Thanks to McClatchy’s Dion Nissenbaum for informing all readers of the specifics of the restrictions imposed on all Israel-based reporters covering the conflict with Gaza.
Of course it is a nearly universal practice of parties to an armed conflict to restrict media coverage of many aspects of the conflict. But it is very useful for readers/consumers of the reporting that results to remain aware that there are several significant aspects of the events that we are prevented from seeing or reading about.
For example, in Dion’s list, #2 is perhaps especially important for readers to be aware of:
- 2. The IDF Censor will not authorize reports of rocket hits at IDF bases and/or strategic installations.
This, in line with the Israeli authorities’ long-sustained practice of trying to describe the rocket attacks launched against it by Hamas and other groups in Gaza as being “targeted”– inasmuch as they are targeted at all– only against civilian neighborhoods.
When I was in the recent panel discussion with Daniel Levy on Capitol Hill, one of the notable things he said was that his information from Israel was that Hamas’s rockets attacks had clearly been targeted at military installations, while it was the non-Hamas organizations that had sent rockets (whether “targeted”, or more randomly, was unclear) into civilian neighborhoods.
We can note the precedent of the way the hits inside Israel from Hizbullah’s rockets were reported by the Israel-based media in the 33-day war of 2006. There, too, the reporting was overwhelmingly of civilian casualties, though I do recall some reporting of military casualties, most particularly of the numerous IDF soldiers killed while mustering in Kfar Darom. I believe the IDF censor’s rules have been tightened since then.
Regarding Hizbullah’s targeting practices in 2006, we should also note the report on this topic released last November by the Nazareth (Israel) -based Arab Association for Human Rights.
The AAHR report was based on “the testimonies of 80 Arab residents interviewed by the HRA, documenting 20 Arab communities that were hit by an estimated total of some 660 rockets, killing 14 civilians directly.” The AAHR researchers found that:
- the Arab towns and villages that suffered the most intensive attacks during the war were ones that were surrounded by military installations, either on a permanent basis or temporarily during the course of the war. These installations are located at a distance of just 0.5 – 2 kilometers by air from the civilian community; in some cases, the installations are located inside the town or village. Such short distances are within the margin of error of the rockets fired by Hizbullah. During the war, artillery fire was launched at Lebanon from many of these installations, and particularly from the temporary installations.
The investigation also found that communities that were not surrounded by military installations, including villages close to Israel’s northern border, were not hit by rockets, or suffered a lesser degree of damage. Conversely, communities that were surrounded by military installations were hit by rockets, even when these communities were further removed from the Israeli-Lebanese border.
During the war, Hizbullah declared on several occasions that it was targeting its rockets primarily at military installations inside Israel. Given the findings of the investigation undertaken by the HRA, there is no reason to doubt that the Arab towns and villages were hit due to their proximity to the adjacent military installations. At the very least, it may be assumed that the fact that Israel located certain military installations in or close to Arab civilian centers significantly increased the danger to which the residents of these communities were exposed; in some cases, this danger may have been realized in practice.
In the present conflict, if no Israel-based journos are allowed to report any hits on Israeli military installations, then the myth of all the Gaza Palestinian groups “targeting civilians” can be maintained.
At the very least, Israel-based journos should persistently be asking the IDF’s military briefers to give broad figures about the proportion of Palestinian rockets that fall within, say, one kilometer of a military installation, even if the censorship precludes them from reporting on any details of these hits.
If they do not do this, then surely they are simply colluding in the work of the Israeli hasbaristas in packaging the Palestinian rocketeers as being irreparably evil and inhumane. (A number of western journalists used to collude with with Israel’s hasbara efforts for many years. The phenomenon is probably less widespread now than it once was.)
There is of course a perfectly valid reason for item 2: that reports of strikes on military targets might help Hamas improve its aim. In the event, Qassam hits on military bases have been reported by both Israeli and Palestinian sources, the latter of which can be used as a cross-check in case the IDF censor attempts to impose a “political truth.” To date I do not see any indication that the censor has tried to do so because it is well known in Israel that a few of the rockets have hit army bases.
You might also want to add that the AAHR report did not draw any conclusion that military bases were deliberately sited near Arab towns, and its author noted that Jews who lived in proximity to military bases were also injured or killed by Hezbollah rockets.
Actually if anything is under-reported about the qassams, it’s how many of them fall short of the border and injure or kill Palestinians.
Azazel, I understand why the IDF, from its perspective as a warfighting organization, seeks to restrict reporting of the military efficacity (or otherwise) of Hamas’s attempts at targeting. That’s why my main suggestion to the journos in Israel was not that they seek to break the IDF’s rules on reporting individual incidents but rather to persistently seek the broader kinds of information that I mentioned. I don’t think the IDF would have anything like as valid an operational reason to withhold that information; and if it is not forthcoming, journalists could and should ask why.
I forget whether the whole text of the AAHR report– which I read some weeks ago– mentioned anything about the IDF’s deliberate siting of military installations near Arab villages and towns. But I believe they were one of many organizations that noted the striking disparity in the “preparedness” situation in Arab vs. Jewish communities in northern Israel. That is, things like availability of shelters, warning systems, etc.
And of course, there were many reports of at least one artillery battery being located very close to a Jewish community– so close indeed that the little girls from the community were invited to stop by the battery and write their hate messages onto the artillery shells while being photographed doing so. Talk about exploiting those young people as potential human shields!
Hamas’s rockets attacks had clearly been targeted at military installations, while it was the non-Hamas organizations that had sent rockets (whether “targeted”, or more randomly, was unclear) into civilian neighborhoods.
If Hamas does not have a monopoly of force in Gaza, what’s the point of negotiating with them?
“That’s why my main suggestion to the journos in Israel was not that they seek to break the IDF’s rules on reporting individual incidents but rather to persistently seek the broader kinds of information that I mentioned.”
Yes, that information should be public.
“But I believe they were one of many organizations that noted the striking disparity in the ‘preparedness’ situation in Arab vs. Jewish communities in northern Israel.”
This is very true. There were several causes: part of it was that Arab cities didn’t want to spend money on civil defense, part was that nobody believed that anyone would attack an Arab town, and part was good old fashioned budget discrimination. Whatever the reason, it led to unnecessary deaths. It is being rectified now but too late.
I’m in Kafka’s birthplace. Just one question.
JES or Az or Joshua or Vadim (please tell me you’re not Roger)…why is Israel occupying the Occupied Territories?
Be interested to know the official reason – if there is one – and what you think is the real reason (if that’s different from the official reason).
And also – okay this is a second question – where it’s all going to end? If it’s 400,000 now are there plans for two million? And 2,000,000 where?
Sort of like that question put to ray kroc 20 years ago – “I see you’re up to 16 million burgers sold – how many more to go?”
I’m here to be schooled…
Israel is occupying the territories because those territories are chock full of individuals who try to destroy Israel, and would continue to try to do so even if the occupation was completely lifted.
Why only look at point #2? It is perfectly clear from the entire list that the purpose of these rules, taken as a whole, is to prevent journalists from (hopefully inadvertantly) assisting those launching the rockets improve their accuracty.
In other words, there is nothing special about point #2 – referring to military bases or strategic installations – and #1:
Real-time reports on the exact locations of rocket hits are strictly prohibited. Reports, on delayed-time, of exact locations must always be approved by the IDF Censor.
which would, for example, help them sight in on particular residential neighborhoods, or point #3:
The IDF Censor will not authorize reporting on rockets that fell into the Mediterranean Sea.
Or point #4:
The IDF Censor will not authorize photographs of rockets with identifying marks.
so that the “militants” aren’t able to identify specific rockets from specific launchers.
I read the AAHR report. I read it very carefully. It is very flawed.
One needs only look at a map to see this. The report tries to claim that Arab towns and villages were hit by Hizballah rockets because of military installations that were placed adjacent to or inside of these villages. They used as their standard proximity of a .5-2km radius. However, what they don’t point out is that all the Arab towns and villiages hit by rocket fire were within a .5-2km of Jewish towns and villages, and that the Jewish communities were hit much more heavily.
Concerning the issue of “things like shelters”, first of all, the entire north was unprepared in terms of public shelters, and this includes Jewish as well as Arab communities. What the report does not point out is that, since just before the first Gulf War in 1991, it has been the responsibility of the local administration and individuals to make provisions for shelters and safe rooms. If local officials (i.e. those elected to the local councils of these towns and villages) do not uphold the regulations handed down by government ministries and ensure that they do not approve building plans lacking these provisions and do not carry out the required inspections of these facilities before granting the required permit for the new construction, then this is a matter of local corruption rather than discrimination.
Joshua, your answer “Israel is occupying the territories because they are… full of individuals trying to destroy Israel” is noyt entirely satisfactory.
Why, for example, are the territories full of people who want to destroy Israel?
One reason is that said people were driven into the territories by ethnic cleansing undertaken by Israel in 1948. That filled the refugee camps with people with little reason to love the state which had destroyed their villages, seized their lands and killed many of their fellows.
Then there are the other people, those who lived in the territories which were invaded and occupied in 1967. They have been living, under a brutal military occupation ever since, and they have no reason to love the state which has been stealing their water and their lands and clearly trying to drive them out or reduce them to subjection to their colonial masters.
It seems to me that the wonderful thing about this resistance to Israel is that it is perfectly logical and eminently reasonable. I know just how they feel in Gaza or the West Bank. I’d feel the same. And so, I suspect, would most of the people who live in Israel if they were so treated.
Its wonderful because it has nothing to do with hatred, racism or fanaticism: it is simply the natural reaction of people subjected to tyranny.
As Pitt said, about an earlier example of national resistance to arbitrary government, it is a good thing that they are resisting because if they didn’t they would make good material for enslaving others.
Seems to me – complete outsider of course, so I’ve got no axe to grind, can look at the thing completely dispassionately – that it might be a good idea to suck it and see. I.E., get out of land that’s not theirs – or is it theirs because of what it says in a book put together by a bunch of Bronze Age nomads? – is that the justification? probably best to come clean about it if it is…
By suck it and see I mean up stakes, get back to the 67 borders…and then see what happens.
You could always go back if the “chock fulls” turn nasty.
Otherwise of course – again this is just an outsider looking at the thing – if you keep stealing other people’s land – creating more refugees, more hatred…well the “border” with people on the “outside” looking in – or looking back at what was theirs – with unfathomable amounts of fairly understandable hatred – the border just keeps being pushed forward and the further away it gets from Israel the logistical problems get greater and greater – supply lines, that sort of thing…this is just elementary military science. And the border gets longer and so, naturally, it’s harder to defend. And the number of enemies grows exponentially.
It just seems to me to be unsustainable. I certainly wouldn’t want to be loathed by two and a half billion – or however many it is – moslems. And disdained – the way Apartheid South Africa was disdained – by most of the rest of the world. I wouldn’t want that for myself – for my peace of mind – who in his right mind would want to live like that – in that particular ghetto? Let alone pass that millstone round-the-neck on to his children and grandchildren.
