(Photo: Hossam el-Hamalawy)
The above photo is from Arabist.net. The caption reads:
Local and international activists demonstrating in front of the Press Syndicate, downtown Cairo, against Mubarak’s Wall of Shame. In the pic above, an activist is carrying a banner that reads: The Liberation of Jerusalem starts with the liberation of Cairo.
If Egypt sees this, they will simply deport all of the 1300.
Are you sure you are into promoting Egyptian revolution, in the name of Palestine?
“If Egypt sees this, they will simply deport all of the 1300.” What if it is an Egyptian who is holding the placard? Will they deport him too?
I don’t think that showing this picture Phil is promoting Egyptian revolution. He is simply reporting and showing the extent of the disconnect between the collaborationist puppet regime of Mubarak and the Egyptian people.
Sorry make that Adam not Phil.
Huh. You’re getting scared. :) Don’t think we can’t smell it, Witty.
The more democracies there are in the Middle East, the better. Egypt being the most populated state in the Arab world, and being a state that has a lot of influence over the wider Arab world, that would be the perfect place to have a democratic revolution.
But then again, I don’t think the protester meant it that way, so it doesn’t matter.
What makes you think it would work, or even survive?
See Iran 1905, 1953
See Palestine 2006
And see who the biggest arms traders with the US are this year: Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Iraq and Morocco.
Democracy makes for poor puppets.
Well, it didn’t work in 1979 with the albeit partial, democratic revolution in Iran.
Palestine in 2006 didn’t work because the Palestinians didn’t have a state. Imagine the uproar from democratic observer countries if the US tried to undermine an established democracy today. You can’t really hide behind a convert operation today like you could in 1953.
Have you heard of Pakistan?
AIPAC doesn’t want democracy in Egypt, the reason is that if Egyptians get democracy, Israel will get in trouble. Egypt with its 80 millions population and its F-16 can be so bitter to the Jewish state.
Long live Palestine, long live Egyptian people.
This is what I fear too. The activists are forcing the Egyptians to make them global heroes…sooner the Egyptians will swoop them 1300 down for instigating to distabilize the Egyptian national interity…Expressing sympathy for one suffering is entirely different to subverting the state!
The world does understand that… All other western nations involved should now send emissiaries to these people quick and warn them to return home immediately… We cannot afford to lose time for these activist to stay long incarcinated while the world politics experiment approaches to resolve this political isssue for an indifinite time.
I think this is also the time ‘to separate the grains from the staff’.
I don’t think that will happen in this case, unless they get out of hand.
The involvement of Mubarak’s wife at all, gives it the stamp of state acceptance, even if reluctantly.
It was actually a masterful form of dissent on her part, that pulled the carpet out from under Netanyahu’s likely admonishment to dismiss the dissent.
I’m not sure yet how much press this will get. It may be a rallying of the converted, which sometimes results in effective and humane action, and sometimes spins out.
I’m thinking of the early 70′s anti-Vietnam War actions that started turning self-indulgently petty violent. It quickly alienated many that would otherwise would have demonstrated non-violently. The counter culture split at that point. Some stayed politically conscious and active in some regard. Others just dropped out.
Hopefully, all this will result in an acceptance of the Arab League proposal, and some actual peace.
The longer the activitst stay in Egypt, the risk of fallout against the Egyptian government is becoming more imminent…
Yes Richard, you have totally the point. If that fellow is an Egyptian, the more the Egyptian government will become defensive; as without such instigation of the activits, this man will never raise that placard.
Signs of progress, signs that Egypt can’t ignore the protest. link to haaretz.com
Note: I am not expecting any of this to actually happen, but this is the first time the explicit linkage has been made.
The linkage to relative normalization and freeing Shalit has been made by back channels and in press leaks for years.
I sincerely hope that Hamas acknowledges that a relaxation of conflict is in their interest, rather than an exageration of conflict.
Instability makes people’s lives very stressful.
Hamas has always known that a relaxation of the conflict is in their interests Witty. Are you joking?
Its not Hamas that broke the ceasefire. Its not Hamas that is subjecting Israel to a punishing blockade. Its not Hamas that unleashed a massacre on a largely defenseless population. It’s also AGAIN not Hamas that holds 11,000 Palestinian prisoners including women and children prisoners.
Israel is the one intensifying the conflict, the blockade on Gaza is ILLEGAL under international law, no ifs or buts about it. Hamas has always stated that its crude ineffective rockets are merely a response to Israels brutal blockade.
Instability makes people’s lives very stressful.
Really? Is that all you can muster to say in the face of what your beloved racist apartheid state metes out to the indigenous people of Palestine on a daily basis? The instability is all a result of Israeli actions, its time you acknowledged that and tried to make a difference instead of white washing crimes against humanity.
Hamas broke the post-lull quiet.
Hamas thrives on revolutionary states of struggle. It gets street cred by its “victories”.
I wish that it desired the relaxation of the conflict. I see it among some, and don’t see it among those that are now deciding whether to accept the Shalit offer, or among those that decided to resume and escalate shelling of Israeli civilians last December (also a one-year anniversary).
Are you really that overtly supportive of Hamas methods, behavior, political positions? No criticism at all.
The way that Hamas can apply that goal of theirs, especially relative to the prospect of linkage to relaxation of borders, is to accept the Israeli Shalit proposal, and not seek “victory” of getting the last lick in.
Thats if they were soberly interested in improvement in Gazans lives.
Blame Hamas blame Hamas blame Hamas blame Hamas blame Hamas blame Hamas blame Hamas blame Hamas blame Hamas blame Hamas….
Anyone else notice a pattern in Witty’s world outlook?
You are a liar Witty.
Every time you have asserted that Hamas broke the ceasefire, I challenged you to provide the evidence and you have run away claiming you read it somewhere.
The fact is that Israel broke the ceasefire and the calm, not Hamas.
Are you really that overtly supportive of Neteyahu methods, behavior, political positions? Wait, don’t answer that, we already know where you stand.
And by your own admission, the right wing of Israel is who thrives o fear and violence.
Israel broke the post-lull quiet and never let up on its blockade as it promised
in the months prior to November 4th, when Israel invaded Gaza and killed Palestinians while its enabler, the USA, was self-absorbed with its presidential election. And, in the weeks that followed right up to Israel’s OP Cast Lead, Israel continually spurned Palestinian overtures to keep the quiet.
The IDF, a people’s military force, gets street cred by its “victories.”
I wish the Israeli regime desired the relaxation of the conflict but instead
it merely increases its oppression by ever-expanding settlements.
Are you really that overtly supportive of Israeli methods, behavior, political positions?
“post-lull quiet” what the hell is this supposed to mean? Ah I get it, you can’t refute the fact that Hamas abided by the cease fire but you are “convinced” that Hamas broke something–yes Hamas is always to blame–so you had to invent a non-sensical term “post-lull quiet” and blame Hamas for breaking it. BTW a quick question is Witty supposed to be a relative adjective?
The history was:
June cease-fire agreed through mediators, consistent confusion from day 1 as to what was agreed. Some dissenters and Hamas hoped that that fulfilled agreement would result in immediate opening of borders. Some hoped that after the period of the hudna borders would open. Potentially an agreement confirmed by both sides, not certain from what I’ve read.
Hamas initially permitted Islamic Jihad to shell, but restrained themselves.
In response to Israeli and international complaints, Hamas agreed to compel other factions to abide by hudna (not officially a cease-fire)
Excellent and disciplined quiet for 2 1/2 – 3 months, both sides
November 4, Israeli claims of tunnel construction plausibly only for abduction purposes, individuals and site attacked
November 4 – 17, active direct retaliation, some shelling of civilians, active skirmishing
November 17 – December 17, Hamas returns to hudna, Israeli nearly, Hamas encourages (slightly more than accepts) other factions to shell
December 10-17, relative quiet, hudna obviously in effect rather than no holds barred shelling
December 17 – 27, incremental Hamas and factional shelling escalating from shelling of desert (a warning), Sderot, Ashkelon, Beersheba. Incremental warnings issued from Israel, no organized military response.
December 27 – January 15 – Strategic and then excessive Israeli aerial assault on Gaza in preparation for ground assault. Hamas goes into deep hiding. Israel encounters only moderate on the ground resistance. Many civilians and civilian sites damaged/destroyed in process.
Do you agree with the summary? What specifically do you differ with if you differ?
From December 17 – 27, the hudna had ceased to be in effect formally. Hamas faced the decision of whether to informally extend the hudna, or abandon it and return to prior levels of shelling or escalate.
My personal sense was that Israel respected the discipline that Hamas showed, that it proceeded to begin to change Israeli’s and the world’s attitude towards Hamas, and that my own speculation was that very shortly the borders would have opened to late 2006 levels (especially if Shalit were returned).
Hamas instead lost patience, and sought to communicate to Israel that it regarded the process as a betrayal, and the initial shelling was a communication of that.
There was a near complete communication breakdown from what I perceive even in what the shelling meant. That Hamas understood that they were communicating their displeasure and demand that the borders be opened, per their understanding of the agreement, and to the day and not a minute later. That Israel interpreted the agreement as a confidence building exercise and perhaps carelessly, perhaps realistically, considered the skirmishes at the end of the cease-fire as the communication that Hamas had not changed its intention in fact.
The shelling after the formal hudna occurred during that period of voluntarily lull, outside of the committed hudna, in the limbo period (not hudna, not yet war). Hamas’ shelling into the desert originally was a statement, and was noted in the press as intentionally not at population centers. The shelling of Sderot was hoped to be temporary, just a statement. The escalation of shelling to Ashkelon and then Beersheba was interpreted as a commitment to escalate until war, an insistence that Israel and Hamas return to active war, not a lull, not a skirmish.
