Economic boycott of Israel?

[julianer]

Editor's Note: This article appears in the January 14 issue of the Norwegian newspaper Aftenposten.

Why an Economic Boycott of Israel is Justified

by Norman G. Finkelstein
Aftenposten | 01.14.2006

The recent proposal that Norway boycott Israeli goods has provoked passionate debate. In my view, a rational examination of this issue would pose two questions: 1) Do Israeli human rights violations warrant an economic boycott? and 2) Can such a boycott make a meaningful contribution toward ending these violations? I would argue that both these questions should be answered in the affirmative.

Although the subject of many reports by human rights organizations, Israel's real human rights record in the Occupied Palestinian Territory is generally not well known abroad. This is primarily due to the formidable public relations industry of Israel's defenders as well as the effectiveness of their tactics of intimidation, such as labeling critics of Israeli policy anti-Semitic.

Yet, it is an incontestable fact that Israel has committed a broad range of human rights violations, many rising to the level of war crimes and crimes against humanity. These include:

www.normanfinkelstein.com/article.php?pg=11&ar=130

[applegrove]

1. No recognition at all that Iran, Wahabis & Saddam Hussein funded

the terrorism that has kept peace at bay and Israelis terrified.

[passy]

3. By that reasoning, * can do no wrong, as he's only protecting us from OBL.

Let me use the analogy of patricide. If you are killed by your children don't you think that says something about the way you brought them up.
Maybe we should believe that Palestinians are not an oppressed people but are simply inherently evil, they must hate Israel for its freedoms I guess.

[applegrove]

7. I sympathize with Palestinians. But much less so when they fool

kids into blowing themselves up. The problem is that there has been a little excess oil money floating around the middle east - going to the warped passtimes of elites and not towards democracy or peace (which go against the sick needs of oilmen be they radical islamists or simply rich elites who do not want to share with their people and have used religion as an antidote to democracy). Doesn't just happen with Islam. Happening in the USA too.


I don't like Bush. Bush is not Israel. Bush vision is not mine or most of Israel's. I agree lots of work needs to be done on both sides. I agree that until Israel is in a state of grace (palestinians have land, autonomy, a nation, a chance to build something of their own) it is hard to agree with everything they aspire to be. But that does not mean sanctions.

They should have a chance at peace first. Now that Saddam isn't buying the family of each suicide bomber a fancy home, and now that Palestinians have a vote - now is not the time.

IMHO

[julianer]

11. Seriously read the article

It may give you a different perspective on Palesinian violence which, taken out of context, just seems senseless and coming from an inherent evil. This decontextualisation of the situation is a serious hurdle to understanding it.

[julianer]

10. That is pretty much the argument

I've seen it here from regular posters that Palestinians have a 'corrupt culture'. Racism, pure and simple is used to justify the continued occcupation.

The article makes clear that this racism is institutionalised in law: there are two separate laws governing the West Bank based on nationality. Where else has this happened? South Africa and Nazi Germany spring to mind.

[applegrove]

12. Oh - no doubt it is a two tiered system and the Pallestinians need

complete autonomy and access to programs with no interferance from Israel.

[eyl]

42. Wait, I thought

your position was that Israel should follow international law?

[julianer]

84. I don't get your point

are you pointing out some hypocrisy or inconsistency?

[eyl]

95. The situations under which

two legal systems exist - that is, that Palestinans are subject to a different legal system (which is a mix of Ottomanic, Mandatory, and Jordainian laws, plus Israeli Military Adminsitration regulations) tha the Israeli one - something which is often used to exemplify Israeli "discrimination" - is a direct result of the requirements of international law. See, for instance, GC4 Article 64. In fact, Israel's expanding the jurisdiction of Israeli law to cover the Palestinians could be seens as annexation.

[julianer]

112. I was thinking more on these lines

http://books.guardian.co.uk/review/story/0,,1690070,00.html

'The most telling of LeBor's details on Jewish methods is his account of the quasi-legal subterfuge by which all confiscated land was handed not to the state, of which Israeli Arabs were citizens, but to an institution called the Jewish National Fund. One of the JNF's founding articles held that property in its possession was the inalienable property of the Jewish people. Thus Arabs could neither appeal the decision nor apply for compensation. It was a racist land-grab worthy of apartheid South Africa at its worst, and between 1948 and 1990 Israeli Arabs lost almost one million acres. Even in 1950 a Jewish journalist called it "wholesale robbery in legal guise".'

And this:

http://www.arabhra.org/

'The Israeli Interior Ministry continues to repeatedly refuse Israeli citizenship to Qadar Ismail Mawasi, who three years ago was born in Nabulus when her mother from Baqa al Gharbiyyah in Israel was visiting her husband in the West Bank city.

Qadar's name was also not imprinted on her mother's ID as is usually done for children of Israeli parents. This denial of identity stems from the fact that she was born at the Rafidia hospital in Nabulus. Qadar's brothers, Fahmi and Ahmad are both Israeli citizens.

Qadar's mother, Izdihar Mawasi, says, "When I was in my last month of pregnancy (3 years ago) I was visiting my husband Ismail at his home in Nabulus; being from the West Bank, he is forbidden entrance into Israel. During that visit, I felt that I was about to deliver, so began my return to Baqa al Gharbiyyah. However, I was stopped at the checkpoint leading into Israel due to a security closure. This kept me in Nabulus, even though I told security staff that I was on the verge of delivery". Shortly after Qadar was born, Izdihar's husband suffered a heart attack and passed away; all this time her daughter had been living with her in Baqa al Gharbiyyah in Israel.

Izdihar then attempted to have her daughter registered at the Interior Ministry in Israel given their current residence within the State and Izdihar's status as an Israeli citizen, but was refused. Again, the reason given was that Qadar was born in Nabulus. Izdihar has been going to the Interior Ministry on multiple occasions (with all the appropriate documentation) but has continually been denied identity papers for her daughter.'

(taken from the linked site indirectly via http://jewssansfrontieres.blogspot.com/ which also details the first story above)

[eyl]

191. About Lebor

I haven't read the book, but his account seems wrong on its face. Arab property owners have both appealed seizure of land under the Absentee Property Law and received compensation (I'm afraid I'm too busy for a trip to the library right now, but I'll try to get you some figures later or tomorrow). As well, not all the land went to the JNF (and in any case, the land transferred to the ILA and JNF were public lands, not private lands, which remained in the control of the Custodian of Absentee Property); and lastly, while technically JNF lands can only be leased to Jews, in practise they have been leased to Arabs as well.

The second case does not appear on the linked website.

[julianer]

8. Did you read the article?

It wasn't about Iran, Wahabis and Saddam, it was about Israeli crimes and the complicity and inaction of the 'international community' in the face of these crimes.

[applegrove]

13. When the Israelis are in a position of being perhaps less scared

than they have been for years - with a wall and all - no, I'm not going to abandon them and be for sanctions. Israel less scared means chance for peace and deal-making.

Why on earth would anyone want to light a fire under Israel/Palestine when they are both having elections and moving along towards something... perhaps not peace.. but something.

Why now? You have to ask that. Let's see how far we (the whole world) can get on this peace train. The one in the station right now? THe one where even Sharon became a moderate? That one!

Not what Iranians, or any of the Sunnis want. But the Palestinians seem kinda curious about it - and the Israelis are trying and giving up stuff.

Let it be!

[julianer]

16. There is no peace train

Or, if there is, there's no steam and it's facing the buffers. The guard, Mr G. W. Bush, a drunken, dishonest incompetent, is thought by many to be determined that the train never leaves the station. He is helped by a succession of drivers who have turned round in their cabs and pretended to drive the train out of the station, but in reality, have just edged closer to the buffers.

Meanwhile on the station platform, thousands of impatient passengers want to get home because their houses are being taken over by the drivers' friends.

[applegrove]

20. Why do you link this thread on peace prospects in Israel or giving up

to Bush. Has nothing to do with him. Again - Pat Robertson & the neocons must be very unhappy with the peace that has a chance today. That a quite a few crazy settlers.

[Colorado Blue]

54. Lighting fires - that does in fact seem to be the purpose of

this kind of rhetoric, and I think it is reprehensible.

And you're correct - the party that Sharon founded, the centrist Kadima, would probably win an election today - without him. They do in fact represent the majority of Israelis.

[julianer]

86. You confuse rhetoric with reportage

But you are right - it is reprehensible that such injustice finds such ready support from you.

I can only presume you haven't read the article: you wouldn't call it rhetoric unless you are unconcerned at Israeli injustice and Palestinian suffering, IMO.

Be brave, read the article and then re-appraise your support for such crimes. You'll have to do it sooner or later, like the supporters of apartheid had to face up to the reality of their actions.

The first step to peace lies within you.

[passy]

2. You're playing with fire posting this.

I'm just saying, even here on DU it's hard to get a balanced look at the situation in the Middle East.
This is one of the most well research and balanced piece on what can be done to help put an end to the conflict, but you will find that this article will be attacked and pulled apart very quickly, although I hope that it won't.

[julianer]

5. You don't have to tell me about the difficulty

involved in posting to this forum. I have no doubt that I will be called a pro-terrorist anti-semite before this one is done.

But, the fact that there are legions of people here who will shout down and bully any poster they disagree with is, actually, an incentive for me to post the truth.

You need a thick skin here. The Likudist/Sharonist grouping is not known for its gentle tactics.

[Colorado Blue]

67. Just because people disagree with you, it does not make

them rightwingers or Likudniks.

I grew up in a Socialist household. Many of us did. We hold certain principles dear.

What we object to is creating more victims, one-sided presentations of the situation, demonization of an entire nationstate, historical revisionism and draconian solutions that will inflict MORE pain and guarantee more violence and misunderstanding.

To me, that seems diametrically opposite to the idea of the ESSENTIAL "left wing" philosophy: that of helping people.

On the other hand, there have always been some on the left who have recommended violent means, revolutions, and totalitarian governments.

I guess that's just not my style.

[julianer]

80. You claim to be brought up in

a socialist household yet you seem to be unaware of the most basic tenet of socialism - the right of self-determination of a people. That is - no occupation or colonisation.

Socialism isn't about 'helping people' - that's social work - it's about liberation from exploitation.

Could you tell me what position Israeli socialists take on the occupation and where your opinions differ from those of Likud and Sharon?

[Colorado Blue]

115. The Likud, which by the way isn't monolithic, essentially

believes that the land west of the Jordan is inherently part of Israel. Many feel that this is legally so, not just biblically so. People in Hebron, for example, have deeds to their property. The millenia-long "occupation" of the West Bank by Jews, and the millenia-long Jewish majority in Jerusalem, can't be ignored when discussing their philosophy and neither can the conclusions drawn by the League of Nations when the entire Palestine Mandate was to become the Jewish homeland.

Their point of view is that, since 78% of the Mandate has already gone to Jordan, why shouldn't Israel keep the remainder? Also, since the entire Middle East is now practically judenrein - why shouldn't THESE refugees have a home in Israel? Why isn't that a fair population exchange, and a fair exchange of valuable property?

Also, many in the Likud were opposed to withdrawing from Gaza, some for religious regions, some for legal reasons, others for security reasons.

Unilateral withdrawal without peace agreements is seen as suicidal by many on the right. And in fact, the West Bank was captured because Jordan attacked. It would never have been taken had King Hussein not entered the war, and in fact Dayan assured him that this was so. However, apparently Hussein felt bound by treaty and obligation to Syria and Egypt, and he did attack. Gaza, Dayan believed should not have been touched but apparently, heady with victory, it was taken as well. Subsequently, settlements were built there to provide some buffer zones between Israel and Egypt. Had peace agreements been forthcoming from the Arab League, the land would have been returned ages ago, as the Sinai was returned to Egypt.

The problem with giving it to the Palestinians was simply this: there was no governing body, representing the Palestinians, to give it to. The PLO was not seen as a reliable partner, seeing as how their covenant calls for the destruction of Israel, and the Oslo Accords actually resulted in an immediate increase in terrorism and fatalities, the rejection of Palestinian statehood by Arafat, so empowering Arafat did not in fact lead to peace either.

On the one hand one it is easy to say, the land should belong to the Palestinians, on the other hand the real-world problems involved were and remain, daunting. For one thing, Israel really is a democracy. Even the religious kooks and the far right, have rights. Shall we just drag them around by the hair? That actually has happened, in the Sinai, when it was returned to Egypt and Israelis lost their homes, in Gaza, when the land was returned to the Palestinians and Israelis lost their homes, and people are now being dragged around the West Bank. Do you have any sense what this does to a democratic state? The irony, of trying to provide justice for the Palestinians, by violating the rights of Israelis.

The fact is, Israel itself is complex, rich in political and religious and social ideas, and to simply ignore that spectrum, and to ignore that fact that it's a democracy and CAN'T legally or morally cross certain lines without doing untold damage to itself, is against all progressive principles. So we must be patient and work for a concensus - which in fact is happening. The center IS holding, and centrist politics are becoming the dominant force.

And in fact, in 1973, the buffer zone proved to be invaluable, as has the intelligence provided by Israel's management of the West Bank. The number of attacks which have been stopped is impressive. Israel's security concerns are very real.

So those of us who can see from more than one angle, see the rights of one groups of people AND the rights of the other, and can't see either sanity or justice in quick fixes. Does this make sense?

Sharon in his last years, came to feel that the Palestinians also have rights to this same region, the West Bank, and should have the opportunity to create a state. And of course he led the controversial withdrawal from Gaza, which I supported in the hopes that the Palestinians there would have more freedom, more space and more opportunities for economic advancement. I'm discouraged now, however, by what appears to be growing discord, by the continuous attacks on Israel, and fear that the empowerment of Hamas via election will lead to more war. I hope I am wrong.

