Skip to main content

It was clear by January 5, 2009 that something terrible had happened to the Al-Samouni family, after a few survivors of the bombed building reached the hospital. In front of Al Jazeera cameras, a father gestured toward the bodies of several of the family's toddlers and said in Hebrew: "We just want to understand what these children did, that they killed them." - In Gaza, Cast Lead felt like a war on civilians

Twenty-nine members of the Al-Samouni family were murdered, now there is a single member of the Israeli military going on trial for this crime.

What was "unique" in Zeitun was that soldiers, who spoke in Hebrew to some family members, ordered them, according to every testimony given, to gather in a one-story house. About 100 members of the Al-Samouni family did so, certain they would be safe because the soldiers had seen that there were elderly people and children among them. The next day, the house was bombed (it is hard to know from testimony and the remains of explosives whether by tank or from the air ).

What is clear is that the members of the Al-Samouni family were not killed due to the error of a single soldier.

Story after story we heard of families being killed, people who have surrendered, women walking with white flags... killed.

Hundreds of children killed.

This was not the work of individual soldiers. After all, given the planned and calculated misery that was imposed on Gaza by the military siege by Olmert/Tzipi "no humanitarian crisis in Gaza" Livni, how can anyone seriously think that the Israeli military took care not to hurt civilians, when in front of the worlds eyes they deny Gazans water fit for human consumption?

B'tselem's Report (good reading)

Harsh restrictions on imports
Under agreements between Israel and Egypt, Gaza’s foreign trade must be conducted through Israel. The quantity of goods that Israel allows into the area is less than one‐quarter of what entered before the siege, and far below the amount required for the population’s needs. The range of goods that Israel allows is limited: some 150 products compared with 4,000 before the siege. Israel refuses to publish the list of products permitted into the Gaza Strip, or the rules used in determining the list.

Difficulties in rebuilding destroyed and damaged Buildings
Israel prohibits the importing of building materials, including iron and cement. The prohibition has remained in place even after Operation Cast Lead, during which 3,500 houses were completely destroyed, thousands more damaged, and extensive harm caused to infrastructures.
Israel’s prohibition is preventing the reconstruction of thousands of buildings destroyed during the operation. Frequent blackouts, sewage flowing into the sea The siege also severely impairs the supply of electricity in the Gaza Strip. Since September 2007, when Israel declared the Gaza Strip a "hostile entity" following the firing of Qassam rockets,
Israel has reduced the supply of industrial fuel, which is needed to operate the power station in Gaza. Following a petition filed by the NGOs Gisha and Adalah, the state agreed to supply some 63 percent of the fuel needed to meet the residents’ needs. In practice, however, it provides less than this quantity. As a result of Israel’s policy, 98 percent of Gaza residents suffer from planned blackouts lasting up to ten hours a day. The other two percent of the population do not receive any electricity at all, in part due to the shortage of spare parts, which makes it impossible to repair infrastructure, or due to the proximity of their homes to the border with Israel.

The frequent power cuts and shortage of spare parts prevent the proper operation of wells and desalination plants. This combined with excessive pumping over the years result in extremely poor water quality. At the end of 2009, 93 percent of the wells were found to be polluted with
high quantities of chloride and nitrates, far in excess of the World Health Organization’s recommended levels. Waste treatment has also been affected: every day, some 100,000 cubic meters of untreated, or partially untreated, wastewater flow into the sea. B'tselem

this was not the work of individual soldiers, this was the hard work of dedicated political leaders, Sharon/Olmert's crew and Bibi's, seeking to punish the whole people of Gaza for daring to defy Israel. Yet one soldier is on trial. And Obama gives a grand reception to a politician who was wildly supportive of this operation and the blockade.

The US must reconsider its support of the Israeli military, aid must at least be preconditioned, as with every other country on the planet, with a demand that basic human rights be observed and respected.

Originally posted to Tom J on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 06:15 AM PDT.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Screen crawl on IBA TV (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    lyvwyr101, zannie, Tom J

    stated that an Israeli soldier had been detained for his role in civilian deaths in Gaza but there was never an accompanying story during the broadcast

  •  Even one prosecution (11+ / 0-)

    is too much for this Israeli columnist, for whom it amounts to 'needless self-flagellation'.

    •  why investigate when no one was killed! (13+ / 0-)

      that's the bottom-line for folks like this...

      Huck Finn, talking of steamboat accident:

      "It warn't the grounding -- that didn't keep us back but a little. We blowed out a cylinder-head."

      "Good gracious! anybody hurt?"

      "No'm. Killed a nigger."

      "Well, it's lucky; because sometimes people do get hurt.

      Freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed. -MLK

      by Tom J on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 07:00:54 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  OH NOEZ!!!! AN ISRAELI (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      livosh1, JNEREBEL, greatdarkspot, Mets102

      Columnist on Ynet is an a-hole. Well I guess we just flush it all, eh? Is that what you are trying to show. I don't suppose you would care to count the myriad of Israeli columnists that support an investigation into abuses during Gaza.

      Hey, Thomas Sowell writes a column in the U.S. - does that mean that he is the dominant voice of America. You wouldn't be trying to viffify an entire nation based on ONE columnist would you? I mean otherwise your point here is what?

      "No Groin.... No Krav Maga" - The Simpsons

      by volleyboy1 on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 08:54:24 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  *backs away slowly* (8+ / 0-)

        "Well I guess we just flush it all, eh?"

        Er...no?

        "Is that what you are trying to show. [sic]"

        No.

        "I don't suppose you would care to count the myriad of Israeli columnists that [sic] support an investigation into abuses during Gaza."

        No.

        "Thomas Sowell writes a column in the U.S. - does that mean that he is the dominant voice of America. [sic]"

        No.

        "You wouldn't be trying to viffify [sic] an entire nation based on ONE columnist would you?"

        No.

        "I mean otherwise your point here is what?"

        That for some in the Israeli (and American) mainstream even one measly prosecution is too many. See my previous comment.

        •  that comment by volleyball (5+ / 0-)

          is a prime example of his core problem.

          You cited a columnists in Ynet, he tells you that you meant that this one columnist represented the whole of Israel. Nowhere, no place, No How, did you say such a thing.

          but that is the way he interprets your comment.

          he does this time after time after time, with many a user.

          Yes, Volley's views of Israel are different than say Dark Spots or A Hamilton's and certainly that writer in Ynet and so on. If we were all three questioned in a poll on this issue and just gave answers, you and i and volley would agree or at least come close to agreement in our responses to different questions...
          Like "should the US be more demanding of Israel", "Should the US demand a settlement freeze" and even, "Would it be good for the US to cut back on military aid to Israel if it refuses to stop settlement building" we'd all say yes (I want all aid  to stop at this point, but i think it very much a good step to limit aid)

          But it is his wild accusations, including his Hamas-baiting and yesterday his uprate of Dark Spot's "friend of fascist" comment, and his very off interpretation of your comment here, that makes him just as annoying as the Dark Spots and Hamiltons and Ambrose Burnsides.

          Freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed. -MLK

          by Tom J on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 10:21:36 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Ok and yeah there (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          livosh1, JNEREBEL

          are some in the media here, there and everywhere that have problems regarding issues. I mean what is the point of pointing it out? Is it just to point out that one columnist doesn't like this? Why not also point to the many Israeli columnists that do support an investigation?

          "No Groin.... No Krav Maga" - The Simpsons

          by volleyboy1 on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 10:58:59 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  care to comment on the diary, (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        unspeakable

        yesterday you did not comment on the diary, about political prisoners (what the hell do you think about Adeeb getting 2 years in prison, anyway... and its not like you can quote Peace Now on this issue, they will be unlikely to talk about such things)

        You did, however, uprate a remark by the extremist troll darkspot that suggested that i was a friend of fascists.

        classy move.

        don't have to go to Ynet to find a-holes.

        Freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed. -MLK

        by Tom J on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 10:07:52 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Obama diplomacy: (11+ / 0-)

    hurray!

    'Obama did not settle for the personal, friendly gestures or Michelle's meeting with Sara, but also added messages that are music to Israeli's ears: A call for direct talks with the Palestinians "before September," and a public promise that efforts for weapons control and decommissioning nuclear weapons "will not harm Israel's security."

    Netanyahu, in exchange, spoke of peace, but evaded publicly supporting a Palestinian state, warned that a withdrawal from the West Bank could culminate with rockets landing in central Israel, and urged Obama to strengthen the sanctions against Iran.

    For Netanyahu this was a huge victory. His claim that he can stand against U.S. pressure, making only tactical concessions, has proven true. He leveraged internal U.S. politics in his favor, without weakening the right-wing coalition in Jerusalem.

    Netanyahu got off easy, without having to make any announcements that would anger Benny Begin, Moshe Ya'alon and the Yesha council. Meanwhile, Obama is strengthening him from the left.'

    •  It's a win-win... (9+ / 0-)

      Bibi solidifies his support at home.

      Obama gets campaign donations for his re-election.

      the small, hardly worth-mentioning downside is that this will lead to more violence, endless war, unending misery for Palestinians.

      Freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed. -MLK

      by Tom J on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 06:48:32 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Bibi solidifies his support for this: (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Rusty Pipes, Tom J

        Since the end of 1995, the Interior Ministry * * * has pursued a policy of mass revocation of residency [of Arabs in Jerusalem].  The record was set in 2008, when 4,577 men and women were stripped of their right to reside in their own city * * * .

        * * *

        The current case, however, is the first time Israel has denied Jerusalem residency on political grounds.

        * * *

        Today, people affiliated with Hamas are being expelled from Jerusalem. Tomorrow, if the PA falls apart or dares to reject Israel's dictates, it will be known Fatah activists who will be stripped of their residency due to "disloyalty to the occupation."

        Following the flotilla raid, the expulsions from Sheikh Jarrah and the royal plans for Silwan, this is yet another match that Israel is tossing into the tinderbox. And it is one that even its friends will find it hard to ignore

        .

        http://www.haaretz.com/...

        Forced transfer has been part of the Zionist plan for far longer than Israel has existed.  This is ethnic cleansing carried out by bureaucrats rather than hired killers, but the odor is still that of a rotting society.

        Their real God is money-- Jesus just drives the armored car, and his hat is made in China. © 2009 All Rights Reserved

        by oblomov on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 10:10:22 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  well, at least we know that Abbas could have (0+ / 0-)

          life-time residency!

          This is ethnic cleansing carried out by bureaucrats rather than hired killers, but the odor is still that of a rotting society.

          Yes, just routine. almost banal.

          Freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed. -MLK

          by Tom J on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 10:23:49 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  That (0+ / 0-)

      That was good news indeed!  Not sure why Obama wanted to wade into I/P early in his first term anyway.  That's a second term project at best.

      "In his library at Simi Valley, dead Reagan waits dreaming"

      by greatdarkspot on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 08:01:11 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  They learned from the US (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    lyvwyr101, Tom J

    Do something once every blue moon. People will think you care about civilian deaths and gives you a free pass to do whatever 'till the next blue moon.

    •  I have a feeling that the Gaza war will (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      lyvwyr101, capelza, alamacTHC, soysauce

      soon be seen as the "moderate" war (and it was run by the "moderates", Olmert and Livni are, we are told, moderates.)

      The next war will be much worse than this last one.

      Freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed. -MLK

      by Tom J on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 06:51:00 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I doubt it. (3+ / 4-)
        Recommended by:
        lyvwyr101, zannie, Tom J
        Hidden by:
        greatdarkspot, zemblan, BFSkinner, Mets102

        The only way someone can make this worse, is by re-introducing the Gas Chambers and they missed the mark on that one. It's too late now - the US and Israel are weaker than they used to be, and the world is getting less and less afraid of speaking up.

        •  unbelievable link! (5+ / 0-)

          i was getting ready to hr you for making comparisons til i read it. inconceivable.

          "As Israel treats Jerusalem, so shall the world treat Israel. As Jerusalem goes, so goes Israel." - B. Burston/Ha'aretz

          by zannie on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 07:26:36 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  There is no reference to gas chambers in the link (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            mll, zemblan

            I can't think of a better example of "a dog whistle" post.

            •  Really? (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              weasel, zannie, capelza

              Some Jew talks about making Israel more Nazi Germany-like as something to aspire to - and all you can say is, "I don't see gas chambers mentioned in the link"?

              Sad.

              •  exaggerate what was actually said (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                mll

                The Judges comment was idiotic, but not a call for gas chambers.

                Discussing ways to improve the State of Israel's PR efforts in the world, and mentioning the way Germany used the international courts to help spread it's message.

                use these tactics in courts worldwide, just like the Nazis – with all distinctions – used the courts to spread their message

                I certainly disagree with the Judge, and anyone who uses any comparison to Nazi's, however nothing about gas chambers, or even your conclusion of making "Israel more Nazi Germany-like".

                Nothing at all.

                People talk about being fans of Mao, and we don't assume they mean EVERYTHING about Mao.

                Again, I think the Judges comment was idiotic, but not a call for gas chambers.

                •  huh (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  capelza, Tom J

                  however nothing about gas chambers, or even your conclusion of making "Israel more Nazi Germany-like".

                  Nothing at all.

                  first of all the poster asked The only way someone can make this worse... second wrt 'nothing' about making "Israel more Nazi Germany-like". what is this?

                  Ben-Itto said during the conference that Israel should adopt the tactics used by the Nazis after they distributed the Protocols of the Elders of Zion: Refusing to reach a compromise and continuing their battle in the courts although they had no proof of the protocols.

                  how is that not making israel more nazi like? and btw, it wasn't as you claim 'mentioning' the way Germany used the courts it was advocating. that is different, and it came from a judge. once you adopt the court to advance radical agenda sans evidence (no proof) what comes next besides convictions based solely on conjecture?

                  it's radical and should be condemned.

                  "As Israel treats Jerusalem, so shall the world treat Israel. As Jerusalem goes, so goes Israel." - B. Burston/Ha'aretz

                  by zannie on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 09:56:15 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

  •  Gaza war - radical islamists' fault, not Israel's (5+ / 2-)
    Recommended by:
    mll, greatdarkspot, mattwb, BuckM, BFSkinner
    Hidden by:
    borkitekt, brasilaaron

    It's highly unfortunate there had to be a Gaza war.  That's what happens when you allow radical extremists to launch rockets and bombs into Israel which are intended to terrorize the civilian population.

    It's equally terrible that those same radical extremists would launch those rockets and bombs from the midst of Gaza's civilians, thereby making those launch sites legitimate military targets.

    These criminal radicals deliberately started a war, then cruelly and deliberately endangered their own civilian population.  

    It's just terrible that you would defend these radical criminals.

  •  The treatment (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    capelza, heathlander, alamacTHC

    of Palestinians is positively appalling-always has been.

    What the hell is wrong with people-anyway?

    Just-what-the-hell-is-wrong?

    Any group of people that actually that has to come right out and say that 'they have a right to exist' should be setting off alarm bells everywhere for everybody.

    Frankly-to support Israel's policies-here-is to support rank abuse of an entire people.

    Just plain rank.

    "Republicans keep saying they want their country back. I want my country forward."-Bill Maher

    by lyvwyr101 on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 07:21:06 AM PDT

  •  I am sure that in your constant search for (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    greatdarkspot

    peace between the Iasraelis and Palestinians that the recent meeting btween President Obama and Prime Minister Netanyahu filled you with hope.

    Obama confirmed that hope with his statement that, "The bond between the United States and Israel is unbreakable". Unspoken but intrinsic during their meeting, is that aid to Israel from the US aid to Israel will be increased.

  •  You ignore the preceding Hamas rocket war (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mll, greatdarkspot

    Once again, you fail to apply any measure of logic or international law to the terrorists in Hamas, whose  every action constitutes war crimes and calls to genocide - a crime against humanity.

    Hamas' charter demands genocide and ethnic cleansing.

    Your diary tries to criminalize Israel's defensive operation in Gaza while whitewashing the casus belli -- the preceding and unprovoked Hamas rocket war -- effectively de-legitimized any active Israeli defense against its self-declared terror enemies.

    It is wonderful that you seem to care for the Palestinians in Gaza, but you fail to defend them against a revolutionary Islamist, anti-American, anti-Western, repressive, Iranian client, terrorist regime that oppresses women, drives out Christians, and abuses children’s lives by turning them into future suicide bombers.

    •  Yes, Israel is an innocent victim. (5+ / 0-)

      It is all Hamas' fault.

    •  offensive substitution (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      capelza

      defensive operation

      So is Israel occupying Gaza or not?  If it is not, as it so often claims, then it was an offensive military action. You can not be defensive unless you are within your own country.

      •  Your logic is twisted (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        mll, greatdarkspot

        and makes no sense.

        It is not occupying Gaza.   Every Jew was removed by force.  In return for this unilateral action they received increased border violence and rocket/Mortar, and missile fire directed at civilians.

        "You can not be defensive unless you are within your own country."

        ????????

        The exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognized in Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations.  

        "Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, "

        Hamas in Gaza continues to attack Israel. The rockets continue to be fired from Gaza, into Israel.

        •  a jail warden need not be (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          capelza, Lefty Coaster, Alec82

          in the jail cell. He just controls all access.

          Freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed. -MLK

          by Tom J on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 10:45:06 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  What are you talking about? (0+ / 0-)

            what nonsense...

            Why do you think that Hamas should control the ISRAEL SIDE of the border?

            Why should Israel commit suicide and allow Hamas (who is at war with Israel) free movement across the borders?

            If the Palestinians would cut out the jihad against Israel, they would immediately find the so called  Israeli "oppression" ended.

            If given any chance, Hamas would use open access to import weapons.  These weapons would AGAIN be placed in civilian areas, and used against Israel.

        •  False (7+ / 0-)

          Many of your points are erroneous, but this one:

          Hamas in Gaza continues to attack Israel. The rockets continue to be fired from Gaza, into Israel.