19th June:
Ceasefire agreement between Israel and the Hamas government comes into force for six months. Israel insisted on a verbal agreement. It stated: cessation of all military hostilities on both sides, opening of Gaza’s borders after 72 hours for 30% more trade, unrestricted trade after ten days. Egypt supports the extension of the agreement to the West Bank. (source: International Crisis Group: Ending the War in Gaza. Middle East Briefing No. 26, 5.1.2009, p.3)
19th June
Israeli warships fire four rockets at Palestinian fishermen in Palestinian waters. On the same day aircraft circling over Gaza City break the sound barrier near the ground and trigger a panic among the people. In the area of Khan Yunis Israeli patrols shoot over the border fence at farmers who work on their fields on the other side of the border. (source: Ma’an, 26.06.2008). This scenario is repeated almost daily.
24th June:
Two young officials of Jihad are murdered in their homes in Nablus by units of the IDF (Israeli Defence Force). On the same day al-Quds Brigades fire three rockets at Sderot in retaliation. (source: Ma’an 24.06.2008) The Israeli side uses the action of Jihad as an excuse to close the border crossings again.
26th June:
The al-Aqsa Brigades fire a rocket on Sderot after many Fatah members have been arrested in raids by the Israeli army. With this the al-Aqsa Brigades want to force the extension of the ceasefire to the West Bank. The spokesman of the Hamas government in Gaza warns the al-Aqsa Brigades that their actions would prevent the lifting of the blockade and favour instead the narrower interests of a organisational and political nature.
29th June:
A delegation of farmers complain to Hamas’ Ministry of Agriculture that because of the Israeli bombardment they can no longer cultivate their fields along the border fence.
4th August:
During a meeting of the Israeli labour party the Minister of Defence, Ehud Barak, threatens a ground invasion into the Gaza strip, despite Hamas’ adherence to the ceasefire.
8th August:
The director of the secret service Shin Bet, Yuval Diskin, thinks that a ceasefire would reduce the pressure on Hamas to release Shalit. He calls on the army to prepare for a major military offensive. (source: Ma’an 8.8.2008) These statements reinforce the impression among Palestinians that as far as the Israeli military leadership is concerned the purpose of the ceasefire is to gain time in order to prepare an offensive.
29th September:
The Israeli navy sinks a fishing boat (source: link to btselem.org
, after fishing boats were shot at and rammed several times.
4th November:
Israeli troops enter into Khan Yunis. Deliberately targeted projectiles kill six Hamas members and injure several people, including one woman. In the Deir al-Balah several rockets are fired at residential areas. Near Wadi Salqa two houses of the Hawaidi family are destroyed and seven family members, three of them women, are kidnapped and taken to Israel. The same day Israeli border guards prevent French consular officals, who want to get a picture of the situation, from entering the Gaza strip. (Some background information: the dubious tunneller Abu Dawabah is arrested and claims during interrogation that both Hamas and and al-Aqsa brigades had offered him money for kidnapping an Israeli soldier. (source: Ma’an 3.11.2008) One day later the Hamas Ministry of Internal Affairs issues a denial. (See also International Crisis Group: Ending the War in Gaza. Middle East Briefing No. 26, 5.1.2009, p.5)
5th November:
Residential areas in the north of the Gaza strip and Khan Yunis are bombarded. Israeli troops kill a leader of Jihad and six Hamas officials. Because of this, Hamas, the al-Aqsa Brigades and Jihad fire rockets into Israel. Until then Hamas fully observed the ceasefire. Jihad and the al-Aqsa Brigades state that the ceasefire will not prevent them from reacting to Israeli violations of the agreement. In spite of this, Hamas wants to continue the ceasefire and ask Egypt for mediation.
5th November:
The Gaza Strip is completely sealed off. Even food, medicine, fuel, spare parts for generators and water pumps, paper, telephones and shoes can no longer or only in minimal amounts enter the Gaza Strip.
8th November:
Israeli bulldozers enter into the strip at several points. This leads to armed clashes with the units of the DFLP.
9th November:
Hamas Chief Ismail Haniya declares to European delegates who had broken through the sea blockade with a boat of the Free Gaza Movement and visited Gaza that Hamas could live with a solution of the Palestine problem on the basis of UN Resolutions. (source: Ma’an 9.11.2008)
12th November:
A further four Hamas members are killed. Israeli airplanes fire rockets at residential areas. The Palestinian factions are getting ever more skeptical about the ceasefire. Israeli bulldozers cut a 150 metre swath into an area in the Gaza Strip for military patrols, destroying about 750 hectares of agrarian land. (source: Ma’an 21.11.2008)
13th November:
Israeli boarder patrols bar a UN food convoy from passing the border. The DFLP claims that for Israel this was not about the ceasefire, but about breaking resistance to the occupation. In the following days the PFLP, the DFLP, the Popular Committees and Hamas fire projectiles at Israeli places while Israeli airplanes bomb the north of the Gaza Strip.
16th November:
The Israeli Minister of Transport calls for killing the whole Hamas leadership. During new attacks another four members of the Popular Committees are killed. By now 15 people have been killed during the air strikes in recent days. The Popular Committees declare the end of the ceasefire. Their spokesperson blames Israel.
17th November:
The DLFP and Jihad fire rockets into Israel.
18th November:
The food crisis gets worse and worse. 50% of the bakeries cannot operate anymore due of lack of flour. Others use animal feed to bake bread. Israeli tanks enter the strip, there are armed clashes with the PFLP and the mujaheddin, another resistance group of Fatah. The Israeli Navy arrest 15 fishermen and three foreign solidarity activists off the coast of Gaza. The “Internationals” accompanied the fishermen in the hope that their presence would guarantee a minimum of protection. They are taken to Israel and get expelled after six days of solitary confinement. (source Ma’an 18.11.2008). The three fishing boats were given back after 9 days, but one boat was damaged, the GPS device was missing. During their days in prison, the solidarity workers were barred from contacting their lawyers and their embassies. (source: link to freegaza.org
and link to freegaza.org
]
20th November:
Yet again a Hamas member is killed by targeted rocket strikes. Hamas increasingly comes under pressure from the other groups as well as their own base, who demand they force Israel to keep to the ceasefire. But how?
23th November
Diplomatic sources claim that the Egyptians stepped in and got Hamas and the Israeli government to agree to resume the ceasefire according to the conditions originally negotiated. This is confirmed by Hamas. Hamas spokesman Ayman Taha furthermore states that the other resistance groups also agree to the continuation of the ceasefire – on condition that the blockade is lifted. Israel does not comment on this.
24th November:
A member of the Popular Committee is killed by an Israeli rocket. After Israeli claims that rockets were fired – but no one claimed responsibility for that – the Israeli Minister of Defense Barak retracts the order to open the border for urgently needed food deliveries. As far back as August rockets had been fired on several occasions from the Gaza Strip to the Negev desert, without claim of responsibility, which led to the closure of the border each time. At the time Hamas leader Mammud al-Zahhar accused Israeli agents of creating a pretext for a land invasion. (source Ma’an 12.9.2008). Also at the time the names of groups nobody in Gaza had heard of before and knew anything about crop up such as Ahrar al-Jalil, Tawhid Brigades or Hisb Allah. Some believe they are collaborators wanting to corrupt the ceasefire. Other voices believe they are small radical cells who think Hamas have made too many concessions.
28th November:
The Israeli army kills a man from Khan Yunis, who doesn’t belong to any organisation. On the same day eight Israeli soldiers are injured at a boarder border post through attacks by the mujaheddin.
30th November:
Jihad declare they no longer feel bound by the ceasefire. The al-Aqsa Brigades fire projectiles at Sderot again. Hamas and Jihad are warned by mediators from Qatar that Israel plans a major military offensive in the Gaza Strip. The political leadership of Hamas issues an urgent appeal to armed groups including their own al-Qassam Brigades to stop firing rockets into Israel.
2nd December:
Israeli tanks enter the Gaza Strip again. Two teenagers are killed in air strikes.
4th December:
Al-Aqsa Brigades fire rockets at Ashkelon.
5th December:
Massive assaults by Jewish settlers on Palestinians in Hebron. While the al-Aqsa Brigades, the DFLP and the al-Quds Brigades of the Jihad fire rockets at Israeli places as a reaction to the events in the West Bank, Hamas organises solidarity demonstrations with Palestinians in Hebron to rescue what is left of the ceasefire agreement.
7th December:
The blockade in the Gaza Strip is getting more severe. A boat from Israel with peace activists wanting to bring food and gifts for children to Gaza on the occasion of the feast of sacrifice is forced to turn back by Israeli warships. The same fate befalls a boat from Qatar and another one from Libya, both of which want to deliver food to Gaza.
13th December:
Tzipi Livni states that in case a Palestinian state is set up the Palestinian people living in Israel would be expatriated. By now no organisation thinks there is any purpose in extending the ceasefire. Brigades of the DFLP, al-Aqsa, the Popular Committees and Jihad fire at Israeli places on a regular basis. The political leadership of Hamas in Gaza, especially the de facto president Haniya has no means of preventing this, because even their own armed faction, the al-Qassam Brigades, no longer see any sense in the ceasefire.
14th December:
The Hamas leadership abroad states through Khaled Mashaal that Hamas reject an extension of the ceasefire, whereas Haniya still hopes that Egypian mediation will help achieve an extension.
19th December:
On the same day the six-month-ceasefire ends all factions declare at separate mass events that they consider the ceasefire to be finished – even Fatah.
20th December:
Fawzi Barhum, the spokesman of Hamas, calls on all factions to form a common resistance front. His acerbic reply to the Russian demand that Hamas should consider the extension of the ceasefire is that the onus was now on the international community to put pressure on Israel to cease the attacks on the Palestinian people, instead of blaming the victims of these attacks. (source: Ma’an 21.12.2008) But the Egyptians do not react.