Over to you, Joshua.
School me please. If it’s possible. Looking at it as a “goy” – who in the words of a hugely talented young man from Louisville, Ky many years ago, “I ain’t got no quarrel with them Cong.” Which is to say, that’s how I feel about Muslims and the Muslim world. And what’s the alternative? A final solution? Killing 2.5 billion human beings? I don’t think so. And surely you don’t think so either. So, yes, please school me – because as an outsider this matter – and the position that you and others of a like mind take on it – is completely inexplicable. Indeed, it seems to me to be insanity.
We can note the precedent of the way the hits inside Israel from Hizbullah’s rockets were reported by the Israel-based media in the 33-day war of 2006. There, too, the reporting was overwhelmingly of civilian casualties, though I do recall some reporting of military casualties, most particularly of the numerous IDF soldiers killed while mustering in Kfar Darom. I believe the IDF censor’s rules have been tightened since then.
You may want to consult a map. Kfar Darom was a settlement in Gaza abandoned during the 2005 disengagement. (This settlement was built on the site of a kibbutz that was “ethnically cleansed” by the Egyptians in 1948.) The soldiers killed in the Hizballah attack in 2006 were in Kfar Giladi, which is south of Metulla.
Frankly, I find your attempt to justify Hamas’ attacks as targeting military installations, based on the rather scanty and cherry-picked evidence you provide, to be sleight-of-hand. Furthermore, considering that Mahmoud az-Zahar has recently stated quite openly the purpose of targeting civilian locales such as Sderot, with the objective of making life there unbearable for the civilian population, tends to make your arguments look rather disingenuous.
is that the justification?
No, that isn’t the justification. Clearly you haven’t understood the positions Joshua and others “of a like mind” have articulated here. No one on this board supports the occupation of Palestinian land on a biblical or any other basis. Please read more carefully before branding political views you don’t understand “insane.”
The Israelis are currently attacking Gaza because they are under attack and have been ever since they picked up and left in 2005. Occupation therefore cannot be said to have caused the many rocket and suicide attacks Israel has suffered since this event, emanating from unoccupied land. This is not a vote for occupation, but against the view that occupation is the root of all evil.
And I say that as a prejudice-free dispassionate goy, writing from the most neutral place on earth.
Of course it is a nearly universal practice of parties to an armed conflict to restrict media coverage of many aspects of the conflict.
That’s right Helena, from US invasion of Iraq and their practice, starting with embedded journalists with military force, also using journalists with their military routine mission inside cites and towns to give firsthand experience.
The journalist works for a credible media organization who can pass some kind of background check those who used in these practice to give(filtered) the right picture or reports what’s going on but not reflecting the truth instead they picking events or instants that used reflecting the Goodness of the armed conflicts.
We did not see real truth of Baghdad (formally Saddam) International Airport battle?
We did not see the real truth from Falluja battle and what went on the ground?
We do not see daily battle that US facing inside Iraq and what the collective punishment for areas or towns where US forces attached.
During the war, Hezbollah declared on several occasions that it was targeting its rockets primarily at military installations inside Israel. Given the findings of the investigation undertaken by the HRA,
Israeli reactions was as reported, bombed the areas and towns from where Hezbollah’s rockets launched, Hezbollah used tactics by embedded his fighters in cities and towns with populated civilians areas which caused more and sever loses of civilians in that war due to Israelis deadly and madness reactions.
Do not forget that Sderot’s original name was Najd, a Palestinian village. Along with hundreds of Palestinian villages, Najd was destroyed, in Najd’s case by the Israeli Negev Brigade on March 13, 1948. Najd’s 719 surviving inhabitants were ethnically cleansed and deported to Gaza.
The Palestinians are lobbing rockets at what is rightfully theirs. They are lobbing rockets at colonists on their property.
Milos, you are correct. As Bill Clinton would have said, “It’s the occupation, stupid.”
That’s great logic Kassandra. I suppose that Israel should be able to lob shells at the area around Kfar Darom in Gaza, which was originally built on land purchased by a Palestinian Jew named Tuvia Miller. Perhaps Israel should also be free to shell Hebron, which was “ethnically cleansed” as well.
If they do not do this, then surely they are simply colluding in the work of the Israeli hasbaristas in packaging the Palestinian rocketeers as being irreparably evil and inhumane.
BTW, Helena, when did you stop beating your significant other?
The matters dealt with above – Israel allegedly placing military installations near Arab towns, and military censorship of journalists – have been extensively reported by Nazareth based jounalist Jonathan Cook.
http://www.jkcook.net/
“By suck it and see I mean up stakes, get back to the 67 borders…and then see what happens.
You could always go back if the “chock fulls” turn nasty.”
First of all, many, far too many, of the neighbors have made clear, that the 67 borders are not the issue for them. Plenty of the “Hamasbaristas” here have articulated that point quite clearly.
The experience of Israel giving every inch of Gaza to the Palestinians (and American supporters of Israel purchasing the productive agricultural land for them as well!) shows that, by leaving the area, you don’t make it safer, and may actually make it more dangerous.
Secondly – “You can always go back” is not nearly as simple as you like to think it would be. There are parts of the West Bank which would allow the neighbors to rain rockets down right on Tel Aviv. And anyone who has taken a walk around Jerusalem will realize that the 1967 “borders” (actually armistice lines, defined as such due to the insistence of the Arabs who refused to accept any line with Israel as a border) are not a feasible way to divide a city, not simply for security purposes.
Perhaps some people might actually feel sympathy for Israel then “Gee, maybe we were wrong when we said going back to the 67 borders would bring peace.” But in the end, Israel has to be the one to actually live with its decisions. I would consider it reasonable to heed outsiders’ calls to withdraw to the 1967 borders if it were accompanied with an agreement that the nations that have so demanded would agree to complete political and economic accountability for any damage suffered from such a move. Say, $5 million dollars to Israel for each life lost by subsequent terror attacks. And if violence got out of hand, then the governing political party of the nation demanding Israeli concessions would immediately agree to step down from office and be barred from seeking elected office for a period of 25 years.
In any event, Israel is not nearly as loathed as you would like to think. Compare Israel’s situation now to Israel’s situation in the 50s, 60s, and 70s. Israel was not recognized not only by the Arab and Muslim nations, but by significant chunks of the entire world. Israel’s economy was at third world levels. The Arab boycott was enforced at secondary and tertiary levels, leaving Israel unable to do business.
Now today? Israel is recognized by everyone except the Arab and Muslim nations (which was the case before the “occupation” anyway). Israel is completely integrated into the world market, a powerhouse in technology, and has a solid manufacturing and export basis. The Arab boycott isn’t even regularly enforced at the primary level, let along the secondary and tertiary levels.
So you do have the occasional UN resolution to appease the “Arab Lobby,” and some conferences around the world where misanthropes can vent about the evils of Zionism. It’s unfortunate, but the ultimate losers are the Palestinians, because it just gives them a false sense of support and prevents their moderates from speaking out in favor of actual coexistence. That’s not a surprise, because the most vociferous critics of Israel generally don’t have Palestinian welfare in mind. They just hate Israel and need a bugbear to attack.
“In any event, Israel is not nearly as loathed as you would like to think.”
Somebody needs to get out more.
Jonathan Cook is not a journalist I would regard as credible. He has a consistent habit of portraying the worst as the norm, characterizing rumor and accusation as truth, and picking motives out of thin air. He also has a very openly stated ideological agenda, which is refreshing in its honesty but which must be accounted for when reading his articles.
With respect to the specific accusation of using Arabs as “human shields” (his words), I’d note that no Arab organization in Israel ever made that allegation before him. Also, the AAHR report that Helena quoted went out of its way to avoid drawing such conclusions (it said instead that military bases were located “in or close to civilian centers,” which includes Jewish towns, and didn’t accuse the government of deliberately siting military installations in Arab areas). In fact, as I said earlier, the author of that report mentioned that many Jews in the north also lived near military bases and were injured or killed by rockets.
Israel isn’t a big country and most places are close to one military base or another, especially in a war zone. And since the minority advocacy organizations in Israel aren’t shy about making claims or filing court petitions against the military, I can’t imagine that systematic use of Arab communities as human shields would have gone unnoted until Cook. Thus while I do not doubt that there is discrimination against Arabs in many areas of society, I don’t credit this accusation.
Hi Murphy, I get out plenty and talk to lots of people. But as my post above points out, the facts and stats speak for themselves. Generic opinion polls are malleable and may talk about general moods, but they don’t refute the fact that Israel is much more accepted in both political and economic intercourse than it was 50, 30 or even 20 years ago.
I think it’s you that probably needs to get out more. Or if you have them, I’d like to see actual facts that represent that Israel is less accepted in the world today. Again, opinion polls mean very little, I’m talking about actual economic and political indicators.
To be fair, by frequenting this site you risk losing touch with a reality based community. Helena often resorts to platitudes that are belied by facts. I’m not sure if you were here when she repeatedly cited one source as a claim for Gaza’s “de-development” since 1967. I and other posters pointed out that, after 1967, every reliable economic and social indicator showed that the standard of living INCREASED until the intifada, at which point it regressed. It actually got to the point where Helena started to delete posts and threaten to ban users that contradicted her.
It’s certainly my impression – purely anecdotal of course – that Murphy’s right. I mean admittedly you do have the Last Days Christians “on your side” – well, sort of on your side. They are of course the least intelligent and most anti-semitic of all the American “tribes”. So that on the face of it doesn’t seem like a very good “trade” – sort of like trading Mickey Mantle for Marv Thronebury. (Alienating – and alienating profoundly – huge swaths of goyim intelligentsia – Vadim always excepted of course, I mean.)
Problem with walls – real walls – is that they’re always accompanied by walls of the mind. Which are real as well. But more corrosive.
Glad it’s your problem and not mine, pal. Though it is of course mine – ours – because of the general gestalt – let alone tax monies.
Anyway, the American tax monies certainly won’t see out the century. Thanks in large part to the worst goyische “friends” Israel’s ever had – Bush and Cheney.
Anybody learning Chinese there?
“Israel giving every inch of Gaza to…”
Since when was it theirs to “give” to the Palestinians?
“Give” in the sense of relinquishing possession, not ownership (which in the event was never claimed).
oh yes of course.
Give in that sense – is that spelled cap S lower case o lower case p lower case h lower case i lower case s lower case t lower case r lower case y?
Or is it gimme an F gimme an r gimme an e gimme a u
as in Freudian slip?
Just wondering.
I assume, then, that you use some word other than “give” when you say “give back?”
The matters dealt with above – Israel allegedly placing military installations near Arab towns, and military censorship of journalists – have been extensively reported by Nazareth based jounalist Jonathan Cook.
Yes, and Jonathan Cook has even been more inaccurate and biased in his reporting of the AAHR than the AAHR itself.
