While Israel’s Turkel Commission Report and the UN Palmer Report differ on some key determinations, they do clearly overlap on three main conclusions pertaining to the May 31 incident on board the Mavi Marmara:
- Contrary to a mind-numbing number of accusations that Israel’s blockade of Gaza is “illegal” both reports conclude that the Naval blockade is fully consistent with international law, and that IDF Naval forces have the right to stop Gaza-bound ships in international waters.
- Contrary to reports that the IDF attacked peaceful activists, both reports concluded that when Israeli commandos boarded the main ship they faced “organized and violent resistance from a group of passengers” and were therefore required to use force for their own protection.
- The IHH sponsored flotilla, Mavi Marmara, “acted recklessly in attempting to breach the naval blockade.”
In the light of these established facts, I thought it would be interesting to take a look back at the Guardian’s obsessive coverage of the incident – which included 71 separate pieces (reports and commentary which were placed on their special Gaza Flotilla page) over the course of the first four days following the incident – and their frantic rush to judgement.
I’m sure we’re all certain that the omission has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that the Palmer Report’s findings wildly contradict the tone, tenor and editorial bias of the Guardian’s tendentious and simply obsessive coverage of the incident.