BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Penny S.
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 07:41 AM

Sorry about the link - it isn't to Mankell's own pice but an interview with him. I'll chase up his own piece.

Penny

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Penny S.
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 07:43 AM

Here's an audio version.

Mankell audio

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 07:44 AM

I do not know the legal position, but this person thinks he does.
1. A maritime blockade is in effect off the coast of Gaza. Such blockade has been imposed, as Israel is currently in a state of armed conflict with the Hamas regime that controls Gaza, which has repeatedly bombed civilian targets in Israel with weapons that have been smuggled into Gaza via the sea.

2. Maritime blockades are a legitimate and recognized measure under international law that may be implemented as part of an armed conflict at sea.

3. A blockade may be imposed at sea, including in international waters, so long as it does not bar access to the ports and coasts of neutral states.

4. The naval manuals of several western countries, including the US and England recognize the maritime blockade as an effective naval measure and set forth the various criteria that make a blockade valid, including the requirement of give due notice of the existence of the blockade.

5. In this vein, it should be noted that Israel publicized the existence of the blockade and the precise coordinates of such by means of the accepted international professional maritime channels. Israel also provided appropriate notification to the affected governments and to the organizers of the Gaza protest flotilla. Moreover, in real time, the ships participating in the protest flotilla were warned repeatedly that a maritime blockade is in effect.

6. Here, it should be noted that under customary law, knowledge of the blockade may be presumed once a blockade has been declared and appropriate notification has been granted, as above.

7. Under international maritime law, when a maritime blockade is in effect, no boats can enter the blockaded area. That includes both civilian and enemy vessels.

8. A state may take action to enforce a blockade. Any vessel that violates or attempts to violate a maritime blockade may be captured or even attacked under international law. The US Commander's Handbook on the Law of Naval Operations sets forth that a vessel is considered to be in attempt to breach a blockade from the time the vessel leaves its port with the intention of evading the blockade.

9. Here we should note that the protesters indicated their clear intention to violate the blockade by means of written and oral statements. Moreover, the route of these vessels indicated their clear intention to violate the blockade in violation of international law.

10. Given the protesters explicit intention to violate the naval blockade, Israel exercised its right under international law to enforce the blockade. It should be noted that prior to undertaking enforcement measures, explicit warnings were relayed directly to the captains of the vessels, expressing Israel's intent to exercise its right to enforce the blockade.
http://www.crethiplethi.com/the-gaza-flotilla-and-the-legal-maritime-blockade-of-gaza/israel/2010/

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 07:45 AM

People keep on asserting that the blockade on Gaza was put in place because of rocket attacks on Israel. That is not true. It was imposed in 2007 when Hamas, having won democratic elections, took over control of Gaza after a conflict with Al Fatah, which, having lost the election, refused to relinquish power. Al Fatah held on to power in the West Bank, with backing from Israel, the USA and the EU and others.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Ed T
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 07:48 AM

As noted, that was merely one example....(of course). Those seeking a broad perspective to frame opinions openly consider many sources and perspectives. Others, even those that may be intelligant in many other aspects of life, refer to limited and biased sources to reinforce their current opinions (not to be confused with facts). A useful tool to recognise this type of person is the tactic of attacking (attempting to silence or discredit) those who see an issue differently, those open to debate, and those who are not limited to narrow thinking or opinion on any issue.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Ed T
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 07:51 AM

"Of course the media are writing from a particular bias - however some are much more upfront about this than others"

If so, what about the bias of the American Educational Trust, and The Washington Report on Middle East Affairs?

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Penny S.
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 07:53 AM

Here's Mankell's piece, at last.

Mankell's flotilla diary

And that law suggests it is made up by those with the guns to justify anything they do. Such as sinking the Rainbow Warrior, torpedoing South Korean ships, sabotaging ships on their way to Cyprus, whatever. If it has any validity, surely it was devised to deal with gun running and suchlike aggressive behaviour, not prefabs, coriander and butter.

If the law is on the side of the Israelis in this, then Mr Bumble was right. It needs reworking for the modern world. It can't be left to just one state to declare that it applies in any particular case.

