Powerful stark theatrical expression coming from Henochowicz. Note the radical-ness of her posture juxtaposed to her natural expression in I Miss You Palestine. There's no ease here. She's raw, determined and goes in for the kill-kiss. No victim. Israel stole her eye, not her heart, she's no jolted lover.
Posted September 2 by Emily Henochowicz, who was shot in the occupied territories during a peaceful protest on May 31, 2010. (Hat tip CigarGod)
i love her
Thanks Annie.
I really was unable to process the video.
As Dirty Harry said: A man’s got to know his limitations.
anytime cigar god.
I’m glad to see she’s still going strong. It can be hard for an artist to lose a vital, physical part of oneself that is necessary for the process of making one’s chosen art. I myself do find the prospect of losing my sight or my hands terrifying, even if I do possess the sort of physical computing background that (theoretically) would allow me to develop prosthetics and “digital analogs.”
This is definitely a clever and incisive piece. There is something about Israel’s gravitational pull on Jewish culture (very much in North America, and to a somewhat lesser extent worldwide) that very much mimics the behaviors of a physically and verbally abusive spouse. It’s like Jews feel forced to love Israel for her crimes, because to do otherwise is to be abandoned by the “spouse” and be left a total outcast. Which of course, doesn’t actually happen for Jews who turn their backs on occupation and apartheid.
RE: “Israel’s gravitational pull on Jewish culture…” ~ Chaos4700
MY REPLY: The theory of “gravity” remains unproven and is just one of many competing theories. Consequently, alternative theories should be taught in our schools. For instance, “some people” believe that what is mistakenly referred to as “gravity” is in reality the force created by Satan in order to suck everything down into Hell.
Also, the universe is approximately .00000000000000000000000000000000000000000001 microseconds old!
I know all of this because I am a proud graduate of Glenn Beck University ™.
Exceptional woman.
Shot in the eye? How many times do we have to read in the press that the IDF shoots at the feet? In May AUB student and American citizen Munib Masri was shot in the abdomen at a Nakba protest in Lebanese territory. Other protesters died. Foot wounds don’t kill.
Sure they do. When IDF snipers/tanks/f16 does not allow ambulances to take the bleeding/blody people to the hospital.
>> She’s raw, determined and goes in for the kill-kiss. No victim. Israel stole her eye, not her heart, she’s no jolted lover.
Powerful and sensual. She rocks! :-)
>> Shot in the eye?
She was hit by a high-velocity tear-gas canister which apparently wished to self-(self-)determine itself on her eye. Clearly the fault of “dissent” and/or Hamas.
You crack me up, Eljay. You’ve found your calling, a “dissent” ferret.
What a remarkable and beautiful young lady. That Israel would defile her young body in the manner it has is truly an obscenity. Yet her indefatigable spirit shines through.
I am 50+ years old and have never so much as broken a bone. The missing teeth and toenails that have fallen off have been through no one’s fault but my own. To lose an eye for the brazen crime of peacefully standing up for the rights of fellow human beings is unthinkable.
She prompts in me both tears of shame and joy. Shame for what was done to her and the realization that I do not possess a fraction of her courage, and joy for the knowledge that there are people such as her in the world.
“Israel” defiled her? Yeah, right. The Israeli state and all its people conspired to remove her eye. Why, I have been planning this for years, even before she was born. Another piece of disgusting extremism on mondoweiss.
Jesus, eee, why don’t you just spit on her and call her a whore.
Woody,
If I thought she was a whore I would say so. I think that she is a misguided person with bad luck and that her poetry sucks.
Weeeell, yes eee, the “Israeli state and all its people” did conspire against Emily and others like her when it decided to take over, keep and colonize other people’s land. Since the vast majority of the Israeli Jewish people seem to believe the stolen lands are part of their country and don’t set up or vote for political parties who would comply with international law, since most participate in the violent repression of opposition at some time in their lives, or turn their own blind eyes from the misery they inflict on millions of other peoples lives, yes, Israel deliberately defiled Emily, maimed her, as it has many others. She was only lucky Israel didn’t kill her as it has so many others.
Bumblebye,
Most Israelis are for a two state solution. And if you believe that the majority of Israelis are responsible for defiling her, you are a bigot. Israelis are just like any other people in democratic countries, muddling along in a difficult situation. Israelis are not saints, nor are they devils as you attempt to portray them.
Same as it conspires to abuse children by kidnapping in the middle of the night and torturing them, making them sign false confessions.
It’s not always the crime that betrays evil; it’s the cover-up. The crime is bad; the cover up is worse. Israelis are experts in that field.
Thankfully, Emily didn’t pay the price that Rachel Corrie did.
>> Most Israelis are for a two state solution.
What, the same kind of 2-state solution Bibi and Avidor espouse?
It seems the Israeli electorate speaks much more loudly than you, eee.
Most Israelis believe in a two state solution? Is that why you built Jews-only housing on the West Bank at a rate that increased by 600% this year?
If you’re really an average Israeli, than the example that you set, eee, is that the average Israeli just gushes with falsehood and meaningless, insincere propaganda.
“muddling along in a difficult situation”… A difficult situation created by the reality of Zionism, a Jewish and Democratic state in a region that is sacred to Christians and Muslims. Most Israelis don’t understand why there are problems as fundamental to Zionism as Newton’s Laws are to physics. So they feel that they must muddle through.
“… in a region that is sacred to Christians and Muslims”
This region is first and foremost sacred to Jews.
Followers of (false) Messiahs and (false) Prophets (Muslims does not accept Jesus Christ as a Messiah only a Prophet, Christians ridicule the fact that Mohammad was a Prophet, let alone a Messiah) are free to think whatever they please, but they will have to accept one fact – this land was promised to Jews, and the promise haven’t been called back yet.
“To Moses We [Allah] gave nine clear signs. Ask the Israelites how he [Moses] first appeared amongst them. Pharoah said to him: ‘Moses, I can see that you are bewitched.’ ‘You know full well,’ he [Moses] replied, ‘that none but the Lord of the heavens and the earth has revealed these visible signs. Pharoah, you are doomed.’”
“Pharoah sought to scare them [the Israelites] out of the land [of Israel]: but We [Allah] drowned him [Pharoah] together with all who were with him. Then We [Allah] said to the Israelites: ‘Dwell in this land [the Land of Israel]. When the promise of the hereafter [End of Days] comes to be fulfilled, We [Allah] shall assemble you [the Israelites] all together [in the Land of Israel].”
“We [Allah] have revealed the Qur’an with the truth, and with the truth it has come down. We have sent you [Muhammed] forth only to proclaim good news and to give warning.”
[Qur'an, "Night Journey," chapter 17:100-104]
link to templemount.org
“This region is first and foremost sacred to Jews.”
Sure, if you believe the Jewish religion. But to the vast, vast majority of the world who don’t, your claim is quaint, but no basis on which to formulate modern political policy.
Further, I can’t speak for the Muslim religion, but for the vast majority of the last two thousand years, the Christians have not recognized the region as being “first and foremost sacred to Jews” but have held that whatever connection God may have had with the Jews was broken when the Jews rejected the Messiah, God incarnate, the Lord God, Jesus Christ.
Further, for most of their history, Christians believed that the Jews of Jesus’ time voluntarily brought God’s curse upon themselves and their children for all time, rather than accept Jesus Christ.
Therefore, the land was, to those Christians, first and foremost, sacred to the Christians as the place where God became man, sacrificed Himself, was crucified, died and was buried and rose in fulfillment of the Scriptures.
So there’s that.
first and foremost sacred to Jews
where do you come up w/this stuff and who are you to judge what level of sacredness a person or group of people hold for a region. get a grip. this is ridiculous!
Hmm…
Let’s see:
Entire land of Israel has been promised by G-d to the Jews, not Christians nor Muslims.
Jews conquered the land and have set up a great kingdom here. Christians and Muslims have done the same, only about 2000-3000 thousand years later.
Jewish Temple was burnt twice in Jerusalem, and now on top of it shines golden dome.
It is numerous times mentioned in both New Testament and Quran that the bond between G-d and Jews haven’t been broken and that all old agreements are in power.
It never says the contrary.
To Muslims sacred is only small area in Jerusalem where Mohammad have visited.
To Christians sacred is the Jordan river, the Galilee Sea, some locations in Galilee, Kfar Naum, Beit Lehem, another small area of Jerusalem and some other locations.
As of Jews, some of mentioned locations are of special sacristy as well – like the Temple Mount in Jerusalem, Tomb of Patriarchs in Hebron, Tomb of Matriarchs near Tiberias and some other locations – link to en.wikipedia.org
(note that some locations are (temporary) outside of Israel)
But that’s not all – the Land of Israel itself is sacred because it has been promised by an Almighty Creator to the Jews.
Of course one could deny such claim – Almighty Creator have not actually promised anything, or even in he did it’s outdated, unsigned and there is no alive witnesses.
Ok.
But denying it efficiently renders two other religions meaningless.
To take the Promised Land from Jews?
R u nuts lol?
You see, it is of extremely little importance whatever an uneducated group of people – specifically Catholic and Orthodox Christians have recognized en masse.
Neither has had any importance whatsoever what the Patriarchs of Christian church have said or written.
It is not said anywhere that G-d have broken it’s promise.
Whatever other people might think it’s their personal heretical assumptions, nothing more.
Furthermore, Jews have managed to survive (at least) 2000 years.
Much greater nations and religions have disappeared completely, being assimilated by other nations and religions.
But Jews today live the same way, at the same place, worship same Almighty Creator and speak almost the same language as 2000 years ago.
P.S.
some 2 000 000 000 billion people believe that Jesus were messiah
another 2 000 000 000 billion people believe that Jesus was prophet as well as Mohammad.
+some Hinduists who believe in their own stuff – and they are doing it slightly more than Christians – or maybe even Jew
and add to this Buddhists – who are practically Christians BTW – just FYW there is a theory that Buddha is actually Jesus who went to that region while been gone for 4 years. Timing seem to be correct – you don’t really believe that exactly 2011 years, 9 months and 11 days ago a boy named Yeshua was born to Miriam and Yosef in Beit Lehem, do you?
P.P.S.
Ever heard that lots of Jew converted into Islam at it’s early days because in fact it seemed as proper, stricter version of Judaism?
The crime is not premeditation or conspiracy, It’s disregard for human rights.
Maybe in this particular case; but it’s not the general rule where Israel is concerned. Although, funny how those cannisters keep smashing people’s heads. Oh well, must be just a coincidence.
