1. Tear gas. The crawl on CNN screen last night said that the teargas used in Egypt was manufactured in the United States. CNN also published an article to that effect.
But look: Israel has been using the same teargas to suppress and kill nonviolent demonstrators for a long time. Not a peep. So far...
2. Sanctions. In his bumbling press briefing two days ago, Robert Gibbs put the U.S. "assistance posture" toward the Egyptians on the table, warning the gov't not to crack down on the protesters or there goes our money. People are listening. Firedoglake has called for ending aid to Egypt, citing the teargas canisters we produce being used against demonstrators.
Let me remind you, the Israelis killed nearly 400 children in Gaza by dropping white phosphorus on them over 22 days of hellish attacks on a population of 1.5 million two years ago, and the U.S. said nothing. The siege of Gaza is collective punishment, a war crime. And pro-democracy demonstrations in the West Bank, where the people have no rights, are routinely suppressed by Israel. A worldwide movement has called for boycott, divestment and sanctions. Will Firedoglake and Robert Gibbs see the writing on the wall?
3. Hamas/Muslim Brotherhood. The most important statement on cable news I have seen in days came from Peter Bergen, security analyst for CNN, when he demolished an anchor's suggestion that the Muslim Brotherhood is a terrorist organization. The MB is a "responsible" organization that has renounced terrorist tactics long ago. "Of course they are democratic," Bergen said."These groups are all around the Middle East, sometimes they become the government. We saw that with Hamas." Brilliant breakthrough, thank you Bergen. James North pointed out days ago here that MB wants nothing to do with Al Qaeda. Compare these insights to Martin Fletcher at MSNBC, the son of Holocaust survivors, who warned that an "Islamic fundamentalist" government in Egypt would make it impossible for the U.S. to support Egypt. That is simple intolerance.
I don't think these contradictions can survive this moment of incredible education for Americans.
4. Dialogue. On CNN this morning, Candy Crowley bridled at Hillary Clinton's suggestion that "dialogue" is the answer in Egypt. The verdict was in a long time ago, people want their oppressor gone; what possible process of negotiation would produce a satisfactory outcome, Crowley was saying. This lesson needs to go next door, where Palestinian anti-occupation groups have pointed out for years that dialogue has produced one result: the powerful stay in power, the victims are further oppressed and dispossessed, the occupation never ends.
The firewall of polite hypocrisy when it comes to Israel can't survive.
5. Obama's policy. Talking to Andrea Mitchell on MSNBC the other day, Jane Harman scolded Mubarak for ignoring Obama's call for democracy in Cairo two years ago. You are now reaping the whirlwind, she said in effect.
Well, Obama called for an end to the settlements and an end to the humiliation of the Palestinian people in that same speech; and Netanyahu has brazenly defied him.
America, are you listening?
Edit: “demolished an anchor’s suggestion that the Muslim Brotherhood is not a terrorist organization.” to “demolished an anchor’s suggestion that the Muslim Brotherhood is a terrorist organization.”
thank you. jumped right on it. apologies
great post phil. should be read by all. complete double standard here, another sign people are immune to palestinian suffering.
disgusting!
“another sign people are immune to palestinian suffering.”
To be precise, the US political mainstream does its best to ignore suffering inflicted by Israel on anyone (Palestinians or Lebanese). Palestinian suffering inflicted by an official enemy (to use Chomsky’s term) would get much more coverage.
You are smokin’ Phil. Tremendous, passionate writing.
And you’re on target: the double standard must be exposed: it’s a matter of simple justice and fairness.
But exposure of the double standard will be perceived as a dangerous threat to Israeli Jewish identity: that Jews are the world’s perpetual victims has become entrenched in the Jewish psyche. It follows logically that, as Haggai Ram writes, “Israel needs an existential threat,” and the reason Israel needs an existential threat is because Israel requires a scapegoat, a justification to continue its “repertoire of violence” — if not against the Palestinian people, then against SOME people somewhere: one of zionism’s pillars is militarism: “the Maccabens will rise again!” declaims Theodore Herzl in Der Judenstaat: this is zionist Jewry’s equivalent of “We the People . . .”