23th December:
The former Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Hamas government, Mahmud al-Zahhar, declares once again that Hamas is prepared to continue with the ceasefire agreement, provided Israel adheres to the conditions agreed in June, in particular the lifting of the blockade. But the discourse of al-Qassam Brigades is more subdued. Abu Ubaida, spokesman of al-Qassam Brigades, speaks only about the possibility of suspending the military action and no longer about a ceasefire and does not exclude any military action in Israel if Israel does not stop its agression against Gaza. (source: Ma’an 23.12.2008)
27th December:
The Israeli military attacks the Gaza Strip, killing about 1,360 people, mostly civilians including more than 400 children, by 18th January 2009. Many thousands are injured and made homeless. Israel uses phosphorus as a weapon, turns over a cemetery, shoots at the UN, schools, mosques etc. About 13 people die on the Israeli side, some of them are killed by their own soldiers. The West puts the whole blame for the catastrophe on Hamas.
WittyLie #84
.
.
So clarify what you think is innaccurate. Please don’t lame out and say “all of it”.
You don’t treat other people’s contributions with respect, Richard, so I don’t think potsherd is under any obligation to clarify.
However, I noted that you “speculate” Israel might have been willing to ease up slightly (to late 2006 levels) its blockade and that Israel was impressed by Hamas and their attitude was changing. This is inconsistent with both Israeli and American behavior. Part of the reason the US and Israel helped instigate the Palestinian civil war was precisely because they didn’t want to see Hamas as part of a Palestinian government and the blockade (which doesn’t just keep out weapons, but also civilian goods) is meant to weaken Hamas by immiserating Gazans and hopefully providing a contrast between Gaza and the West Bank. The Israelis and the Americans want a “responsible” Palestinian government, but what they mean by that is a government which is pliable to their demands. A disciplined and unified Palestinian government which took a very firm line on what it would accept and would not jump through hoops is not what the Israelis want to see. It’s the same reason the US and Israely aren’t in favor of democracy in Egypt–they’re afraid of what that would bring.
Aside from that, everything you said was just your “impression”. The history of the conflict shows Israelis clamping down, easing up slightly, clamping down, ad nauseam. The Palestinians are supposed to wait indefinitely on the chance that Israel might someday decide to treat them as equals. Palestinians are held fully responsible for their violent acts (which is fine), but Israelis are not. The responsibility for Israeli actions is placed mainly on the Palestinians.
It’s a racist attitude, though of course you deny it. You think of the Palestinians as lesser beings, who only have rights to the extent that the Israelis are willing to grant them. Your attitude is similar to what one commonly sees in the New York Times (especially in Tom Friedman)–a great many American liberals have an unconsciously racist attitude towards the rest of the world. They see them as unruly children who have to be disciplined and forced to behave like civilized people, forced by blockades or sanctions or if all else fails, with bombs. Of course the suggestion that members of the civilized races misbehave and might need to be sanctioned is treated with horror.
No. Attempting to correct your lies is a waste of time. You ignore any facts and evidence that contradict your prejudiced notions and keep repeating the same falsehoods, ad nauseam.
I think if you actually consider my summary, you will find that it does represent Israeli impressions on the history.
So, if the rocket firing was a communication and not an actual defense then what is communicated and examples of communication breakdown are important to know about (even deterrant actions are communications, not actual defense, communication of subsequent threat).
In some your comment that “Potsherd doesn’t have to clarify” might be a reluctant admission of misunderstanding.
My description paints a conflict, rather than a deliberate and ruthless oppression/genocide. I think it is more accurate than the conspiratorial.
My understanding of the Israeli attitude towards militant Palestinians is frustration, frustration that Israel isn’t accepted.
I personally believe that adopting the 67 borders would put that question to rest for the world, if not for Palestinians that insist on unlimited right of return for all direct and indirect “national” descendants of Palestine.
I’m sorry that you think I “don’t respect” commentators here. Its true. I find there to be much assertion without inquiry, descriptions named as “facts” when they are more humbly interpretations.
You illustrate a projection “YOU think of the Palestinians”. How do you know what I think except by projection?
Question:
When is a cease fire not a cease fire?
Answer:
When Witty needs to characterize Palestinians not killing as bad, and Israelis killing as good.
More:
14th December:
Hamas proposed in mid-December to return to the original Hamas-Israel ceasefire arrangement. The proposal to renew the ceasefire was presented by a high-level Hamas delegation to Egyptian Minister of Intelligence Omar Suleiman at a meeting in Cairo Dec. 14. The delegation, said to have included Moussa Abu Marzouk, the second-ranking official in the Hamas political bureau in Damascus, told Suleiman that Hamas was prepared to stop all rocket attacks against Israel if the Israelis would open up the Gaza border crossings and pledge not to launch attacks in Gaza.
It could not be learned, however, whether Israel explicitly rejected the Hamas proposal or simply refused to respond to Egypt.
Your preamble is factually innacurate:
“Some dissenters and Hamas hoped that that fulfilled agreement would result in immediate opening of borders.”
This is pure rubbish. The Israelis agreed to lift the blockade as part of the ceasefire agreement. Why else would Hamas have agreed to a ceasefire themselves?
“Potentially an agreement confirmed by both sides, not certain from what I’ve read.”
So you are that this was the terms of the ceasefire, but insist that it was not certain.
“Hamas initially permitted Islamic Jihad to shell, but restrained themselves.”
Rubbish. There is absolutely no evidence to support this propaganda.
“In response to Israeli and international complaints, Hamas agreed to compel other factions to abide by hudna (not officially a cease-fire)”
Again, unsupported by any evidence.
“November 4, Israeli claims of tunnel construction plausibly only for abduction purposes, individuals and site attacked”
You omitted that part about the Israeli raid that killed 6 Palestinians. Now had Hamas conducted a raid on Israel and killed 6 Israeli Jews, you would have been the first to declare this an act of war and a violation of the ceasefire, but seeing as Palestinians were killed, you maintain that it is vague as to whether the ceasefire was violated.
What this demonstrates is that you have little regard for the lives of Palestinians and are a rabbid propagandist.
Thanks, Aref, for the detailed timeline. I’ve saved it and will repost it if sometime in the future Witty feels it necessary to repost his whitewashed version, in which only rockets from gaza are important, and not the deaths of Palestinians at the hands of the IDF that occurred during the same time.
Any comment, Richard, on Aref’s much more detailed timeline that refutes yours?
Aref,
Thanks for the research. I didn’t know your sources. Where are they from? Is there a link that I can view?
I noticed that you did not have any Israeli press sources, nor American press sources, nor even Al-Jazeera or other Arab press sources.
I think the truth is in an overlay. The assertion that the agreement was verbal, mediated rather than face to face, and interpreted from day one differently by each is an accurate statement.
Also, that there was an objective reduction of armed fighting immediately before the cessation of the hudna is also accurate, though there were cited incidents.
Also, that Hamas kept to the hudna largely, but late allowed and even encouraged factions to shell.
Israel’s attitude throughout the hudna was of tolerating no exceptions to the Hamas/Gaza actions, and are interpretable as excessive and provocative OR interpretable as “we mean to hold you to the hudna, no exceptions”.
The description of the frustrations of the factions is likely accurate, and demonstrates in more detail than I that process, again alternatively understood as rational response to conclusions that Israel did not honor the agreement, or that Hamas lost patience and the ability to retain discipline among the factions.
My continued impression is that the hudna unraveled mutually, a breakdown in communication, NOT was definitively and conspiratorially broken by Israel.
And, it still does not satisfactorily explain (though it did omit) the sequence of Hamas shelling desert, then Sderot, then Ashkelon, then Beersheba, an assertive escalation.
How do we all get to speak the same language, to not exclude what doesn’t embellish our own arguments? Or, shall we continue to talk skew?
It definitely is confused by politics, but the preamble to that includes Israel’s hatred of Hamas for actively undertaking gruesome and intimate terror campaigns during the 90′s and 00′s.
Hamas certainly had its stimuli, both rational and exagerated, to be assertive during that time, but the effect of the terror campaigns left a permanent imprint, that reduces Hamas’ ability to conduct any peaceful governance in Gaza or anywhere prominently in Palestine.
“You illustrate a projection “YOU think of the Palestinians”. How do you know what I think except by projection?”
I don’t truly know what sort of thought processes go on inside your cranium that enable you to talk like a hippy peace child from the 60′s and defend some of Israel’s more cruel policies, but the pattern is there. You accept Israel’s right to blockade Gaza, not just from Israel, but the sea routes, and keep out civilian supplies, but react vehemently to any talk of sanctions against Israel, though no proposed sanctions on Israel would inflict the sort of misery that Israel inflicts on Palestinians. You rationalize this by saying it is war–I thought there were laws in war that forbid collective punishment, but I understand that many Americans, including so-called liberals, tacitly assume that such rules don’t apply to us or our close allies. My speculation that they must think the rest of the world is composed of lesser humans who need to be civilized by us is based on their actual stances–this was the actual expressed views of white imperialists until recently, and while it’s gone out of fashion to openly state them, obviously many people still advocate policies which suggest they still harbor these attitudes.
You yourself appear to be muddled, talking like a Tikkun subscriber in some posts and then making excuses for Israeli atrocities in others (or sometimes the same one). You like to think of yourself as superior to the “posse” here but this is a defense mechanism. No need to listen to people if they’re beneath you and if they can all just be lumped together into a mob. Not everyone here agrees with each other, actually, but most of us can spot your double standards on human rights.
“I’m sorry that you think I “don’t respect” commentators here. Its true. I find there to be much assertion without inquiry, descriptions named as “facts” when they are more humbly interpretations.”
You’re sorry that I realize you don’t respect people here, but you don’t? Oh, please, say it’s not so. Well, cheer up, Witty, it was obvious all along. And you’re no slouch at baseless assertions and defenses of same (Richard Bernstein’s for instance) and as for humility–well, we could all use more of that around here, even the incredibly well-read folks with thoughts and opinions too deep for mere mortals and posse members to understand.