Thanks 3e, I see the light now.
The nerve of Ms. Henochowicz hitting one of the world’s most moral army’s (or police force’s) projectiles with her face!
I hope she was prosecuted to the fullest extent of Israeli and World Court law for any damage to/”defiling” of the canister, as well as any trauma suffered by the person who fired it, and the government and apologists defending it who understand the need to brutally restrict and discourage those who might actually shine a spotlight on Israeli criminal behavior.
Maybe she should have had her face slashed with a razor like that other whore in the Clint Eastwood movie “Unforgiven.”
Would that better suit your bloodlust?
The Israelis keep crying “accident, mistake” etc. Perhaps the tune plays upon the ignorant, but not those who are familiar with Krav Maga where everything at hand is used as a weapon. So, they willfully shot her in the face, knowing it causes death in some instances but she only lost an eye. The application of deadly force is used at peaceful demonstrations, and the demonstrations are blown out of proportion in the propaganda news machine in Israel to “justify” this overkill. Meaning they will take all peaceful resistance, even of foreign activity as if there is some threat to life – when the only people whose lives are threatened are the peaceful demonstrators. The means used in Israel is irredeemable – they need to be given reasons to use such force, which the “peace movement” refuses to deliver, because the only thing it causes for the most part are Palestinian injuries and deaths. Another form of resistance is needed, which will keep Israelis from employing such force if they know their lives will be in danger. A bully avoids a victim if they fight back, and if you check the record you will find less deaths during violent resistance – check it out for yourselves. When there is no violent resistance the death toll of the Palestinians rises higher (see first few months of the second intifada, when mostly peaceful resistance was employed) – to a more recent example of Operation Cast Lead, because there is no threat of viable in kind resistance they kill with impunity more often. We lasted (not me personally) longer in the Warsaw ghetto, and some survived who would have otherwise died, with violent resistance. They should fight back, ask Israelis to join them, and an international revolutionary cadre.
In all seriousness, maybe you are right and I misused the term. It says to corrupt the purity or perfection of. Israel merely maimed her and her “perfection” is unaltered (as is their “corruption”).
Lance,
The moment you attribute the result of the action of one person to all Israelis, you are a bigot. Are all Americans responsible for the death of Iraqi civilians? For every child maimed in Iraq? Of course not. But this is the standard you apply to Israel.
Sadly, in a way, we all are.
All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing~ Edmond Burke
Or not enough even.
Hunter S. Thompson was put on a Secret Service watch list after a speech to a gathering in a Protestant church in which he declared, “If you really believed in those things you profess to, you’d march down to Washington and stomp that son of a bitch to DEATH!” (i.e. Bush I).
If my IP wasn’t blocked by the LA Jewish Journal, I might try to find for you the piece where I showed just how awkward and cumbersome it is to preface every statement with “some” in regards to members of a particular group.
I don’t think it applies here because the acts of a nation-state are the responsibility of its citizens, directly, indirectly, or otherwise. Israel either acts in concert of the will of the majority of its people, or its people are essentially silent in the face of Israel’s acts.
To establish your own consistency, I don’t imagine that it would be hard at all to find a single instance of your rebuking someone for laying the acts of some Palestinians, or some element of Palestinian leadership, at the feet of all Palestinians (let alone the possibility of your own usage following such a pattern), now would it?
Compare and contrast eee’s accusations of bigotry with:
Well sure Chaos, if you want to dig way back to the distant past (September 4, 2011 at 1:37 am), but what has he said in a similar vein in the last 5 minutes, huh?
I seriously doubt that accurately reflects his current views (and he did qualify it bit with the possibility that, in theory, there might exist a Palestinian or two that is not hateful, racist, anti-Semitic scum…as of yet).
But of course they would be unredeemable anyway as they might have a sliver of compassion for arch-terrorist Emily Henochowicz.
As I’ve stated previously, I’ve come to find his arguments quite compelling.
I find eee’s arguments compelling in EXACTLY the same way as I find a laxative compelling. It’s a matter of what it compels one’s reaction to be.
I am compelled to agree with you.
Warn regards, Chaos.
The state of Israel…through it’s spokesmen/women and various hangers-on, follow an established policy of demonizing all Palestinian people when questionable actions are taken by small portions of their societies.
but beyond that, they have institutionalized their 2nd, third and starvation classes.
When Israel changes their bigoted behavior, the Palestinians won’t have it to react against.
RE: “She’s raw, determined and goes in for the kill-kiss.” ~ annie
MY COMMENT: Lol!!!!!!! Those kill-kisses are “to die for”!
There’s an icon right there. And for years to come…
Redemption doesn’t come easy. In this case, you must first step into the shoes of the abused and be abused yourself and lose something precious to you to reclaim your innocence…your Zionist illusion and…more. Some people think redemption is free and that it’s enough just to be aware and talk about it, politely, like Derfner. Sure losing one’s job is a kick in the gut; but retraction means you lost it…for nothing.
Forgive me for borrowing this quote: “It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be sent* to hell.”
This is the price that Zionism makes you pay.
I feel…your…sin, Israel.
[*orig. version: "to be thrown into"]
KJV always says it best, unless Milton or Shakespeare compete, “it is better for thee to enter into life with one eye, rather than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire.”
Israel has the most humane vicious security forces in the world.
In other countries, either police wants to disperse people with tear gas, and they shoot at 60 degree angle, or they want to gun people down and they use normal guns. As a result, it is only from Israel that we read about direct hits of gas canisters on the heads and bodies of protesters.
Regarding getting clocked in the head by a tear gas canister, has everyone seen this video of Christopher Whitman.
link to youtube.com
Check out 0:55 exactly. There is one frame where there the projectile is visible as an orange ball of light, which I assume is the rocket exhaust on the canister as it propels itself into Christopher Whitman’s head, tearing his scalp.
People want to believe in a fantasy Israel, or that one faction is worse than the other – as an example, that the military takes its deadly liberties independent of the rest of the Israeli government or apparatus. However, this is not the case, court decisions are taken in order to recklessly endanger the lives of innocent people, I found this out a few years back –
“What makes this crass are two points – first, Israel initially had a 300 meter rule for firing shells of this nature because the accuracy of these projectiles is usually a couple of hundred meters off. Earlier this year they purposefully reduced their guidelines to 100 meters – you see the results. Second, shells of this nature must only be fired when there is a immanent threat – according to Israelis own command confession, the rockets they alleged were fired the day before!
This tell us two things – what was done was a bold faced war crime. It also tells us how valuable Zionists believe Palestinian lives to be, worthless. It reminds one of the statement many years ago of Menachem Begin (previous prime minister) – “Palestinians are animals walking on two legs.” The question that this evokes is simple – does someone who acts this way, and obviously believes that the Palestinians are worthless (by this very present atrocity) deserve to run a government, let alone the fourth most powerful military force in the world? Justice must roll like a river.”
SHELLED IN YOUR SLEEP – GAZA
“It also tells us how valuable Zionists believe Palestinian lives to be, worthless. ”
Little did they know that the child of one of their own would be hit instead. Maybe she’ll get more justice than any Palestinian child could dream of. Maybe she’ll get more justice than Rachel Corrie got. But if she doesn’t, she’ll really get to understand what it feels like to be treated like a sub-human and maybe her father and grandfather who are both Zionists will feel it too. She’s lucky to at least be able to have insurance to cover her surgery and disability in the meantime while she seeks justice, but most Palestinians can hardly afford their next meal.
From Bender to Israel:
link to ultimatefuturamafans.webs.com
She was hit by the most moral tear-gas-canister in the world.
Funded by (if not actually manufactured by) the besterest buddy of those pulling the trigger unleashing the most moral tear-gas-canister in the world.
It constantly amazes me that so many of my posts are refused for obscure or inexplicable transgressions, yet the hasbaridiotic SHIT that rolls off eee’s keyboard is consistently defiling the discourse here.
Emily Henochowicz is an opportunity lost. This astounding young woman has the traits that would tear at the heartstrings of America, and go far in challenging and changing the pro-Israel narrative that has contaminated any pool of “truth” with which the American public can form opinions about Isr/Pal. Put this woman and her story in the public eye, and great strides would be made in INFORMING the publivc about what our tax dollars are subsidizing.
It should occur to ALL of you that eee’s attempt to isolate the “Israelis” from what was done to this woman demonstrates his FEAR of what this woman’s story could do to Israel’s image.
What he DOESN’T want underscored, is that the “Israelis” that actually dissent or protest against what is occuring in bergs like B’iln are in a small minority.
Do Israeli citizens bear some responsibility for how the IDF conducts itself towards peaceful protest? OF COURSE THEY DO.
The ONLY reason that eee seeks to separate the Israeli majority from what happened to Emily is because he cannot defend the IDF for its actions in Emily’s case. Not only are high velocity tear gas cannisters ILLEGAL, (by Israeli law, to be used in the manner the were used at the protest Emily was attending), the circumstances, films, and witness accounts buttress the argument that Emily was TARGETED, and not the victim of an accident.
POA,
Give it a rest. Even if someone wanted to, you cannot aim a canister so accurately. So to say she was targeted is a complete lie. Perhaps it was not used as it should be, but certainly nobody was trying to take out her eye.
Is Emily suing the IDF in court over this? Let’s wait and see what the verdict is.
“Is Emily suing the IDF in court over this? Let’s wait and see what the verdict is”
Your question demonstrates that your knowledge of Emily’s story is minimal. Do a little research, THEN blather forth with your dispicable spew. It won’t be any less slimey, but at least you’ll be slithering out from under your rock with some facts.
I’d like to know what her father and grandfather think of Zionism now and how she reconciles what happened to her with who they are and what they stand for.
I viewed her previous video, “I miss you Palestine” and this “love poem” to Israel and for a fleeting moment, I thought, “Ophelia?”.
She’s giving Israel what it wants in this video, a kind of perverse and depraved b…tchiness that I would say characterizes the examples of some Zionist women I’ve seen in the media and encountered on blogs. I viewed her other video and she appears so different, innocent and yet empowered with righteous indignation. It’s ironic that in an interview with Democracy Now! she states: “And those people—”I must say that one reason that I’ve felt so strongly about supporting the Palestinians is that they’ve been so incredibly friendly and open to me and other internationals—just really warm people.” And yet Israel goes out of its way to demonize Palestinians to the rest of the world. It’s interesting to note that her love for Palestinians brings out the best in her while her attachment to Israel distorts this image.
