Gaza round 189

[Keef]

So, Keef, you think that past attempts at political access through "staged cinema" void the fact that they are now getting slaughtered or something?

I think the Palestinian reports hold little to no value now that it's been proven that they stage scenes which then gets turned into fake news, reported by irresponsible news agencies around the world. All those casualty numbers and all the reports they're making could be fake--but we'd never know it because the news would report it anyway. Palestinians have cried wolf now one too many times, and I think they're using a plastic worm this time too. I'm on Israel's side.

Egypt also sent medical convoys to their border with Gaza in an attempt to help take out the wounded--but Hamas wouldn't let any wounded out of the country. Then they cry that the wounded and dead are piling up and its overwhelming.

Here is a link to Cunningham's podcast from Monday. He's got an expert on radical Islam and the Gaza/Israel situation named Bridgette Gabriel, and she speaks on the current deal and also a bit about Iran.

 

[magburner]

I just found this little piece of videogame satire that kinda sums up the Gaza conflict, though some might say that it is in bad taste.

You play the Israeli army, and at your disposal are tanks, infantry, Apache gunships, F-15's, and missiles. You have 3 minutes to kill as many Palestinians as you can, but you have to manage your resources carefully, or you will run out of cash. If you do run out of cash, click on you headquarters and ring in some foreign aid - simple as that! Oh yeah, increase your productivity by clicking on the headquarters, and you also get bonuses for destroying hospitals and police stations, but watch out for those pesky Qassam rockets!

RAID GAZA!

An article about the game:

Raid Gaza! Editorial games and timelines.

 

[boiltheocean]

My figures were an amalgamation of two sets of figures. Principally I used the figures from the BBC, but since they didn't state how many soldiers had been killed, I look at an article on Reuters, which did state. I will admit the 228:1 was a slight distortion of the truth, because I did not take into account the number of Israeli civilians killed. My apologies for that. 👍

BBC article: (Israel accepts truce principles.)

This was taken from the section below the video, near the bottom of the page:



Reuters Article: (Israel urged to accept truce as Gaza fighting continues

The Reuters figures that state how many Israeli soldiers have been killed (taken from the third paragraph from the bottom of the page):



They say that 99% of statistics are made up on the spot, and mine were no different. I was in a rush to Watch Star Trek Voyager (which was starting at 8pm), so I guestimated the 100:1 figure.

The figure is very close to what you stated if you use the claimed 683 Palestinian dead on the BBC News website, and the claimed 10 Israeli dead on the Reuters website (this is assuming you take into account the four soldiers killed by friendly fire). If you take out the four soldiers killed by friendly fire, then my figures are close to being correct.

mabye you should inform BBC that they are not giving the fully processed figures. You seem to have put alot more thought into this than they have.

 

[boiltheocean]

Another issue I have is media coverage. Now I can only say this about the BBC but I'm sure its probably the same for other news networks. All I hear from the reports are is Israel this, Israel that.
Do they know that wars contain a second party?

 

[Touring Mars]

I have to disagree with you there - the BBC's normal coverage is pretty balanced, and the BBC News channel have alot more in-depth reporting, including reporters embedded within Gaza itself (despite the fact that the BBC, like all other western broadcasters, are not allowed in there by Israel). The BBC also share news and info with Al-Jazeera, who are the only major network allowed by Israel to be inside Gaza at the moment, and their coverage is alot more focused on the Palestinian side (so much so that it appears quite biased relative to what we'd consider normal in the UK, anyway). The main news programmes do not contain particularly graphic or disturbing content, but other BBC programmes like Newsnight contain much more critical commentary and analysis, including roughyl equal airtime from political figures both for and against the Israeli offensive.

The BBC report the facts and steer clear from editorial content and emotive language, which I personally like - although I also watch Channel 4 news, which avoid the toned-down, sanitised language that the main BBC news programmes usually adopt. The best advice is to get your news from a variety of quality sources and realise that each broadcaster/newssheet has an editorial style that will differ slightly depending on their policital leanings and their broadcasting remit. Channel 4 are considerably more left-wing, however, hence if the BBC's coverage is too Israeli-centric for you, I recommend flipping over at 7pm and watching that instead...

 

[Omnis]

Even if Israel killed just one innocent person, a murder is a murder. Quantifying death is unnecessary because the value of life is infinite.

Back to feudalism? Sweet!

Only problem is, I do fear for what the Israelis would do if they were let completely loose by the western powers. Although their motto may be "never again," genocide does not seem like something they'd be incapable of.