Richard, your “timeline” had no sources whatsoever so its hypocritical to criticize the extent of Aref’s sources when you don’t provide any of your own.
If you cannot accept criticisms that may lead to peace, no wonder Hamas is quick to lift their guns and count dead Palestinians!
I suppose you haven’t even looked at the post. Most dates have the source and the date which is much more than what you have provided in your post. You also assert that there were no Israeli sources — well what is Btselem? I suppose in your view Israeli means Israeli government propaganda machine? Well you won’t see that in my posts because we here that all the time in the mainstream media in the US.
Anyway, Mr. Witty, you have confirmed my suspicion in that your purpose here is not to engage in a dialog and rational exchange but to make a point and propagate lies and propaganda. By definition this is what is referred to as “trolling” in cyberspace. Goodbye.
‘Hamas initially permitted Islamic Jihad to shell, but restrained themselves.’
In the Philippines they called it ‘MILF Renegades…’ or lost commands…
whatever…, This faction caused the renewal of hostilities in the Mindanao…
Could this be a classic belligerent tactic? If yes, it already cost thousands of lives in anyof these conflicts…
Please see a much detailed and sourced chronology since the agreement of cease-fire until the attack on Gaza in December last year. What Mr. Witty wrote here is nothing more than interpretation without any sources whatsoever. So take it with tens grain of salt.
Richard, do have knowledge on facts behind the incidents between 19th to 24th June? By the facts presented by Aref Israel could be guilty indeed of unwaranted of provocation…
‘Excellent and disciplined quiet for 2 1/2 – 3 months, both sides’
Do you meant from September to November?
What were the events behind the IDF attacks, and harass civilians in 19th of June? Why are these two young officials of Jihad killed in their homes in Nablus? What were their accountabilites?
And what was the circumstance behind the capture of Shalit? Was he under mission?
One day before Hamas captured Shalit, Israeli soldiers entered Gaza City and kidnapped two civilians, the Muammar brothers, bringing them to Israel to join the thousands of other prisoners held there, almost 1000 reportedly without charge.
The Muammar brothers have not been seen or heard of since, but all we hear about is Shalit.
I don’t know the details.
From wikipedia
Early on Sunday morning, 25 June 2006, Shalit was captured by Palestinian militants who ambushed an Israeli army post on the Israeli side of the southern Gaza Strip border after crossing through an underground tunnel near the Kerem Shalom border. During the attack, two Palestinian militants[25] and two IDF soldiers were killed and three others wounded, aside from Shalit, who reportedly suffered a broken left hand and a light shoulder wound after his tank was hit with a rocket-propelled grenade (RPG).
What is funny with you? are you seeding bias and prejudgment before this others present their arguments? let other people say their minds… we would appreciate to ‘listen’! “….for the truth shall make us free.”
When you have seen the same person repeatedly lie and lie, you tend to discredit their arguments, particularly when you have seen them all repeated time after time, unaltered by exposure to facts.
This was a couple days after a similar abduction attempt in the West Bank, and a few days before the abduction in Lebanon that began the war with Hezbollah.
Israeli military described the Hezbollah abduction as potentially coordinated, or timing certainly inspired by the Shalit abduction, and with the three incidents in a short period constituted a three-front approach.
The left dismissed the timing as of no importance. But, Israel related to it like a multiplying white blood cell response to multiple infections, which explains the very intense reaction in Lebanon.
The tone of Hamas and Hezbollah statements was “we’ve got them on the run”.
So, it is now clear that this war in Gaza is not focused on Gaza alone? But also complicated by conflict in Lebanon? This is becoming more frustating; how can the people of Gaza ever have the chance of peaceful lives, when they too were included in the war of others? The more we know the more we realize the nature of this Gaza conflict is even more terrible than we see!
Ok! could anyone add more input between 19 and 24th of June about possible underlying circumstances in the provocations?
Lebanon, Syria, Iran …
And more, on the other hand, does this development suggest the people of Gaza were only pawns of this greater reagional Arab-Israeli war? Has this war not ended yet since the 1973 Arab-Israeli War?
Oh my, the peace activists in Egypt have not realize this? That they could also been unwittingly used as pawns in this more broader scoped invisible war?
How I wished I can know more about this incidents as initially it appears a case of ‘backstabbing’ between two warring parties that the ultimate victims are the civilians of Gaza and southern Israel….
The people of Gaza were mostly people of Palestine who were driven out of their homes during the 1947-48 war and into refugee camps in Gaza, at the time controlled by Egypt. They have been pawns and victims ever since.
And the peace activists in Egypt know it quite well.
In Gaza, the civilians there are genuinely suppressed and harmed by the current condition.
Efforts to improve their condition, so long as they don’t get out of hand (attacking Egypt’s government, or encouraging any violence), are needed and will likely bear fruit.
In Cairo, the intercession of Mubarak’s wife to allow dissenters presence in spite of very great reluctance to allow mass dissent there, gave the march great credibility, undeniable credibility.
Egypt was offended by Israel’s over-reaction last year, both in sympathy for civilians, and at least partially for the dissent that it stirred up domestically.
The comments here describing Mubarak as suppressive, even if true, are then counter-productive to the specific task at hand.
Although the dissenting group dismisses the segregation of hooligans from accepted dissenters on the bus to Gaza, it does describe some of the “direct action” advocates there.
I was arrested in 1970 at a militant anti-Vietnam War demonstration on May Day, in which the demonstration was organized as a non-violent direct action day (sitins in street corners, etc.), a large number of the people that came did moderately violent direct action (violence to property, burning cars, overturning garbage cans, some petty some significant).
We were arrested en masse, illegally (without any due process, “administrative detention”), and while in the stadium where we were held, dissenters requested that no detainee give their identification to protect those that were under probation or warrant associated with other dissent. It sounded similar to the description of high-adrenaline radical zeal that Phil described.
Determination, discipline, artful non-violence mixed with “by any means necessary” direct action anarchists.
That Mubarak’s wife orchestrated the validation of the march is already a success.
A volatile mix in Egypt. It can succeed, and it can spin out miserably.
“This was a couple days after a similar abduction attempt in the West Bank, and a few days before the abduction in Lebanon that began the war with Hezbollah.”
So I take it you have conceeded that the capture of the Israeli soldier took place on the Lebanese side of the border, not in Israel?
“The left dismissed the timing as of no importance. ”
The timing is of importance because the attack on Lebanon took pace AFTER Blair and Bush were informed of Israel’s plans to start a war.
“The tone of Hamas and Hezbollah statements was “we’ve got them on the run”. ”
You often use terms like “tone” when you have no evidence to support your thesis. The statements themselves don’t support your theory that Israel is always innocent, so you argue that the tone does.
“Efforts to improve their condition, so long as they don’t get out of hand (attacking Egypt’s government, or encouraging any violence), are needed and will likely bear fruit.”
More sanctimonious and insincere BS. The most fruitful of all would be the lifting of the blockade and opening of borders, which you are oposed to.
Of course not, that was a slip. You did read the post a few weeks ago by someone visiting Southern Lebanon and described SEEING the location in Israel?
On informing allies, that is norm when undertaking a military effort with potential political consequences. It was not a seeking of permission as you imply.
Tone is a description of what is communicated. If I can perceive that tone, you can be guaranteed that Israelis perceive similarly.
I know you like to ignore what is communicated by actions, perceived, in favor of “what actually occurred” (but sifted through a propaganda screen), but actions like shelling Sderot are primarily a communication, moreso than an actual deterrent.
Its important to discuss what is communicated between the parties. I’ve learned from you and others what is communicated to Gazans, Palestinians, factions, by Israeli actions which I wouldn’t have otherwise been aware.
I support concensual lifting of the blockade, but the only way that I can see Israel consenting to that is by a dependable international organization actively and conscientiously monitoring for weapons import.
And that can really only happen after some trust-development.
The short-term possibilities are increases in the number of trucks passing through the Israeli and Egyptian checkpoints, but again there are prerequisites to Israeli and Egyptian consent to that, as difficult as that maze map is to swallow.
“You did read the post a few weeks ago by someone visiting Southern Lebanon and described SEEING the location in Israel?”
Another one of your make believe sources that you can’t link to Richard because it is no longer available? Why are you so afraid to provide links?
“On informing allies, that is norm when undertaking a military effort with potential political consequences. It was not a seeking of permission as you imply.”
Blariand Bush were informed 6 months prior. So I take it you admit the attack on Lebanon was pre-determined and pre-conceived by Israel? That Israel was going to carry it out no matter what?
“Tone is a description of what is communicated. If I can perceive that tone, you can be guaranteed that Israelis perceive similarly.”
What you perceive is subject to your insufferable bias and double standards, so arguing that Israelis see things as you do is meaningless.
“I know you like to ignore what is communicated by actions, perceived, in favor of “what actually occurred” (but sifted through a propaganda screen), but actions like shelling Sderot are primarily a communication, moreso than an actual deterrent.”
Another contrived and meaningless statement. How on earth do you divide actions from what actually occurred? The shelling of Sderot were actions that followed a violation of the ceasefire by Israel. What it communicated was very simple. Kill us and we’ll try to to kill you, or as Israel likes to call it, we are defending ourselves.
The war on Gaza is part of a regional conflict which started long time ago and is the result of colonial domination of the region after WWI. However, this is the larger context which is necessary to understand the Israeli-Palestinian/Arab conflict.