But why does she need to do this now? Israel doesn’t care. Does she imagine that after killing and maiming so many others, she would stand out as unique in the collective conscience of Israel? What satisfaction can she possibly get from this? When Israelis view this they’ll merely think: poor child–she’s so confused, and ignore it.
This isn’t art; this is something else. Torment mixed with rage and a sense of feeling rejected.
She was initiated into the reality of powerlessness that victims of the Occupation have been living with for decades. Awareness is painful, but it’s the beginning of maturity and responsibility. Something must die so that a new life emerges. I hope what died in her when she got hit is Zionism and that she can rid herself of the emotional crutch and/or baggage it represents in her life.
This is a tragic story and Ms Henochowicz is an inspiration to people on all sides of the conflict who have suffered for what they believe in.
She also puts the lie to all those MondoWeisslings who believe that dual citizenship cannot work and must imply a traitorous disposition.
Emily Henochowicz is a proud Israeli-American who believes in justice for the Palestinians. An impressive young lady, undoubtedly.
Mondweisslings? Really?
And no one here thinks that btw. It’s the Zionists who are in high positions of power in our government who are clearly Israeli-firsters.
“This is a tragic story and Ms Henochowicz is an inspiration to people on all sides of the conflict who have suffered for what they believe in.”
Yeah, because there is no difference between those Israelis who “suffered” for the belief that they could steal Palestine from the Palestinians, and those Palestinians fighting to stop that theft. They’re just about the same thing.
You think she’s proud of being Israeli? God, how dishonest are you willing to stoop?
How arrogant of you to assume she isn’t.
In the absence of evidence that she has tried to give up her Israeli citizenship, one can assume she is as proud of her national origins as most people.
link to youtube.com
At the end of this interview she talks about her Israeli citizenship without a hint of regret. She even jokes that “they haven’t tried to take it”. She also talks about her compulsion to return to Israel and the love and support she had from the Palestinians she met there. I see nothing to suggest she is not a proud Israeli-American. Do you?
She seems remarkably well-adjusted despite her trauma. As I said before, she seems to be a remarkable woman.
GF:
You can be so simple sometimes.
Oh really? We can’t look at her statements or her deeds? We have to look for a renunciation of citizenship?
In other breaking news, from GF World:
All married people love each other, unless they’ve filed for divorce;
All fathers are proud of their sons, unless they’ve explicitly disowned them; and of course
Everyone is proud to be a citizen of their nation unless they’ve renounced their citizenship.
Her national origins? She is an AMERICAN you twit. The only reason she’d need her Israeli citizenship is it makes it easier for her to get past assholes like you and reach the protest sites on the West Bank.
Chaos, Haytham, you noxious pair of name-calling nudniks. If you have any evidence that Emily Henochowicz is unhappy about being an Israeli citizen then please bring it.
Otherwise stop your meaningless prattle. Silly billies.
And what praise would you shower on Rachel Corrie who also believed in justice for the Palestinians?
Would you also describe her this way: Ms Corrie “is an inspiration to people on all sides of the conflict who have suffered for what they believe in.”?
And as far as dual citizenship where Israel is concerned; she’s one of the exceptions to the rule.
How about that:
She got hit by ricochet and lost her eye. Very sad but still the accident, which are quite often happen during the demonstrations.
What she does now-it is some kind of political statement mixed with sexual content.
What is exactly her message here?
link to youtube.com
You can’t aim tear gas canister-it’s is a highly inaccurate weapon.
“You can’t aim tear gas canister-it’s is a highly inaccurate weapon.”
So are the firecrackers that are fired from Gaza. But that doesn’t stop you people from portraying them as the second Holocaust. So the next time that something is killed in Sderot (rarely happens, I know, but still, you can keep hoping!!), we’ll just say “very sad” but still, just an “accident”.
Woody, we’ve been through this before. Grad missiles are not firecrackers. If you say they are again you are not only defending war crimes, you’re doing it while looking like an idiot.
link to en.wikipedia.org
This is your sickest comment yet. I’m amazed the mods let this slide, but I’m glad they did as now everyone can see Woody Tanaka “hoping” for more civilian fatalities, just like the people firing the rockets. This is some evil stuff, Woody, that I didn’t even think you were capable of.
Those rockets have killed a very small amount of people. Has even twenty people died?
Israel has killed hundreds of palestinians and destroyed hundreds of buildings.
There is no comparison. Youre right that both sides are committing war crimes but your side is committing them on a wjole other scale and that is accurately characterized by woody. Youre the one who looks like an idiot.
GF,
“Woody, we’ve been through this before. Grad missiles are not firecrackers.”
Interestingly, in most years, firecrackers kill more people in the US than are killed by missiles in Israel. Except in 2008, when only 7 Americans were killed by firecrackers and 8 were killed by missiles in Israel. So, wow, you’re right, they’re usually not even as dangerous as firecrackers!! (Note the two exclamation points, it will be important later.)
But the point isn’t about the power of these rockets. These aren’t particularly lethal weapons. That is a fact. More people die in auto accidents in the US, on average, every 5 hours than have been killed by these rockets in a decade. That’s about the same number of people who die in the average 8-week period in the US from bee stings.
And I’m not defending anything. Whether they constitute war crimes is an entirely separate from whether they are particular lethal. They could constitute war crimes and be, as here, not particularly lethal.
They shouldn’t fire them, nor should they give the same kind of excuses that you Israelis use to excuse your war crimes and crimes against humanity (the “security” excuse; the “human shield” excuse; the “putting military targets among civilians” excuse; the “collateral damage” excuse, etc., etc.)
“This is your sickest comment yet.”
Only to someone who can’t read in context and has no sense of reading comprehension.
“I’m amazed the mods let this slide,”
I’m not. They can read in context and they have a sense of reading comprehension.
“but I’m glad they did as now everyone can see Woody Tanaka ‘hoping’ for more civilian fatalities, just like the people firing the rockets.”
You must think that “everyone” is as bad at read comprehension as you are. Let’s do a little thought experiment. On the one hand, you have a poster (that would be me) who has repeatedly, at length and in many different contexts, stated that his desire is to see everyone in the region have his or her political, social and human rights absolutely respected and treated absolutely equally.
Given that unquestionable, documented and unimpeachable position, which do we think is the more likely scenario:
1) that same poster suddenly went CraZy, justifying attacks that go against that very position, or,
2) the statement was ironic hyperbole (and even noted as such with two exclamation points), and a comment on the fact that certain Israeli apologetics require treating these rockets, of notably limited lethality, as being the equivalent of the fire-bombing of Tokyo.
Which do you think is more likely, and why. Please discuss.
“This is some evil stuff, Woody, that I didn’t even think you were capable of.”
I gather there is little you don’t think someone opposed to your state is capable of. After all, it seems that to its most die-hard supporters, opposition to the state can never be based on merit, but must be based on a reactionary (and, I suspect in your mind, probably genocidal) opposition to Jews as Jews.
You’re convinced, no doubt, that one day one of us will slip up, and our careful cloak of progressiveness will fall away and you can at least be “glad” that “everyone can see” that your Kirk Douglas-style assumptions* are right, after all. Pathetic.
* See, link to mondoweiss.net
GF:
Where do you get off? Who exactly do you think you are? What a silly ultimatum.
Who are you to dictate how someone characterizes a weapon? Especially when that characterization is eminently reasonable and accurate…? What makes you think you can accuse someone of defending war crimes only by virtue of the fact that they pointed out reality to someone (you) who seems so very far removed from it?
Is it defending murder by describing a homemade knife used to kill someone as a “crude weapon?” Do you have any ability to use logic or reason when it comes to Israel/Jews?
You really are pathetic. Why don’t you go take an intro to logic class and don’t come back here until you can converse with the adults, okay? We would all appreciate it.
Perhaps less patronizing would be a nice start for you Haytham as well?
Opposing the occupation or any other “injustices” you seem to suffer by shooting rockets at civilian targets is a war crime. Opposing that by regular military force is the way ANY government is required to do.
link to unispal.un.org
divert alert! emily was yards away. the projectile was aimed right at her head. she was a non violent protestor.
this thread is not about hamas.
Good work, annie. Is suppose GuiltyBrit and Dimabulb are going to cool off with a nice glass of West Bank water before lecturing us about how much Ms. Henochowicz loves them for gouging out her eye.
“Opposing the occupation or any other ‘injustices’ you seem to suffer…”
Yeah, they only “seem” to suffer “injustices” the same way the Jews of Europe only “seemed” to have suffered “genocide.”
Moron.
Perhaps, but do you realize that your very question is patronizing?
Nobody cares what you think would be a “nice start.” People here are interested in facts woven into compelling arguments using logic and morality. I provide that consistently and unfortunately you and your Zionist friends can’t seem to keep up. Or is there another reason that you keep changing the subject?
This is not in response to me because I didn’t address injustice, rockets, civilian targets or war crimes. Maybe your imagination working in overdrive again? In fact, with regard to the war crimes issue, I proved that discussing only the strength of weapon–and nothing else, as Woody was careful to do–neither defends nor condemns war crimes. It’s just discussing the potency of a weapon. Here’s my analogy:
Prove that your comment above is in response to me.
Here’s my comment again so you don’t have to scurry off to find it:
All:
I want to point out to everyone the tactic that’s being used by the Zionists on this thread. They’re using it consistently and in almost all of their responses and some of us are getting caught up in it and engaging in their diversion game.
Let’s say GF, dimawhatever, or any of the other trolling Zionists makes the following argument:
Now, because the commenters here for the most part care about accuracy, they will read the above and say, wait, this isn’t right. So one of us might respond:
The response is invariably this:
Is this on the Zionist argument list? (You suck, everyone sucks, etc.) If not we should label this tactic and add it to the list.
No.
And the sole reason to that is because Israel has killed hundreds of palestinians and destroyed hundreds of buildings.
Haytham,
Sorry, you are being uncharitable (in the philosophical sense) and unreasonable. When characterizing a weapon as a “firecracker”, any reasonable person would understand that what is meant is that it is not actually a weapon and not dangerous and that the people using it are not really using weapons. Yes, it is not necessary that the person is making an opinion on the validity of using the object. After all, one can kill another person with firecrackers and with many other common objects not viewed as weapons. But that is not how reasonable people would interpret what Woody said. The reasonable interpretation is that Hamas is not really attacking Israelis. If that is not what Woody is saying, let him be clear.
“If that is not what Woody is saying, let him be clear.”
I think that I’ve expressed myself clearly. If you don’t understand it, I don’t care, as I’m not in the habit of explaining myself to people with the kind of sociopathic ideas you hold.
