State Dep’t says Israel has a right to defend itself, but can’t say the same of Palestinians

Israel/Palestine
on 63 Comments

People are passing around a disturbing exchange at the State Department Tuesday (first spotted by Megan Iorio at Just Foreign Policy) in which the State Department spokesman emphasized Israel’s right to defend itself from rocket attacks from Gaza but was then incapable of saying that Palestinians have a right to defend themselves from Israel’s onslaught of missiles.

Spokesperson Jen Psaki began by stating:

No country can accept rocket fire aimed at civilians, and we certainly support Israel’s right to defend itself against these attacks.”

This exchange followed, at 9:25 in the video above:

QUESTION: But you feel that sort of the Israeli air raids, like maybe hundreds of them so far this day, are proportionate to the rockets?

MS. PSAKI: That’s not – I wouldn’t validate the accuracy of that number, but I would say, Said —

QUESTION: Okay. Well, the sorties – there are hundreds of sorties.

MS. PSAKI: I would say, Said, that I don’t think any country would be expected to allow rockets to come in and threaten the lives and health and well-being of the citizens in their country, and Israel has the right to defend themselves.

QUESTION: Okay. Do you believe that the Palestinians in Gaza have the right to defend themselves?

MS. PSAKI: I think – I’m not sure what you’re getting at, Said.

QUESTION: I am asking you: Do they have the right to defend themselves against Israeli aggression?

MS. PSAKI: What are you specifically referring to? Is there a specific event or a specific occurrence?

QUESTION: Do they have the right to respond to Israeli rocketing and bombing their homes, their houses, their areas, their schools?

MS. PSAKI: We’re talking about attacks from a terrorist organization, Said. I don’t think you’re —

QUESTION: No, but there is also a population —

MS. PSAKI: — we’re having a conversation about what’s happening here.

QUESTION: I mean, you agree that there is a civilian population in Gaza that is also subject to —

MS. PSAKI: Certainly, and the threat, as I mentioned earlier, to civilian populations is of great concern to us. And that’s one of the reasons why we’re so focused on encouraging all sides to de-escalate.

This line of questioning continued yesterday:

Question: …if they are largely civilians, then they should have, certainly, the right to self-defense or to protection.

MS. PSAKI: Well, Said, I would simply say there’s a  strong difference between attacks –

QUESTION: Right, I understand.

MS. PSAKI: — rocket attacks launched by a terrorist organization that is based in Gaza and the right of Israel to defend itself. At the same time, as you know, we work closely with the Palestinians. We work closely with the Israelis. And it’s important at this point in time to see if all sides can take steps to de-escalate.

A similar imbalance in treatment of the attacks is reflected in the mainstream media. Wolf Blitzer interviewed Ben Wedeman yesterday afternoon with a caption beneath the reporter that said, “Deadly air attacks in Israel and Gaza.” Has anybody been killed in rocket strikes out of Gaza this month? Reuters says today:

Rocket barrages on Israel – the military said there have been 365 since Tuesday – have caused no fatalities or serious injuries…

And our Alex Kane reports that 59 Israelis have been treated for shock and light injuries. 

In its coverage yesterday, The New York Times also looked at the hostilities from an Israel-centric perspective. Reporter Steve Erlanger:

For the moment at least, the hostilities between Israel and Gaza are partly a fight between rockets and interceptors — between the varied and improved arsenal of rockets possessed by Hamas and its allies, like Islamic Jihad, and the antimissile systems of Israel.

Today’s story in the Times is a bit more evenhanded in its emphasis:

The death toll from Israel’s aerial offensive in Gaza rose on Thursday, while rocket fire from the Palestinian coastal enclave reached ever-broader swaths of Israel.

It takes till the third paragraph to learn: 

As the air campaign entered its third day, the Palestinian death toll rose to at least 67, according to officials in Gaza.

The death toll now stands at 74. The Times story does not state, as Reuters does, that no Israelis have been seriously injured by Gazan rockets. There was this paragraph near the end:

Militant groups in Gaza, which have fired more than 350 rockets into Israel since the operation began in the early hours of Tuesday morning, according to the military, continued their attacks Thursday. At least one rocket was intercepted over Tel Aviv by the Iron Dome missile defense system. Shrapnel rained on the city but caused no injury.