I think you guys really need to look at a map. The Upper Galilee panhandle is about 10 kilometers wide along the border with Lebanon. It’s a joke to claim that Israel could have placed artillery and staged three divisions along this line without being within .5-2km of towns or villages. Yet, with the exception of the incident at Kfar Giladi (in which, it was reported, Hizballah triangulated their fire from three separate locations to ensure a hit), there were no reports of military installations or positions hit, while virtually every street in Qiryat Shmona received rocket fire.
The AAHR report goes out of its way not to mention specific locations where temporary military presence was placed near Arab locales, conveniently using the censorship restrictions to facilitate this lack of evidence. They do give one example of Furadis being used once (and it’s not clear whether this was before or during the war) for a military exercise – although only one rocket actually hit anywhere near this town.
But if we are to believe either the AAHR report or Jonathan Cook, many of the Arab “locales” (the terminology that the AAHR uses) mentioned or implied are behind mountains and not visible from Lebanon. The implications of attributing targetting these locales due to IDF activities in their vicinity are quite serious.
No, I don’t. And what’s more, I don’t presume to “give” – or “give back” – to people what is rightfully theirs, what wasn’t ever mine to “give” or “give back” to them.
But then I’m not toiling away inside that particular mental pale – to borrow Milos’ useful formulation.
“The experience of Israel giving every inch of Gaza to the Palestinians”
I don’t really want to get bogged down over semantics here, but it isn’t “sophistry” to recognize that words have multiple meanings. If I have something in my hand and put it into yours, I have given it to you. Whether it was rightfully mine in the first place is a legal issue separate from the physical act I have performed. It isn’t unusual in the least for the word “give” to be used this way – e.g., police officer to felon: “give me the gun.”
I can’t speak for Joshua, so I’ll stop here let him explain what he meant. For myself I would have said “return” rather than “give,” but his use of the latter word was consistent with its meaning and your retort, which ignored this, was sophistic in itself.
I really don’t see the controversy here. Gave back was used in terms of relinquishing control.
Milos, as with Murphy, do you have any facts? Or just insults?
In the words of the immortal Bill Clinton, “It’s the occupation, stupid.”
In contravention of all and any international law or understanding and solely based on pilpullistic reasoning and legal sophistry, such as that demonstrated by the posters here, does Israel continue to justify the occupation of Palestinian lands.
Just as the French Resistance was justified in defending themselves against the Nazis, so are the Palestinians. Just as the Hungarians were justified in defending themselves against the Bolsheviks, so are the Palestinians. This doesn’t seem to have sunk in to about 90% of the Israelis and their supporters.
Just a reminder why Israel has become one of the most loathed, if not the most loathed, country in the world,check the link. Murphy knows why. Can’t think of any child of Eichman being proud of his father’s actions:
http://www.soundofegypt.com/palestinian/adult/massacres.html
In the words of the immortal Bill Clinton, “It’s the occupation, stupid.”
In contravention of all and any international law or understanding and solely based on pilpullistic reasoning and legal sophistry, such as that demonstrated by the posters here, does Israel continue to justify the occupation of Palestinian lands.
Just as the French Resistance was justified in defending themselves against the Nazis, so are the Palestinians. Just as the Hungarians were justified in defending themselves against the Bolsheviks, so are the Palestinians. This doesn’t seem to have sunk in to about 90% of the Israelis and their supporters.
Just a reminder why Israel has become one of the most loathed, if not the most loathed, country in the world,check the link. Murphy knows why. Can’t think of any child of Eichman being proud of his father’s actions:
http://www.soundofegypt.com/palestinian/adult/massacres.html
Just as the French Resistance was justified in defending themselves against the Nazis, so are the Palestinians. Just as the Hungarians were justified in defending themselves against the Bolsheviks,
What about East Timor?
They got full support of UN, US and other big players given them independence.
So why we had 60 years of genocide of Palestinians with promises of US successive administrations to help to solve their problem but in all time VETO is the best tool used by US showing full support for Israeli crimes in Palestine.
So why we had 60 years of genocide of Palestinians…
There were, 60 years ago, about 1.5 million Palestinians. Today, there are over 4.5 million. Now, either this interpretation of “genocide” is so far removed from the commonly accepted definition as to be totally ridiculous, or we Israelis are completely inept in carrying out a genocide.
60 years ago, about 1.5 million Palestinians. Today, there are over 4.5 million.
JES you did not come here telling us this because Israeli occupations health polices?
I may pick your attention to study in US found that after 2001 more women gave birth in US, there study the case with careful attentions and they conclude that because of fear and horrible terrorist acts that drive these increase in babies.
So its God well, not Israelis health care that Palestinians increased due to to survival of Genocide done along 60 years of occupation of their land on 5000 dream old claim.
Warsaw Ghetto and Gaza: Disturbing Parallels
……
There is a basic conflict of inhumanity occurring to the Palestinian people of Gaza that the world is deliberately ignoring. An inhumanity that was inflicted by the Nazis on the Jews in the Warsaw Ghetto is now more than ever closely paralleling that which they are inflicting on the people of Gaza. They learned a hard lesson but it was not a lesson learned well. They have been given the power to practice humanity but have decided instead that they will treat the concerns of the Palestinians in the same inhumane way the Nazis treated them.
Steve hucheson
Dear Mr. Joshua et al,
Chanced across this discussion. Don’t know whether this counts as an “economic indicator” – “how the outside world views the situation” or not. In short, it’s my personal experience – make of it what you will.
Anyway, for what it’s worth…
I live in London. My former car dealer was Jewish. I like him very much – not “great pals…golf playing mates” that sort of thing, but I do like him. That said, I stopped buying cars from him a few years ago. I suppose I was a fairly good customer – like clockwork it was a new car every two years. I stopped because he happened to mention to me one day that he was “a big Zionist” or words to that effect. Barring the unforeseen – given my “demographic group,” I mean – that’s going to be getting on for a million dollars (sounds more impressive than half a million pounds) in lost business over the long haul.
For the record, my lawyer and my sawbones and indeed my vet are also all Jewish. And I also like them very much. And they still get my custom. L. doesn’t.
Similarly, we do our shopping online. Fairly young middle-class family – three ravenous teen-agers. Big food bills: over 10,000 pounds a year. We had been Tesco shoppers. Switched out when we found out where some of our money was going.
Not to put too fine a point on it, I don’t want so much as a farthing to come out of my pocket and end up paying for a bullet that takes the life of a Palestinian kiddiewink. End of story.
And – again, for what it’s worth – I know as a matter of hard fact that we’re not alone in taking that position. And it’s by no means a “campaigning, activist” stance. Far from it. It’s just ordinary, professional, north London British families whose moral compass has told them enough is enough.
“There were, 60 years ago, about 1.5 million Palestinians. Today, there are over 4.5 million.”
In a fairly long lifetime of voracious reading I don’t think I’ve come across two more depraved sentences than the above. Given their context and the argument they’re pursuing. You should be deeply ashamed of yourself, JES.
Why exactly is that a “depraved” statement in response to a specific accusation of genocide? Simplistic, maybe, but given the charge that it was intended to answer, I don’t see the depravity. Or is it supposed to be one of those things that anyone other than an Israeli would instinctively understand?
More like: what isn’t depraved about it?
Glibly tossing some statistic like that out as if to say, “sure, everything’s wonderful for the Palestinians – they’re flourishing – happy as Larry – breeding like bunnies.” It’s what you’d expect from some odious little functionary – some “apologist” – working for – well, you can fill in the blank yourself.
And you know as well as everybody else here that there are plenty of Israelis – hundreds of thousands of them – who “get it”. That slur – that dawg – won’t hunt, old son.
Based on my admittedly brief acquaintance with this website, it seems to me as if there’s a marked reluctance from your quarter to look the thing square on and see it for what it is. Can’t see the woods for the golden calves, so to speak.
Who’s saying that “everything’s wonderful for the Palestinians” or that “they’re flourishing?” I can’t speak for JES but he certainly has never said that. What he did say was that Israel has not committed genocide against the Palestinians, in response to an explicit accusation of same. A population increase throughout the period when the alleged genocide was occurring is pretty relevant to whether one happened, wouldn’t you say?
“No genocide” doesn’t mean “happy as Larry,” and you’re a hell of a one to accuse JES of glibness when you willfully misinterpret his comment as saying so.
Az,
You okay with “ethnic cleansing” then?
And given that remark a few days ago about a shoah being visited upon the Palestinians in Gaza – well, gee, maybe in the fullness of time and all that.
You sure you want to have this discussion just now?
Changing the subject rather than admitting you were wrong? Don’t worry, D.L., we’ve all done it.
“Ethnic cleansing” is fine, because it occurred in 1948 and to a lesser extent in 1967 (Golan and Jordan Valley). Genocide of the Palestinians never has happened, is not happening now and, Vilnai’s stupid outburst notwithstanding, there are no signs that it ever will. And that’s all that JES was saying. Changed your mind about his moral depravity yet?
Hi Alistair,
No, I would not say your anecdote is particularly relevant. Look, it is well understood that there are bigots such as yourself who engage in racist boycotts. They’ve been around before Israel existed and will be around even if Israel did what they allegedly demanded of it.
What a delightful illustration of false consciousness! Everyone here seems to know what “the world” is thinking – Alastair based on his acquaintance with other North London bien-pensants, Murphy based on his intimate knowledge of Jonathan Cook’s (and no doubt Counterpunch’s) readership, our dear Kass based on… well, who knows what strange tribe she belongs to, and Joshua based on his own circle of friends and correspondents. And everyone believes that the others inhabit a mental ghetto, complete with picturesque Old Testament allusions. Mirror, mirror…
Hi Azazel, I make no pretensions to say what “the world” thinks, And I don’t pretend that the various acquaintances that I make necessarily extrapolate into “the world.”
My rebuttal to the “the world loathes Israel” is simply based on looking at the larger facts over the past 50 years. It’s a fact that previously, Israel was a non-entity not just among the Arabs, but among the rest of the world. Now almost everyone recognizes it. It’s a fact that Israel was subjected to severe boycotts at the primary, secondary and tertiarth level in the past, and that those boycotts are nearly non-existant now. It’s a fact that Israel’s economy has seen stratospheric growth over the past several decades. I think that these are more illustrative than anecdotal rants.
Dear D.L,
I should be ashamed of myself?
Salah accuses me, indirectly, of committing genocide, and I point out to him the fact that genocide usually results in the elimination of populations rather than their four-fold growth over 60 years.
I did not say, nor did I imply, that “sure, everything’s wonderful for the Palestinians”.
I should be ashamed of myself? You should be ashamed of yourself for your shallow reading efforts and for allowing your minimal comprehension skills to be influenced by your prejudices. Shame on you!
Disturbing parallels? Right. It’s easy to see what kind of mindset delivers the “Warsaw Ghetto” comparison:
“Adultary of the Mind”, “Ethnically Pure Neighborhoods”, “Moral Equivalent of War”, “Israeli Apartheid”…”Terrible Excuse for a President.”
“Again, opinion polls mean very little, I’m talking about actual economic and political indicators.”