I believe, like many others in the center and on the left, that the rights of the Palestinians can't be ignored - but also that they are our brothers. We should not be fighting, but working together to create something new, something that hasn't been seen before. I also believe that, as Arabs live within Israel, Jewish people should be able to live in a Palestinian state. I don't think that's unreasonable.

But neither do I think that cultural differences between Israelis and Palestinians can be ignored. That is why I can't support a one-state solution. The issues of women's rights alone argue against that. Even within Israel, Israeli Arabs still have problems with honor killings. The increasing power of fundamentalist-type Islamism among the Palestinians suggests that trying to mix this group with people whose women serve as soldiers and wear bikinis, would cause serious conflict, even violence. And, Israel really is multicultural, multiethnic, multiracial. Israelis come in all colors, all races. What do the Palestinian Arabs think about this? I don't know. But studying the history of dhimmitude, and simply looking at the way minorities are treated and perceived throughout the Middle East, I don't think a Jewish minority would be safe, let alone able to flourish, in a one-state solution.

So I believe there must be two states, or a confederation of several states, for example, with Israel, a Palestinian state, Jordan, Egypt, Lebanon and Syria.

And I don't support a solution to the problem that involves further violence or coercion. I just don't think that dragging hundreds of thousands of Jewish people from their homes, destroying Arab residences in Jerusalem or destroying the rights of Jewish people to self-determination in Israel, is just or fair either. So we have to come up with new ideas, regional ideas: work with neighboring Arab states, IMMEDIATELY start working to relieve conditions of Arabs still in refugee camps, acknowledge the expulsion and dispossession of hundreds of thousands of Sephardic and Mizrachi Jews. There are so many problems and so much trouble has been caused by the fact that two groups of people have been used as pawns by the great powers, by the interests of powerful families,

I believe Labor in Israel, except for some on the hard left, is pretty much in line with these ideas, some even including some right of return for those ORIGINAL refugees from 1948, though I don't see how dispossessing people in certain houses would be right. But I also don't see why they shouldn't come home, to live somewhere in Israel, if that is what they want. I also think Peretz, the Labor leader, would sit down with Abbas and just start talking, not putting conditions on this and on that, and I can support this idea. If Hamas is elected, that might be another story. But who knows?

The overarching problem is war. There is a lack of trust, dating back to the 1920's, that the Palestinians want to get rid of all Jews and certainly, Israel, and the many decades of war and terror tend to bear that out. So for the time being I reluctantly think the wall is a good idea, withdrawal from the territory beyond the wall will probably occur, and some sharing of Jerusalem will probably occur. I don't think a situation that has taken decades to create is going to be fixed overnight. So I believe in small steps, patience and reconciliation.

Also, I don't think the settlements per se represent a threat to a Palestinian state. There are bad settlers, who hurt people, but many others who are good, who before the intifada had created an economy and relationships with the Palestinians. The effects of the intifada on this situation can't be underestimated. It has been terribly harmful. The Palestinian economy had been growing, people drove back and forth, there was interaction. Now there is so much hatred, fear and distrust. Those are our real enemies.

Finally, your view of Socialism is different from mine. "Self-determination", for one thing, works both ways. The Jewish people have won their land, paid for it with millions of lives over 2,000 years of diaspora, second-class citizenship in the middle east, struggle, hard work and war. They did their best, in the 19th and 20th centuries, to play by the rules of their time, and were confronted by xenophobia and racism and rejection, and with murder. These are the same problems we now confront, when trying to integrate Muslim populations into the West - but they were much worse for the Jewish pioneers, who were in a far more desperate situation.

And it must never be forgotten: when speaking of indigenous people - we too, are indigenous people.

This isn't at all akin to some white guys colonizing South Africa. We are akin to the Britons who came home with the Normans, along with their stories of King Arthur. If you look at British literature, you can see a similar story. King Arthur fought the Saxons, who ultimately won and conquered the land. In those stories the Saxons were the enemy. In Robin Hood and Ivanhoe, the Saxons were the heroes and the Normans were the enemy. Yet riding with the Normans, were descendents of indigenous Britons who'd been expelled by the Saxons. Thus, the complexity and also the error of trying to compare Israel to South Africa.

That kind of rhetoric is truly misleading, unfair and historically inaccurate.

The war of 1948 was not inevitable. But when it broke out it was existential. The object was to destroy the Israelis absolutely. Had their defenses failed we'd be telling a different tragic story. But they survived, and Israel exists, and has the right to exist, and the Jewish people have the right to self-determination as a people, within their state.

The primary problem seems to be, where do the borders go? That has never actually been determined. The Green Line was never a real border, just an armistice line, drawn between dead bodies and burned-out cars. It is illogical, and ultimately indefensible; it leaves major holy sites out of reach and major populations, stranded. So a sensible border needs to be created.

Finally, the whole rhetoric of revolution and liberation, seems calculated to create bloodshed, to inflame hatred. My mother told me this was a key difference between Socialism and Communism (I had a Communist aunt, though she mellowed) - Socialists believe in evolution, Communists in revolution.

And if socialism isn't about helping people, then it's meaningless. Terms like "self-determination" mean nothing, if the struggle leads to a pile of rubble, a blown-up bus, the destruction of everything beautiful, hopeful and free.

I apologize for the length of this post and hope I haven't put you to sleep. But I don't see in black and white. I see in a million colors and a million shades of gray, and it's difficult for me to communicate subtle ideas effectively.

Shalom.

[Coastie for Truth]

116. Very good

I think the over heated rhetoric on both sides -the Haredi in the USA and the "Socialists" in Europe are just fueling the conflict.

Let me add as to "Socialists" - two of my uncles were blacklisted by McCarthy/HUAC. I know "Socialist" and these young "Socialists" give "Socialism" a bad name.

[Colorado Blue]

121. I'm confused by them actually. My mom taught me that

Socialism is #1, evolutionary, but #2, is primarily concerned with economic issues, such as ownership of the means of production, economic justice and safety nets for people, and above all, the maxim: to each what he needs, from each what he has to give. Thus, the individual's contribution to his culture is maximized, his essential needs are met. People don't starve, they have the opportunity to excel, to do their best work.

Under pure capitalism, for example, artists are often hungry, people with doctorates drive cabs. Only wealthy people have good medical care. True socialism would eliminate many of these problems and indeed, good social programs exist that try and compensate for some of life's misfortunes.

I don't know from this new Socialism, which seems more like Communism, and which is now selecting certain nationalities or peoples for salvation and damning others.

That seems highly discriminatory, it seems to suggest that violence is acceptable, and it does strike me as being in conflict with progressive values.

Another point - I have met victims of communist takeovers. I had a Cuban Art History professor who'd lost all to Castro. At the time, I was waving the red flag myself a bit, and didn't really understand his sorrow and his anger. Now, almost 40 years later, I'm beginning to GET IT. And too, time is making me understand the Palestinian situation better as well, and it's making me want to find good, practical, creative ways to help make things better.

Maybe people really do have to live, work, suffer and experience loss? Does each generation have to learn this for itself?

[julianer]

129. You make some valid points

but you are distorting very old political traditions to fit into your worldview. You seem to do this in order to justify Israel's very non-socialist actions.

If you are a socialist you generally know it. You find yourself motivated by the suffering of people you've never met, not supporting the people who are inflicting the suffering. These things are not easy to confuse.

The 'practical, creative' solution would be the adoption of socialism as a method of governance for a unified state of Israel/Palestine. Equality under the law is also a basic requirement of socialism.

[Colorado Blue]

196. We keep coming back to this idea of a unified state. In the

best of all possible worlds, one in which there was no xenophobia, no bigotry, no sexual discrimination, no culture conflict and no history of hatred, fear, terror and war - I think this would be fine. There would be no need of a majority Jewish state in that case because nobody would be trying to wipe out Jews in the first place, although that still doesn't argue against the case for cultural survival - which every people EXCEPT the Jews are apparently entitled to.

Think about that, when you have time. Isn't it ironic? And sad? Communism did try to wipe out religion, in the Soviet Union - but it didn't work. Modern day leftists defend Islam vigorously, even if Islamic law often seems to contradict democratic values. Yet Jewish cultural survival, in Israel, is considered wrong by some on the Left, even though Israel strongly supports democratic values, equal rights for women, freedom of religion and the press, and provides a home for people of all races and ethnicities, from all over the world, most of whom are in Israel because of persecution to the point of actual genocide, let alone cultural bias and xenophobia.

I find that strange. And it strikes me as odd that any leftist would seek to demolish such a state or harm her people, in any way.

In any case, just on the issue of physical survival, given the current circumstances in I/P, I think it's impractical, at least for now, not to mention coercive, to try an impose a one-state solution. It would be wrong to force the people of Israel to accept somebody else's vision of what their state should be. Socialists should respect that coercion and force are wrong, should they not? And self-determination shouldn't apply just to The Group Of The Month - which in your argument supports Palestinians at the expense of Israelis.

I can see a situation in which the people of the West Bank would be given a chance to vote on their preference: do they wish to become citizens of Israel, live in a Jewish majority or strong plurality state, adopt the principles of the West? I'd be interested to see the results. I'd bet that most would say no. The intifada suggests that not only do they not wish to become citizens of Israel, they wish her off the map.

But if they said yes, or if a majority said yes, then that would something to seriously consider and possibly act upon. Then you'd have people freely choosing a path, to break with the past. Maybe if that were the case, it would be something to build on. I'd try it, if I were in charge of the P.A.

At least we do seem to agree on the need for reconciliation. But the blame for past and continuing crime and damage is apparent on both sides, not just on one. If one is going to accuse IDF of crimes, then one must also acknowledge PLO, al Husseini, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, their forebears and their counterparts. They more than IDF, have and continue to deliberately target civilians. The proportion of dead Israeli women is especially high.

Also, I think that one can't assume who's motivated by other peoples' suffering and who is not. I could as easily say, a socialist would also be motivated by the suffering of the Israelis. All these vaguely supported accusations of IDF soldiers killing Palestinian children deliberately, pale beside the absolutely concrete evidence of homicide bombers blowing up buses and terrorists shooting pregnant women, murdering babies in their father's arms.

There's more than enough blame to go around here. That's why I think it's crucial to stop the damnation and start the reconciliation, right here and now, between us. If we out here are at each other's throats, how can THEY be expected to heal?

The Left must set an example - of compassion, rationality, mutual respect and moderation, and above all I think we shouldn't be deliberately trying to foment violence, and we certainly shouldn't be trying to hurt each other.

[Englander]

201. That post was not bad, really.

You almost had me until the last four paragraphs, the blatant propaganda, &
one-sided view of history, & the situation, that was contained in those paras
broke the spell, though. It wasn't subtle, at all. I support your call for
the need for reconciliation, but rewriting history does not, imo, move that
any closer. The idf have, on occasions, deliberately targeted children, to
deny that is to deny documented case, after documented case. At some point
that issue needs to be addressed, & once that is admitted, further questions
can be asked, & discussed.

'IDF's war on children

Twighlight zone: Suffer the little children
GIDEON LEVY
Ha'aretz, 4 December 2004

In the present intifada, 323 Palestinian children under the age of 14 have been killed by IDF fire. Three recent examples from Nablus...

Why waste ammunition? A few days ago, an Israel Defense Forces soldier fired at two boys in the casbah of Nablus. Just a lone bullet that penetrated the body of one of the boys, exited, penetrated the second boy, and killed both of them. Two 15-year-old boys standing with their arms around each other on the street that descends to the marketplace.

The soldier didn't "confirm the kill" after his two victims fell; perhaps that is why nobody on our side was shocked by this horrific double killing. But in two homes in the casbah of Nablus, dead children were being mourned. One, Amar Banaat, was his mother's only child, born after 15 years of infertility; the other, Montasser Hadada, had lost his father only three months ago. On the wall, next to the picture of the two children, there is also one of their good friend Hani Kandil, who was killed in the same place in the casbah several months ago. Three pictures of dead children on the wall.

Not far from there, in the casbah, they are mourning another child who was killed, who died with a huge hole in his chest. This is the home of Khaled Osta, who was 9 years old. Muataz Amudi, aged 3, was fortunate: The bullet just pierced his leg as his father carried him in his arms in the middle of the night, fleeing after the soldiers told them to evacuate their home.

Nablus is mourning its children. Those among us - including the chief of staff - who were so horrified by the affair of the "confirmed killing" of 13-year-old Iman al-Hamas in the Rafah refugee camp - including the chief of staff - can have the same reaction 323 times over, once for each of the 323 children under the age of 14 (according to the statistics of the Palestinian Human Rights Monitoring Group, PHRMG) who were killed in this intifada by IDF fire. Anyone who thought that the case of Iman al-Hamas was exceptional should know that killing children is a routine matter, without commissions of inquiry and without public interest. Nablus alone has buried 29 children, two of them on Shabbat two weeks ago.

http://www.fromoccupiedpalestine.org/node.php?id=1466

[Coastie for Truth]

199. You may call yourself a "Socialist" but your appends

show a departure from "Socialism" and a flirtation with "Stalinism."

[Englander]

200. Are yer sure?

Shouldn't that be "Trotskyism"?

;-)

[Andromeda]

126. Excellent!

Your post is simply breath-taking, CB. I'm bookmarking this thread so I can use your post as a reference.

