Dear “Sceptical Malaysian”,
You asked ten questions in the name of accountability.
Fair enough.
But fairness also means knowing the facts before you accuse.
So let’s go through them one by one.
.
𝐐𝟏: 𝐃𝐢𝐝 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐤𝐧𝐨𝐰 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐌𝐚𝐥𝐚𝐲𝐬𝐢𝐚𝐧 𝐩𝐚𝐬𝐬𝐩𝐨𝐫𝐭𝐬 𝐞𝐟𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐞𝐥𝐲 𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐛𝐢𝐝 𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐯𝐞𝐥 𝐭𝐨 𝐈𝐬𝐫𝐚𝐞𝐥 𝐞𝐱𝐜𝐞𝐩𝐭 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐬𝐩𝐞𝐜𝐢𝐚𝐥 𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐦𝐢𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧? 𝐘𝐞𝐬 𝐨𝐫 𝐧𝐨. 𝐍𝐨 𝐞𝐮𝐩𝐡𝐞𝐦𝐢𝐬𝐦𝐬.
» Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... «
Yes, they knew.
Every Malaysian knows that line printed in their passport:
‘This passport is valid for all countries except Israel.’”
But here is what you left out: they were NOT travelling to Israel.
They were sailing in international waters, under the protection of maritime law and international humanitarian conventions.
Malaysia’s restriction applies only to voluntary entry into Israel, not to citizens aboard a humanitarian mission seized on open sea.
The Israeli navy intercepted them roughly 90 nautical miles from Gaza, a breach of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).
No Israeli border was crossed, no passport stamped, no law violated.
They DID NOT visit Israel.
They were taken there by force, abducted from international waters during an unlawful military operation.
.
𝐐𝟐: 𝐈𝐟 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐤𝐧𝐞𝐰, 𝐝𝐢𝐝 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐜𝐡𝐨𝐨𝐬𝐞 𝐭𝐨 𝐛𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐤 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐥𝐚𝐰 𝐚𝐧𝐲𝐰𝐚𝐲, 𝐨𝐫 𝐰𝐞𝐫𝐞 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐬𝐢𝐦𝐩𝐥𝐲 𝐜𝐚𝐫𝐞𝐥𝐞𝐬𝐬 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐲𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐯𝐞𝐥 𝐝𝐨𝐜𝐮𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐬? 𝐄𝐢𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫 𝐚𝐧𝐬𝐰𝐞𝐫 𝐰𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐝𝐨, 𝐛𝐮𝐭 𝐨𝐰𝐧 𝐢𝐭.
» Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... «
Neither, because there was no law to break.
They did not enter Israel willingly, so there was nothing to own. Their passports remained valid, their journey legal, and their purpose humanitarian.
If anything, the only party that needs to own a violation is the one that committed armed interception in international waters. This was not carelessness. It was courage within international law.
And Malaysia’s position is clear: the activists acted lawfully, morally, and with the government’s full diplomatic support.
.
𝐐𝟑: 𝐖𝐡𝐨 𝐩𝐥𝐚𝐧𝐧𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐭𝐫𝐢𝐩? 𝐀 𝐖𝐡𝐚𝐭𝐬𝐀𝐩𝐩 𝐠𝐫𝐨𝐮𝐩, 𝐚𝐧 𝐍𝐆𝐎, 𝐨𝐫 𝐚 𝐩𝐨𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐥 𝐜𝐞𝐥𝐥?
» Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... «
In case you have been living under a rock, this was not a weekend stunt.
It is part of the Freedom Flotilla Coalition, a humanitarian campaign that has been sailing since 2010 to challenge the Gaza blockade peacefully.
This was the thirty-seventh mission, following Madelene (number 35) and Handala (number 36).
And yes, people have died in these efforts.
Every participant was vetted, briefed, and registered under international NGOs that work with the UN and Red Crescent networks.
So no, it was not a secret cell or pub chat.
It is a global movement of hundreds from more than forty countries, united by principle and discipline.
And while you are reading this from your sofa, the thirty-eighth flotilla, the next wave, is already preparing to sail. Just as a reminder so you did not need to ask this question again.
.
𝐐𝟒: 𝐁𝐮𝐭 𝐆𝐚𝐳𝐚 𝐡𝐚𝐬 𝐧𝐨 𝐮𝐬𝐚𝐛𝐥𝐞 𝐩𝐨𝐫𝐭. 𝐇𝐨𝐰 𝐰𝐞𝐫𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐲 𝐠𝐨𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐨 𝐮𝐧𝐥𝐨𝐚𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐚𝐢𝐝?
» Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... «
Wrong question.
The real question is: why does Gaza not have a working port in the first place?
Because Israel bombed it.
Because every attempt to rebuild it was blocked.
Because for seventeen years, the Israeli navy has enforced a blockade that forbids Palestinians from developing or using their own coastline.
And even without a functioning port, the aid could still have been delivered easily. Humanitarian groups proposed that Israel or international observers inspect and escort the cargo into Gaza, as was done before 2007.