Eh? You were saying Israel is not ‘loathed’ and are now saying that what people actually think of it means ‘very little’? It’s obvious why you would say that, though, since opinion polls just about everywhere on else confirm the overwhelming view of Israel as a rogue nation. Even in the US, where taxpayers prop up the failed state, poll after poll shows that Israel is far from universally admired, and the majority of people feel their government is far too close to Israel. Now, imagine they lived in a country where the political and media elites were not in hock to Zion…
Now you may continue to harbour the illusion that the likes of Tony Blair, Javier Solana and George Bush somehow represent world opinion. Go right ahead and do so – as milos said, your problem,not ours. The main reason political elites in the West and the Arab world are in any way friendly towards Israel is not, in any case, remotely due to any admiration of that state, but because it’s a way to score points with America. As America’s power continues to wane, so too will Israel become more and more irrelevant. Can’t see the Chinese being cajoled into supporting a failed ethnic state of no strategic value.
Dear Alastair, old chap. You know, if you really want to make sure your farthings don’t by bullets for us Zionists, in addition to boycotting “L”, Tesco and Marks&Sparks, you should probably get off the Inernet.
Anyway, here’s to hoping your Jew doctor makes a mistake. Cheers!
Zionists leaving Zionist occupied Gaza to move to another part of Zionist occupied Palestine is as much of a “pull out” as when a rapist pulls out of his victims pussy to rape her ass. Hardly a reason to weep or cheer for the rapist or Zionists. And Joshua makes it sound like the rape victim should be thankful and simply forget the Zionist crimes committed since 1948.
Very clever analogy Rachel. Did you come up with that one yourself?
Alistair, you have much company. Impossible to quantify, of course, but I sense we are becoming a (less) silent majority.
Poor Joshua, bigots under every bed it would seem. No wonder he is so ill-tempered.
As JES noted even using the internet contributes to the Israeli economy, since one of Cisco’s largest R&D units resides there.
Ameaningful boycott of Israel must also include Teva, one of the largest generic drug manufacturers in the world — hope you never get ill, Alastair!, NDS (use satellite TV in the UK? turn it off, please!) Check Pont (encryption software used by businesses throughout the world) I hope too you never have to undergo any experimental cancer therapy, since so many of these new technologies come from Israel’s biotech laboratories.
Personally “symbolic” boycotts of one’s Zionist mainicurist dog groomer etc arent likely to achieve much. especially as it seems you haven’t the nerve to inform “L” either of your boycott or its rationale.
Poor Joshua, bigots under every bed it would seem.
Certainly no worse than viewing tens of millions of Zionists as genocidal scum. Poor Alastair! Poor biko!
Good luck with that boycott gents! The power button is usually found behind the router, near where the plug goes in. We’ll be seeing you!
Here is a very thorough treatment of “Hiding Behind Civilians” theme via Lawrence of Cyberia that the hasbaristas let fly around here:
http://lawrenceofcyberia.blogs.com/news/2006/08/hiding_behind_c-html
If the reference fails, look under Lawrence of Cyberia’s older posts, under “Hiding Behind Civilians”
Vadim,
Yes that is correct. However, you left out Microsoft, who’s R&D facility in Israel develops and supports major portions of the Windows operating system. Also Intel, that has extensive R&D and production facilities in Israel that have developed several generations of CPUs for PCs.
The fact of the matter is, anyone using the Internet – or even a telephone – is directly using Israel-made technology or, at least, going through a router or switch.
Lawrence of Cyberia, well worth reading
http://lawrenceofcyberia.blogs.com/news/
Hiding Behind Civilians
http://lawrenceofcyberia.blogs.com/news/2006/08/hiding_behind_c.html
biko, Yes, even Americans are beginning to wake up. Today, CNN and BBC have as their lead story the Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch reports on Gaza, with a rebuttal by some well-fed and pork-necked zionist in a military uniform, and by some perfectly-coifed and jewelled squatter in the Palestinian village of Najd (renamed by the zios as Sderot), conrasted with lengthy shots by BBC and CNN of Palestinians living in abject povery.
Hasbara is not working too well anymore.
Rachel, Excellent analogy. Why should we be finicky about language, when the zios are engaged in the most brutal and thuggish behaviour possible? To Israel and its defenders, its the illusion that has always mattered more, not the brutal facts. Even Freud had a name for it: Projectionism. Blaming others for the evils that you yourself commit. F
Here is an excellent site for those who are interested in truth and not the zionist version:
http://www.palestineremembered.com/index/html
Wow, what vulgarity Rachel!
The question now is will Helena apply her editorial policy in any remotely consistent way. Or is it alright to use Rachel’s obscene language and for kassandra to make personal attacks because they are directed toward Jews?
Biko, I don’t see antisemites under every bed. But I do see plenty of it congregating on this site.
From Scotland, an excellent post on the hasbara brigade, whose representatives are well-represented here.
Hasbaraniks, or as Helena refers to them, Hasbaristas, scour the web for articles critical of Israel. They fill the comments field with generic pro-Israel views. . .
There is a manual for this, the HASBARA HANDBOOK.
Rachel, if you haven’t looked at the Hasbara Hanbook before. Take a look. Our Joshua falls right in line. But, hey, we’re catching on . . .
http://www.redstarcoven.blogspot.com
Israel is indeed a technology giant!
But, alas, we learn this from the BBC today:
“Gaza’s humanitarian situation is at its worst since Israel occupied the territory in 1967, say UK-based human rights and development groups.
They include Amnesty International, Save the Children, Cafod, Care International and Christian Aid.
They criticise Israel’s blockade on Gaza as illegal collective punishment which fails to deliver security.”
And a moral midget?
“bigots”…”jew doctor”
Goodness gracious. There’s a couple of dishonourable discharges for you. Very sorry to learn, gentlemen, that you’ve got that kind of thing festering in your minds.
From your reaction it’s painfully clear that there’ll be no meeting of minds here, but for the record let’s get the following down here in black and white.
1) I am not a bigot (though I strongly suspect that you are – that’s the territory that defending the indefensible [“conditions in occupied Gaza are the worst they’ve ever been in the 40 years of occupation”] gets you into).
2) I support Israel’s “right to exist”. I also believe that the indigenous people have some claims there as well. What’s needed – desperately needed – is some way of reconciling those two claims so both peoples can live at peace, live productively, etc. I don’t think that creating the world’s largest concentration camp – shoahing the Gazans – or indeed regarding them as “cockroaches” is likely to lead to anything but catastrophe after catastrophe – for both peoples – and indeed perhaps for the rest of us as well.
3) I would never use the phrase “Jew doctor” or “Jew lawyer” or “Jew plumber” or whatever. It’s simply not part of my mental makeup. Though it clearly is part of yours, JES.
4) Like tens of thousands of Israelis (let alone millions of other people around the world) I dislike what’s been visited upon the Palestinians in the Occ. Terr. and Gaza for the past 40 years. Just as I was opposed to Apartheid. Just as…well, it’s a tragically long list, isn’t it.
I suspect that to your way of thinking, gentlemen, anyone who disagrees with you about any aspect of the Zionist project is a “bigot”.
The problem with all of that is that it totally debases that particular currency.
It seems to me that you gentlemen really need “the other” – you define yourselves in opposition to it, you’d be quite lost without it. In which connection, Sartre once said “hell is other people”. He was wrong about that. Hell is seeing other people as hell. Hell is yourself if that’s how you view your fellow human beings.
I’m a life-long agnostic – and have never uttered these words before – but they’ve welled up out of somewhere: God bless you – and be with you.
Discussion on some of Helena’s boards have turned disastrous because kassandra, anomolous, Rachel in her one post, and to a lesser extent Murphy insist on using inflammatory tones and language to force their points on people. Kassandra can’t just point out that AI is bringing attention to atrocities in Gaza and debunk people defending those actions; she has to use personal dehumanizing insults like “a well-fed and pork-necked zionist in a military uniform” and “some perfectly-coifed and jewelled squatter” for a Sderot resident. We’re trying to fight against the effort to dehumanize Gaza residents suffering from the siege; trying to dehumanize Sderot residents is just as distasteful. She’s also throwing Hasbara conspiracies against anyone trying to argue about Israeli policies. That’s no better than branding every critic an anti-Semite. For his part, Murphy keeps making bold statements like how Israel is “overwhelmingly unpopular…everywhere”. No specifics or context, they just are. And I don’t think brandishing this alleged opinion around gives justification to demonizing a whole people. And like kassandra but to a lesser extent, he keeps repeating phrases over and over like Orwellian chants: “failed state”, “failed state”, over again like hypnosis. I don’t agree with a lot that Joshua, JES or the like have argued, and some pro-Israeli posts have treated other people very rudely and unfairly in the past. But currently, I can’t blame any of them for feeling any resentment at the hysterical demonization they’re being force into by posters like kassandra and Murphy.
Israel’s actions in Gaza are horrific; I’m glad that AI and other groups are warning about this. But kassandra, Murphy and others are not arguing about the current Gaza treatment, they’re arguing about destroying Israel. I wonder if some of the people arguing with them feel trapped in focusing on Israel’s existence rather than focusing on this current action. That trap has to be broken so that we can focus on Gaza at last.
Inkan, I couldn’t agree more. The solution to this problem is through some sort of mutual understanding between the two peoples, and not the supposed sole rights of either side. This is difficult enough without the intervention of blind-sided ideologues (from either side) who apparently have no real stake in the issue.
Folks like Murphy, Kassandra and Rachel – apart from saying some generally pretty disgusting things – are petty demogogues who do not serve the human inerests of either side.
Ummmm….. back to the original theme of this thread , today’s Ha’aretz had interesting reporting on the Bush vs. Risen/NYT legal fight — over who leaked the details of the Mossad/CIA plot to frame Iran….
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/961337.html
Oh the ironies….
Alistair,
1) I don’t know why Joshua considers you a bigot, but I will tell you why I do. You paint all Zionists with a single brush, and just because L. told you he was a Zionist, you assume that money that you pay him for cars will wind up in Israel as bullets. That smacks of bigotry.
2) Did it ever occur to you that your doctor, lawyer and vet may all be Zionists, but just didn’t feel obliged to tell you? Or do you interrogate them to find out their views on Israel?
3)I don’t believe that you generally use the term “Jew doctor” or “Jew lawyer”, but I strongly suspect that that’s the way you think (even if you don’t admit it to yourself). Why on earth do you even find it necessary after telling us about the “big Zionist” to inform us of your service providers? Do I go out of my way to tell you about my Palestinian Arab friends, acquaintences and medical practitioners? What I find offensive is the arrogance and smarmy British patronizing attitude that you have to point out how a “good Jew” should behave in contrast to a “bad” one. (BTW, I have nothing against the Brits. I have many British friends. In fact, my son-in-law is a Brit, and I would probably like him a lot, even if he weren’t the father of my grandson.)