“The reasonable interpretation is that Hamas is not really attacking Israelis”
No, that is not what a reasonable person would think.
A reasonable person knows that a firecracker can cause damage or even death…but the likelyhood is very small….as oppossed to an F-16 guiding a missile into a suspect in a UN hospital, school, etc.
“I gather there is little you don’t think someone opposed to your state is capable of. After all, it seems that to its most die-hard supporters, opposition to the state can never be based on merit, but must be based on a reactionary (and, I suspect in your mind, probably genocidal) opposition to Jews as Jews.
You’re convinced, no doubt, that one day one of us will slip up, and our careful cloak of progressiveness will fall away and you can at least be “glad” that “everyone can see” that your Kirk Douglas-style assumptions* are right, after all. Pathetic.”
Superb. The whole post was superb.
And you’ve identified the central theme, sometimes unspoken, sometimes not, in almost any defense of Israel. One really can’t defend Israel’s actions, so what you do is wait for an opportune moment to spring the “you’re an anti-semite” defense. Or “you favor terrorism against Jews.” Or something like that. Just get the charge out there and turn the discussion into one about the moral inadequacies of Israel’s critics.
The “you suck” defense, in other words.
“No, that is not what a reasonable person would think.
A reasonable person knows that a firecracker can cause damage or even death…but the likelyhood is very small….as oppossed to an F-16 guiding a missile into a suspect in a UN hospital, school, etc.”
Nail on the head, CigarGod.
eee:
I will concede your point if you can pass the following test:
GuiltyFeat thinks that comparing a rocket to a firecracker is an affirmation and apology for war crimes and that’s who I responded to; therefore, you have to meet the GuiltyFeat standard.
[GF said: "Grad missiles are not firecrackers. If you say they are again you are not only defending war crimes..."]
[eee said: "When characterizing a weapon as a “firecracker”, any reasonable person would understand that what is meant is that it is not actually a weapon and not dangerous and that the people using it are not really using weapons."]
If you answer yes to BOTH of the following questions, I will concede the point:
1. Comparing a Palestinian rocket to “firecracker” justifies war crimes; and
2. Calling a homemade knife a “crude weapon” justifies murder.
You can’t have it both ways.
What say you?
Nope, the reason the rockets have failed is because Hamas lacks the capabilities to kill 1000s.
They can launch thousands of rockets though. In fact, it’s a hasbara meme to stress the sheer number of rockets fired because there are no comparable amount of casualties to shift the empathy.
Israel simply kills wantonly because it can.
“You can’t aim tear gas canister-it’s is a highly inaccurate weapon.”
Okay, that is the same argument used against militant rockets fired out of Gaza. Since they can’t be aimed, they are a war crime.
>> She got hit by ricochet and lost her eye.
>> You can’t aim tear gas canister-it’s is a highly inaccurate weapon.
It certainly looks that way in the video.
This brings to mind a point and a (rhetorical?) question:
1. She still did lose an eye protesting against Israel’s ON-GOING campaign of aggression, oppression, theft, colonization, destruction and murder.
2. Why would the Israeli military – or any military – equip itself with and use “highly inaccurate” weapons?
Yes she did lost her eye.Period. The end (very sad as it is). As many other good people from BOTH sides. To make a personal statement with some kind of erotic subtext out of it-that’s something….
Any military and police forces use same weapons for delivering gas canisters, these weapons:link to en.wikipedia.org
are not designed for killing. Period. The end.
Nothing more, but some sort of conspiracy and accusation hype as usual here.
The search for “Jeanne D’Arc” symbolism here is not appropriate, neither the Holocaust or apartheid comparisons.
She is an injured person and shouldn’t be judged harshly, but those who use her suffering are pitiful.
>> Any military and police forces use same weapons for delivering gas canisters, these weapons (link to en.wikipedia.org) are not designed for killing.
Accuracy is not required just for killing. Anyway, the claim was made that tear-gas canisters are “highly inaccurate”. And, yet, according to your link:
—————-
Canister projectiles
These are also called gas grenades, and are used at longer ranges. They are analogous to rifle grenades, providing increased accuracy and range [emphasis added] over hand-thrown gas grenades. …
—————-
This appears to indicate that they are rather quite accurate.
Typical cover-up of Israeli crimes.
Any military and police forces use same weapons for delivering gas canisters, these weapons are not designed for killing. Period. The end.”
Not designed, but clearly capable, which is why every competent force trains people not to do what this criminal did here.
“She is an injured person and shouldn’t be judged harshly”
How mighty nice of you. Take her eye and make sure that you don’t judge the victim “harshly.” She should be applauded for her stand against your state’s criminality and for her sacrifice. The beast who shot her, and those in the chain above him should be hauled into court and tried for their crimes, and judge harshly. (And a real court, not the nonsense the Israelis call courts.)
these weapons:link to en.wikipedia.org
are not designed for killing. Period. The end.
Nothing more
oh stop. bulldozers are not designed for war either but israel invades with them and kills with them. just stop.Period. The end.
Nothing more.
Oh the great game of words! It seems that is the only action people here are capable of. Also the refrigerators, cars, and other heavy objects if you STAND on their way to fall or on their paths. Both cases of Emily and Rachel are sad, since I view these girls as victims of false narrative perpetrated here. If you want to protest, you may, however you should be aware that you can be injured or killed, depending on the severity of the clashes, local situation and type of forces you are facing.
>> Oh the great game of words! It seems that is the only action people here are capable of.
So what’s your excuse? You claimed that gas canister weapons are “highly inaccurate”, and attempted to bolster your claim by stating that they’re not used for killing. Then you provided a link which appears to assert quite the opposite. So who’s lying – you or Wiki?
And before you get your panties in a knot, please note that I’m just inquiring about the accuracy of gas canister weapons. I’ve already accepted – based on the video you linked to – that Ms. Henochowicz’s injury appears to have been accidental rather than intentional.
victims of false narrative?
spare us!
if you want to read the great game of words you should check out how team shalom fights over the word “the”. i kid you not!
what link, this one link to en.wikipedia.org
Are you reading the same words as I am: A riot gun or non-lethal launcher is a type of firearm that is used to fire non-lethal ammunition for the purpose of suppressing riots.?
Maybe I’m missing something?
>> Maybe I’m missing something?
No, you’re purposely avoiding. As I indicated earlier:
>> eljay: And, yet, according to your link:
—————-
Canister projectiles
These are also called gas grenades, and are used at longer ranges. They are analogous to rifle grenades, providing increased accuracy and range [emphasis added] over hand-thrown gas grenades. …
—————-
This appears to indicate that they are rather quite accurate.
Wiki appears to indicate that they are rather accurate. Why do you claim that they are “highly inaccurate”.
Based on your posting history here, that is a distinct possibility and one that can never be discounted.
In fact, I think we’re close to just assuming this–”I think dimadok is missing something”–upon seeing that you have written a new post.
When you consistently leave out or twist facts to push your propaganda in a forum that is meant for honest discussion, it is inevitable that you will lose credibility, and you will lose it very quickly. You should consider yourself lucky if we just think you’re “missing something,” rather than outright lying (i.e, “missing the ability to tell truth”).
“that Ms. Henochowicz’s injury appears to have been accidental rather than intentional”
Bullshit. If you doubt that protestors are targeted, familiarize yourself with Tristan Anderson’s fate, or, more recently, that of Christopher Whitman. Just because the cannister that hit Emily was a richochet dioes NOT negate the FACT that it was fired directly at her posiotiuon. Read the witness accounts, and Emily’s own account that she initially offered at her website. Also, read Naomi Klein’s essay on the event.
When you fire a high velocity projectile into a crowd of people, it is no “accident” that that projectile hits someone. And yes, the actual shooter DOES aim, and determine what area within that crowd the projectile will travel.
Think about the amount of times you have seen tear gas cannisters, on reality shows like “Cops”, targeting windows.
Ever seen one miss?
“You should consider yourself lucky if we just think you’re “missing something,” rather than outright lying (i.e, “missing the ability to tell truth”).”
The “missing” component ALWAYS absent from the hasbaridiotic blather of the zionist trolls; honesty.
I actually shot quite a bit of these-and YES they are inaccurate. Shooting in “Cops”-that is great example. Thanks POA!
>> I actually shot quite a bit of these-and YES they are inaccurate.
Thanks for your reply.
This still makes me wonder why any military would equip itself with (highly) inaccurate weapons. Oh, well.
“Why would the Israeli military – or any military – equip itself with and use “highly inaccurate” weapons?”
Exactly.
One can imagine the General Dynamics rep proudly demonstrating to the Generals of the purchasing dept. just how wildly inaccurate the tear gas cannon is…and explaining the PR advantage of being able to say that the IDF gives the demostrators a fighting chance.
“Look, it’s a cannon – and – a humane PR campaign”.
Dim says her eye being shot out by idf goons was an accident. It wasnt. The idf regularly uses extremely abusive measures againt anti occupation demos. Thats why people have even died there.
Disgusting apologetics from a former idf coward isnt surprising tho.
The terrifying footage I have seen shows the canister bouncing off the ground and into Ms. Henochowicz’s face. It was clearly not the intention of the person firing to hit her.
I understand that you don’t want to call this an accident, but tear gas canisters are not offensive weapons. If the goal was to maim demonstrators, there are probably more certain ways of achieving that goal.
But, as usual, none of this makes a difference. Another person, in this instance a young Israeli-American artist, has been severely harmed for no good purpose regardless of intention.
“but tear gas canisters are not offensive weapons. ”
They are if you fire them at (i.e. in the direction of) people with negligent disregard for those in the area where you are firing.
“If the goal was to maim demonstrators, there are probably more certain ways of achieving that goal.”
That point is irrelevant to the question. It’s like saying that firebombing a city isn’t conclusive of an intent to destroy it, because if they REALLY meant to destroy it, they would have used a nuke.
And, besides, it is just as likely that they chose a weapon such as this so that they could claim that they had no intent to injure, notwithstanding firing into crowds, based on the defense that you are asserting here. The criminals firing at the protesters know that they have a horde of apologists that will concoct whatever nonsense argument to protect them.
“But, as usual, none of this makes a difference.”
Actually, it does. It exposes the rot at the heart of Zionism precious flower.
more certain ways
Oh, that’s called “self-defense”.
Hold on a second, GuiltyFeat… are you suggesting that a weapon that does NOT specifically kill or even injure a civilian 90% of the time is NOT an offensive weapon? So where does a Qassam fall on your spectrum?