The peace activists in Egypt are all too aware of the fact that the people of Gaza are victims–that is precisely the reason they are there. They are not there to support Hamas but to bring support to the people of Gaza because the world governments lead by the US stand unwilling and complicit in perpetrating the misery of the people of Gaza. Israel, with the support and blessing of the US, the EU and Egypt has imposed a crippling blockade of Gaza. People cannot leave, cannot enter, cannot get food or medicine other than what Israel allows. This has been going on for over two years now without anyone other than peace activists raising a voice in opposition. All of this is because Hamas has won the legislative elections in 2006. Some example of democracy that the so-called “civilized world” wants the rest of the “barbarians” to follow.
“I support concensual lifting of the blockade, but the only way that I can see Israel consenting to that is by a dependable international organization actively and conscientiously monitoring for weapons import.”
Another sleazy avoidance trick.
By your own admission, Israel does not supporting the lifting of the blockade, so to argue that you support the “consensual” lifting of the blockade is a vaccuous statement. All you are telling us is that you support Israel’s policies without condition.
Israel is not the arbiter of international law, or law in Gaza, and has no jurisdiction over Gaza’s water ways. air space or borders.
Isrel is not interested in “trust-development”. When Tzipi Lizni told us that a long ceasefire was not in Israell’s strategic interests, she was admitting that Israel does not want trust to develop or Hamas to be legitimized, becasu that would mean having to enter into real negotiations.
ll you are telling us is that you are happy with the status quo because Israel is powerful enough to dictate the terms.
Consensual lifting of the blockade means a solution that Israel can consent to, not that it would initiate.
There are definitely strains to developing trust with Hamas. Their history of terror is severely imprinted into Israeli consciousness, and even if Hamas changes its attitude towards Israel, that would not be quickly trusted. It would take some time.
I want things to change. Suggesting a way that I see it as feasible is not a “sleezy avoidance trick”.
The only way for Gaza to be independant in its port management is to become a state on its own (and avoid going to war somehow), or in association with the PA.
There is no flying across the chasm, even though to fly would be 100 meters, and the road is 100 miles with difficulties and dangers.
Completing the Shalit deal will change much. Delaying the deal will keep tensions high, with the horrible possibility of misunderstanding or unilateral factional action.
Gazan civilians achieve security of border access by calm. Access derived from a constant state militant agitation is reluctant rather than accepted, and undependable.
“Consensual lifting of the blockade means a solution that Israel can consent to, not that it would initiate.”
Again, Israel has no authority to consent to this matter. Israel has no right to blockade Gaza and as such has no say in the matter.
“There are definitely strains to developing trust with Hamas. ”
As usual, your argument is based on the assumption that the fault lies with Hamas, not Israel. Why does Hamas have to win Israel’s trust, and not visa versa? Whatever history of terror is associated with Hamas, it is an order of magnitude of the severity that Israel have unleashed.
Until international law is either enforced on Israel or respected by Israel, there wil ever be any just or equitable solution.
“The only way for Gaza to be independant in its port management is to become a state on its own (and avoid going to war somehow), or in association with the PA.”
The PA’s legitimacy is not set in stone. If the PA becomes discredited or irrelevant, then there is every likelyhood that a successsor will assume the authority in the West Bank/EJ and Gaza. Gaza cannot and will not become a state on it’s own, much as you and the right wing of Israel would love that to happen.
The Shalit deal is a side show. Even if he is returned, Israel will simply riase the bar on their demands to be recognized as a Jewish state and for all of Jerusalem to be recognized as Israel’s capital.
“Gazan civilians achieve security of border access by calm. ”
This is demonstrably false. Gaza tried this and Israel simply violated the calm and escalated it into a siege, as they always have,
I saw on Aljazeera the bombing of Sderot… I was wondering why? I have not read any report that civilians of Sderot are piling up arms nor rockets! This was a questionable counter attack tactic. On the other hand Aljazeera showed tunnels in Gaza whom IDF accused of smuggling arms. For us outside viewers, this accusation by Israelis could be malicious, but the fact there were almost a continued series of missiles launched by Hamas, and hundreds (?) of missiles in Gaza as Hamas flaunted to strike against southern Israel give credence about the tunnel arms smuggling , and the decision of Israel shutting down of the Gaza entry gates…
And besides, killing innocent civilians are not merely communicating, it’s challenging for more killings!
About dealing with Shalit, I donot agree that Hamas should demand for a hundred against one for Israelis. It may sound clever for the Palestinians, but the excessively high ratio has a negative repercussion to the Palestinians…It suggest that the life of an Israeli is hundred times worth that of the Palestinians. To the viewing world, even among rabid anti-semites, Israelis would earned a higher respect and a lot of esteem…This is promoting self-defamation to the Palestinians as the ‘aggrieved party’.
Shalit deal is a confidence building measure. No giving up on that as fractured as relationships are.
There is coming to be much discussion in the world on helping Gaza, including in Israel. Bradley Burston today wrote an article describing the ten worst Israeli mistakes of the decade. (He didn’t really think that far back.) His ten were:
1. Gaza siege
2. Gaza siege
3. Gaza siege
4. Gaza siege
5. Gaza siege
6. Gaza siege
…
The problem is still the utter breakdown in communications between Hamas and PA, Hamas and Israel, and the lack of practical tangible proposals that affirm international law (not just the parts of it that relate to Gaza’s isolation – a great tragedy that is potentially remediable).
International law includes Gazan civilians rights to self-govern and to have access to international rights (freedom of movement, trade, etc). And, it includes Israel’s right to security, protection from assaults on civilians from Gaza, and sovereign right to control cross border traffic.
BOTH are international law.
The question is how to get there, actually, not magically.
It seems absurd, but the contrasting reality is that Israel holds 10,000 Palestinians in jails, some overtly criminals, some terrorists, but many just dissenters or suspected of association with terror (often not even active support), and some that were in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Normalization is the best path, but the problem is triangular (Hamas, PA, Israel) + other parties. Triangular conflicts are very difficult to negotiate.
That was one of Orwell’s themes in 1984, of three major powers shifting allegiances against shifting isolated common enemies.
Its spoken of a Israel vs Palestine, and is binary like that in many ways, and also not.
Your wrong about my intent Aref.
I definitely am a Zionist, in that I believe that Israel has a right to exist safely and securely by the definitions of its own self-governance.
But, I also agree that Israel has responsibilities to respect civilians’ lives fully both within Israel and in relations.
And, I fully support the establishment of a healthy, secure, viable, Palestinian state, with the assumption that Palestinian self-interest includes good neighbor relations with Israel and a right to expect good neighbor relations from Israel.
That is the humane Zionist creed.
If you only suggest war, then I am a Zionist. If you suggest reconciliation based on the principles of affirmation of self-governance, then I am a humanist.
Aref,
In your detailed list, you presented details of Israeli asserted violations of the hudna, but omitted ANY detail on the sequence of shelling of civilian towns in Israel between December 17th and 27th (before organized military operation).
That strikes me as a material ommission.
Did you get my suggestion that the truth is likely an overlay. Some revision of each side’s truth, but also recognition of each side’s perception and the relevance of considering perception in decisions.
I get that Hamas and Gaza Palestinians perceive that no confidence building with Israel succeeds. But, I would ask you and others to question that conclusion and be more determined and committed to humanism to pursue peace, and definitions of justice that tangibly result in reconciliation, than definitions of justice that result in revenge and self-justification.
The civilians in Gaza are not piling up arms or rockets either. The difference is that behind Sderot is a government recognized by the international community. In the Occupied territories (West Bank and Gaza) the legally elected government was dismissed by the international community–representatives of Hamas in the legislative council were rounded up and imprisoned by Israel–entirely illegal and transgressing Palestinian “sovereignty (if such a thing exists)”. Hamas, even after it won the Palestinian elections in 2006 was never treated as being part of the legitimate political process of democracy but was deliberately and systematically marginalized not only by Israel but by the US, EU and other collaborationist puppet Arab regimes.
People have the right to defend themselves. This right extends to all. Is it OK to use rockets and launch missiles to do so may be arguable. However, understanding the context is necessary before making judgments. Had the international community and Israel accepted the results of the elections and did not work so hard to marginalize Hamas things might have turned out differently–I can’t speculate on how they might have turned out to be.
As for the tunnels, the Israeli mantra is that they are used to smuggle weapons. Well, they may be used to smuggle weapons but also they are used to bring in necessary supplies such as food, medicine, fuel, etc… Please remember that Gaza is under blockade–all borders are sealed by Egypt and Israel–nothing gets or out without the approval of Israel. Under those circumstances what are the people of Gaza to do to survive? Well they build their own roads underground where they can get things in and out. Saying that they are used to smuggle weapons is only half of the truth and half of the story and is meant to justify and further point out the “evil nature” of Hamas. I am not a fan of Hamas by any stretch of the imagination. I am a secularist and anti-nationalist socialist. However, before condemning anyone we need to look at the facts and do the analysis.
“However, before condemning anyone we need to look at the facts and do the analysis. ”
Good recommendation.
Thoroughly. Hopefully, you will recognize the limitations and gamble of condemnation, and stick to criticism and proposal instead.
Also, I would drop any assumption that all will think as socialist humanists. Most have other primary social references, and it becomes abusive to insist that they not be accepted.
Behaviors are a different question. Cruelty is still cruelty, no matter how you construct your identity.
Denial of right of self-governance by the definitions that different people define as “self”, is a violation of their prerogative to freely associate, whether that is ideological conflict with Palestinian nationalism or Zionism.
A day before, on 24th of June 2006 young palestinian doctor and his brother, Obama and Mustafa Abu Muamar were taken by incursion of IDF into Gaza. Nobody knows their fate. There are hundreds of disappeared Palestinians that western media ignore completely.
Richard,
The soliloquy of the two-headed crickets is reminiscent of the green clouds of hard boiled eggs who sleep furiously in the shallowness of the deep night.
I’m sorry that my language does not meet your standards/limitations.
I’m criticizing the emphasis on social agitation and condemnation as your chosen subject matter, rather than social connection and reform.
Do you get what I mean by the distinction between condemnation (of person as well) and criticism (of policy or action)?