Owen Jones of the Guardian makes my point, regarding British media:

But the media coverage hardly reflects the reality: a military superpower armed with F-15 fighter jets, AH-64 Apache helicopters, Delilah missiles, IAI Heron-1 drones and Jericho II missiles (and nuclear bombs, for that matter), versus what David Cameron describes as a “prison camp” firing almost entirely ineffective missiles. Twenty-seven Palestinians are reported to have died in Gaza – and, mercifully, no Israelis have been killed by Hamas rockets – and yet the BBC opts for the Orwellian “Israel under renewed Hamas attack”.

P.S. Palestinian Authority president Mahmoud Abbas has said of the assault: “This is not a war against one faction or another, or against Hamas, but against the entire Palestinian people.” And here is a different take on the imbalance, from Elizabeth Turkov, who works for an NGO that serves refugees in Israel.

About Philip Weiss

Philip Weiss is Founder and Co-Editor of Mondoweiss.net.

Other posts by .


Posted In:

63 Responses

  1. Justpassingby
    July 10, 2014, 10:21 am

    The usual then, this “Psaki” seems to be fked in the head, here she defends the same type of killings of ukrainians by the regime in Kiev.

  2. rationalist
    July 10, 2014, 10:25 am

    To say that the residents of southern Israel are “forced” to live beneath rocket fire is tragically ironic.

    It’s the Palestinians who are forced into small territories and then denied freedom of movement.

  3. seafoid
    July 10, 2014, 10:52 am

    She brings shame onto redheads with freckles.

    • Citizen
      July 10, 2014, 11:39 am

      You’d think she learned something from now the potato famine in Ireland was manipulated . I guess she just wants to emulate Chelsea Clinton.

    • amigo
      July 10, 2014, 11:39 am

      “She brings shame onto redheads with freckles.” seafoid.

      Seems as if redheads and freckles are the in thing in Washington.

      Don,t forget MS Power.

      I can however ensure the readers that Red haired freckled faced lassies are not all liars and war crimes apologists.

  4. Sumud
    July 10, 2014, 10:54 am

    QUESTION: Okay. Do you believe that the Palestinians in Gaza have the right to defend themselves?

    MS. PSAKI: I think – I’m not sure what you’re getting at, Said.

    Which translates to plain English as “hell no those sand niggers do not you uppity jew-hating bastard”.

    • bilal a
      July 10, 2014, 1:27 pm

      She reacts physically as if witnessing a threat . The very concept of civilians , in Gaza, or the USA, defending themselves against state power is anathema to her ilk in washington dc. Civilians being bombed by America or Israel, They are ‘terrorists’, ‘human animals’, it seems, by definition.

      This is the insight of Orwell, language can control thought, provide self deception as a defense against .. empathy.

  5. Sumud
    July 10, 2014, 10:58 am

    It is important that finally this topic has been broached by someone – why do Palestinians NOT have the right to self-defence, particularly when they are the victims of exponentially more violence than Israelis are.

    Dead in Gaza: 81
    Dead in Israel: 0

    Not only these “hot” events but the daily violence of the occupation. It’s so long overdue that Israel was yanked into line.

    • seafoid
      July 10, 2014, 12:03 pm

      Palestinians do not have the right to self defence because international law is not appropriate to asymmetric warfare, Sumud.

      link to mondoweiss.net

      That is a serious long tail risk for Zionism. Some day it’s going to come back to haunt them.

    • Bumblebye
      July 10, 2014, 6:36 pm

      Daniel Sieradski is fighting back against the ADL’s poor ‘ickle Iswail ad (What if Hamas was in your Neighborhood) with Gaza superimposed on New York, with missile range added.
      He’s come up with What if Your Neighborhood was a Giant Prison? (and he’s renamed ADL under its logo – Arab Defamation League)
      link to commondreams.org

  6. Kay24
    July 10, 2014, 11:01 am

    It is as if she is regurgitating the talking points, without the ability to think through the question independently. Anyway this is just the perfect example of American support for Israel, right or wrong, they have the right to defend themselves, and as for the unarmed civilians of Palestine and THEIR right to defend themselves? Seems the State Department has not even given that aspect of the conflict a thought, no wonder the world is under the impression the US takes on the expensive burden of protecting the lives of Jews only. Unarmed Arabs? The answer was clear here…it was eh, ah, never asked that one before, what exactly do you mean, response. Yeah, nice way to convince the Arab world we genuinely care for all humanity. Sheesh.