Oh I get it! Because it was JEWISH hands who fired the gas canister, THAT’S why you don’t consider it an act of aggression!
I don’t think you get it that when Emily mocks Israel, Guilty, she’s mocking you specifically. You’re exactly the kind of dishonest, callous hypocrite she’s targeting with her message.
Gas canister is not loaded with explosives. That’s all that simple and nothing else.
Neither is a rock.
Why doesn’t that same logic apply to your lethal “rubber coated” bullets, each and every one of which contains a REAL actual bullet? You guys are full of shit.
Look you twit, you can use a frozen leg of lamb to kill someone too. The difference, and this is a difference respected by law, is intent.
If the intent of the person firing a tear gas canister was to cause harm then it was an offensive weapon. If the intent was to fire a tear gas canister at the floor in order for the tear gas to disperse the protesters then it was not an offensive weapon.
I think the fact that the canister hit the ground first clearly shows that the intent was not to cause harm with the canister itself.
You can argue a strong case for negligence based on the velocity of the canister and the distance from the firing to the protesters, but in the case of a fatality this would be manslaughter, not first or second degree murder which requires different degrees of intent.
Does anyone know what the legal terms are for such an injury that were a) caused with intent, b) caused through negligence (of the perpetrator, obviously not the victim c) caused by accident. Cheers.
No. I’ll try to speak slowly for you. I’m suggesting that if there is no intent to cause physical injury then it is not an offensive weapon. As soon as there is intent to cause physical injury, then anything, a fist, a rock, a katyusha or a cupcake is an offensive weapon against which anyone, Israeli or Palestinian, has the right to defend themselves against to prevent the intended harm occurring.
and you know there was no intent to cause injury because..why? didn’t khaled meshaal say don’t intend to target civilians. so where’s your defense of his intent? in fact i do believe he said if he was supplied with the right weapons he could target more accurately. and don’t the US and israel both claim they don’t intend to use white phospherous as a weapon as they rain it down on civilians? i think it speaks for itself. the soldiers would be punished for firing directly into crowds if there was no intent, and they are not. this is routine, it’s not a coincidence.
I am suggesting that there was no intent to cause injury because the canister was fired at the ground.
I am suggesting that if the intent was to cause injury why not just go ahead and cause injury with bullets, or flamethrowers or tanks.
As you point out, Israel has all this weaponry and didn’t in this instance use it. I am not excusing this case which may well be negligent, but it was not, in my opinion, caused with intent.
If you agree that the soldiers are trained to use the weapon, then it logically follows that he was trained in a specific manner and used that specific manner in the field.
I have a hard time believing that in training, the cannister did not riccochet off the ground just as it did before it took out Emily’s eye.
It logically follows, that soldiers know precisely what the action of the cannister will be when fired at the ground…and in fact, can aim at the ground at various angles with the intent to target individuals with the riccochet.
The evidence that two cannister bracketed either side of her before the third one hit her, seems to be strong evidence that the soldier was aiming for the spot on the ground that would give the perfect bounce…into her face.
“I am suggesting that there was no intent to cause injury because the canister was fired at the ground.”
That could be some evidence. But the best evidence is to identify the perpetrator, arrest him and try him in a fair (non-Israeli) court. Then the truth might come out. If the Israelis aren’t willing to offer him up to answer for his crimes, then your painting what-if’s is pointless.
“I am suggesting that if the intent was to cause injury why not just go ahead and cause injury with bullets, or flamethrowers or tanks.”
This is very weak. There’s such a thing as plausible deniability. You can be brutal towards protestors and then claim you didn’t mean to cause serious injury if you fire tear gas canisters at them, but it’s a little harder to make that argument with a flamethrower.
Fair enough. Was the video evidence not clear enough for you? I’m curious though, why should this be tried in a non-Israeli court. An Israeli soldier fired a tear gas canister and an Israeli citizen was tragically injured. I get that you don’t trust the Israeli court system, but I see no justification for taking it anywhere else.
As it stands, I don’t believe soldiers of any country are ever tried in criminal courts (as opposed to civil court or some kind of international court for war crimes) for their actions in uniform and I have not heard of any civil action being brought by Ms Henochowicz against the army, so it seems your point, however well made, is moot.
Agreed, but the question is “why?”. Why would Israel try to injure civilians in a haphazard manner when everyone knows the negative publicity it causes. It’s just not a sensible goal. You can argue as much as you want that Israel is a brutal and terrible regime, but the simple and devastating truth is that what happened to Ms Henochowicz was an accident. Once we agree on that we can argue about Israeli negligence and how much they could and should have anticipated, but it can only be framed in the understanding that this was not the planned or desired outcome when the decision was taken to fire tear gas to disperse the protesters.
He should be tried in a non-Israeli court because Israel courts are incompetent.
“He should be tried in a non-Israeli court because Israel courts are incompetent.”
OK. let me know when you solve that problem and I’ll send you a couple of my parking tickets.
Can you suggest a country that has in your opinion competent courts to take over all Israel’s legal logistics? Go on, name a country, I dare you.
GuiltyFeat proves it again — Zionism == 21st century Holocaust denial. Israel MUST not be doing something because he just can’t conceive that Israel could be doing something so heinous, so he just won’t believe his lyin’ eyes.
The fact is, GuiltyFeat, the courts in your country will NEVER punish an IDF soldier for maiming or killing a Palestinian or a Palestinian rights supporter. You yourself prove that — if you were on the jury for this man, YOU WOULD EXONERATE HIM NO MATTER WHAT. He’s a Jewish soldier, you believe in his inherent righteousness and you’re CONVINCED that he’s innocent, no matter what the physical evidence demonstrates.
The only reason the courts in the UK might not handle this case fairly, in the event venue was somehow magically changed to them, is that Hillary Clinton would threaten to pull intelligence sharing AGAIN if the courts didn’t rule in how the US strong-arms them to rule.
GF,
“…take over all Israel’s legal logistics?”
How about if we just stick to possible war crime issues/military abuses?
The answer: Netherlands/The Hague
Seems a bit heavy handed, but OK. Where on the docket does this incident fit, before or after Syria, Yemen, Hamas, the US in Afghanistan, torture in Guantanamo, rendition by the UK etc., etc.
Oh sorry, I forgot you only apply these kinds of things to Israelis. You certainly have an interesting idea of “universal justice”.
Chaos:
link to bbc.co.uk
link to haaretz.com
“Oh sorry, I forgot you only apply these kinds of things to Israelis.”
What? I don’t apply these things selectively. Put them all there, as far as I’m concerned.
Why would you think that anyone would only want… Oh, yeah, that’s right, it’s part of your massive victimization complex to believe that everyone in the world is picking on poor little-flower Israel because we’re all big antisemitic meanies who wouldn’t apply those principles to anyone else. It must be really nice to never have to face the evil that your state does because you have that built-in excuse…
GF,
I’ll post the same post I just posted to eeee…who was responding to Haytham.
It fits your argument perfectly.
“Why would you think Haytham’s “standards” are different for other countries?
This is a site for Israel/Palestine discussion.
I comment on…and donate to…and participate actively for other causes/countries…on other sites.
Just because you don’t know about it…doesn’t mean my sole focus is Israel to the exclusion of other inequities in the world.
Your reasoning process is fatally flawed.”
LMAO. What is the phrase about the exception proving the rule? Do something that may make Israel look bad, get a slap on the wrist. Shoot a protester in the face with a gas canister? Crickets.
woody, this is the same argument (diversion tactic) going on in another thread. it just litters up the threads which i suppose is the point.
Because I’ve never seen Haytham call for a single member of Hamas to be tried for war crimes against Israel or the Palestinians alongside Israeli war criminals
That’s why I’m convinced Haytham’s standards are different for Israel than for other countries.
Based on things Haytham has told us about his family I can even understand why Haytham’s standards are different for Israel, but I think it’s unwise of you to try to argue that they aren’t when his bias is so glaringly obvious.
GF:
Are you disingenuous or are you smearing me by accident?
Please link to a post that I have made where I have called for an Israeli to be charged as a war criminal.
Why do you feel the need to lie about me? Are you trying to attack my credibility because I have destroyed your posts here time and time again? I notice that you don’t often respond to them, even after they’re praised. You’re kind of like Witty in that regard, looking for low hanging fruit, and not even really good at that, if we’re being honest.
Please link to one–just one–post where there is a provable use on my part of a different standard for Israelis as opposed to another nationality. I don’t know what you think that you read about my family but unlike you I don’t use my life experience as way to craft dishonest and supremacist arguments.
Do not use my name in a post again unless you are going to honestly represent what I have written. You do not me to start picking every one of your posts apart, word by word. Do you?
a different standard for Israelis is the hasbara theme this morning. they are doubling down in two threads, maybe three.
this is a tactic to come into a days old thread with 150 comments and start littering it up w/crap.
GF,
Before I read Haythams post, I was going to give you some benefit of the doubt…as I am relatively new here…and don’t have an extensive knowledge of Haytham…nor do I have the kind of memory required to make the kind of statement you feel qualified to make.
But, since Haytham has engaged you…and put the ball in your court…I look forward to you defending your comment.
“Agreed, but the question is “why?”. Why would Israel try to injure civilians in a haphazard manner when everyone knows the negative publicity it causes. It’s just not a sensible goal.”
As far as I can tell, and I’m serious here, not snarking, Israel doesn’t much care what most of the world thinks. Much of the world despises them as a throwback to the days of European imperialism. Israel does care very much what Americans think, but so far the very loud Israel supporters in both the Christian fundamentalist and Jewish communities have this well under control.
Emily and Rachel Corrie and other Westerners (nevermind Palestinian civilians) can be seriously injured in peaceful protests and it just doesn’t make that big a splash in the US. That’s all that matters. And injuring people is what brutish governments tend to do with dissenters when they can get away with it.
>> CigarGod September 6, 2011 at 2:22 pm
+1. GF, I don’t see you as the sneaky Zionist others appear to think you are. In fact, I respect your posts because you state your position on various issues clearly, you have no qualms about clarifying your position when questioned, and you appear willing to re-think and adjust your position when faced with a reasonable challenge to it.
I do hope you will either support your assertion against Haytham, or retract it. And I do hope others will give you similar benefit of doubt and stop crapping on you.
Just my 2¢… :-)
>> And injuring people is what brutish governments tend to do with dissenters when they can get away with it.