[julianer]

127. Um, thanks for that

An old South African friend used to tell me how complicated the situation was there and how the blacks weren't innocent and there were valid points of dispute and the history gave rights to the settlers and the blacks didn't own the land anyway and anyway THEY were the migrants 'cus they came from east africa and we brought them civilisation they would still be in the trees u see if it wasn't for us coming along and putting them down the mines and they didn't have a proper government and who can say that land belongs to anyone and the whites had a benign purpose really but it was hard to see some time but really all they were asking for was understanding and anyway all these blacks were communists and racists because they wanted to destroy the decent society that whites had brought to them so ungrateful you see and if apartheid collapsed just imagine how quickly society would descend into gang rape and shootings and robberies so really it was all for the best that black people were living in their own independent homesteads and they didn't need to have the right to vote because their culture prevented them from understanding what democracy is well you know what they are like children really


You seem to be more thoughtful than most of your fellow Zionist supporters, but you really do need to start addressing the truth rather than the justificatory myth you are presently clinging to.

[Englander]

99. Hugh!1!1

--On the other hand, there have always been some on the left who have recommended violent means, revolutions, and totalitarian governments.

I guess that's just not my style.--

Yeah, like George Washington, or Michael Collins, or Nelson Mandela, or Che,
or Castro, or Bolivar, or Thomas Paine, &tc, &tc.

Or non-leftist revolutionaries, like Begin, or Shamir, or Sharon, &tc.

A long, long, list of "National liberation movements", from Wiki;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:National_liberation_movements

[Englander]

98. Absolutely, I've lost count of all the instances.

I've lost count of all the times the accusation, or insinuation of a-s, &/or
pro-terrorwist has been used as an attempt to bully, or divert attention away
from the subject under discussion.

[Peace Patriot]

4. The Bushites have gone far beyond Israel in human rights violations.

They've slaughtered tens of thousands of innnocent people (100,000 from the initial bombing of Iraq alone, according to the British doctors' report), and have tortured, and rendered, and 'disappeared' many more, in Iraq, in Abu Ghraib and other prisons, in Guantanamo Bay, in Afghanistan and on black flights carrying anonymous prisoners to torture dungeons in eastern Europe and points east. They further have looted the American people blind, are destroying our infrastructure with neglect, and let poor people die of starvation and dehydration in New Orleans. I'm not saying Israel is innocent. I'm just saying that a boycott of the U.S. would be more appropriate. And then there's England, which did more than any other country to legititmize the Bushites' illegal, immoral, slaughterfest in Iraq.

But, really, I don't think boycotts of countries are a good idea. Corporations, maybe. But boycotts of countries just hurt the little people--the people who have no power.

I have no doubt that many Israelis, for instance, feel just about as helpless as we do to stop our government from defying international law and committing atrocities. I think MOST people in MOST countries want peace and justice, and a quiet, secure, decent life, and a lawful government, and good will to all. A boycott hurts the ill, children, shopkeepers, the poor, small businesses, and all the people who are least able to influence policy, and it rarely hurts the rich, the war profiteers, the arms dealers, and the warmongers and wrongdoers.

So, what is behind this Norwegian idea to boycott Israel? I think it should be looked at more deeply. I would look for financial motives. I don't automatically accept it as straightforward. And I wonder why they are ignoring the U.S.'s much bigger and more dreadful offenses.

[julianer]

6. I believe the Palestinians are behind the calls

for boycott. I know that Palestinian support groups are advocating a boycott.

I agree with most of your post: there is guilt and complicity everywhere but dealing with one issue doesn't mean you have to ignore the rest. I criticise both the US and UK as well as Israel.

Boycott's aren't ineffective. The years long boycott of South Africa was the biggest external factor in causing change and justice in that country.

[Peace Patriot]

18. OK, agreed. The South Africa boycott was effective. But black

South Africans were quite desperate. There weren't many ways that their plight could have been worse. And the boycott was high level, against investors. Would a boycott mean that medicine couldn't get imported, as was the case with Iraq (causing the deaths of many thousands of children)? Who would it hurt? I wouldn't mind if it hurt arms deals and war profiteers, and warmongers. And, again, I don't think you can disentangle Israel and the U.S. at this point. The entire U.S. political establishment is unthinkingly pro-Israel, no matter what Israel does. That's WHY we're in Iraq, if the truth were known. To protect Israel, to surround it with US military might, and destroy its enemies, even if they have done nothing whatever to harm us. It's absolutely madness to think that we are improving Israel's security by slaughtering and torturing Iraqis, and driving Iran to get nukes (if that's what they're doing). But that what it's about, in my opinion. We should be an honest broker in the Middle East, after our long history of disreputable activity there (especially with regard to destroying Iran's democracy in the 1950s, and inflicting the horrible Shah on them for 25 torture-filled years). But instead, we have acted as Israel's bulwark against reprisals, as it stole more Palestinian land, built the wall, killed peace protesters, and committed other crimes. There is no way the U.S. is going to join a boycott of Israel. If Europe boycotted Israel, the U.S. would fill the gap, and supply Israel with whatever it needed. So what is the point? My guess is that those who see the injustice of the situation, as to the Palestinians, are desperate to get a handle on the situation, in the absence of U.S. peace initiatives.

I don't see it as being effective. Maybe I'm wrong. I don't know that much about EU or Norwegian financial dealings with Israel. What's NEEDED, in my opinion, is, a) for someone* to curtail the Bushites, who clearly intend to invade more countries, illegally, unconstitutionally, and, once again, with no just cause--and I wouldn't mind seeing the EU ban us from the Mediterranean because of it; and b) Israel desperately needs to understand that building a medieval fortress, bristling with armaments, in the midst hostile neighbors--with their big bully brother, the U.S., poking those neighbors with a stick--is NOT security! And will never be security. Security comes from patient diplomacy, generosity, and a concern for ALL the people involved. From wisdom! A barricaded house, surrounded by a chain link fence, and armed to the teeth, in a rough neighborhood is NOT secure. And it never will be secure until community problems are solved in the interest of all affected people.

-------

*(That really should be US, the sovereign people of the United States, but we are hampered, at the moment, by having lost our right to vote, and until we take it back from the Bushite corporations who now control it, we have no power over our government.)

[julianer]

22. Well said

That's a pretty accurate summing up of the position in my view.

I'd disagree about the effectiveness of sanctions - they start out as actions by individuals not buying product but can easily lead to disinvestment by various bodies and much larger, targetted campaigns against certain businesses. In the end, if the pressure is built sufficiently, this can lead to government action.

That's one way to go. Perhaps it isn't the way that will end the present injustice, but it is a way and it might end it. So it must be tried.

Also I don't think the Palestinians are any less desperate than black South Africans were in their Bantu settlements.

[applegrove]

23. Palestinians are voting this week.

[Colorado Blue]

68. Interesting post, but I disagree we're in Iraq because of Israel.

Our primary interests in the Middle East have to do with oil, and its geostrategic location, a crossroads.

We've been interested in this region long before Israel was a dream, along with other major powers.

I think that Israel, and American Jews, are being unfairly blamed for causing the war in Iraq.

Another point: follow the money. Where have all those billions gone? How about checking out those contracts with Haliburton and other huge construction and oil-related industries, plus of course the so-called military-industrial complex?

War is big business, this one perhaps more openly than most.

[Coastie for Truth]

69. As to the effect of the boycott - please look at append 60

, citing . It's all about taking the technologically viable, but economically disastrous "Fischer-Tropsch" process for synthetic liquid fuels - and making it economically viable.

This is pretty much the history of the Israeli avionics industry, the electronics industry, the aviation industry, the microelectronics industry, and even (arguably) Israel's water desalination technology.

So keep smoking them funny cigarettes and poppin them pills - if you really believe that an economic boycott will destroy Israel.

[julianer]

165. Oh I've just noticed

that you accuse my of being a drug user becaue I disagree with you.

Nice.

[Behind the Aegis]

166. Are you Peace Patriot?

[julianer]

169. ?? n/t

[Behind the Aegis]

171. ??!?!?!

[Coastie for Truth]

70. In Iraq for Israel ???

You posted

That's WHY we're in Iraq, if the truth were known. To protect Israel, to surround it with US military might, and destroy its enemies, even if they have done nothing whatever to harm us. It's absolutely madness to think that we are improving Israel's security by slaughtering and torturing Iraqis, and driving Iran to get nukes (if that's what they're doing). But that what it's about, in my opinion.

Gimme a break - I've been in the energy industry for 30 plus years.

There is an impending oil shortfall. People from across the political spectrum - right to left, neocon/PNAC to Green/Greenpeace recognize that we are in deep doodoo with respect to our energy balance --- and Bush's wishin' and Cheney's pissin' in the wind and aggressive wars for oil won't make it better.

I would commend to your attention James Howard Kunstler, The Long Emergency: Surviving the End of the Oil Age, Climate Change, and Other Converging Catastrophes of the Twenty-first Century, or for a different viewpoint I would recommend Amory Lovins, Winning the Oil Endgame: Innovation for Profit, Jobs and Security, or perchance, Matthew Simmons, Twilight in the Desert: The Coming Saudi Oil Shock and the World Economy, and maybe for some scientific backup, Ken Deffeyes' two books, Beyond Oil : The View from Hubbert's Peak or Hubbert's Peak : The Impending World Oil Shortage. See Anthony Evans' An Introduction to Economic Geology and Its Environmental Impact for a good non-technical read on petroleum geology.

Why are we in Iraq? - you can go with the PNAC doctrine of aggressive wars to project military power and assert hegemony over other people's oil, as described in PNAC's Rebuilding America's Defenses, and as explained simply, from a left perspective, in Paul Sperry's Crude Politics : How Bush's Oil Cronies Hijacked the War on Terrorism, or Mark Levine's Why They Don't Hate Us : Lifting the Veil on the Axis of Evil.

And if you want to get screwed up like me, start with Unit Operations of Chemical Engineering by Warren McCabe, Julian Smith, and Peter Harriott and go on to Transport Phenomena, 2nd Edition by R. Byron Bird, Warren E. Stewart, and Edwin N. Lightfoot.

It is all about oil, crude oil in the ground, oil pipelines, and Euro denominated oil brouses. But it's all about oil.

To Texas oil men, like Bush I, Bush II, and Cheney - Israel ain't a pimple on a real Texas oil man's left butt cheek.

[xchrom]

9. thanks for the post.

[applegrove]

14. Torture was made illegal in Israel by the Top Courts. I think 1999.

As to razing the home of a suicide bomber - well what do you do when Saddam Hussein is paying off the families of the bombers. That is how they get bombers in the end. No - your average teenager anywhere is not going to want to die and kill themselves no matter how badly they want to follow religious "teachings" or seek revenge. The men who procure suicide bombers always have to sweeten the pot at the very end... "your family will have a new home, your family will get some land, your brothers will go to school, your grandmother will get fed". That is why the homes get razed. To undo that honeypot psychology that Saddam Hussein and the sociopaths who farm the teenagers into becoming suicide bombers use at the end - to tip the kid into turning himself into a bomb. The final tip. Sad how they indoctrinate kids and have to use "love" at the end to seal the deal. Actually not funny. D

o ya think some little palestinian looked around his mom's house and said to himself - no way - I will not be a bomber. My mother loves her house. And so the kid GETS TO LIVE!!!!!

Israel has been at war. No, it is not a great egg while it is still at war. Nobody is. But they look like they are heading towards peace. The only people upset with this would be the Sunnis in the greater middle east, the Iranians, bin Laden, all terrorist recruiters or religious politicos, neocons, pat robertson and the Norwegians.

[julianer]

15. If you actually read the article

I don't think you would be so complacent.

Also I don't think that, on the basis of all the available evidence, it is possible to say that they 'are heading toward peace'. The most one could say is that there will be a unilateral imposition of boundaries - something the article describes, rightly in my view, as a guarantor of future violence.

[applegrove]

19. Did you read my post where I talked about how the threat of razing

suicide bombers homes likely has saved the lives of many kids, and made their mothers happy in that regard.

Israelis went against torture. Because that is what the democracy wanted.

The only people who want Israelis scared are people who do not want peace. That would be relgious extremists outside of Israel/Palestine (p.s. Koran says Israel should be where Israel is so that is acceptable to the Koran).

Notice the shift to the middle in Israel. People who helped negotiate the Oslo accord can only hope that Israel gets as close as it is now. To something better.

And who is panicking? Well it looks like the sociopaths who farm the teenage suicide bombers. How old was the teen today who killed himself?

[julianer]

24. You should know

and, if you bothered to read the damned article, you would know that the issues you raise are dealt with in it.

Seriously, why bother 'commenting' on a piece you've obviously not bothered to read?

[passy]

17. Please leave the Norwegians out of this.

The Norwegians might have worked harder than any other country to try and resolve the conflict.
In fact in 1993 Israel and the PLO began a series of secret meetings in Oslo, Norway. The result of the Norwegian diplomatic efforts was the Declaration of Principles on Palestinian Self-Rule, signed in Washington, D.C., on Sept. 13, 1993, by Israel and the PLO.
The following year the efforts of the men involved, Yitzhak Rabin and Yasir Arafat, was rewarded by the Nobel peace prize, which unlike other Nobel prizes is awarded by a Norwegian jury.
You could also try to look at the Norwegian diplomatic efforts at trying to bring peace to Sri Lanka.
Next time you bundle them with the likes of OBL and Robertson please do a bit of research.

[applegrove]

21. Sorry - I should have said Norwegian article writer. Perhaps named

Whilham Kristaloffer :rofl: or some such thing. Did anyone check?

Who is spreading the fear and the hate today?

