Trending Topics:

‘Let them eat candy’ – Israel’s ideological war against incendiary kites from Gaza

Israel/Palestine
on 76 Comments

“As the Hamas terror group threatened to launch 5,000 flaming kites and balloons at Israel on Friday, Israeli children at the Gaza border countered with an airborne message of peace,” the Times of Israel reported  on Friday.

At Kibbutz Nir Am, which has suffered a number of fires sparked by burning kites flown from Gaza, children and residents launched balloons carrying candy towards the Palestinian enclave.

Adults and children are seen releasing soft-colored helium balloons attached to candy. On the one hand – a demonstration of tolerance, as it were. But how tolerant is it really, to send off candy to those whom you simultaneously force to drink the sea at the Gaza concentration camp?

Israeli apologists love this one, you can be sure of that. Here’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s new Deputy Media Advisor, Hananya Naftali , tweeting immediately:

Israeli children at Kibbutz Nir-Am are flying balloons with candies to #Gaza. We want peace, but the media will never show you this. #Hamas.

Israeli fields in the vicinity of Gaza have been targeted by incendiary kites and balloons during the recent months. As Norman Finkelstein writes, “Israel appraised damage from the fires at around $1.4 million, or less than the average price of two homes in Brooklyn, New York (where I reside).” Such suffering is apparently incomparably greater than that of Gazans. Our fields VS their lives. Therefore, we have to officially return to targeted assassinations (as if the massacres of about 130 unarmed protesters in the recent months were not just that). Aye, Public Security (and Hasbara) minister Gilad Erdan has recently suggested that Israel apply “targeted assassinations” of those who fly incendiary kites:

“The fact that Hamas is enabling the shooting and the sending of the kites means we must return to targeted assassinations, and the kite launchers and Hamas commanders should be targeted for killing.” 

And so according to this plan, this morning the Israeli army bombed the car of an “incendiary kite and balloon cell leader” in Gaza. The army said in a short statement:

“Our forces launched an airstrike against the vehicle of one the leaders of a cell relating to incendiary and explosive kites and balloons. The attack was carried out in response to the ongoing launching of incendiary and explosive kites and balloons into Israel.”

The Palestinian Shehab news agency reported that the airstrike had hit an empty vehicle outside a mosque in Shejaiya, a suburb of Gaza City, early Sunday morning – no casualties reported.

The campaign of lifting candy-balloons is a kind of Hasbara campaign, which is both aimed to make Israeli adults and children feel good about themselves, as well as send the self-righteous message of “we want peace” to the world. Because it’s actually a dual message – ‘we want peace, they want war’, ‘we want love, they want hate’, ‘we throw candy at them, they throw fire at us’, as it were.

Friday’s candy-balloon campaign had a continuance yesterday, with replanting of groves which got burned. “They burn and we plant,” the campaign network said.  

Such a campaign is tricky precisely because of the ideological sugar-coating. When you criticize it, like I do, you are liable to be seen as a cynical child-hater who doesn’t support peace. But such sugar-coating campaigns are known historically to be cover-ups for the most cynical genocidal campaigns. The quote attributed to Marie Antoinette of “let them eat cake” (if they don’t have bread) is an epitome of such callousness. Here it’s ‘let them eat candy’ (if they don’t have water).

Few Israelis have shown understanding for the logic behind Gazan kites and also projectiles – the cases of such understanding include both young and old. In a broadcast concerning damage on the Israeli side from a couple of weeks ago (Mako, Hebrew), some children at Kibbutz Nirim (only a few kilometers south of the mentioned Nir Am), were asked “why do you think they do it?”  in reference to projectiles shot over the fence. Nine-year old Neri said:

“They shoot rockets only because we abuse them… because they were in Israel and we expelled them, and we also killed some of them.”

Not bad. Little Neri seemed to understand the logic. That’s something.

Then there is the 78-year-old playwriter Yehoshua Sobol. He was asked by an interviewer (Maariv, Hebrew): “Do you identify with the those who fly incendiary kites?” Sobol answered:

“I tried to imagine myself as a kid in the Gaza strip, when my neighbors are wounded and killed. My relatives are returned home as handicapped or as perforated bodies, and I asked myself: ‘What would I do as a kid?’ And I answered: ‘I would fly an incendiary kite.’ I remember myself as a kid in the 1940’s in the Sharon (central coast area, Palestine). We flew kites. Not incendiary kites, because we were not in despair.” 

So some Israelis are getting it. But they are few. And it can’t help to sugar coat this with candy, while Israel ups its murderous strategies with openly declared targeted assassinations. Gazans don’t need more candy. They need water. They need a life. And if you keep killing them for protesting the denial of their basic human rights, then no amount of candy in the world will help.  

 

About Jonathan Ofir

Israeli musician, conductor and blogger / writer based in Denmark.

Other posts by .


Posted In:

76 Responses

  1. Marnie
    June 17, 2018, 11:08 am

    typical zionist ‘gifts’ with obligatory strings attached. What’s going to be really interesting will be to see how the MSM will go into overdrive about the largesse of ‘israel’. This is one of the more disgusting publicity stunts yet.

  2. Marnie
    June 17, 2018, 11:15 am

    “They need water. They need a life.”

    Which is exactly why they won’t get it.

  3. John O
    June 17, 2018, 12:54 pm

    This conjured up an entertaining mental picture for me. If the wind blows balloons from Gaza towards Israel, then the same wind will carry the candy further into Israel. If any greetings messages attached are in Arabic, then it will look like the Palestinians are sending presents to Israeli kids.

  4. Ossinev
    June 17, 2018, 1:23 pm

    Gruesome as it may sound I think that Gazans should send the candy balloons back to Zioland with attached pictures showing those children who have been murdered and grotesquely maimed by the mommies and daddies in the IDF.

    These are the obvious mass casualties of these revolting “human beings “. Behind it all and less obvious but equally horrific is the ongoing poisoning of a million children by God`s Chosen.
    http://normanfinkelstein.com/2018/05/16/norman-finkelstein-palestinians-have-the-right-to-break-free-of-the-unlivable-cage-that-is-gaza/

  5. jon s
    June 17, 2018, 5:21 pm

    The kites were not launched “towards Gaza” , since the wind blows west to east. I heard an interview this morning with a resident of Nir Am who explained that they organized a kite activity for the kibbutz kids in order to remind themselves that flying kites used to considered a fun, peaceful , passtime and hopefully will return to being so. They knew that the kites would not reach Gaza and hadn’t intended them to.

