Monday, October 19, 2009

Goldstone trashing modeled on Holocaust denial

The Zionist blogosphere is an example of an MPS (mutual praise society). One blogger writes a post and up come a zillion others who copy paste it. Multidirectional flattering follows and they all end up marveling at how thoroughly they've convinced each other that Israel is what keeps the world going and that the Palestinians are a piece of crap.

Take, for instance, Yaacov Lozowick's piece of yesterday. It was immediately transcribed verbatim by Elder of Ziyon, with the customary commendation, and from then on it seems to have gone viral. In due time, Lozowick will approvingly reproduce a post by Elder of Ziyon and the masturbatory cycle will be completed.

The post is part of a massive Zionist effort to trash the Goldstone Report, the document produced by an inquiry mission sent to Gaza to investigate Israeli and Hamas war crimes during Israel's invasion of the Strip in early 2009. The strategy of the whole effort is disturbingly reminiscent of Holocaust denial techniques. The Zionists pick on this or that minor detail that may be wrong, just like the deniers point to several inconsistencies in the stories of Holocaust survivors, and they conclude that there were no Israeli war crimes, just like the deniers conclude that there was no Holocaust. Let's quote it in full to see how it works:

On page 200 of the Goldstone Report we find this sentence:

706. The Israeli ground offensive from the east reached al-Samouni neighbourhood around 4 a.m. on 4 January 2009. In addition to the ground forces moving in from the east, there were, in all likelihood, heliborne398 troops that landed on the roofs of several houses in the area.

Should you wonder what that means, heliborne troops (and how would the Commission members have known?), you can follow footnote 398:

One witness told the Mission that on 5 January 2009, walking on Salah ad-Din Street towards Gaza, he saw by the roadside parachutes Israeli troops had used to land in the area.

Israel has not used parachutes in battle since 1956. I've never heard of parachutists in any army jumping from helicopters, because the two methods contradict one another. Parachutists jump from mid-altitude airplanes, and aim at large areas since they cannot be guided to precise points. Helicopters land troops on precise points; the troops jump out from a height of a foot, or three.

I haven't heard of Israeli troops being flown by helicopter into battle in Gaza, but who knows? Maybe it happened. If so, eyewitnesses would be able to tell about it in one, very clear case: if they saw the helicopters coming in, effectively landing, and then leaving troops behind them. It's that simple.

The story told by the witness is straight from some Arabian tall tale. I am totally at loss for an explanation as to why the fact finders would have wished to cast themselves as giving the time of day to such fabulists, but I'm at loss for an explanation about lots of things in their report. Keep in mind, however, that one of the four members was chosen for being a military man, and some of their staff were hired for their military expertize, so it's not that they didn't know better.


Unfortunately for Lozowick, he can't rein his own troops in, and his followers, unable to refrain from boasting their own expertise, comment:

I had a friend who served in the US green berets who told me that during training they used to jump with small parachutes from the heights of around 10 meters. Ussually such jumps are necessary for cases where the surface doesn't allow the helicopter to land or where rapid dislodge is needed.(Anonymous)

I remember reading similar accounts from Soviet Spetsnaz - 50 meter parachute descents - but we're talking special forces jumping out of a ultra-low flying aircraft attempting to evade radar. (Victor)


Although the reader then adds "There is simply no need for this kind of drama in Gaza," it's clear from the start that Lozowick is no expert in what he so authoritatively talks about.

But that's not the main point here. The main point is that from Lozowick's post it would seem that how the troops arrived to the site is essential to the war crime being described, and that if ground vehicles were used instead of helicopters the whole accusation will be debunked.

And that's not the case. The paragraph cited is the introduction to a story called "The killing of Ateya al-Samouni and his son Ahmad," which describes the murder of a man who was shot at point-blank range while he was with his arms raised, and of his 4-year-old son, who was denied medical attention after having sustained critical wounds from shots fired by the soldiers occupying the al-Samounis' house.

Now while the parachutes by the roadside are hearsay, the crime itself is not hearsay. There are names and death certificates, and a forensic examination of the corpses can be demanded. By making an enormous deal of a minor and thoroughly peripheral detail, the Zionists make an attempt, not very successful, at planting a red herring that will divert attention from documented deaths that appear to have taken place outside of a combat situation.