[julianer]

25. You are demonstrating a regrettable

and consistently low understanding of the situation.

Your tactics seem to be to divert discussion into irrelevancies and blind alleys.

I don't think I'll bother responding to you any more. You aren't interested in reading the article this discussion is about, so I don't see why we should be interested in replying to your misinformed assertions.

[applegrove]

27. I am laughing at the blatant attempt to slice and dice the american

electorate using fear. Who in their right mind would be for a boycott - now that Israel is on a moderate trend and Palestinians have elections this week?

Who does this story benefit! This is not a serious discussion.

:rofl:

Rove is looking for New York. And fear will do the trick. And seeing as how they cannot plant stories in USA newspapers without it being illegal propaganda - the move is on to put stories out there in Europe.

Who in the world is into a boycott of Israel. They just GAVE UP PART OF THE OCCUPIED TERRITORIES. PALESTINIANS HAVE THE VOTE. ISRAEL IS FURTHER FROM BREAKING THE RULE OF LAW THAN IT HAS BEEN FOR 30 Years. THEY DON'T TORTURE ANYMORE.

Yesterday the story was that a majority of Israelis would willfully give up that portion of Jerusalem to Muslims if it meant peace. There was a poll yesterday.

These are delicate & important times. Someone is very unhappy with the way it is going.

[julianer]

30. Empty Vessels......n/t

[applegrove]

40. It seems this guys fear is that it might work - and that Israel will not

be held accountable for all it has done. He seems to be hoping for more violence. As human beings - no matter how bad it gets - we always have to hold out hope. Hope that it gets better if it is bad.

[julianer]

49. Amnesty International

'Furthermore, Amnesty International reports that "many" Palestinians have not been accidentally killed but "deliberately targeted," while the award-winning New York Times journalist Chris Hedges reports that Israeli soldiers "entice children like mice into a trap and murder them for sport.'

AI and the NYT 'seem to be hoping for more violence'!

[applegrove]

50. No. They want it all to stop. Anyway possible.

[julianer]

87. But the author you claim 'hopes for more violence'

was quoting extensively from AI and similar organisations.

How can you claim that the author, by repeating independent evidence, 'wants more violence'?

It is this sort of off-the-wall, illogical, untrue association that does so much harm to the Palestinian people. You help in their suffering by refusing to look directly at the truth.

[applegrove]

97. I'm getting tired of this. You are not listening. The author mentions AI.

But AI would no more want more suicide bombings or war. They would not. They want the human rights devastation to stop. Period.

I'm sorry but I cannot continue this. You seem terribly upset ... and it is palatable... that there is a current chance for peace in Israel Palestine.

[julianer]

109. A rhetorical trick

to claim your opponent is 'upset'.

You have yet to make a reasonable point in this thread, that I can see. You haven't really bothered to address any of the points the author makes, merely claiming he 'wants more violence' but not supporting this with any evidence from the article or elsewhere.

It is not a standard of discourse I'm used to, so I'm very glad you aren't going to 'contribute' to this thread any longer.

Edit: soften language

[pelsar]

117. dont fret...

several posters here have trouble with discussions when it doesnt go there way.....they will claim all kinds of tricks are being used, when in fact they themselves have trouble with information that may contradict their own beliefs....

[Englander]

125. Oh, the irony. n/t

[Peace Patriot]

29. I agree with you, Passy! That was completely uncalled for (putting Norway

on that list). Applegrove apparently has an axe to grind here. It's amazing to me how anybody could dwell so much on the crimes of Palestinians, when our own country is committing such slaughter, and planning much more of it, and when the Palestinians have been so shoved around, disarmed, imprisoned, tortured and oppressed. Imagine if Mexico decided it was too overcrowded, and created a policy of a "right of return" to California, and carved out, say, southern California as the rightful homeland for Mexicans with indigenous blood, and didn't just permit immigration, but went further, and set up a California government and started pushing current residents into refugee camps, and carving up their neighborhoods and farms and businesses, and giving all the prime properties to Mexicans, and then took everybody's guns, and started imprisoning and torturing people who resisted. No one can say that Mexicans don't have a right to be in California, especially those with Indian blood. But many of US would be inclined to resist by any means possible, if Mexico tried to force such measures upon current residents. It might not be suicide bombings, but it might be something close to it. Palestinians are desperate, poor people, who don't have many means of defense, resistance or appeal. I agree that Israelis have a right to be in their homeland, as do Palestinians. But it's an extremely unbalanced situation--like the US government vs. the Indians, in the 1800s--always a temptation to powermongers and the greedy.

To overly stress the ways that Palestinians have resisted--and just to assume that they are crazy people--while you ignore everything that might have turned some of them into crazy people, and while you ignore the far, far bigger crimes, on a scale of genocide, that Israel's major ally has committed recently, at least in part to PROTECT Israel, and let her have her way with the Palestinians--is very wrong. I am very inclined to believe that Israel is simply making unilateral decisions about what it wants, and imposing those decisions. I think the facts support this. This is NOT a peace process. The Palestinians have almost no say, are given the worst lands, have had much of their land confiscated, and have been shoved around for so long, and are so poor, that it's difficult for them to govern themselves, in these desperate conditions.

Applegrove says Israel outlawed torture. Well, so did we. That doesn't mean there aren't secret decrees, permitting torture--or no paper work at all. Israel is a paranoid security state, which has relied on violence and threats of violence to deal with various problems. It would be no surprise at all to me to find that people in Israel's security apparatus were routinely violating the torture law, just as the Bushites are doing. I think they are closely allied in this and other regards, to the benefit of neither country. They seem to be trying to outdo each other in how horrible they can be.

[applegrove]

31. The Palestinians are voting this week. Israel in a few months. Hey -

let it happen. No reason to invoke fear. Or buy into it when someone else tries to up the anti.

[julianer]

33. "entice children like mice into a trap and murder them for sport."

Carry on defending this, if you can.

[applegrove]

35. The Palestinians, decided, to restart, the intifada. Not all palestinians.

Perhaps just a very few. And many, Palestinians, died. Now they want peace. What is so scarry about that?

Palestinians have leaders who are assholes too.

[julianer]

36. Read the article n/t

[applegrove]

37. Read the page of the guy who wrote the article.

:puke:

[julianer]

46. Israel is a criminal state

More from the article:

Recalling the U.N. Charter principle that it is inadmissible to acquire territory by war, the International Court of Justice declared in a landmark 2004 opinion that Israel's settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory and the wall being built to annex them to Israel were illegal under international law. It called on Israel to cease construction of the wall, dismantle those parts already completed and compensate Palestinians for damages. Crucially, it also stressed the legal responsibilities of the international community:

all States are under an obligation not to recognize the illegal situation resulting from the construction of the wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including in and around East Jerusalem. They are also under an obligation not to render aid or assistance in maintaining the situation created by such construction. It is also for all States, while respecting the United Nations Charter and international law, to see to it that any impediment, resulting from the construction of the wall, to the exercise by the Palestinian people of its right to self-determination is brought to an end.
A subsequent U.N. General Assembly resolution supporting the World Court opinion passed overwhelmingly. However, the Israeli government ignored the Court's opinion, continuing construction at a rapid pace, while Israel's Supreme Court ruled that the wall was legal.

[Jim Sagle]

63. Israel is a criminal state the same way Emmett Till was a criminal youth.

[julianer]

81. Glib comments are always the solution

Murder and occupation reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeekkkkkkkkkksssssss.

[applegrove]

90. What is it you do not understand about elections in Palestine this week?

[Jim Sagle]

105. But Israel RRRRAWWWWWWKSSSSSS!!!!!!!!!!!

[Englander]

100. ~Ignorance = not bliss.~

Get out of the gutter, get a clue, it's not v. difficult if you try.

[Jim Sagle]

106. My comment encapsulated the sheer upside down morality of the

Israel-bashing frenzy on display within this thread.

Every day is Opposite Day down here in I/P.

[julianer]

128. You mean there is a mismatch

between reality and the propaganda you accept as truth. Yes, I agree, but I have very kindly presented you with sourced evidence that the propaganda is lies. It is your misfortune that you cannot see that - more, that you cannot actually face reading anything that doesn't affirm your misapprehensions. Not just your misfortune of course. The Palestinians have to suffer for you lack of support for justice and truth.

Otherwise can you point to anything in the linked 'Israel-bashing' that is inaccurate, or in any way 'upside down morality'?

[Jim Sagle]

187. I'm right, you're wrong, and that's the end of it.

[applegrove]

34. Axe to grind? Look up the author of this article and do a "find" for

axe to grind.

[julianer]

47. You should be challenging your govt

More from the article:

Due to the obstructionist tactics of the United States, the United Nations has not been able to effectively confront Israel's illegal practices. Indeed, although it is true that the U.N. keeps Israel to a double standard, it's exactly the reverse of the one Israel's defenders allege: Israel is held not to a higher but lower standard than other member States. A study by Marc Weller of Cambridge University comparing Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territory with comparable situations in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo, East Timor, occupied Kuwait and Iraq, and Rwanda found that Israel has enjoyed "virtual immunity" from enforcement measures such as an arms embargo and economic sanctions typically adopted by the U.N. against member States condemned for identical violations of international law.

[Englander]

102. That doesn't mean it ended.

The abuse of prisoners continues, in a different manner;

'Prison Tactics A Longtime Dilemma For Israel

By Glenn Frankel
Washington Post Foreign Service
Wednesday, June 16, 2004; Page A01

>snip

New Techniques

A turning point in Israel's treatment of detainees came in September 1999 when the Israeli Supreme Court, after a year and a half of deliberations, banned all forms of physical abuse. "Violence directed at a suspect's body or spirit does not constitute a reasonable investigation practice," the court declared.

The justices left open several loopholes. Interrogators who used force preemptively to prevent a terrorist attack could invoke the "defense of necessity" if faced with prosecution. The court also made allowances for "prolonged" interrogation, even if it involved sleep deprivation, and shackling, "but only for the purpose of preserving the investigator's safety."

>snip

The latest report by the committee against torture, covering the period from September 2001 to April 2003, alleged that detainees faced a new regime of sleep deprivation, shackling, slapping, hitting and kicking; exposure to extreme cold and heat; threats, curses and insults; and prolonged detention in subhuman conditions.

"Torture in Israel has once more become routine, carried out in an orderly and institutional fashion," concluded the report, which was based on 80 affidavits and court cases.

The committee accused the Israeli legal system of effectively sanctioning torture by routinely rejecting petitions seeking to grant detainees access to lawyers. Not one Shabak interrogator has been prosecuted despite hundreds of allegations, the report said.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A44664-2004Jun15?language=printer

[julianer]

26. Illegal killings - More from article

Illegal Killings. Whereas Palestinian suicide attacks targeting Israeli civilians have garnered much media attention, Israel's quantitatively worse record of killing non-combatants is less well known. According to the most recent figures of the Israeli Information Center for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories (B'Tselem), 3,386 Palestinians have been killed since September 2000, of whom 1,008 were identified as combatants, as opposed to 992 Israelis killed, of whom 309 were combatants. This means that three times more Palestinians than Israelis have been killed and up to three times more Palestinian civilians than Israeli civilians. Israel's defenders maintain that there's a difference between targeting civilians and inadvertently killing them. B'Tselem disputes this: "hen so many civilians have been killed and wounded, the lack of intent makes no difference. Israel remains responsible." Furthermore, Amnesty International reports that "many" Palestinians have not been accidentally killed but "deliberately targeted," while the award-winning New York Times journalist Chris Hedges reports that Israeli soldiers "entice children like mice into a trap and murder them for sport."

Torture. "From 1967," Amnesty reports, "the Israeli security services have routinely tortured Palestinian political suspects in the Occupied Territories." B'Tselem found that eighty-five percent of Palestinians interrogated by Israeli security services were subjected to "methods constituting torture," while already a decade ago Human Rights Watch estimated that "the number of Palestinians tortured or severely ill-treated" was "in the tens of thousands - a number that becomes especially significant when it is remembered that the universe of adult and adolescent male Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza is under three-quarters of one million." In 1987 Israel became "the only country in the world to have effectively legalized torture" (Amnesty). Although the Israeli Supreme Court seemed to ban torture in a 1999 decision, the Public Committee Against Torture in Israel reported in 2003 that Israeli security forces continued to apply torture in a "methodical and routine" fashion. A 2001 B'Tselem study documented that Israeli security forces often applied "severe torture" to "Palestinian minors."

[julianer]

32. And more - concerning Israel's racist laws and home destruction

House demolitions. "Israel has implemented a policy of mass demolition of Palestinian houses in the Occupied Territories," B'Tselem reports, and since September 2000 "has destroyed some 4,170 Palestinian homes." Until just recently Israel routinely resorted to house demolitions as a form of collective punishment. According to Middle East Watch, apart from Israel, the only other country in the world that used such a draconian punishment was Iraq under Saddam Hussein. In addition, Israel has demolished thousands of "illegal" homes that Palestinians built because of Israel's refusal to provide building permits. The motive behind destroying these homes, according to Amnesty, has been to maximize the area available for Jewish settlers: "Palestinians are targeted for no other reason than they are Palestinians." Finally, Israel has destroyed hundred of homes on security pretexts, yet a Human Rights Watch report on Gaza found that "the pattern of destruction…strongly suggests that Israeli forces demolished homes wholesale, regardless of whether they posed a specific threat." Amnesty likewise found that "Israel's extensive destruction of homes and properties throughout the West Bank and Gaza…is not justified by military necessity," and that "Some of these acts of destruction amount to grave breaches of the Fourth Geneva Convention and are war crimes."