    Meanwhile yesterday and today were the most destructive since the incendiary kites and baloons were introduced. Yesterday 17 fires occured, today at least that much again. Thousands of dunams of crops and pasture and trees and farm equipment have been destroyed. Firefighters have been able to keep the flames and explosives away from homes and schools and other facilities but the damage is extensive. So far the IDF has only fired warning shots at the terrorist units responsible but so far they don’t seem to be deterred, so the next step will probably be live fire . And then Hamas will cry that they’re innocent victims…Does anyone expect the IDF to just sit by and watch our country burn?

    • Bumblebye
      June 17, 2018, 8:33 pm

      I don’t give a flying whatever about your thousands of dunums destroyed crops and farm kit. Pales in comparison to the hundreds of thousands of stolen dunums, destroyed crops, herds and farm equipment most of your fellow israelis and you, who probably thinks your fellow “nationals” of the israeli state shouldn’t lose homes and livelihoods they’ve sweated over even if they’re stolen. Anyhow, it’s the time of year for fires – you can’t blame all of them on kites. Screw the damage. Taste a tiny bit of the pain dished out for decades by your compatriots. “Terrorism”. Hah. You expect the Palestinians to sit back or play dead – full of (un)righteous indignation when they don’t. You’re already setting yourself up to justify the next few score murders dished out by your criminal state. Reset the clock – look what they’ve done – they hate us, they’re antisemites – we’re the victims not them – we’ve done nothing wrong!
      Sickening hypocrite.

      • LHunter
        June 17, 2018, 9:11 pm

        Hear Hear Bumblebye!!!!

      • oldgeezer
        June 17, 2018, 10:00 pm

        @jons et al

        I am jumping in with LHunter and adding my Hear Hear to his voice

        jon s you are so full of it. Thousands and thousands… are Israelus that incompetent? Do they deserve a state if that incompentent? Nobody is buying your bovine excrement.

        You describe yourself as a leftist but all you are is another eternal victim of your delusions. Despicable. Disgusting and disgraceful.

        On a serious note jon… 17 fires in the region… Israel is not capable of being able to estimate where they will land and to be near at hand? We aren’t talking F35”s or F16’s dropping one tonne bombs at will on civilians here.

        You are a total disgrace to humanity. Sticky to teaching state approved history like a good propagandist

      • Misterioso
        June 18, 2018, 10:34 am

        @Bumblebye, LHunter, oldgeezer,

        AGREED!!!

    • Marnie
      June 17, 2018, 11:46 pm

      “Does anyone expect the IDF to just sit by and watch our country burn?”

      When their time is better spent killing medics and children and maiming thousands? Putting out fires they’re responsible for in the first place seems like an excellent use of their time. If they get bored maybe they can shoot each other. And it’s not your country. Whine to anyone else who might give a rat’s ass.

      • American Perspective
        June 20, 2018, 9:30 pm

        Mooser —

        If we’re going to play the analogy game, let’s try to keep it to analogues that happened since the invention of the color camera.

        Commentators here seem obsessed with WWII, with the British colonial drawdown in the 1940s and other wildly irrelevant analogies. For gosh sakes, guys, your State of Palestine is smack in middle of Mediterranean and is in a region that’s been riven by dozens of major wars in the past few decades.

        Instead of European examples from a Century ago, wouldn’t it be more clear-eyed to analyze Palestine and its wars of choice with contemperaneous and local analogues? You seem to have learned your rhetorical style from Hajj Amin’s speeches at the UN (“the Zionists claim to be victims of the Nazis, but they are the real Nazis”). But that was the 1940s – nowadays Nazi analogies are an admission you lost the argument.

        Let me ask you- has the military strategy of the State of Palestine been a winning one?

      • Annie Robbins
        June 20, 2018, 10:07 pm

        If we’re going to play the analogy game, let’s try to keep it to analogues that happened …

        nah.

      • Mooser
        June 21, 2018, 3:58 pm

        “AP”, look, I’m not saying you’re the same guy (after all, there’s a plentiful supply) but do peruse “jeffb’s” comments. Read some of good ol’ “Hophmi” in earlier days (He’s ‘fallen away’ recently ).

    • JohnSmith
      June 18, 2018, 1:27 am

      The racist, racial-supremacist bigoted mentality of Jon S. is indicated by the fact that he refers to “terrorist units.” Even if this kite-flying involved more violence or resulted in greater harm: “terrorist units”? Really??? Bigot Israelis and IDF soldiers in riot gear are of course super-compassionate and worthy human beings, but Palestinian teenagers are bestial, subhuman “terrorist units,” with their wicked, not-to-be-allowed agenda of surviving!

      • Marnie
        June 18, 2018, 9:09 am

        Bingo!

      • American Perspective
        June 18, 2018, 11:27 am

        “Bigot Israelis and IDF soldiers in riot gear”

        Let’s repeat that: “in riot gear”.

        Do you guys even hear yourself?

        Spoiler alert – The Rome Statute, which your State of Palestine joined, requires all participants in “resistance” or other military activity to wear “gear”. According to the law of the State of Palestine, any act of resistance while not in uniform renders the attacker an unlawful combatant (popularly known as a “Terrorist”).

      • oldgeezer
        June 18, 2018, 11:58 am

        “According to the law of the State of Palestine, any act of resistance while not in uniform renders the attacker an unlawful combatant (popularly known as a “Terrorist”).”

        Yep that’s Israel.

        Musta’ribeen

      • Marnie
        June 18, 2018, 1:52 pm

        American Perspective

        is not necessary here. You’ll get plenty of hugs at the JPost, Haaretz and Arutz Sheva. Bye!!!

      • Talkback
        June 18, 2018, 3:36 pm

        American Perspective: “Spoiler alert – The Rome Statute, which your State of Palestine joined, requires all participants in “resistance” or other military activity to wear “gear”.”

        Nope. You just made that up.

        “According to the law of the State of Palestine, …”

        Nope. You just made tthat up that this is al law of the State of Palestine.

        “any act of resistance while not in uniform renders the attacker an unlawful combatant.”

        Nope. Someone who resists an occupation doesn’t attack. The occupier is the aggressor. And a so called “unlawful” combatant simply can’t accept to be treated according to the III. Geneva Convention as a soldier (or pow), but should be treated according to the IV Geneva Convention and therefore as a civilian.

        “(popularly known as a “Terrorist”).”

        Nope. A terrorist is someone who attacks civilians to achieve political goals.

        You don’t seem to know much about the terms you use. Sounds less like an American Perspective, but more like a Zionist ideocy.

      • Mooser
        June 18, 2018, 5:18 pm

        “American Perspective is not necessary here. You’ll get plenty of hugs at the JPost, Haaretz and Arutz Sheva. Bye!!!”

        “Marnie” it’s when they are banned, moderated or deleted at websites with an interest in making Zionism look good that they come to Mondo.