The flotilla organisers even offered to offload the aid at sea under UN supervision.
Israel refused every offer.
So this is not about logistics.It is about control.
The blockade is not protecting anyone. It is preventing food, fuel, and medicine from reaching civilians.
The flotilla was not a stunt.
It was a reminder that if the world truly wanted to, aid could reach Gaza tomorrow.
The only thing stopping it is not geography. It is policy.
.
𝐐𝟓: 𝐖𝐡𝐨 𝐠𝐚𝐯𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐦 𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐦𝐢𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐭𝐨 𝐠𝐨? 𝐃𝐢𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐢𝐫 𝐛𝐨𝐬𝐬𝐞𝐬 𝐚𝐩𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐯𝐞?
» Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... «
Should I ask you the same question?
Who gave you permission to sit comfortably while others risked their lives?
Sound ridiculous right? Joking.
Jokes aside. Some of them took unpaid leave. Some were humanitarian professionals. Some were full-time volunteers.
They did not need permission to act where silence had already failed.
They were not employees on a corporate retreat.
They were citizens stepping in where governments fell short.
If helping the helpless now requires official approval, then maybe the problem is not with them. It is with us.
.
𝐐𝟔: 𝐇𝐨𝐰 𝐝𝐢𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐲 𝐚𝐟𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐬? 𝐂𝐫𝐨𝐰𝐝𝐟𝐮𝐧𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐠? 𝐒𝐩𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐨𝐫𝐬? 𝐇𝐢𝐝𝐝𝐞𝐧 𝐛𝐚𝐜𝐤𝐞𝐫𝐬??
» Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... «
Everything was transparent.
Funds were raised through registered NGOs, open crowdfunding platforms, and community networks across forty-four countries, from Asia to Europe, Africa to Latin America.
These were not secret financiers or political fronts.
They were ordinary citizens, influencers, journalists, doctors, teachers, and parliament members who refused to stay silent while Gaza starved.
Many used their own savings. Others ran small campaigns, ten ringgit here, twenty euros there, from people who believed in sending food, not funding war.
The organisers published financial statements and passenger lists publicly.
Every ship, every name, every destination was known before they even left port.
The vessels themselves were humble, converted fishing boats and small cargo ships, not luxury liners. No corporate sponsors, no PR agencies, no five-star accommodations.
Just volunteers, elected officials, and media professionals documenting the truth.
So if you really want to talk about money, ask the harder question.
Who funds the siege? Who profits from the blockade? Who supplies the bombs that make these flotillas necessary in the first place?
Because if ordinary citizens across forty-four nations can pool their resources for compassion, then what excuse do governments have for financing cruelty?
.
𝐐𝟕: 𝐃𝐢𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐲 𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐧 𝐩𝐚𝐜𝐤 𝐞𝐧𝐨𝐮𝐠𝐡 𝐟𝐨𝐨𝐝? 𝐖𝐚𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐬𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐨𝐮𝐬 𝐨𝐫 𝐚 𝐬𝐭𝐮𝐧𝐭?
» Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... «
You do not measure sincerity by the size of someone’s lunch box.Humanitarian voyages do not pack for comfort.
They pack for purpose.
The Global Sumud Flotilla carried medical kits, nutritional supplements, sanitary supplies, and non-perishable food, all declared and documented before departure.
Every ship was inspected by local port authorities in Europe before sailing. The supplies were for Gazans, not for passengers.
The participants expected rough seas, interception, and possibly detention. They brought just enough to survive, not to live comfortably.
No one boards a small vessel for days across open waters under threat of airstrikes and naval patrols because it is fun.
They were not playing heroes. They were filling the silence left by governments that refused to act.
If this were a stunt, it would have ended when the cameras stopped rolling. But these people are still at sea, still being arrested, still risking their lives, again and again.
That is not theatre. That is conviction.
.
𝐐𝟖: 𝐃𝐢𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐲 𝐞𝐱𝐩𝐞𝐜𝐭 𝐭𝐨 𝐛𝐞 𝐚𝐫𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐟𝐥𝐨𝐰𝐧 𝐡𝐨𝐦𝐞 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐟𝐫𝐞𝐞 𝐩𝐮𝐛𝐥𝐢𝐜𝐢𝐭𝐲?
» Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... «
They expected to be stopped, yes, because history told them so. As every flotilla since 2010 has been intercepted or attacked by Israeli forces, from the Mavi Marmara massacre that killed nine activists to the Handala and Madelene missions that were seized before even reaching Gaza.
They knew what was coming, and they went anyway. If it was about fame, they could have stayed home and posted hashtags. Most of them had jobs, families, and reputations to lose.
Some were parliamentarians, others journalists, medical workers, and ordinary citizens with everything to risk and nothing to gain.
They were not chasing attention.
They were chasing accountability.
Because every time Israel hijacks a humanitarian ship in international waters, it proves the point of the mission itself.