I agree. And the video I saw of a Palestinian prisoner getting shot in the leg with a rubber-coated bullet at almost point-blank range was a perfect example of intentional harm. (He later died.) This – Fence protester hit in the head by tear gas canister – is a perfect example of intentional harm.
Ms. Henochowicz was hit by a ricochet. If someone can prove that the canister was aimed at the ground with the sole intent of having it ricochet some 20′ to the left and strike her eye, I will readily agree that it was an intentional injury. Failing that, it was, sincerely, a terrible tragedy – but a complete accident – that she lost her eye.
And please note: I am in no way excusing Israel’s ON-GOING occupation, its oppression of Palestinians, the violent suppression of peaceful protests, etc.
Hey eljay,
I do enjoy a good roast…even if I am the one being roasted.
You and North are quite skilled at this style. I doubt I have what it takes to duplicate it, but I do have what it takes to appreciate it.
CG:
I appreciate the deference (for you choosing to wait to respond to GF) but I assure you, GF is not going to respond to me.
If you haven’t noticed, some people here have learned not engage me (Witty, GF) and others have not (eee, longliveisrael).
Maybe GF will read me calling him/her out and respond?
I doubt it. Much too cowardly.
> Hey eljay,
>> I do enjoy a good roast…even if I am the one being roasted.
Hi, CigarGod.
I’m not sure if you’re referring to the comments in the post in which I +1-ed your preceding post but, if you were, please know that they were not directed at you specifically.
For what it was worth, I was just trying to explain to GF that I don’t see him at the sort of troublemaker others – generally speaking – do, and that that’s why I hope he clarifies his allegation re. Haytham.
Sorry if you felt I was taking a jab at you personally. That wasn’t my intention.
I didn’t take any offense.
I guess we both feel the same about GF…though I wish she/he would respond when she/he has been trumped. Typical of zionists not to admit errors.
>> I didn’t take any offense.
Cool. :-)
>> I guess we both feel the same about GF…though I wish she/he would respond when she/he has been trumped. Typical of zionists not to admit errors.
I’ve seen GF respond when trumped, and I’ve seen him accept arguments and modify his position as a result of them. Although I could be wrong about him, I do find him to be considerably more reasonable than either the outright hateful Zionists like eee or longliveisrael, or the more-subtle “humanist” ones like RW.
eljay,
I guess that is why I’m inclined to be more polite to GF…though it bothers me he took such a strong position on tear gas ballistics, while it was obvious he knew nothing on the subject.
Haytham, sorry for not responding sooner, but I’ve been doing other things.
Sorry also if you feel unfairly picked on, I didn’t really mean to single you out. Your threat to “start picking every one of my posts apart, word by word” is truly chilling (no snark) so I will do whatever it takes to back down from this mini war of words I seem to have started.
Next time you’re over let me know and I’ll buy you a coffee to apologize properly.
You’ve called me a coward which I guess is fair after I said your posts show a clear bias. I think the accusation that I go for low-hanging fruit is also probably fair. Who (apart from you, clearly) has the time to refute each sentence? Plus there are way more of “you” than there are of me. Sometimes when I comment 5 or 6 people respond with one or two of those being nothing but ad hominem abuse so apologies again if you feel neglected. Your posts are often too long and nitpicky (you’re a lawyer, right that’s still further down the international pariah scale than Israeli… for now) for me to parse so I tend to weave and jab rather than get into a long-winded tussle which is only going to be attacked by 5 or 6 more abusive commenters.
As per your request, I promise not to use your name in a post again.
Maybe I picked the wrong guy when I said you have never called for the leaders of Hamas to be tried for their war crimes. I certainly can’t be bothered to read through all your posts. Apologies if you’re not one of those. I guess I just meant that you sound like one of them, but my bad for making an assumption.
The one post of yours that I did find problematic amongst an unhealthy number of sarcastic posts was this one:
link to mondoweiss.net
Frankly, it makes you look like a conspiracy-loving nutjob.
I’m off to bed. Are we done here?
Eljay, CigarGod, you do know I can hear you, right?
I will try to do better about admitting when I’ve been trumped. It’s always much easier to slink off and look for another thread and there are still people here who just hurl abuse whatever I write so I’m kinda loathe to publicly back down every time I think someone else makes a strong point. There are far greater numbers of Israel bashers than Zionists on this board and I have never seen anyone, apart from eljay and occasionally Donald even acknowledge my impeccable grammar let alone concede that I might have a worthwhile opinion.
I can put up with the crap that is hurled my way and the lies that people have told about me, but I am always disappointed when people like Annie and Phil, who kinda set the tone for the whole site, ignore the ad hominems as long as they are directed at Zionists. It shows a lack of moral courage in my opinion.
>> GF: Eljay, CigarGod, you do know I can hear you, right?
What the…! How’d you DO that?! ;-)
I appreciate your reply, and I appreciate your efforts to engage in what I believe is sincere discourse relating to the I/P issue. And I’m sorry you keep getting shit on.
>> I guess that is why I’m inclined to be more polite to GF…though it bothers me he took such a strong position on tear gas ballistics, while it was obvious he knew nothing on the subject.
Uh-oh. Just wait ’til you see my post which has been awaiting moderation since 15:04 (EST) this afternoon! :-)
GF,
So, that was an antenna sticking out of my matzo?
Seriously, I appreciate your comment and really do welcome productive discussion. I left a whole lot of sites frustrated because it always ended in a monkey and gorilla poo slinging contest. I know I can be a bit of an arrogant ass sometimes…because I can…and like to break things down into their smallest parts…in order to understand, etc. I @#$%ing test everything.
You think this site gets on your back?
Try having 100 smart and not so smart, zionist relatives on your back…for decades.
>> CG: I left a whole lot of sites frustrated because it always ended in a monkey and gorilla poo slinging contest. … You think this site gets on your back? Try having 100 smart and not so smart, zionist relatives on your back…for decades.
Sounds like you could use a good cigar! ;-)
(I prefer single-malt Scotch, especially for soothing the nerves. :-D )
eljay,
The interesting thing about the cannister is that two previous one’s bracketted her right side, then her left…and the third hit her.
I’m both ex-military and a lifelong hunter and that suggests intention, to me. I have used the hard ground to scatter shot over a wider area, I have skipped shots off water and rocks to hit a target, I have lobbed shots at a target I couldn’t see but knew I would hit.
Trust me, an experienced, professional soldier or hunter has skills.
Hey eljay, there you go!
I have a bottle of The Balvenie and I think I’ll have an Essaoura 40/60 by Felipe Gregorio. One of his Moroccan Series.
One of the most brilliant cigars made, imo.
Thanks for the suggestion…I have a habit of neglecting the necessities ;-)
>>CigarGod September 6, 2011 at 7:37 pm
I appreciate the insight and, since my opinion is based on nothing more than my opinion, I will refrain from further comment regarding the intentional vs. accidental nature of this incident. Point is, it came about during a peaceful protest against the Israeli occupation and that – ultimately – is what matters.
>> CG: Hey eljay, there you go! I have a bottle of The Balvenie and I think I’ll have an Essaoura 40/60 by Felipe Gregorio. One of his Moroccan Series. One of the most brilliant cigars made, imo.
>> Thanks for the suggestion…I have a habit of neglecting the necessities ;-)
Glad to help. :-)
I used to occasionally smoke (cigars and cigarettes), but swore off all tobacco a number of years ago. Alcohol (in moderation) – well, I don’t think I’ll ever let that go. :-) The Balvenie Double Wood, IMO, is a tremendous value in a single-malt (up here in Ontario, Canada, anyway).
Enjoy! :-)
eljay,
Roger that.
“Point is, it came about during a peaceful protest against the Israeli occupation and that – ultimately – is what matters.”
Why can’t a zionist see that?
I used to smoke more of them, but I got new Russian girlfriend this spring. The trade off has been waaay worth it.
Point is, it came about as a result of lies and propaganda.
link to youtube.com
At 00:11 she’s saying “and of course [b]the numbers were completely inflated that morning, 21 were killed[/b] … [laughing] There is gonna be demonstration starting in Ramalla.”
Apparently there were no other way to make her – and her colleagues” go to the demonstration but to lie to them.
Just cause needs no lies.
She was severely harmed because your IDF is excessively violent against Palestinians and their supporters. That’s why Palestinians have been MURDERED at these protests. That’s why Rachel Corrie was murdered by a IDF moron in a BULLDOZER. A goddamn BULLDOZER.
How the hell do you kill someone in a bulldozer, then claim it wasn’t intentional.
You’re a clown, GF. I think you’ve achieved Richard Witty status.
“Excessive”
ROFL
I’ve heard a millions of times “excessive” this, “excessive” that.
Yet whenever it comes to actually defining a standard of what is NOT excessive it’s virtually impossible to get a comprehensible answer.
Maybe you could define it?
What means are not excessive to be used by military to disperse a demonstration?
To prevent rocket squad from launching another missile?
To ensure that suicide bomber won’t complete it’s freedom-fighting mission?
P.S. Ending so-called “occupation” is not an answer because it does not respond to our security concerns.
So you don’t consider massive head trauma to be “excessive,” huh? And you intend to wipe Palestine off the map because you want their land? Thanks for the confirmation, Israeli.
Chaos
Instead of asking me same rhetorical question could you please do something useful and answer one of mine ?
Specifically:
What means are not excessive to be used by military to disperse a demonstration?
To prevent rocket squad from launching another missile?
To ensure that suicide bomber won’t complete it’s freedom-fighting mission?
P.S. I know for fact that you won’t be able to produce any relevant and comprehensible answer – you never do. it’s just to show the level of your incompetence.
P.P.S.
Joke of the day
A son comes to his father and asks:
- Dad, what words “incompetence” and “apathy” means?
- I don’t know son, neither do I care.
LB,
Wrong question.
Why did they need to disperse?
Why did they need to pull down the flags the protestors had erected?
CG
If you prefer questions asked but not answered, I’ll ask you one more:
What would happen should security forces stop dispersing all and any demonstrations?
As of flag – since Palestinians repeatedly remove and burn Israeli flags, I think that it is an appropriate and not excessive way to respond.
LB,
You widened the scope of the discussion when you brought up other reasons why the security forces might be deployed.
In the interest of focus, I ignored them and simply broadened the discussion of this specific instance.
With this immediate post, you are doing a similar thing.
1. There would be a mixture of demonstrations. Yes, most likely, some with violence or vandalism. So what? Should your primary focus be on the symptom or the cause?
2. Is the PA burning flags in the WB?
Individual Palestinians burning a flag from time to time, should not be an excuse for the IDF…the most moral and professional army in the world – to do the same.
