Total number of comments: 43 (since 2010-03-18 00:43:43)
-
-
- Resume builders: Be a broken record on Iran, cheer authoritarians … 1
- UN Committee: Israeli system ‘tantamount to apartheid’ 0
- Slater on Beinart 9
- And we live on… 1
- US official — we went to Israel first 3
- Israel lobby’s favorite senator tries to erase Palestinian refugee status … 23
- Israel takes 30 dunams of land near Salfit ‘for security … 4
- Aaron David Miller: After a short ‘peace process,’ look … 38
-
- BDS victory: South Africa strips Ahava’s ‘made in Israel’ label 713
- Video: Israeli mob demands all African refugees be deported from … 475
- Day after pogroms, Likud MK calls for internment camp for … 427
- Neverending Nakba: Israel breaks lull, attacks Gazan farmers 413
- ‘This is not fair play’: Mahmoud Sarsak’s family demands his … 389
- March of the Flags 345
- Neocons in Washington Post: Military strike on Iran would ‘calm … 323
- Nabi Saleh’s Bassem Tamimi convicted by Israeli courts based on … 293
-
- The Messiah’s Donkey: Settlers fire on Palestinian villagers as the … 235
- Aharon Appelfeld’s rage at the German language (and Arendt’s need … 156
- US to differentiate between ‘personally displaced’ Palestinian refugees and their … 129
- March of the Flags 127
- Affirming a Judaism and Jewish identity without Zionism 110
- Feeling the hate in Long Island 97
- Israeli judge to issue verdict in Rachel Corrie case 94
- WaPo’s Walter Pincus says US is ‘going above and beyond … 87
-
Recent Comments
click link to see last 100 comments- Slater on Beinart (9)
- radii: the train has left the station and a few like Beinart have noticed but think they can still run and catch it...
- Citizen: This is all tempest in a Jewish identity teapot because Congress just gave Israel $4 Billion dollars for...
- Krauss: Have you all noticed how the real liberal Zionists, even with warts and all, keep getting more and more...
- Resume builders: Be a broken record on Iran, cheer authoritarians in Gulf (1)
- Annie Robbins: Having recognized its weakness, the US knows that it will be the UN that takes the lead in Syria and...
- Did Israeli Eurovision contestant watch too much Juliano Mer Khamis? (54)
- Annie Robbins: GL, urban dictionary has PEP, just no explanation of progressive except for palestine....
- German Lefty: Annie, it looks like you got infected with the Eurovision virus. Great. The more fans, the better. The...
- US official — we went to Israel first (3)
- traintosiberia: OMG! Why I don”t have that Stockholm Syndrome yet! How long do I have to feign that I have it.
- Annie Robbins: a U.S. official…asked to remain anonymous owing to the sensitive nature of the issue. sensitive?...
- And we live on… (1)
- Talkback: They should make Gaza the most beautiful place just to p*** compulsory expellers off. Enviromental...
- Israel lobby’s favorite senator tries to erase Palestinian refugee status for millions (23)
- piotr: How many Jews who made aliya were actual refugees from Roman persecution? Thus the “Jew who taunted...
- Slater on Beinart (9)
Our Writers
- Philip Weiss
- Adam Horowitz
- Today in Palestine
- Annie Robbins
- Alex Kane
- Kate
- Alice Rothchild
- Ahmed Moor
Blogroll
FANTASTIC letter!!!
eee,
According to the law in Israel there is no such thing as a secular Israeli. You might be a secular Jew, but you can't be a secular Israeli because there is no such thing as an Israeli. A person from America is American, a person from Israel is Jewish or Arab (or Druze, etc.). The Israeli Population Registry Law designates you as being of Jewish nationality and not of Israeli nationality. Life in Israel is organized along nationality (not citizenship). On this basis, the law in Israel is able to discriminate against Arabs. When secular Jews in Israel went to the courts to change this they were rejected. There are over 20 laws that discriminate against Palestinian citizens of Israel which makes this apartheid as opposed to inequality.
Ok...I'm sorry. This is stupid. Why would you do something knowingly illegal and then publish about it using your own name? Besides being able to prosecute the person you also alert the authorities to be more strict in the future.