Apart from the sheer magnitude of its human rights violations, the uniqueness of Israeli policies merits notice. "Israel has created in the Occupied Territories a regime of separation based on discrimination, applying two separate systems of law in the same area and basing the rights of individuals on their nationality," B'Tselem has concluded. "This regime is the only one of its kind in the world, and is reminiscent of distasteful regimes from the past, such as the apartheid regime in South Africa." If singling out South Africa for an international economic boycott was defensible, it would seem equally defensible to single out Israel's occupation, which uniquely resembles the apartheid regime.

[eyl]

43. I take it B'Tselem is also

opposed to international law?

[julianer]

48. Also??

[eyl]

58. see post #42 n/t

[julianer]

88. I didn't understand the point you were trying

to make in that post, either.

Enigmatism is not often a good communication method on a forum such as this.

[eyl]

96. Sorry, it's just that I've made this

point more than once here. See post #95.

[julianer]

130. Listen, do you mind if I don't play

this game any more?

You are either capable of making your point or you aren't.

[eyl]

192. What "game"?

I just don't want to have the same discussion twice in the same thread.

[applegrove]

28. I think this is what is so scary. Seems Israelis are doing some

soul searching. That has to stop. So time for the big alarm bells. Time to whip up a little fear! :sarcasm:

This article is from yesterday. The idea today that there would be a boycott on Israel is ridiculous.

Most Israelis willing to cede E. Jerusalem Arab neighborhoods

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/672095.html

[Peace Patriot]

39. Applegrove, you don't seem to understand what compulsion is, and what

it does to people. Or what "might makes right" does to people. These things make people rebellious and even suicidal.

"Most Israelis willing to cede..." Well, yeah. Kind of like Bush backed down on Social Security. But he's got all the cards in his hand. And I mean ALL the cards. He can wait until his buds Diebold the '06 elections, and then get on with looting our meager pensions. Or not. Maybe he'll decide to just keep slowly draining it of funds, for some other filthy, murderous, looting project of his, like so many others we seen. Or maybe he'll have his new buds in his packed Supreme Court at long last win the argument with FDR and declare Social Security unconstitutional. No matter that peons have given it a lifetime of their contributions. Bushites kick peons in the balls, after they're down. Peons don't matter to them; they don't compute. And what recourse will people have, as this country goes bust, except maybe to start suicide bombing?

Oppression drives people crazy. Palestinians have endured decades of oppression. And virtually the entire U.S. army is hanging over that situation like a dark cloud. The Arab countries will shut up or be invaded. That's about the size of it. "Seems Israelis are doing some soul searching." I'm glad to hear it. But I don't think that "soul searching" places Palestinians on anywhere near an equal footing. They are being given "concessions," As with Bush and Social Security, some little concessions had to be made to Republican politicos, because they were under blistering assault by Republican and other old folk, worried about their retirement money, and they have to put together some kind of campaigns, even with a 5% to 10% automatic Diebold advantage. They have to get out and actually do something, besides lining their pockets--because Diebold can't just manufacture an election out of thin air. It has to have something to tweak. So Bush gives them a little "concession," and temporarily backs off on Social Security. Doesn't mean he isn't going to loot it. Just not now.

I'm afraid that the Israelis have been as devious with the Palestinians, as the Bushites have been with the American people. And don't blame me for conflating the two. They conflated themselves.

Bargaining just isn't bargaining, if one side holds all the cards. A corollary would be; Non-transparent elections are not elections. They are tyranny. Inherently; by their nature. The same with vast inequality at the bargaining table, especially with the U.S. army backing one side.

[applegrove]

41. Palestinians.. some sects.. are at war with Israel. They kill civilians.

The ANC hardly killed a white person. Nelson Mandela spent 27 years in jail for blowing up electricity towers. He didn't touch a hair on the lilly white head of an africaner.

There is a difference.

I'm all for the UN going in and keeping the peace.

How many civilians died yesterday?

[eyl]

44. By that token

I can maintain that Israeli actions are a result of "craziness" due to Palestinian terrorism - which predated the occupation in 1967, or even 1948*

*At this point, someone usually brings up the Etzel (Irgun). What is ignored is that terrorism predated its existence - in fact, one of the primary reasons for the split off of the Etzel from the Haganah was the former's founders' disagreement with the latter on the appropriate response to terrorism/

[julianer]

45. You have nothing to say about this devastating article?

Or the crimes it details?

[applegrove]

51. What I have something to say on is the idea of sanctions. I give up!

[eyl]

59. I have quite a bit to say

but not the time to do so. Maybe tomorrow.

[Coastie for Truth]

55. You miss the point.

There are some real Judeophobes - who cloak it in "Anti-Zionism" . See the link - or maybe it's just jealousy as described by Berkeley Professor Jerome Karabel

[julianer]

74. This looks like my earlier prediction coming true

Just waiting for the 'pro-terrorist' smear now.

[Englander]

101. I'd say post #61 tries that.

The tactic's not effective, or subtle, or accurate, but the baseless
smears just keep on appearing.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=124&topic_id=112298&mesg_id=112385

[julianer]

167. I ignore some people on this forum

because they claim the Palestinians have a 'corrupt culture' - practically the same language anti-semites use to describe Jews.

I don't want to be exposed to such racism and have to treat it with respect, so it's better that I don't see it.

[Coastie for Truth]

107. Karabel's book

refers to the "old money" elitists - the same old money elitists who stirred up the working people to fight Brown v. Board of Ed, and the Equal Rigts Amendment. The same old money elitists who sit in their leather easy chairs in their mahigany walled clubs sipping port nd smoking cigars -- and keeping "undesirables" out (Alito's "Concerned Alumni of Princeton"). I was there. (I went to a big city urban high school, and a commuter engineering school --- I do not have a BE from Yale's Sheffield School)

[Colorado Blue]

66. There was another article today, a majority of Israelis want

to withdraw from more land on the West Bank.

This is not, as you say, time to punish them.

[applegrove]

38. The whole point of boycotting Apartheid was to force that state to

fail. And, after 30 years, it finally worked.

Do you want Israel to fail? That is what a boycott would accomplish. That is what boycotts are for.

I can understand that the Palestinians have no land and no right of return in many cases. I also do not want to see Israel, the only long term democracy (within israel) in the middle east, to fail. I don't.

I am very hopeful that something will come out of the elections. And the withdrawls. And as people live more on the internet than ever before, that people will be able to live side by side, even if they fought for eons.

That is my hope.

[Coastie for Truth]

52. Proposal - Move All of the Israelis out of WB, Israel, Gaza, Jerusalem

ALL - 100% - NO EXCEPTIONS

1. Give them the package proposed in , - kind of like the "instant millionaire" emminent domain code of Pennsylvania. Paid for by the US, UK, France, Australia, Norway, and, oh yes, Saudi Arabia.

2. Resettle them where some appenders can help with resettlement

Berkeley Hills, Oakland Hills, Pacific Heights, Bath UK, Canberra Australia, etc.

No more Uzbekestan, Uganda, Birobdzhan.

3. No , No abandonment of the International Humanitarian Law Doctrine of ASYLUM as documented in, inter alia , every advocate of dismemberment must act in the manner of and and - no blogging, put it on the line.

4. In the imperialist, colonialist, capitalist dismemberment of the Ottoman Empire, see e.g., and the western powers played on ethnic rivalries to protect the Suez Canal, East African and South Asian colonies, and access for oil. The bill is coming due.

The sins of the Western Democracies' gerrymandering at the end of WW1 are coming home to roost. And Israel is not going to pay for the Western Democracies' sins this time.

:rant:

:sarcasm:

[Colorado Blue]

56. That is, in fact, what they want - the destruction of Israel.

Being left wing is supposed to mean helping people, caring for people. It doesn't mean undertaking destructive and coercive acts and it certainly doesn't entitle any particular group or supporters of an ideology to label the creation or existence of a UN member nation "evil", or to deliberately attempt to harm her citizens.

There have historically been factions on the left who believed in violent revolution. I've known Cubans, for example, for who forced to flee Castro's Communist revolution and who lost everything, including people, in the process.

The search for justice is a noble one. But let it not be a violent, coercive, totalitarian approach that creates new victims.

[julianer]

75. Read the article

and then blather on about the 'search for justice being a noble one'.

Really, I can only presume that you keep yourself deliberately ignorant in order to sustain such a delusion.

[Coastie for Truth]

53. The New Anti-Semitism

The New Anti-Semitism:
Who are its advocates? What are its goals?

The Holocaust, in which over six million Jews were brutally murdered by the Nazis and their enthusiastic collaborators, happened over 60 years ago. So terrific were the events that — even today, about two generations later — nobody would wish to identify himself with them. Yet, a new anti-Semitism is now rearing its head. It is important to be aware of it.

Who are the new anti-Semites?

The new anti-Semites do not publicly proclaim their desire to bring about a second Holocaust or to subject the Jews to mass murder or annihilation. The hatred is aimed against the state of Israel, which, according to the new anti-Semites, represents all that is evil in the world and which is the main violator of human rights and guilty of virtually every other abuse that can be conceived. This poison is now so widespread that a poll taken in Europe not too long ago found Israel to be the greatest menace to the peace of the world — far ahead of such murderous regimes as those of Iran or of North Korea.

The leaders and instigators of this new anti-Semitism are concentrated on the political left, its most active and vocal spokesmen being found in our prestige universities. Such is the anti-Zionist (anti-Semitic) focus of the left that, almost incomprehensibly, it includes a fair number of Jewish professors and other “intellectuals,” not just here in the United States, but even in Israel itself.

Those on the extreme left call for the abolition of the State of Israel outright, although they do not tell us what they propose to do with the five million Israeli Jews. They would presumably be left to the tender mercies of the Arabs, who would, of course, have no greater joy than to emulate or perhaps even to “improve” on the Nazi model and to give “final solution(!) to the Jewish problem” once and for all. That isn’t going to happen, of course, not because anybody in the world would lift a finger to prevent it, but because, fortunately, Israel is a very strong and most capable nation.

A death wish for Israel. In deference to “world opinion” and also to the wishes of the United States, Israel has allowed itself to be pressured into innumerable concessions to those who are sworn to destroy it. But it seems clear that, when the chips are really down, a most decisive response on the part of Israel can be expected. With the possible exception of Carthage during the Punic Wars, almost 2500 years ago, no country in the world, no country in recorded history, has ever been threatened with extinction. Israel is the one exception. Fueled by the extreme left, the “legitimacy” of Israel is a constant topic of discussion. The abolition of the “Zionist entity” gets serious attention, even in the hallowed halls of the United Nations. Iran feverishly pursues the Holy Grail of atomic weapons. Its president has publicly declared — not once, but repeatedly — that Israel is a “tumor” that must be excised and that it must be wiped off the map of the world. Medium-range missiles (so far, fortunately without atomic warheads) are being paraded through the streets of Teheran, with signs attached to them, shamelessly giving their destination as Jerusalem. A few eyebrows are being raised around the world, but otherwise nothing is being done about it.

Because the memory of the Nazi Holocaust still lingers after all these years, the new anti-Semitism is disguised as the socially more acceptable “anti-Zionism.” It is pursued and propagated by the radical left. Every leftist demonstration — be it about the war in Iraq, against globalization, for or against whatever else — does inevitably include appeals against “Israeli subjugation of the Palestinians,” the “occupation of Palestinian lands by Israel,” or simply asks for the elimination of Israel. Sadly, quite a few Jews, having been saturated with leftism from their early years, participate in such demonstrations.

While the propagation of the new anti-Semitism by prestige universities started in Europe (mostly in England), it has found fertile ground in the universities of the United States. The active participation in the new anti-Semitism by the American clergy (beginning with the Presbyterians) is a scandalous reality.Surely, not everybody who criticizes Israel is an anti-Semite. The actions of Israel, just as the actions of any other countries, are subject to examination and criticism. But the viciousness, volume and consistency of this criticism against Israel is such that it cannot be considered as anything but anti-Semitism — the new anti-Semitism, disguised as anti-Israelism or anti-Zionism. The foolish professors and the hypocritical preachers are besotted by their leftism and by their hatred against Israel and America. Overt vilification of America has to remain muted — it’s somewhat dangerous to be too outspoken about it — but Israel, perceived as the satrap and the handmaiden of the United States in the Middle East, is an easy target. Nobody should be fooled. Anti-Semitism is anti-Semitism in whichever way it may be disguised.

[passy]

57. Enough with this bullshit!

The country of Israel is unique and a great vision of the modern man. However like all utopias it has it's draw backs.
The concept of Israel was offered to the Jewish people by imperial powers who thought they could simply do as they wished when carving up land they had won in battle, as they had done all over the world as long as man can remember.
However this happened at a time when calls for independence from colonized nations came to the fore.
This brought about a conflict of ideologies, on the one hand colonial powers were giving independence to their colonies and on the other a young state like Israel was created with a large population of immigrants. It is easy to see how it appeared to some that Israel was a new colonialist state.
The state of Israel has been in existence long enough for people to accept it.
What is not accepted however is that Israel under the guise of keeping the state safe uses methods against the Palestinians that are a reminder of the worst excesses of former colonialists states.
To use the term anti-Semitism against people who criticize the policies of the current government of Israel is like saying that disapproval of *'s actions, such as warrant-less spying on Americans, is anti-Christian, anti-American and anti-patriotic.
I am sure that many Israelis disagree with their government and have witnessed first hand the treatment of Palestinians. Should we call them anti-Semites or is it possible to be a Jew and not agree with the governments of Israel's actions against the Palestinians, just like it is possible to be a Democrat and an American.
The author of the article posted above has made no statements attacking the Jews, Judaism or the people of Israel as a whole, it is therefore out of place to denounce it as anti-Semitic propaganda.
Please explain to me what would happen if these so-called anti-Semites, the ones criticizing Israel's government, achieved their goals. The message of these "anti-semites" is for Israel to start treating the Palestinian better so that they can live together peacefully. It's the voice of concern that is expressed in the article. We should all be able to freely express our concern when we think somebody is making a mistake without being attacked.
You might not agree that Palestinians have the right to freely live as equals alongside Israelis and that is your opinion, however you do not see people denouncing you as being an anti-Islamist for that reason.
You are free to dissect my post for any comments that you might find insulting. If you do find some, I apologize, maybe my knowledge of the issues is tainted by my education and my leftist upbringing.
I also accept your coming apology for insinuating that people who agree with the views of the article that this post discusses or any critic of the Israeli government are anti-Semites.