The world, however, knows better than that, and understands that a (possibly) inaccurate claim about troop transportation or a misplaced semicolon do not alter the general picture of lots of unwarranted deaths. That's why some top Israelis are beginning to regret that Israel chose to boycott Goldstone: Israel could have described exactly what happened to the al-Samounis if it had collaborated with the mission. Although, from another perspective, maybe it's precisely because it would have had to that it didn't.

44 comments:

Anonymous said...

these zionist propoganists regurgitate the spin so many times that these lies finally become facts for the purblind orthodoxy.

they remind me of a drowning man who will cling to anything to stay afloat, even his CAMERA

Gert said...

HB:

This is where you nailed it in one:

"The strategy of the whole effort is disturbingly reminiscent of Holocaust denial techniques. The Zionists pick on this or that minor detail that may be wrong, just like the deniers point to several inconsistencies in the stories of Holocaust survivors, and they conclude that there were no Israeli war crimes, just like the deniers conclude that there was no Holocaust."

Holocaust deniers, Creationists, Flat Earthers, Truthers, Birthers and many other conspiracy theorists all apply the same principle.

Anonymous said...

do you agree with the folks who shouted down olmert at chicago? i recall when the iranian leader spoke at columbia, we jews felt it would be wrong to stop his freedome of speech...he spoke.

to me they looked like a handful of thugs who stopped someone from giving speach...it only shows how intolerant and 15th century they actually are. freedom of speech means nothing.

btw, i am callie from elders blog.

Ibrahim Ibn Yusuf said...

I think Olmert should have been allowed to speak. Arguments should be responded to with arguments.

Anonymous said...

I was wondering what you would say....I was thinking that perhaps Elder should ban you from his blog for posting that holocaust joke but after seeing your reply maybe he is right in letting you stay...he clearly doesn't think you should be banned.
well I don't agree with most of what you say but I will give you the fact that you are not a holocaust denier and you may not be an anti semite even. oergaps you are just misguided.

Gert said...

Hey, waddayaknow HB, oergaps you're not even an anti-Semite, just misguided. That's 3 weeks obligatory attendance of Birthright seminars for your penitence, at the very least...

Of course Olmert should have been allowed to speak: in the ICC in The Hague I'd love to hear what he's got to say for himself...

Anonymous said...

Belgium has a dark history of how it deals with Jews....I dont' think for a moment he could have a fair treatment there.
The fact he was shouted down by a screaming mob ( 30 inside) and 130 outside.....shows intolerance and stupidity.
Myself, I disagreed with Cast Lead but that sort of thing makes me wonder.
The rockets fired into sounthern isreal have all but stopped.

Anonymous said...

gert, and it was your blog I saw it on...it was a disgrace.
as I said, the idea of free speach is very important.
there was much debate in the jewish community when the president of iran spoke at columbia, the president of columbia is jewish...he gave the go ahead for him to speak and no one shouted him down...protests were peaceful.
there has been a collective decision amoung the pro israel community not to sink to that sort of thing. for one thing, it doesn't work and it makes you look like a thug.
enough people have died, the stupidity has to stop somewhere.

Ibrahim Ibn Yusuf said...

there has been a collective decision amoung the pro israel community not to sink to that sort of thing. for one thing, it doesn't work and it makes you look like a thug.

Callie, you're wrong.

The pro-Israel community has reacted very violently against anyone who, exercising their freedom of speech, has denied the Holocaust. Robert Faurisson was beaten to a pulp. Ahron Cohen had his house pelted with thousands of eggs. Moshe Aryeh Frydman was savagely assaulted by an Israeli in Poland.

Also, Zionists actively lobby for free speech to be muzzled through other means, like:

a) Denying people tenure at universities because of their views about Israel.

b) Passing legislation or resolutions that sanction catch-all definitions of antisemitism, whereby campaigning for a binational state is antisemitic.

c) Withholding donations to universities that hold anti-Zionist meetings.

Gert said...

Anonymous:

The Hague is in Holland (The Netherlands), not Belgium.

How Jews were once treated in a country is not indicative of how they are treated there today. In the greatest benefactor of Israel, the US, during the Thirties, there existed anti-Semitism on a level similar to Europe. Ignorance about the Holocaust was rife in the US up to about the mid-seventies.

I've seen Zionist hecklers shout down anti-Zionist speakers like George Galloway and others.

HB and myself have been banned from Harry's Place for our anti-Zionist views. Also Tony Greenstein. I've had comments deleted at Simply Jews and Terry Glavin.