I think we need to learn how to subvert the system and not brag about it in the media for publicity's sake.
great idea though!
Beautiful piece. I see Primo Levi in their: put people in hell and they will learn from their surroundings.
And the continuum of violence and non-violence: very true.
We are conditioned to think of these as polar opposites never thinking of their connections. A violent act can give way to non-violence and the opposite is true. people who partake in war crimes also partake in weddings and moments of deep sensitive love. I could go on with examples... Wish it were not so gray, but that's the world we live in.
50 Christian and Muslim...hmmm. In true Lebanese fashion I bet it is 25-25 ;-)
Goldberg says Israel aspired to be Jewish as much as France is French...yes, on a land without a people perhaps...
Now that he understand that there was and is a people, maybe he should be rethinking that aspiration in light of the historical facts.
Seems to me that they are recognizing Israel's sovereignty over Gaza. What they are doing is what the ICRC and UN do. They try to get permission from Israel before going into the besieged territory. This doesn't sound like resistance to me. it sounds like you are giving the Israelis legitimacy over "liberalizing" the siege.
As for the quote, sounds like the white man's burden. Jews going to free the deprived Palestinians. Other stuff they said sounded like J-street discourse.
Hey everyone,
In case you didn't know.
This Jewish boat thing is a sham. Check this out:
link to haaretz.com
With this discourse i would question why the Palestinians would even let them dock! They are going to recognize Israeli sovereignty over Gaza by allowing them to check their ship even though it would be checked at the departing port. It is almost like they are trying to coopt the Free Gaza Movement and change the discourse.
Cool...this has turned into a soccer blog :)) Woo hoo...
i know about the myths. hence I said, "we can argue about the reasons they left." The existence of Israel put the Jews in danger in Arab countries, with or without the Mossad. The Israelis are at fault for it. I know that. But that doesn't negate the fact that Jews felt safer in Israel and did leave their homes in many countries - Iraq is just one example. This argument is moot. I don't disagree, but I do think a just solution should take into account Jews who want to go back to their homes elsewhere. it at least shuts up the Israelis who say "we have refugees too and we took care of our refugees." I'm not even saying the compensation should be equal. It may only need to be symbolic since they have been more than fairly reimbursed I can imagine - although Mizrahi jews have it bad you know.
thats fine. But they could be compensated as a good faith effort on the part of the Arabs. The compensation would not be equal of course. But this should solve the issue that Jews had to leave their countries. We can argue about the reasons they left but I think they could be compensated so long as it does not detract from the compensation of Palestinians.
Hey, I think what you say is tempting. But I also think its the easy explanation. Just imagine everyone as crazy and in some ways you don't have to deal with their logics and meaning. In many ways, the lunatic Israeli position is the easy position when you grow up in israel. To think otherwise is to be excommunicated (practically). few people would dare to do that. But humanity isn't an issue. We all dehumanize the other everyday in our daily lives and in different ways. Some objectifying is harmless but coupled with sinister political objectives it can turn brutal.
Not all your "crazies," as you put it, are in jail in other societies. There are few millions, supporters of Glen Beck, who are roaming around in the US. I can give you examples in just about any country. I think I would call them "right wing." But that's a political position.
I think we need to move beyond this discourse of humanity. It's rhetorical and doesn't actually mean anything. What does it mean to see someone as not human? I think it is worse. Israelis recognize that Palestinians are human but they do this to them anyway. The Israelis would fully accept Palestinian "humanity" if it were elsewhere. It isn't about humanity. It's about politics (understood in its range of meaning: social, economic, etc).
You're a bit rough. it's a proposal and has flaws. No need to get personal. Anyway, I agree about the Golan Heights. I have no idea where that came from either. As for the name, yes, Palestine is an option. But I think the name does not have to be a sticking point. If there was an end to occupation, equal rights, and right of return, would you say "no, you have not called the new state Palestine!" ?
Noble attempt but without addressing the refugee issue I don't think you have much of a solution yet. Most of what you said is characteristic of many states and not very new. Not sure why English should be an official language? It can be a business language or unspokenly official but to enshrine that seems odd.