      • Jon66
        June 18, 2018, 9:32 pm

        Talkback,

        Lawful combatants must be treated as soldiers. Civilians as civilians. Civilians who participate in hostilities who do not meet the criteria of lawful combatant are not afforded the protections of soldiers and are therefore subject to criminal laws. A soldier who kills another soldier cannot be prosecuted for murder. However, a civilian who kills a soldier but does not meet the criteria of lawful combatant may be tried for murder. There is no distinction in IHL of resistance.

        “at the heart of ihl lies the principle of distinction between the armed forces, who conduct the hostilities on behalf of the parties to an armed con ict, and civilians, who are presumed not to directly participate in hostilities and must be protected against the dangers arising from military operations. ”
        https://www.icrc.org/eng/assets/files/other/icrc-002-0990.pdf

        “Not only do civilians who participate directly in hostilities become legitimate targets,11 they may also be prosecuted under national laws on the basis that they are not combatants who are entitled to so participate.12”
        https://www.icrc.org/en/download/file/20820/irrc-872-3.pdf

        “In situations of international armed conflict, individuals not belonging to a party to the conflict who act on a merely spontaneous, sporadic and unorganized basis – unlike organized resistance fighters who take up arms in a situation of occupation – lose their protection as civilians. ”
        https://www.icrc.org/en/international-review/article/editorial-direct-participation-hostilities

        “ihl provides an express “right” to directly participate in hostilities only for members of the armed forces of parties to international armed conflicts and participants in a levée en masse.223 this right does not imply an entitlement to carry out acts prohibited under ihl, but merely provides combatants with immunity from domestic prosecution for acts which, although in accordance with ihl, may constitute crimes under the national criminal law of the parties to the con ict (the so-called combatant privilege).224 e absence in ihl of an express right for civilians to directly participate in hostilities does not necessarily imply an international prohibition of such participation. indeed, as such, civilian direct participation in hostilities is neither prohibited by ihl225 nor criminalized under the statutes of any prior or current international criminal tribunal or court.226 however, because civilians – including those entitled to prisoner of war status under article 4 [4] and [5] Gc iii – are not entitled to the combatant privilege, they do not enjoy immunity from domestic prosecution for lawful acts of war, that is, for having directly participated in hostilities while respecting ihl.227 consequently, civilians who have directly participated in hostilities and members of organized armed groups belonging to a non-state party to a conflict228 may be prosecuted and punished to the extent that their activities, their membership, or the harm caused by them is penalized under national law (as treason, arson, murder, etc.).229”
        https://www.icrc.org/eng/assets/files/other/icrc-002-0990.pdf

      • Talkback
        June 19, 2018, 10:53 am

        What’s your point, Jon66 besides proving my point?

        According to American Perspective’S reasoning Jews who fought against the German occupation in the Warsaw Intifada were “terrorists”. That was basically Hitler’s view regarding resistance fighters.

      • Jon66
        June 19, 2018, 8:31 pm

        Talkback,
        “Someone who resists an occupation doesn’t attack. The occupier is the aggressor. ”
        There is no such category in IHL. There are those who participate in hostilities and those who don’t.
        Qualified combatants who participate in hostilities gain certain rights such as immunity from prosecution and release when hostilities end.
        Civilians who participate in hostilities but who do not meet qualifications of combatant status may be treated as criminals and prosecuted for acts that could be prosecuted if they were soldiers. In addition, these criminals may be held beyond hostilities. Being a civilian who participates in hostilities does not mean that you cannot be arrested or shot.

      • Mooser
        June 19, 2018, 9:26 pm

        Shorter “Jon 66″: ‘They were only following orders, so they can’t be prosecuted.”

        Now where have we heard that before?

        So let’s get this right, “Jon 66”, when a bunch of soldiers, following orders, shoot unarmed civilians their uniforms and their orders give them immunity?
        Or should they get immunity because after all, Zionism is a religious endeavor?

      • echinococcus
        June 19, 2018, 11:20 pm

        The international law category our Zurgeon is looking for is protected persons, ie all civilians occupied by a foreign military power. So the next category he is looking for is that of unprotected persons, like a. occupation personnel, by UN Charter definition free game for the occupied who have the right to resist occupation, and b. the civilian population settled by the occupier in the occupied areas. Now occupation personnel are illegally there, so they have no right at all to do anything to the occupied, anything at all.

        And just in case he wants to think that the occupation “category” is dated 1967 he can forget that, too. The illegal occupation dates from the official start of hostilities in November 1947 and applies to all Palestine. End of “categories”. All his other “categories” belong not to international law but to Nazi occupation “law” as we know it well.

      • MHughes976
        June 20, 2018, 1:22 pm

        A. Roberts, ‘Resistance to Military Occupation: an Enduring Problem’ (Cambridge Core, 2017) talks of the complexities and makes much reference to Palestine. It seems that international law makes little distinction between occupation in good faith, ie manifestly temporary, protecting the occupied people against further depredations etc., and one that lacks these qualities and is a mask for conquest – that distinction would be important for me.

      • American Perspective
        June 20, 2018, 2:36 pm

        Talkback —

        Kind of odd to bring up a random analogy from a century ago in Eastern Europe.

        I don’t know much about the Warsaw Intifada – but if a Warsaw Intifada took place today in a member state of the ICC and the “Resistance” did not wear identifiers, carry their weapons openly, provide notice to local residents of their military plans – then they would be in violation of the Rome Statute.

        International Humanitarian Law and LOAC are not some vague aspirational hopes & dreams. They are very specific rules and regulations that are virtually impossible to comply with fully. As for the Rome Statute, which the State of Palestine joined (Israel hasn’t), it criminalizes virtually any and every act of military (or “Resistance”) activity.

        In every situation investigated by the ICC and the UN, no country has ever been found to fully comply with the Rome Statute. Proosecutions of individuals are basically impossible under the new standards outlined in Bemba.

      • Annie Robbins
        June 20, 2018, 3:24 pm

        the new rule concerned bemba’s Pre-Trial Chamber, which made it a requirement to confirm every single underlying criminal act committed (how bemba was convicted under article 28). so going forward how does that make it “impossible” to comply with the rome statue? it just exacerbates the pre trial doesn’t it? if you didn’t make up so much stuff out of thin air you might be taken more seriously. and what analogy isn’t random? there’s nothing odd about the Warsaw analogy at all.

      • Talkback
        June 20, 2018, 3:31 pm

        Jon66: “There is no such category in IHL. There are those who participate in hostilities and those who don’t.”

        “American Perspective” brought it up and it is a category in international law. And again, your elaborations don’t support his view and they don’t contradict mine.

        Someone who resists occupation is not a terrorist whether he is wearing a uniform or not. And his not “unlawful” if he has a right to resort to violence which he has if he is under occupation. Everybody has the right to resist occupation, alien domination and colonialization. That doesn’t mean that he has the right to violence against civilians. But bear in mind that Israels illegal occupation (illegal, because it is not interim and illegal, because of its settlements) targets EVERY Palestinan civilian and is pure state terrorism. Not only because it commits collective punishment which is a crime since the Nuremberg trials against the Nazis.