4)So, to sum up: no, I don’t believe that anyone who disagrees with me about any aspect of the Zionist project is a “bigot”. I do, however, believe that anyone who doesn’t even go to the trouble of understanding what the Zionist project is and the variety of viewpoints that are part of that enterprise, and then makes a blanket condemnation of all Zionists is, most certainly, a bigot.
“In any event, Israel is not nearly as loathed as you would like to think.”
Over the last several years there has been a noticeable increase in the number of perfectly ordinary, not extraordinarily-well-informed Americans – Americans who previously have always reflexively supported Israel – who are completely appalled by Israel’s conduct, and who are becoming more aware of the reality, as opposed to the popular myths, of Israel’s founding. They are also becoming increasingly aware of the degree to which their tax money supports Israel’s atrocious behaviour.
Loathed is probably too strong a word, but disliked is not inaccurate. Israel is digging its own grave with the rest of the world, slowly but surely.
Yes, loathed IS too strong a word. Being appalled at specific conduct is reasonable. Loathing a country or people is something entirely different.
Inkan, when a country’s conduct is consistently appalling being appalled at that country is a natural, rational, and reasonable reaction. When a country’s conduct is consistently loathesome, then it does tend naturally, over time, to inspire loathing toward that country, particularly when oneself or people one cares about are subjected to that loathesome conduct.
Having said that, I still think loathed is a bit hyperbolic. Something ranging from disapproval to dislike is what I sense from most Americans I hear commenting on the subject.
No, it’s not reasonable. Outrage should be directed at governments instead of countries. The path that shirin is calling reasonable leads to whole peoples being seen as not human. That’s how the neocons get away with talking about Iran or Syria being the “axis of evil”, encouraging a mental disconnect from the humans who make up those countries.
And, I’m referring to the opinion of bystanders, not about the Palestinians themselves, who are living under the seige.
Ovadia Yosef, the spiritual leader of the ultra-orthodox Shas party, has told his followers that Israeli soldiers need to be blessed by the Almighty for killing and maiming hundreds of Palestinians, mostly innocent civilians, in the past few days.
“Had it not been for them, would we have time to study the Torah? To turn the books?” Yosef was quoted as saying in his Sunday night sermon in Jerusalem.
Yosef, who on several occasions called Palestinians “rats” is considered by many in Israel as one of the greatest living sages of the Torah. THE GREATEST LIVING SAGES!!!
One good turn always deserves another, Yosef. I hope you and your students have finally arrived at that Jerusalem of Gold in the sky. Your mighty IOF cannot defend you. All they can do is murder children — 56 at last count. Ahmedinejad looks better by the day.
JES, My doctor could never be a zio? Don’t you think careful people take precautions?
So Inkan, remember that study not long ago where about 74% of jews would refuse to live next to Palestinians? A government IS the reflection of its people. And you jews are about as racist as they come. I’ve followed your persecution of the Palestinians for a long time.
JES, My doctor could never be a zio. Don’t you think careful people take precautions?
So Inkan, remember that study not long ago where about 74% of jews would refuse to live next to Palestinians? A government IS the reflection of its people. And you jews are about as racist as they come. I’ve followed your persecution of the Palestinians for a long time.
JES,
It’s really very simple. It can be summed up in four words: dead kids, enough already.
Justifications, evasions, sophistry, ad hominem arguments etc. etc. – it’s so much squid ink.
“A government IS the reflection of its people.” is the perennial excuse for collective punishment. That has been the justification of pro-Israeli hardliners to carry out this continued persecution of Palestinians, equating the Hamas government with the Palestinian people.
I don’t equate the supporters of al-Qaeda with all of Islam. I don’t equate Shas and its creeps with all of Israel, or Jews, or Zionists either. Actually, I don’t recall anyone here, even the most pro-Israeli posters, being Shas supporters. BTW: as far as I know, Yosef is still alive.
BTW2: Did I say I was Jewish?
There are enough ill-informed non-jews who have fallen for hasbara, especially those evanelicals.
Sounds like you’re not up-to-date on the latest.
Big and well deserved Bang at a jewish seminary in Jerusalem. Was it the one where Ovadia Yosef made his pronouncements? Haven’t heard any jews denouncing Ovadia at all. All their bile is directed at the Palestinians.
Inkan, just in case our dear Kassandra’s latest comment was too cryptic, the event that has sent her into paroxysms of glee is the shooting of eight students at Yeshiva Merkaz Harav in Jerusalem. For her information, the yeshiva is not associated with the Shas party but was founded by Rabbi Zvi Yehuda Hacohen Kook.
Those who associate “dead kids” exclusively with the “Zionist project” may wish to take note.
Actually I should not have said “the shooting of eight students.” Eight students were killed; at least 17 in total were shot.
JES,
I should be ashamed of myself? You should be ashamed of yourself for your shallow reading efforts and for allowing your minimal comprehension skills to be influenced by your prejudices. Shame on you!
JES first I did not said “YOU” it’s your country; you terribly mixed and showing shallow reading of my points.
Secondly what you said above obviously it’s very clearly fit yourself more than me.
Thirdly next time with your minimal comprehension skills don’t put your words in my moth.
You and other Israelis who proudly expressed themselves here as “Experienced Adult” shamefully failed influenced by your prejudices by showing support of the killing of civilians although both sides suffer from this conflict but as a mindful person who have heart should not accepting the killing of people and bombing them, all the efforts should be focused to solve the problem from the root, the last and ugly thing to do run to Bombs.
Israel is indeed a technology giant!
Of course it is, in every ugly tools also!!
Keep reading Shameless guys
Apparently the Israeli Occupation Army cannot even defend the occupiers in Jerusalem, can’t even spot an AK-47 being carried into a building, a building one kilometer from the Knesset. What a gang of incompetent thugs. But, what the heck, their only experience has been shooting babies in Gaza. It’s time to start making that alyiah back to Florida.
http://deutsche.wordpress.com/2008/03/04/when-crying-eye/
“No, it’s not reasonable. Outrage should be directed at governments instead of countries.”
That depends. In a country that touts itself proudly as “the only democracy in the region”, in which the government is chosen by the people from among the people, and as in the case of Israel is clearly overwhelmingly supported by the people, it is quite, quite reasonable to direct outrage at the country for the consistently outrageous conduct of the government. This is particularly true when, as in the case of Israel, the outrageous conduct permeates the history of the country from the pre-state period to the present day.
“The path that shirin is calling reasonable leads to whole peoples being seen as not human.”
Not at all. It might logically lead to them being seen, quite accurately, as human beings who live in a country the majority of whose citizens support outrageous or even loathesome policies and practices.
“That’s how the neocons get away with talking about Iran or Syria being the “axis of evil”, encouraging a mental disconnect from the humans who make up those countries.”
Your analogy is wanting on several different levels.
“I’m referring to the opinion of bystanders, not about the Palestinians themselves, who are living under the seige.”
That is logically inconsistent. Either it is reasonable to be outraged at a country or it is not reasonable to be outraged at a country regardless of who one is.
“No, it’s not reasonable. Outrage should be directed at governments instead of countries.”
That depends. In a country that touts itself proudly as “the only democracy in the region”, in which the government is chosen by the people from among the people, and as in the case of Israel is clearly overwhelmingly supported by the people, it is quite, quite reasonable to direct outrage at the country for the consistently outrageous conduct of the government. This is particularly true when, as in the case of Israel, the outrageous conduct permeates the history of the country from the pre-state period to the present day.
“The path that shirin is calling reasonable leads to whole peoples being seen as not human.”
Not at all. It might logically lead to them being seen, quite accurately, as human beings who live in a country the majority of whose citizens support outrageous or even loathesome policies and practices.
“That’s how the neocons get away with talking about Iran or Syria being the “axis of evil”, encouraging a mental disconnect from the humans who make up those countries.”
Your analogy is wanting on several different levels.
“I’m referring to the opinion of bystanders, not about the Palestinians themselves, who are living under the seige.”
That is logically inconsistent. Either it is reasonable to be outraged at a country or it is not reasonable to be outraged at a country regardless of who one is.
All That is Given
Hannah Arendt on being Jewish
By Vivian Gornick
“I don’t equate the supporters of al-Qaeda with all of Islam.”
This analogy is so faulty I don’t know where to begin! It IS interesting, though, that you seem to be equating the Israeli government with Al Qa`eda.
“I don’t equate Shas and its creeps with all of Israel, or Jews, or Zionists either.”
We are talking here about the duly elected government of a democratic state – a government whose actions are overwhelmingly supported by the citizens of that state. In fact, in the cases in which the citizenry has NOT supported the government – e.g. Lebanon, 2006 – it has been because the government did not go far enough in its brutality, suggesting that if anything at least a significant percentage of Israeli citizens are even more bloodthirsty than their government. Not just that, we are talking about a series of duly elected governments throughout Israel’s history.
If a majority supports an unjust stance you respond by working hard to change their minds. Shirin, you sound like you’re following the other path instead, to declaring, “They’re all guilty! They all deserve to die!”.
I’m not logically inconsistent. If someone hurt or killed a loved one of mine, it would be reasonable for me to be so angry that I’d want to kill the guilty party. But it would be unjust of me to actually kill the criminal. The anger felt by the Palestinians feeling beseiged is reasonable, but responding beyond self defence to blood revenge would be unwise. And people who haven’t been directly affected themselves, it’s not reasonable at all to be so outraged. They didn’t lose anything.
BTW: I haven’t checked yet as to what role that seminary played in the settlement industry. I’ve heard that the seminary was pro-settlement, and so I’ll give the assailants some credit for picking a target relevant to the settlement injustice as opposed to some random target. OTOH, I’m still not sure if the seminarians could be considered combatents. Supposed Israel dropped bombs on a Hamas rally, killing a large number of people who were not active members of Hamas but who were ardent Hamas supporters. Would that also be a just target?
Inkan, I am very disappointed to see you so grossly mis characterizing my position. That is something I know to expect from some people here but not you! Most particularly, I absolutely have never suggested, or even given a scintilla of a hint that anyone should die. So, cut it out, please, and address what I have actually said, sans hyperbolic distortions.
When Doves Cry
Mischaracterize? I have to say that your most recent post, about the Israeli public, “the cases in which the citizenry has NOT supported the government – e.g. Lebanon, 2006 – it has been because the government did not go far enough in its brutality, suggesting that if anything at least a significant percentage of Israeli citizens are even more bloodthirsty than their government”, left me even more convinced that my characterization was correct. With every post you make Israelis even less like humans and more like a monolithic mass of villains as one dimensional as, say, Orks. Like I said, we should respond to thoughtless support of high-civilian casualty actions by hammering them with the argument against this injustice; I’m glad that Haaretz and Peace Now are there to help with that. It’s the same response we should have to homophobes and racists we’ve encountered in the United States.
