# Israeli Piracy: What the f... is wrong with the New York Times ?

Apparently the American Press does not want you to know too much. Watching CNN speaking but not saying anything was not too surprising. However, reading the New York Times that relays pretty well the Israeli State's declarations, hides the obvious and even writes deliberate errors is just outrageous.
If we analyze today's article about the recent act of Piracy from the Israeli army, it seems impossible not to observe the incredible positioning of what is consider as a progressive American newspaper:

First: The Israeli State's declaration: Apparently the flotilla's boat could have bring “missiles, mortars and Iranians who will help them arm and train.” Pronounce the word Al Qaeda or Iran and the USA will let you do whatever you want. Seriously the thread is a bit too obvious here. Should we really recall that those boats were transporting aid to the Gaza strips that suffers from the Israeli blockade for a decade now. (the official blockade started in 2007 but it actually began in 2000, the only exchanges were only for the colonies before they had to withdraw).

Second: Omission. The NYTimes presents a geographical map showing where the boats were assaulted without precising on it or in the text the most important element here which is that all this operation happened in the International Waters which constitutes an absolute act of piracy. I don't want to be too much imprecise here so the followings paragraphs are directly excerpted from the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea:


Article101
Definition of piracy

Piracy consists of any of the following acts:

(a) any illegal acts of violence or detention, or any act of depredation, committed for private ends by the crew or the passengers of a private ship or a private aircraft, and directed:

(i) on the high seas, against another ship or aircraft, or against persons or property on board such ship or aircraft;

(ii) against a ship, aircraft, persons or property in a place outside the jurisdiction of any State;

(b) any act of voluntary participation in the operation of a ship or of an aircraft with knowledge of facts making it a pirate ship or aircraft;

(c) any act of inciting or of intentionally facilitating an act described in subparagraph (a) or (b).

Article102

Piracy by a warship, government ship or government aircraft whose crew has mutinied

The acts of piracy, as defined in article 101, committed by a warship, government ship or government aircraft whose crew has mutinied and taken control of the ship or aircraft are assimilated to acts committed by a private ship or aircraft.

Article110

Right of visit

1. Except where acts of interference derive from powers conferred by treaty, a warship which encounters on the high seas a foreign ship, other than a ship entitled to complete immunity in accordance with articles 95 and 96, is not justified in boarding it unless there is reasonable ground for suspecting that:

(a) the ship is engaged in piracy;

(b) the ship is engaged in the slave trade;

(c) the ship is engaged in unauthorized broadcasting and the flag State of the warship has jurisdiction under article 109;

(d) the ship is without nationality; or

(e) though flying a foreign flag or refusing to show its flag, the ship is, in reality, of the same nationality as the warship.

2. In the cases provided for in paragraph 1, the warship may proceed to verify the ship's right to fly its flag. To this end, it may send a boat under the command of an officer to the suspected ship. If suspicion remains after the documents have been checked, it may proceed to a further examination on board the ship, which must be carried out with all possible consideration.

3. If the suspicions prove to be unfounded, and provided that the ship boarded has not committed any act justifying them, it shall be compensated for any loss or damage that may have been sustained.

4. These provisions apply mutatis mutandis to military aircraft.

5. These provisions also apply to any other duly authorized ships or aircraft clearly marked and identifiable as being on government service.

Not mentioning this information pleads guilty for NY Times' (and obviously other American main medias) objectivity. Once again Israel despised International Laws (see my article about the article 49 of the Convention of Geneva) in a complete immunity. The question of the ALLEGED weapons on one of the boat becomes also obsolete since it enters into the denomination "self defense" against pirates.

Third: Error on purpose: The NY Times mentions on another page (that propose a debate about "rethinking the blockade" which already tells a lot about how this military blockade is interpreted in the Times' redaction) the "Hamas takeover of Gaza in 2007". Let's recall that the Hamas became a majority in Gaza thanks to democratic election on the contrary of what would like to be believed in the Western World that finds more simple to mix everybody who is not an ally or a subject in order to amalgamate them as "security threats".

Today I am furious.
I am furious that the Israeli State daily opress the Palestinian people.
I am furious that the American medias actively hide information.
I am furious that we actually need a suppression towards an international group of people to hardly open our eyes.
and I am furious in advance to know that things are going to go back to normal very quickly and Netanyahu will be very likely able to come back very quickly in the United States to finish his American tour without anything practical atempted against the State of Israel's international crimes.

We have to act.

ps: I don't want to be too paranoid but the fact that there used to be a link towards a page for Rachel Corrie (this American woman who was killed in 2003 by an Israeli Bulldozer D9 while she was trying to avoid a Palestinian house in Gaza to be destroyed) on an other article of the NY Times and that the link does not work anymore, worries me about some (self)censorship...
Here is the original article