    Anyone noticed that woman with blue baubles around her neck (hmm wonder what side she supports) kept insisting why Abbas has not been asked to make his people restrain themselves too? She almost looked annoyed about it.Heh.

  7. seafoid
    July 10, 2014, 11:01 am

    link to filipspagnoli.wordpress.com

    When evil-doing comes like falling rain , by Bertolt Brecht

    Like one who brings an important
    letter to the counter after
    office hours: the counter is already closed.
    Like one who seeks to warn the
    city of an impending flood,
    but speaks another language. They do not understand him.
    Like a beggar who knocks for the
    fifth time at the door where he has four times been given
    something: the fifth time he is hungry.
    Like one whose blood flows from
    a wound and who awaits
    the doctor: his blood goes on flowing.
    So do we come forward and report that evil has been done us.
    The first time it was reported that our friends were being
    butchered there was a cry of horror. Then a hundred
    were butchered. But when a thousand were butchered
    and there was no end to the butchery, a blanket of
    silence spread.
    When evil-doing comes like falling rain, no body calls out
    “stop!”
    When crimes begin to pile up they become invisible. When
    sufferings become unendurable the cries are no longer
    heard. The cries, too, fall like rain in summer

    • Citizen
      July 10, 2014, 11:44 am

      I’d guess less way less than 1% of Americans have ever heard of Brecht. It’s a problem. They all know who goy-handsome Paul Newman is, and the commissioned film Exodus has left them pie-eyed. It’s all about framing the narrative, and making it entertaining in terms of white hats and black hats.

    • Abierno
      July 10, 2014, 12:00 pm

      @seafood
      Thanks – I’ve never come upon this poem by Brecht., which so aptly describes the situation in Palestine and Gaza. As you must well know, the Three Penny Opera accurately reflects the trajectory of the US as well as Israel, with Netanyahu as their own, esteemed Mac the Knife.

      • Abierno
        July 10, 2014, 12:01 pm

        My apologies for the misspelling, Seafoid. I am not so capable on
        a keyboard.

  8. Sumud
    July 10, 2014, 11:19 am

    I’ll bet you they keep killing until they hit 300 dead Palestinian civilians. Three dead Israeli settler kids are worth about 300 Palestinians right? That was the kill ratio for the 2008/09 massacre.

    One million Arabs are not worth a Jewish fingernail said the rabbi giving Baruch Goldstein’s eulogy.

    But NO! Israel is a light unto nations and they just won’t tolerate that kind of bigotry. It’s not a million arabs – only a hundred – and they are equal to that jewish fingernail.

  9. hophmi
    July 10, 2014, 11:21 am

    So what is it that you want? More dead Israeli civilians?

    I’m not aware of the military principle that says that when an enemy is firing you, you should wait until x number of your people are killed before you respond.

    • Justpassingby
      July 10, 2014, 11:27 am

      hophmi

      Right, so why do you deny palestinians the right to defend itself.

      Maybe should contact your boss, I dont think he appreciate your perverted judiciary views.

    • RobertB
      July 10, 2014, 11:41 am

      “I’m not aware of the military principle that says that when an enemy is firing you, you should wait until x number of your people are killed before you respond.”
      ~~~~~

      So you just want ONLY your Israeli IDF child killers to have the right to respond when Jews are killed… correct???

      And do the Palestinians have the same right to respond when their children, mothers, grandmothers, fathers, grandfathers… whole families are brutally murdered by Israel’s IDF / army …???

      • MHughes976
        July 10, 2014, 1:45 pm

        The more ruthless philosophies may say that annihilation of the enemy – physical annihilation or annihilation as a political force – is a legitimate aim of military operations if it can be achieved. Even that logic, though, implies that if you cannot achieve that level of success you will have to live with the present enemy in the future and therefore should not give indefinite reason for revenge to be taken on you, meaning that you should to some significant degree be slow to anger and choose de-escalation – some chance will always arise – rather than ratcheting-up.

    • marc b.
      July 10, 2014, 11:44 am

      1. you don’t use the comparative ‘more’ in relationship to zero.
      2. yes, there are rules of war and international law regarding proportionality, which have been repeated here, but you continue to feign ignorance about.
      3. there is no military campaign. (F-16s bombing civilians isn’t a war any more than shooting a caged animal is sport.) it is a manufactured political ‘crisis’ intended to curtail any cooperation between Hamas and the PA and to turn attention away from the increasingly open racial insanity that passes for politics in Israel. (the circumstance of ‘war’ normalizes nuts, frothing at the mouth, screaming for blood.)
      4. pffft.