The basis of the solution should hold that it is one state for one people, rather than two people. That for me is the principle. There are differences within the palestinian and Israeli communities just as there are differences across them. The more they live together as one the more intra-ethnic differences will arise and you'll see more Israelis-Palestinians joining up against other israeli-palestinians.
But the refugee issue as you described it makes it all collapse. Palestine-Israel is much larger than Lebanon - why would Lebanese have to shoulder the burden of 300-400 thousand refugees just because you feel you have a demographic problem? Incidentally, the demographic problem is similar to the racist excuse the Israeli gov't gives now. So you haven't departed much. I would urge you to look at Salman Abu Sitta's research as a starting point for repatriation. I would suggest that all Jews and palestinians would have a right to return to their countries. So Jews should be allowed to return to Arab countries if they so choose - repatriation on the Arab side should account for the fact that Jews who moved to Israel received large subsidies, but there should be a scheme regardless. Palestinians should all be allowed back along some scheme as well and repatriated heavily - a la Holocaust victims.
Anyway, I'm just throwing things out real quick but any serious proposal has to address the toughest issue first and be in principle with the principles of a one-state. All the other issues get taken care of, like Jerusalem, roads, water, land, governance. Those become easy once you think of one-state. Security of this state becomes more of an issue - how do you guarantee the rights of the minority in this state while also guaranteeing the prosperity of the poor majority (South Africa style - which has not bode well for blacks thus far).
You know, all this talk is a load of horse dung - on both sides. Until any of you can face people with guns either with your own guns or weaponless then i don't think principles or pragmatism mean anything. Test your principles or pragmatism through action and then we can all speak. Until then it is just a bunch of people sitting in their comfy homes pontificating about violence, nonviolence or both. I think though, assuming we want to build a better world, that the principle of nonviolence outlined in these posts should not be demeaned, even if you think it makes strategic or tactical nonsense in your current political realism.
Helen Thomas probably figured that she isn't brave enough to quit her job. She had been doing it for so long she didn't know how to just stop and get out. So she decided to try a little experiment. It worked. She can now spend the rest of her days enjoying family, friends and the unpolluted air outside Washington.
Criticize Israel...It's the best way to get out of your job without having to confront your boss ;)
No, I was referring to the logic that makes a monster out of your enemy and then assumes if you punish them all your problems will go away.
Listen, I'm not going to disagree with you that the fear is misplaced. I know and you know. But the fear, Sherbrsi, does have a basis in reality. That's the sad part. It might not be a basis you and I think is right, but it is a basis. Paranoia is real, whether it is imagined or not, the person lives it as real.
I'll give you another example. Christians in Lebanon fear they will be slowly expelled by the Muslims. The fear, I would argue, is legitimate. Meaning, we have to take it into account. is it right? No. Is there a factual basis for it? I would also argue no. But in the Christian imaginary, there is a basis. You need to change that imaginary. You need to change it for the Israeli because, YES, the Israeli uses it for his/her own self interest, as would anyone else: like HollyTree's sister. She ain't a bad person. That's just the way the psychology of fear works.
And no, you don't entertain it. That's not what I'm saying. But you have to acknowledge that it exists and that it comes from somewhere. A suicide bomber encourages that fear - whether he/she is defending or doing the greatest deed on earth. You can't tell an Israeli who just lost a limb that this threat isn't real. Even though you and I might agree that it isn't real and that it is a reaction, and so on. But s/he lost a limb! There is a basis, regardless of the politics you and I know about.
To just ignore the Jewish imaginary of victimization, and claim that it has no basis (I'm sorry, but the Holocaust serves some basis at least), seems a bit, well, a bit, I don't know...naive perhaps?
Fear does not have to be of something real - you can fear an imagined threat. You fear the fantasy of what could be. That fantasy is very very real. You can't dismiss that just because the Palestinians "pose little threat." Well, you can, but you won't get anywhere. Even the Palestinians acknowledge that Israelis have fear. it isn't anything new and I'm not sure why we are even arguing about that.