How condemnation with incomplete information is a gamble with moral consequences.
Or, does that not concern you?
So you are saying the conflict and its result the blockade and Cast Lead were in Hamas best interests?
Please guys ignore yonira, s/he is just wasting your time, i m sure s/he is working the Nazi of TLV. yonira tell your Nazi people FUCK YOU!
aparisian, I am a guy, I don’t care if you or anyone else calls me a woman, but it is disrespectful to the women on here by trying to denigrate me by calling me a woman when in fact you know otherwise.
As for the rest of your comment, what on earth are you talking about? I know English is not your native language and I can usually work with what you give me, but in this case, I haven’t a clue.
I would also appreciate it if you don’t call me a Nazi anymore.
Hits a bit close to home, mein Herr? I think we’ve quite well established the similarities between Zionism and lebensraum — and between Nazi brutality to Jews and Zionist Jewish brutality toward Palestinians. If you don’t like how the shoe fits, yonira, stop wearing it.
We read your time line and content and Aref’s. Why don’t you?
no you really haven’t Chaos. I haven’t yet to see a post by Phil or Adam where they compare Nazism to Zionist Jewish brutality.
Have I brutalized or supported the brutalization of Palestinians?
Please don’t allow yourself to be goaded into rudeness. You only accomplish two things: making yourself look weak and immature and discrediting the anti-Zionist movement. The former is your own choice, the rest of would appreciate if you didn’t do the latter.
yonira
First of all, I said ‘s/he’ because i didn’t that you were a guy.
Second, i just observed many common lines between Zionism and Nazism, Zionists believe that Jews have more rights than non Jews on the land of Palestine, they kill innocent children, women and civilians, they build walls, and concentration camps (Gaza), they drop chemical weapons on civilians (white phosphorus etc…), they build Jewish only settlements and Jewish only roads. Ok Nazi massacred more civilians, but Zionists if got the same tools i am sure they would do the same.
and of course both have/had colonial ambitions. I would say Zionism is more dangerous because it has religious character.
I can help you out a bit there aparisian,
In an informal talk with the ambassadors to Washington, London, and Paris, Moshe Dayan describe military retaliations as a “life drug” to the Israel Army. First, it obliged the Arab governments to take drastic measures to protect their borders. Second, and this was the essence, it enabled the Israeli government to maintain a high degree of tension in the country and the army. Gideaon Rafael, also present at the meeting with Dayan, remarked to Moshe Sharett:
“This is how fascism began in Italy and Germany!” (Iron Wall, p. 133-134)
btw yonira, i believe in Israel right to exist, but not this colonial Zionist Israel, not because its just, just because i don’t want to see anyone suffering anymore, i am fed up with your wars.
Interesting Thanks Shingo :-) sorry for my limited English
These emerging forces and issues that threathens Egypt, clearly suggest that their involvement to the Gaza conflict will lead to that quagmire. This will even pressure, and make the Egyptian see more the necessity of building the wall…
At the end, only whose interest is to aggravate this war will benefit, while the Palestinians in Gaza continues to suffer…
No, the pressure will come from the people of Egypt, who sympathize with the Palestinians and suffer under the same dictator, Mubarak, who has sold out to the US as a pawn of Israel.
If this fiasco, heavens forbid, would blow out of control and badly affect Mubarak, there is one to blame first – Mrs. Mubarak! What an amusing family dynamics…It could cost the whole nation…
This is rediculous…, for even at the home comes the difference between one who do, and one who don’t stand at the helm of the nation…
Perhaps, this aspect is only a matter of diplomatic touch or sophistication…
If the aborted march creates hatred for Egypt, Israel, US, Europe in the Arab World, and achieves NO coverage in the west, is that a success or a failure?
Witty is sulking because the march actually may take place.
Success. No question about it. It will demonstrate to the entire world the conspiracy to keep the Palestinians in the mud age following the US taxpayer funded white phosphorus/DIME cube bomb devastation of Operation Cast Lead.
It is not basically an American tax funded devastation. It could also be sustaining the American national economy largely related to Defense Industry… Just like any other militant, or rebel groups throughout the world; war is exceedingly a good business…
aborted marches do not create hatred. we are too far down the road to be blaming marches, aborted or otherwise on any hatred emanating from the ongoing brutal siege, slaughter and destruction of gaza , the decades long occupation of the WB and the continued illegal expansion of the zionist enterprise.
cool framing tho, nice try and all that. the march is already a success as the train has already left the station. NO coverage is impossible, gaza is massively twittered and blogged about daily. the msm serves dinosaurs and if they ignore it so be it. gaza is not a tree falling in the forest w/no one around to hear anymore. those days are long gone.
I hope that the march results in the parties that be being motivated sufficiently to facilitate reconstruction materials to enter Gaza.
I hope that includes sobriety on the part of Hamas, Israel, Egypt, US, Europe.
I fear that the method of civil disobedient pressure, especially with the presence of “direct action” advocates on the ground there, will distract from that goal into more partisan or anarchic objectives.
Dinosaurs which control the world Annie. There is a lot of coverage, but not in the right places to enact real change. Unfortunately I am not sure if it ever will. I want a solution to this as much as anyone, but Israel and its allies are the ones with the power, the Palestinians, Hamas, and your cause will need to give some. (And of course Israel will have to give some too(and then some))
Remember Rome? Controlling the world is not a permanent position.
Think its time the 27 year dictator was shown the gate. At least a REAL American would think so, not a racist supremacist.
Jeez, Dick Witty is channeling Goebbels!
More prolonged agonies to the people of Gaza…
Gaza is a signal to the Egyptian people, of what their government would do to them if it were asked to do so. If they (Egyptian government) continues to be an accomplice to the further suffering of the Palestinians, who are actually helpless victims, what will they not do? It closes the door on all hope for the Egyptian people, and the only move that makes sense from there is full revolt. So, if the Egyptian government wants to be released from this pressure, it will open the borders to the protesters immediately – all of them.
How about a little resistance music? Play it loud
UPRISING
“The paranoia is in bloom,
The PR transmissions will resume,
They’ll try to push drugs to keep us all dumbed down,
And hope that we will never see the truth around,
SO COME ON!
Another promise, another seed,
Another packaged lie to keep us trapped in greed,
With all the green belts wrapped around our minds,
And endless red tape to keep the truth confined,
SO COME ON!
They will not force us,
They will stop degrading us,
They will not control us,
And we will be victorious!
SO COME ON!
Interchanging mind-control,
Come, let the revolution take its toll,
If you could flick a switch and open your third eye,
You’d see that we should never be afraid to die,
SO COME ON!
Rise up and take the power back,
It’s time that the fat cats had a heart attack,
You know that their time’s coming to an end,
We have to unify and watch our flag ascend!
SO COME ON!
They will not force us,
They will stop degrading us,
They will not control us,
And we will be victorious!
SO COME ON!
OI OI OI OI OI
They will not force us,
They will stop degrading us,
They will not control us,
And we will be victorious!
SO COME ON!
COME ON!”
And also the lyric of a song,
….where have all the soldiers gone?
long time passing …
where have all the soldiers gone?
long time ago…
where have all the soldiers gone?
gone to graveyard everyone,
When will they ever learn?
When will they ever learn… (Peter, Paul and Mary)
The Egyptian puppet regime clan is worried that if the Gaza protest march gets wide publicity, it may be called to account by its own citizens for being a bribed lackey of the USA-Israel
enterprise.
VR,
i like the following song on youTube by bjork DECLARE INDEPENDENCE. don’t let them do that to you!
That is a good one BluePearl. You know Bjork used to visit the anarchist enclave in Ungdomshuset, along with others like Nick Cave. This was before the riots in 2007 before the center was torn down by moneyed interest and riots broke out that had not occurred for decades. It is always the same question, in a country is it more about people or the property of a small elite? It is no different in Egypt, where oppression of the people has been brought to an art by a few elite and foreign interest. Here was the response there –
RIOT
Here’s something more local
link to youtube.com
Yes Sammy, I have always love that music video, it is truth incarnate. DAM does a damn good job.
I love their songs. Very hard hitting in their bleak narration of reality
See this:
link to youtube.com
I was with some of the organizers of the protest at the Press Syndicate the evening before the protest. This protest had been scheduled by Egyptian activists having nothing to do with the GFM. Internationals were invited to join because they were in Cairo.
So, its only Adam that is suggesting the linkage?
Witty it is an asinine proposition to say that two peoples who need liberation within such close proximity have nothing in common. Secondly, it is doubly stupid to say that there is no connection when it is the SAME entity, the USA which is financing and supporting a tyrannical regime in Egypt and an occupation in Palestine. There is a deep and abiding connection (see my post above at December 29, 2009 at 10:52 pm, this is what I am appealing to.). Did you have a mental breakdown sometime in your life that you never recovered from that causes you to be unable to see such clear connections, or are you so dense merely because Israel’s ass is clearly in the middle of this mess?
Now, with the above noted, even if there were two different events scheduled it means zero in the total sum of the context. This is why a man would raise a sign speaking of Jerusalem and Egypt at the same time. Also, there are other reports coming out of Egypt which say that the international presence has emboldened the activity of resistance in Egypt.
Of course there is a link. These are two groups of activists protesting the Israeli occupation of Palestine in general and the siege of Gaza in particular. Because they happen to be in the same place at the same time the Egyptian activists (as the folks who have obviously more experience with activism in Cairo) have reached out to the international guests. My point was not a lack of a link but just that it was the Egyptians including the internationals in their activism not the other way around. The internationals are in a particularly privileged place during their stay in cairo, Egyptian activists are regularly beat for any type of protest. So I think saying that saying that the internationals are inspiring Egyptians is a serious misreading of the situation. But I do think we can learn a lot from the Egyptians while on their turf.
