Texting from hell, a Norwegian doctor who doesn't want to leave:
place has created “massacres” because civilians stand “no chance of
getting out of the line of fire.”
“The intensive care unit here is full of children with serious
injuries. Twenty-five percent of the victims are women and children and
forty-five percent of the injured are women and children. This is the
closest you come to a massacre,” Gilbert told Swedish Radio….
“We are swimming in death, blood, and amputated victims. Many children.
Pregnant women. I've never experienced anything so awful.”
Gilbert’s messages eventually became a doctor’s cry for people to take
action to pressure European governments to pressure their leaders into
brokering a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas.
'Send it (the SMS) along, call it out. DO SOMETHING! DO MORE!,' Gilbert
pleads in one SMS, adding, “We shouldn't call ourselves decent
Europeans if we don't act to stop this.”
well done, that man
Here in the antimatter moral universe — the other side of the looking glass from the one the Norwegian doctor inhabits — colloboration brings recognition and prizes:
————
Tony Blair will be presented with one of America’s highest civilian honours by President Bush for his unfaltering support for the United States in the fight against terrorism, the White House announced yesterday.
The award of the Presidential Medal of Freedom is being made on January 13, just a week before Mr Bush leaves office after eight years in which his Administration has largely been defined by terror attacks at home and two unfinished wars abroad.
Dana Perino, the White House press secretary, said that Mr Blair will receive the medal from Mr Bush along with President Uribe of Colombia, and John Howard, the former Prime Minister of Australia.
“All three leaders have been staunch allies of the United States, particularly in combating terrorism. Their efforts to bring hope and freedom to people around the globe have made their nations, America and the world community a safer and more secure world,” she added.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article5455004.ece
————
At first I thought the over-the-top quote from Dana Perino was from The Onion. But no, it appears to be unwitting self-parody.
PM Olmert must feel envious — where are MY rewards for slaughtering all them terrorists?
Must be an anti-semite.
Those are mortar-firing babies, dontcha know?
I am scared that Isreal is following step by step the development of social and political psychology of Nazism, and if people protest that Israel is not committing a Holocaust. I say: NOT YET
DO WE WAIT FOR A HOLOCAUST TO OCCUR BEFORE WE HAVE SUFFICIENT PROOF THAT ALLOWS US TO TRY STOP THE PERPETRATORS?
war is tragic and inhumane-to be avoided at nearly all costs. but governments have certain responsibilities to their citizens. israel is acting on them. hamas is not. by indiscriminate and largely ineffectual rocket fire they have invited a response from a more powerful foe. by launching and storing weapons in residential buildings they violate international law and sacrifice their own citizens. it seems to be without logic…at least from a western mindset.
am i to believe that israel invited civil strife by leaving gaza 3+ years ago so that they could find an excuse to revisit death and destruction? do you not really believe that the citizens and the government have better things to do with their resources? granted the strip has been isolated and "locked down" with security used as the excuse. but the smuggling of missiles and arms through tunnels suggests that opening the airport and oceans would have been sheer insanity, for they surely would have been used for the same purposes.
i firmly believe that a more constructive approach by the palestinians would have been reciprocated-just as the alternative has been. so the issue is one of responsibility and i don't get how hamas isn't held accountable for creating, fostering and manipulating these deplorable circumstances.
OK, Redward, let me explain it to you. The reason why people in Hamas fire those primitive home-made rockets into Sderot and Ashkelon is because they don't have any other weapons with which to fight Israel. And the reason why they won't stop fighting Israel is because EVERY INCH OF THE STATE OF ISRAEL IS BUILT ON STOLEN PALESTINIAN LAND.
'granted the strip has been isolated and "locked down" with security used as the excuse. but the smuggling of missiles and arms through tunnels suggests that opening the airport and oceans would have been sheer insanity, for they surely would have been used for the same purposes.' — redward
Think again. Incoming cargo inspection can be performed VERY effectively, to detect illegal weapons. US Customs does it on HUGE quantities of incoming cargo.
I would submit to you that with legal channels of importation available, the economic incentive to open tunnels only for contraband (instead of for ALL consumer goods) would be greatly reduced.