No, not feudalism. Just small self-determined states. Democracy inevitably leads to dissolution of the state to be replaced by smaller city-states, anyway. Hans Hermann Hoppe ftw.

 

[Keef]

Which all eventually get angry because they don't have enough land for the expansion they need, forcing them to attack their neighbors in an effort to gain more land. Soon everyone is attacking everyone else, all of them pushed to the brink of extinction, where the one or two most powerful states will take over all the weaker ones. Sounds like imperialism to me. Then it all goes round and round in a big cycle over and over again. So what?

 

[YSSMAN]

Self-determination of states, sovereignty of nations (the people, not the government) is what he is getting at, and I can't say that I completely disagree. However, if we were to see a Balkanization in the Middle-East, my estimation of the situation seems rather bleak. Establishing a Palestinian state within Israel, in general, seems like the only option to fix some of these issues. Problem is, we have to figure out a way to get Israel's itchy trigger finger to go away.

And in the moment that threw me into a fit of rage last night...

Some idiot Launched Rockets at Israel from Lebanon

 

[magburner]

Another issue I have is media coverage. Now I can only say this about the BBC but I'm sure its probably the same for other news networks. All I hear from the reports are is Israel this, Israel that.
Do they know that wars contain a second party?

The war does contain a second party, but since they are only firing primitive rockets, there is not much to report there. Israel on the other hand, have a vast and powerful war machine that is pounding Gaza to within an inch of its life. Obviously, there is more to say about Israel doing this, or Israel doing that.

I have to disagree with you there - the BBC's normal coverage is pretty balanced, and the BBC News channel have alot more in-depth reporting, including reporters embedded within Gaza itself (despite the fact that the BBC, like all other western broadcasters, are not allowed in there by Israel). The BBC also share news and info with Al-Jazeera, who are the only major network allowed by Israel to be inside Gaza at the moment, and their coverage is alot more focused on the Palestinian side (so much so that it appears quite biased relative to what we'd consider normal in the UK, anyway).

Depending on who you talk to, the BBC is regularly accused of pro-Israeli/pro-Palestinian bias. There was also a report in the Daily Mail today which stated that the BBC had recieved a number of complaints regarding its coverage of the Gaza conflict.

I even saw a report in the paper today that Israel had accused Al-Jazeera of anti-Israeli bias! I guess you can't please some people...

If you look into the wording of any article, you could see bias. Look at this from Reuters:

European governments have proposed backing the Egyptian ceasefire proposal with an EU force along the Gaza-Egypt border that would prevent Hamas, which seized control of Gaza in 2007, from rearming through its many tunnels.

Israel bombards Gaza, US backs ceasefire plan (full article)

See it? I thought Hamas was democratically ellected? Did Tony Blair sieze control of the United Kingdom when he swept to power in 1997?

 

[Touring Mars]

the BBC is regularly accused of pro-Israeli/pro-Palestinian bias.

Exactly...

I thought Hamas was democratically ellected?

They were, but terms like "seized control" refer to the fact that although Hamas were elected, the President (who is also Chief of Staff of the Military) is Fatah, and so (as far as I understand it) Fatah and Hamas effectively shared power in Gaza until they both attempted to get rid of the other, with Hamas coming out on top. So although they were 'democratically elected', you could also say that Hamas achieved a coup d'état (in Gaza, anyway). In other words, I wouldn't say it was bias to say that Hamas "seized control" because that is a pretty fair reflection of what they really did.

I guess you can't please some people...

If they ever make a film about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, that should be the tagline.

 

[Metar]

The biggest issue was that the Fatah refused to hand over it's control, and effectively started a war to prevent the Hamas' government. They didn't realize it's power in the Gaza strip, however, and lost it to the Hamas.

 

[TVC]

Only the government of these countries care about fighting but the Civilians are the only ones who are hurt.

 

[Omnis]

Wow, check this out... a religious leader says killing countless civilians is A-OK.

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1180527966693&pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull

And people think Muslims are screwed up?

 

[Metar]

The link won't connect, sadly, but I can think of three-four people that would say that.

In a more optimistic tone([/sarcasm]?), there are now reports of White Phosphorous used in bombings, and Israel just officially banned two of the three main Arab parties from participating in the upcoming elections for the Israeli Parliament.

 

[nk4e]

The link won't connect, sadly, but I can think of three-four people that would say that.