Ibrahim Ibn Yusuf said...

The Hague is in Holland (The Netherlands), not Belgium.

All the same, Gert.

C'mon, speak some Belgian for us.

Anonymous said...

There has never been any sort of pograms or widespread violence against Jews in the US, including in the 30's.
I would strongly disagree that an Isreali leader could get a fair trial in the Netherlands. One of the highest percentage of the Jewish population was murdered there....and since you don't seem to be holocaust denyers you may already know that.
Do you think there are any Jewish or pro Isreal professors in Egypt or Syria?
100s of thousands of people have been murdered in Darfur, so many people live under horribly repressive dictators thru out the Muslim world....
How much time do either of you spend speaking out about this on the net or anyplace?
Elder doesn't think you are an anti semite, I believe, and its only my opinion that is the reason he hasn't banned you.
And Muslims are not hassled in NYC the way Jews would be in Muslim countries and believe me NYC is a very Jewish city....

andrew r said...

callie, Olmert was shouted down by his victims. I don't think they owe him any civility. Plus, our tax dollars pay for Israel's warcrimes.

andrew r said...

That gives me an idea...let's try Olmert at Nuremberg.

Anonymous said...

i disagree totally. hamas fired thousands of rockets at civilians, and are sponsored and funded by iran...israel defended themselves and had the right to do that as tragic as it was.
hamas leaders fired from civilian areas on purpose and when the idf arrived ran across the border in amulances according to the pal authority or fatah, palestinians should look in the mirror and get some new leaders all around.
that said, enough people have died and suffered on all sides.
the stupidity of it has to stop.
and as long as hamas is in charge it has to stop by force. horrible, but true.
hasbara, thanks for letting me say what I think and good night to you all.
callie

andrew r said...

Rocket fire in 2008
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Peace/tablerocketattacks.html

Rocket fire during Cast Lead
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Peace/tablerocketattacks.html

2009:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Palestinian_rocket_attacks_on_Israel,_2009

Rocket fire was actually frequent for several months after Cast Lead and during the aerial bombing they increased drastically. Israel was able to get a lull during Jul.-Oct. due to the ceasefire that they violated on US election day (and the guerillas they killed then weren't even firing rockets!).

The ceasefire last year only showed Israel could stop the rockets through a political settlement. But it's more interested in war. In fact, Israel refused an agreement for the West Bank even though no rockets are fired there.

Anonymous said...

you have to be kidding! you actually believe that hamas wants to live in peace and harmony next to isreal?

so you are saying that iran is not funding them and the rocket attacks are sort of a way to just say hello? israel can't stop the blockage since then even more rockets would be there....it would be even worse.

if the rockets stopped, if they recognized israel it would be a border just like with jordan....but thats not what hamas wants.

andrew r said...

Israel isn't trying to annex Jordan - yet - and didn't have to remove settlers from there. And look at what the Palestinian Authority gets for recognizing Israel...or no, look at what they get the average family: http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article10802.shtml

Israel is not only annexing the West Bank, it's exacting a punitive toll on Gaza for having to remove its settlers. Hamas has demonstrated more ability to make peace while Israel hasn't stopped attacking Palestinians for one day.

BTW: Iran contributes a minority of Hamas' budget. They get more from private fundraising. This is also true for Hezbollah which is mostly funded by diaspora Lebanese.

Anonymous said...

you are actually saying you think israel would want to annex jordan???
really you have been reading electronic intifada too much you are starting to get paranoid delusions.
and how do you know iran isn't funding hamas?
wait, don't answer, its late, we will never agree and anyone who thinks iran doesn't have much to do with hamas and hizbollah and who quotes EI isn't someone I care to talk to...
that said, all the best to you all.
callie

andrew r said...

Well, if you're still here, I said Iran contributes some but not all to Hamas. Anyway, just relax and ignore the possibility Israeli soldiers might be harassing people for reasons nothing to do with self-defense. Everything will be okay in the nice little bubble.

Oh and this is where I got the info about Hamas' funding. http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/para/hamas-funds.htm

Anonymous said...

Andrew, I never said that Isreal was perfect and never claimed they didn't harass anyone...its not all bladk and white...

Gert and Andrew you should come some to Elder of Zyons's blog with HB sometime, we don't bite and you might be able to get a well...different point of view from what you normally read.