Yes, that's what I'm saying. Your logic is the realism that has brought us to where we are. I'm not saying the only burden is on the victim. And I'm not even saying in all cases. I am saying that in this case, and possibly in the case of the Nazis and rape victim (and I'm not saying the victim/oppressed should sit down and take it - no, I'm saying they should resist but keep this in mind as one goal). On the other hand, your approach is to just create monsters of your enemy. I think that's what the Zionists have done. Your logic is the one that just about every world leader follows. You're in good company.
So they feel superior not fearful. So you have to bring them down to earth. Its the same thing. The burden is on the oppressed, unfortunate as that may be.
decentjew and Sherbrsi,
that's just silly. You don't just become a label and you don't just believe propaganda.
It's not just fear, although that is a big part. You can't reduce it to just one thing. In your logic then the solution would be to kill all the Nazis??
I said it in response to Matthew Taylor's blog. The sad fact is that Palestinians need to teach Israelis how to overcome their fear, how to be free, how to be just, and all that stuff. In a sense, Israeli salvation comes through Palestinian freedom - and I'm not talking about the racist two-state solution either.
Your last point is a tough one. I'm more inclined not to go down the path of means/ends. The means are the ends because they are all we know. The struggle for justice is also in the justice of the techniques of struggle.
Jeff, (and to Cliff below),
It seems you know the background of Mr. Taylor a bit more than I do, but despite some shortcomings which were pointed out, I don't see why the hardcore attack. We all pontificate in our different ways, whether on the ground or in our high chairs. People can choose to listen or not. I don't think Taylor's call for nonviolence should be shunned, so why would Phill not give him a platform?
You claim that without resistance there would have been no media coverage. But Taylor is not telling them not to resist or sacrifice their lives. He is just saying, from my interpretation, that in their resistance they should not be using pipes, knives or sticks, as at least some did. His point, from what I understand, is that this serves to split the media attention so that it is not entirely on Israel. I agree that there is little the activists could do that would not deem them terrorists, but I see Taylor's call as asking for more commitment to pure nonviolence in our confrontation. Nothing wrong with that is there?
And Palestinians are calling for exactly the same thing with their BDS call and their confrontations in Bilin where they resist Israeli violence with their bodies - dying in some instances.
I have provided my own interpretation of Taylor - Mr. Taylor, correct me if I am wrong. And Jeff, if you know something I don't then that's something else.
I don't think it's too depressing. As I said, the answer is that each has to assess what they can personally do. For some, protesting mildly in the US is enough; for others, it is to write (blogs, books, etc); and still others, it is to confront more directly; and finally, it is to carry arms as well. I think the sum total of that is where you will find change and where liberation comes about. One hopes that few will choose the way of violent arms after seeing its ineffectiveness, but it is for those people to decide. My point is simply that if you decide to go on a voyage to confront the enemy (whether a flotilla or walking up to a police barricade at a US protest) then you need to understand what that confrontation means. it does not mean turning around at the last moment because you are scared to lose an eye or a limb. Well, you can, but you wouldn't be working in the spirit of Gandhi's nonviolence, or mine at least.
I think they should go as far as they personally decide. In this case, they should have made it clear that they would "resist nonviolently in any way possible". One thing this could have meant was pushing soldiers back into their Zodiacs for example, and using their arms in any way they could. This would have not been pretty, and maybe I would not be brave enough to do so. But I was not on the ships. If one is to commit to going on the voyage then one should, I think, also commit to the possible sacrifice if nonviolence is met with force.
One more thing...in the article, there was a Turkish-Western division between activists that I do resent. Those who resisted with any way they could were not all Turks. There was at least one US citizen (a former Marine) and a number of other non-Turks. Maybe it was not intentional, but such a division plays into the orientalist view of the world. Paul Larudee's article (quoted above) is more nuanced in this sense.
Don't take this as a criticism of the article. It was a great piece! Just some thoughts...
Saying that the Salt works protest led to independence is like saying that the Flotilla action or even suicide bombing will lead to independence. To create that kind of causal argument doesn't have too strong a basis. It would probably be more accurate to say that a number of things led to independence, including violence.