'Security' is a phony excuse for Israel's lockdown of Gaza. The real reason is that they are trying to starve out Hamas with an economic siege, as Israeli officials have confirmed when they speak of 'putting Gaza on a diet.'
Not only was the lockdown illegal — IT DIDN'T WORK.
If Israel would play by international rules, instead of applying outlaw state methods, it might obtain better results for itself.
redward – nice try, but your talking points need some updating. Here are some hints:
"war is tragic and inhumane-to be avoided at nearly all costs. but governments have certain responsibilities to their citizens. israel is acting on them. hamas is not."
A few errors here. Are you considering hamas, a boycotted group, to be on par with the government of israel? capable of acting on all their responsibilities (even as their elected representatives languish in jail for the crime of being elected)? so, if they are on the same level, would you label israel's government state terrorists too? after all, you seem to draw some symmetry here…
As for israel's responsibilities – given that their goal is to avoid as much as possible any meaningful peace process (an evidenced by their actions/inactions), should we believe that this is a responsible approach towards their own citizens – given that theft has consequences?
regarding the tragedy of war – yes it's very sad for one side to confine the other side, then proceed to execute them by any means they think they can get away with. But hey, I do understand the children of ashdod are traumatized. Would that the gazan children suffered only such psychological trauma. I'm sure they would trade starvation and and loss of life and limb for a little trauma in a heart beat.
"by indiscriminate and largely ineffectual rocket fire they have invited a response from a more powerful foe. by launching and storing weapons in residential buildings they violate international law and sacrifice their own citizens. "
No israeli or israel-defender has any right to make a peep about "international law". That's the one israel flaunts daily – more so than the serbians or the Burmese ever did. And don't the settlers store weapons in their own residences, thereby opening themselves to fully justified bombing raid too?
" it seems to be without logic…at least from a western mindset."
Actually, it's Israel that seems illogical here and very "unwestern" – whatever that is. Just what do you call committing a deliberate massacre? murdering 100's of children and babies? I'd call that savage, for starters. a war crime, if there ever was one. But hey, as you say, war is hell. Just don't complain next time a suicide bomber strikes your family. After all, you refuse to recognize palestinians right to exist in peace on their own lands, don't you? and you do seem to justify murderous "soldiers' (ie, kossacks) walking around with their weapons in the heart of towns full of "innocent' people, thus inviting vengence upon all – guilty (the soldiers) and innocent. At least that's where your "logic' leads.
me thinks you should try again.
and who exactly is going to do the inspections, hamas? or perhaps intl.observers or the u.n.? those efforts have proven to be a joke in lebanon with hiz more than rearmed right under the u.n.'s noses and in violation of the terms of the truce.
and why is security a phony excuse when you have an organization, now with leadership responsibilities, dedicated to the destruction of a legally established country. and it is just not words that highlight israel's concerns but rather actions-rockets on a daily basis throughout the truce period (something cnn anchor sanchez conveniently overlooked) and continuous suicide bombing during the intifada.
by ignoring these facts you and others then have license to demonize the israelis by outrageously asserting genocidal proclivities on their part. it is absolutely ridiculous and without merit and would be evident if you sent any time in israel. not that there aren't people with extreme perspectives, but that nation is overwhelmingly (80%+) secular and liberal and would be more than happy to give up land for peace as has been demonstrated on numerous occasions.
ana-
thank you for your comment. it gets to the crux of the issue. israel's existence on stolen land. apart from the fact that a portion of the land was always inhabited by jews and that meaningful portions were purchased starting over 100 years ago, a larger reality needs to be recognized and accepted.
the world community voted to create the state of israel in 1948. just as they voted in the years just prior to establish jordan, syria, lebanon etc. and just as they have voted to recognize 100 other countries since then. perhaps it's establishement is a remnant of a colonial world view but at the time that was acceptable. you can't go back and change history based modern day sensitivities.
so at the same time you had a jewish state established, the world made room for a christian arab country-lebanon and a muslim country-pakistan. the establishment of the latter led to the displacement of over 10 million people and continuos violence with india, yet no one questions the right of those countries to exist.
so help me to understand the justice and constancy of your position. thanks.
'Who is going to do the inspections?' How about Societe Generale de Surveillance? Swiss … unbiased … efficient … experienced. Worked with 'em my ownself.
http://www.ivp.sgs.com/
I assure you that cargo inspection is a technical non-issue, if the will exists to do it.