So Obama, speaking for the US government, warns Mubarak not to interfere with freedom of speech and of assemby or risk losing US aid, but not one word regarding the Israeli’s and PA’s trampling for decades upon the same freedoms for Palestinians. Seems that some Arabs are more equal than others…
I suggest that Wikileaks and the leaks by AJ of the Palestinian Papers–given a successful Egyptian revolt–could soon ignite serious unrest among Palestinians. Would like others’ take on this possibility.
Hillary Clinton hasn’t noticed that in their first full day in office, Mubarak’s new cabinet has (1) pulled the plug on Al Jazeera’s Cairo office and (2) in an incredibly crude, brutal display of force, starting buzzing protesters in Tahrir Square with fighter jets, as if warning of a Tiananmen Square denouement?
What happened to the idealistic young graduate who preached these words at her Wellesley College commencement speech in 1969?
————
We’re searching for more immediate, ecstatic and penetrating mode of living. And so our questions, our questions about our institutions, about our colleges, about our churches, about our government continue. But along with using these words — integrity, trust, and respect — in regard to institutions and leaders, we’re perhaps harshest with them in regard to ourselves.
Every protest, every dissent, whether it’s an individual academic paper, Founder’s parking lot demonstration, is unabashedly an attempt to forge an identity in this particular age. That attempt at forging for many of us over the past four years has meant coming to terms with our humanness. If the experiment in human living doesn’t work in this country, in this age, it’s not going to work anywhere.
But we also know that to be educated, the goal of it must be human liberation.
————
All those principles — American constitutional principles — have been eroded to dross by the corrosive Realpolitik of Washington’s global military regime.
Our leaders shame us.
Unfortunately, too much of America is watching Faux News and getting their education in lies.
Another brilliant post. I would add to this the contrast, the amazingly “in living technicolor” contrast, between the scenes of GENUINE popular upheaval that we saw in Egypt compared with “contrived” fake upheaval that we saw in Iraq when America supposedly “liberated” it — I just keep thinking of the bogus footage of that small engineered group toppling the statue of Saddam in that square… As well, the contrast as you already pointed out between our horrifying disregard for culture and history when we bombed the museums and libraries in Iraq versus the deep respect shown by ordinary Egyptian citizens who risked their own lives to join hands in a simple but highly effective protective line around their treasured museum… Really this whole theme is so strong — that perhaps America could learn a thing or two about true democracy and civics and societal comportment from the Arab world in fact, not the reverse…
I wish there were an opportunity here to do split screen videos or something of Iraq and Egypt. Because I certainly keep seeing it in my mind. But most Americans have probably already forgotten by now that we went to war against Iraq in any meaningful sense beyond just a soundbite talking bite sort of understanding… if they ever even knew in the first place.
The other opportunity for learning is HISTORY… this revolution is all the much richer if you understand and know Egyptian history, the last hundred years or so… and then just the broader sense of realizing that the Egyptian people has been around and building civilizations for soooo much longer than we silly Americans… the idea of our lecturing them “how to do it” is utterly absurd and insulting. They will figure it out. Egypt is a great and ancient nation.
Perhaps, too, it will FINALLY sink in to Americans that billions of people in the world are Muslims and they are peaceful and civilized… Egypt is ONE Arab nation, ONE nation that is largely Muslim, among how many? Can we finally GRASP this basic, basic fact – that not all “Ay-rabs” and “Mooslims” are “terr’ists?” They’re just ordinary folks who want to give their kids a shot at a decent life.
Its NOT true that 400 Gazan civilians were killed by white phosphorous. (1 killed by white phosphorous is too many. ) Your grammar is deceptive in that case Phil. (One rhetorical exageration is also too many.) 400 of 1400 killed were civilians (though the categorization differs by source). Thats 28%. And, some proportion of those were family of actual bombers, killed while their husbands and sons were with them. (A tragedy without question, and possibly some crimes.)