    • amigo
      July 10, 2014, 11:45 am

      Go back in your hole hophmi.

      Israeli citizens are not having their land stolen from them.Israeli citizens are not being f—-d around every minute of every day for fifty years.

      Btw , your military has no principles and by extension , neither do you.

    • Donald
      July 10, 2014, 11:49 am

      “I’m not aware of the military principle that says that when an enemy is firing you, you should wait until x number of your people are killed before you respond.”

      If you gave that any thought, you’d realize that Palestinians under occupation in the WB and under blockade in Gaza have a better claim to use violence than Israel. The Palestinians in Gaza are sometimes shot at for being in an Israeli-imposed buffer zone inside Gaza. Their fishermen are also fired upon. Palestinian protestors are shot. Etc…

      You’re using an argument that works in a media context where most people are either ignorant of or tacitly support the daily repression and violence Israel uses on the Palestinians. I see people commenting on other websites who talk that way. The argument just looks stupid when you use it with people who know which side has killed more civilians, and which side is oppressing the other.

      I don’t think the Palestinians should use violence, btw. It doesn’t help them and it’s wrong to target civilians. But it’s just Western hypocrisy when people condemn Palestinian violence and support Israeli “self-defense”, when that “self-defense” is part of a larger pattern of oppression.

    • Sumud
      July 10, 2014, 11:54 am

      Don’t fret hophmi, I long ago stopped expecting any zionist to be aware of any principles.

      I want to introduce you to a radical concept, better take a seat for this one:

      there are solutions that don’t involve more killing

      Now don’t panic! Just sit with the idea, breath deep and when you’re feeling calm ponder that revelation.

      • Mooser
        July 10, 2014, 9:48 pm

        “there are solutions that don’t involve more killing”

        ‘Sure, sure,’ says the Zionist, ‘we’ll get to those, but in the meantime we have several atrocities and Holacaust to our credit, and we intend to use them.’

        You know what would be nice? If one of the other ziobots read Hophmi’s archive and…..
        Oh, my God, I have turned into a monster! Forget I said that, I’m supposed to be against torture.

    • seafoid
      July 10, 2014, 12:04 pm

      2 states, you bigot.
      How does the latest butchery square with tikkun olam.
      Or is it just mowing the lawn ?

      • Sumud
        July 10, 2014, 12:27 pm

        One of the best in the ‘Apartheid Adventures’ series, will have to be updated now I guess:

      • Kris
        July 10, 2014, 1:00 pm

        Wow, I didn’t know about these extremely funny and effective videos–thank you, Sumud! The “Apartheid Adventure” series is great!

    • David Samel
      July 10, 2014, 12:09 pm

      So what is it that you want? More dead Israeli civilians?
      hophmi, you are repeating a deeply dishonest line of argument that has been made innumerable times in response to complaints of Israel killing civilians. It is designed to portray those who object to Israeli mass murder as hoping for dead Jews. It is inexcusable.

      • Naftush
        July 10, 2014, 12:49 pm

        Inexcusable:
        Allocating moral high ground to whomever has the higher bodycount.
        Crediting deliberate targeting of civilians to the wrong side.
        Mistaking missile defense for aggression.
        Dismissing evidence in favor of axiom, fact in favor of narrative.

      • Donald
        July 10, 2014, 2:29 pm

        “Allocating moral high ground to whomever has the higher bodycount.”

        More stupidity from an apologist. First, Hamas doesn’t have “moral high ground”. Neither does Israel. I know ideologues are incapable of acknowledging war crimes when committed by their favored side, but the unhappy fact is that both Hamas and Israel are guilty. Second, you don’t get to kill civilians in very large numbers and say that it’s okay because you didn’t mean to do it, when obviously you didn’t care much one way or the other. Third, Israel has Gaza under siege and the WB under occupation and builds illegal settlements–it provokes violence every day by imposing unjust policies.

        In your other post you tread pretty close to Nakba denial–there’s no other way to interpret your whining about the reinterpretation of 1948. That reinterpretation was the truth-telling about Israeli massacres and ethnic cleansing, which had long been covered up by Israel and its apologists.

      • seafoid
        July 10, 2014, 2:44 pm

        “Inexcusable:
        Allocating moral high ground to whomever has the higher bodycount”

        Christ. Where to start ? Zionism left morality behind a LONG time ago. It’s just another Prussia. Blut und Eisen.