There was a good article this morning on the treatment of Palestinians in Arab countries that might interest you folka..

have a good day, hope to see you at Elders.

Gert said...

HP wrote: C'mon, speak some Belgian for us.

Well, 'noblesse oblige', of course: a typical 'Belgian' expression would be: 'Ei bennek, ei blavek!' ('Here I am and here I stay!')

;-)

Gert said...

Callie:

Have you ever read Gabriel Ashe's now quite famous We Rock! They Suck! You Suck! Everything Sucks! guide to Hasbarah?

What the Elders do is exactly what Gabriel describes and for seasoned anti-Zionist debaters that's plain boring. So, unless there's something out of the ordinary published at EoZ, you won't find me there in a hurry...

Anonymous said...

Not even being interested in anothers point of view leads nowhere.
I would never say 'everyone sucks' or take that attitude nor would Elder. You really can't make that sort of judgement of people you have just met.
I said, since you seem concerned about Palestinian rights, and not simply bashing Isreal there is an ariticle from the Independent on the refugee situation in Jordan and Lebanon that might be of some interest to you....
of course you can choose to assume all zionists, all pro israel people are not worth hearing, but my opinion is that there is always common ground and looking for that is a better idea than simply saying 'they suck'.
back to work for me....all the best to you, stop by elder, hb is a regular there....:+}

Gert said...

Fair points...

andrew r said...

callie, you said a few posts up you don't care to talk to someone who reads EI. Oh well... If I read anything pro-Zionist, it's only for research ideas or nerve building. I mean, there's more than enough research by Israelis like Benni Morris, nevermind Palestinian testimony, to crumple that Nation article the Elder linked today.

Could we find common ground? Maybe, but defending Israel is too much a faultline for me to walk on. And do I really want to interact with someone who counts digging a tunnel as "Deaths during terror or criminal activities" or writes, "The fact that Palestinian Arabs have less regard for their own lives than Israel has for PalArab lives is rarely reported." Ugh. And he probably suffixes Palestinian with Arab every single time he writes the term because there's just so many Arabs and they have so much land there's no way they could need that little sliver. See, I know the other viewpoint all too well, thank you.

For the record, As'ad abu Khalil, aka Angry Arab linked the Palestinian Diaspora article.

Anonymous said...

Suit yourself....and yes, EI in my view crosses the line too much toward anti semitism....at least they used too, perhaps they cleaned up a bit.
weapons are smuggled in thru those tunnels that are then used against civilians, and lets not forget that is how Gilad Shalit was kidnapped. Deaths tho are deaths are always sad, never something to be celebrated.
simply being in favor of israel existance is enough for you to write someone off....if you were really concerned about social justice and not more more internet hater obsessed with jews and israel you would see that a death is always always a tragic thing, and that enough of it has been enough.
Btw, benny morris has changed his tune of late...I would be surprised if you would like him now.
and to be honest, no you don't know 'the viewpoint' not at all. the fact that you assume you do speaks volumnes.
That said, i will go and read angry arabs blog a bit, I dont' know everything about the situation, and don't pretend to.
i don't dismiss the views of one people so handily, its why it all goes on and on...
it doesn't have to be a non zero sum game a la EI....
i am off, all the best to you guys.

Anonymous said...

well I checked out angry arab and noted him referring to jews as nazi's....not a good way to start a conversation, he clearly preaches to the converted....a zero sum game.

andrew r said...

"simply being in favor of israel existance is enough for you to write someone off...."

It depends on the individual. If they can write about the topic without vulgarizing like the Elder I can deal with them. And the commentors there don't run through anything I haven't heard.

It's not that I'm unconcerned about the refugees in other Arab states, it's more like, other than donating, I'm not sure what to do. I also suspect writing the US govt. is fruitless because it has shown indifference to how Palestinians are treated in their client states every step, not the least includes Iraq and Kuwait.

Benni Morris never changed his tune, he only turned the subtlety down to zero. Even as he revealed new facts about the expulsions inflicted by the Zionist paramilitaries, he took the opportunity to exonerate them for having planned it in advance and he always blamed the Arab side for the necessity. The important thing is, he destroys the credibility of any attempt to blame the Arabs directly for the refugees' flight.

Gert said...

Anonymous:

"Btw, benny morris has changed his tune of late [...]"

Like most Israelis he's veered to the Right. On what happened in 1948 I don't see any change in his position.