In WW2, the good war, the number of civilians killed was closer to 40%. (I don’t know the exact number.) In Vietnam 60%.
“These” lessons to Israel. What specific lessons do you derive? That Israel should learn.
Specific. So, I know whether I agree or disagree, rather than the vague, “something’s wrong”.
Also, although Hamas’ organization does do humane and democratic work, it ALSO actively contains a terrorist infrastructure, that has been used to do and to encourage, train, fund terror on civilians.
Is it a terror organization? I don’t know. I know that to claim that its not, is also a misrepresentation.
good point. some were killed with white phosphorus. i saw the house in beit lahiya that was hit by a phosphorus shell as the family huddled in fear. a dozen people sheltering there, when the shell hit the roof and turned the house into a charnel house. many incinerated. i should have said, many
i beleive hamas is little different from the muslim brotherhood. if anyone did to the people of egypt what israel has done to the people of gaza, the int’l outrage in the us would be huge, and the rockets fired from the ghetto would far exceed anything we’ve seen in gaza. not that it’s right! goldstone called it a war crime. remember goldstone?
The important question is “what lessons should Israel learn?” Specifically.
So far in this essay you’ve only stated “something’s wrong”, not proposal, not clarity.
Get that, Phil? Merely documenting what’s wrong is the wrong thing to do. Being a journalist? Wrong! You need to hastily fabricate a solution to any problem you present so that Witty doesn’t have to make his own straw man to tilt at.
It is a criticism of his journalism, if thats where you want to go.
He doesn’t need to be the one to proceed to proposal, but as a journalist, it would be a reasonable next question to ask, “what would be the appropriate scale response in circumstances?” Perhaps asking a number of activists and establishment people what their criteria might be.
And, how they come down in this situation.
We need to be informed actually, not just yelled at.
Perhaps asking a number of activists and establishment people what their criteria might be.
it would make no difference, you would find other ways to critique him. it’s your yoda role. i’m sure over at your own blog you have numerous posts where you’ve asked a number of activists and establishment people what their criteria might be? i’ll be looking forward to reading that post/not.
re: “The important question is “what lessons should Israel learn?” Specifically.”
1. That the days of the Zionist Crusade in Palestine are numbered.
2. That they should implement a South African-style plan for equality and full civil rights for all.
3. That refusal to recognize this reality leaves them to slowly wither away as a pariah zombie state.
“400 of 1400 killed were civilians (though the categorization differs by source). Thats 28%”
Don’t know where you’ve pulled these bogus figures from but I trust B’Tselems assessment is closer to the truth
link to bit.ly
And considering at least 350 of the casualties were children, Witty apparently thinks that A) infants, toddlers, preteens and teens can be “military personnel” too! or B) every adult magically becomes a militant once they become an adult and doesn’t lose that designation by becoming infirm or elderly. Even women.
Never mind that in Israel, unlike in Palestine, every adult man and woman is a conscript for the military, don’t you dare assume that the same logic applies to the Jewish nation!
Now, now, Chaos, give Richard a chance. Maybe he is busily typing up ways that Palestinian terrorists can improve their tactics. Here is one suggestion I gleaned from Richard’s own post. What they should do according to the Witty doctrine is go to the home of an Israeli “militant”, say a Likud voter or a settler or someone in the IDF and then blow themselves up. Sure, they might also kill family members. A tragedy without question–maybe even a crime.
I don’t think that pre-teens, toddlers can be military personnel. That is your habitual misrepresentation.
I do believe that pre-teens, toddlers can be opportunistically sited as indicating intent, when what at least partially indicates is the intent for the militias to be immune from accountability.
Is this an oblique reference to Israeli settlements on the West Bank? I’m not sure.
“Is this an oblique reference to Israeli settlements on the West Bank? I’m not sure.”
I’m guessing he is saying that Hamas uses babies as human shields. But it’s in a particularly difficult passage of Wittyese, so it’s hard to translate.
