yes, blockade is ok, raiding a ship in intl waters too... BUT ...the report says- the fatalities are NOT acceptable, israel did not explain the obvious executions... so, the report states: israel has to apologize for the execution(! - this the report says!) of the 9 passengers PLUS pay compensation, as it failed to apply appropriate, proportionate measures at EVERY STAGE of the raid !

Well then it was a joke from the start. It's job was to look at what happened and to decide who did what wrong. Now I dont agree with some of their conclusions, but If it's job was to make nice between Israel and Turkey, they should have set up a diplomatic mission, not a report.

sorry mate , but if the commission found Israel ''to blame'' it would have recommended an apology wouldn't it ...duh! The report is an astonishing vindication of Israel's position on Gaza on point after point. I've just been reading it. It will create a sh*tstorm of outrage around the world from the anti-Israel crowd.

simple connection between cause and effect leads me to think that. and if breaking the blockade is ilegal than israel had any right to stop it in the way it wants. not to mention that the IHH "activists"(= terrorists) came with weapons and attacked the IDF soldiers....

They were attacking the soldiers with iron bars and knives etc! Would it have been better had they been shot at long range? The report also contradicts itself, first it says that the IDF used excessive force, then it says that the Israeli forces encountered violent resistance that required the use of force. Oh, and hindsight is 20/20, it's easy to criticize after the fact, the report fails to take into account what happens during the heat of the moment.

I've been reading the report and it says nothing of the sort. Maybe you should read the full report and get back to us with the page number where it says Israel must apologise. Israel agreed that ''in light of the outcome'' Israel would express ''regret''.....expressing .''regret'that something happened is not the same as accepting blame for it.

As always, when something in Israel fails you find that Ehud Barak is responsible. Barak decided to send a tiny group of lightly armed soldiers so that the terrorists were not intimidated, an invitation to attack. Barak's stupidity made the terrorist attack, risked soldiers' lives and making the shooting inevitable. If Barak was not an idiot, the IDF would have sent in a large force of Yassam armed with clubs, tear gas and backed up by snipers. The event would have ended with badly-bruised hog-tied terrorists begging for mercy.

Please reread the article and then what you wrote. Your response in no way reflects the findings. Does this often happen to you?

...is not illegal, but it is a legal act of war. Example: in WWII the US and Japan set up various legal blockades in the Pacific and fought legal naval battles to break them. As a technical matter, anyone who engages in an act of war is NOT a civilian, whether they wear uniforms or not. Under international law a nation has no duty to protect the lives of non-civilians engaged in an act of war against it. I'm not saying Israel should have sunk the marmara and everyone on board, just saying that it would have been legal. Israel should be applauded for not doing that, even though it had the legal right to do so, and even though it meant putting Israeli lives at risk. Meanwhile, everyone who was on the Marmara, especially the IHH, should be a POW. They should be treated humanely, but they should be in prison.

You must take it farther. The bungling of the operation is evident. Those who signed off on the operation should have handed in their resignations immediately, whether it be Bibi, Barak, Ashkenazi, or commander of the navy (forgot his name). Until we demand that our decision makers take responsibility we are doomed to repeat our mistakes (ex Carmeil Fire). Our national motto of "It'll be ok" has got to stop.

Comandos acted properly. Whoever armed them with paint-ball guns should be fired for placing their lives in avoidable reckless danger which resulted in the death of the turkish terrorists and serious injuries to the Israeli comandos. The comandos were left in a potential life threatening/hostage situation and acted very reasonably under the circumstances

upheld the legality of Israel's blockade of Gaza and chastised Turkey for allowing Turkish flagged vessels to run that blockade. Israel was chastised for using excessive and unreasonable force in response to the obviously unanticipated reckless and violent resistance of the embarked activists. Upon seizure, the activists were dissed, punked and unceremoniously ejected from Israel. So be it. Ego bruising injuries and violent deaths were associated with this incident... that issue still remains to be resolved... waiting for the posturing to end.

re...

your government offered really BIG BUCKS to turkey, instead of an apology... your government tried to buy their way out... with your money, of course...

the Turks wont to be able to aggressively murder Jewish troops with the okay from the UN and get an apology or paid 'apology on top of it by Israel. Reminds me of the burglar, when leaving the scene of the crime, hurts his hand while fleeing over the fence and sues the homeowner for neglect.

"The United Nations Palmer Report on Israel's raid of the 2010 Gaza-bound flotilla failed to accomplish its main objective – devising a compromise between Israel and Turkey." Excuse me - wasn't the main objective to establish the truth? And the truth appears to be that Israel is right in its actions regarding Gaza while the soldiers got a little carried away because that's what human beings sometimes do under extreme stress. The report is fine, while Turkey is a big bully that needs to be contained from all sides. The sooner the better.