      • Talkback
        June 20, 2018, 3:37 pm

        American Perspective: “I don’t know much about the Warsaw Intifada – but if a Warsaw Intifada took place today in a member state of the ICC and the “Resistance” did not wear identifiers, carry their weapons openly, provide notice to local residents of their military plans – then they would be in violation of the Rome Statute.”

        Nope. You just made that up. That’s the reason why you can’t quote from the Rome statute. If you could use your brain for a second you would recognize how stupid it is to even consider that Jews who fought against German occupation would violate any statute nowadays.

        Do us a favor. Quote from the Rome Statute. AND. List every violation of Israel against international law, humanitarian law, Rome Statute and human right law. Just to make sure that your idiocies at least are not biased.

      • echinococcus
        June 20, 2018, 4:30 pm

        I don’t know much about the Warsaw Intifada

        What a liar. If he didn’t know much about the Warsaw insurrection, how come he spends all that ink using the exact same reasoning, and almost the exact same words (except for the half-hearted update to “Rome Statute”) as the Nazi military DA of the time?

        “American” perspective indeed.

      • American Perspective
        June 20, 2018, 4:32 pm

        Annie —

        Great question! Here are the most important takeaways from the Bemba decision, which are relevant to the State of Palestine’s alleged war crimes:

        Until this month’s decision, when the Office of the Prosecutor (which is position roughly half-way between a D.A. and a preliminary hearing judge in the American criminal justice system) laid out claims against a Defendant she alleged what the Defendant did *wrong*.

        The Bemba decision said, that’s not enough.

        The Prosecutor will now have to create an alternate universe and make out a factual claim of what the Defendant could have done *right*. The Prosecutor now has to notify the Defendant in the charging documents which “specific measures” she could have taken to comply with the Rome Statute – See, e.g., Paragraph 142.

        Bemba also raised the standard, and now requires the OTP to try cases of mass criminality just like any other criminal charge – with specific allegations about the crimes and the defendant’s complicity. See Paragraph 110.

        Last, when it comes to charges for failing to properly investigate and prosecuting crimes committed by Palestine’s military – the Defendant’s actions will be judged “in light of the limitations [the Defendant] faced in investigating and prosecuting crimes”, in other words the Defendant can claim “it was really hard to investigate the crimes committed by my soldiers” and may be acquitted. Paragraph 193.

        Case should cause a lot of relief in Palestine. Having acceded to the Rome Statute, political leaders who are physically in the State of Palestine face substantial liability for actions by individual soldiers, paramilitaries, and non-uniformed “Resisters”. But under Bemba, actually indicting them (or getting a conviction) is a long way off.

        Based on the history in past cases, the ICC should be expected to issue a decision on whether to prosecute the State of Palestine in 2022. After Bemba, though, it’s hard to see any prosecutions moving forward.

        * Yes – the Warsaw Intifada involved a highly unusual war (WWII), and a highly unusual domestic situation. The Warsaw Intifada took place long before the so-called Nuremberg Principles (which themselves have long since modified and codified) and long before the modern era and widespread adoption of IHL and LOAC rules.

        I don’t know what possible relevance the Warsaw Intifada may have in informing the Law of Armed Conflict in the State of Palestine. I also worry that reference to the Warsaw Intifada comes close to making a Nazi analogy, which means you already lost your argument. I’d rather dialogue with y’all on substance and not on Racist/Antisemite/Nazi cliches. Mondoweiss is better than “I know you’re Hitler, but what am I” taunts.

      • American Perspective
        June 20, 2018, 4:46 pm

        Talkback —

        Just saying someone has the “right to resist occupation” doesn’t tell you very much about what they are allowed to do. Here in the United States, you have a “right to conduct business”, but there are literally tens of thousands of rules and regulations that govern every aspect of insurance, real estate, law, transportation, construction, services industries, etc . . . .

        The entirely mundane statement that the residents of Gaza have a “right to resist occupation” doesn’t mean anything. Assuming for the sake of argument that they folks in Gaza do have a “right to resist occupation”, that only opens the question of “how to resist”.

        Simply put: It is really hard to engage in “Resistance” in a way that complies with International Humanitarian Law and the Law of Armed Conflict. If you’ve ever read the relevant law and U.N. reports, you’ll know that anyone who engages in “resistance” is required to wear a uniform, required to carry her weapon openly, and required to provide sufficient notice and preparation for any potential civilian victim of her “resistance”.

        And under the Rome Statute (which the State of Palestine adopted), the restrictions are even greater. As applied, every single act of “Resistance” needs to be conducted pursuant to written rules of engagement and subject to prior and subsequent review by the Resistance’s advocates general. The postcard system that we use (I think Israel uses a similar system) was found by the U.N. to be necessary but not sufficient. The law may even require a separate JAG determination before every single engagement – in the case of Palestine, before every rock is thrown.

        Merely saying “right of resistance” is meaningless.

      • Mooser
        June 20, 2018, 5:06 pm

        “If you could use your brain for a second you would recognize how stupid it is to even consider that Jews who fought against German occupation would violate any statute nowadays.”

        No, he is using his brain. “AP” knows that any advantage or excuse granted the Nazis redounds to Zionism’s benefit.

        Besides, what possible connection does today’s Zionist have with those loser, out-of-uniform Jews in the Warsaw Ghetto?

      • Mooser
        June 20, 2018, 5:30 pm

        “that distinction would be important for me.”

        The length, and the actions taken during that length (settlements, etc.) alone aren’t enough to make a distinction for you?

      • echinococcus
        June 20, 2018, 5:31 pm

        Assuming for the sake of argument that they folks in Gaza do have a “right to resist occupation”, that only opens the question of “how to resist”

        ” American” Perspective seems to have started to learn reading but more is required: the phrase ends with “… by all means available.” Repeated in three resolutions, not just the Charter. So there, he has a full answer to the stupid question.

        I’ll agree with that piece of “American” propaganda refuse that a right needs enforcement to be respected. That’s why he’ ll only wake up when his darling Nazionist state is utterly destroyed.

      • American Perspective
        June 20, 2018, 6:03 pm

        Echincoccus:

        “Nazionist” – broke the rule. You lost. Everyone knows that the first person to yell “Racist”, “Nazi analogy” or “Antisemite” when discussing government policies lost.

        That said – “by any means necessary” subject to the relevant rules and regulations. When Osama bin Laden flew planes into American buildings to support the government of the State of Palestine; when the Syrian Arab Republic and its counterparts killed 500,000 people to “Liberate Palestine”; when supporters of the government of the State of Palestine raped 100s of thousands of British children – none of that was kosher because of “Resistance”.