Eliyahu advocates carpet bombing Gaza
May. 30, 2007
Matthew Wagner , THE JERUSALEM POST
All civilians living in Gaza are collectively guilty for Kassam attacks on Sderot, former Sephardi chief rabbi Mordechai Eliyahu has written in a letter to Prime Minister Ehud Olmert.
Eliyahu ruled that there was absolutely no moral prohibition against the indiscriminate killing of civilians during a potential massive military offensive on Gaza aimed at stopping the rocket launchings.
The letter, published in Olam Katan [Small World], a weekly pamphlet to be distributed in synagogues nationwide this Friday, cited the biblical story of the Shechem massacre (Genesis 34) and Maimonides' commentary (Laws of Kings 9, 14) on the story as proof texts for his legal decision.
According to Jewish war ethics, wrote Eliyahu, an entire city holds collective responsibility for the immoral behavior of individuals. In Gaza, the entire populace is responsible because they do nothing to stop the firing of Kassam rockets.
The former chief rabbi also said it was forbidden to risk the lives of Jews in Sderot or the lives of IDF soldiers for fear of injuring or killing Palestinian noncombatants living in Gaza.
Eliyahu could not be reached for an interview. However, Eliyahu's son, Shmuel Eliyahu, who is chief rabbi of Safed, said his father opposed a ground troop incursion into Gaza that would endanger IDF soldiers. Rather, he advocated carpet bombing the general area from which the Kassams were launched, regardless of the price in Palestinian life.
"If they don't stop after we kill 100, then we must kill a thousand," said Shmuel Eliyahu. "And if they do not stop after 1,000 then we must kill 10,000. If they still don't stop we must kill 100,000, even a million. Whatever it takes to make them stop."
In the letter, Eliyahu quoted from Psalms. "I will pursue my enemies and apprehend them and I will not desist until I have eradicated them."
Eliyahu wrote that "This is a message to all leaders of the Jewish people not to be compassionate with those who shoot [rockets] at civilians in their houses."

That should clear up a few things.

 

[Touring Mars]

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1180527966693&pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull

May 30, 2007

The point (as Metar and others have made already) that there are Jewish fanatics as well as Muslim fanatics is well established already. Frankly, these idiots should all be ignored.

It's despicable nevertheless, and it is a good example of how gross stupidity will always be relevant to this conflict...

 

[Omnis]

The point (as Metar and others have made already) that there are Jewish fanatics as well as Muslim fanatics is well established already. Frankly, these idiots should all be ignored.

It's despicable nevertheless, and it is a good example of how gross stupidity will always be relevant to this conflict...

Yeah, I know the date. But, seriously, do you think this Israeli invasion is not pre-meditated? I think it's a laugh to say that this is all just a reaction to Hamas rockets. Didn't Israel support Hamas against Arafat as he was getting popular?

 

[Keef]

Yeah, I know the date. But, seriously, do you think this Israeli invasion is not pre-meditated? I think it's a laugh to say that this is all just a reaction to Hamas rockets. Didn't Israel support Hamas against Arafat as he was getting popular?

I think this a reaction to the fact that Palestinians have always screwed with Israel. Likewise, the rockets are a reaction to the fact that Israel exists. If Israel exists somebody will screw with them, and they have a right to defend themselves. The rocket shooters don't recognize that right and keep shooting rockets and carrying on about how Israel is invading them, and all the news around the world takes the bait. Meanwhile, Israel defends itself, and the rocket shooters keep screwing with them.

It's like a fight between two little toddler boys. They're both smarter and dumber than they look, and they both blame the other kid, and nothing ever gets solved until they're both taken to separate rooms.

 

[Touring Mars]

Yeah, I know the date.

I get the point that the statement is indicative of the kind of fundamentalist thinking on the side of the Israelis, but I don't accept that it's useful to dig it out every time there is a conflict against the Palestinians. It was wrong then and it remains wrong now.

But, seriously, do you think this Israeli invasion is not pre-meditated? I think it's a laugh to say that this is all just a reaction to Hamas rockets.

Depends on what you mean by "pre-meditated". Israel may well have been waiting on Hamas to give them the opportunity to deal with them militarily - but it would be unfair to say that Israel themselves are the ones who have handed them the rope with which to hang themselves... Hamas are sponsored by Iran, and Iran are using Hamas and the Palestinians as proxies, just as the US are using Israel as a proxy to further their interests in the region. But this proxy war is only of secondary importance to Israel and the Palestinians themselves...