Having said that, I agree with your principle. The goal of the flotilla was to get world attention (the same with the WTO protests). In that sense they were both successful and the violence that occurred may have even served their goal. Who knows, without this, those soldiers could have boarded and taken the flotilla to Ashdod with no incidence, and the whole event would have passed like the other 5 Free Gaza ships - with little coverage. As one comment above said, look at the Rachel Corrie, who will remember that? Had they pushed soldiers off their boat and been aggressive in their posture it might have led to more coverage, but maybe more casualties. The point here is the one Gandhi makes, which is that you shouldn't take on these voyages if you are not ready to sacrifice your life - not those of the enemy - by some accounts, it seems the Turkish fleet operated on those terms and not killing the Israeli soldiers.
On the other hand, where you are right, is that the coverage has been gray. People are questioning the limited violence, even if defensive, on the part of the activists, and that is detracting from the great crime that occurred. I think it is productive for us to self-critique and think that possibly our nonviolence can be improved - instead of defending with sticks we should use fists next time for example - or nothing, but I'm not so brave.
With world opinion the way it is, we should know that only true nonviolence will ultimately be effective, and not because it is necessarily more principled.
Some comments have pointed to the article implying that Palestinians need to free themselves and their oppressor, and that this is ridiculous. Sadly, it is ridiculous, but yet, it is the only way. In some ways, crazy as it is, the Palestinians, especially those inside 48 palestine, are the Israelis salvation. The oppressed must make the oppressor understand equality and love and all that "junk." In some ways this is Franz Fanon's argument and nothing entirely new.
I'm not really sure what this footage provides that others don't? We'll have to wait for the full hour of unedited tape that she has. But based on the democracy now interview it doesn't seem like there is anything different. it's new, as Richard says, but it doesn't shed new light on things. Or am I missing something?
I am totally against any investigation that would find these soldiers guilty. It is even worse if the Israelis conduct a "free, fair and independent" investigation to find them guilty, but just as bad if the international community does it. To be sure, the soldiers are guilty. But it is not them that should be judged but Israel and its government. And even that is not enough. it is not enough to impeach Netenyahu or jail a few ministers. Because they alone are not guilty. The occupation should be on trial, it is guilty, and everyone who supports it. To punish any single individual without ending the occupation, giving the Palestinians the right to return, etc. would simply be strengthening Israel's stature. "See," the pundits will say, "Israel respects international law, they have independent investigations, they submit their criminals to our courts, etc." All the while the occupation, the siege, the dispossession will continue.
There should be an investigation but not one whose sole aim is to find guilt in individuals and shift blame from the occupation. An investigation that leads to Israel being guilty should recommend sanctions and boycott - this is what Goldstone should have recommended, and not a trial.
that "one day" cannot come too soon!
cultural terrorism...I like :)
Sign me up!
Speaking of BDS...
Maybe someone should send this to Elton John since he is supposed to be playing in Tel Aviv this month. He didn't sing in the original, but it might drive the point that culture and music is political.
From a PDF of talking points sent to Israeli citizens:
Dear Friend:
Various Israeli official bodies,
including the ministry for Hasbara
[i.e. propaganda] have sent
messages to Israeli citizens urging them
to take an active part in
the “propaganda war”. They are told not to
ask questions but rather to spread the official messages in every
possible way in the virtual world: talkbacks, forums, Facebook etc.. I
have the material which
is mostly in Hebrew. Although every citizen
was asked to use the languages he knows. The attached file is in
English. It
would be nice if some of you can publish it on the net in
order to
unveil this coordinated campaign.
BELOW IS THE PDF
1
World Zionist Organization
IDF Interception of Gaza-bound Flotilla
Responding to the Consequences of the Episode
1. Information and Main Points
Israel Ministry for Foreign Affairs
Ongoing Updates link to mfa.gov.il
Weapons cache link to mfa.gov.il
Full account and additional information collected by Zionist Council of Victoria / Zionist Federation of Australia:
link to zcv.org.au
2. Legal Points [MFA]
The Gaza Flotilla and the Maritime Blockade of Gaza
Legal Background – 31 May 2010
1. A maritime blockade is in effect off the coast of Gaza. Such blockade has been imposed, as Israel is currently in a state of armed conflict with the Hamas regime that controls Gaza, which has repeatedly bombed civilian targets in Israel with weapons that have been smuggled into Gaza via the sea.