Penny

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Emma B
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 07:54 AM

Keith - we were talking about bias in reporting

Could I just point out for anyone that doesn't actually look at the source of your quote 'justifying' the attack on the flotilla it is on the same page as an appeal for money

"IF YOU WANT TO SUPPORT OUR WORK, PLEASE CONSIDER MAKING A DONATION.

YOUR DONATION WILL ALSO HELP US IN OUR ABILITY TO SUPPORT A PRO-ISRAEL LOBBY"

well no doubt about any bias there?

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Emma B
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 08:09 AM

Ed, as well as examining some of the reports presented here I have, wherever possible provided the sources of my quotes and some information about the political stance and background of the contribtors and what organization they may represent

When I quoted from The American Educational Trust I also provided the information that it was
'a non-profit foundation incorporated in Washington, D.C. by retired U.S. foreign service officers' and
'best known for publishing the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs ("The Washington Report")

Without going back over many posts, some of which are nothing less than personal attacks of anti semitism on some members, I think I might also have provided some additional summarized information from Wiki that -

'AET's founders included Edward Firth Henderson, the AET's first chairman, and a former British Ambassador to Qatar; Andrew Killgore, AET's first president, who was U.S. Ambassador to when he retired from theUnited States Foreign Service in 1980; and Richard Curtiss, AET's first executive director, who was chief inspector of the U.S. Information Agency when he retired from the U.S. Foreign Service in 1980.'

or that

'AET's Foreign Policy Committee has included former U.S. ambassadors, government officials, and members of the United States Congress, including the late Democratic Senator J. William Fulbright, and Republican Senator Charles Percy, both former chairmen of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and members of its Board of Directors and advisory committees "receive no fees for their services."'

In this way you are at liberty to compare their perspective with that of the CanWest article and make your own judgement about which is likely to be most objective which was my intention.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 08:15 AM

Emma, I am sure you are right that the info is from a pro Israel site.
I posted it because it sounded authoratative on international law on blockades.
I am no expert myself.
Are you saying that it is factually incorrect?

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Emma B
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 08:59 AM

Keith, I'm saying it is how Israel interprets the law

According to a legally recognised document called the "San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea" under some of the key rules, a blockade must be declared and notified to all belligerents and neutral states, access to neutral ports cannot be blocked, and an area can only be blockaded which is under enemy control.

One view is that "On the basis that Hamas is the ruling entity of Gaza and Israel is in the midst of an armed struggle against that ruling entity, the blockade is legal,"

Under the U.N. Convention of the Law of the Sea a coastal state has a "territorial sea" of 12 nautical miles from the coast over which it is sovereign.
Ships of other states are allowed "innocent passage" through such waters.

There is a further 12 nautical mile zone called the "contiguous zone" over which a state may take action to protect itself or its laws.

HOWEVER even the same lawyers that argue the sea blockade can be legally justified also say

"strictly beyond the 12 nautical miles limit the seas are the "high seas" or international waters"

The Israeli navy said on Monday the Gaza bound flotilla was intercepted 120 km (75 miles) west of Israel.
The Turkish captain of one of the vessels told an Istanbul news conference after returning home from Israeli detention they were 68 miles outside Israeli territorial waters.

Under the law of a blockade, intercepting a vessel COULD apply globally so long as a ship is bound for a "belligerent" territory, some legal experts argue.

HOWEVER, "If force is disproportionate it would be a violation of the key tenets of the use of force," said Commander James Kraska, professor of international law at the U.S. Naval War College


It is reported today that

"The Israeli military will conduct its own investigation of the May 31 commando raid on a flotilla of ships trying to breach its blockade of the Gaza Strip, which left nine pro-Palestinian activists from Turkey dead."