          ...is simply false, and cannot be redeemed by a difference in interpretation.  Do you have any support for this assertion?

          "All along the watchtower, princes kept the view..."

          by Alec82 on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 03:38:34 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

            •  Fired by Hamas? (5+ / 0-)

              "All along the watchtower, princes kept the view..."

              by Alec82 on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 04:36:49 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Yes.... In Gaza, a closed society (0+ / 0-)

                nothing like this would happen w/o Hamas permission, or approval.

                These are fired from civilian areas... in full view of people around them.

                From time to time, and not in these cases, Hamas ONLY arrests the terrorists and does not actually charge them, or try them but instead releases them back out with no charges and they go back to doing the same crime again and again....   Hamas is guilty.  As guilty as any official who looks the other way when a crime is being committed.  

                •  Except that.. (7+ / 0-)

                  ...they've killed salafists before (in August of last year), and they've intercepted them in the past when they were firing rockets into Israel.  

                  See here:

                  Palestinian sources said Hamas security forces have raided suspected Salafist strongholds in the central and southern Gaza Strip. They said Hamas targets included commanders of suspected Salafist militias.
                  The sources said tension between the Al Qaida-aligned militias and Hamas worsened in 2010 amid a spate of attacks on Hamas security officers and others believed close to the regime. They said Hamas was trying to stop the Salafist militias from firing missiles and rockets into Israel.

                  Or here:

                  Ehab al-Ghsain, spokesman of the Hamas interior ministry, said security services had finalised the plan to provide security protection to public places where residents would go to enjoy summer holidays including restaurants and beaches.

                  He said a number of suspects were detained over the attack on the UN summer camp, but gave no details of their affiliation.

                  Ghsain attributed a drop in bomb attacks in the territory to a security campaign to "arrest characters involved in causing chaos" and to an educational plan to rehabilitate members.

                  Anyway, if you are holding Hamas responsible for all violence committed in the Strip, you're just being irrational and there's not much that can be done for you.  Hamas has repressed salafi jihadists, sometimes violently; last summer they killed twenty-eight of them in an attack on a mosque.  

                  "All along the watchtower, princes kept the view..."

                  by Alec82 on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 04:54:39 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  You don't even believe this (0+ / 0-)

                    "amid a spate of attacks on Hamas security officers "

                    They were putting down resistance to their rule of Gaza.

                    Hamas was attacked, and they killed p[eople who were attacking them.

                    NOTE: that after the brutal murders of the Salafist militants, the rocket fire continued.

                    It went on before the Salafist freedom fighters arrived in Gaza, and continued after they were slaughtered in a massacre.  

          •  June 30, 2010 (0+ / 0-)

            June 30, 2010 - A Qassam rocked fired from the Gaza Strip hit the western Negev before dawn Wednesday, seriously damaging a packing plant and other structures in the Sdot Negev Regional Council, but causing no casualties.

            •  Again...by Hamas? (3+ / 0-)

              "All along the watchtower, princes kept the view..."

              by Alec82 on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 04:38:23 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Again, yes. (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                JNEREBEL

                The cease-fire required both parties to refrain from violent action against the other. Hamas had to cease its rocket assaults and prevent the firing of rockets by other groups such as Islamic Jihad... and Israel had to put a stop to its targeted assassinations and military incursions.

                The rockets and mortar fire continued.

                •  Vastly reduced rocket fire and not from Hamas (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Rusty Pipes, Alec82

                  It was Israel that couldn't be trusted to abide by a cease fire, not Hamas.

                  "These old Wall Street boys are putting up an awful fight to keep the government from putting a cop on their corner." - Will Rogers

                  by Lefty Coaster on Thu Jul 08, 2010 at 01:49:38 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  You don't know if it is Hamas or not. (0+ / 0-)

                    BUT Hamas is the ruling entity in Gaza, and does seem to be able to arrest and murder people who defy them.

                    Laws the suppress women, gays, and men who might cut womens hair are enforced in full.

                    As there has never been a case of anyone who fired rockets arrested and convicted, I can make a pretty good case that Hamas is directly responsible for the rocket fire.

                    AND reduced rocket fire is not what the cease fire asked for.

                    You use "vastly reduced" in the same sentence as "cease", which tells me you either don't understand what "cease" means, or you have a double standard with regards to Jews and Arabs.

                  •  asdf (0+ / 0-)

                    Senior Hamas official Mahmoud a-Zahar called for West Bank residents to fire rockets into Israel, Israel Radio reported Sunday.

                    "There is no escaping from these rockets in the West Bank," Zahar said to the east Jerusalem newspaper al-Quds. "Why should they only be in the Gaza Strip?"

                  •  asdf (0+ / 0-)

                    Mahmoud Zahar's remarks were made during an interview with an Iranian TV station.

                    He denied reports according to which Hamas has been arresting Palestinian militiamen who fire rockets at Israel. “Our prisoners are open to all and we don’t have even one person who fired rockets at Israel,” he said. “Hamas in the Gaza Strip protects the resistance.”

                    I am sure you won't accept the translation.  And you can't confirm this with a transcript you would believe.

                    All I can say is that I can't for the life of me understand why you would give these guys the benefit of the doubt.

  •  FYI (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    volleyboy1

    Twenty-nine members of the Al-Samouni family were murdered, now there is a single member of the Israeli military going on trial for this crime.

    That's inaccurate. The soldier who has been indicted is charged in the "white flag" incident, not the Al-Samouni tragedy.

    There's a separate criminal investigation into the Al-Samouni deaths as well:

    Mendelblit also ordered disciplinary proceedings against a captain for the failure in professional discretion in the approval of an attack on a terrorist operative, as well as opened a criminal investigation into the deaths of 29 members of the Al-Samoni family in the opening days of Israel's ground offensive.

    •  So (7+ / 0-)

      you uprate a comment that claims, ludicrously, that Hamas's "every action" constitutes "war crimes" [sic], but for the brutal massacre of dozens of Palestinian civilians by Israel you use the word... "tragedy".  

      •  asdf (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        volleyboy1

        It was clearly a terrible tragedy. Whether it was also a "brutal massacre" or just a tragic mistake in the chaos of war remains to be determined.

        I agreed with the gist of the comment I uprated, not every single point.

        •  asdf (7+ / 0-)

          "remains to be determined"

          Not really - it has been exhaustively investigated by multiple internationally respected, independent organisations. The only way the existing conclusions could be improved upon would be through an international criminal investigation, for instance by the ICJ. Since the won't happen, because we live in world governed by force rather than by law, reasonable people will settle with what has already been established.

          "I agreed with the gist of the comment I uprated, not every single point."

          Except that that point was representative of the "gist" of the comment.

          •  asdf (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            volleyboy1

            To determine whether it was a deliberate massacre or a mistake, you need to know what the soldiers who shelled the building knew about who was inside, whether there was miscommunication, etc. The organizations that have issued statements on the subject did not have access to such information, so they have no basis to decide whether the attack was accidental or murder. It may have been a war crime. But we don't know that yet. So I'm not going to use terms like murder and massacre until I have evidence to support them.

            (Incidentally, I think you meant the ICC not the ICJ. Under relevant international law, neither has jurisdiction.)

            •  asdf (8+ / 0-)

              "you need to know what the soldiers who shelled the building knew about who was inside, whether there was miscommunication, etc"

              The IDF ordered those people there in the first place. Israeli soldiers then repeatedly shelled the building it had ordered those people into. They then set up base a few meters away from the wreckage, where children lay dying next to the bodies of the dead parents, and shot at relief workers who tried to access to the injured and wounded. After some three days they finally permitted a team of relief workers access to the site - but they forced them to park their vehicles 1-2km away, meaning the dead and wounded had to evacuated on a donkey cart.

              Like I say, the evidence is clear that war crimes were committed. We might not yet have the standard of evidence required to convict this or that individual Israeli soldier, since Israel won't permit an independent trial, but by those standards we can't say Saddam committed crimes either.

              "Incidentally, I think you meant the ICC not the ICJ. Under relevant international law, neither has jurisdiction."

              No, I meant the ICJ. Why do you say it has no jurisdiction? It had jurisdiction to adjudicate on the legality of the annexation wall, so why not of this massacre? Goldstone himself recommended that the matter be referred to the ICJ, a recommendation that should be pursued.

              •  asdf (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                volleyboy1

                The evidence does not determine whether war crimes were committed, though it certainly established grounds for suspicion requiring investigation. The shelling took place well after the family was ordered into the building. It's not clear that whether the unit that ordered the family inside and the unit that shelled the building were the same. Thus, it's possible that unit A ordered the family inside, later left the area, and then unit B entered the area,  was not informed in the chaos of the war that civilians are inside, and, believing itself under threat, shelled the building unaware of the family's presence. Terrorist groups in Gaza have used ambulances to disguise their operations, and Israeli forces may have had (mistaken) intelligence that this was happening in the area, in which case they may have believed that they were firing on militants, not relief workers. I'm not saying this is what happened. But it could be. And without knowing what information and intelligence (possibly mistaken) the IDF had, and which units were involved, we can't determine whether war crimes were committed or not. They may well have been. I'm not saying it wasn't a war crime. It certainly has the hallmarks of one, and requires investigation. But we don't have enough information to say for sure.