After all, wouldn’t you consider that behavior to be similar to what you are condemning…a demonstration?
CG
Initially I’ve asked one question rather within the scope of this discussion, answering which should’ve not caused any challenge to experts like we have gathered here.
Yet there never was an answer.
Instead right now your are trying to make a point that no demonstrations needs to be dispersed and maximum what we will have as an outcome is some violence and vandalism.
*Some* violence.
Yeah.
Right.
Like it was in Ramalla back in 2000?
Remember, only 2 IDF soldiers died.
Unarmed.
Beaten to death by jubilant Palestinian crowd.
Not too much violence indeed.
P.S. The cause of this conflict it that Jews back in the Holy Land and are ruling it.
To remove the cause is to deprive Jews of all power and send them elsewhere.
Just do it LOL
P.P.S. Is the IDF burning flags? No.
At the same time, there is not one single reason why hostile entity’s flag should not be removed.
By whom, Lightbringer? By Israeli settlers setting fire to olive orchards and mosques? I have to assume that’s what you’re referring to when you talk about violence and vandalism, because that’s the primary source of those things right now.
Chaos
Instead of asking me same rhetorical question over and over again could you please do something useful and answer one of mine ?
Specifically:
What means are not excessive to be used by security forces to disperse a demonstration?
Does it matter if they are peaceful or armed Lucifer?
Does it matter if they are peaceful or armed Lucifer?
Peaceful is not necessarily opposite to armed just for your information.
Aforementioned soldiers were murdered with bare hands.
So the answer is no. It does not matter.
Oh, I apologize for the late response-but what makes my coward exactly?
Being part of a military that resorts to terrorism (i.e. attacking unarmed civilians).
you should read the HRW report on Turkey’s attack on the Kurds, Chaos. There isn’t a conflict in history where unarmed civilians aren’t killed. War sucks.
The attacks on the Kurds in Iraq that were only made possible because the occupational forces of the United States made it possible for Turkey to enter Iraqi airspace? Is that what you’re referring to? Just clarifying.
Chaos, that is entirely false, if you had a clue about how these things work you’d know better. But it did reveal how you really feel about your country…..
No actually, it’s not false at all. Who controls Iraq’s air space right this minute?
What Chaos said.
You’re a coward for being part of a colonial army that bullies a virtually defenseless population – AND for excusing/justifying and outright denying the existence of said crimes.
Woody,
Great way to nuke a regularly used defense.
“It’s like saying that firebombing a city isn’t conclusive of an intent to destroy it, because if they REALLY meant to destroy it, they would have used a nuke.”
“…they chose a weapon such as this so that they could claim that they had no intent to injure…”
Personally, it seems a cowardly, though clever terror tactic designed to keep international activists away.
If they keep running over, blowing the eyes out of the heads of girls, etc. they are capable of anything.
That is terror inducing.
So the “brave” way would be what-charge with batons and shield, face to to face? There would be far more injuries and perhaps deaths.
Semantics as “IDF terror” vs peaceful demonstrations are hollow, since these people will be stopped and they know that, but still marsh directly towards the soldiers. There are no naive bystanders and victims there.
Yeah! They should do what the Jews trapped in the Warsaw Ghetto did, right? Just lie there and take it quietly.
“So the “brave” way would be what-charge with batons and shield, face to to face?”
Interesting how there is no response by you that doesn’t involve violence by your attack dogs against these protesters. How about let them march and let them protest.
Not a chance:
Full equality for all citizens…and the occupied…would eliminate the Zionist privilege.
Yup. And “if there isn’t privilege for the Jews, what’s the point of governance?” seems to be the operative thesis.
“So the “brave” way would be what-charge with batons and shield, face to to face?”
Hmm, well, I guess thats one alternative. I mean, after all, there is more than one way to oppress, disrupt, and discourage peaceful protest, isn’t there?
OMG!!!!! These weaponless heathens actually “marsh (sic) directly towards the soldiers”????? Oh, well, in that case, fearless warrior, you better pick up your TV remote, and pretend its an Uzi! The heathen barbarians are on the march!!!
You own a mirror??? Ever look in it? Don’t envy you.
The brave way would be to drop their batons, face shields, tear gas cannons…and join the protestors who are defending homes, communities and universal human rights.
That wouldn’t be bravery but a treason in line of duty. Simple court marshal will sort this thing out, or anyone may refuse to serve in first place, which I maintain is their personal right. However as a state I will not accept these acts, as long as the service is required from my citizens.
The same way Nazi Germany punished Germans who would not participate in their attacks on civilians.
Defense of “just following orders”.
“my citizens.”
Delusions of grandeur, Dimatok? No suprise, it fits your narrative.
Amazing. This sofa warrior Dimatok is an embarrassment.
He knows as well as I do that high velocity tear gas canisters CAN be aimed. That is part of the reason a high velocity projectile is desirable. The greater the speed of its trajectory, the greater its accuracy. That’s why so many IDF use them, DESPITE the illegality of using them, as the IDF routinely do to stifle and disrupt PEACEFUL protest.
Even if one chooses to swallow the swill that eee and Dimatok offer, that hitting Emily was an “accident”, IT IS NO ACCIDENT THAT SOMEONE WAS HIT. You CANNOT fire a high velocity projectile into a crowd of people and assume that it is simply going to miss everyone. That particular premise is ABSURD, as both Dimatok and eee cannot fail to be cognizant of. Which, of course, renders their comments here on this thread as blatantly and purposely dishonest.
Which, again of course, calls into question the defensibility of Israeli policy. I can think of no other topic that is so requiring of propaganda, lies, deflection, and the compromising of one’s character and integrity in order to offer a defense. What kind of person is willing to so consistently squirm, worm, slither, and slink, composing endless essays and comments devoted to defending the indefensible? If it was simply one or two individuals, one could just chalk it up to bad apples. But such defenses, employing such despicably disingenuous arguments and premises are actual Israeli official policy, the Hasbara and Megaphone campaigns being blatant examples of this official policy of obsfucation, lies, and media manipulation.
So does GuiltyBrit. They all have military experience after all, since they CHOSE to go to Israel and therefore chose to be Israeli soldiers.
This horrible dishonesty and apologism and attempt to dress up attacks on civilians by military forces as palatable in much the same way as their counterparts in the US try to dress up torture and racial profiling as palatable, really shows how morally bankrupt these people that we’re dealing with are.
They weren’t talking “non offensive armament” when Israeli commandos attacked the Mavi Marmara with assault weapons and the passengers had nothing left to defend themselves but whatever blunt objects were handy.
That’s what takes the cake — the double standard. It makes it painfully clear these bigots consider innocence to be a uniquely Jewish trait, and everybody else has to forfeit their very lives to accommodate Zionist dominion and territorial aggression.
Not true. I chose to come here, but I have no military experience, I have never held a gun and I am not a soldier.
GF,
This explains why you don’t understand the dynamics of projectiles.
But it doesn’t explain Chaos’s persistent lying. Will we ever get to the bottom of that thorny issue?
But enough about me. We were discussing your spirited defense of the man who fired on Emily Henochowicz and stole her eye.
Please show me where I defended anyone in a spirited manner. More of your lies, Chaos, sweetie? You do try to fit one in with every comment, don’t you?
I will say again, I have seen no evidence that proves the tear gas canister was fired with the intention of causing physical harm.
I will go further and say that you have no evidence that proves this either. As usual the burden of proof is on the side making the claim and that’s you, baby.
So I’ll keep it simple and ask a straightforward question (the kind you never answer). What evidence do you have that the soldier who fired this tear gas canister did it with the intention of causing injury?
Without such evidence (and I realize you have no idea what the word evidence means) you have no good reason to claim that Ms Henochowicz was targeted and maimed as part of an ongoing policy of violence against peaceful demonstrators. You can propose it as one of several hypotheses, but that’s a long way from a fact wouldn’t you agree?
I don’t think we can read his mind GF, so you got us there.
Clearly, this poor IDF soldier was suffering from Holocaust-traumatic-stress disorder and misfired his freedom-canister and Emily tripped on a rock that a Palestinian had thrown, landing in the path of the canister.
Brave noble IDF!
i am sick of you all mocking the Holocaust on here, it is sickening.
DBG:
We’re sick of you being sick of something that you find sickening that we’re not actually doing–and if we did do it, you’re right, it would be sick.
We think it’s sick that you’re making up sick things that sicken you that we’re not doing. Only a sick person would make that sick stuff up.
Gee DBG, I think you’ll find Cliff was mocking the IDF soldier, not the holocaust.
Maybe you need to listen to an Israeli psychotherapist on the detachment from reality of most Israelis and their holocaust-based trauma:
A psychotherapist looks at Israel
What Arbarbanel doesn’t say, but I believe, is that this trauma is continuously and deliberately re-inflicted by opportunistic Israeli politicians.
DBG,
I’m afraid the excessive use of the Holocaust as an excuse for present day Israeli government behavior, mocks the Holocaust far more than any attempts at wry/sarcastic humor.
thanks for the link sumud, i am listening to it now. very rational thus far. i’ve read Avigail Abarbanel’s writing before.
Haytham ~ that comment was fully sick mate.
it is the new antisemitism CigarGod.
It’s merely freedom of speech.
As I’ve said before, it’s good having an option to know what our counterparts actually think of conflict – makes one understand perfectly well that no matter what Israelis do, as long as there is at least one white-blue flag flying somewhere between the Jordan river and the Mediterranean sea the conflict will be on and Israelis will be guilty.
I’ve just got an idea – some comments should be selected and cited to Israeli students and soldiers. Should be a morals booster. Even better that visit to Auschwitz.
So Cliff, Holocaust humour designed to offend Jews, but no actual evidence of anything to support your point? What a mensch.
DBG,
I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt; but in exchange, I’d like to see a real. rational argument instead of throwing out the old “boogyman just over the horizon”, thing…as if fear is an argument.
CigarGod, google the new antisemitism. it is exactly what people like Cliff and Chaos4700 are practicing on here.
It looks like three of us too offense to this comment CigarGod.
GF,
Your double standard is showing again. You’ve consistently argued, with respect to Israeli victims, that the very fact that a civilian is killed or injured PROVES that the Palestinian perpetrator was targeting civilians. See here:
Palestinian rockets are lethal. They are fired into Israel with the sole purpose of taking civilian lives.
And here:
But since you ask I know some of them do because they recently scored a direct hit on a schoolbus killing a 14 year old boy seconds after the rest of the students had disembarked. This was clearly not an accident. It was a rocket attack aimed at children. It was tragically successful.