"i don't dismiss the views of one people so handily, its why it all goes on and on...
it doesn't have to be a non zero sum game a la EI...."


Then you must be one of the few at EoZ that claims to be open-minded. EI is 100 % pro-Israel and 100 % anti-Palestinian. It searches for events that support its stance so fervently that it ended up making a crucial mistake regarding the alleged case of Iranian rapes and torture.

EoZ is really by and large a smearsite: it offers no solutions or insights but seeks to promote Israel by trying desperately to delegitimise anything Palestinian/Muslim. It's the They Suck! argument of the Hasbara guide I linked to above.

"That said, i will go and read angry arabs blog a bit, I dont' know everything about the situation, and don't pretend to.

Reading and understanding Angry Arab requires a lot of knowledge about the ME at large: that blog isn't dedicated to the I-P conflict alone.

Anonymous said...

Hi Andrew, Hi Gert,

There are a wide range of views amoung pro israel people. Yes, Morris veered to the right like many in Isreal and I would argue in Palestine, but to say 'right' or 'left' are lables that apply more to American or British politics than to the ME.
What really happened I think is that people became very afraid and for good reason. People began to kill each other, to blow each other up, to return to the insanity of thinking if they can scare each other and kill each other someone will win.
Elder is to the right of where most of the American Jewish community is but I don't think his views can be simply dismissed, nor can those of Angry Arab. AA refers to Nazi analogies between Nazi's and Jews....always a way to simply preach to the converted...your response to Elder's position on the tunnels....its the same thing but a different side.
When the Americans and Canadians see how the UN does nothing about the explosion of rockets stored by Hizbollah in Southern Lebanon it makes the tragic events of Gaza more plausible.
I know a number of expats from Lebanon who hate Hizbollah Syria and Iran more than they do Isreal and that is saying something considering the terrible history between them..
If you can't really understand the other sides pain you can't understand the ME.
If you can't see why people in Upper Galilee are the way they are remember they grew up to the sounds of Syrian bombs and spend a quarter of their childhoods in bomb shelters while living in the country the and their parents were born in.
And of course scoff if you will but Jewish history is one of persecution and genocide, add that to the bombs....and you get Gaza...
Also, the Palestinians have suffered so much too. They have a right to be angry and afraid, many American Jews see that too.
You have to see the other side to really understand it...
have a good weekend...
Callie

Anonymous said...

At least if the dumb goyim keep posting their antisemitic rubbish on this shittly little blog, they won't be out there endangering jews.

Gert said...

Callie:

"What really happened I think is that people became very afraid and for good reason. People began to kill each other, to blow each other up, to return to the insanity of thinking if they can scare each other and kill each other someone will win."

Assuming you are referring to Hamas, they resorted to violence because the PLO's renunciation of terrorism had obtained very little for the Palestinians. Today the PA is viewed by many (most?) Palestinians as collaborators of Israel and the US. See also Abbas' ridiculous stance on Goldstone (later retracted).

"When the Americans and Canadians see how the UN does nothing about the explosion of rockets stored by Hizbollah in Southern Lebanon it makes the tragic events of Gaza more plausible."

That's because, to put it bluntly, the Americans and Canadians understand fuck all about the Middle East and are only interested protecting their Queen: Israel. Everything the US (and by extension the West) does is in function of protecting Israel, as well as using it to project power in the ME. Israel is the West's proxy. You're very naive. Do you know why up to about 1967 wasn't even remotely interested in Israel? Ask yourself why...

Hezbollah is the resistance movement of South Lebanon, borne out of the brutal invasion and occupation of Lebanon by Israel (in Leb I). There still today is no 'regular Lebanese army' worth speaking of. Hezbollah will not be dismantled until there is lasting peace in the ME. Every country in the world that hasn't got a regular army worth talking about should have their own 'Hezbollah'. I'm an atheist and I couldn't give a rat's arse about their 'Islamism'. They're a very effective fighting force.

"I know a number of expats from Lebanon who hate Hizbollah Syria and Iran more than they do Isreal and that is saying something considering the terrible history between them..
If you can't really understand the other sides pain you can't understand the ME."


Those Lebanese who hate Hezbolah are mainly Maronite Christians who want their country to be aligned with the (Christian) West, not the Arab/Muslim world. Despite that, even among Maronite Christians, there is considerable support for Hezbollah as a resistance movement against Israel. See also how Israel fared on the ground during Leb II.