Inspiring was not the word, embolden was the word. Just like Israel holds back its venom in the presence of foreign cameras (or more recently, does not allow them in at all). This is not a question of inspiration, but taking advantage of international presence and the self -restriction it brings for the time being from the Egyptian dictatorship. Enough said
By someone there –
“However, we also realize that, as foreigners, we have a huge amount of privilege that Egyptians who protest their own government’s actions do not have. We are just not going to be subject to the same level of repression that’s meted out to Egyptian activists, for whom arrest, beatings, long prison terms and torture are common features of political life. This means that we have the ability to push back against some of the Egyptian government’s attempts to control us….
While they have been fairly successful on the first count, they have massively failed on the second one. Our actions were on the front page of newspapers in Cairo this morning. In the downtown neighborhood where many of us are staying, people who see our keffiyahs, t-shirts and Gaza Freedom March buttons have been stopping us to talk and show their support (and frequently try to plug the family shop located nearby, but that’s just how it goes here.)…
We know it is very dangerous for the Egyptians to be taking part in any protest at all and we felt honored and inspired to stand among them. “It is because of you [internationals] that we are being allowed to do this at all,” one protester told us. “If you weren’t here we would be locked up straight away.” ”
Emboldened
<a href="link to lauraontheleftcoast.blogspot.com
FREEDOM MARCH UPDATE
GAZA FREEDOM MARCH UPDATE
As I wrote before, there are many good thing the Egyptian government could gain by arresting these 1,300 marchers and putting them all of them in one rehabilitation and processing camp on the ground of inciting rebellion without any indication of forced labor, or similar form of cruelty or gross inhumanity:
a) Processing fees in Euros or in dollars (Humanitarian act, as it better be fined than imprisoned for violating against the law);
b) Manual production of plastic tents for disaster management through the Arab world specially after earthquakes (Disaster Risk management and Climate Change Adaptation). Iraq and Afghanistan are earthquake prone countries;
c) Manual assembly of drip irrigation systems that can be donated to less privileged Arab farmers (poverty alleviation);
d) Production of night soil (human wastes) for greening the peripheral desert lands adjacent to the vast reed swamp in Alexandria Egypt, which I personally saw it once. (Regional Food Security and Climate Change Adaptation)
e) Promotion of bilateral agreement or granting of economic development grants with concern countries as token of goodwill for early pardon and releasing their citizens (promoting goodwill and mutual international diplomacy);
For those who do voluntarily work, their total output will earn them free plane ticket home executive class, and other surplus outputs will be exchanged for gifts certificates at the Egypt International Airport PX, and rest are converted into cash allowances. Those who will not work will be given special diet that would produce high quality humus…
1,300 people is quite a large human resources, which can contribute significantly to Alexandria Sustainable Urban Development or to societal development all over Arab region. After some years, at the end of this charade every one will be feeling gratified as they are given special certificates or recognitions for having contributed meaningfully to the ecological well being of global humanity.
here is a video which makes things clear for you Dick Witty
link to palestinevideo.blogspot.com
What’s your point?
What was said?
Who are the people?
you said there is no linkage.
I m saying that you are wrong because in the video posted above, Egyptian protesters chanting ” down down Israel, down down Muburak. Free Free Palestine.”
RE: “The Liberation of Jerusalem starts with the liberation of Cairo.” – banner
MY COMMENT: Such “incitement”* against Israel and Egypt!
Incitement! Incitement! Incitement! Incitement! Incitement! Incitement! Incitement! Incitement! Incitement! Incitement! Incitement! Incitement! Incitement! Incitement! Incitement! Incitement! Incitement! Incitement! [ad nauseam]
*channeling Avigdor Lieberman
P.S. Main Entry: in·cite
Etymology: Middle French inciter, from Latin incitare, from in- + citare to put in motion — more at cite
Date: 15th century
: to move to action : stir up : spur on : urge on
RE: “The Liberation of Jerusalem starts with the liberation of Cairo.” – banner
ALSO SEE: “Arab Dictatorships Take 4 of Top 5 Spots in Purchase of U.S. Weapons and Services” – allgov.com, 12/28/09
(EXCERPT) Most of the leading buyers of American military hardware in 2008 had two characteristics in common: they speak Arabic and their governments are opposed to democracy and basic freedoms. Information compiled by the Congressional Research Service revealed that the biggest recipients of U.S. arms sales last year were (in order): the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Saudi Arabia, Morocco, Iraq and Egypt. With the exception of the popularly-elected government in Baghdad, all of these American military partners are ruled by autocratic or theocratic regimes. The leading defense contractors manufacturing the weapons for these governments are Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, General Dynamics, and Raytheon. Earlier this month, the Defense Security Cooperation Agency notified Congress of the potential for $2.2 billion of new weapons sales to Arab dictatorships, in particular $1.2 billion worth to Hosni Mubarak’s Egypt for air-to-surface missiles, anti-ship missiles, aircraft engines, and Fast Missile Crafts (FMC)….
SOURCE – link to allgov.com
Israel receives more US military aid than any other country (and the most advanced weapons and systems)–except the weapons are not
purchased (as they are by the Arab despot regimes; even Egypt has to pay back its
“loans”)–no to Israel, the weapons it gets from the USA are given to it net FREE.
link to allvoices.com
The question that has to be asked when these dictatorships “buy” (that is with so-called US aid as Egypt’s case), what are they buying the weapons for? Has Egypt attacked any surrounding enemies? No. The answer is that the weapons are bought to suppress their own people. They stand as a threat, armed to the teeth, against their own peoples desire for liberation, much more than any attack from an external enemy.
Just got this GFM press release:
When they start infighting and later getting arrested, they will achieve some press coverage.
How many are willing to sit in Egyptian jails?
The announcement that the march intended to march through the Erez crossing is very troubling.
Israel will not respond kindly, as Egypt did not respond kindly when its border was breached last year.
Non-violent civil disobedience on that scale requires MUCH MORE disclipline on the non-violence side. The proponents obviously include more “direct action” minded individuals that somehow accept unnecessary suffering and even likely deaths as a politically justified collateral damage, named as martyrs or cause celebre.
In an undisciplined demonstration the people in the front will be pushed forward by the crowd.
Phil, stay away from the front of the march in that case. I still value your even tentative friendship.
i dont understand why this march bothers you that much? Witty you are a Zionist snake, a very talented liar!!!!!!!!!!!
“A Zionist snake”.
The reason the march bothers me at all is for the prospect of violence, and for the stated goal of removing Israel’s right to have soverign control over its border with Gaza.
It changes an otherwise humanitarian gesture to a use of force with “non-violence” merely as a tactic.
Storm the border.
Prospect of violence? these are activists, and Israel right to have sovereign control over its border with Gaza? Do you the Egyptian borders with Gaza? Egypt became Israel now? And where is the sovereignty when it comes to Palestinians?
Witty, why not you just ask your friends AIPAC to respect the international law?
WITTYLIE #123
.
.
Richard, ‘snake’ or not, go on with your arguments, for a fair judgment it is the presented arguments that counts not ‘personalities’… many people could be ‘listening’ with rationality…
So, since when did Israel’s border extend along the coast of Gaza?
What part of “march to Erez Crossing into Israel” didn’t you understand, Richard? At no time, have any of the organisers ever intimated that they would attempt to cross into Israel. On the contrary, they have said that they would not get anywhere near the immediate buffer zone – out of concern for the saftey of the Palestinians who will be marching with them. You have made this up out of whole cloth. The Gaza Freedom March is entirely non-violent, and has never had any intention of forcing its way through the Israeli border – or allowing the creation of a situation in which that might happen.
So the “Erez Crossing INTO ISRAEL” was just a description of the Erez Crossing, and not a description of the organizers intent to march into Israel?
Of course that is what it means. Note the preposition “to”, the capitalisation of the word “Crossing”, the lack of punctuation between the words “Crossing” and “into”. A description of the Erez Crossing was certainly in order, if only to distinguish it from the other crossing mentioned in the press release: “Egypt’s Rafah Crossing” . Only someone intent on smearing a non-violent, humanitarian protest could have misconstrued this to mean that “the march intended to march through the Erez crossing“. If you had any doubt about the phrasing, you could have checked or asked, instead of making inflammatory statements.
He’ll keep repeating this lie, like all the others that people bother to correct him on.
Why are you yelling?
Don’t you see the ambiguity in the language? I was generally concerned for the people’s safety into what looked like a dangerous setting.
Please drop your necessity to demonize me and others that regard Israel as valid, hopeful, preferring maturation to assimilation or dissolution (single state).
Witty?
If you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.
I.e.
If you can’t understand basic semantics, quit making a rampant fool of yourself in the debate. This isn’t a remedial English course.
Your assumption of the meaning of the phrase is based your previous false assertion that the march was planning on forcing its way through borders (you were corrected, if I am not mistaken). If you felt the language was ambiguous, you could have looked into it, instead of unambiguously deciding it meant that the organisers didn’t give a damn about whether anyone got hurt.
If there is anyone who is demonising here, it is the person who made this outrageous statement: “The proponents obviously include more “direct action” minded individuals that somehow accept unnecessary suffering and even likely deaths as a politically justified collateral damage, named as martyrs or cause celebre.“
It is probably his (Richards) penchant for trying to protect Israel just in case they decide to shoot some people Shmuel, which may happen. One must understand the pathological drive to protect Israel no matter what atrocities it commits, even before the fact. This means that you must naturally demonize innocent people, especially women, children and infants.
Again,
You don’t need to condemn a read of an ambiguous text.
Your at the point of getting mean about this.
I didn’t decide it meant anything. I asked.
So much for intended respect of others posting.