                As for why the ICJ wouldn't have jurisdiction, it's kind of like the difference between civil and criminal courts. The ICJ is more like the former, and deals with disputes involving states, not individuals. The ICC is a criminal court, and tries individuals, not states. (Bosnia did sue Serbia unsuccessfully before the ICJ for civil damages for genocide. The ICJ claimed jurisdiction on the basis of the genocide convention in that case.)

                A massacre is a criminal violation of international humanitarian law (IHL), and responsibility for violations of IHL (war crimes, crimes against humanity, genocide) rests with individuals, not states. The ICJ does not deal with individuals. It only addresses disputes involving states. So it would not have jurisdiction. Also, ICJ decisions are only binding on states that specifically accept it's jurisdiction.

                The ICC tries individuals (not states) for war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide. But it only has jurisdiction if the accused is a national of a state party (Israel is not a state party), or the crime happened on the territory of a state party (Gaza is not a state party), or the case is referred by the Security Council (which isn't going to happen). Also, ICC jurisdiction is complementary to states: it can only investigate if states with jurisdiction fail to do so. Israel is investigating the incident. So the ICC cannot.

                Also, Goldstone recommended (para. 1766 on pages 547-8 of this (large) PDF version of the report) referral of allegations against Israel and Hamas to the ICC, not the ICJ, and only if Israel and Hamas were not investigating allegations against their personnel within six months. Israel did investigate all of the allegations in the report (and was investigating within six months of the report's release), has taken disciplinary or legal action against soldiers in at least four cases, and is conducting an ongoing criminal investigation of the Al-Samouni killings.

          •  Even the Israeli govt admits that (0+ / 0-)

            something went wrong there. they are prosecuting one man.

            Freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed. -MLK

            by Tom J on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 10:33:02 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

  •  Israel pays a price for its crimes... No Meg Ryan (5+ / 0-)

    or even Dustin Hoffman...
    and while this may seem insignificant, it is the total cumulative effect that will make a difference...

    Here's the story from J Post... and note the hilarious misspelling of Hollywood as "holywood"...

    Holywood stars snub film festival

    Freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed. -MLK

    by Tom J on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 12:14:41 PM PDT

    •  I bet you Mel Gibson (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      JNEREBEL

      probably isn't going either.

      Oh and don't think this:

      and while this may seem insignificant, it is the total cumulative effect that will make a difference...

      was missed... kind of like the goal of a certain persons diaries wouldn't you say?

      "No Groin.... No Krav Maga" - The Simpsons

      by volleyboy1 on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 12:28:34 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  yes, that is the goal of my diaries... (6+ / 0-)

        thanks for noticing.

        Freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed. -MLK

        by Tom J on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 12:34:06 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I think many have noticed... I am surprised (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          JNEREBEL, Tom J

          you admit it. But at least that is honest. Thanks.

          "No Groin.... No Krav Maga" - The Simpsons

          by volleyboy1 on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 12:40:30 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  thanks! my hope is that (7+ / 0-)

            the diaries are making a difference. why else would i write them?

            here again... it is not just my diaries, it is not just that boycott action or that protest event... it is the cumulative effect of my diaries and those of others, many protest actions, many boycott actions that will make a difference to challenge US policy of supporting Israel's refusal to recognize Palestinian rights, to stop supporting oppression in the Middle East.  

            Freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed. -MLK

            by Tom J on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 12:56:04 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  just out of curiousity (4+ / 0-)

            what exactly do you think i am "admitting to"?

            and why did you bring up Mel Gibson? Do you think that Dustin Hoffman is like Mel Gibson? Or Meg has much in common with Mel?

            Freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed. -MLK

            by Tom J on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 01:14:45 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Well Tom I have never seen you (0+ / 0-)

              admit that you write diaries day after day pointing out the wrongs of Israel to discredit the country and sway people to seeing a solution as one (the One State Solution proposed by Palestinian Civil Society) that will solve the issues you bring up. Basically a cumulative effect of day after day news to show Israel as it currently exists in a negative light. It is a standard political tactic so I understand why you use it.

              What I am thanking you for is has having the courage to admit it... People here day after day pretend they really care about certain things when all they are doing is trying to make a political point. See my comment to Heathlander above.

              You however, just took a big step in my eyes at least by "admitting" to what you were doing. I may disagree with you but, I can respect honesty in a political case.

              Just so you know, I respect those who are clear about what they want and who they support. Now knowing what you are doing (and again I appreciate that) I think our dialogue can be less contentious. I wish others would simply come out and say what they mean directly. At the same time - you should understand what I say to you I mean. I will not and cannot support a resolution that you want to this issue. We may disagree, we may fight, but, at least it's honest.

              "No Groin.... No Krav Maga" - The Simpsons

              by volleyboy1 on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 01:34:01 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Everyone wants pretty much.. (7+ / 0-)

                ...the same thing: a "just" resolution of the Conflict.  Not being ethnic nationalists, we're not particularly attached to the two state solution/mirage.  

                People here day after day pretend they really care about certain things when all they are doing is trying to make a political point.

                Well sure, this is a political blog, and the people who participate on it are interested in achieving certain policy aims.  The Democratic Party is the non-crazy domestic political party, and its base is the political left.  The political left, by and large, opposes Occupation and settler colonialism.  

                Now knowing what you are doing (and again I appreciate that) I think our dialogue can be less contentious. I wish others would simply come out and say what they mean directly.

                You've been aware of Tom's objectives for over a year.  He's opposed to US support of Israel's Occupation.  I thought you were, too?

                Anyway, highlighting Israel's negatives to end military support for its occupation is hardly nefarious; it is a legitimate and praiseworthy progressive goal.  Israel can do what it wants on its own dollar, without US support.

                   

                "All along the watchtower, princes kept the view..."

                by Alec82 on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 01:51:11 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  You just have to do this - eh? (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  JNEREBEL

                  Everyone wants pretty much the same thing: a "just" resolution of the Conflict. Not being ethnic nationalists, we're not particularly attached to the two state solution/mirage.  

                  Gotta toss the term "mirage" in right? Okay, then you won't mind if from now on I mention the One State "Fantasy" solution. Right?

                  The Democratic Party is the non-crazy domestic political party, and its base is the political left.  The political left, by and large, opposes Occupation and settler colonialism.  

                  True, we are the non-crazy party. I would not call it's base particularly "left" though. I would call it rationally center-left. Personally I am fairly "left" but by my definition of how I see leftist ideology. And while Democrats oppose "settler colonialism and occupation" as you mention, Democrats by and large support Israel and moreso the Two State solution.

                  You've been aware of Tom's objectives for over a year.  He's opposed to US support of Israel's Occupation.  I thought you were, too?

                  Oh Please..... Tom is opposed to much more than Israel's occupation - which is his right. No big deal there. Again you really need to toss in: "I thought you were too?" Really? But.... sigh... for the record the answer is Yes I am opposed to the Occupation by Israel but I am not opposed to Israel and it's existence.

                  "No Groin.... No Krav Maga" - The Simpsons

                  by volleyboy1 on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 02:19:23 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Heh. (6+ / 0-)

                    Okay, then you won't mind if from now on I mention the One State "Fantasy" solution. Right?

                    You all already refer to it as that anyway.

                    And the two-state solution advocated by Israel is a mirage. Only people who believe Palestinians are entitled to fewer rights than Israelis support the consistent Israeli governmental vision of a Palestinian "state."

                    Sufficiently advanced cluelessness is indistinguishable from malice. -- Clark's Law

                    by unspeakable on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 03:12:53 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  LOL well maintain (3+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      JNEREBEL, Captain C, Mets102

                      your One State Fantasy (now that I have clearance to say that) - how is that working out for you so far? Guess what... It. Wont. Happen. Click your heel three times, toss money down a wishing well, do what you think will work but, IT. WON'T. HAPPEN.

                      BTW, for the record and again thank you for allowing me to point out: I support a fully viable Two State Solution with Jerusalem as capital for both sides (East for Palestine, West for Israel), negotiated water rights that are fair, borders that are mutually agreed upon with fair and just land swaps and compensation for those refugees from the 1948 War.

                      "No Groin.... No Krav Maga" - The Simpsons

                      by volleyboy1 on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 03:48:19 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  One of these things is not like the other. (3+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        mattwb, volleyboy1, Mets102

                        On the one hand we have a solution, accepted by the vast majority as the reasonable endgame with two neighboring states side-by-side living in peace and prosperity.

                        On the other hand we have a fantasy for some, a nightmare for others, and a dream for all. With no basis in reality nor acceptance by a majority of any people living in the area.

                        Which of these should be used as the foundation for long term peace and security?

                        Let me think....hmmmm...........