Netanyahu said he hasn't agreed to a proposal by United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon for an international investigation of the incident.
Israel refused to participate in a UN report on the 2008 Gaza war

Benny Begin, a minister without portfolio, said on Israel Radio
"The questions that need to be examined are whether the naval blockade was imposed according to international law, and was the way it was enforced on May 31 according to that law in all its interpretations,"

HOWEVER, as can be seen from the uncompromising statement from the Israel Ministry of foreign Affairs posted 08 Jun 10 - 07:44 AM it has already been stated by Israel that the blockade and therefore any attack is absolutely justified in legal terms making an internal military investigation the whitewash many people fear, from previous such internal enquiries, it will be

There are many opinions about the legality of the blockade and the assault on a ship in International waters

Israel continues to dismiss all these interpretations as the products of

'numerous NGOs and "human rights groups" have issued harsh and one-sided condemnations of Israel's actions.
Many of these statements have been couched in the terminology of international law…….. these claims are legally incorrect or dubious.

They represent the continued exploitation of international law for political ends."

Yeah! Everyone's doing it - sigh

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 09:06 AM

Thanks Emma.
It seems to be a question of interpretation and not a clear cut case of legal or illegal.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: CarolC
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 09:24 AM

Keith, considering the fact that all of the testimonies of the flotilla members who were in visual range say the same thing - that the government of Israel opened fire first, the fact that in what is quite clearly a very fearful and worried state, the correspondents report wounded people, and the fact that we can prove that everything else Israel has said about what happened is a lie, there is no credible evidence that the Israelis were acting in self-defence, and all of the evidence shows that they attacked first.

And also the fact that the government of Israel won't release all of the footage and still shots that the people on the flotilla took of the events, and in fact, they dumped a lot of it overboard. If Israel had nothing to hide, it wouldn't have any problem with letting people see that material. That, alone, is proof enough of the Israelis guilt.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: CarolC
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 09:30 AM

Keith, please show me the specific wording in international maritime law that applies to this situation and that would make the blockade on Gaza legal.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Emma B
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 09:32 AM

"It seems to be a question of interpretation and not a clear cut case of legal or illegal."


And therein lies the problem Keith

Opinio Juris is a forum for informed discussion and lively debate about international law and international relations. It was founded by Chris Borgen, a law professor at St. John's University Law School, who started the site with Peggy McGuinness of the University of Missouri Law School and Julian Ku of Hofstra Law School

Here Prof Kevin Jon Heller is currently a Senior Lecturer at Melbourne Law School admits he is confused



Israel's defense of the blockade thus appears to create a serious dilemma for it. Insofar as Israel insists that it is not currently occupying Gaza, it cannot plausibly claim that it is involved in an international armed conflict (IAC),
with Hamas.
And if it is not currently involved in an IAC with Hamas, it is difficult to see how it can legally justify the blockade of Gaza.
Its blockade of Gaza, therefore, seems to depend on its willingness to concede that it is occupying Gaza and is thus in an IAC with Hamas.
But Israel does not want to do that, because it would then be bound by the very restrictive rules of belligerent occupation in the Fourth Geneva Convention **


There is, however, another possibility: that Israel's blockade of Gaza is not a "belligerent blockade" at all, but is instead something akin to a "pacific blockade," defined by the Dictionary of International Law as "a form of coercive measure short of war, whereby a state (or group of states) bars access to the coast of a state or part of it in order to prevent entry and exit of ships of the state under blockade."
I say "akin to" a pacific blockade, because — as the definition indicates — such blockades assume that the blockaded entity is a state, not a non-state actor.

Even if Israel's blockade of Gaza would analogically qualify as a pacific blockade, however, it would still be of questionable legality: pacific blockades are only legal with the approval of the Security Council, according to the Dictionary of International Law, and the Security Council has never approved the blockade of Gaza"

full article

** it is claimed by many - including the Government of Canada that -

"This construction (the 'seraration barrier')is contrary to international law under the Fourth Geneva Convention.
Canada not only opposes Israel's construction of a barrier extending into the occupied territories, but also expropriations and the demolition of houses and economic infrastructure carried out for this purpose."

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 10:11 AM

Carol, from Emma's post "Under the law of a blockade, intercepting a vessel COULD apply globally so long as a ship is bound for a "belligerent" territory, some legal experts argue"

Most or all of those on board were intensely partisan against the Israelis. They were also clearly expecting trouble, or why the life jackets? They were witness to terrifying violence. I do not find their testimony reliable.