[Coastie for Truth]

65. Two points

1. I have read all of Norman G. Finkelstein's books and many of his articles. I am neither a psychiatrist nor a psychologist (altho I did work in HR for a short time and my sister is a psychology doc) - so I won't opine on obsessive compulsive disorder. But, he is so agenda laden as to be even crazier then blogosphere addicts and political junkies and the Zionists he condemns.

2. I have been the victim of a boycott. I'm a doc of chemical engineering (which was "petroleum refinery centric" and "petroleum industry centric") when I was in college. Thanks to Arab League Boycott, the oil industry used to discriminate based on race, religion, creed, and national origin (as well as gender, gender orientation, age, disability, etc.). I was a federal environmental and safety regulator of the oil business. I was told - politely - you're "over qualified" for the kind of jobs we can hire you for. So, I know what I boycott is.

Forty years as a chemical engineer, never been a regular (paid with a W2) employee of an oil company since my high school days when I pumped Citgo.

[julianer]

76. But is Finkelstein an anti-semite

as you seem to be suggesting?

Is it possible for Jews to be anti-semitic? Who decides?

[Behind the Aegis]

79. Good grief!

:eyes:

Oh course Jews can be anti-Semitic! Who decides? The person acting like a bigot decides his/her path, and therefore, is the one who chose to be a bigot.

[julianer]

83. I see

Can you describe Jewish anti-semitism for me?

I presume it would involve a Jewish person criticising him or herself, but for what? - plotting to undermine western civilisation in conjunction with Bolsheviks? Condidering themselves to come from a 'corrupt culture' that infects western society? Being inherently evil and dishonest?

That is anti-semitism: crediting the entire Jewish population with inherent traits and damning them for it. Do you have any evidence of this on DU?

Anti-Zionism is a criticism of the political philosophy of Zionism: Zionism seeks the creation of greater Israel and the dispossession of the original Palestinian occupiers. Zionism is racist in that the people who may live in Israel are restricted to Jews, not the original population.

So, in a typical twist, the racists accuse the non-racists of racism. Very similar to what the racists in America are trying to do to American anti-racists.

[Behind the Aegis]

85. Two words.

Roy Cohn.

[julianer]

89. That means nothing to me, I'm afraid

Are you saying that Finkelstein is an anti-semite? On what grounds? Can you show me where he has accused Jewish people of some inherent trait? Has he said that Jews have 'a good sense of rhythm' for example?

I presume you cannot find anything wrong with my definitions of anti-semitism and zionism. Does this mean that you will no longer confuse the two in public debate as you have done so often in the past?

[Behind the Aegis]

118. Two things.

Do a google search on "Roy Cohn."

Second, you really need to read more carefully. I never said Finkelstien was an anti-Semite. As a matter of point, I didn't say anything about him, or the article. I was addressing your bizarre question whether Jews could be anti-Semites. As for your definitions, the anti-Semitism one is close. As for pointing out examples at DU, most are spirited away (deleted message). Check with the mods about all those "deleted messages." They are not all personal attacks.

Your definition of Zionism is the old, out-dated version and still isn't even close to correct. Since you continue to call Zionists racists, then we will not agree on this point...EVER! Incidentally, I don't confuse the two, you do. It mainly derives from your lack of understand the nuance of the term "Zionism."

Anti-Semitism exists on DU. It is one of the reasons so many topics about Jews and Israel are whisked into this room. The moderators in this room seem to understand the difference between "anti-Israel" and "anti-Semitic." It is not that the other mods are lacking, but some aren't as comfortable with it. Or do you think somehow that DU and the left are immune to anti-Semitism? That seems to be your inference.

Since you didn't understand the reference, Jewish anti-Semitism is simply anti-Semitism practiced by Jews! They fall into the same traps that non-Jews do and actively criticize Jews, often hiding their own identity. Since this seems to be a difficult thing for you to wrap your mind around, think of homophobic gays. Surely, you know they exist?

And, do not imply I am a racist again!

[Name removed]

131. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

135. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Colorado Blue]

120. I think there is some misunderstanding about Zionism here.

Zionism does NOT seek the creation of Greater Israel. Some religious Zionists do believe that, but many others - most others - do not. We merely seek secure borders, logical borders, and Jerusalem for a capitol. There are many types of Zionism, and it's improper to sieze upon only one to describe the philosophy.

Israeli citizens are NOT all Jews! Over 1/5 are Muslim, there are Christians, Buddhists, people from all over the world. Jewish people come in all colors, from white to black. Some are African, some Indian, some German, most are Arab, descendents of people who were expelled or who fled from their communities throughout the Middle East, after 1948. Some indeed made aliyah, most did not have a choice. Some Jews never left, and have lived in Israel since ancient times.

Most Arab Israelis ARE descendants of the "original" population, which includes Bedouin and Druze as well. Other Arabs -large numbers in fact - have immigrated to join family members.

It would be good for you, if I might suggest it, to read the Hadassah website about Zionism and its very modest goals.

Also, I think it would be logical to compare Israel with, for example, modern Greece, modern Turkey, Sweden, etc. Most of those nations are indeed comprised primarily one one ethnic group who practice a certain religion. Are they racist? Actually, some are.

But that is a function of humanity, not of a particular philosophy. Very few modern states, in fact, really are "melting pots" and most of those are in the Americas. Even enlightened France has had awful riots, misunderstandings, with people from North Africa and beyond.

Given that 1/3 of the UN member states are de facto Muslim, and billions of people live in de facto Christian, Buddhist, Hindu or Daoist states, why can't a tiny Jewish state be left in peace, especially since it IS inclusive and multiracial, multiethnic and respects all religions?

The purpose of Zionism was never to hurt other people - merely to provide a safe haven for a hunted minority. I don't know why the Left, which has traditionally fought for the underdog, can't see Israel and the Jewish people clearly: 13 million population worldwide, Israel being smaller than one of our smallest states, having less people than many major cities, and still two million less than existed in the 1930's.

When you talk about oppression, in the case of the Jewish people you are talking about people who have quite literally, been oppressed almost to death. I've read estimates that, without the persecutions of the past 2,000 years, our population might actually number around 125,000,000. Instead it is 13,000,000. That's it - worldwide.

Meanwhile, the supposedly weak, underdog Arabs actually control a vast region, rich in resources, and number hundreds of millions.

Maybe beating up Israel will get old one of these years. I sure hope so.

People seriously interested in reform should start talking to Syria, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and the Sudan. Only recently were Jews allowed to visit Saudi Arabia - after having been expelled from there for centuries. It's so dangerous right now in Jordan that religious Jews can't travel there.

On women's rights issues alone, one could quite properly suggest a boycott of the entire Middle East and much of Africa. But maybe that is a politically incorrect suggestion and it would be economically impossible. So we'll beat the crap out of Israel instead.

In fact, we should all be concerned about our poor neighborhoods and our racial problems - at home. In Los Angeles California, for example, gang warfare has killed THOUSANDS of people in the past few years - some 8,000 woundings, 3,000 deaths over a four year period.

That's as bad as the Intifada. And it's right under our noses.

Finally, antisemitic Jews certainly do exist. Who knows why people have issues? They rebel, they hate themselves, their parents, the fact, in the case of Jews, that we are seen as perennial schnooks, losers. We can't win even when we win. Other antisemitic Jews hate Jews because we can't measure up to some exalted moral standard, supposedly conferred upon us by our suffering and our supposed connection to the Almighty. When we act like normal people, take on the burdens of statehood and self-defense, we are damned for being criminals.

You know what? We are just people. Wanting a nation, an acknowledgement of our peoplehood, our history and culture, and someplace we have a prayer of self-defense, where a Jew can be a criminal and not be damned for being a Jew - to quote Yehuda Amichai - is not racist at all. It's a very humble thing, actually, that people who have this - a Frenchman in France, an Englishman in England - take for granted.

[julianer]

132. You state on another post that the

aim of Likud is the territorial acquisition of the entire West Bank. I'm sure some Zionists are happy to simply occupy the land that has already been stolen but this doesn't make them a different sort of Zionist, merely less ambitious.

I would urge you to address this problem rather than seek to compare the situation in LA or Egypt or anywhere else. Anti-apartheid activists concerned themselves with problems outside SA only in passing. The same goes for those who want to see an end to the racist state of Israel. I don't mind seeing a progressive, just and democratic Israel but not a 'Jewish State'. That's just racist by definition and it is the crux of the zionist movement and philosophy.

If you could just accept that the vast majority of people who criticise Israel are, like the Zionists, not monolithic in their views. We want justice for all not justice for Palestinians at the expense of Israelis, whether they are Jews or not.

We don't think that Jews can only find security in Israel and that the existence of Israel is not a pre-requisite for the security of Jews. Rather the opposite, in fact. We need tolerant, non-racist societies everywhere, not special havens where people can escape prejudice and persecution only by inflicting it on others.

[barb162]

188. It'a historical fact that Jews have been tossed out

from many areas of the world time and time again. You can write about tolerant societies all day long but that is idealistic dreaming, I think. Maybe sometime in the distant future there will be such societies.

[Violet_Crumble]

82. I've asked the Who Decides question before and gotten no real answer...

Considering that label is thrown around at times with gleeful abandon towards anyone who doesn't agree with the labeller's political views, it's not surprising there's never been any real answer...

Violet...

[Coastie for Truth]

103. I stick by my append 65

65. Two points
1. I have read all of Norman G. Finkelstein's books and many of his articles. I am neither a psychiatrist nor a psychologist (altho I did work in HR for a short time and my sister is a psychology doc) - so I won't opine on obsessive compulsive disorder. But, he is so agenda laden as to be even crazier then blogosphere addicts and political junkies and the Zionists he condemns.

I will leave it at that.

You failed to query me on the second point

65. Two points
2. I have been the victim of a boycott. I'm a doc of chemical engineering (which was "petroleum refinery centric" and "petroleum industry centric") when I was in college. Thanks to Arab League Boycott, the oil industry used to discriminate based on race, religion, creed, and national origin (as well as gender, gender orientation, age, disability, etc.). I was a federal environmental and safety regulator of the oil business. I was told - politely - you're "over qualified" for the kind of jobs we can hire you for. So, I know what I boycott is.

Forty years as a chemical engineer, never been a regular (paid with a W2) employee of an oil company since my high school days when I pumped Citgo.

[julianer]

111. I still don't see what point you are making

Firstly you claim that the author is mentally ill. I have nothing to say about that.

Secondly, you've had a bad experience....this should weigh heavily in my political opinions?

[Coastie for Truth]

114. You, sir are misquoting and hijacking and diverting.

You alleged

Firstly you claim that the author is mentally ill.

I said

...But, he is so agenda laden as to be even crazier then blogosphere addicts and political junkies and the Zionists he condemns.

which is a judgment any layperson can make.

You also said

Secondly, you've had a bad experience....this should weigh heavily in my political opinions?

This was a fairly widespread experience for engineers and scientists of the Jewish religion seeking employment in the petroleum industry.

[julianer]

133. Ha, ha

that's top distorion!

I won't comment on anyone's descent into compulsive obsessive disorder, either! I'm certainly not making any accusations of mental illness against you, as I'm sure you can see!

Brilliant stuff. Well done, keep it up.

[pelsar]

73. your tainted with navity....

my knowledge of the issues is tainted by my education and my leftist upbringing

I am sure that many Israelis disagree with their government and have witnessed first hand the treatment of Palestinians
_____________________________

and many of us also have leftist education and witnessed the treatment of palestenains and in fact have been a part of it, that doesnt excuse one for being naive....the palestenian narritive is not just one where "all they want is to live peacefully next to/with israelis"....if that were true, there wouldnt have been a war in 48, terrorists attacks from "day one" of israelis establishment."

any view of the "all they want is live freely with israel" should have the ability to explain the attacks pre 67 and explain what has changed since then? (one small interesting note: palestenains refer to israels as "JEWS" - in arabic.)

or for that matter, why they keep trying to kill jews from gaza, now that they have their own society with no israelis around. They've actually had to go and build a missle just to terroize israelis even after they've gone......now what was that about "living freely as equals alongside israelis...."

[passy]

93. Let me ask you a couple of questions.

I would be interested in your opinion on the two following questions.
1, Do the people of Israel want to live peacefully alongside the Palestinian but is that wish thwarted because the Palestinians only want war?
2, What is the purpose of the wall being built, to protect Israel or to create a Palestinian ghetto?

[Coastie for Truth]

108. I will give you my answers

1, Do the people of Israel want to live peacefully alongside the Palestinian but is that wish thwarted because the Palestinians only want war?