But then when it is Palestinian (or international, or Israeli Pro-Palestinian activists) that are victims of Israeli violence, you demand proof of intent and insist that without it, no determination can be made about “targeting”.
So which is it? Does the fact that a civilian is injured or killed prove that he or she was targeted? Or is there no possible proof of intent? Or does it matter who’s the victim and who’s the perpetrator?
So Cliff, Holocaust humour designed to offend Jews
Really??? Making fun of an IDF soldier is “designed to offend Jews’? Because all Jews reflexively identify with IDF soldiers?? That sounds like a pretty anti-semitic generalization you are making about Jews, GF.
Intent, intent, intent.
No member of Hamas has ever said we fire rockets into civilian areas to scare people, we never meant them to hit anyone.
Do you deny that the purpose of rockets fired from Gaza is to cause maximum casualties even if they’re crap at doing so? Intent.
The rockets have a clear intent and that is to cause physical harm.
No one on this thread has provided any evidence that the intent of the person firing the tear gas canister was to cause physical harm.
Tree, you’re a bit late to the party, but you’re certainly not helping your case with this weak-ass, already-argued-and-lost drivel.
No, you blockhead. Make fun of IDF soldiers all you like. Calling them Nazis, on the other hand is a specific insult designed to offend Jews.
Either you’re being dense or you’re just an insensitive prick.
DBG,
I read this wiki on it.
Certainly a lot of discussion on it.
I’ll have to think about it and maybe read it again…but on first read…it has the same gaps in logical reasoning that I find among the opposition here on MW.
link to en.wikipedia.org
DBG,
I read Cliff’s comment again…after reading the New AS….and I was not offended.
But, I converted from Zionism, many years ago.
Woody Allen has a quote I often think of when my fellow Jewish human beings seem to take things too seriously:
“I used to be of the Jewish persuasion, but then I converted to narcisscism”.
GF,
If someone highlighted behavior of mine…that was similar to the behavior of a Nazi…I would have to accept to criticism in any manner he chose to deliver it.
There are no sacred cows.
I don’t object in the same way when Israelis are called fascists. I don’t even consider the accusation of Apartheid to be in itself offensive.
One of the fundamental goals of Nazism was the genocide of the Jews. In leveling the accusation broadly at all Israel (by which they mean Jewish Israel) the aim is to offend not to illuminate a particular facet of Israeli law.
If you want to bring an example of something that happens in Israel that you believe has a corollary in Nazi Germany, we can have that debate, but that is not what happens here. People like Taxi make declarations that all Israelis are Nazis and that Israel is a Nazi state. It’s aggressive and it’s designed to hurt. It’s not a point of view, it’s an example of hate speech.
If you can point to a systematic process by which millions of people in Israel are being transported to death camps and then gassed and incinerated with the informed consent of the entire country, then I will consider it a fair comparison. Until then you need to stick to specific issues you have with Israeli domestic policy and highlight why you believe them to be misguided.
GF, you’re misquoting again.
No, you blockhead. Make fun of IDF soldiers all you like. Calling them Nazis, on the other hand is a specific insult designed to offend Jews.
This is what Cliff said:
Clearly, this poor IDF soldier was suffering from Holocaust-traumatic-stress disorder and misfired his freedom-canister and Emily tripped on a rock that a Palestinian had thrown, landing in the path of the canister.
Where’s the reference to IDF soldiers as Nazis? There ain’t one.
Either you’re being dense or you’re just an insensitive prick.
Or maybe you’re getting senile and can’t even remember what was said in an online conversation when you can look it up at any time. So I guess what you really mean is ‘make fun of IDF soldiers all you like, as long as you do it according to my specific instructions and prohibitions. ‘
Calling them Nazis, on the other hand is a specific insult designed to offend Jews.
As yes, the penchant to speak for all Jews. You got offended, even though Cliff didn’t call the soldiers Nazis, and you think that therefore calling an IDF soldier a Nazi is “designed to offend Jews? News flash. You don’t speak for all Jews, and there is nothing specifically ‘offensive to Jews’ about calling a particular Jew a Nazi. Or are you trying to claim that no Jew could possibly act like a Nazi (even though there were Nazi Jews in Germany)?
No member of Hamas has ever said we fire rockets into civilian areas to scare people, we never meant them to hit anyone.
I don’t know for a fact that they haven’t said that, and neither do you. Its no more implausible than the various disclaimers issued by the IDF. Maybe they were targeting “terrorists”. That makes it OK right? At least that’s what the IDF and the Israeli government say. I don’t see anything wrong with giving Hamas the same unearned benefit of the doubt you give to Israeli government officials when they kill civilians. Keep your standards the same and we won’t need to keep having this discussion.
Do you deny that the purpose of rockets fired from Gaza is to cause maximum casualties even if they’re crap at doing so? Intent.
Do you deny that you have no idea what the intent of the individuals firing those rockets are and that you just assume that the “intent is to cause maximum casualties even if they’re crap at doing so” solely because it supports your bias? Do you realize that you insist that no one can know what the intent of the IDF soldier that fired at Emily H was without asking him, but you drop that requirement when it comes to anyone who fires a rocket toward Israel? Do you realize how hypocritical that is of you?
The rockets have a clear intent and that is to cause physical harm.
Rockets don’t have intent. I can think of multiple reasons a person might choose to fire a rocket at Israel that do not include “causing physical harm” to a civilian. You give the IDF the benefit of the doubt when it kills tens or hundreds of Palestinian civilians but refuse to give that to any individual firing a homemade rocket when they surely know that, as you say, the rockets are “crap” at causing physical harm.
No one on this thread has provided any evidence that the intent of the person firing the tear gas canister was to cause physical harm.
And my point is that this is a debating point that you throw out the door when it comes to Palestinian violence. Double standard.
Tree, you’re a bit late to the party, but you’re certainly not helping your case with this weak-ass, already-argued-and-lost drivel.
No, its you that was totally absent from the party when, in response to your misstatements that you agreed with the Goldstone report, that the Report claimed that Palestinian rocket attacks were deliberate rather than indiscriminate, and that the Report considered Hamas’ violations equivalent to Israels, I cited passages of the Report that disproved you on each point, and you went AWOL rather than respond.
link to mondoweiss.net
I am merely reiterating the points you chose to ignore over a week ago. You don’t “win” an argument by running away, no matter how you pretend otherwise after the fact.
CigarGod ~ read the section of that wiki article on the EU working definition of anti-semitism, here. It attempts to raise a sacred cow over the issue you mention – comparing the policies of Israel to those of Nazi Germany could be anti-semitic apparently.
So the author of this pro-zionist anti-BDS piece that appeared in Jewish Journal some months ago is potentially anti-semitic, and so are jews (and non-jews) who agree with this observation:
When prominent Israeli rabbis announce that Jewish law prohibits renting apartments or homes to Arabs within Israel, we don’t need our enemies to proclaim that Zionism is racism; we have rabbinical rulings endorsing a racial policy that reminds many Jews of German policy toward the Jews in the pre-exterminationist years.
GuiltyFeat claims:
Yet I’ve quoted that article many times – I think it’s important that at least some zionists are alarmed at Israel’s direction and can place it in an appropriate historical context – and GuiltyFeat has never bothered to comment. He appears happy just to make inaccurate claims about the comments section here at MW.
Yeah, well, to the rest of the world, one of the apparent goals of the state of Israel, given your non-stop attacks on Palestinians, their property, their livelihood, their cultural institutions and their civil infrastructure, is the total eradication of the Palestinian people to make way for the “Jewish” state.
Your country has a genocidal character, as far as many of us are concerned, and you’re not very persuasive at convincing us otherwise, GF.
Hi Samud, (and Guiltyfeat)
Thank you. Yes, I have read that EU organization version of anti-semitism and I agree that they are trying to make sacred cows. It is a bad document and is as biased, unreasonable and lacking in professionalism as the Palmer report.
You touch on a great point, that those who deny the Israel similarities with around 1928 Germany onward…are blinding themselves to perspective.
They act as if the extermination period is all there need be discussed…and as there is no direct (or at least sustained) similarity in Israel with…the final solution…then there can be no similarity.
As you state, the “pre-exterminationist period” in Germany is VERY similar in countless ways….from at least 1948 onward.
Unfortunately, GF and the other apologists of apartheid/fascist policies, etc…are terrified of discussing this subject because they know it is true…and even worse…morally indefensible.
GF,
Call me Mr. Dual Purpose, but it saves time…which I think you said you appreciate:
Hi Samud, (and Guiltyfeat)
Thank you. Yes, I have read that EU organization version of anti-semitism and I agree that they are trying to make sacred cows. It is a bad document and is as biased, unreasonable and lacking in professionalism as the Palmer report.
You touch on a great point, that those who deny the Israel similarities with around 1928 Germany onward…are blinding themselves to perspective.
They act as if the extermination period is all there need be discussed…and as there is no direct (or at least sustained) similarity in Israel with…the final solution…then there can be no similarity.
As you state, the “pre-exterminationist period” in Germany is VERY similar in countless ways….from at least 1948 onward.
Unfortunately, GF and the other apologists of apartheid/fascist policies, etc…are terrified of discussing this subject because they know it is true…and even worse…morally indefensible.
Isreal’s use of lethal and less-than-lethal weaponry against protesters reminds me of the how hate crimes are prosecuted. It will be pointed out that the perpetrators were not concerned about targeting a particular victim, just that a victim must be made to suffer from the target group.
Maybe the Israeli forces were not that concerned that it be Ms. Henochowicz that was maimed, just the possibility that someone from that crowd was.
Good point.
I think it is a form of terror.
Since such crowd, should it be given a chance, would happily maim any Israeli, the treatment is actually fine.
Would you mind repeating that in English Lucifer?
LB,
You have secret powers…perhaps a crystal ball?
You have secret powers…perhaps a crystal ball?
No, I only have some 20 years of experience dealing with our neighbors.
No, I only have some 20 years of experience dealing with our neighbors.
LB said: ‘I’ve bullied and beaten them for 20 years now, and STILL they hate me! Ingrates! Anti-Semites! They deserve more beating!’
Since such crowd, should it be given a chance, would happily maim any Israeli, the treatment is actually fine.
Ah, the IDF was merely doing a pre-emptive strike? Since they were so sure that the Palestinians themselves were going to maim Israeli Emily H, they decided to do her a favor and maim her first. What kind and caring soldiers!