Remember that Israelis have stopped ships on many previous occasions, and stopped other vessels that night.
All without violence.
It is possible to abseil with a weapon in hand. I suspect that the soldiers were not expecting a fight and sought not to appear provacative, otherwise I simply can not believe that Israeli commandos could be so readily overcome by people armed only with clubs.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Greg F.
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 10:34 AM

No, the problem is that Israel, very much like the U.S. from wch it learned the stance, considers itself generally "EXEMPT" from the rules that govern the rest of the world.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: bobad
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 10:42 AM

"No, the problem is that Israel, very much like the U.S. from wch it learned the stance, considers itself generally "EXEMPT" from the rules that govern the rest of the world. "

Unlike it's law abiding neighbours.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Emma B
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 10:43 AM

"They were also clearly expecting trouble, or why the life jackets?"

Of course they were expecting trouble Keith - Israel's foreign minister, Avigdor Lieberman, said the country was prepared to stop the flotilla with its cargo of humanitarian aid "AT ANY COST."

A previous incident in December 2008 when a similar attempt to reach Gaza by sea ended in the activists' boat being rammed by the Israeli navy
The passengers on board the flotilla were wearing life jackets - not flak jackets!!

"I suspect that the soldiers were not expecting a fight and sought not to appear provacative, otherwise I simply can not believe that Israeli commandos could be so readily overcome by people armed only with clubs."

I believe they were possibly not expecting a 'fight' too, but dropping from the sky at 4 am in the morning masked and apparently armed to the teeth - could you tell a paint gun from a lethal rifle under those conditions? - the passengers were quite obviously convinced they were under lethal attack as in fact they were when the commandos opened fire with their pistols at close range at their attackers, one of whom, Cevdet Kýlýçlar who was shot in the head was armed solely with his camera

As they were dropped one by one I suppose they were heavily outnumbered by the passengers

Despite such overwhelming odds however none of the Commandoes were killed despite the photos of the 'weapons' claimed to be found on board

It is alleged that the final commando to be lowered was responsible for killing at at least six of the victims and it is reported that he is in line for a medal of valour.

Is that a 'provocation'?

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Penny S.
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 10:50 AM

It's very curious that the Russians have chosen now to reveal that they are trying some of their soldiers for theft of cards belonging to the dead of the Polish air crash - I wonder if it is to show up the Israelis who have similarly stolen cards, cameras and so on.

Penny

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Emma B
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 11:01 AM

"and stopped other vessels that night.
All without violence."

Well, this was the official Hasbara spin while the passengers from the flotiila were still held in prisons in Israel

However on returning home a very different picture to the peaceful 'takeover' has developed


Activist Dimitris Gielalis, who had been aboard the Sfendoni, was among six Greeks who returned home on Tuesday.

"Suddenly from everywhere we saw inflatables coming at us, and within seconds fully equipped commandos came up on the boat," he said.

"They came up and used plastic bullets, we had beatings, we had electric shocks, any method we can think of, they used."

Mr Gielalis said the boat's captain was beaten for refusing to leave the wheel, and had sustained non-life-threatening injuries, while a cameraman filming the raid was hit with a rifle butt in the eye.

"Of course we weren't prepared for a situation of war," he said.


Aris Papadokostopoulos was aboard the Free Mediterranean, travelling behind the Mavi Marmara and carrying mainly Greek and Swedish activists.

"The Turkish ship [the Mavi Marmara] was in front of us... on which there was a terrible raid from the air and from the sea and from everywhere, with shooting," he said.

Mr Papadokostopoulos said aboard the other boats, commandos beat activists but nobody was gravely injured.

He said no-one put up resistance on the Free Mediterranean, which was carrying a cargo of wheelchairs, building material and medical and pharmaceutical aid.

"Some people were hit by clubs and electric shocks. During their interrogation, many of them were badly beaten in front of us," he said.