                        "Stay close to the candles....the staircase can be treacherous" (-8.38,-8.51)

                        by JNEREBEL on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 03:58:12 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  Wait I know the answer...Pick me, Pick me (2+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          JNEREBEL, Mets102

                          "No Groin.... No Krav Maga" - The Simpsons

                          by volleyboy1 on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 04:01:43 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                        •  Point to a single instance (5+ / 0-)

                          where I've stated I support for a one-state solution, or an instance where I stated that I want a solution imposed on both populations regardless of what they want.

                          Sufficiently advanced cluelessness is indistinguishable from malice. -- Clark's Law

                          by unspeakable on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 04:03:48 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  Sure. No problem. (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            volleyboy1

                            Just as soon as you point out where I said you support a one-state solution.

                            "Stay close to the candles....the staircase can be treacherous" (-8.38,-8.51)

                            by JNEREBEL on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 04:08:34 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  You uprated vb's comment saying I did, (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Aunt Martha

                            and then you went on to add to his points.

                            Since it's a complete lie, you can either back it up or retract your support.

                            Sufficiently advanced cluelessness is indistinguishable from malice. -- Clark's Law

                            by unspeakable on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 04:11:08 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Well if you mean this uprate (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            volleyboy1

                            here

                            I did it primarily because I agree here

                            I support a fully viable Two State Solution with Jerusalem as capital for both sides (East for Palestine, West for Israel), negotiated water rights that are fair, borders that are mutually agreed upon with fair and just land swaps and compensation for those refugees from the 1948 War.

                            As you have stated yourself, one may uprate for a portion of the comment....

                            Sorry no retraction will be forthcoming in this instance.

                            "Stay close to the candles....the staircase can be treacherous" (-8.38,-8.51)

                            by JNEREBEL on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 04:31:16 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Thank you for acknowledging that (3+ / 0-)

                            you disagree with vb about my beliefs. That's all I ask.

                            Sufficiently advanced cluelessness is indistinguishable from malice. -- Clark's Law

                            by unspeakable on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 04:37:14 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Oh and really.... (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            JNEREBEL, Mets102

                            Here you go sir:

                            or an instance where I stated that I want a solution imposed on both populations regardless of what they want.

                            Do the majority of Israelis want or support Palestinian Right of Return to Pre-1967 Israel? Because here you say Palestinians have the:

                            inalienable right of return

                            They do eh?

                            And you think the majority of Israelis support giving back ANY part of Jerusalem? really? They might only do that if it was part of a comprehensive PEACE deal (something you seem to belittle as compared to your inalienable rights).

                            You want that imposed upon Israel as part of a solution.

                            Ummm so you were saying?

                            "No Groin.... No Krav Maga" - The Simpsons

                            by volleyboy1 on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 04:17:38 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  The right of return is inalienable. (5+ / 0-)

                            Only Palestinians have the right to concede it. Israel has no right to prevent it.

                            I really have no idea what Israelis believe about Jerusalem. If their leaders agree to something approaching a just division of Jerusalem, then given the fact that they don't live in a direct democracy, then the only people doing the imposing are the Israeli leaders.

                            If Israeli leaders want to push something on their population, that's their issue, not mine. What I'm talking about, which would be obvious to anyone who isn't interested in lying about my views, is that I don't believe any outside party should be imposing anything on either side.

                            Sufficiently advanced cluelessness is indistinguishable from malice. -- Clark's Law

                            by unspeakable on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 04:23:14 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Ok... so let me get this straight (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            JNEREBEL, Mets102

                            Israel has no right to prevent Palestinians from moving back to Pre-1967 Israel but yet you are not telling them what they can or can't do. Ok.

                            Now as far as Palestinians concedeing that... I realize how difficult that would be but there is no way to peace and Two States with it. Israel cannot recognize it as policy. They can (and should) recognize the plight of refugees and help them economically in their new State. That I absolutely support.

                            As for Jerusalem.... that has to be negotiated by both. My beliefs wouldn't be accepted by most Israelis but I think they are the only way to acheive peace. So in my mind the Israelis can either have peace and stop having to have so many die or go through hell or they can keep a few streets where they have no populace or influence in a City. Which is the better choice?

                            You say you don't advocate for someone outside pushing something but you support BDS. What is that but Outside pressure?

                            "No Groin.... No Krav Maga" - The Simpsons

                            by volleyboy1 on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 04:39:55 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I never stated that I oppose pressure (3+ / 0-)

                            being placed on any side. I think there's plenty of room to pressure both sides.

                            For example, Fateh and Hamas need to be pressured on accepting reconciliation. Israelis need to be pressured on accepting that they can't continue their barbaric occupation indefinitely.

                            That's very different from imposing a solution on them against their will. It's really quite simple.

                            Sufficiently advanced cluelessness is indistinguishable from malice. -- Clark's Law

                            by unspeakable on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 04:46:33 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  You just proved my point (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Tom J, unspeakable

                            you don't think Palestinians have the right to live anywhere they want, including their own homes and lands.

                            Buffy: "Your logic does not resemble our earth logic" Xander: "Mine is much more advanced". BtVS, The Wish.

                            by Fire bad tree pretty on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 11:05:46 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                        •  Not really, though (4+ / 0-)

                          Although there is an international consensus in favor of a two state solution, Israeli actions have so far been inconsistent with its realization.  "Facts on the ground" have consequences; they are read as revealed preferences.  So it isn't at all clear that your proposed solution is "accepted by the vast majority," at least not the Israeli majority.  

                          Currently, there is a one state reality: Israeli rule over Palestinians.  The single state solution is the legitimization of this scenario by merging, in one way or another, the political deliberation process used by both Palestinians and Israelis.  The two state solution, further partition, is the basis of a highly theoretical two state solution that Israel does not appear to have any interest in.  Since ethnocratic rule over non-Jews in a racist state is not in the cards for any state that wishes to remain part of the international community, Israel has some tough choices to make.  And the choices are almost all Israel's.  

                          "All along the watchtower, princes kept the view..."

                          by Alec82 on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 04:31:54 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  Really, not really. (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            volleyboy1, Mets102

                            Stop the dogma:

                            Israeli actions have so far been inconsistent with its realization.

                            Too blame Israel alone for the lack of a Palestinian state is not an honest assessment of history.

                            With this much I will agree, there is an open question as to whether Bibi is an honest broker for a two-state solution.  I have my opinion but would like a brighter light shined here and as such why I have hoped for a reunified PA willing to negotiate a final peace treaty with Israel.  An united PA ready to negotiate coupled with strong US diplomacy would forever cast away any cloak Bibi has wrapped himself in for the public.

                            If this were to pass he would then either have to put up or shut up. If the former great and if the latter then his coalition would crumble. This would allow new elections with resultant of a government prepared to seek peace and a two-state solution.

                            "Stay close to the candles....the staircase can be treacherous" (-8.38,-8.51)

                            by JNEREBEL on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 04:44:32 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  LOL (4+ / 0-)

                            Stating that "Israeli actions have so far been inconsistent with [the] realization [of a two-state solution]" apparently means that "Israel alone [is to blame] for the lack of a Palestinian state."

                            How does that compute?

                            Sufficiently advanced cluelessness is indistinguishable from malice. -- Clark's Law

                            by unspeakable on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 04:51:46 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                      •  Lie, lie, lie. (3+ / 0-)

                        No matter how many times I say I support two states, you'll continue to lie about my beliefs.

                        All you can do is lie about me.

                        Sufficiently advanced cluelessness is indistinguishable from malice. -- Clark's Law

                        by unspeakable on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 04:01:16 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  I used to think you supported two states (1+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          Mets102

                          You said that and I believed that, But.. let me show you your own quotes.

                          And the two-state solution advocated by Israel is a mirage.

                          Now there are many two-state solutions that have been advocated by Israel. Progressive Zionists (who you like to ridicule) believe in the Two-State Solution that I advocate (and one negotiated at Taba) is that a "mirage" if so... and you say:

                          He compares the gravity of giving up the inalienable right of return with making peace with neighboring countries.

                          Well then, if you feel the Palestinian R.O.R. is "inalienable" and they return to Pre-1967 Israel, AND that country remains a Democracy - exactly what do you think the demographics will look like? Seriously? You would have Palestine.... and ummmmm..... Palestine.

                          Please tell me how that supports "two-States". Go on. Please enlighten me as to how that works.

                          Nice deflection though from your outright lie about me "belittling" Palestinian suffering.

                          "No Groin.... No Krav Maga" - The Simpsons

                          by volleyboy1 on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 04:12:12 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  I've explained it to you so many times, (4+ / 0-)

                            and you've uprated my explanations. Nevertheless, you continue to accuse me of supporting one state. You do not get to spread lies about me and then ask me to confirm them for you.

                            As for Israel's version of the two-state solution, I said this, "Only people who believe Palestinians are entitled to fewer rights than Israelis support the consistent Israeli governmental vision of a Palestinian 'state.'"

                            There has never been a progressive Zionist government, much less one that has proposed anything to the Palestinians that includes a independent, sovereign, and viable state.

                            Unable to deal honestly with my points, all you can do is insult like five-year-old and spread lies about me.