        The State of Palestine acceded to the Rome Statute, by which it solemnly committed to ensure that every act of Resistance is strictly in compliance with International Law.

        You can’t wave the word “Resistance” around like a talisman to justify rape and non-uniformed soldiers. That’s not how International Law works.

      • Mooser
        June 20, 2018, 7:14 pm

        “You can’t wave the word “Resistance” around like a talisman to justify rape and non-uniformed soldiers.”

        Psst, “AP”, Stern Gang, Hagannah?, ixnay on the aperay and the onnay-uniformed oldiernay, capiche.

      • Jon66
        June 20, 2018, 8:12 pm

        Echi,
        “b. the civilian population settled by the occupier in the occupied areas”

        Incorrect
        “Various Palestinian organizations offer different arguments in an attempt to justify the targeting of Israeli civilians, including that “all is fair” in the fight against the occupation, or that the illegality of the settlements justifies targeting settlers.

        These arguments are baseless and untenable. Attacks that target civilians subvert every human, moral and legal norm. There is no justification for the wilful killing of civilians, nor can there be. That is why international humanitarian law defines such attacks as grave breaches that constitute war crimes and cannot be justified, whatever the circumstances.”
        https://www.btselem.org/israeli_civilians
        “Israeli settlements in the Occupied Territories are unlawful under the provisions of international humanitarian law. The Fourth Geneva Convention prohibits the transfer of civilians from the occupying power’s territory into the occupied territory (Article 49 (6)). However, the unlawful status of Israeli settlements does not affect the civilian status of settlers. Settlers, like any other civilians, cannot be targeted and only lose their protection from attack if and for such time as they take a direct part in hostilities (Article 51 (3) Protocol 1). Similarly, Palestinian residents of the West Bank and Gaza are civilians benefiting from the protection of the Fourth Geneva Convention unless and for such time as they take direct part in hostilities. […]”
        https://casebook.icrc.org/case-study/amnesty-international-breach-principle-distinction

        “Now occupation personnel are illegally there, so they have no right at all to do anything to the occupied, anything at all.”
        Incorrect.
        “Civilians who take a direct part in such hostilities lose their protection against attack for the time of their direct participation, but not their civilian status. ”
        “Indirect support for the resistance movement, such as providing infor- mation or non-military supplies, does not constitute taking a direct part in hostilities. Those so engaged are civilians and therefore protected against attack. They may, however, be in contravention of security laws passed by the occupying power. In that case, they can be tried and sentenced or their freedom of movement restricted.”
        https://www.icrc.org/eng/assets/files/other/law9_final.pdf

        Anything that supports your position other your opinion?

      • Jon66
        June 20, 2018, 8:23 pm

        Talkback,
        “Someone who resists occupation is not a terrorist whether he is wearing a uniform or not. And his not “unlawful” if he has a right to resort to violence which he has if he is under occupation.”
        Incorrect.
        A civilian who does not qualify as a legal combatant may be prosecuted for the simple act of participating in hostilities. Soldiers may not. Civilians may not be attacked when not participating in hostilities. However, there is no immunity for a civilian partaking in hostilities.

        “Civilians who take a direct part in hostilities against the occupying power may be prosecuted. ”
        “After effective occupation of territory, members of the territory’s armed forces who have not surrendered, organized resistance movements and genuine national liberation movements may resist the occupation. If they do so, they must distinguish themselves from the civilian population, or on the basis of GP I, at least carry their weapons openly during attacks and deployments.
        Civilians who take a direct part in such hostilities lose their protection against attack for the time of their direct participation, but not their civilian status. If they do not participate directly in hostilities or no longer do so (for example, if they are hors de combat), they are protected against attacks.”
        https://www.icrc.org/eng/assets/files/other/law9_final.pdf

      • Talkback
        June 21, 2018, 9:36 am

        Jon66: “Incorrect.
        A civilian who does not qualify as a legal combatant may be prosecuted for the simple act of participating in hostilities. Soldiers may not. Civilians may not be attacked when not participating in hostilities. However, there is no immunity for a civilian partaking in hostilities. ”

        Again, Jon66. Nothing proves the claim that someone who resists occupation is “terrorist”, because he is not wearing a uniform or that he is an “unlawful combatant”. The fact that he isn’t wearing a uniform simply means that the humanitarian law regarding soldiers can’t be applied. Every human being has a right to resist occupation, alien domination and colonialization.

        NOBODY except Nazis would argue that Jews didn’t have a right to resist German occupation if they were not wearing a uniform. JUST THINK, before you apply humanitarian law WITHOUT considerung Martens clause.

        Now Jon66. List all of Israel’s violations against international and humanitarian law and human rights since you seem to know so much. I bet you won’t.

      • Talkback
        June 21, 2018, 10:04 am

        @Jon66:

        “3. In order to promote the protection of the civilian population from the effects of hostilities, combatants are obliged to distinguish themselves from the civilian population while they are engaged in an attack or in a military operation preparatory to an attack. Recognizing, however, that there are situations in armed conflicts where, owing to the nature of the hostilities an
        armed combatant cannot so distinguish himself, he shall retain his status as a combatant, provided that, in such situations, he carries his arms openly: …”
        https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/applic/ihl/ihl.nsf/Article.xsp?action=openDocument&documentId=524284F49042D4C8C12563CD0051DBAF

        And in the commentary:
        “cannot so distinguish himself [from the civilian population]”. Such situations may result from the occupation and the security measures taken by the occupying forces relating to the possession of arms by the inhabitants of the occupied territory, for example, but they are not restricted to this aspect. In fact, they cover methods of war which have become common, so-called asymmetrical conditions of combat, where the balance of power is out of all proportion in favour of one of the Parties, whether or not the legal régime applicable to occupation is in force, accepted or contested, recognized or denied.”
        https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/applic/ihl/ihl.nsf/Comment.xsp?action=openDocument&documentId=D04A6A9CBBF8B28CC12563CD00433946

      • Talkback
        June 21, 2018, 10:30 am

        American Perspective: “Just saying someone has the “right to resist occupation” doesn’t tell you very much about what they are allowed to do.”

        First of all it is not just “someone” who is saying that there is a right to resist occupation, but it is enshrined in international law. Secondly you are correct regarding the means of resistance. It is regulated by humanitarian law. Neither the occupier nor the occupied have the right to attack civilians. I sincerly hope that you don’t expect the occupied to be more restrained than the occupier since the physical and structural violence of the latter affects EVERY occupied civilian.

        But I understand from your moral high point of view that you condemn terrorism in general. Even the one that led to the emergence of Israel. Correct? And I also understand from your high moral point of view that you condem if civilians are kept expelled just to create a fake majority of expellants. Right?