It is not about being seen. It is about making sure the truth cannot be unseen.
And for the record, most of them were not flown home. Out of more then 400+ people abducted majority are still being detained, interrogated, and held in Israeli facilities before being deported in stages, often after diplomatic negotiations led by their respective governments.
That is not a free ride. That is the price of conscience.
.
𝐐𝟗: 𝐓𝐡𝐞𝐢𝐫 𝐝𝐞𝐭𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐯𝐢𝐝𝐞𝐨𝐬 𝐥𝐨𝐨𝐤𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐨𝐨 𝐜𝐚𝐥𝐦. 𝐖𝐚𝐬 𝐢𝐭 𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐠𝐞𝐝?
» Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... «
Calm does not mean fake.
It means discipline under threat.
When armed soldiers board your ship at night, shouting orders in a language you do not understand, panic helps no one.
They stayed calm because they had been briefed to remain non-violent, a central rule of every Freedom Flotilla mission.
They were trained to film, not to fight.
They were taught to keep the camera steady no matter what happens, because chaos favours the aggressor, not the truth.
That is why the footage looks composed. It is the result of civil resistance training, not rehearsal.
Some of those same calm people were later shown with bruises, torn clothes, and confiscated gear once they reached detention.
No scriptwriter could plan that. Calm in fear is not acting.
It is survival, the only kind of dignity you can still control when someone else has taken your freedom.
.
𝐐𝟏𝟎: 𝐖𝐡𝐲 𝐝𝐢𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐲 𝐚𝐥𝐥 𝐬𝐚𝐲 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐚𝐦𝐞 𝐥𝐢𝐧𝐞𝐬? 𝐖𝐚𝐬 𝐢𝐭 𝐬𝐜𝐫𝐢𝐩𝐭𝐞𝐝?
» Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... «
What lines are you talking about?
If you mean the SOS messages, yes, they sounded the same. They were meant to.
Every participant on the flotilla was instructed to repeat a unified distress call once the ships were surrounded.
It was not a performance. It was protocol.
When communication is jammed, when satellites go dark, and when military boats close in, they are trained to record and repeat the same phrases so the world knows what is happening in real time.
It was not drama. It was documentation.
Now, if you mean the testimonies after detention, of course they sounded similar.
When trauma repeats, words repeat.
They were not reading from a script. They were describing the same ordeal: blindfolded, handcuffed, interrogated, deprived of sleep and water.
You would sound the same too if you went through identical treatment.
Their voices trembled not because they were acting, but because they were exhausted.
They were not reciting lines. They were recounting violations.
And even if their phrasing overlaps, that is called consistency, not choreography.
In journalism, when multiple witnesses tell the same story without contradiction, that is called evidence.
If anything, their uniform testimonies strengthen their credibility, not weaken it.
Israel calls it “processing detainees.”
The rest of the world calls it collective punishment. And the people who spoke calmly about it on camera did so knowing they might be punished again for speaking.
That is not performance. That is courage under captivity.
.
To the "Sceptical Malaysian"
You are right about one thing.
Malaysians have a right to know whether this was a sincere humanitarian effort or awell-orchestrated show.
Scepticism is fair, but only if it comes with curiosity, not cynicism.
It is easy to call it naïve if you did not know what you were looking at. Because the truth is, this was never a small local mission.
It was part of a global humanitarian network that has existed for over a decade, spanning forty countries and thirty-eight flotillas.
Doctors, journalists, lawmakers, and faith leaders have sailed before and some never made it back.
So if you thought these Malaysians acted alone or stumbled into politics by accident, that misunderstanding is understandable.
We live in a time where activism is often performative, so genuine courage looks unfamiliar. But ignorance of history does not make those who act naïve(as what you have written).
There was no hidden script, no media choreography, no profit to be made.
The accounts were published, the NGOs registered, the cargo documented.
If sincerity is proven by sacrifice, then these people have already given enough.
So yes, Malaysians have a right to ask.
And they have been answered not through press conferences, but through 48 hours of captivity, through calm faces behind metal bars, through voices that refused to break even when the world doubted them.
Call it naïve if you wish, but remember this: the only reason it looks naïve is because faith in humanity has become rare enough to look unrealistic.
And let’s flip the Question
Instead of asking who paid for the boat,
ask why aid to Gaza still needs boats in 2025.
Instead of mocking those who sailed,
ask why armed soldiers board civilian vessels in open sea.
Instead of doubting their sincerity,
ask why our silence always sounds louder than their courage.
You wanted accountability. Fair.
But accountability cuts both ways, between those who act and those who scoff from safety.
Maybe the real awkward question is not for them at all.
Maybe it is for us. Yes You and Me.
When did compassion become something we had to apologise for?
Signed,
A Malaysian Who Still Believes in Humanity
FB: Khairul Azri
Oct 7 2025, 03:37 PM
Quote
0.0196sec
0.40
6 queries
GZIP Disabled