The Turkel Commission was not able to interrogate the passengers, who did not come before them. BUT, the Commission also did not cross-examined the SOLDIERS directly, it only accepted the IDF investigation, which is at best hearsay, and more likely - whitewash. Nobody can accept this, no matter how much PR effort is expended. Note that the Turks actually interrogated the survivors, real eye WITNESSES, so they have a better legal case. As far as the legality of stopping the Marmara, the UN's Human Rights Commission already submitted an analysis by independent jurists, which concluded it was illegal for two reasons I will not go into. At best, there will be an argument of experts. The UN (Ban) Commission will have to decide. I suspect they will either conclude illegality (I am choosing the independent opinion rather than the biased opinion of the Turkel people), or will refer the issue to the ICJ for the Court's legal advisory opinion. PR will not work here. Given that Israel has such a miserable reputation nowadays, it is possible the issue will be referred to the Hague. Would Obama the lawyer veto a resolution based on legal views? I wonder, but Turkey might do the referral on its own; this is allowed under ICC Charter.
State comptroller to PM: Focus on answering Gaza war report rather than criticizing it (Haaretz)
from the article: The report is good, the situation is bad
Quality of life, sane housing prices, incredible scenery and quiet have failed to lure many Israelis to settle there, while local Druze and Arabs are still more connected to their Syrian brethren.07:49 06.05.16 | 0 comments