        American Perspective: ” If you’ve ever read the relevant law and U.N. reports, you’ll know that anyone who engages in “resistance” is required to wear a uniform, required to carry her weapon openly, and required to provide sufficient notice and preparation for any potential civilian victim of her “resistance”. ”

        Nope. You are just making this it up and fail to provide any quote that someone who engages in what you only dare to quote (because you are living in denial) HAS to wear a uniform in any case of resistance. These kind of questions only regulate the degree of protection a combatant can or should have and under what cirumstances he looses combatant status.

        Based on your ludicrous interpretation of humanitarian law an occupied people which doesn’t find a way to create uniforms has no right to resist occupation.

        American Perspective: “And under the Rome Statute (which the State of Palestine adopted), the restrictions are even greater. As applied, every single act of “Resistance” needs to be conducted pursuant to written rules of engagement and subject to prior and subsequent review by the Resistance’s advocates general.”

        Prove it or change your nick to “Nazi German perspective”. Cause you are still inherently claiming that Jewish civilians had no right to resist Nazis and their occupation.

        American Perspective: “I don’t know what possible relevance the Warsaw Intifada may have in informing the Law of Armed Conflict in the State of Palestine. ”

        Sure. Palestians don’t have the same right to resist as Jews, right? They don’t even have a right to create a state through terrorism, civil war and/or expulsion. Only Jews have, correct?

        American Perspective: “I also worry that reference to the Warsaw Intifada comes close to making a Nazi analogy, which means you already lost your argument.”

        Don’t worry. The analogy is that Palestinians have the same right to resist occupation as Jews. And without uniform, too. Which means you allready lost your argument.

        P.S. Why do you fail to list every violation of Israel against international law, humanitarian law, Rome Statute and human right law?

      • oldgeezer
        June 21, 2018, 11:33 am

        While I don’t like nazi analogies in relation to I/P and consider them counter productive this line that using a nazi analogy means you’ve already lost the argument is a pile of hooey. Nothing further from the truth.

      • American Perspective
        June 21, 2018, 12:34 pm

        Talkback —

        We were having a discussion about government policy in 2018 and an interesting debate about the requirements of participants in “Resistance” under International Law and the Rome Statute. I thought we were reaching clarity about some of the differences between the far-right Arab nationalist position and the mainstream International Law position.

        Then you threw in an analogy to some domestic insurgency, what you call the Warsaw Intifada, a century ago in Central Europe. When pressed on how irrelevant that example is to the current debate you responded with – by my count – a half-dozen references to Nazis, a half-dozen references to Jews, and a dozen references to occupation.

        Look – if you want to participate in a legal/political discussion, you should be aware of the unofficial rule that once you scream “Nazi” or “Racist” or “Antisemite” , you already lost the argument.

        And if you want to make a moral claim, you should know that the Nazi analogy is so tired and overused as to be worthless. I think analogies in general don’t help much because they require long explanations of how the analogy is similar/different/unique/relevant. But even if you believe an analogy is the only way to make your argument, using 1940s Nazis v. Jews analogies is such a beaten horse that it’s counterproductive.

      • American Perspective
        June 21, 2018, 1:23 pm

        ” Based on your ludicrous interpretation of humanitarian law an occupied people which doesn’t find a way to create uniforms has no right to resist occupation.”

        I think the way that Professor Norman Finkelstein described it, the only lawful way for folks in Gaza to “Resist” is to gather en masse in an open field in Gaza wearing uniforms and openly carrying their weapons. They need to announce in Hebrew to folks near Gaza exactly what military tactics they will be using and when. That’s just about the only way to lawfully “Resist” under International Law.

        You may call that ludicrous. And I wouldn’t disagree. But like I’ve written, the local garbage collection service fines for mixing recycling with garbage and the 12-inches-from-the curb tickets have a far more relevant impact on your life (and the life of folks in Gaza) than International Law.

        And as a rhetorical device, this whole “International Law” shtick misfired. Israelis aren’t American Ashkenazim who swoon when you say the words “International Law”.

      • Jon66
        June 21, 2018, 4:23 pm

        Talkback,
        I didn’t use the word “terrorist”.
        To clarify, if a person who is dressed indistinguishable from a civilian who is not carrying arms openly then engages in an attack on an enemy soldier- that person has performed a criminal act, not ‘resistance’?

      • Talkback
        June 21, 2018, 5:49 pm

        American Perspective: “I think the way that Professor Norman Finkelstein described it, the only lawful way for folks in Gaza to “Resist” is to gather en masse in an open field in Gaza wearing uniforms and openly carrying their weapons.”

        And I think you are just making things up which is the reason why you don’t provide any source.

        “They need to announce in Hebrew to folks near Gaza exactly what military tactics they will be using and when. That’s just about the only way to lawfully “Resist” under International Law.”

        ROFL. They need do announce their military tactics [sic!] in Hebrew [sic!]! Oh boy. Resistance fighters not only have to learn the language of the occupied, but also tell them their military tactics according to “American Perspective.

        “You may call that ludicrous.”

        Idiocy is the right word. Or maybe compulsive lying. Or both. And of course the complete failure to provide any source.

        “Israelis aren’t American Ashkenazim who swoon when you say the words “International Law”.”

        Of course not. They are more like German Nazis who give a sh** about international law, settling in occupied territories and illegaly annexing them.

      • Talkback
        June 21, 2018, 6:07 pm

        American Perspective: “I thought we were reaching clarity about some of the differences between the far-right Arab nationalist position and the mainstream International Law position.”

        Not at all. You were just repeating far right Jewish nationalist position and selling them as International law without being able to provide any quote to back up your claim. And you will continue to fail.

        American Perspective: “Look – if you want to participate in a legal/political discussion, you should be aware of the unofficial rule that once you scream “Nazi” or “Racist” or “Antisemite” , you already lost the argument.”

        I don’t care about your unoffical rules. Especially not when we are dealing with an Apartheid Junta that doesn’t care about any rule at all and cries antisemitism.

        And regarding Nazism: You are inherently claiming that Jews didn’t have a right to resist Nazi occupation, because they were not wearing a uniform and didn’t anounce their military tactics in German. I must say that not even the Nazis made such a ridiculous claim ever.

        American Perspective: “But even if you believe an analogy is the only way to make your argument, using 1940s Nazis v. Jews analogies is such a beaten horse that it’s counterproductive.”

        Your delusions are even more interesting than your failure to prove your claims by quoting from international law or the Rome Statute and your failure to list Israel’s violations of the same.

        But here’s is an analogy. Germany commited the crime of illegaly annexing of and settling in occupied territories. Israel commits the same crime. Whether you like it or not.

      • Talkback
        June 21, 2018, 6:15 pm

        Jon66: “I didn’t use the word “terrorist”.”