Inkan, that yeshiva is a stronghold of radical religious Zionism and an ideological center of the settler movement. I find its ideology reprehensible. That however does not make its students into armed combatants. Take as an analogy Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, the spiritual father of Hamas. One reason his assassination was so much more controversial even than other killings was that he was not a member of Hamas’ military wing, and was instead an ideological and political figure. As such, he could claim to be a civilian protected from attack. Those who believe that his killing was a war crime – and I am one – should not find the attack on this yeshiva any different.
… and Shirin, have Rabin, Taba and Olmert’s election on a withdrawal platform gone so easily down the memory hole? The Israeli people have voted for hope when they are convinced that it is real, just as, like others, they succumb to the atrocities of fear when they are not. A succession of democratically elected British governments practiced torture and repression in northern Ireland, but a subsequent one elected by the same voters brokered the peace, n’est ce pas?
And for what it’s worth, I have not seen Shirin claim that anyone deserves to die. It is Kassandra who apparently gets orgasms over that kind of thing.
Salah,
You made a charge of genocide against a state, which includes its people. That charge is absurd. It’s like calling someone a murderer when the alleged victim is still walking around the room.
Goodbye now.
OK, Inkan, I was hoping this would not be necessary, but I am going to respond in detail to your allegations, and after that if you still want to play this useless game, I will bow out and let you have the last word.
“Mischaracterize?”
Yes, indeed, you have not only mischaracterized, you have consistantly presented a moving target, making it very difficult to have a coherent discussion with you.
“I’m not logically inconsistent.”
Indeed you are (and that is far from the only flaw in your logic!). I repeat that either it is reasonable to be outraged at a country or it is not reasonable to be outraged at a country. You cannot have it both ways.
“If someone hurt or killed a loved one of mine, it would be reasonable for me to be so angry that I’d want to kill the guilty party.”
Here you go, moving the target again. The argument is not about whether it is reasonable to get angry and want to kill the person who hurt or killed your loved one. The argument is about whether it is reasonable or not reasonable to be outraged at a country over the actions of its government. I submit that it is absolutely reasonable to be outraged at a country whose government was democratically chosen and whose actions are supported by the majority of the people of the country.
“But it would be unjust of me to actually kill the criminal.”
You see how incoherent this is the way you keep moving the target? The argument was about whether or not it is reasonable to be outraged at a country, not whether or not it is reasonable to kill people. Those are two entirely different discussions.
“The anger felt by the Palestinians feeling beseiged is reasonable, but responding beyond self defence to blood revenge would be unwise.”
Again, you move the target, and the discussion becomes even more incoherent.
“And people who haven’t been directly affected themselves, it’s not reasonable at all to be so outraged. They didn’t lose anything.”
I see. So, by your reasoning, it is not reasonable at all for you to be outraged when a suicide bomber detonates himself in a pizza restaurant during a child’s birthday party taking multiple children and their mothers and fathers and grandparents with him into death. After all YOU didn’t lose anything.
And more hyperbolic misrepresentations:
“I have to say that your most recent post, about the Israeli public, “the cases in which the citizenry has NOT supported the government – e.g. Lebanon, 2006 – it has been because the government did not go far enough in its brutality, suggesting that if anything at least a significant percentage of Israeli citizens are even more bloodthirsty than their government”, left me even more convinced that my characterization was correct.”
Is it a fact or not a fact that the citizenry of Israel did not support its government’s actions in Lebanon because it did not go far enough in its brutality? If that is a fact, then what is your problem with it? Is it that it is factual, or is it that I used it effectively to make a valid point?
“With every post you make Israelis even less like humans and more like a monolithic mass of villains as one dimensional as, say, Orks.”
You are, of course, free to place any interpretation you like on anything anyone says, whether it fits or not. Hyperbolic interpretations are, of course, an excellent form of defense when you have no factual or logical counter argument.
“Like I said, we should respond to thoughtless support of high-civilian casualty actions by hammering them with the argument against this injustice; I’m glad that Haaretz and Peace Now are there to help with that.”
Ah yes! And they have been ever so effective, haven’t they? (Irony intended)
“If a majority supports an unjust stance you respond by working hard to change their minds.”
Oh, what a lovely pipe dream that is! And what do you expect me to do, go to Israel and stand on some street corner and work to change people’s minds?
“Shirin, you sound like you’re following the other path instead, to declaring, “They’re all guilty! They all deserve to die!”
Right, except that I never said anything about guilt, and I never said anything about anyone dying, let alone deserving to die.
It is impossible to have a coherent discussion with someone who is constantly changing the terms of the argument.
Cut it out, Inkan. Stop pretending I have said things I have not, and stop moving the target around so we can have a real, coherent discussion about something.
“And for what it’s worth, I have not seen Shirin claim that anyone deserves to die.”
Thank you for that observation. Since I am categorically opposed death as a penalty even for those proven beyond any doubt to be the worst of the worst, it follows that I do not think anyone deserves to die.
“Shirin, have Rabin, Taba and Olmert’s election on a withdrawal platform gone so easily down the memory hole?”
How does that support an argument that it is unreasonable to be outraged at a country over the actions of its democratically elected government when those actions are supported by the majority of the people?
“The Israeli people have voted for hope when they are convinced that it is real, just as, like others, they succumb to the atrocities of fear when they are not. A succession of democratically elected British governments practiced torture and repression in northern Ireland, but a subsequent one elected by the same voters brokered the peace, n’est ce pas?”
See the question just above.
Inkan, I have one more question for you. If it is not reasonable to be outraged at a country over the consistently appalling actions of its democratically elected government when those actions are supported by the people, is it equally not reasonable to be very pleased with a country over the civilized and humanitarian actions of a democratically elected government whose actions are supported by the people?
“How does that support an argument that it is unreasonable to be outraged at a country over the actions of its democratically elected government when those actions are supported by the majority of the people?”
Your argument – or at least so it seemed to me – went well beyond that. You argued that Israel had shown a consistent and unbroken pattern of acts since even before there was a state. This would imply that Israeli actions are not attributable to a bad government, or to a scared electorate in a given year, but to some inherent flaw in its people. In response I think it is fair to point out that on numerous occasions, those same people have voted for hope, peace and compromise, even if the compromises they supported were not always to the Palestinians’ satisfaction. The Israelis are no less virtuous than the people of any other democracy under threat, as I think the past few years in the United States (or, as above, the Troubles) show very clearly.
If this was not your argument, then please disregard the above.
I should add that one of the dirty little secrets of democracy is that it can actually be worse at dealing with external threats than dictatorship. In democracies, people often vote their fears (especially when encouraged to do so by demagogues) and expect those fears to be appeased. A dictator can make peace even if peace is unpopular, and can do so easily. This is not impossible for a democratic leader of courage and vision, but it is much harder, especially in a fragmented political system that gives disproportionate power to fringe parties.
This is not to say that I prefer dictatorship to democracy! Short of platonic philosopher kings, the latter is clearly preferable. But I think it goes some way in explaining why democracies – not just Israel but many democracies – don’t necessarily have a lesser propensity for atrocities or foreign wars.
I also see that the blame game has begun with respect to the yeshiva shooting. Lieberman is blaming Arab incitement (does he ever blame anything else?) and the Yesha council is blaming the government. Kassandras, every one of them – although not, of course, in the classical sense.
Regardless of whether the 8 students were religious settlers or not, the loss of lives is regrettable.
The gunman was a 25 year old who was mentally ill and disturb.
Associating him with Hamas and Hizbullah or a new group translates to : taking advantage of the death
to insight further hatred, a spin is in the making by the same government that was responsible for the indiscriminate killings of 130 Palestinians, a third of them children, the youngest a two day old baby girl.
The coverage of the Israelis killed on our TV screens, will no doubt assure the Zionist-as if they need assurance- that their lives worth much much more than the rest. This is not healthy, neither for them nor for the rest.
It is time for those who promote injustices, to ask why are we treated differently on world stage?how much longer can we go without being checked, morally, as well on the basis of our accountability.
Before it is too late. And that needs brainstorming. The mind set of retaliation needs to be changed.
Having waded through all the comments:
One persecution does not justify another persecution, no matter who said it.
The actions of governments are intentionally and continually glued to the populations by writers who oppose them. Both sides in the comments above do this and it is obfuscatory and most unhelpful. I do not equate the actions of governments with the populations they govern. That there is a wide range of agreement and disagreement between peoples and their governments should be openly accepted.
Photos of the Warsaw ghetto look like Fallujah. Photos of the Warsaw ghetto look like Lebanon.
Photos of the Warsaw ghetto like like Gaza.
If the apologists for Israel writing above wish to be heard by me, they will have to admit some guilt in Israel’s oppression of an entire population over multiple generations. There is plenty to go around on all sides. Such repression creates guerrilla warfare. I distrust anyone who cannot see or acknowledge the warts of the side they espouse. The Israel government’s (and people to my mind) exceptionalist bent, along with that of the Bush administration and growing portions of the American population, are the stuff of self inflicted catastrophe.
I once believed Israel had the undeniable right to exist, but WHY I believed that was more due to what I was taught than reality. And there were many people being paid to tell me what to think. Later my perspective broadened to included the issue of the Palestinian people who Israel displaced, and it was very clear that the Palestinians have no less right to exist in peace than does Israel.
Loathsome is a nasty word that I find hard to apply to any living creature. But to me the actions of the Israeli government are appalling, disgusting, illegal, immoral, self-defeating, counter to international law, etc, check your thesaurus.
Three billion a year in US aid and all I got was this lousy refugee problem.
The book “Black Like Me” put white Americans into the shoes of southern blacks and influenced the American civil rights movement of the 1960’s. I invite any Israeli apologist to similarly assume the identity of an faceless unemployed Palestinian, take up residence in Gaza, and report back to us in one year. No armored vests allowed.
It isn’t just the dead babies, though that should be enough. It is all the dead, deformed, debilitated, angry, guilty, unemployed, destitute, or grief-sticken babies, children, mothers, fathers, grandparents, uncles, aunts, friends, lovers, teachers that oppression creates.
“Let my people go” applies to everyone. Unfortunately the Palestinians ARE home.
“I invite any Israeli apologist to similarly assume the identity of an faceless unemployed Palestinian, take up residence in Gaza, and report back to us in one year.”
Actually, once upon a time back in the late 1980’s an Israeli Jew named Yoram Binur did something very similar to that, and wrote a book about it (for which he was excoriated by many, praised by some). The name of the book is My Enemy, Myself. Amazon has it. No doubt now, as the situation for Palestinians has worsened by orders of magnitude, his experience would be orders of magnitude more horrific than it was then.
And the wonderful journalist Amira Hass has come pretty close to doing that by living for years among Palestinians for well over a decade, first in Gaza, now in the West Bank. Though as a Jew and an Israeli – and quite a visible one at that – she is still exempt from the terrible treatment Palestinians are subjected to 24/7/365 by the State of Israel, at least she is a direct witness to it on a daily basis, and writes and speaks about it eloquently.
“Loathsome is a nasty word that I find hard to apply to any living creature.”