As for his first two sentences–
“I don’t think that pre-teens, toddlers can be military personnel. That is your habitual misrepresentation.”
Wrong again. It can’t be a habitual misrepresentation because I don’t say that. I said that you tacitly assume that any adult was a legitimate target and then make excuses for the deaths of children, by implying that it is okay to target men in their homes (where they might be surrounded by family members). Of course men in their homes surrounded by family members aren’t likely to be participating in hostilities, but I suppose now is the time when you make some racist fact-free claim about that.
I was being sarcastic. My point is, Witty sets one set of standards for Jews (“Israel has a right to defend its illegal settlements, and even though they’re illegal removing those Jewish children who were trucked in by the Israeli government is ethnic cleansing”) and another set of standards for everyone else (“Clearly, a Palestinian man living at home with his wife and his children are using them as human shields. Israel MUST bomb apartment buildings and murder whole families. Our self determination demands it.”)
How is this totally unlike when a Holocaust denier quibbles about the exact number of Jews killed in the Holocaust? (“Its NOT true that six million Jews were thrown into ovens in death camps.”)
It continues to appall me how similar the aspects that one extremist group takes toward another.
I think your reaction is appalling Chaos. Phil is caught in a misleading statement, then you compare those calling him out to Holocaust deniers. It is disgusting that you can’t go a thread without calling someone a Holocaust denier or bringing up the Nazis.
he’s not caught in a misleading statement. you and richard are just creating a diversion to evade discussing the point. picking apart word phrasings. and yes, denial of death and suffering is no different depending on who’s dying. call it nakba denial if it makes you feel better.
Taking some time out of your daily routine of slandering Norman Finkelstein over at the Jewlicious echo chamber to come troll at me here and help Witty distract from the real conversation? I’m flattered by the special attention I merit.
“creating a diversion”.
You have yet to talk about Egypt at all in this article, Witty.
“400 of 1400 killed were civilians (though the categorization differs by source). ”
Witty is using the Dershowitz numbers, which in turn come from a misleading interpretation of the words of a Hamas official (who I wouldn’t trust anyone–obviously Hamas officials would like to claim everyone in Gaza is one of theirs).
i noticed donald. last week i recall reading a buncha zios discussing the massacre saying hamas ‘admitted’ israel killed 7or 8 hundred militants ‘bearing arms’. then others started humping this, these guys like to play the game telephone massaging/morphing ideas til they grow strong and hard.
as if bombing a graduation ceremony of police officers was some major accomplishment. as if it took courage or bravery or something.
phff
I hadn’t read the rest of the subthread when I posted that–also, I started to edit it to make it harsher, but my original post went through.
This is really one of the most obscene things Richard has ever posted and that is saying something. He takes for granted that 1000 people deserved to die because a Hamas official claimed them as supporters, which is not a standard he would apply to Israeli members of Likud, for example. Jews are human and Arabs aren’t. He then assumes that of the 400 people who he grants were civilians (most of them children, apparently–somehow when Israel did kill a civilian it was a child), many were standing next to a “bad guy” who had it coming. Picture what he is implying. In Richard’s mind, a “militant” sitting in his home surrounded by his family (obviously not fighting) is fair game for an Israeli bomb. If others are killed around them, it’s a tragedy. Possibly it’s a crime.
But we’re down to a fraction of 28 percent of the 1400 deaths which might be crimes. Richard, of course, shows zero indication that he has ever studied any of the studies put out by human rights groups on what happened in Gaza, but the second someone puts out a number he likes, he immediately assumes it is factual and follows the Dershowitz line.
This is our great humanist. I don’t know what the limits are on what one can say in this forum, and that is holding me back from typing what I think, but I don’t see any great moral distinction between what Richard typed here and, say, Holocaust denial or enthusiastic support for suicide bombing against civilian targets.
I was actually using the Weiss numbers.