Whereas, Israel's stance on Gaza trade was made perfectly explicit by Dov Weisglass, just weeks after the 2006 Palestinian election:
————
Israel's policy was summed up by Dov Weisglass, an adviser to Ehud Olmert, the Israeli Prime Minister, earlier this year. 'The idea is to put the Palestinians on a diet, but not to make them die of hunger,' he said. The hunger pangs are supposed to encourage the Palestinians to force Hamas to change its attitude towards Israel or force Hamas out of government.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/apr/16/israel
————
Nice try, but no cigar, redward. Better ring back to Hasbara Central for further instructions.
jim-
applying economic sanctions towards ones enemies is an often tried approach. the world community is engaged in just this fashion with iran. yet no one is railing on about a genocide against the persians.
i'm just struck by the overwhelming desire of so many to demonize israel. and b/t/w, i'd like to think that the hasbara crack is beneath you.
Redward,
In the year 1900, Palestine was inhabited by 5% Jews and 95% Palestinians, both Muslim and Christian. Through immigration from Europe, Ashkenazi Jews arrived in Palestine so that when the United Nations voted to partition the land, they gave the Jews, who now comprised 33% of the population 55 % of the land, even though they only actually owned 7% of it. Do you think that's fair? Through warfare, Israel has managed to increase that percentage to 78%, not counting the settlements, which eat up half of the land of the West Bank. So today Israel controls 90% of the land of Palestine even though originally they only represented 5% of the initial population. They also occupy part of Syria (Golan Heights) and part of Lebanon (Shebaa Farms.) There are roughly equal numbers of Jews and Palestinians in Israel/Palestine (5million each) so why should the Jews have 90% of the land, control of air, water,resources, borders and the Palestinians be expected to stop resisting? Assuming of course that you believe that both are equal in the eyes of God and international law.
Phil:
You really are a moral midget. Read on.
In an interview with the Norwegian daily, Dagbladet, shortly after the attacks, Gilbert stated:
“The attack on New York was not surprising, after the policy that has led the West in recent decades. I am upset over the terrorist attack, but am equally upset over the suffering which the United States has created. It is in this context that the 5000 dead people must be seen. If the U.S. government has a legitimate right to bomb and kill civilians in Iraq, then there is also a moral right to attack the United States with the weapons they had to create. Dead civilians are the same whether they are Americans, Palestinians or Iraqis.”
When asked by Dagbladet if he supported the terrorist attack on the U.S., he replied:
“Terror is a bad weapon, but the answer is yes, within the context I have mentioned.”
Fake Jim Haygood,
Go crawl back under your rock. The slime is cooling down, and you know how you hate wriggling back into cold slime.
"The attack on New York was not surprising, after the policy that has led the West in recent decades"
PM: To me, it's not surprising at all.
"I am upset over the terrorist attack, but am equally upset over the suffering which the United States has created."
PM: To me, I am MORE upset over the suffering created by the US. It reflects on me directly, as I hold US citizenship and therefore should try prevent murder in my name. Those responsible for 9/11 are criminal, but I cannot be blamed for thier crimes.
"It is in this context that the 5000 dead people must be seen. "
PM: And it is in this context that I have long viewed it, and by the way, the 9/11 dead are far fewer than 5000, and those killed by the US in the past to hard to count, definitely in the millions.
"If the U.S. government has a legitimate right to bomb and kill civilians in Iraq, then there is also a moral right to attack the United States with the weapons they had to create."
PM: The US has NO legitimate right to bomb and kill civilians anywhere, and therefore there should never be a moral right to attack the US.
"Dead civilians are the same whether they are Americans, Palestinians or Iraqis.”
PM: Unless of course, they're Jewish Israelis, and then a ratio of 500 dead Palestinian civilians to one Jewish Israeli
is required, right SOG?
Slime of Gideon.
PM
Fuck the medal. Could I have Perino sit on my face?