        I never said you did.

        Jon66: “To clarify, if a person who is dressed indistinguishable from a civilian who is not carrying arms openly then engages in an attack on an enemy soldier- that person has performed a criminal act, not ‘resistance’?”

        It depends. For example if they intentionally dress up as civilians. Like the Israeli Mista’arvim who dress up as Palestinan demonstrators.

    • Misterioso
      June 18, 2018, 10:59 am

      @ jons

      You are one sick puppy, another Zionist creep trying to convince the world that you and your fellow fascists are the victims when any reasonably informed person knows full well that you neo-Nazi monsters are the victimizers.

      The world is waking up and comprehending the extent of your vicious crimes committed against the indigenous defenseless inhabitants of historic Palestine. Like Germany’s Third Reich, you murderous racist thugs will inevitably face your day of reckoning.

      https://www.hrw.org/news/2018/06/13/israel-apparent-war-crimes-gaza

      Human Rights Watch, June 13/18

      “Israel: Apparent War Crimes in Gaza. Accountability Needed for Officials Who Authorized Lethal Force.”

      EXCERPT:
      (New York) – “Israeli forces’ repeated use of lethal force in the Gaza Strip since March 30, 2018, against Palestinian demonstrators who posed no imminent threat to life may amount to war crimes, Human Rights Watch said today. Israeli forces have killed more than 100 protesters in Gaza and wounded thousands with live ammunition.

      “The United Nations General Assembly should support a resolution that calls for exploring measures to guarantee the protection of Palestinians in Gaza, and a UN inquiry mandated to investigate all violations and abuses should identify Israeli officials responsible for issuing unlawful open-fire orders. The killings also highlight the need for the International Criminal Court to open a formal investigation into the situation in Palestine. Third countries should impose targeted sanctions against officials responsible for ongoing serious human rights violations.”

      “’Israel’s use of lethal force when there was no imminent threat to life has taken a heavy toll in life and limb,’ said Sarah Leah Whitson, Middle East director at Human Rights Watch. ‘The international community needs to rip up the old playbook, where Israel conducts investigations that mainly whitewash the conduct of its troops and the US blocks international accountability with its Security Council veto, and instead impose real costs for such blatant disregard for Palestinian lives.’”

      • mondonut
        June 18, 2018, 12:44 pm

        @Misterioso
        You are one sick puppy
        Zionist creep
        you and your fellow fascists
        you neo-Nazi monsters
        you murderous racist thugs
        ===========================================
        Comments Policy
        4. No personal attacks. We encourage spirited, passionate debate, but if you have to resort to vicious personal attack, you’re not advancing the discussion. Stay on the issues.

      • Mooser
        June 18, 2018, 1:57 pm

        Oh, come on, “mondonut”, be reasonable. “Jon s” is most definitely, by the most generous standards, a “creep”. (If you want to read him at his creepiest…yup, he’s creep.).

      • Misterioso
        June 18, 2018, 3:22 pm

        @modonut

        Re Jons:

        As the old adage goes, “if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, IT’S A DUCK”

      • Mooser
        June 18, 2018, 5:22 pm

        I’ll leave it up to “Marnie”, to determine if “Jon s” addressing Avigail Abarbanel is “creepy”.

      • Marnie
        June 19, 2018, 12:39 am

        Mooser
        June 18, 2018, 5:22 pm

        I’ll leave it up to “Marnie”, to determine if “Jon s” addressing Avigail Abarbanel is “creepy”.

        Mooser – What’d I do to you?

      • Marnie
        June 19, 2018, 11:39 am

        @Mooser

        ‘(If you want to read him at his creepiest…yup, he’s creep.).’

        Oh my. TMI. I think he was trying to get as much help from Ms Abarbanel as this space and her compassion would allow.

      • Mooser
        June 19, 2018, 12:03 pm

        “Mooser – What’d I do to you?”

        I’m sorry, you are right, that was low. I apologize.

        I just thought perhaps there was some secret charm, some appeal I was missing in “Jon s”, which you could perceive.

      • Mooser
        June 19, 2018, 1:49 pm

        “trying to get as much help from Ms Abarbanel”

        “Jon s, trying to get ‘help’ from Avigail Abarbanel:

        “Although I note once again that you do hold on to your name, a name so illustrious in Jewish history, and now borne by a person who has chosen to detach herself from that heritage.” (all at links, above)

        Yup, he’s at his best. Makes my skin crawl.

    • amigo
      June 18, 2018, 1:38 pm

      “Does anyone expect the IDF to just sit by and watch our country burn?” .Jon S

      Countries usually have declared Borders.

      You should take Trump,s statement on that subject !!.

      “A Country without Borders is not a Country”.

      https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/01/25/511565740/trump-expected-to-order-building-of-u-s-mexico-wall-wednesday

      Btw, we don,t expect the IDF to do anything but commit war crimes every hour of every day of every year of it,s existence.

      That,s what they exist for and you support them at every opportunity you get.But then, they are the reason you are able to continue squatting on stolen land .Shame on you.

    • Marnie
      June 19, 2018, 12:19 am

      There are no citizens and that includes you and I. Wrap your head around that jon s and you may get the beginning of what it is like to be a palestinian in palestine surrounded by a majority population in the nebulous ‘israel’ who see you as an enemy, an animal, dangerous, a terrorist and one who needs to go away, either by choice or by force, either to another place or in the ground. Imagine walking around with a target on your back and your head in the crosshairs of a ‘soldier’.

      “Hamas will cry that they’re innocent victims….”

      Worried about job security?

  6. Kay24
    June 17, 2018, 10:04 pm

    Why are the zionist whining about the cost? How much damage do they cause when they send their precision bombs into civilians structures, and UN shelters, and how many lives lost due to zionist violence? This is just another ruse to play victim, and pretend the kites were deadlier than their snipers. No one is buying.

    • JohnSmith
      June 18, 2018, 1:38 am

      “Whining about the cost” is a pretty hilarious issue here! There is the vast economic outlay in the military spending it takes to support racial supremacy and the massive victimization of a subject people. And then some burnt fields or crops. The economic harm to Israel is comparable to the tax-deductible pilferage by the staff or customers of a single, decent-sized United States grocery store. If Israel wanted to worry about wasted wealth, hey, how about not practicing racial supremacy? How about having an army one-tenth the size and using millions (billions?) to help Palestinians, bedouins, and even those Israelis who are comparatively deprived and need more help?

    • oldgeezer
      June 18, 2018, 9:58 am

      How about they just add up the economic cost of all the crops they destroyed using herbicides.

      Eternal victimhood.