2. Maritime blockades are a legitimate and recognized measure under international law that may be implemented as part of an armed conflict at sea.
3. A blockade may be imposed at sea, including in international waters, so long as it does not bar access to the ports and coasts of neutral States.
4. The naval manuals of several western countries, including the US and England recognize the maritime blockade as an effective naval measure and set forth the various criteria that make a blockade valid, including the requirement of give due notice of the existence of the blockade.
5. In this vein, it should be noted that Israel publicized the existence of the blockade and the precise coordinates of such by means of the accepted international professional maritime channels. Israel also provided appropriate notification to the affected governments and to the organizers of the Gaza protest flotilla. Moreover, in real time, the ships participating in the protest flotilla were warned repeatedly that a maritime blockade is in effect.
6. Here, it should be noted that under customary law, knowledge of the blockade may be presumed once a blockade has been declared and appropriate notification has been granted, as above.
7. Under international maritime law, when a maritime blockade is in effect, no boats can enter the blockaded area. That includes both civilian and enemy vessels.
8. A State may take action to enforce a blockade. Any vessel that violates or attempts to violate a maritime blockade may be captured or even attacked under international law. The US Commander's Handbook on the Law of Naval Operations sets forth that a vessel is considered to be in attempt to breach a blockade from the time the vessel leaves its port with the intention of evading the blockade.
9. Here we should note that the protesters indicated their clear intention to violate the blockade by means of written and oral statements. Moreover, the route of these
2
vessels indicated their clear intention to violate the blockade in violation of international law.
10. Given the protesters explicit intention to violate the naval blockade, Israel exercised its right under international law to enforce the blockade. It should be noted that prior to undertaking enforcement measures, explicit warnings were relayed directly to the captains of the vessels, expressing Israel's intent to exercise its right to enforce the blockade.
11. Israel had attempted to take control of the vessels participating in the flotilla by peaceful means and in an orderly fashion in order to enforce the blockade. Given the large number of vessels participating in the flotilla, an operational decision was made to undertake measures to enforce the blockade a certain distance from the area of the blockade.
12. Israeli personnel attempting to enforce the blockade were met with violence by the protesters and acted in self defense to fend off such attacks.
3. Israel Ministry for Diaspora Affairs
Talking Points
1. The State of Israel expresses its sorrow for the casulaties, but places full responsibility on the organizers and the participants who initiated the violence.
2. Prior to this, the State of Israel had offered the organizers the option of docking at Ashdod port and transfer the humanitarian aid to Gaza overland, but this offer was rejected.
3. The activists on one of the six boats had intentionally planned a violent response to the IDF Navy interception, including a gunfire attack as well as other weapons, knives, etc., which placed them in a life-threatening situation.
4. The Gaza Strip is not threatened by starvation or a humanitarian crisis. It is controlled by Hamas, a terrorist organization which is actively stockpiling arms and rockets for the purpose of targeting Israeli citizens, as in the past, and is holding an Israeli solider hostage in contravention of international covenants. Israel therefore reserves its natural right to check all cargo inbound for Gaza.
5. The flotilla was a deliberate ploy and act of political provocation designed to attract media attention on the part of anti-Israeli elements and the IHH which is a violent and extremist organization that supports terror organizations under the cover of humanitarian activity.
6. Israel reiterates its desire and readiness for peace with all who interested in making peace.
4. With Intent – Articles and visual documentation
IDF Spokesman: Article and video footage link to dover.idf.il
Video by IDF Spokesman [N America Desk] link to youtube.com
A brutal ambush at sea link to ynetnews.com
Ron Ben Yishai: bloody clash aboard Gaza-bound vessel
Weapons on board link to ynetnews.com
Peace activist stabs IDF soldier www.youtube.com/watch?v=buzOWKxN2co
3
Navy commandos:‘They came for war’ Yaakov Katz, 05/31/2010 20:14 link to jpost.com
View footage, read soldiers' description of the 'Mavi Marmara' raid.