“the Israelis killed nearly 400 children in Gaza by dropping white phosphorus on them”
(most of them children, apparently–somehow when Israel did kill a civilian it was a child)
no different than fallujah or the reports we got out of iraq. men are not recorded as civilians unless they are over 80. same w/palestine. muslim men are assumed to be militants or insurgents or whatever. they can’t be labeled as civilians, it would require humanizing them.
I don’t know what the limits are on what one can say in this forum, and that is holding me back from typing what I think, but I don’t see any great moral distinction between what Richard typed here and, say, Holocaust denial
don’t let it get to you. remember this is infowarfare, the point is to knock us off kilter, steal the thunder, turn us into the holocaust deniers, the deceivers, the liars. even when we get something right it becomes a complaint about what isn’t said (So far in this essay you’ve only stated “something’s wrong”, not proposal, not clarity.)
just breathe in breathe out and remember the internet is the global battlefield and we are winning on this front. information/truth is our friend, not theirs.
>> This is our great humanist.
With RW, it’s never humanist – it’s “humanist”.
>> I don’t know what the limits are on what one can say in this forum, and that is holding me back from typing what I think,
The limits of personal attacks are reasonably strict. I know, because I typed a post with a choice name for RW last week and my post was ‘disappeared’. Fair enough, I was pretty sure at the time my post wouldn’t make it through moderation, but I felt that RW’s hateful, Zio-supremacist and fradulently “humanist” comment merited an appropriate reply.
“the Israelis killed nearly 400 children in Gaza by dropping white phosphorus on them”
If that comment from Phil isn’t misleading, I have no idea what is. He even admitted he misspoke.
“I was actually using the Weiss numbers.
“the Israelis killed nearly 400 children in Gaza by dropping white phosphorus on them””
So you think the only civilians in Gaza are children?
Approximately 400 children died in Gaza. The white phosphorus part was wrong. It’s a comfort to know that Israel killed children with other weapons, not just WP.
That’s a great point, Donald. Phil was a little careless in implying the kids were all burned to death by white phosphorous when that was just one of many war crimes, and the vast majority died from having their bodies blown apart instantaneously from explosives dropped from the air, or when their houses collapsed on top of them, or they bled to death from untreated injuries. But RW attacks this rather insignificant inaccuracy as “deceptive,” implying intention to deceive. Arghhhh!!!
Like I said. Holocaust denial, redux.
Of course Witty is a humanist.
Just remember what he counts as human.
Yes, Donald, and Dershowitz draws his numbers from the number of people who might have used arms to repel an Israeli invasion. In other words, it was all right to slaughter a couple hundred police recruits in the opening hours of the “operation,” because these people would have defended their land from foreign invasion. By that logic, it would be all right to bomb virtually every Israeli population center, because many Israelis have access to arms and all of them would use them to repel any foreign invasion.
Another twist in their logic is this. Israel loves to blame Hamas for everything that happens in Gaza, even if other groups are firing rockets, because Hamas is supposedly in control and can stop them. But the only conceivable way Hamas could discipline other groups is with a police force. Yet joining the police qualifies one for an Israeli death sentence, because they are now armed combatants.
I also think it’s important not to concede that Israeli slaughter of “Hamas militants,” whether they numbered 400 or 1000, was OK. They may be armed males of fighting age with some degree of military training, but so is the IDF, with the difference being the IDF is enforcing a monstrously cruel status quo and Hamas is fighting against it. I do strongly oppose Hamas attacks on civilians, but such attacks are dwarfed by IDF killings and they have a much more defensible motive: liberation from military rule. Also, Israel could have peacefully protected its citizens, and made the decision to initiate military assault instead, resulting in the deaths of 1400 human beings.
The bottom line is really one of a nationalism so venal that it is indistinguishable from racism. Israelis’ lives are more valuable, and therefore they are entitled to take any action, in defense or offense, while Palestinians are entitled to none at all. I never hear Israelis or their apologists offer an explanation or rationale in which the two sides have equal rights in any sort of armed conflict. It always boils down to: “We can, and they can’t.”