I can see the pain from all sides but a bleeding heart isn't going to solve this quagmire.

"If you can't see why people in Upper Galilee are the way they are remember they grew up to the sounds of Syrian bombs and spend a quarter of their childhoods in bomb shelters while living in the country the and their parents were born in."

I can see the way they are but being that way doesn't solve anything.

"And of course scoff if you will but Jewish history is one of persecution and genocide, add that to the bombs....and you get Gaza..."

Callie, do you believe the victims of past crimes should be excused for or absolved from committing crimes themselves? Try and imagine what kind of world that would be...

"Also, the Palestinians have suffered so much too. They have a right to be angry and afraid, many American Jews see that too.
You have to see the other side to really understand it..."


Many Americans (Jews or not) are beginning to see it, but it's too little too late...

Gert said...

Oooops! That should have been:

Do you know why up to about 1967 the US wasn't even remotely interested in Israel?

Anonymous said...

Gert,

thanks for your reply....and I did read it.

its quite simple to see why its so hard to make any progress....

even a small concession that the other side may have some points is totally discounted by the majority of those interested in the subject and this makes any sort of rational discussion quite impossible.

Your view that the US and Canada dont' know anything about the ME and only care for Isreal is so simplistic....there are many many people here from the ME and many of us have traveled there, and of course the new media offers so many voices if only one were able to listen.

But thats the trouble isn't it? people talk, people talk and no one is listening...and wanting your country more aligned with the west as do many in Lebanon, and not only Christians is should not be a crime.

Thats all for now, all the best to you.

Callie

btw, the anon poster above you is a troll, no jew under 90 calls gentiles 'goyim'...normally one sees that term used on hate sites run by tim mcveigh types.

Gert said...

Callie:

"Your view that the US and Canada dont' know anything about the ME and only care for Isreal is so simplistic..."

No, it's not: when it comes to Joe Sixpacks what I say is by and large true. The US media are terribly incompetent when it comes to US foreign policy in general and extremely picky in what they report on Israel/Palestine. And what they report is very consistently pro-Israel. Even the 'most progressive' of the networks (CNN - the 'COMMUNIST News Network' - lol) rarely reports anything from the Palestinian perspective.

What is gradually changing things is the Internet, which allows ordinary Americans to obtain an alternative views at the click of a mouse. That's why American opinion is gradually shifting. Israel will increasingly launch 'Internet counter offensives', like The Israel Project's 'Dictionary on Israel'.

I still meet American commenters who quote from 'From Time Immemorial', go figure!

"[...] and wanting your country more aligned with the west as do many in Lebanon, and not only Christians is should not be a crime."

I didn't say it was. But those who hate Hezbollah do so mainly because they're Christian. Demographically speaking, Lebanon is the most complicated country in the world.

As regards the Anonymous troll, he's here a lot. How do you know he's not Jewish when so clearly he claims to be?

Gert said...

Oh and BTW, Callie, those relatively few Americans that do actually try and see things from both sides usually still make the crucial mistake of considering both sides to be somehow equivalent: this way they can lull themselves into believing this thing will be solved by 'talking'.

But both sides aren't equivalent at all: on the one side we have a fully functioning state with one of the most powerful armies in the entire world, equipped all the latest gadgets and gizmos (courtesy of the US), nuclear weapons (courtesy France and Britain) and even second strike capability, on the other side we have a stateless (and often homeless) People, dispossessed, impoverished, hemmed in and locked up, with an estimated 10 - 15,000 fighters armed with light weapons, improvised explosives and stove pipe 'rockets', no air force, no air defence, no Navy, no guided missiles.

Why on Earth would Israel give an inch to a People that essentially cannot touch them?

Only outside pressure applied to Israel can yield any results.

In the absence of that, Israel will sleepwalk into a de facto one state solution: it will expand and expand its WB settlements until there really is no more scope for a Palestinian state at all (assuming there still is today). At that point Israel will have two choices: genocide 'away' the Palestinians or assimilate them into Greater Israel...

Israel needs saving... from itself!

Arayus said...

Geert, thank you for posting in the comments section.

Your posts are incredibly informative.

Ernie Halfdram said...