                            Sufficiently advanced cluelessness is indistinguishable from malice. -- Clark's Law

                            by unspeakable on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 04:18:32 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  OOOOOHHH I am so shattered (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            JNEREBEL, Mets102

                            Still deflecting... Ok I suppose this is a mature comment:

                            Unable to deal honestly with my points, all you can do is insult like five-year-old and spread lies about me.

                            Not insulting in the least... no siree bob... and considering you have been doing nothing but lying about me lately (see your post about me belittling Palestinian suffering) - you should not be yakking about lying.  

                            And way NOT to address my comment. As I said I used to believe you. I uprated what I thought were reasonable points. Lately, it appears to me you seem to have abandoned those points.

                            Barak's government proposed Taba, and the Clinton borders. Now maybe that wasn't good enough for you but not unreasonable. Despite framing btw, Clinton was contiguous not the map of Bantustans that Arafat publicized.

                            And BTW since you "belittle" Israel's wars of survival or constant struggle against terror I am not surprised to see you creating fantasies here.

                            So tell me again how your positioning is in any way just concerning the existence of Israel?

                            "No Groin.... No Krav Maga" - The Simpsons

                            by volleyboy1 on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 04:30:45 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Please. (4+ / 0-)

                            Barak is not progressive anything by any stretch of the imagination, and he pulled out of Taba in the middle of negotiations.

                            I never said that what was being proposed at Taba was unreasonable. In fact, I believe that the talks at Taba had great potential.

                            You can believe whatever you want about me, but if you lie, I'll have no problem calling you out on them.

                            I have not lied about you. I have stated that I find your views about crimes against the Palestinians offensive.

                            Sufficiently advanced cluelessness is indistinguishable from malice. -- Clark's Law

                            by unspeakable on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 04:35:28 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I have not lied about you (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Mets102

                            but I find your "interpretations' about my views offensive.

                            As for Taba... I believe differently than you do regarding what happened at the end.

                            But this:

                            I never said that what was being proposed at Taba was unreasonable. In fact, I believe that the talks at Taba had great potential.

                            I agree with you but I think you are contradicting yourself here with this:

                            There has never been a progressive Zionist government, much less one that has proposed anything to the Palestinians that includes a independent, sovereign, and viable state.

                            yet above you clearly state Taba had great potential.

                            As for Barak not being progressive - I may agree with you - but Taba was and it was his government that was negotiating it.

                            "No Groin.... No Krav Maga" - The Simpsons

                            by volleyboy1 on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 04:45:30 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I'm not contradicting anything. (4+ / 0-)

                            The Taba talks never concluded. They were ended when the Israelis withdrew. There was no final offer that was accepted or rejected by either side. It doesn't count.

                            Sufficiently advanced cluelessness is indistinguishable from malice. -- Clark's Law

                            by unspeakable on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 04:47:57 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  The reason he pulled out of Taba (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            volleyboy1

                            was the impending Israeli Prime Ministerial election triggered by his resignation from office.  He subsequently was defeated by Ariel Sharon, who won 60% of the vote in the last of three election where the PM was elected separate from the Knesset (and the only one that didn't occur concurrently with a Knesset election).

                          •  However, they also pulled out (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Mets102

                            because they felt that Arafat was not ready to "pull the trigger" to sign a deal. Here was Barak's comment:

                            Prime Minister and Defense Minister Ehud Barak clarified this evening that the ideas which were brought up in the course of the recent negotiations conducted with the Chairman of the Palestinian Authority, including those raised at the Camp David Summit and by President Clinton towards the end of his term in office, are not binding on the new government to be formed in Israel. In a letter to President George Bush, Prime Minister Barak stated that his government had done the utmost to bring about an end to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, but that these efforts did not bear fruit, primarily because of a lack of sufficient readiness for compromise on the part of the Palestinian leadership...Before sending the letter, Barak spoke with former President Clinton, and they were in agreement that the ideas raised in the past months are not binding on the new government in Israel. Prime Minister Barak intends to convey this position also to the heads of the European Union and to Chairman Arafat.

                            http://en.wikipedia.org/...

                            "No Groin.... No Krav Maga" - The Simpsons

                            by volleyboy1 on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 05:20:35 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  So in other words, (3+ / 0-)

                            he gave up, and I'm right about there not being a final offer to reject or accept.

                            Barak's lies about there being "no Palestinian partner for peace" are well-documented.

                            Sufficiently advanced cluelessness is indistinguishable from malice. -- Clark's Law

                            by unspeakable on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 05:35:09 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  he wasn't even there at Taba. nt (0+ / 0-)

                            Freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed. -MLK

                            by Tom J on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 09:57:27 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Let's make something clear. (5+ / 0-)

                            A few days ago, that not all the hundreds of thousands of Palestinians who were forced out of their homes and towns were ethnically cleansed. Then you seemed to justify the ethnically cleansing by saying:

                            The early Yishuv didn't want a hostile population sitting inside it's borders.

                            Then today, you compare the various wars that Israel has fought with Arab states with our Nakba, as if wars can be compared to crimes against a population. Can you understand how any of that is offensive to someone who has listened to his grandparents talk about how they suffered during that time?

                            Sufficiently advanced cluelessness is indistinguishable from malice. -- Clark's Law

                            by unspeakable on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 04:44:11 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Can you understand (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            JNEREBEL, Mets102

                            how offensive your statement me to belittling those wars including the War of Independence is to me. I had relatives who fought there. And yes they won but, Israel lost 1% of it's population, just three years after the most horrific event in modern history.

                            And those Wars and guerilla actions included pain to civilians, uncounted tears over all the years of Israel's existence.

                            Those Wars caused suffering on both sides not just one. I don't belittle your suffering and you should not belittle the suffering of Israelis (my relatives). If we want to have Peace however, we need to work forward. That is again, not to minimize anyone's suffering. That is simply a fact.

                            "No Groin.... No Krav Maga" - The Simpsons

                            by volleyboy1 on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 05:15:49 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I haven't belittled anyone's suffering. (3+ / 0-)

                            But a war is not comparable to a war crime.

                            Sufficiently advanced cluelessness is indistinguishable from malice. -- Clark's Law

                            by unspeakable on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 05:18:46 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  War... and terror strikes (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Mets102

                            are not comparable.... WHAT?

                            Seriously?

                            "No Groin.... No Krav Maga" - The Simpsons

                            by volleyboy1 on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 05:21:54 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  War is not comparable (4+ / 0-)

                            to ethnic cleansing, no. War is fighting between two or more sides that have weapons. There is always a lot of suffering, but the sides are capable of defending themselves.

                            Ethnic cleansing directly targets the noncombatant population. That's why it's a crime.

                            I never said anything about terrorist attacks.

                            Sufficiently advanced cluelessness is indistinguishable from malice. -- Clark's Law

                            by unspeakable on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 05:24:39 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Yes but I did.. and they were part of the (0+ / 0-)

                            conversation. And they are part of the ultimate solution to the problem.

                            "No Groin.... No Krav Maga" - The Simpsons

                            by volleyboy1 on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 05:30:30 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I meant I didn't take issue (0+ / 0-)

                            with your reference to terrorist attacks.

                            Sufficiently advanced cluelessness is indistinguishable from malice. -- Clark's Law

                            by unspeakable on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 05:32:39 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Sigh.... I hate what is becoming of (0+ / 0-)

                            our discussions. I really do. this sucks. I really wish we could hit a "reset" button.

                            "No Groin.... No Krav Maga" - The Simpsons

                            by volleyboy1 on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 05:35:52 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I don't. (4+ / 0-)

                            I have no desire to forget what has been said about the Nakba. Nor do I wish to go back to pretending that there is any serious international effort to ensure the well-being of Palestinians.

                            I'm not saying I'm happy with this, but it's better than the fake atmosphere of camaraderie that existed before.

                            Sufficiently advanced cluelessness is indistinguishable from malice. -- Clark's Law

                            by unspeakable on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 05:44:58 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Ummm what did I say about the Nakba (0+ / 0-)

                            except to let Mets know that it was out of bounds for us to criticize that in the terms he used. He subsequently apologized... OR am I coming to this late.

                            As for a "fake atmosphere of comraderie",.. no you could not be more wrong.

                            "No Groin.... No Krav Maga" - The Simpsons

                            by volleyboy1 on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 06:28:59 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Please use a neutral term (0+ / 0-)

                            because traditionally the term "Nakba" was used to refer to the creation of the State of Israel.  I can't speak for Volley, but to me, as a Jew and supporter of Israel, that is a loaded term because it says to me that you think Israel's creation itself was a catastrophe, and not merely the fact that Palestinians suffered greatly through a combination of fleeing and being forced off their land.

                            I do my best here to avoid use of loaded terms, such as referring to the West Bank as Judea and Samaria, and I ask that you do the same.  I had a professor in college that used the term "Territories" in class to refer to the West Bank because that was the most neutral term he could think of because it didn't indicate favoritism for either side.

                          •  Unfuckingbelievable. (7+ / 0-)

                            This shit is fucking surreal.