For the record, I did not apply the word loathsome to any creature, living or otherwise. I did suggest that it could be applied to at least some of the actions of the State of Israel and members of its military, and I stand by that absolutely. I would count as loathsome, for example, telling a family to come out with their hands up, and then, as they emerge, shooting at a young woman holding a one month old baby, hitting her in the shoulder and killing the baby. I would count as loathsome, for example, dropping tons of bombs on an apartment building at 3 AM while families are sleeping inside. That is no less loathsome than walking into a shopping mall and detonating a bomb belt. In fact, on a number of levels it is more loathsome since it is done cleanly and coldly from a position of relatively far less risk to the criminals who do it.
Regardless of whether the 8 students were religious settlers or not, the loss of lives is regrettable.
And, half of them were children.
The gunman was a 25 year old who was mentally ill and disturb.
Associating him with Hamas and Hizbullah or a new group translates to : taking advantage of the death to insight further hatred….
And what of these people:
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3516031,00.html
Are these thousands simply “mentally ill and disturb[ed]”individuals?
Had this been a madrassa promoting extremist views and had such a madrassa been bombed in Pakistan, it would not even have made the news.
Take a look at the ziofascist madrassa located in Israel:
Irgun commander David Raziel was one of its first graduates. Gush Emunim, the god-gave-us-the-land gang, was formulated there and that madrassa is still the main stronghold of the Gushi-terrorists. Gush Emunim is the gang that occupies Palestinian homes, beats up Palestinian shepherds and even manages to stone little Palestinian girls on their way to school, some of its more heroic exploits. Not to mention outright acts of murder. The Gush Emunim movement is supported by the Israeli government and its squatters are protected by the IOF.
That madrassa is the birthplace of a form of militant ziofascism, approved by the Israeli government, shown by the fact that 40% of IOF officers have attended their sessions, and it being the main supplier of mullahs to the squatters.
In the war against terrorism, such an extremist ziofascist target was utterly justified. There are enough prescedents to be found in Afganistan and Pakistan.
JES,
The gunman is a 25 year old, not affiliated with any group, showed no interest in politics as his mother said while grieving.
JES, seeing Palestinian children thorn into pieces by the dozens is as disturbing as any other child. When the world cease to discriminate between different human based on their race, only then can we say it is a democracy, were social justice is applied equally.
As JamesL posted, ask yourself the question, what will my children or grand children do if they live in Gaza? will want them to comply or revolt ?
What did the Jewish people do in Warsaw when they were walled and ruled by a brutal party the Nazis that is equivalent to the zionist ruling party in your beloved country do ? They revolted, the Nazis did not like it, shoah was the answer. If you did not like it then you must not like it now.
Put yourself in their shoes and then defend the ones you choose.
The brutality of occupation is not something any sane person can accept.
Why will American and Canadian parents chose for their children to become a pariah, a persona non grata, a settler against all international laws.
The difference is the Palestinians under international laws have a right to defend themselves, while the settlers are zealous combatant equivalent to the Taliban, whom at once hurt atheists patriots, as well the religious ones.
If Jewish settlers(name?) is okay why not Taliban ?
Here are some of that ziofascistm terrorist madrassa’s officers in action. Pay attention to the recorded conversation among themselves.
http://thesaifhouse.wordpress.com/
Capt. R was compensated with 800 000 shekels plus legal fees, for the inconvenience of being taken to court over a triviality such as the life of a Palestinian. The court criticized the Military Police for investigating the case in the first place. Capt. R was then promoted to the rank of major and continues to serve in the IOF, where he continues to carry out the philosophy of Gush Enuminiuminum.
To those of you here who insist that there is a difference between the government and people of Israel, one question. If you do believe there is a difference, why aren’t you on some zionist blog condemning their beliefs and actions? Why are you here defending Israel?
I understand Kassaandra. It’s okay to indiscriminately bomb madrassas.
What did the Jewish people do in Warsaw when they were walled and ruled by a brutal party the Nazis that is equivalent to the zionist ruling party in your beloved country do ? They revolted, the Nazis did not like it, shoah was the answer. If you did not like it then you must not like it now.
Well, “world peace”, you seem to have confused the nexus here. By the time the Jews of the Warsaw Ghetto revolted, some two-thirds of the population had died of starvation or disease, and another quarter of the population had been deported to death camps in the east. In other words, the uprising was a response to the Shoah, and not the other way around, as you imply.
I have not made the distinction between the death of one child and another. It appears to be you who are doing so. I don’t particularly agree with or care for the settlers or for the settler movement, whom I rate as reactionary as Hamas – both in their religious fanaticism and maximalist ideologies. I do not, however, believe that this justifies the murder of their children.
Well Kassandra, the only problem with your story is that Capt. R. is not a member of Gush Emunim, nor is it likely that he was trained in a yeshiva. Capt. R. is an Arab Druze.
JES,
” In other words, the uprising was a response to the Shoah, and not the other way around, as you imply.”
To rephrase your statement with a question : are you implying that after a Holocaust will the Palestinians have a right to revolt ?
JES, doing that pilullistic jewish thing again. Do you know Capt. R personally? How do you know so much about the story? Why haven’t you told us about this before? Does Capt. R have a name or just an initial? How about all those other jewish soldiers involved? Do you want me to put up more stories of jewish soldiers intentionally targeting Palestinian children? There are many such stories, and if you know about Capt. R, you should know about the others also.
Let’s try another comparison.
Picture this: the Nazi high command runs a school for future officers charged with shooting every Judaic they can find, and teaching genocide to the prospective leaders of the nation. While the mostly unarmed Nazi youths were gathered in prayer to Odin over copies of Mein Kampf, suddenly a lone Judaic resistance fighter bursts into the school and opens fire with an automatic weapon.
If this had happened during WWII, a street in Germany would now be named in honor of the killer and he would be listed among the righteous at the Yad Vashem Holocaust Museum.
At the end of February 2008, Mata Vilanai, the Israeli deputy minister of “defense”, called for the extermination of the Palestinians of Gaza. The weekend after he made that homicidal declaration, 120 Gazans lay dead, victims of Vilnai’s edict. Some Gazans had been used as human shields, with Israeli soldiers resting machine guns on their shoulders. Others were Palestinian children who had been shot in the mouth and head in cold blood, by Israeli snipers who had been waiting for just such an opportunity. (cf. Steven Erlanger, NY Times, March 6, 2008).
The Mercab Harav yeshiva has produced the bulk of the Talmudic leadership of Israeli “religious Zionism”, which is the most racist and genocidal ideology in the Israeli state. Among its thousands of graduates are senior rabbis who have themselves their personally killed Arab civilians or called on the Israeli army to show them no mercy.
From http://thisiszionism.blogspot.com/2008/03/attack-on-yeshiva-in-jerusalem-on-march-html
JES, do you and your type of apologist ever thinks that your defense of the indifensable really do help in the growth of this thing you call “anti-semitism”? Has the thought ever crossed your mind that time itself may be circular, as is claimed by some thinkers, and the “holocaust” that took place during WWII was indeed a payback or “mana” for the actions of the jews in Palestine? Think about it.
JES, If you don’t agree with the “settlers” or the “settler” movement (I call them squatters),
a movement that the Israeli government encourages and finances, why are you here defending them and the government that finances and encourages them? Why aren’t you damning them for the Nazis and/or Stalinists that they are? Why aren’t you on some Rabbi Kook blog telling them how disgusting they are?
At the end of February 2008, Mata Vilanai, the Israeli deputy minister of “defense”, called for the extermination of the Palestinians of Gaza.
Matan Vilnai said no such thing. He said that Hamas was bringing a “catastrophe” upon the Palestinian people. Call it a “nakba”, if you will.
The Holocaust was wrong then, is wrong now.
Singling a group of people for collective punishment is an inexcusable act, period.
The audacity of liars ie: JES, is a despicable act of self-disrespect, period.
“Are these thousands simply ‘mentally ill and disturb[ed]’ individuals?”
And the Israeli “students” who were seen high-fiving, cheering-on, celebrating the twin towers catastrophe (and, willy nilly, the deaths of several thousand people on 911)?
Any truth to those apparently well verified reports? And if so, what was that all about?
Those high-fiving piano movers were spirited out of the country, fast.
WorldPeace, JES is indulging in a form of jewish reasoning termed “pilpulistic”. It was a method of disputation perfected by rabbinicial scholars regarding the interpretation of obscure Talmudic rules and principles that involves the development of often excssively subtle distinctions, or splitting hairs, which in the end is considered remarkably unproductive of worthwhile thinking.
Or as you said, dissemble and lie, all to protect your own argument.
Well, the smell around here is getting pretty bad.
I wonder if Helena is aware (and happy with) the maggots that her site has apparently attracted.
Why aren’t you on some Rabbi Kook blog telling them how disgusting they are?
T
I did and I do argued JES and others, some times JES regretted Israelis and settlers acts as I remember that Palestinians woman hugging here very old olive tree that was chainsawed by settlers who targeting Palestinians civilians. But may be he might be think ending be called a self-hating Jew
Although those settlers did and do harming Palestinians and breaking the law in DEMOCRATIC state but still their action can be consider like old Zionist gangs early 1900, but there is no massive killing of Palestinians instead IDF doing the job now.
Calls me a maggot.
Based on? Surely not the following:
1) the Latina lady who spotted them and thought their behaviour – in the circumstances – was a little bit strange and accordingly called the police…well, in the event her account – including her speaking to camera – is all over the internet.
2) the East Rutherford policeman, who together with his team, arrested them…well, his account – including his speaking to camera – is all over the internet
3) Three of the “students” – or piano movers or whatever they were – appeared on Israeli television in November 2001. One of them clearly states, “our purpose was to document the event”.
Again, that material – including the relevant clip of the the Israeli talk show on which the three of them appeared – is all over the internet.
Anyway, no problem at all with them documenting the event. Though from my “national” perspective their “taste” – high-fiving, celebrating – seems a little bit regrettable.
And great allies and all of that – why in the world didn’t it occur to them to let us know that a sizable “event” – something worth “documenting” – was apparently on the cards? Or were they just in that parking lot with their video cameras on the off chance that something might happen that it would be a good idea to “document”?
Just wondering.
And wondering about the leap of rancor that gets JES from the above to calling me a maggot.
There may be a perfectly good reason of course – in which case I’d very much like him to edify us, one and all. Good manners – let alone honesty – calls for that to be done.
Dear “An”,
My “rancor” was directed primarily at Kassandra – who has consistently cited false or misleading quotes as facts, as well as the rantings of a “revisionist” historian (who, incidentally, is also a “slavery deiner” in addition to being a Holocaust denier) and regularly responded to factual arguments with borderline racist slurs, not to mention personal attacks – and to “world peace”, who has suggested that the Holocaust may have resulted from something that the Jews did, rather than from an overtly racist program implemented by the Nazis.
As to your specific questions:
1) What was the “Latina lady” (as I recall her surname was Italian) doing when she noticed the five young men’s “strange behavior”? Well, she was standing on her balcony viewing the tragedy with binoculars. Perhaps she was also suspect? And what was this strange behavior? Well, from reading the transcript of her on-camera, 15-minutes-of-fame, it appears that she was rather unable to characterize it.