        I hope Yossi and Mrs Israeli have a chance to get a few pictures

        link to sabbah.biz

      • Sumud
        July 10, 2014, 3:40 pm

        Inexcusable:
        Allocating moral high ground to whomever has the higher bodycount.

        Please cite an example of an obvious massacre where the perpetrators have the ‘moral high ground’.

        I remind you Israel is attacking a defenceless captive population with a full compliment of advanced battlefield weapons. It is a massacre. Not a war, not a battle, not even a skirmish.

      • Shingo
        July 10, 2014, 7:41 pm

        Crediting deliberate targeting of civilians to the wrong side.

        Yeah right.

        The Israeli army has always struck civilian populations, purposely and consciously. The army has never distinguished civilian from military targets, but has purposely attacked civilian targets.
        Mordecai Gur(Israeli politician and the 10th Chief of Staff of the IDF)

        There was a rational prospect, ultimately fulfilled, that affected populations would exert pressure for the cessation of hostilities, satisfying Israel’s goals.

        Mistaking missile defense for aggression.

        Attacking Gaza, which in turn incites repsonse by rockets is not defense of any kind.

        Abba Eban

      • oldgeezer
        July 11, 2014, 12:08 am

        “Mistaking missile defense for aggression”

        Missile defense is not blowing up those buildings in Gaza.

    • Naftush
      July 10, 2014, 12:57 pm

      hophmi, it isn’t a military principle but one of those only-for-Israel axioms: that Israel’s missile defense and superior armed forces confer unfair advantages that entitle its enemies to moral and, they hope, political victory. Folks who feel this way have already reinterpreted the 1948 and 1967 wars accordingly and celebrate Hizballah’s “victory” in 2006, so why shouldn’t they do so now?

      • eljay
        July 10, 2014, 2:49 pm

        >> Naftusheee: … Israel’s missile defense and superior armed forces confer unfair advantages that…

        …allow it to:
        – perpetuate, with impunity, its 60+ years, ON-GOING and offensive (i.e., not defensive) campaign of aggression, oppression, theft, colonization, destruction, torture and murder;
        – refuse to honour its obligations under international law;
        – evade accountability for its past and ON-GOING (war) crimes;
        – avoid having to enter into sincere negotiations for a just and mutually-beneficial peace.

      • seafoid
        July 10, 2014, 2:53 pm

        Israel’s missile defense and superior armed forces and DC money have kept YESHA going but it’s all building up into a catastrophe.

      • Shingo
        July 10, 2014, 7:44 pm

        that Israel’s missile defense and superior armed forces confer unfair advantages that entitle its enemies to moral and, they hope, political victory

        Stop lying. The political victory comes from the fact ISrael is the occupier and has laid siege to Gaza. There are indefensible positions, which is why you Israeli apologists try to frame the narrative as irrational hatred of jews, as if to suggest that if Israel were not a Jewish state, there would be no complaint from the Palestinians.

  10. Kay24
    July 10, 2014, 11:30 am

    Last time I checked Number of Palestinians killed in Gaza = 75 (including of course innocent children and women) Injured = more than 500

    Number of Israelis killed = O

    Latest From headlines from Haaretz:
    “Israel, U.S. try to ward off UN condemnations of Gaza air strikes
    The Security Council is meeting to consider whether to condemn Israel amid the deaths of Palestinian civilians.

    Jerusalem and Washington are trying to prevent the UN Security Council from condemning Israel’s air offensive in the Gaza Strip, in which dozens of Palestinian civilians have been killed, Israeli diplomats said Thursday. The Security Council is due to meet at 10 A.M. New York time to discuss the fighting between Israel and Hamas.”

    Yep, despite Israel not having any casualties, the US is trying to prevent the condemnation of the side that has inflicted death and injuries. Oy vey, the US showing just how neutral they are, once again.

    • yonah fredman
      July 10, 2014, 11:39 am

      kay- Skip the “oy vey”. You don’t need it.

      • amigo
        July 10, 2014, 11:51 am

        “kay- Skip the “oy vey”. You don’t need it.” YF

        Me thinks it is you who does not need it Yonah.

        Btw , did you have any comment about the main substance of Kay,s post???.
        I get the impression from your reaction, you don,t need any of that either.

      • Kay24
        July 11, 2014, 8:07 am

        Crickets….:))

        Oy vey!