Israel may be only too happy to see Hamas set themselves up for this fall, but to imply that Israel are somehow complicit in the attacks on itself by Hamas is almost as ridiculous as suggesting that 9/11 was done with the approval of the Neo-Cons.... just because the behaviour of Hamas has played into their hands strategically doesn't mean that Israel are behind Hamas's behaviour... I prefer to accept the idea that Hamas's behaviour is dictated by their own fundamentalist ideology and that their methods are a product of desparation and the moral bankrupcy of their bigotry. Funnily enough, you could say the exact same for the Israeli government.

Didn't Israel support Hamas against Arafat as he was getting popular?

Don't know much about that but I'd hazard a guess that this is old news - a bit like blaming the CIA for creating Osama Bin Laden.

 

[Omnis]

I get the point that the statement is indicative of the kind of fundamentalist thinking on the side of the Israelis, but I don't accept that it's useful to dig it out every time there is a conflict against the Palestinians. It was wrong then and it remains wrong now.

Yes, you're right about that. However, I never hear this side portrayed in our TV news, so this was pretty striking to me. Makes you wonder why we have people in our country like that one lady scared to death that "Barack Obama is a(n) muslim/a-rab".

Depends on what you mean by "pre-meditated". Israel may well have been waiting on Hamas to give them the opportunity to deal with them militarily - but it would be unfair to say that Israel themselves are the ones who have handed them the rope with which to hang themselves... Hamas are sponsored by Iran, and Iran are using Hamas and the Palestinians as proxies, just as the US are using Israel as a proxy to further their interests in the region. But this proxy war is only of secondary importance to Israel and the Palestinians themselves...

Israel may be only too happy to see Hamas set themselves up for this fall, but to imply that Israel are somehow complicit in the attacks on itself by Hamas is almost as ridiculous as suggesting that 9/11 was done with the approval of the Neo-Cons.... just because the behaviour of Hamas has played into their hands strategically doesn't mean that Israel are behind Hamas's behaviour... I prefer to accept the idea that Hamas's behaviour is dictated by their own fundamentalist ideology and that their methods are a product of desparation and the moral bankrupcy of their bigotry. Funnily enough, you could say the exact same for the Israeli government.


Don't know much about that but I'd hazard a guess that this is old news - a bit like blaming the CIA for creating Osama Bin Laden.

I did not mean to imply that Israel was complicit. You mention the 9/11 conspiracy to that end but I see it rather like the Iraqi invasion. There is enough information to know that there were plans to go into Iraq and remove Saddam Hussein, etc, and that all that was needed was an excuse to go. Likewise, I'm saying that Israel had to have planned such an invasion far in advance, and that they were waiting for Hamas to give them an excuse to invade Gaza. Rocket fire into your country is certainly a better excuse than the U.S. had for invading Iraq, but my point is simply that an invasion of this scale could not simply be a reaction to a few rockets. It had to have been previously considered and on the table for some time.

Finally, I agree with your last comments. Blowback may be old news, however, but it is very real. You can't victim-blame, but there is no doubt that certain meddling can contribute to the meddler getting burned.

 

[Keef]

It had to have been previously considered and on the table for some time.

I see no problem with that. A military must be prepared to deal with unforseen problems, and must plan for all sorts of things, whether they happen or not. Though I have no proof, it wouldn't suprise me if the US has a very detailed plan for dealing with Iran, this conflict, China, North Korea, and all those guys. THey're just not about to tell anyone about it. You actually think the countries of the world trust each othre? Hell no. They've all got plans. And they probably hope they'll never have to execute them.

 

[Omnis]

The problem is it's entirely disproportionate as a response, and it's against Palestinians and not just Hamas.

 

[magburner]

The problem is it's entirely disproportionate as a response, and it's against Palestinians and not just Hamas.

I've given up on this conflict. After the refusal of Hamas to accept a ceasefire that they were 'actively seeking', I think I've finally realised that the ordinary Palestinian has an enemy in Hamas as much as Hamas has an enemy in Israel. Israel is guilty of some shocking crimes within this conflict, but Hamas are equally guilty by giving the Israeli's motive to commit them.

If there is to be an end to this, the cylce of violence needs to be ended. Israel needs to take the lead on this because as much as I detest their actions, I believe that they are more capable of change than Hamas.

People often forget about the children in conflicts like these, but it is children that hold the key to the future peace in the region. Israel is creating many 'future martyrs' with its action, no matter how justified they feels their response is. An orphaned child, or a child that loses a sibling or a parent will only have hate for those that committed the crime.