Despite the barely intelligible comments you left on my blog, callie, I gave you the benefit of the doubt and provided a considered reply (https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=5873160920540394292&postID=3192187195989215366). On the same basis, I have now squandered five minutes of my life perusing that preposterous Elders of Ziyon blog where a bunch of idiotic hypocritical bigots are arguing that it's fine for a British university to refuse to enrol a woman wearing niqab on the grounds that some Muslims claim it's not a religious requirement for women to cover their faces, but 'just cultural' as if they thought religion was anything but just cultural. As if the Western requirement to cover your genitals was anything but just cultural. The Qur'anic prescription of modest dress at least provides scope for such an interpretation. I'm not aware of anything in the Torah you could interpret as requiring men to cover their heads, but I'd expect these same bigots to be the first to shriek antisemitism if anyone dared suggest they remove their kippot.

You talk about understanding the other side’s pain and then go on to bleat ‘hamas fired thousands of rockets at civilians’. Let’s leave aside the question of how you fire unguided rockets ‘at’ anything in particular, and the presence of Israeli soldiers and military facilities hiding behind civilians in the vicinity of Gaza. How many rockets, shells, and missiles has the Israeli military fired at civilians in Gaza? Surely, as you understand the other side’s pain so well, you’d be the one who can answer that question.

Here’s a little gedankenexperiment for you: Imagine a big, well armed thug beating a small woman. His mates are queuing up behind him for their turn. A crowd has gathered urging him on. The woman manages to lay her hand on a stone and in her anger and distress throws it at random, injuring one of the jeering voyeurs. Did she target innocent civilians? Is she guilty of crimes against humanity? If so, is that the most significant thing that happened in the scenario described? Would it be fair to say that while she may be culpable for the bystander’s injury, it was the thug’s action the precipitated the situation in the first place and that without it, there would have been no injury?

You criticise Hamas for receiving aid from Iran, but resile from criticising Israel for receiving aid from the bloodthirsty US government. You criticise Hamas for ‘smuggling’ arms through tunnels, but decline to criticise Israel for ‘importing’ arms in the open. You criticise someone unspecified for ‘kidnapping’ Shalit, who I think it it’s worth remembering was captured on duty, not hors de combat, but have nothing to say about the thousands of Palestinians ‘arrested’ and incarcerated by Israel. There’s only one explanation – Israeli pain is important and Palestinian pain doesn’t matter and you’ll find eminent philosophers spewing the same racist double standards ( http://bureauofcounterpropaganda.blogspot.com/2009/05/on-front-lines.html). No surprise you find Ziyon so comfortable – birds of a feather.

andrew r said...

Callie, at some point you have to take a side. Lots of moderate Zionists - and even a handful of Palestinians - think there's a happy medium between both narratives. Shortly before Cast Lead in St. Louis there was an informal negotiating session between Israelis and Palestinians who were willing to recognize each other's right to a state. Here, the balance of power disappeared and the Israelis felt it good and proper to ask them to demonstrate for the release of Gilad Shalit. When confronted with the fact of ~10,000 prisoners in Israeli jails the Israelis said they were arrested for wrong doing (think about this - they're okay with their country arresting people who aren't citizens and aren't in their country) and shouted down someone who said Israel only releases prisoners in exchanges when their sentences are almost up.

Examples like this only taught me you can't make peace with Israelis because they're entitled to use force against a whole population. Sure enough, one of them went on to write an op-ed for the Jewish Light about the necessity of Cast Lead. Of course it was only directed against Hamas, not Palestinians, but no one who thinks critically believes Israel only attacks terrorists.

It is true there's a range of pro-Israel views. And none of them are acceptable if you think every one has the right to leave and reenter their country and no one has the right to keep them out. That's what makes zionism incompatible with human rights.

This doesn't mean we're dismissing pro-Israel views. Every time we look at the other side we become more vehement in opposing it.

Gert said...

Ernie, you say it so well I'm now green with envy. Hats off to you!

Ernie Halfdram said...

Thanks, Gert. It's not every day my little interventions merit compliments like that, particularly from such an admirable source. But please, if you're among those who believe their religion requires them to cover their heads, no need to doff your lid on my account;-}

Gert said...

Nah, Ernie, I'm a good ol'atheist. Tolerant but non-believing...

Ernie Halfdram said...

Whew! Well you can't be too careful. As for me, I don't call myself an atheist because I wouldn't want to suggest that I thought the existence of supernatural entities was something I needed to take a position on:~]