Based on conversations with close family members who ran for the Knesset as "Peace Now" candidates -- about 75% - 85% of both communities want to live peacefully with the other community, and their will is thwarted by a highly militant, vocal minority in each community.

It happens in my country too, see, e.g., What's the Matter with Kansas? How Conservatives Won the Heart of America by Thomas Frank. Do you really think the majority of Americans oppose gay rights, reproductive choice, teaching of evolution?

2, What is the purpose of the wall being built, to protect Israel or to create a Palestinian ghetto?

To protect Israel.

I have walked along the green line. It is an armistice line - a line connecting two soldiers' corpses or two burned out jeeps.

In another posting you said

my knowledge of the issues is tainted by my education and my leftist upbringing.

Well, I had more family members investigated (and blacklisted) by the McCarthy Committee and HUAC then you did, and my Dad had the daylights beaten out of him by the "Coal and Iron Police" (company goons with state police commissions) for the "crime" of defending striking coal miners. Most of us here on DU had leftist upbringings.

[pelsar]

182. its a mixture.....

nor is it that simple, however:

its not a matter of the "palestenains want war"...thats far too simplisitic, the question we ask is, can they live alongside of us in peace, accept that fact that we are here to stay.

in looking for that answer, one is trying to read the future, since the palestenains like the israelis come in all "stripes, sizes etc"...so beyond the mere words of the politicians one looks at other aspects, the media, the education, the culture, their human rights groups, the outside forces and then it gets a bit muddier.

Israelis, according to the latest polls have no problem in principle in giving the palestenians E.jersualsem, west bank etc. However we take a look at gaza, see chaos, see missles flying in to israel and think: whoaaa. we dont need that chaotic mess on our doorstep. Let the Palestenains get a hold on governing themselve first before we risk missles on jersusalem

i could go on but I'll stop at that for now.

the wall has two missions, first and formost to stop suicide bombers from entering israel, which it has, secondly its placement is a combination security and politics (i.e. a land grab).....the palestenain ghettos being made are a result of the "land grab" more than anything else.

[Coastie for Truth]

60. A New Old Way to Make Diesel - To Beat The Boycott of South Africa

A New Old Way to Make Diesel - To Beat The Boycott of South Africa

RAS LAFFAN INDUSTRIAL CITY, Qatar - In this tiny emirate near the border with Iran, the world's largest oil companies are betting billions of dollars on an obscure method for making diesel fuel that stems from apartheid South Africa's aggressive efforts to wean its economy off imported oil.

<<<snip>>>

The gas-to-liquid method, on the other hand, provides an alternative to oil as a transportation fuel. Gas-to-liquids essentially transforms natural gas into liquid diesel that can be transported and sold using existing tankers, refineries and gas stations.

Diesel is much more commonplace in Europe than in the United States, where consumers still think of it as a heavily polluting fuel used in big trucks and machinery. Two German scientists, Franz Fischer and Hans Tropsch, developed the process in the 1920's after discovering a way of converting coal into a liquid fuel.

<<<snip>>>

Transforming gas-to-liquids into an environmentally-friendly fuel source is new, even if production methods have already gone through several incarnations. During World War II, Germany developed methods to convert coal into fuel for their army. And, apartheid leaders in South Africa adapted methods to convert coal into a transportation fuel to survive economic isolation.

This a variant of the Fischer-Tropsch process which essentially combines natural gas with water and oxygen, then exposes that mixture to cobalt to produce a transparent liquid fuel.

BTW - this is pretty much the history of the Israeli avionics industry, the electronics industry, the aviation industry, the microelectronics industry, and even (arguably) Israel's water desalination technology.

[julianer]

91. Interesting

Yet you forget to mention the extensive help that Israel gave to South Africa in breaking sanctions, including helping them with nuclear technology (the sort of things Iranians would be bombed for).

What did you think of this at the time? Did you support it or try to stop this collusion between racist states?

[Coastie for Truth]

104. Really

Yet you forget to mention the extensive help that Israel gave to South Africa in breaking sanctions

Like synthetic fuels - which the West needs. Like pharceuticals and pharmaceutical manufacturing - does the code H5N1 ring any bells. Like medical instumentation - ring any bells. Like graduate training of physicians - which used to be easy for Palestinians before Intifada II; like software development (not just recreational - do Adobe Acrobat and the Microsoft Graphics Processor ring any bells).

Get real. Maybe you should read The Rise of the Creative Class: And How It's Transforming Work, Leisure, Community and Everyday Life by Richard Florida.

[julianer]

110. Maybe I should read that book

but I should also go to see my mum more often. Priorities, priorities...

Your post fails to address in any way the issue of Israeli sanction busting in South Africa or the issue of Israel helping to develop the nuclear industry of an international pariah.

[Coastie for Truth]

113. Which is totally irrelevant

You posted

Your post fails to address in any way the issue of Israeli sanction busting in South Africa or the issue of Israel helping to develop the nuclear industry of an international pariah.

which is totally irrelevant.

Sometimes an economic boycott just brings out the creativity and ingenuity of the target.

[julianer]

134. That's it, is it?

Israeli sanctions busting might have lead to an apartheid nuclear bomb and what that shows is the ingenuity and creativity of South Africa.

Well, bravo for the racists.

PS the post is about boycotts, so it is relevant IMO.

[pelsar]

61. cute article...ignores the basics....

the only minor flaw is that it ignores the fact that its not clear if the palestenians goal and friends is the destruction of all of israel (sort of like irans goals, or the hizballas, or perhaps the hamas, and the muslim brotherhood....) or not.

and since gazas independence has given israel collective terrrorism on its neighboring cities, that seems to be a hint of what is to be expected of further withdrawls

....i would say that israels defensive measures are well within the realm of protecting its citizens...of course suggestions are always open (usually i met with silence at this point...seems the prefered defensive measures for israeli is to do nothing)

and for those who think israels defensive measures are horrendus....your suggestions please?

kassams from gaza?
palestenains bringing bombs to the karmi crossing (gaza)

suicide bombers in tel aviv?

to name a few.....

[Name removed]

62. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

92. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[57_TomCat]

64. I went to the trouble of reading the entire piece.

I then toured the website of it's author.

My simplistic opinion is it is a hit piece and the "facts" presented are suspect. Another case of information being twisted to support the preconceived ideas of the author. I bet I can find identical garbage being advanced by the other side. A direct violation of the DU supplemental rules for this forum I might add if I were to author a similar piece here.

I do not support Israel nor Palestine. I do believe that the author of this piece and some of his other published material are doing a disservice to those looking for the truth. They are instead being somewhat disingenuous.

It comes from both sides but I must side with applegrove on this. They are working toward a solution and those it would interfere with are up in arms pushing for unnecessary sanctions.

[julianer]

77. Can you please specify where Finkelstein

is talking 'garbage'?

It is all very well claiming that someone is being 'disingenuous' but it is better to give an example to underline your case. Can you do that, please?

Or or you just trying to discredit the messenger who's delivering a devastating attack on Israel's criminality?

[57_TomCat]

119. Finklestein has done a good job

of discrediting himself. If you peruse the different authors with agendas you see a similar style work. I do not profess expertise on the issue. As a person with no axe to grind I find the article and the site to be biased beyond reason. The comments made about Israeli soldiers shooting Palestinian children for sport is a prime example of malicious demagoguery that is repeated on both sides. Reading such alleged facts demands immediate suspension of reason. They were quoted from an author with a bias to support another author with a bias and no reference as to the actual incident's attribution other than the employer of the author.

Smells fishy to me.

[Colorado Blue]

124. Interesting and valid observations. The OTT demagoguery

is just blinding people to each other.

We all have so much to offer - but we're stymied by people who seem to want conflicts to continue, instead of offering the path to reconciliation. This has been a pattern in the I/P situation for decades, and it's borne tragic fruit.

[julianer]

138. The very first requirement

is that people should be able to agree on the situation in I/P.

It is not OTT demagoguery that is holding back peace - it is the refusal to accept that there is any truth in the allegations, and mountains of proof to support them, of Israeli violence and criminality.

This goes back to the point about truth and reconciliation hearings. They can't even start unless people admit the reality of what is happening. Children are being shot by the IDF - recognise this simple fact and we're on the right track.

[Name removed]

137. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Behind the Aegis]

140. Smells like tuna to me!

Kurt Nimmo!?! LOL! NO...LMFAO! :rofl:

Your final source....what a fucking joke! Talk about propaganda! It's not even a real site!

On edit: So you know...Novi Pazar is a city and there is no "St. Louis Post Gazette."

[julianer]

143. I see, so I can presume that the IDF

has never shot children and everyone is just lying about it?

But I note that you take any chance to avoid discussion real children shot by real bullets fired by real Israeli soldiers.

Whew, that's all right - a dodgy website absolves us of all responsibility, not just for the murders, but also to hold anyone to account.

I don't think I could live in your conscience.

[Behind the Aegis]

145. Dance around the head of the pin.

I didn't say or imply or encourage anyone to think that the IDF hasn't shot children. But, you provided fake sites to back up for claim. You provided FALSE evidence. I note that you'd rather rely on lies than factual information. Because, there are plenty of REAL sites that show the IDF has killed children. But, you made the IDF seem like they were luring children to their death.

For someone that is supposed to be so concerned about the truth, you have no problem with providing fake sites to back up claims.

[julianer]

148. I have to take your word for a site

being false. I don't know about that and can't see why I should trust what you say on the matter, since you are merely saying this to avoid accepting the reality of people you support deliberately murdering children.

As I say, it's not a moral position I'd like to be in.

LOL! They're only made up kids :ROFL:

What does it matter if a few are killed YOU PROVIDED A LINK THAT I CLAIM IS MADE UP.

I really should hang my head in shame, shouldn't I?

[Behind the Aegis]

150. check your own sites!

The last one...not even real.

[julianer]

153. We won't let that one drop

will we?

What do you have to say about the substance of the allegations made on the 'made up site'?

Are they lies? Is it evidence that the IDF doesn't shoot kids?

All I can do is provide the evidence: if you choose not to read it or acknowledge the truth there's not much I can do about it.

I would suggest your role in this 'discussion' is to distract and deny.

[Behind the Aegis]

155. sick and twisted!

No, I won't let it drop! There are plenty of legitimate sites that show the IDF has killed children. Yet, you are content with providing lies and deceit. By your reasoning, anything that might be true on a Holocaust revisionist site is worthy of citing and discussion here! There is nothing more than intellectual dishonesty occuring...by YOU!

[julianer]

159. Brilliant

So not only did I know (because you say so) that the site was 'made up' I am being 'intellectually dishonest' in referring to it. How do you arrive at that conclusion?

Apart from anything else, if there are 'plenty of legitimate sites that show the IDF has killed children' why should you make such a fuss about one site you claim is made up? Simply because you are grasping at a pretty thin straw.

Another point is if there are 'plenty of legitimate sites that show the IDF has killed children' why would I deliberately use a 'made up' one? Occam's razor would suggest that the simplist answer is the right one, but please don't let that get in the way of avoiding the issue.

Anyway, enough distraction - will you condemn or refute the murder of children by the IDF?

Seems a reasonably simple question to me. And I'll carry on asking it until you answer.

[Behind the Aegis]

162. More twisting!

Where did I say you knew the sites you provided were made up? Oh, that's right, I didn't! I said, after your acknowledgment the sites were "dodgy," there were 'real' sites that showed the same info (dead Palestinian children).

I claim the site is made up?! It is made up! I gave you the tools. There is no such person that 'wrote' the last article, and the paper he 'wrote' for doesn't exist!

I think we both know what Occam's razor would say!

The murder of children by the IDF happens. Murder is never right.

[julianer]

170. Is this the best we can expect

'The murder of children by the IDF happens. Murder is never right.'

I suppose it is better than nothing. Since you now accept that the IDF murders children, what are you going to do about it? Are you going to carry on supporting the status quo in Israel and the occupied territories (including the murder of children) or are you going to re-appraise your committment to such support?

Now that you have taken the first step to recognising Israeli crimes you need to move forward to a position of opposing them, in all conscience.

[Behind the Aegis]

173. Who is this "we?"

Since I am not in Israel, I should do what?

have you recognized that your sites are shite? Will you stop using them here like this is a field of flowers?

[julianer]

174. Since you are not in Israel

you can do what the rest of us do. We provide what support we can to the victims.

Oooooh, that dreadful web site. List it among the great crimes of humanity. Will I ever get over it???

[Behind the Aegis]

176. Uh-huh.

Oooohhh that dreadful website....I bet your panties would be in a bunch if it was an Islamaphobic site!

[julianer]

179. Are you going to stop attacking peope

who argue against the murder of children for sport? (homage again noted).

This puts your grudging acceptance of such murder in context. A miserable admission dragged out of you as if from a guilty schoolboy and constant attempts to discredit what you already admit to be true.

You seem confused. I'm not surprised, you've just taken a big step forward.

Go and have a beer and get used to the new, anti-murder, you.

[julianer]

146. Sniff these

http://www.reachm.com/amstreet/archives/2004/05/26/shooting-children/

http://www.fromoccupiedpalestine.org/node.php?id=1461

http://www.fromoccupiedpalestine.org/node.php?id=1466

http://www.bintjbeil.com/articles/en/011115_eldar.html

There are plenty more. Only the deliberatly purblind will not see the reality here.

LOL! They're only made up kids :ROFL: LOL, LMFAO, and other chilling responses.

[Behind the Aegis]

149. twisted!

I never said children were not killed. I said they were not used as target practice, as you suggest!

[julianer]

152. Well the links I provided disprove you

I suggest you read them and re-appraise your support for the people who are doing the shooting.

