee
Only Humanitarian groups don't hold the force of law.
The U.N. does not say its illegal.
The Manual is not a binding document. In view of the extent of uncertainty in the law, the experts decided that it was premature to embark on diplomatic negotiations to draft a treaty on the subject.
Originally posted by Lemon.Fresh
reply to post by lee anoma
Hamas is the elected government of Gaza. In being so, they represent the state. What you are trying to imply is that it is like the Democrats fought in WW2, so the US was technically not involved.
Preposterous.
“Hamas is not a state. Hamas is a terrorist organization,”
- Barrack Obama on his disagreement with Carters Hamas meeting
Originally posted by clay2 baraka
reply to post by lee anoma
The San Remo argument is a red herring
as it is not actually a treaty, but a series of non-binding recommendations:
The Manual is not a binding document. In view of the extent of uncertainty in the law, the experts decided that it was premature to embark on diplomatic negotiations to draft a treaty on the subject.
www.icrc.org...
The latest information we have is that the MV Rachel Corrie is headed full speed toward Gaza escorted by Turkish warplanes. Please stay tuned to Mantiq al-Tayr for further updates.
Originally posted by ulsterman
reply to post by PuterMan
They were told not to go, so dont go.
what are these people tryin to prove