  7. Marnie
    June 19, 2018, 4:17 am

    ‘Our hope is not yet lost,
    The hope two thousand years old,
    To be a free nation in our land,
    The land of Zion and Jerusalem’

    I can’t believe something so cheesy is anyone’s anthem. However, the notion that jews weren’t free is ridiculous and that they had a land empty and waiting for them insane, but that’s what they use to justify the sin. Modern jews have nothing to run from or to because of danger and fear. Historically there were times, but I don’t want to give a big opening for the A.P., the multiple jon’s and others to wax neurotic about.

    In our lifetime and under our noses are people who are literally running for their lives and for a chance for their children to live a life with freedoms they don’t currently have. Those people on the us/Mexico border, who are seeking asylum and being turned away, go in the ‘wrong’ way and get violently separated from their children.
    The Rohingya – fleeing for their lives to escape what is clearly a genocide in Myanmar.
    Syria –
    In Rwanda, the Tutsis given no sanctuary and 1 million slaughtered.
    There have been more since the age of ‘never again’.
    I can’t identify with them because I was never pursued, threatened and abused and neither were the jon’s and the other fruits and nuts on these pages. FFS look at see what it is to be seeking sanctuary in the 21st century and you won’t find jews among them. It’s all been a game.

    • Marnie
      June 19, 2018, 7:39 am

      I’m so sorry. I just realized why the u.s. won’t change the new tRUMP administration policy of separating children from their parents – first, the precedent set during the 200+ years of slavery and the forced separation of indigenous tribe’s children to reducation camps (‘christian’ education), but if the u.s. does the right thing towards their neighbors from Mexico and other places south of the u.s. southern border, the zionist state is going to be next on the chopping block for it’s quaint practice of middle of the night kidnappings of palestinian children. Silly me!

    • eljay
      June 19, 2018, 8:56 am

      || Marnie: ‘Our hope is not yet lost,
      The hope two thousand years old,
      To be a free nation in our land,
      The land of Zion and Jerusalem’

      I can’t believe something so cheesy is anyone’s anthem. … ||

      All national anthems are cheesy. This anthem also underscores “Jewish State” supremacism.

      • Marnie
        June 19, 2018, 11:32 am

        ‘All national anthems are cheesy.’

        O’er the land of the free, and the home of the whey.

      • Mooser
        June 19, 2018, 12:17 pm

        That’s a verse from the national anthem? Are you sure? It doesn’t scan with the melody of “Exodus”

        If you are over a certain age, do not click that link without putting two Pyrantel tablets in each ear.

    • Mooser
      June 19, 2018, 1:29 pm

      “In our lifetime and under our noses are people who are literally running for their lives”

      Jeff Sessions explained the difference between the children’s death camps in the US and Nazi concentration camps:

      “Well, it’s a real exaggeration, of course. In Nazi Germany, they were keeping the Jews from leaving the country,”

      • eljay
        June 19, 2018, 1:58 pm

        || Mooser: … Jeff Sessions explained the difference between the children’s death camps in the US and Nazi concentration camps:

        “Well, it’s a real exaggeration, of course. In Nazi Germany, they were keeping the Jews from leaving the country,” ||

        Reporter: Mr. Sessions, there have been reports about starvation, forced labour, disease and mass gassings at U.S. camps. Would you say that the U.S. is now like Nazi Germany?

        Sessions: Sweet baby Jesus, what’s the matter with you media folks?! As I indicated, we are not keeping the Jews from leaving. So, no, the U.S. is not yet…I mean, the U.S. is not like Nazi Germany.

        Reporter: Word is that some of the victims are Jews.

        Sessions: Oh. Uhhh…were they coming or going?

        Reporter: Reports say they were illegal Jewish immigrants.

        Sessions: Okay, good, that means we’re still not like Nazi Germany.

      • Mooser
        June 19, 2018, 2:54 pm

        “eljay” no imagination needed. No parents, crowding,heat, inadequate medical care, terrible psychological stress, and BTW, brothers separated from sisters, the camps are single gender. How’re they managing the food situation, take out?

        No imagination, there’ll be horrors aplenty, real soon.

        But I’m a little surprised. I was expecting Sessions to defuse all the religious objections by saying that Stephen Miller was merely starting a children’s kibbutz, and objections are anti-semitism.

      • eljay
        June 19, 2018, 7:08 pm

        Mooser: … No imagination, there’ll be horrors aplenty, real soon. … ||

        At which time Sessions can use the “necessary evil” excuse. It’s worked for Zionists and, well, “shared common values” and all that.

  8. Spring Renouncer
    June 19, 2018, 7:10 pm

    For the past two weeks ago I’ve been seeing headlines and articles in serious American papers warning of the grave threat incendiary kites pose to Israel and casting the Palestinians who fly them as evil. I’m shocked (and then shocked that I can still be shocked) by how such surreal, incredible things can be passed as fact.

    On one hand you have a country that has the most advanced warplanes, drones, ICMBs, nuclear weapons, tanks and guns, which had been massacreing hundreds of unarmed civilian protestors, including children, medics and journalists and maiming thousands more – on the other you have imprisoned, impoverished, occupied Palestinians who are rising up in resistance, shouting slogans, burning tires and a kite or two so that their voices of pain might be heard by the world – and American and Israeli papers are trying to pass Israel as the victim of grave kite-attack and Palestinians as terrorists who deserve their fate?! What’s more, some people buy this narrative.

    This terrible, Kafkaesque state of affairs does give me a smidge of hope, though. The fact that American and Israeli propaganda has gotten so thin, desperate and ridiculous is a sign that the narrative and situation are slowly slipping out of their grasp, like burning balloons carried away by a breeze.

    Other recent headlines about Israel in the American press lauded the country for being the first to launch an airstrike with an American-made F-35 stealth bomber. These articles had an upbeat and congratulatory tone. They focused on the plane and its weaponry in a bizzarre isoltation from what the airstrike actually was: yet another of countless examples of Israel (this could apply to the US too) completely violating and ignoring the sovereignty and borders of its neighbors, yet again agressively attacking a country whose land it illegally occupies.

    The fact that the strike was illegal under international law was never mentioned; those who may have died were not considered human enough to discuss. On the other hand, when an Israeli plane was shot down after it bombed another country or when an unmanned drone ventured into terretory it occupies the sky falls: Israel is under attack. Up is down, down is up, victims are terrorists, the Hayena is called a rabbit even as it’s seen strangling the lamb.

    • Marnie
      June 20, 2018, 3:41 am

      I know, it’s really hard to believe but that’s the way they roll in Zioland – terrorist kites, incendiary kites, etc., what’s the most moral army in the world supposed to do? Get out your sharpshooters and shoot, shoot and shoot some more. Then cry (see jon s) that Hamas made them do it and they lost count of the bullets. Who knows know how they’ll keep their shit when the protestors roll out their Slinky snakes or Hoops and Ladders. God forbid a game of Candyland.

Leave a Reply