- Two accounts from the BBC of the experiences of passengers on other ships

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Ed T
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 11:31 AM

An interesting opinion perspective, from The Halifax Chronicle Herald:
http://thechronicleherald.ca/Opinion/1186265.html

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Lox
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 11:48 AM

"- Two accounts from the BBC of the experiences of passengers on other ships "

And I have seen other similar accounts from the other ships.



Well Bobad,

You have made a blanket acccusation against those who disagree with you on here that they believe Jews should leave Palestine.

You refuse to provide examples.

That is because there are none.

Which makes your accusation a lie.


In fact, upon analysis, you haven't bothered to back up any of your assertions with evidence.

In addition, you appeart to have ignored the available evidence.


That makes your other posts meaningless.


The fact yhe you consider a request for evidence to be a "tactic" is evidence that your point of view is a fantasy.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Lox
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 12:02 PM

"An interesting opinion perspective, from The Halifax Chronicle Herald:"

Yes - an nteresting comparison of the flotilla, carrying humanitarian aid to Gaza, and the Russian Navy, carrying nuclear missiles to cuba at the height of the cold war.

That's almost as absurd as Golda Meyers friend Gerald Kaufman comparing the IDF to Nazi soldiers.

And of course we coudn't possibly countenance such gross exaggeration could we.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: CarolC
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 12:34 PM

Keith, I want to see the language that defines who can blockade whom. The language I've seen so far says that a country can prevent foreign countries from bringing anything to the shores of the country that is enforcing the blockade. I have not yet seen any other definitions of who can conduct blockades and who can be blockaded.

There are some questions that arise with the language I have seen so far. The first, of course, is this - is Gaza a foreign country from Israel? If so, does that mean that Gaza is a country that is independent from Israel? The second is, if this is the case, then under the language I used above, Israel cannot be said to be preventing anything from reaching its own shores if it blockades Gazan waters.

I want to see the specific language as it appears in international maritime law, and how this language specifically applies in relation to both Israel and Gaza.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: CarolC
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 12:37 PM

"They were also clearly expecting trouble, or why the life jackets?"

They knew from experience that Israel could attack in such a way that they might need the life jackets. Prior ships had been rammed by Israeli war ships. The members of the flotilla themselves said they anticipated the possibility that they might be sunk. But none of them expected Israeli helicopters to fire on sleeping passengers, which many of the passengers report did happen.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: CarolC
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 12:43 PM

Most or all of those on board were intensely partisan against the Israelis. They were also clearly expecting trouble, or why the life jackets? They were witness to terrifying violence. I do not find their testimony reliable.

Well that's easy enough to clear up, isn't it? All Israel has to do is show all of the video and photographic evidence that they confiscated from the passengers. Right? Now I wonder why they won't do that.

And you find Israel's account credible even though they have been proven to have lied about everything else they have said about the flotilla? Why is that, Keith? Is it your own partisanship in this matter?

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: CarolC
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 12:55 PM

And if the passengers on the ships were so partisan that they would lie about what happened, why is it that they are the only ones who are calling for all of the video and photographic evidence to be released?   Really, don't insult our intelligence and yours with that "passengers can't be believed" nonsense. They are the ones who want everyone to see all of the evidence, while the government of Israel has done everything it possibly could to hide evidence.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: mousethief
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 01:00 PM

There is NO Jewish state. The state is Israel, and a proportion of its population follow the Jewish faith.

Sorry, Netanyahu says it's a Jewish state. He demands that Hamas recognize it as a Jewish state. You're just flat-out wrong. STBU.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: beardedbruce
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 01:08 PM

Israel is the successor state to Mandate Palestine, established in 1921 ( along with Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, and others) as the Jewish Homeland. It was a spoil of war awarded to Great Britain as a result of the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire.