                            Sufficiently advanced cluelessness is indistinguishable from malice. -- Clark's Law

                            by unspeakable on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 05:20:33 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  ThankFuckingYou! (7+ / 0-)

                            I don't even know what to say, man.

                            The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world She didn't exist.

                            by callmecassandra on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 05:22:00 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  This isn't the first time (8+ / 0-)

                            this point has been raised with me.

                            The people who do this want to define our experience for us. They want to choose the terminology, the extent that it's affected us, how pivotal it is in our history, and so on.

                            Imagine if I said that referring to the experience of Middle Eastern Jews post-1948 as "ethnic cleansing" is loaded and should therefore be avoided or, even worse, that it was justified. They'd all die of apoplectic rage.

                            Sufficiently advanced cluelessness is indistinguishable from malice. -- Clark's Law

                            by unspeakable on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 05:32:06 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  You're telling me .... just (0+ / 0-)

                            depends on perspective.

                            "No Groin.... No Krav Maga" - The Simpsons

                            by volleyboy1 on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 05:22:53 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Mets, I will disagree with you here (4+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            capelza, mattwb, Alec82, Mets102

                            in that "Nakba" is a term that means a lot to the Palestinians. I don't use it because of the conotation regarding Israel but I honestly don't think it is fair to ask Palestinians NOT to use it.

                            For them, the creation of Israel was a catastrophe. I bear no ill will for that. I don't think we can or should ask that.

                            "No Groin.... No Krav Maga" - The Simpsons

                            by volleyboy1 on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 05:28:43 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  How about the both of you (6+ / 0-)

                            not comment on words you don't understand?

                            Sufficiently advanced cluelessness is indistinguishable from malice. -- Clark's Law

                            by unspeakable on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 05:36:07 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Well he's right (6+ / 0-)

                            The State of Israel, as conceived by the early Zionists, was not possible without ethnic cleansing.  I take it as an admission.  Just like he won't use the term "ethnic cleansing" because it has negative connotations.  Or colonialism, presumably.  

                            "All along the watchtower, princes kept the view..."

                            by Alec82 on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 05:42:57 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  No, he's wrong. (7+ / 0-)

                            The Nakba has always been about the commemoration of the ethnic cleansing of Palestine.

                            That doesn't mean that we ignore what the creation of Israel, and the occupation later on, have done to Palestinian society. But it is not understood to mean the creation of Israel.

                            Sufficiently advanced cluelessness is indistinguishable from malice. -- Clark's Law

                            by unspeakable on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 05:58:34 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  In that case, my apologies (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            volleyboy1

                            and thank you for the clarification of the term.

                          •  The issue is.. (6+ / 0-)

                            ...that they are one and the same.  It is a state built on ethnic cleansing, and continued ethnic cleansing and Hebraization of the land to this day.  It is not really unique, except it has no process for incorporating the Palestinians, as it is built on pretty rigid ethnic nationalism.

                            So in a way it does have connotations for the state of Israel, and not pretty ones, either.

                            "All along the watchtower, princes kept the view..."

                            by Alec82 on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 06:07:33 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  The term Nakba, however, (7+ / 0-)

                            specifically focuses on the experience of the Palestinians, not on the experience of the Israelis.

                            Sufficiently advanced cluelessness is indistinguishable from malice. -- Clark's Law

                            by unspeakable on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 06:18:41 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Okie Dokie.... (0+ / 0-)

                            "No Groin.... No Krav Maga" - The Simpsons

                            by volleyboy1 on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 06:25:28 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  It's that connotation why I have that reaction (0+ / 0-)

                            because the catastrophe referenced traditionally is the creation of a Jewish State and it makes me feel like they'll never accept that state.  I readily recognize the tragedy that befell the Palestinian people in 1948.  They were the pawns in a war being fought between Israel and her Arab neighbors and they were denied the state they were supposed to have under the UN Partition Plan.

                            Having learned about our history, I have learned of the horrors of war from a very early age, be it the Babylonians, the Assyrians, the Romans, the Spanish, the Russians, the Germans, and so on.  Perhaps the solution would be to create a new term, one unburdened by history, but if the reference is merely to the plight of the Palestinian people and their being dispossessed and being denied their state under the UN Partition Plan, and not the traditional connotation associated with the term, then I could learn to live with it because it would be foolish, and I would say criminal, to hold up peace over a single word like that.

                          •  Utter filth. (6+ / 0-)

                            Sufficiently advanced cluelessness is indistinguishable from malice. -- Clark's Law

                            by unspeakable on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 05:40:15 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  This bullshit (8+ / 0-)

                            where you post the most odious of ideas behind the veneer of civility is really getting old.

                            Sufficiently advanced cluelessness is indistinguishable from malice. -- Clark's Law

                            by unspeakable on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 05:37:39 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Mets-- NAKBA, NAKBA NAKBA (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Alec82, Fire bad tree pretty

                            & intifada, intifada, intifada....
                            Nakba, Nakba, Nakba.
                            intifada.

                            Freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed. -MLK

                            by Tom J on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 10:03:41 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  The most perfect TomJ comment yet. n/t (0+ / 0-)

                            "Stay close to the candles....the staircase can be treacherous" (-8.38,-8.51)

                            by JNEREBEL on Thu Jul 08, 2010 at 08:22:35 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                      •  Two states died when Israelis elected Sharon (0+ / 0-)

                        and Israel started its march toward Apartheid in earnest.

                        "These old Wall Street boys are putting up an awful fight to keep the government from putting a cop on their corner." - Will Rogers

                        by Lefty Coaster on Thu Jul 08, 2010 at 01:54:34 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

              •  where in my comment (7+ / 0-)

                did i say anything about a one-state solution?

                my effort is to change US policy of ending unconditional and uncritical support for Israeli policies, to bring about the end of Israeli oppression of Palestinians... how they resolve it in the end is not my primary concern... but a first step is ending this uncritical US support for Israeli policies... right now politicians are doing squat... well, actually, whenever  aipac wants them to, they do squat, or jump, or heel or fetch... so the effort must come from the grassroots. even from artists who are repulsed by what they saw last May 31st.  

                Freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed. -MLK

                by Tom J on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 01:54:31 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Well Tom, I think we are having a (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  JNEREBEL

                  "breakthrough" here... In your comment you say nothing about a One State Solution but in the past you have mentioned either that or something approaching that. Correct me if I am wrong. You have mentioned that you support Palestinian Right of Return to Pre-1967 Israel. Now we both realize what that means.

                  But this is I think our big difference:

                  ...how they resolve it in the end is not my primary concern

                  See that is mine. I am only looking at the end game here. And any move to get to that end game is important to me. So while I can agree with you when you say end "uncritical support" for Israel, I don't agree with your tactic of only pointing out the wrongs of Israel. Why? Because then that lets the other side "off the hook" for the end game.

                  You and I have different visions of what comes next. Just as my vision of Two-States (Israel and Palestine - the most realistic outcome IMHO) is not acceptable to you (more specifically what I think those States look like, rules and so forth), What I perceive to be your vision is not acceptable to me.

                  Fair enough that way.

                  I can't just support a tactic or strategy without seeing the end result of it. Ever. In my opinion that is irresponsible. Actions have consequences and so I think taking those consequences into account is important.

                  "No Groin.... No Krav Maga" - The Simpsons

                  by volleyboy1 on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 02:08:55 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Few things (4+ / 0-)
                    1.  Supporting a right of return is not the same as supporting a single state solution.  As with Israel's "law of return," it simply provides an option to those who were ethnically cleansed in 1948.  I know you would prefer it if the Palestinians simply "got over it" and went about setting up a new state beside Israel, but you weren't expelled by Jewish terrorists freedom fighters.   Moreover, it is entirely possible, perhaps even probable, that the collective right of return would be waived for something else, monetary compensation or something else entirely, in final status negotiations.  But we're getting ahead of ourselves; we know that the "peace process" and the endless charade of negotiations is simply a way of buying time for land theft.  Which leads me to...
                    1. Americans have no place telling anyone how they should govern themselves; thankfully, we don't have to live with this conflict or its resolution.  Agnosticism on our part is not only appropriate, it is frankly preferable.  Given that "both sides" have their grievances to work out, getting rid of the trump card, American protection and military support, will help facilitate negotiations.  Real negotiations, not the farcical display we're witness to today.  

                    "All along the watchtower, princes kept the view..."

                    by Alec82 on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 02:19:05 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  In response to "A few things" (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      Mets102

                      Supporting a right of return is not the same as supporting a single state solution

                      Really... how so? What will the population and demographics of that State look like? Given that how do you propose Israel be governed? If it is by Democracy then please tell me how that would end up different than the One State Solution proposed by Palestinian Civil Society.

                      I know you would prefer it if the Palestinians simply "got over it" and went about setting up a new state beside Israel, but you weren't expelled by Jewish terrorists freedom fighters.

                      No one asks anyone to just "get over it" but in the interests of Peace sometimes you have to move past certain tragedies of your past (which is not to minimize what happened to the Palestinians). For instance, for Israel they have to move past attacks from neighboring Arab States, bombings and attacks by Palestinian terrorists err freedom fighters to get to a place where they can feel secure enough to make a peace treaty.