      • Kay24
        July 10, 2014, 11:52 am

        Why not? Here is a clear definition of it:

        oy vey
        Yiddish: short for “Oy vey iz mir,” Oh, woe is me!
        Today’s only Tuesday? I thought it was Friday! Oy vey!!!!”

        I think it is appropriate sometimes to describe the subject.

  11. eljay
    July 10, 2014, 11:35 am

    >> hophmeee: I’m not aware of the military principle that says that when an enemy
    is firing you, you should wait until x number of your people are killed before you respond.

    And the Palestinians are entitled to respond with the same alacrity, with the same ferocity and to same extent as the Israelis have done the next time Israel fires at them…yes?

  12. RobertB
    July 10, 2014, 12:05 pm

    Israel is using the most sophisticated American made weapons to bomb a mostly unarmed Palestinian civilian population. The Palestinians have NO navy, No air force, No army, No tanks, No fighter jets… This is NOT a war…its a mass civilian population murder … all made possible by American made weapons given to Israel…all free… out of the US taxpayers pockets…year after year!!!

    The Palestinians are getting slaughtered and most of the world just stands by the sidelines …. nothing done!!! How many more Palestinians must die by Israel’s nazi army before Americans can dare to speak?

    What is next coming to the Palestinians in Gaza….”White Phosphorous” one of many Israeli chemical weapons from its unchecked chemical arsenal warehouses…?

  13. American
    July 10, 2014, 12:29 pm

    ”’ I-can’t-hear-you” —-”Raise a cry so loud it can’t be mistaken. Make me do what you want me to do; I’m sympathetic to your cause, but the initiative can’t come from me.”—
    President Obama,( the community organizer.)

    White House public comment line—-1-202-456-1111

    Bust his ear drums.

  14. seafoid
    July 10, 2014, 12:56 pm

    “State Dep’t says Israel has a right to defend itself”

    It’s funny but Israel needs Psaki to say that because Israel can’t defend itself in the court of public opinion without the US behind it. Can’t defend itself in the UNSC without America.
    What Arendt said . Zionism would become dependent on foreign powers to survive.
    Ain’t it just so ?

  15. Sycamores
    July 10, 2014, 1:17 pm

    Take Action: Protests around the world respond to assault on Palestine

    check for upcoming protests near you

    link to ufreeonline.net

  16. hughsansom
    July 10, 2014, 2:53 pm

    After an attempt to pin an American official down on whether Palestinians have a right to self-defense, reporters need to ask the following: “Can you name a right that the administration believes Palestinians do have?”

    “Does the administration believe that Palestinians and Israelis are all human beings? . . . Does the administration believe that Palestinians have all the rights that Israelis have by virtue of being human?”

    We know what Netanyahu and his American idolaters think. We need to know whether Obama and his fellow war criminals in the US agree.

  17. amigo
    July 10, 2014, 2:55 pm

    Prosor just got his clock cleaned by an AJ interviewer.

    She kept asking him if he knew how many innocent civilians have been killed in Gaza.He would not answer but kept spouting on about Hamas using Human shields and hiding amongst civilians and blah blah blah.

    At one time AJ turned down the volume so he could not be heard.

    Not used to that , are they.

    Sorry , cannot get a link.

    • Maximus Decimus Meridius
      July 10, 2014, 3:57 pm

      Here it is: link to youtube.com

      Sometimes I think Al J is falling into the ‘both sides’ narrative, but this interview was excellent. The interviewer just didn’t give up or take any of his diversionary bullshit. I was watching the TV and thinking to myself, this is a psychopath I am watching. His complete refusal to even acknowledge the existence of casualties was quite chilling. The psychopathology of Israel, live on TV. And this guy is a ‘diplomat’. FFS.

      • amigo
        July 10, 2014, 6:48 pm

        MDM thanks for the link.I did try but ran out of time and had to be somewhere else.

        Prosor used to be the Israeli ambassador to the UK.He appeared on Irish TV twice spouting zio cock and bull.A nasty piece of work.

  18. Robert Brooks
    July 10, 2014, 3:05 pm

    Somehow, in our role as “honest broker” we forgot to supply Gaza with the Iron Dome we provided Israel.

    • oldgeezer
      July 10, 2014, 11:52 pm

      “Somehow, in our role as “honest broker” ”

      You ignored the balance and context. (kidding)

    • Kay24
      July 11, 2014, 8:09 am

      I totally agree….in fact they have NO bomb shelter, no place to run too, and deserve it MORE than their occupier. Besides, the occupier uses far more deadlier weapons that Hamas does.