I also feel that the Gaza conflict is like a fire started deliberately by Hamas, but the Israeli's are trying to put out that fire with petrol, not water!

 

[YSSMAN]

Hoping for a peaceful resolution at this point just seems like a waste of time. Until the international community actually comes together and actually does something to stop Israel from either a) having the power to do this or b) thinking they have the power to do this without consequence... Even with a cease fire, it isn't outrageous to think it could (*cough* would *cough*) happen again.

 

[Joey D]

Once again Israel feels the need to intercept and capture American citizens who are humanitarian missions. Seriously why the hell does the US support this country? They attack our boats, in international waters, and then hold out citizens against their will, all while they are trying to bring aid to the people who are the collateral damage of war.

Israel navy intercepts boat with ex-U.S. Rep. McKinney

The Israeli navy took control of a boat that violated an Israeli blockade and crossed into Gazan waters Tuesday, the Israel Defense Forces said, while a Gaza group said the ship was carrying humanitarian aid, a former U.S. congresswoman and a Nobel laureate.

The boat's crew included former U.S. Rep. Cynthia McKinney, according to the Free Gaza Movement, a human rights group that sent the boat it calls "Spirit of Humanity" from Cyprus.

Along with McKinney, who served six terms in the House of Representatives from Georgia and was the Green Party's presidential nominee in 2008, Israeli authorities took 20 people into custody, the group said.

Also aboard, the group said, was Mairead Maguire, who co-founded a group that worked for peace in Northern Ireland. Maguire and co-founder Betty Williams received the Nobel Peace Prize in 1977 for their work.

IDF said the Israeli navy contacted the boat, which it called the Arion, while it was still at sea and warned the crew they would not be allowed to enter Gazan waters "because of security risks in the area and the existing naval blockade."

Disregarding all warnings, the boat entered Gazan coastal waters, IDF said. An Israeli navy force intercepted, boarded and took control of the boat, directing it toward Ashdod, Israel, IDF said.

The boat's crew, the military said, would "be handed over to the proper authorities."
Don't Miss

* Israel moves forward with settlement construction

Without naming individuals on the boat, IDF confirmed the incident it described was the same one detailed by the Free Gaza Movement.

According to the Free Gaza group, McKinney said, "This is an outrageous violation of international law against us. Our boat was not in Israeli waters, and we were on a human rights mission to the Gaza Strip," before authorities confiscated cell phones.

"President Obama just told Israel to let in humanitarian and reconstruction supplies, and that's exactly what we tried to do. We're asking the international community to demand our release so we can resume our journey," McKinney said, according to the group.

McKinney's father, former Georgia state legislator Billy McKinney of Atlanta, said he received a call from his daughter about 3 a.m. Tuesday. She told him "I'm OK. I'm OK," then hung up as Israeli military began to board the ship, Billy McKinney said. He added that the U.S. State Department gave his family a contact with the U.S. Embassy in Israel but by Tuesday night the family had not heard anything back from the embassy.

IDF said the aid aboard the boat would be delivered to Gaza "subject to authorization."

"Any organization or country that wishes to transfer humanitarian aid to the Gaza Strip can legally do so via the established crossings between Israel and the Gaza Strip with prior coordination," IDF said.

Free Gaza said the Spirit of Humanity voyage is the eighth such trip the group has launched. Five succeeded, the group said, but the Israeli military stopped attempts in January and December 2008.

Some how I really do not buy the IDF's story considering their history.

 

[Solid Fro]

Hey Israel! You can keep her!

 

[Omnis]

McKinney is alright. Israel is psycho.

 

[Solid Fro]

Hey Israel! Take her troofer friends with you!

 

[Joey D]

Hey Israel! You can keep her!

No they can't, she is still an American citizen.

 

[Metar]

To be honest, though, I don't see them saying they were in International waters - they said Gazan waters, IDF said Israeli waters. Gazan waters have been Israeli waters for the past 42 years: Like it or not (I don't like it at all), the Israeli navy has been in control of Gazan waters, controlling shipping and fishing in the area.

The blockade is a disaster, and yes, it should stop - but I don't think making a fuss about a celebrity's ship getting boarded is right. Single actions rarely make the big change and often fail - it's constant pressure that makes a difference. Other than "making a point", these ships don't help much: The amount of supplies that they can provide borders on useless. The real way forward would be pressuring the new Israeli right-wing prick of a PM and his even-worse ministers to lift the blockade on the trucks carrying supplies. Kids in Gaza need basic food and water, they need books, they even need pencils - none of which are things they can get.