                      Moreover, it is entirely possible, perhaps even probable, that the collective right of return would be waived for something else, monetary compensation or something else entirely, in final status negotiations.

                      It is also possible a meteor might hit Earth and end life as we know it. It is possible that the Messiah could come to the Holy Land and declare Armagedden. You don't make smart political moves by counting on what is possible. You are a fool if you do.

                      Do you really believe?

                      Given that "both sides" have their grievances to work out, getting rid of the trump card, American protection and military support, will help facilitate negotiations.

                      Because honestly, I don't know anyone anywhere with any knowledge of the situation who doesn't think that the minute the U.S. cuts off the aid - there would not be a brutal war for survival there. No one, and I mean no one who wants Israel to survive believes this. I mean seriously... you don't see how this would not result in immediate war? Wow....

                      "No Groin.... No Krav Maga" - The Simpsons

                      by volleyboy1 on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 02:41:52 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Ignoring all your other points (5+ / 0-)

                        Because honestly, I don't know anyone anywhere with any knowledge of the situation who doesn't think that the minute the U.S. cuts off the aid - there would not be a brutal war for survival there. No one, and I mean no one who wants Israel to survive believes this. I mean seriously... you don't see how this would not result in immediate war? Wow....

                        Well pretty much no one believes that a nuclear state will face a serious threat from non-nuclear actors.  Moreover, if what you say is true, the only thing propping up the Jewish state is American support; using your logic, it would be threatened almost immediately if the US did what was good for its own interests and withheld military support and unconditional diplomatic support at the United Nations.  This is a fantasy scenario in more than a few ways; a) it isn't going to happen and b) if it did, Israel would be fine.  Might have to end the colonization project, but that's what we all want, right?

                        "All along the watchtower, princes kept the view..."

                        by Alec82 on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 03:06:06 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  Ignoring those points? (3+ / 0-)

                          Every time he opines about Palestinian suffering, he manages to belittle it.

                          He compares the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians to wars that Israel has faced. He compares the gravity of giving up the inalienable right of return with making peace with neighboring countries.

                          Perhaps you can, but I am past the point of ignoring those points.

                          Sufficiently advanced cluelessness is indistinguishable from malice. -- Clark's Law

                          by unspeakable on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 03:27:10 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  Of course (3+ / 0-)

                            I don't expect you to ignore it.  But I can't, and don't, pretend to represent the Palestinian point of view here.  

                            And I just wanted to get to the really absurd point, which was that Israel, with its military light years beyond any neighbors, its undeclared nuclear arsenal and its penchant for invading its neighbors, was somehow threatened by losing US military support.  It isn't; there's no conventional military conflict that could threaten its existence.  

                            "All along the watchtower, princes kept the view..."

                            by Alec82 on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 03:34:26 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  LOL (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Mets102

                            It isn't; there's no conventional military conflict that could threaten its existence.  

                            Good thing you aren't in charge of planning Israel's military survival.

                            "No Groin.... No Krav Maga" - The Simpsons

                            by volleyboy1 on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 03:39:28 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  You'll note that conventional.. (4+ / 0-)

                            ...does not include "one man, one vote," which is probably what will undo the state of Israel if it doesn't get over its colonization program.  

                            And we know that nuclear states are vulnerable to that.  See, for example, South Africa, circa 1990.

                            "All along the watchtower, princes kept the view..."

                            by Alec82 on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 03:41:25 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I agree with this point (0+ / 0-)

                            You'll note that conventional...does not include "one man, one vote," which is probably what will undo the state of Israel if it doesn't get over its colonization program.  

                            which is one of the reasons I oppose the occupation, it is destroying Israel. The other reason being is that it is morally wrong.

                            But yep, as long as Israel continues to add territory and population if it does not address that issue Israel as a democracy is done for, over, kaput, and lots of other things.

                            "No Groin.... No Krav Maga" - The Simpsons

                            by volleyboy1 on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 03:52:08 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Baruch Hashem n/t (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            volleyboy1
                          •  Wow (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            JNEREBEL, Mets102

                            just wow.... You belittle Peace, eh? You belittle war for survival eh? Well then... Interesting to see where you stand.

                            Oh and nothing seems to low for you to lie about these days. I mean here I said:

                            No one asks anyone to just "get over it" but in the interests of Peace sometimes you have to move past certain tragedies of your past (which is not to minimize what happened to the Palestinians).

                            Apparently you can say anything, get a couple of yahoos to uprate you and completely mis-represent a quote. I don't know why I would expect more from you. What a joke.

                            "No Groin.... No Krav Maga" - The Simpsons

                            by volleyboy1 on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 03:37:48 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I misrepresented nothing. (5+ / 0-)

                            You compared the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians with wars that Israel fought with Arab states. You also compared our giving up the right to return with Israel making peace with its neighboring countries.

                            There was a time when I believed explaining to you why what you said was offensive would be productive. But given how you justified the Yishuv's ethnic cleansing ("The early Yishuv didn't want a hostile population sitting inside it's borders."), I no longer believe that.

                            You can accuse me of being "low" but I don't go around excusing crimes against the Jewish people and then tell Jews to move past it.

                            Sufficiently advanced cluelessness is indistinguishable from malice. -- Clark's Law

                            by unspeakable on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 03:59:42 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                        •  Wow.... (0+ / 0-)

                          Really?

                          Okie Dokie then first of all I think then if you say this:

                          Well pretty much no one believes that a nuclear state will face a serious threat from non-nuclear actors.

                          You would agree with me that if Israel didn't have nukes it would face serious threats from other nations. Right?

                          Moreover, if what you say is true, the only thing propping up the Jewish state is American support; using your logic, it would be threatened almost immediately if the US did what was good for its own interests and withheld military support and unconditional diplomatic support at the United Nations

                          I didn't say the only thing "propping up the Jewish State" is American Support. I said if the U.S. pulled it's aid it would start a brutal war for survival.

                          Personally, I do not think it in our interests (American) to cut Israel loose. The countries in the region are not our natural allies and they would be questionable allies at best in the long term. Israel, in my opinion is and has been a strong ally for the U.S. As an American, I would much rather be allied with Israel than with anyone else in the region.  

                          This is a fantasy scenario in more than a few ways; a) it isn't going to happen and b) if it did, Israel would be fine.

                          You may think this but the Israelis don't. Here is a headline and story from Haaretz: Netanyahu: U.S. pullout from Iraq could leave Israel vulnerable read into things a bit beyond the headline. I know the Israeli perspective doesn't matter to you but you will get no where if you don't consider it.

                          Might have to end the colonization project, but that's what we all want, right?

                          Again, we might be hit with that meteor, or we might see the messiah, or we might have the Beatles rise from the dead, but one does not play for "might" in political outcomes one plays for what is likely. As for the end of the Occupation... Yes we all want that but one of us (hint: not you) knows how realistically it can be done if it will be done.

                          "No Groin.... No Krav Maga" - The Simpsons

                          by volleyboy1 on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 03:29:06 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                    •  Volly will handle everything else, but: (0+ / 0-)

                      Moreover, it is entirely possible, perhaps even probable, that the collective right of return would be waived for something else, monetary compensation or something else entirely, in final status negotiations.

                      FACT is that about 60,000 Palestinian refugees have returned over the decades under the terms of Israel’s family-reunification program. Arabs who lost property in Israel are eligible to file for compensation from Israel's Custodian of Absentee Property. Millions of dollars have already been paid by Israel in settlement of individual claims of lost property.

                      No money has been given to any of the Jews who lost property in any of the arab countries.

                      There is no Syrian Custodian of Absentee Property, and there never will be.

                      •  OK (4+ / 0-)

                        No money has been given to any of the Jews who lost property in any of the arab countries.

                        What does this have to do with the Palestinians expelled in 1948, and their children and grandchildren? Particularly those who remain refugees in need of a return to their homeland?

                        Jews who were expelled from Arab countries should receive compensation and a right to return to their homes as well.  

                        "All along the watchtower, princes kept the view..."

                        by Alec82 on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 05:17:56 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  You suggested a solution that already exists (0+ / 0-)

                          What does this have to do with the Palestinians expelled in 1948?

                          You said:

                          the collective right of return would be waived for something else, monetary compensation

                          This is already in place.  Arabs who lost property in Israel are eligible to file for compensation from Israel's Custodian of Absentee Property.

                          Is it a perfect solution?  No, but better than any system inplace to help compensate Jews who were expelled in 1948, (and their children and grandchildren )

            •  The Mel Gibson reference is snark..... n/t (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              JNEREBEL

              "No Groin.... No Krav Maga" - The Simpsons

              by volleyboy1 on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 01:47:49 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

  •  Thanks, Tom J (5+ / 0-)

    for all that you do.  Tipped and recced.

    "Trolling is a sad reality of internet life...Directly replying to the content of a trollish message is usually a waste of time"

    by Rusty Pipes on Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 06:03:40 PM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site