Finally, it is irritating that Richard W uses the most pro-Israeli numbers I’ve ever seen, even worse than Dersh’s.
“inally, it is irritating that Richard W uses the most pro-Israeli numbers I’ve ever seen,”
He claims it got it from Phil’s post, though Phil said 400 children, not 400 civilians, and anyway that leaves untouched the notion that it’s okay to kill any adult who is claimed by Hamas as a supporter or a militant (whether or not he is armed).
And the rest of your post is on target. There’s a Catch 22 here–if Hamas enforces the ceasefire they are going to need police, but their police become legitimate Israeli targets by Richard’s reasoning.
Annie mentions we’re winning the information war. I’d say the trend is in our favor, but there’s a long way to go. Online I think the hasbarists are losing, at least in left of center circles. At more mainstream liberal blogs that I visit people are two state solution supporters, but they take for granted that Israel is guilty of war crimes and very oppressive practices. Even some of the liberal Zionists either forthrightly admit this or else stay quiet.
In the MSM and among politicians (in the US) it’s still an uphill battle.
I apologize to the interrogators for assuming that Phil meant that 400 civilians were killed, and not that 400 children.
Your verbal assaults are uncalled for, but typical.
It would be wonderful if you respond to what I actually say, rather than what you imagine I infer.
There is a GIANT unanswered question inherent in the Goldstone report itself, its rollout and the reaction to it, of the question of what would be legitimate defense, what scale and what methods.
That Phil has included articles that lend question to the issue speaks in his favor, that he actually desires thoughtful dialog on the question.
I don’t see a slam dunk on it, so it remains an open question, as well as the many questions as to responsibility (war crimes, inneffectiveness, or lawful effectiveness) at other scales other than the formation of policy as a whole.
Specific!!!!
“There is a GIANT unanswered question inherent in the Goldstone report itself, its rollout and the reaction to it, of the question of what would be legitimate defense, what scale and what methods.”
It’s been answered repeatedly. You just don’t like the answer because it shows Israel was guilty of wanton killing.
For the 1000th time, Israel could have responded favorably to Hamas’s just demand that Israel cease the blockade of Gaza. They chose to kill hundreds of civilians instead and inflict vast amounts of destruction on Palestinian civilian infrastructure. If you were an honest person , you would acknowledge the facts of Israel’s guilt are as plain as the guilt of Hamas for launching suicide bombing attacks against civilians in the past. But you don’t. You will do anything and everything in your power to diminish what Israel did. And then you will try to change the subject to Hamas’s crimes.
If you were just one morally confused person unable to reconcile liberal ideals with your beliefs about Israel it wouldn’t matter much, but unfortunately your attitudes are widespread and people who think like you dictate US policy on this issue. I hope this starts to change.
You are confused about my positions. I regard Israel as making very poor judgement about not relaxing the borders in response to Hamas’ discipline in maintaining the cease-fire, as I wrote clearly on my own blog, which I know you read.
But, that does not change the nature of the IDF responsibility relative to Hamas and other factions’ shelling of civilians.
The IDF was required to respond in some military fashion.
The question remains, what would Phil (and others if they like) regard as the appropriate response to that. (I don’t think passively letting the rockets continue and escalate, was a viable option, as Goldstone himself concluded.)
There is the accusation of war crimes, but no clarification here from proponents of which scale of military responsibility, war crimes were committed. By scale, again I mean, whether it was individual soldiers, junior officers, senior officers and/or policy makers.
I state that I bear a level of doubt, based on the claims by Hamas prior to the military action that they possessed many times more weapons than they did, and were prepared for (hoping even per a Haaretz article two days after the cease-fire ended) to wipe the Gazan streets with IDF blood. Assuming that were true, a much larger scale and more deliberate scale approach would be plausible, if not the best political judgment. (The next step up in scale from prior foot engagements, was preparation by air attacks on any potential war related infrastructure, and clearing logistical pathways for tanks and armies.)