2)As for the member of East Rutherford’s Finest, one of the main pieces of suspect evidence was… well… the fact that there were box cutters in a moving van! This was enough to send five young men off to a federal detention facility for over a month in solitary confinement and subjection to aggressive interrogation. (By the way, several of those young men have joined a class-action suit – along with a number of quite innocent Muslims – against the Federal Government for false imprisonment.)
3)Yes, I saw the young man, and he did say that he was “documenting” the event with his video camera. How strange. He was doing exactly what hundreds, perhaps thousands of other people who had cameras and were in sight of the Manhattan skyline were doing at the same time: making a record of what was obvious at the time was a historical event. Do you want to suggest that anyone who was doing so was respoding to some “off chance”?
I agree that “high-fiving” – to the extent that this actually happened – was tasteless. However, I don’t think that there is any evidence that these young men were “celebrating” the event, and this is certainly not anywhere near my defintion of “celebration” as compared with the thousands of Palestinians who took to the streets last Thursday, handing out sweets, congratulating one another and firing their weapons in the air.
And great allies and all of that – why in the world didn’t it occur to them to let us know that a sizable “event” – something worth “documenting” – was apparently on the cards? Or were they just in that parking lot with their video cameras on the off chance that something might happen that it would be a good idea to “document”?
Now does this, your final statement on the matter, reveal the real reason for your original posting? You seem to imply here that they had foreknowledge of the events. Would you care to “edify us” with your evidence? And maybe you would care to enlighten us how you justify your accusation regarding the alleged activities of five young men as generalized to an entire “ally”?
JESS,
No question about it, you’d make a damn fine defense attorney! Hats off to ya.
But as long as we’re at it, howzabout a submission from the other side – e.g., this extract from Democracy Now:
“Now, the upshot of all this available evidence is this: the Israeli government likely was conducting some kind of spy operation on US soil in the run-up to the September 11th attacks. The purpose of the operation was to identify and track Muslim extremists, possibly including members of al-Qaeda.
“Now, the best evidence that we have for this is, in fact, the story of these five moving men. Now, three of these guys were seen on the morning of September 11, just after the first plane hit the North Tower, quote-unquote, “celebrating” on the New Jersey waterfront. Now, that’s—I put the quotes around that, because it comes from a FBI BOLO, or “be on lookout,” an alert that was put out regarding these men that day. The celebration apparently consisted of high-fiving, according to one FBI official, of holding up cigarette lighters, as if they’re at a rock concert. So, remember, the plane has just hit the tower, exploded in the tower, and these three men are behaving rather oddly.
“Later in the day, they were picked up. Two other men apparently joined them in a van. They were—the case was immediately handed over to FBI counterintelligence. The men were held for 71 days. They were repeatedly interrogated. They repeatedly failed lie detector tests. And then, after those 71 days was up, they were sent home, apparently under pressure or because of pressure brought by the Israeli government and by certain players in the US government. And the story sort of disappeared from there. I mean, 20/20 covered this—
AMY GOODMAN: Just one thing, Chris Ketcham, you say—you quote the officer who arrested them, named DeCarlo. You say, according to DeCarlo’s report, this officer was told without question by the driver of the moving van, Sivan Kurzberg, “We are Israeli. We are not your problem. Your problems are our problems. The Palestinians are the problem.”
CHRISTOPHER KETCHAM: Right. Well, what’s interesting there is that, you recall after the first plane hit, no one really thought that this was a terrorist attack. I mean, most people thought—and I was there, you know, on the Brooklyn waterfront watching this whole thing. Everyone thought it was an accident. These guys, when they were interrogated by FBI, told them that—essentially said that they immediately knew it was a terrorist attack. And they actually told the FBI that the reason they were celebrating was because the attacks would be beneficial to Israel, that it was, quote, “a good thing for Israel”—that’s according to the FBI spokesman who spoke on the record about this—and that it would bring sympathy for Israel’s political agenda in the Middle East.
JUAN GONZALEZ: And if I could interrupt, I’d like to bring in Marc Perelman to the conversation. Marc, it was your newspaper, The Forward, that first broke the story that the FBI thought that at least a couple of these people were Mossad agents. Could you talk about that and how you uncovered that information?
MARC PERELMAN: Yes, we ended up writing a story in March of 2002, after several months of reporting, because when this incident happened, obviously, a lot of people were intrigued, including journalists. And so, everybody was trying to find more information about this. And I’ve been talking to sources and trying to find out a little bit more, and after a while, I was able to confirm that, according to the FBI, two of those movers were identified as Mossad agents. And they were interrogated about it.”
——————–
And roll on that class action suit. That’s really good news. The episode is troubling (failed lie detector tests/their “reading it” as a terrorist attack way before everybody else, etc. etc.) and to have it properly aired out in a court of law would be marvelous.
And indeed it would be nice to know who those “certain players in the American government” were.
Cheney? Rumsfeld? Powell? Rice? Who?
An American
who those “certain players in the American government”
The “Dirty Dozen” are listed as the top 12 Neocons in America: Irving Kristol, Norman Podhoretz, Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, Scooter Libby, John Bolton, Eliot Abrams, Robert Kagan, Michael Ledeen, William Kristol, Frank Gaffney Jr.
Well “An”, you make a pretty lousy prosecuter. Look back at your little excerpt from Amy Goodman. There isn’t one piece of evidence to support your, or their, libelous statements.
Where’s that FBI “BOLO” (I love the lingo!)? And when was it issued? Perhaps after East Rutherford’s Finest had picked the five up in a fit of hysteria when they found those box cutters?
In fact the most damning piece of “evidence” in the whole excerpt isn’t even damning.
AMY GOODMAN: Just one thing, Chris Ketcham, you say—you quote the officer who arrested them, named DeCarlo. You say, according to DeCarlo’s report, this officer was told without question by the driver of the moving van, Sivan Kurzberg, “We are Israeli. We are not your problem. Your problems are our problems. The Palestinians are the problem.”
CHRISTOPHER KETCHAM: Right. Well, what’s interesting there is that, you recall after the first plane hit, no one really thought that this was a terrorist attack. I mean, most people thought—and I was there, you know, on the Brooklyn waterfront watching this whole thing. Everyone thought it was an accident.
Except for the fact – and pay attention here “An” – in the statement just before Goodman’s interruption, whomever she was talking to said that first there were three young men “celebrating” after the first plane hit and then “[l]ater in the day, they were picked up. Two other men apparently joined them in a van.”
How long was it, “An”, between the first and second plane? (Let me give you a hint: It was 16 minutes.) And how long did it take for people to understand that this was an attack? Coming from where these young men came from, I think it’s quite reasonable that they assumed a terrorist attack. When a car back fires here, that’s the first thing that goes through your mind. You might also recall that a few years after 9/11 a private plane hit a building in Midtown. What do you think the first thing was that people thought.
But then, why would anyone think that Arab Muslims would attack the World Trade Center? After all, they’d never done that before, had they?
What makes the “Troofer” argument really open to serious question is the idea that there’s this image of the Mossad as this all powerful, super spy agency that is capable – depending on which nut you’re talking to – of carrying out simultaneous surveillance of Arabs and Muslims all over the US, setting explosive charges in both of the twin towers, or electronically hijacking airplanes, and who do they hire as operatives? Five kids without US visas who are stupid enough to get arrested while “celebrating” and filming a terrorist attack. That just makes a lot of sense “An”. It’s a real compelling case.
JESS,
No question about it, that “coming from where they come from” point makes a lot of sense. Only problem is they weren’t in Israel. They were in the United States.
Be like me spending a fair old whack of time in London in the days when the IRA was leaving things that go bang all over the shop and then – my overseas “posting” over with – headin’ home. And best part of a year later (or however long it was the “young men” were in the States – the congruency for the sake of the argument, you know) hearing a car backfire. I don’t think I at any rate would “assume” it was an IRA bomb that had just gone off in Whereversville, Kansas. Or wherever. But that’s me, of course.
I suppose the other thing is the “problem” with the lie detector tests.
And the confirmed Mossadedness of a couple of the young guys.
But look, no problemo. We all understand why you don’t want to go there. Speaks for itself.
You’ll of course have the last word. Something tells me you always do. If it were me I think I’d spend more time with my grandson. But then that’s just me.
Well partner (since you want to get all folksie), why don’t we jest take a look at what we got here.
First off, you tell me that I “don’t want to go there,” and then you put me down for having to have the last word.
Well, I don’t mind “goin’ there”, and I don’t care if you have the last word. Why don’t you start out by providing some evidence here for us all to see on those lie detector tests? What were they asked, and on what did they fail? Did all five fail? Or was it only those alleged “Mossad agents”?
And while we’re on the subject of “Mossadedness of a couple of the young guys”, well why don’t y’all jest provide us with something to substantiate that charge besides what someone said on “Democracy Now”? Think you can do that? Somehow, I doubt it, so I’ll just take your silence as an admission.
As far as the whole issue of why they assumed this was a terrorist attack, I’d say that your hypothetical case makes good sense hypothetically. Fact is, they were arrested and made their statements apparently well after the scond plane hit the World Trade Center, and very likely after American Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon some 15 minutes later. I think pretty much everyone had figured out by that time that this was a terrorist attack. Even the arresting officer stated that they already had concluded that this was an attack when they spotted on the five.
And if it wasn’t clear by then that this was an attack, then why do we have so many people criticizing George Bush for continuing to read a story to those school children?
You’re making a serious allegation here, and I’d expect that you’d be able to back it up. But then, I’m not holding my breath.
BTW, I still don’t see the relevance to the thousands of Palestinians who were dancing in the streets following last week’s attack.
Just kinda sticks in my craw that they apparently thought that was something to celebrate. To my way of thinking that’s just as reprehensible as the celebrating Palestinians. I suppose the difference is the numbers in question. Five or three or whatever it was over against thousands. But I’m not in real estate so it wouldn’t occur to me draw that kind of distinction. Kill ratios are for the Eichmanns of this world. I threw my lot in a long time ago with the John Donnes – every man’s death diminishes me, that sort of thing. I feel about those Yeshiva (have I spelled the word correctly?) students the same way I feel about the thousands who died in the Twin Towers the same way I feel about the hundreds of Palestinians who’ve been killed in recent months. Let alone the several thousand GIs and million or thereabouts of Iraqis (seeing as we’re coming up to the 5th anniversary).
You agree with me about all that? Or not?
Yes, I agree with you. It’s only human to agree.
I don’t know that those young men were “celebrating”, but if they were then that was certainly wrong. But I still think it’s a stretch to accuse them of foreknowledge – and even more of a stretch to accuse Israel.
About your “Kill ratios are for the Eichmanns of this world”, I couldn’t agree more. You might want to remind some people around here when they talk about “low-lethality” rockets and try to minimize the impact of shelling on Israeli towns and cities.