I don’t think I’m getting mean. I’m just insisting that words have a meaning that cannot be changed at will, and that obviously makes you uncomfortable. You did not ask. You expressed dismay at the intention of the marchers “to march through the Erez Crossing“, and went on to condemn some of the activists in no uncertain terms (“the proponents obviously include …”) – based on nothing but your misunderstanding of a single phrase and your previously-held misconception of the entire project, its participants and its supporters. Had you bothered to look into the march, you would have found that the desire to safeguard lives and to avoid possibly dangerous situations – particularly for Palestinians, who lack the protection that internationals enjoy – has been uppermost in the organisers’ and participants’ minds.
You decided some time ago (without any evidence) that the GFM was going to try to force its way through borders, and you weren’t going to let a little preposition get in your way. When I misread a statement and draw far-reaching and defamatory conclusions from it, I usually start off by apologising. I then shut up for a while and promise myself to be more careful next time.
I think you are being aggressive about this Shmuel.
Its really getting petty on your part. Where wording is not understood, the best that can happen is clarification. We got there.
Why are you sticking with this?
I didn’t decide anything. I read of proponents intention, then after you and others conveyed that that wasn’t the case, I was relieved as it would then avoid possibilities of unintended violence. When I saw wording that suggested that some might be attempting to cross into Israel, I was concerned.
It makes perfect sense if you are at all charitable with other human beings. If you seek to throw darts only, then dart-throwing happens.
Dart-throwing deters discussion, or do you think otherwise?
Witty the half of the time aren’t going around attacking the credibility of others, you’re repeating, ad nasuem, outright lies and propaganda (I still remember the time when I pointed out how you were literally parroting the same wording coming out of the Israeli Foreign Ministry).
You frustrate people because you are an inveterate racist. The way you treat Shmuel is exactly the same way I get treated, as a white man in my community who doesn’t believe that, for instance, black people shouldn’t be presumed criminal when walking through a “white” neighborhood.
“The proponents obviously include more “direct action” minded individuals that somehow accept unnecessary suffering and even likely deaths as a politically justified collateral damage, named as martyrs or cause celebre.“
Its taken a little out of context, but do you think that it is true? Do you think that there are any (or many) that adopt direct action towards provoking a response, an exagerated response that can then be posted as “evidence of Israel’s brutality”.
You do know that Gandhian slogan of “the purpose of non-violent civil disobedience is to evoke a response.”
And, you do know that that is how I think of Hamas escalation in December of 2008, an insistence that Israel respond militarily.
Hamas “escalation” in December? You mean their response to the murder of Palestinians in November, six months after an excrutiating seige when less than 20 trucks were sent over 9 days [the requirement being 500 trucks a day] in a ceasefire where they fulfilled all their obligations and Israel not only fulfilled none, but also prepared to massacre trapped Gazans in a ghetto where children have delayed milestones of growth by four years due to chronic malnutrution and PTSD?
Witty, you are despicable. You would blame the Jews in the Warsaw ghetto for not putting their children in the trains to Auschwitz quick enough
“You mean their response to the murder of Palestinians in November”
Is that what it was? So, the shooting back at the IDF in November wasn’t that, only December?
And, shelling Sderot once or twice wasn’t enough. It took shelling Ashkelon and Beersheba to satisfy their revenge?
Back to nazi analogies I see.
Do you know of Subhash Chandra Bose? Are you a fan or an opponent of his?
Sorry but the Nazi analogies fit, Herr Goebbels. Are you still denying the reality that the IDF violated the borders of Gaza and slaughtered six Palestinians in November?
Tell me this, Witty, do you think Mały Powstaniec was an incitement to the Nazis? Do you think the Warsaw Uprising justified the holocaust?
Sammy, Mały Powstaniec refers to the fact that Warsaw uprising against Germans was faught by children and youngsters less than 19 years of age, because Germans removed most adult males and many adult females from Warsaw by then.
Warsaw Ghetto was in Warsaw. Ghetto Uprising took the place in 1943 and the Ghetto was liquidated immediately after. Warsaw Uprising took place in 1944.
Jews rarely learn, or are thought about Polish resistance against Germans. It is goy history.
I don’t know what/who Maly Powstaniec is.
Do I think the Warsaw Uprising justified the holocaust?
I certainly get your suggestion of parallel, a walled up people, starving, slaving, beaten at the whim of ever present nazi guards, no inputs short of the black market, no compensation, highest population concentration in the world with legally no other options, rumors of exportation to death camps, suggesting that the young vanguard heroically fight back as Quixotic as it seemed.
The Warsaw uprising though attacked ONLY military targets, not the whole civilian city of Warsaw. And, the ghetto uprising occurred ONLY in response to the ghetto itself, not following ten years of gruesome suicide bombing in hotels, cafes, school buses, that defined Hamas’ intent.
It suggests to me the relevance of working to change the condition of civilian Gazans, but not to conclude that “Zionism is racism”, nor that the only or most effective approach is harrassment.
Just to clarify, I don’t regard the list of Warsaw conditions to be parallel to Gaza. There are elements of parallel (limited options, restricted access to minimum needs, absence of international freedom of movement), and elements of difference (no death camps threatened, no daily harrassment by nazi guards – Israelis are far away, hunger but not starvation, shortage of medical supplies but not absence, shortage of compensated work but not none or not illegal).
Work for change. Alienating me rather than encouraging me is not it. If you are sincere in seeking their help, the best approach would be to FIND ways to inspire liberals to help, NOT to insult them. There is some other process happening from that.
We’ve been alienated by the far left, not confronted as you imagine, and definitely not inspired.
You know that for three months I fasted with the Rabbis for Gaza group, and stated so in my synagogue. It was contreversial as I am an officer in the synagogue and NOT a popular program.
You take many cheap shots, and gloat about it. Its a tragedy in process.
“. Alienating me rather than encouraging me is not it. If you are sincere in seeking their help, the best approach would be to FIND ways to inspire liberals to help, NOT to insult them. ”
Even in microcosm you do for yourself and your brand of liberal what you do for Israel–deny responsibility for your own actions. Yes, it’s unpleasant to be engaged in arguments with people all the time, but you bring that on with your frequent posts downplaying Israeli crimes. And anyway, it’s your responsibility to look past the name-calling and learn what you can from your opponents. If that’s too hard, then don’t post so much, and just read the human rights reports for yourself. It’s your responsibility, not that of anyone else.
On the larger scale, you have it backwards. It’s liberals like yourself that dominate the discourse and marginalize people like Phil and call him a self-hating Jew or an anti-semite (if not Jewish). I’m an occasional lurker at “Realistic Dove”–Phil is obviously a moral leper in that crowd and though you defend Phil (sort of), you dismiss his “posse”. So we know how you’d like the public debate to go. You catch flak because you come here with your arguments we’ve all heard from Tom Friedman or the like 10,000 times before–people like Phil don’t come near the NYT op ed page.
I think, though, that at some level you’re worried that the exile of the far left might be ending. I’m not so sure myself–Israel has done really bad things before (Lebanon, 1982 was far worse than Gaza 2009) and after a bit of news interest things went back to “normal”.
“The Warsaw uprising though attacked ONLY military targets, not the whole civilian city of Warsaw. And, the ghetto uprising occurred ONLY in response to the ghetto itself, not following ten years of gruesome suicide bombing in hotels, cafes, school buses, that defined Hamas’ intent.”
1. The reason the uprising attacked ONLY military targets, is because ONLY military targets were within reach.
2. The Hamas retaliation occurred ONLY in response to the blockade itself.
3. The ten years of suicide bombing in hotels, cafes, school buses are a fraction of the carnage Israel inflicted in Sabra and Shatilla, the Qana rocket attacks and the many more much more gruesome violations by Israel, who incidentally, always had the choice of putting an end to the violence by withdrawing from the occupied territories and allowing the refugees to return.
Byut again, all that matters to you Richard, are the deaths o fIsraelis.
I understand the cry of the Palestinians…Who does not want to return to their own homes and take their lands back. But the problem is, it appears these lands covered by newest Israel expansion were viewed as spoils of war, by everyone in this world who understands the conduct of war? Perhaps this is one reason no major power nation arm-twisted the Israelis to give up the overtaken lands, and that, one remaining least damaging approach maybe is to apply the common irony; ‘if you cannot defeat them, join them!’
So we should give Poland back to Germany and Russia, then?
Well let’s see. In 1991 Iraq took over Kuwait which historically was part of Iraq–I am not justifying anything by saying that. What happened? Yes the US and the rest of its puppets joined in and launched a war to kick Iraq out–because acquiring land through war is illegal and counter international law.
In the case of Palestine the European colonialists gave Palestine to the Zionists. There are many reasons for that one being that if a Jewish State is established then they will be rid of their Jewish population–that is what Herzl, the founder of political Zionism, promised would happen. Anti-Semitism? Yes you bet. That well known and blatant anti-Semitism did not deter Herzl and his followers on the contrary Herzl predicted that the “Anti-Semites would become our allies”.
International law seems to apply only when the interests of the “civilized West” are threatened. When they benefit then breaching international law is not only OK but is the norm.
Pushed to its conclusion, your logic implies that anyone can launch a war and if they win they can keep the spoils. Would you want to live in such a world? I don’t.
‘Pushed to its conclusion, your logic implies that anyone can launch a war and if they win they can keep the spoils. Would you want to live in such a world? I don’t.”
Pushed further, it would suggest that any state capable of wrestling territory from Israel is has legitimate claims to it. In any case, of keeping stolen land is Kosher, then no Israel supporter should be demanding that Israel be recognize as a Jewish state, becausee the citizens of the state are merely caretakers until someone takes it from the land from them.
zamaaz – on the contrary, “everyone in the world who understands the conduct of war” knows the UN resolution forbidding “the acquisition of territory by war.”
Except for Israel.
There are civilian targets in ethnically cleansed Palestinian villages because Israel does not follow the fourth Geneva convention. Why are there foreign civilian Jews in the villages around the Palestinian ghettos? Where did they come from?