Yes, the report failed in its main objective - which was to appease Turkey and ease relations between Turkey and Israel. Of course Israel's actions were legal. The one area where the UN had wiggle room to appease Turkey was "proportionality," which is kind of like Justice Stuart's definition of pornography - he knows it when he sees it.(i.e. the matter is subjective.) But notice even here in the Palmer report, the UN recommended an Israeli regret - not an apology, and pay compensation (both of which Israel had already offered.) Hopefully, Turkey will finish venting her anger and take the fig leaf that was offered to her.

Turkey misjudged and wants us to apologise cover their bad call. If we suffer some loss of security etc and more pain, so be it. A disfigured person is like a dead person. They battered our best for whatever evil reasononing. We also have honour and much reason to feel hard done by. Turkey we didnt start this you did. Dont expect us to cover for your diplomatic bungle. Eat your humble pie admit and apologise and we can carry on. As you and we must in the future as biggwer thing hit our horizons. Your lesson:Dont test us on a side issue which was not yours to interfere in or fix. We all make mistakes and get past them if we own up to our neighbour and take responsibility. Your response appears very inappropriate and un-called. So be it. Life poes on.

so Turkey action illegall! Turkey must apologize.

...this has been a dismal failure. Certainly,the Palmer commissioners wouldn't make it as marriage counsellors. Better that they'd stuck to uncovering the facts of the matter,but they don't seem to have even done that in an objective way. THREE CHEERS FOR ISRAEL!!!

"Once the force had boarded the ship, and faced with the resistance it met, Israel should have reevaluated its options. " I assume what that means is that while the Israeli commandos were being attacked with metal pipes, knives and other "cold" weapons, they were supposed to sit down and discuss reevaluteing their options? I'm sure the Turkish terrorists would have allowed them time to do this while they made some tchai and maybe smoked a little hash. The United Nothing sucks at Everything!

it will always be balanced to either blame equally (despite of the real difference in level of atrocities) and not assign blame. NGOs have begun doing this in order to not seem so anti-Israel.

it would indicate that a sniper hit them. So the conclusion is that these people were shot, while involved in violent activities like lynching against soldiers. And that's consistent with the fact that ONLY 9 were killed out of 600 occupants on the ship (1.5%). If it was a systematic massacre as Turkey and anti-Israel people say, there would be 100 dead.

NPR in the US just had a report on this very issue in how the public views the govt after the Irene hurricane. Some of the public are stating the govt over-reacted but if the storm was really bad and the govt didn't do enough, they'd be attacked for not reacting. It's a delicate balance to strike. Reports are often devoid of context. In this case, Palmer had experience as a maritime lawyer, which is a great addition (and so much better than the investigators on previous UN reports) but they lacked a military commander who could provide the context of hand-to-hand combat. Col. Kemp did offer that insight to the UN Goldstone investigators but was outrightly ignored.

and it shows that Turkey is mostly interested in humiliating Israel on the global stage and as part of a stage to isolate the Jewish State. Israel helped show their true intentions and absolutely stated NO WAY to self-defense.

You ignore both the report and the article because it doesn't fit your blindness. Typical.

I agree with many of the posters here in one regard, what was the main objective of the report. The author Attila Somfalvi seems to think, and I quote: "falls short of resolving Israel and Turkey's differences" or "failed to accomplish its main objective – devising a compromise between Israel and Turkey." Let's be clear, that is simply the writers opinion, not the true objective of the report. It was intended as a neutral independent fact finding commission. To analyze the incident and see if it complied with International Law. So where Attila S. comes up with "resolving the differences" between the two countries is bizarre at best, ignorant and misleading at worst. It would be nice to differentiate between the truth, and the writers opinion. While the author certainly has the right to their opinion, don't substitute it for facts. Now we have TBer's writing posts about the purpose of the commission being to solve the problems between these countries, and it simply isn't true.

If the blockade is legal, which this report states it IS, than the report contradicts itself. Under customary international law, if a ship is trying to run a LEGAL blockade, than it can be "ATTACKED." From San Remo: 98. Merchant vessels (defined as a vessel, other than a warship, an auxiliary vessel, or a State vessel such as a customs or police vessel, that is engaged in commercial or private service) believed on reasonable grounds to be breaching a blockade may be captured. Merchant vessels which, after prior warning, clearly resist capture may be attacked. How did Israel use "disproportional force" if the vessel is LEGALLY allowed to be attacked?

Any apology could begin like this, "We are so very sorry... That the turkish jerkoffs, (excuse me, so-called leaders), who conspired with hateful & murderous aggressors to endanger Israel, Forced a Defensive & Righteous Response. We are also very sorry... That the ships passengers were not told to wear life jackets & get into their lifeboats, while the rustbucket was towed out to sea, where Somali pirates could hold it hostage for ransom, thereby aiding international trade... =)

More useless crap from the UN. Most people who have a brain know that Israel did the right thing. Let the UN, Turkey and their supporters all go to hell.