The comment on Hamas’ crimes is NOT an attempt to distract from Israel’s failings, but a description of the nature of complex of the conflict, the mutual stimuli that add up to almost a consented dance of the various militant parties (Hamas and IDF).
The IDF stepped into Hamas’ doggie pile setup. AND, Hamas stepped into the IDF doggie pile setup.
There are two moral confusions at play. One is on Israel pursuing imhumane options. The second is of the failure to recognize Israel as Israel, and to accept that Israel will remain.
That would be Israel remaining as an almost universally militarized, child killing, land seizing, sovereignty violating apartheid state.
Oh yes. How immoral of Hamas, not to recognize Israel’s right to make one set of laws for Jews and another set of laws for everyone else. Or to kill children for the crime of being under Israeli bombs.
Richard, your facts are wrong. “400 of 1400 killed were civilians.” Gaza doesn’t have an army, Richard.
From the AFP reporting from Jerusalem:
Potsherd2
A german phylisopher said once:
“If you tell lies to people for generations they eventually believe it to be the truth. Later if you tell them the truth they will call you a lyer!”
Our government and the press uses this simple method.
How long’s a piece of string?
If the new Egyptian government stop gas sales to Israel and reintroduces the military into the Sinai, then what? Simple question to the BDS folks: if the Egypt version 2 abrogates the Camp David Accord, might not Israel revisit some of their own Sinai haunts? After all, when you tried and accused of being the worlds devil, deserving of BDS even more than the little zionist devil Mubarak, then what’s one more crime?
That would be a stupid fight to pick (you know, “pick your fights”).
Much more likely, Israel would get more defensive than it is now. Being surrounded by active antagonists (all armed, some terrorist), is NOT a likely basis of good relations.
This is more of that Israeli exceptionalism, whereby it becomes Egypt’s fault for doing things within their own border that provokes an act of war by Israel. Even if it is especially brutal and underhanded.
If Egypt cuts off the gas, it will do more immediate harm than the economic might of a BDS movement on steroids. Yes, Israel has massive gas reserves, but they will not come online until 2014. Israel would reoccupy the Sinai for this and if the Egyptian military moves back into the Sinai under the new regime.
As for being the basis of good relations. Point taken. But the Egyptian peace treaty or the Jordanian treaty were always about a deal between rulers, never the people. The population at large is completely against any deal with Israel. I think this is a point everybody would agree with. What cemented the Egyptian-Israeli peace treaty was money(The US funding both sides), Israeli withdraw from the Sinai in return for a demilitarized status with gas sales to Israel.
On a tangential front, I cannot see how the democracy movement does not spread to Jordan, the ultimate lackey of the US, with a regime hated by its populace. If Mubarak falls, how does not the Jordanian kingdom fall? Is the king a model of good governance that I missed reading about?
The Egyptian military is already in the Sinai.
link to 972mag.com
Israel isn’t saying a word about it.
I wasn’t aware that the lack of military presence in the Sinai by Egypt was a term of the Camp David Accords, though.
yeah, i read that yesterday for the first time myself.
i also noticed on the very first day of the protests one of our resident hasbarists (eee perhaps) suggesting if MB came into power israel would retake the sinai. something about (paraphrasing) ‘it would be seen as an attack on israel, they would have no choice but to invade and it would be egypt’s fault’. or some such garbage. the immediate association w/the sinai…it was not on my mind until then.
Yossi Gurvitz generally impresses me w/his analysis time and again. he’s well informed, very observant and asks intriguing questions.
Al-Jazeera reporting that the Egyptian Embassy in Tel Aviv is preparing for Mubarak’s exile to Tel Aviv. Saudi Arabia said no.
I don’t know if it’s the entire Sinai or just near the Israeli border. But things changed a couple of years ago with the African infiltrators and Egypt started to put troops near the border to intercept them – essentially protecting Israel – and Israel thought this was just fine, except for a few wackjobs who insisted it was all an arab plot to invade.
>> Being surrounded by active antagonists (all armed, some terrorist), is NOT a likely basis of good relations.