  19. oldgeezer
    July 10, 2014, 10:25 pm

    Any, and every, state has the right to defend it’s citizens.

    No state that is involved in aggressive wars and occupation has the right to claim self defense. Attacks on it’s civilians may, or may not, be war crimes but that’s a different topic. There is no claim to self defense.

  20. DICKERSON3870
    July 10, 2014, 10:29 pm

    RE: “But the media coverage hardly reflects the reality: a military superpower armed with F-15 fighter jets, AH-64 Apache helicopters . . .” ~ Owen Jones

    MY SARCASM: Those damn Apaches wreak havoc everywhere they go! I guess the US should have totally annihilated/exterminated them like L. Frank Baum advocated (whether seriously, or just to make a point) in the late 1800s.*,
    Of course, I guess if you truly believe in American exceptionalism (and/or its exceptionally depraved twin, Israeli exceptionalism), you’ve got to really ‘get off’ big time on the idea of Israelis using Apaches to terrorize the indigenous Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank. It just doesn’t get any better than that (from a colonial/settler perspective)!

    FROM WIKIPEDIA [L. Frank Baum]:

    [EXCERPTS] . . . During the period surrounding the 1890 Ghost Dance movement and Wounded Knee Massacre, [L. Frank] Baum [who later wrote The Wizard of Oz] wrote two editorials about Native Americans for the Aberdeen Saturday Pioneer which have provoked great controversy in recent times because of his suggestion that the safety of White settlers depended on the “extermination” of the remaining Indians.
    The first piece was published on December 20, 1890, five days after the killing of the Lakota Sioux holy man, Sitting Bull (who was being held in custody at the time). Following is the complete text of the editorial:
    [EXCERPTS] Sitting Bull, most renowned Sioux of modern history, is dead. . .
    . . . The Whites, by law of conquest, by justice of civilization, are masters of the American continent, and the best safety of the frontier settlements will be secured by the total annihilation of the few remaining Indians. Why not annihilation? Their glory has fled, their spirit broken, their manhood effaced; better that they die than live the miserable wretches that they are. History would forget these latter despicable beings, and speak, in latter ages of the glory of these grand Kings of forest and plain that Cooper loved to heroize.
    We cannot honestly regret their extermination, but we at least do justice to the manly characteristics possessed, according to their lights and education, by the early Redskins of America.[31][32]

    Following the December 29, 1890 massacre, Baum wrote a second editorial, published on January 3, 1891:

    The peculiar policy of the government in employing so weak and vacillating a person as General Miles to look after the uneasy Indians, has resulted in a terrible loss of blood to our soldiers, and a battle which, at best, is a disgrace to the war department. There has been plenty of time for prompt and decisive measures, the employment of which would have prevented this disaster.
    The Pioneer has before declared that our only safety depends upon the total extirmination [sic] of the Indians. Having wronged them for centuries we had better, in order to protect our civilization, follow it up by one more wrong and wipe these untamed and untamable creatures from the face of the earth. In this lies safety for our settlers and the soldiers who are under incompetent commands. Otherwise, we may expect future years to be as full of trouble with the redskins as those have been in the past.
    An eastern contemporary, with a grain of wisdom in its wit, says that “when the whites win a fight, it is a victory, and when the Indians win it, it is a massacre.” [31][33]

    These two short editorials continue to haunt his legacy. In 2006, two descendants of Baum apologized to the Sioux nation for any hurt their ancestor had caused.[34]
    These editorials are the only known occasions on which Baum articulated such views. . .

    SOURCE – link to en.wikipedia.org

    P.S. You gotta love the idea of Israelis using Apaches to terrorize the indigenous Palestinians

  21. DICKERSON3870
    July 10, 2014, 11:52 pm

    RE: “State Dep’t says Israel has a right to defend itself, but can’t say the same of Palestinians”

    MY COMMENT: “Down, down, down we [the U.S.] go into the deep, dark abyss; hand in hand with Israel*.”

    * SEE: “Obama’s kill list policy compels US support for Israeli attacks on Gaza”, By Glenn Greenwald, guardian.co.uk, 11/15/12
    The US was once part of the international consensus against extra-judicial assassinations. Now it is a leader in that tactic.