Screw the medal. Could I have Perino sit on my face instead?
ana-
not to get mired down, but you now seem to acknowledge that your statement that "EVERY INCH OF THE STATE OF ISRAEL IS BUILT ON STOLEN PALESTINIAN LAND." isn't true. you then site the various statistics regarding land mass-but even here it depends when you start counting. there are many who would argue that a palestinian state exists-it is called jordan, formally trans-jordan and part of the original proposals for the area. if one chose include it in the mix the numbers might be more "right".
but all this misses the point. it may not be "fair" that the land mass doesn't equal the population numbers but it is irrelevant. israel exists as a state of the world community. you can't put that genie back in the bottle. nor can hamas by denying its existence and swearing to destroy it. but until you and they acknowledge its right to exist, you should expect them to be a bit reactive when missiles are shot at them with the intent to maim and kill.
you can't have it both ways.
'applying economic sanctions towards ones enemies is an often tried approach. the world community is engaged in just this fashion with iran. yet no one is railing on about a genocide against the persians.'
'The world community' meaning mainly the U.S., which has broad trade sanctions against Iran. Also, the U.S. has leaned hard on Europe via FinCen to try to freeze out Iranian banks from operating there, but with limited success.
As a result, none of this ill-advised campaign against Israel's 'public enemy no. 1' has prevented Iran from importing food and medicine, exporting its oil, and feeding its people, as has occurred in Gaza. So, no, one can't talk of 'genocide against the persians' now.
The campaign is ill-advised because the U.S. has Iran surrounded on all four sides, via Iraq, Afghanistan, former Soviet republics, and the Arabian peninsula. Sufficiently comprehensive trade sanctions border on an act of war, and are clearly intended to provoke Iran. Such a clash might or might not turn out as the provocateurs expect.
'Hasbara' is a running joke around here, primarily aimed at the long-serving 'Agent Witty.' You do a considerably better job of marshalling facts than he does, I'll grant you. Congratulations on your promotion, hope you enjoy the posting.
…
dana-
-your response to my post-
" it seems to be without logic…at least from a western mindset."
""Actually, it's Israel that seems illogical here and very "unwestern" – whatever that is. Just what do you call committing a deliberate massacre? murdering 100's of children and babies? I'd call that savage, for starters. a war crime, if there ever was one.""
and an example of what i perceive as an unwestern mindset-
"A Hamas representative in the PA legislative council this year expressed pride in the fact that women and children are used as human shields in fighting Israel. He described it as part of a "death industry" at which Palestinians excel, and explained that the Palestinians "desire death" with the same intensity that Israelis "desire life."
The following is the full text of the comments by Hamas representative Fathi Hamad:
"For the Palestinian people death became an industry, at which women excel and so do all people on this land: the elderly excel, the Jihad fighters excel, and the children excel. Accordingly [Palestinians] created a human shield of women, children, the elderly and the Jihad fighters against the Zionist bombing machine, as if they were saying to the Zionist enemy: We desire death as you desire life."
Al-Aqsa TV (Hamas) Feb. 29, 2008
you are making a serious error in judgement if, in fact, this is their orientation.
i'll leave you with a fascinating quote from martin luther king's autobiography that reflects the trap that too many on this blog seem to have fallen into:
martin luther king states in his autobiography "the basic change to my thinking came when i began to question the liberal doctrine of man…liberalism's superficial optimism concerning human nature caused it to overlook the fact that reason is darkened by sin. the more i thought about human nature, the more i saw how our tragic inclination for sin causes us to use our minds to rationalize our actions…i came to feel that liberalism had been all too sentimental concerning human nature and that it leaned toward a false idealism" (pp.24-25).
redward,
Love that quote from MLK – here it is again, and you tell me if it doesn't apply ever so perfectly to the Israeli mindframe (and ever more so to their apologists, such as….you?):
""the basic change to my thinking came when i began to question the liberal doctrine of man…liberalism's superficial optimism concerning human nature caused it to overlook the fact that reason is darkened by sin. the more i thought about human nature, the more i saw how our tragic inclination for sin causes us to use our minds to rationalize our actions…i came to feel that liberalism had been all too sentimental concerning human nature and that it leaned toward a false idealism" (pp.24-25)."
Don't you just love that "reason darkened by sin" line?
Now why did you attach this particular quote? surely you are not inferring that hamas is in any way rational and/or subject to reason? because if they were, wouldn't israel have negotiated with them in the first place?