In 1923 the British took 77% of the Mandate territory and created the Arab Homeland of Transjordan, where NO JEWS were allowed to settle, since the Mandate Power ( Great Britain) did not wish to have conflicts between the Jewish and Moslim populations. The remaining 23% was to be the Jewish Homeland.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: CarolC
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 01:10 PM

That's all entirely irrelevant, now, beardedbruce, since Israel as a Jewish state will not exist for very much longer. After that it will be a state of all of its citizens, and citizenship will not be determined by ethnicity or religion.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: mousethief
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 01:13 PM

From your lips to God's ears, Carol.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: beardedbruce
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 01:25 PM

"since Israel as a Jewish state will not exist for very much longer"

You mean that the Arabs nations will attack it AGAIN, trying to destroy it as they tried in 1948, and 1967?

Or do you mean that Iran will use it's nuclear weapons on Israel, and kill off both those pesky Jews and those annoying Palestinians? Or will they just give the WMD to Hezboallah, for them to use on all those non-existant missles that Iran sent them through Syria?

Either way, the Palestinian people will suffer greatly, and possibly be destroyed by the other Arab nations. I don't know why you think that a good thing- I don't.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: CarolC
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 01:33 PM

No beardedbruce. It's going to happen the same way it happened in South Africa. It's going to collapse under its own weight, because Israel has it exists now is simply not sustainable. And the international civil society will not allow it.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: beardedbruce
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 01:36 PM

I disagree with your assessment.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: mousethief
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 01:42 PM

State-sponsored racism is so 19th century.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: CarolC
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 01:47 PM

I disagree with your assessment.

No problem. Just pull up a chair, grab yourself some popcorn, and watch what happens.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Stringsinger
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 01:49 PM

What is not being acknowledged here is that Israel has become a right-wing theocracy.
The Likkud is dominated by zealots and not reasonable people. When this happens, as it could in the U.S., any attempt at a reasonable solution is thwarted.

Zionism (Zion being a biblical term) started out as a different idea. It is now synonymous
with a violent regime to oppress others who are not Zionists. It has been redefined in the way Christianity is becoming in the U.S.

Fortunately, not all Jews are Zionists. The charge of "anti-semitism" is specious.

"Operation Cast Lead" was the final straw. This is the new face of Zionism.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: CarolC
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 01:58 PM

The only difference between Likud and the other parties, Stringsinger, has been that Likud has been more open about what it is doing. The other governments have been just as bad, but they've been a lot more secretive. None of them have ever had any interest in finding a resolution to the problem. Labor governments have built as many settlements and started as many wars as Likud governments have. And it's not the new face of Zionism, either. The early Zionist leaders were quite open about their agenda to ethnically cleanse all of the Palestinians from Palestine. This has been the plan all along.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Roberto
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 02:01 PM

I don't want to quarrel with CarolC, but I can't help making a couple of comments on what she writes. She accuses Keith A of Hertford of partisanship. An Italian saying: il bue dice cornuto all'asino (the ox calls "cornuto" the donkey, "cornuto" means both horned animal and cuckold). I mean, she is the best in partisanship this thread has to offer. Previously, she replied to me saying I had swallowed the propaganda: it is funny to receive this remark from a person that believes that a single-state solution ruled by Hamas would be a democracy and a safe place where to live for the Israeli people: it would not be safe even for Fatah! In my opinion, the Israeli-Palestinian situation is a tragedy, with rights and wrongs mixed together. You can't support a single part. Especially we who don't live there, we should not be even more extreme than them who have suffered victims, losses and pains, but try to make a balanced solution become possible. I can't see an alternative to a two-states solution, although I'm aware it 's getting more difficult to build every day that passes. Dear CarolC, partisanship from us is not suitable. The Italian group on the flotilla was formed by anti-Semite people, linked to so-called historians that pretend the Holocaust never happened: we don't need that political mob.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: bobad
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 02:19 PM

"Well Bobad,

You have made a blanket acccusation against those who disagree with you on here that they believe Jews should leave Palestine."

I've seen that game played around here too many times to get suckered into it.

Let's try this one:

Well Lox,

Show me where I said that those who disagree with me believe that Jews should leave Palestine. If you can't then I guess that makes you a liar.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Greg F.
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 02:28 PM

State-sponsored racism is so 19th century.