    [EXCERPTS] Israel’s escalating air attacks on Gaza follow the depressingly familiar pattern that shapes this conflict. Overwhelming Israeli force slaughters innocent Palestinians . . .
    . . . Meanwhile, most US media outlets are petrified of straying too far from pro-Israel orthodoxies. . .
    . . . Obama had no choice but to support these attacks, which were designed, in part, to extra-judicially assassinate Hamas military leader Ahmed al-Jabari as he was driving in his car. . .
    . . . Extra-judicial assassination – accompanied by the wanton killing of whatever civilians happen to be near the target, often including children – is a staple of the Obama presidency. That lawless tactic is one of the US president’s favorite instruments for projecting force and killing whomever he decides should have their lives ended: all in total secrecy and with no due process or oversight. There is now a virtually complete convergence between US and Israeli aggression, making US criticism of Israel impossible not only for all the usual domestic political reasons, but also out of pure self-interest: for Obama to condemn Israel’s rogue behavior would be to condemn himself.
    It is vital to recognize that this is a new development. The position of the US government on extra-judicial assassinations long had been consistent with the consensus view of the international community: that it is a savage and lawless weapon to be condemned regardless of claims that it is directed at “terrorists”. From a 15 February 2001 Guardian article by Brian Whitaker on the targeted killing by Israel of one of Yasser Arafat’s bodyguards [emphasis added]:
    “International opprobrium was directed at Israel yesterday for its state-approved assassinations of suspected terrorists – a practice widely regarded as illegal. . .
    . . . “The United States, while also condemning Palestinian violence, made clear its disapproval of the assassinations. . .
    “State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said: ‘The use of Israeli helicopter gunships, Palestinian attacks against settlements and motorists, the use of mortars by Palestinians and the targeted killings by the Israeli Defence Force … are producing a new cycle of action or reaction which can become impossible to control. . .

    . . . As the Council on Foreign Relations documented in April of this year:

    “The United States adopted targeted killing as an essential tactic to pursue those responsible for the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. The Pentagon and the Central Intelligence Agency have employed the controversial practice with more frequency in recent years. . .

    In essence, what we find, yet again, is that the governments of the United States and Israel arrogate unto themselves the right to execute anyone they want, anywhere in the world, without any limitations, regardless of how many innocent civilians they kill in the process. . .

    ENTIRE COMMENTARY – link to guardian.co.uk

  22. Kate
    July 11, 2014, 1:00 am

    That link goes to the usual message about its not being available in my country (the US). I suppose that’s because there is now an Al Jazeera America. Since AJA is available on my cable network (don’t know how many Americans can access it), I watch it a lot – and I was watching it earlier today when Prosor was on. His smile is the very definition of ‘smarmy’ – repulsive person. I turned off the sound myself when I couldn’t stand any more of what he was saying, so I missed observing AJ turning it off themselves! Too bad.

  23. MichaelRivero
    July 11, 2014, 11:25 am

    Psaki gives Netanyahu a blow-job on national TV!

    To which I would add that the kidnapping of the three teenagers did not happen in Gaza and even the Israeli media is reporting a different group, the Islamic State in Bayt al-Maqdis, took credit for the murders. And the head of the Mossad “predicted” three Israeli teenagers would be kidnapped a week before it happened!

    The quickest way to detect a government lie is to look for what should be there and isn’t, and what isn’t there is a REASON for HAMAS to do something that stupid at this particular time.

    HAMAS and FATAH formed a unity government. They need the support of the world right now, and neither HAMAS or FATAH is going to carry out an act that would wreck the very public support they need. It’s like George Washington trying to kick out the British by shooting students in the colonial schools; it is just not going to happen.

    Netanyahu, of course, is adamantly opposed to the unity government and stated he would find some way to wreck it. It appears he has done just that.

    Keep in mind Israel’s history. In both the Lavon affair and the attack on the USS Liberty, Israel carried out attacks then tried to frame Egypt for them, to trick the US into ending political relations and possibly launching war. In these two cases, Israel’s deception became known, but one may presume that where one Israeli deception is found, there are likely dozens more they got away with. This stunt with the three teens appears to be more of the same. Kidnapping and killing these kids does not help HAMAS, but clearly helped Netanyahu by creating the excuse for him to launch outright war on Gaza.

    “By way of deception, thou shalt do war” — Motto of the Mossad

    So who is Israel “defending” itself from, bitch!

Leave a Reply