Flotilla Leaders Stated Sunday that Violence was Premeditated
The organizers of the Gaza flotilla announced in advance their intention of using violence against Israeli forces if the latter tried to prevent the ships from reaching Gaza. This intention was expressed in interviews given by the head of the IHH, Bulent Yildirim, to Turkish television stations on the last night of the voyage, as the ships approached the coast. [More: link to tinyurl.com
]
Facebook group: link to facebook.com
Acknowledgements:
Israel Ministry for Foreign Affairs
Israel Government Press Office
Israel Ministry for Diaspora Affairs
IDF Spokesman's Office
ZCV/ZFA
Ynet News
Jerusalem Post
Jewish Agency for Israel/World Zionist Organization Spokesman's Office
Compiled by Gila Ansell Brauner, 1st June 2010
Cliff,
It's very possible that these are fake. And it isn't stupidity on the part of Israelis. They need a quick fix so what they do is have someone come up with old pictures and throw them out into the media space. They figure that by the time someone decides to do research to figure out the time stamp the suspicion that the activists are terrorists would be out. That's really their main point. Most people will not even get the story that the pictures are fakes. So its a win-win for them.
Of course, these pictures won't hold up in an investigation, but they are hoping their won't be an independent investigation. So long as that doesn't happen then these pictures are worth it.
Good article. One remark: We are all "the flotilla activists." To call them provocateurs and worse, terrorists, is to call us that. The activists did not have to provoke. Israel does not need provocateurs. Israel does a good job acting like a rabid dog without the extra push.
But we see how easy it is to spin things by calling your enemy a terrorist. It creates suspicion, and all the Israelis need is for world opinion to suspect that maybe, just maybe, those activists were terrorists. Once that suspicion is in place then the spin is easy. That is their whole game plan. Under that cover of suspicion they can commit all the crimes imaginable.
if that was in response to my post then entertain me with something other than a hypothetical ;) I was playing devil's advocate. I would like a legal answer to what we see in the video. But I guess when it comes to Israel rationale doesn't work so maybe I shouldn't bother.
Hey...I noticed a link above to the IDF videos. This one is much better. It also has IDF guys talking over radio. I'm not sure what to make of it. Whether the activists put up a brave defense and used sticks, fists, and even knives, is not the issue and is pretty much confirmed (except for the knives part). What is at issue, and what will be picked up on, is whether the IDF went in with non-lethal weapons and were met with the kind of action you see in the video, at which time they responded with live ammo, or whether the IDF "boarded" that ship while firing - in whatever direction.
I understand that either way, the IDF attack of the ship makes the civilians right to defend themselves, but I'm just trying to figure out how this will be read in diplomatic and legal circles, and how much it will weaken the case.
Anyway, here is the link:
link to youtube.com
Aside from one or two large knives, those look like stuff you would find on a 600 passenger ship. But I do love that amongst the weapons found is a flag with Quranic writing and the Kaffiyeh. If you ask me, when the soldiers saw those they must have said "fire, fire! kill them all!"
Now on Al-Jazeera some Israeli is saying 16 soldiers have been injured. Just some more failure on the laugh test. But there are new images from an Israeli helicopter showing an aerial view. There does seem to be some resistance from those on board - as there should be in response to such force! I'm sure Jazeera will repeat the footage. Check it out on www.livestation.com
Evildoer,
I think the clarification is that the principle Moor was calling for still stands, according to him. But that he supports the PACBI call and understands it for being a pragmatic and real world application of principles. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Yonira,
Palestinians can study at Israeli universities otherwise they would have no other chance to get higher education except to leave the country, which some people would like. The boycott does not call on boycotting Barghouti, just as it does not boycott a zionist per se (reading the call and the articles might help you before commenting). Barghouti would be boycotted, however, if he decided to do a joint project with an Israeli institution and under that pretext lecture in the US (as an example). The boycott is of Israeli institutions and so he would not be exempt for being Palestinian and collaborating with an Israeli institution.