But its recently been experiencing a real renaissance, Mouse.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Emma B
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 02:29 PM

In 2007 just before the celebration of Italy's Holocaust Memorial Day the Italian government approved a bill that made denying the Holocaust a crime and stiffened prison sentences for those found guilty of inciting racial hatred.
The decree, submitted by Justice Minister Clemente Mastella, received unanimous approval by the Romano Prodi cabinet..

As this crime can result in a prison sentence I think Roberto that, if you do actually possess ANY evidence for your accusations, and it is not just another Hasbara inspired piece of smear tactics, then you have a moral duty to either put up or - shut up!

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: CarolC
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 02:35 PM

Roberto, please show me where I said that one state in Palestine/Israel would or even should be ruled by Hamas.

And I'm not the one who started the accusations of partisanship. That would be Keith who did that. He really is in no position to be pointing fingers in that regard. And I would see no reason to point out the partisanship on this issue if people who are engaging in it wouldn't be pointing fingers at others for being partisan.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Lox
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 02:48 PM

"Show me where I said that those who disagree with me believe that Jews should leave Palestine. If you can't then I guess that makes you a liar. "

Sorry mate - this point is fundamentally flawed.

You accused "some" of this vierw and it wasn't the ones you agree with.

But you could easily clarify this one anyway by stating all those on this thread who you believe are of the opinion that Jews should leave Palestine.

You have asserted that "some" are of that view.


Who?


I can say with absolute certainty that all those you accuse of believing Jews shuld leave Palestine are in disagreement with you on this thread.


This isn't a game for me.

Only you have called it a game.

That says a lot about you and nothing about this discussion or anyone taking part.

Your slander, evasiveness and refusal to back up any point marks you out as dishonest.

Show some backbone and say who you mean and say where they have either said, implied or insinuated that Jews should leave Palestine.

If you, don't you mark yourself out not only as dishonest, but also as spineless.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Penny S.
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 03:34 PM

Somewhere back up this thread, someone wrote about the genetic connection between Jews, Kurds and Armenians. That would be the Cohen Y chromosome, I seem to recall. I also seemed to recall something about the Journal of Immunology having to rip a paper out of issues on a related subject, so I went and looked it up.

The article, which showed that there were very close similarities between Palestinians and Jews, has had some argument about it, which anyone can check up on by googling "Jews Palestinians immunology paper", and so I'm not going to refer to it. It was included by a guest editor who happened to be the lead author.

Instead, that among the discussion of this withdrawn paper, reference was made to another, produced in Israel by Israeli scientists, on genetic connections between populations. The conclusion was that all Jewish groups, Sephardim, Ashkenazim, and even the Ethiopian Jews show genetic connectedness. But, buried in the work was the finding that Sephardic Jews and Palestinians show a greater genetic likeness than between either group and Ashkenazi Jews.

Which places both groups with the same ancestry, and the same link to the place of origin. (I have seen it said that the Palestinian Christians are probably the descendants of Jews who lived there in Jesus' time, and who never left after 76 AD, but who knows.)

It doesn't help either side if arguments are based on fantasy.

Penny

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: robomatic
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 03:58 PM

Penny S:

If the research you are talking about is true (and I'm not saying it is) it would support my argument that a good deal of the problems of the Mideast are due to the Jewish Israelis not being accepted as 'Palestinians' in their own right. Consider that Israel has a considerable Arab population and is multi-ethnic, multi-believer. The great majority of its neighbors not only are the opposite of this, they can't IMAGINE what it would be like to allow minority rights.

This is a miasma of intolerance in which the only oasis of democracy, tolerance, and freedom is constantly being set up as a fall guy in order to eliminate it.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Ed T
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 03:58 PM

And, there is Helen Thomas.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/andy-ostroy/helen-thomass-sad-new-leg_b_604332.html

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: bobad
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 03:59 PM

OK Lox, it's been fun but you are becoming a little too obsessed for me so I'll just say TTFY, have fun playing with yourself.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Ed T
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 04:08 PM

OK,here is a Guardian article that some folks wont like:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/jun/06/israel-gaza-blockade