That’s right. We all know that the basis of good relations consists of:
- “necessary” ethnic cleansing (even if one must “hold one’s nose” as it is undertaken);
- past and ON-GOING aggression, oppression, land theft, colonization, destruction and murder.
Who better to preach about just and moral “good relations” than a Zio-supremacist who believes that ethnic cleansing could EVER be “necessary”.
Phil: “Compare these insights to Martin Fletcher at MSNBC, the son of Holocaust survivors, who warned that an “Islamic fundamentalist” government in Egypt would make it impossible for the U.S. to support Egypt. That is simple intolerance.”
I am uncomfortable with “the son of Holocaust survivors”. Did you really need that? Isn’t that true of Norman Finkelstein and many others who are on “our” side? If Fletcher has betrayed clear ZIONIST predilections before, refer to THEM.
youre right peter. i just grabbed his book. i do think he is pro-israel. i need another codeword
You missed the point, yonira. 5 million is not 6 million and saying so is not a denial other than that specifically. 5 million remains appalling. Same goes for Cast Lead victims-the actual number of innocent Palestinians who died in Cast Lead, both kids and adults can be viewed at ddi’s link provided above in this thread. The figures are appalling.
Just a quickie (ElBaradei is in Tahrir Square on AJE and about the start speaking), on your first point, here’s the footage of the Rachel Maddow show from a few days ago when she showed the “Made in USA” tear gas canisters photo which flew around the twittersphere again and again a few days ago:
Gas Canisters Used On Egyptian Protesters Clearly Marked ‘Made In The USA’
And here’s a photo of a near-identical tear gas canister taken by an Israeli activist, of the canisters used by the IDF to try and crush the non-violent protest movement that’s blossomed across occupied Palestine.
During the huge protests in Egypt on Friday Joseph Dana was at Palestinian protests in the West Bank taking pictures and tweeting them out to the world (he’s so dedicated, never fails to show up on my timeline, every single Friday). Friday he was at Nil’in, have a look at his twitter timeline and scroll back to January 28 and 29:
Twitter: ibnezra (Joseph Dana)
This tweet jumps out:
Wow. Everyone talking about american made tear gas in egypt yet israelis fire it every other day at palestinians and not a word.
And then these from later in the day when he went to Silwan:
@ibnezra: Riots in silwan riot now. One palestinian has been set on fire from tear gas. Two children have been taking to hospital.
@ibnezra: Children were hit in the face with tear gas canisters. Multiple parts of the area have clashes with police and army
Isn’t that swell? Palestinians set on fire and their children shot in the face by tear gas canisters given to Israel by the US, and paid for with Ma and Pa’a taxes.
*man, still waiting for ElBaradei.
**thanks again to whomever gave me the Maddow clip link yesterday when I asked, Ellen I think.
Regrding Phil Weiss’ challenge to firedoglake to come up with a similar petition regarding US aid to Israel as that created at fdl Friday regarding US support to Israel, I’ve posted the following there:
Mondoweiss Challenges firedoglake – “Sign the Petition – Cut off Netanyahu”
a commenter there says
Firedoglake espouses and defends the neo-liberalism ideology
is that correct? neo liberals want to privatize social security. most neoconservatives are neoliberals. i’m not sure how this relates to the US defunding egypt vs israel.
the commenter who wrote that is a recent arrival and is nitpicking over a couple of issues. the comment was absurd.
interesting initial response from jane also
When it comes to the influence of money in a political system you might be surprised what we understand.
hmmm
I don’t think it’s right to call out another blog with… ‘Will they see the writing on the wall?’
Phil, I truly admire all your extensive and exhaustive efforts to alleviate the plight of the Palestinians and heal Israel, but, why call out FDL specifically…?
Most of the Lake supports activities like BDS to curb Israel…
Your niche is I/P and one reason I read here everyday, along with the commenters…! The Lake is wide and runs deep…! It is rather unfair and tiring to see the same old scab being picked… ‘Why aren’t they front-paging I/P issues?’
Peace, please…?