And had they negotiated with hamas (which they ardently refused to do) would they have not prevented putting their own residents at peril from hamas' so-called bombs?
You know as well as I what the escapade of gaza was really all about. Surely not security for israel, as they could have acheived that far more readily just by extending the cease-fire – as hamas wanted to do. Or for that matter entering into good faith negotiations with the palestinians – which clearly they never did.
So if it's not about security, prey do tell me – what was this about? why did hundreds of sitting-duck palestinian children have to die in a massacre? it wasn't hamas who put them in that UN school to serve as human shields either. So there goes that little argument (nice cherry-picking BTW – where can I get a copy of the talking points?)
In this blog at least, surely you can see you're on the losing side? we've all been through this merry-go-round once too often. Just give up and agree with me – and peace will come to your soul. You'll see.
dana-
i'm touched by your concern for my soul, thank you. and yes it is quite apparent that i am vastly outnumbered on this blog but giving up and agreeing is not the resolution my soul craves!
one key reason is that it often seems that there are so few facts relative to all the emotion yet those facts are so often manipulated, miscommunicated or obfuscated. your statement that hamas wanted to renew the ceasefire is one such example. from reuters-BREAKING NEWSFighting Resumes In Gaza After Lull
Thursday, December 18 04:43 pm
(Reuters) – Hamas Islamists on Thursday declared the end of a six-month-old Egyptian-brokered cease-fire with Israel in the Gaza Strip, raising the prospect of an escalation in cross-border fighting.
for me the key to mlk's comment was "liberalism's superficial optimism concerning human nature". that perception of human nature is defined by our western mindset, one that celebrates life and liberty. but that philosophy is not universal and hamas exemplifies the celebration of death. they don't yearn for peaceful coexistence. they desire victory-jihad.
frankly i understand why israelis aren't in a rush to put their necks on the chopping block. without assurances to the contrary, i would take the words(and actions) of an avowed enemy at face value. its easy to be generous when one is at a safe distance but incorrect to make judgments solely from that perspective.
Redward -
You're wrong about a few things.
(a) Hamas did make efforts to stop rocket fire & shells into Israel during most of the 6-month ceasefire. In fact, Israel's own statistics show that there was virtually no rocket fire from the start of the ceasefire in mid-June until November 4th, when it escalated hostilities by assasinating 6 Hamas operatives.
(b) Hamas was not unwilling to renew the ceasefire per se. Rather, Hamas insisted that the siege of Gaza be lifted as a condition for renewing the ceasefire. Do you really think any rational organization would do nothing when its people were being forced to live in near-starvation conditions.
(c) The siege on Gaza was *not* imposed for security reasons. It was imposed to weaken Hamas' support and deny it a politcal victory. As the International Crisis Group has said:
"But there were limits. Israel adamantly rejected any alteration in its understanding of the ceasefire to Hamas’s benefit, namely an opening of the crossings that would have handed the Islamist movement a victory
and removed one of Israel’s key instruments of leverage and pressure."
As for Hamas' "dedicated to the destruction of a legally established country", a couple of points to be made:
(1) Hamas' popularity is a direct function of the brutality of the Israeli occupation. If Israel is successful weakening Hamas, the beneficiaries will be groups that are even more radical, violent, & uncontrollable. If Israel wants to neutralize Hamas, then the solution is to uproot the settlements, remove the checkpoints, enter into serious peace negotiations based on the Arab Peace Initiative, & let the Palestinians have some semblance of a normal life.
(2) Israel has signed ceasefires with countries/organizations that opposed its right to exist before – with Egypt & Jordan in the 1940's & 1950's, with Syria in the 1940's & 1973, with the PLO in 1981.
(3) It is ridiculous to talk about a group possessing nothing more than crude rockets posing an existential threat to the state of Israel. There is no chance whatsoever that Hamas could destroy Israel in the foreseeable future.
(4) Even radical groups can be realistic and evolve in a more pragmatic direction if the conditions are right. Will Hamas ever recognize Israel’s right to exist? In the near-future, probably not. At the same time, they can recognize the ideological goal of destroying Israel is not attainable & accept Israel as a fact. In fact, Hamas has already shown some signs of doing that. See here, for example:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/jan/10/israel1