[Behind the Aegis]

157. The links you provided were shit!

[julianer]

161. Your arguments are no better

Please validate the claim that the site was 'made up' and the content wasn't true.

Please condemn the murder of children (of which I've provided ample evidence) by the IDF.

[Behind the Aegis]

164. the last source...

http://home.att.net/~professorboris/SPECTRE/Galena_Crier/Frankenstein.htm

Do you really think that "the St. Louis Post Gazette" has to use an "att.net" homepage?!

And Nimmo? Do your own search on him!

[julianer]

168. I have no idea

none of those things were apparent when I visited the site.

Anyway, onto the important stuff.

You have yet to condemn the murder of children (though you have been given many opportunities by now).

Are you going to do so or are you going to carry on up this blind alley that affords you so much relief from answering awkward questions?

[Peace Patriot]

71. Truth and Reconciliation

Someone upthread said that blacks didn't kill anybody in South Africa. That is not true. Blacks killed whites, and blacks killed each other (perceived traitors) in the struggle against apartheid. It was a violent struggle, which eventually turned non-violent--one of history's more amazing turnabouts. And it, too,--like the Israeli/Palestinian conflict--was a situation of great unbalance, whereby white society had taken everything there was to take, and had herded blacks onto reservations that were little more than refugee camps. Actions like these--herding people around, fencing them off, making them carry race identity papers, imprisoning any who resist such measures, torturing people, and so on--are ALWAYS indicators of great economic injustice. People get herded and fenced off and so on BECAUSE something is being taken from them--their rights to land or resources, or other wealth. Jews should understand this more than anyone else. That is exactly what was done to them in the early stages of Nazism--forcing them to carry race identity papers, herding them into penned in areas, stealing their homes and whatever resources they had. It is an indicator of oppression which, if left unchecked, by liberal forces within the society, or by international pressure, almost inevitably leads to worse horrors.

How did the South Africans recover from this? First of all, international pressure forced white society's government to give up its ideas of herding people around on the basis of race, and to open the government to equal participation by the majority blacks. This resulted in the first black president of South Africa, who happened to be a very wise man, Nelson Mandela, who had spent nearly thirty years in prison, to emerge and become president.

Can you imagine the accusations, the resentments, the past histories of what seemed to be unforgivable injuries, the rage, the desire for revenge, the defensiveness of the guilty, the hair-raising stories of violence with accusations on both sides, not to be disentangled--in other words, the whole, awful history of hundreds of years of violent repression and rebellion--that South Africa was bursting with, at that point?

This is what I'm sensing in the Palestinian/Israeli situation--from the situation itself, with its unending cycle of violent reprisals--and in discussions like this one here at DU, where supporters of each side start listing past injuries ad infinitum, as if to persuade some impartial judge of the righteousness of their side alone. One side excuses all of Israel's past crimes against Palestinians, and says, but look, they're now making concessions, and those horrible Palestinians and their supporters who kill Israelis, only want Israel to be annihilated. The other side excuses violent revenge against Israeli civilians by Palestinian suicide bombers and others, and, like Israel and its defenders, has long lists of past outrages going back to the founding of Israel, that seem to justify the view that Israel should never have been founded and shouldn't exist now. Seemingly irreconcilable positions, with both sides bristling with tales of the others' horrors, and insisting on their own righteousness.

What South Africa did was rather amazing--the Truth and Reconciliation Commission--whereby people who would tell the truth about past atrocities, and if it was perceived to be the truth from corroborating witnesses, would not be prosecuted. A grant of immunity was given to truth tellers, so that healing could begin and society could adjust itself and go on. The alternative was endless prosecutions, reprisals and new cycles of violence.

South Africa had an extraordinary leader in Nelson Mandela--a man who had once been angry and violent, in response to the injustice against his race, but who achieved wisdom. Israel and Palestine could use such leaders now, but in the absence of them, there is no reason why the people themselves cannot choose peace and justice--and truth and reconciliation--and demand such policies of their leaders. I believe that the ordinary people of Israel and Palestine are capable of this, despite the history of bad leadership on both sides, and many disastrous mistakes. I am a believer in ordinary people and democracy. What a wonderful accomplishment it would be! Israel/Palestine could become the nexus of peace and a shining light to the whole world.

[pelsar]

72. wrong conflict....

the basis for S.Africa sins was pure racism.....thats not the case in the israeli/palestenian conflict:

just to make the point: israeli arabs not only vote in israeli election, but vote for the "jewish/zionist" parties and not the ones with arab lists...

___________
hence the whole racial issue is precisly whats its NOT about.

[julianer]

78. Once again, I agree with nearly all

you say. However, you insist on seeing this 'conflict' as consisting of two intransigent sides with the Palestinians seeking the complete destruction of Israel

This is not true at all. The latest bargaining position from the Palestinians is that they retain 22% of their original land in return for peace. I.e. that Israel has control over 78% of the land, whereas the original UN agreement gave just over 50% to Israel.

[pelsar]

94. how do you know?

The latest bargaining position from the Palestinians is that they retain 22% of their original land in return for peace-your talking the PA

__________

thats a mere bargining position...the same was said of the hizballa in lebanon, israel pulls back to the intl border, end of conflict-except it didnt happen, they keep shooting at us,

israel pulls out of gaza...surprise! they keep shooting at us...

i detect a pattern here:


hamas hasnt decided it they actually "agree" to let israel exist or not (they're busy infighting)

your "latest bargening" is a mere piece of paper by a govt that may not exist in a month, we need a bit more substance to believe that theres been a change in attitude.

[Colorado Blue]

123. The conflicts aren't similar - but the idea of truth and

reconciliation meetings is awesome.

I think something similar happened in Rwanda. It's vital that people who've been scarred by war, by terrible experiences, be able to seek each other's humanity.

[julianer]

136. It is absolutely essential

that there are truth and reconciliatioin hearings. All who are guilty must admit and have the chance for public forgiveness. Otherwise the cycle will just carry on.

Both Israel and Palestinian resistors must recognise their crimes and ask for forgiveness. I'm sure it will be forthcoming and that such a step could lead to a lasting peace for both populations, maybe via a new constitution encompassing both states.

[Coastie for Truth]

122. Let's talk about an effective economic boycott

ENUMERATE A LIST OF COMPANIES THAT ENGAGE IN ANTI-HUMANITARIAN ACTIVITIES --- AND CLOSE YOUR UNIVERSITY PLACEMENT OFFICE TO THEM

Very simple - just deny them the privilege of hiring you - and your classmates and your students. You, and your classmates, and your students shouldn't want to work there anyway.

The law schools are doing it with respect to closing their placement offices to military recruiters because of the military's "don't ask - don't tell"-

*

And this is high stakes to the law schools and their parent universities. Because of the "Solomon Amendment" they could lose millions in Federal funds. Your university won't lose anything by closing its placement office to Caterpillar - and if you're a progressive you shouldn't be interviewing Caterpillar anyway.

Back in the 1960's many of America's universities closed their placement offices to employers that lacked affirmative action programs.

In 1986 I was adjuncting at a college that closed it's placement office to companies that still had operations in South Africa - including a company that was historically a major employer of the college's alumni.

Inconvenience yourself.

[julianer]

139. I agree entirely n/t

[Englander]

141. More evidence to support the op's factual claims -

'Snipers with children in their sights

Chris McGreal
Tuesday June 28, 2005
The Guardian

It was the shooting of Asma Mughayar that swept away any lingering doubts I had about how it is the Israeli army kills so many Palestinian children and civilians.

Asma, 16, and her younger brother, Ahmad, were collecting laundry from the roof of their home in the south of the Gaza Strip in May last year when they were felled by an Israeli army sniper. Neither child was armed or threatening the soldier, who fired unseen through a hole punched in the wall of a neighbouring block of flats.

The army said the two were blown up by a Palestinian bomb planted to kill soldiers. The corpses offered a different account. In Rafah's morgue, Asma lay with a single bullet hole through her temple; her 13-year-old brother had a lone shot to his forehead. There were no other injuries, certainly none consistent with a blast.

Confronted with this, the army changed its account and claimed the pair were killed by a Palestinian, though there was persuasive evidence pointing to the Israeli sniper's nest. What the military did not do was ask its soldiers why they gave a false account of the deaths or speak to the children's parents or any other witnesses.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Story/0,2763,1516362,00.html

______________________________


'Israel and the Occupied Territories

Covering events from January - December 2004
The Israeli army killed more than 700 Palestinians, including some 150 children. Most were killed unlawfully — in reckless shooting, shelling and air strikes in civilian residential areas; in extrajudicial executions; and as a result of excessive use of force. Palestinian armed groups killed 109 Israelis — 67 of them civilians and including eight children — in suicide bombings, shootings and mortar attacks. Stringent restrictions imposed by the Israeli army on the movement of Palestinians in the Occupied Territories caused widespread poverty and unemployment and hindered access to health and education facilities. The Israeli army destroyed several hundred Palestinian homes, large areas of agricultural land, and infrastructure networks. Israel continued to expand illegal settlements and to build a fence/wall through the West Bank, confining Palestinians in isolated enclaves cut off from their land and essential services in nearby towns and villages. Israeli settlers increased their attacks against Palestinians and their property and against international human rights workers. Certain abuses committed by the Israeli army constituted crimes against humanity and war crimes, including unlawful killings; extensive and wanton destruction of property; obstruction of medical assistance and targeting of medical personnel; torture; and the use of Palestinians as “human shields”. The deliberate targeting of civilians by Palestinian armed groups constituted crimes against humanity.

>snip

Killings and attacks by the Israeli army

The Israeli army killed around 700 Palestinians, including some 150 children, in the Occupied
Territories, most of them unlawfully. Many were killed in deliberate as well as reckless shooting, shelling and bombardment of densely populated residential areas or as a result of excessive use of force. Some 120 Palestinians were killed in extrajudicial executions, including more than 30 bystanders, of whom four were children. Others were killed in armed clashes with Israeli soldiers. Thousands of others were injured.

* Four Palestinian schoolgirls were shot dead by the Israeli army in their classrooms or walking to school in the Gaza Strip in September and October. Raghda Adnan al-Assar and Ghadeer Jaber Mukhaymar, aged 10 and nine, were shot dead by Israeli soldiers while sitting at their desks in UN schools in Khan Yunis refugee camp. Eight-year-old Rania Iyad Aram was shot dead by Israeli soldiers as she was walking to school. On 5 October Israeli soldiers shot dead 13-year-old Iman al-Hams near her school in Rafah. According to an army communication recording of the incident and testimonies of soldiers, a commander repeatedly shot the child at close range even though soldiers had identified her as “a little girl... scared to death”. The commander was charged with illegal use of his weapon, obstructing justice, improper use of authority and unbecoming conduct. He was not charged with murder or manslaughter.
* On 22 March, Hamas leader Sheikh Ahmad Yassin, a 66-year-old wheelchair-bound paraplegic, was assassinated in an Israeli air-strike as he was leaving a mosque in Gaza City after dawn prayers. Seven other Palestinians were killed in the attack and at least 17 were injured. His successor, ‘Abd al-’Aziz al-Rantisi, was likewise assassinated by the Israeli army on 17 April.
* Ten-year-old Walid Naji Abu Qamar, 11-year-old Mubarak Salim al-Hashash, 13-year-old Mahmoud Tariq Mansour and five others were killed on 19 May in Rafah in the Gaza Strip when the Israeli army opened fire with tank shells and a helicopter-launched missile on a non-violent demonstration. Dozens of other unarmed demonstrators were also wounded in the attack.

http://web.amnesty.org/report2005/isr-summary-eng

_____________________________


'No End in Sight
Jon Elmer Interviews Gideon Levy

September 18, 2003

>snip

Elmer: Latest figures indicate that more than 10,000 children have been injured in the intifada (Palestine Monitor). Veteran war correspondent Chris Hedges wrote in his "Gaza Diaries" of Israeli soldiers taunting children in Khan Yunis, then shooting them: "Children have been shot in other conflicts I have covered - death squads gunned them down in el Salvador and Guatemala, mothers with infants were lined up and massacred in Algeria, and Serb snipers put children in their sights and watched them crumble on the pavement in Sarajevo - but I have never before watched soldiers entice children like mice into a trap and murder them for sport" (Gaza Diaries, Harpers, October 2001). Can you comment on this with your experience as a reporter in this conflict?

Levy: Unfortunately it's not far from the truth. Most Israeli soldiers don't treat the Palestinians as human beings. For them, they are the enemy - all of them. They treat them like animals. When you treat them like animals, the difference between a child and an adult... there is no difference. There is no difference between a young cow and an old cow, you treat them the same. Once you've lost your human touch, your attitude to treat them as human beings, then the difference between children and adults has vanished.

And here we stand. I see these things every week, again and again. And it's inevitable. As long as the occupation goes on, these things are inevitable.

Elmer: Israeli forces have beaten, arrested, imprisoned, shot dozens and killed five journalists since the beginning of the intifada, all of whom were clearly identifiable as journalists - James Miller was seen on AP footage carrying a white flag and yelling that he was a British journalist when he was shot point-blank by Israeli forces in Gaza. When Rafaelle Ciriello was killed during Operation Defensive Shield, the International Press Institute said that it was "part of a concerted strategy by the Israeli army to control reports on the recent surge in armed hostilities in the region". Are Israelis murdering journalists?

Levy: No, I think the Israeli soldiers are just trigger-happy. They don't direct it especially journalists. They kill anything that walks – it can be journalists, it can be international solidarity activists, and it can be any Palestinian.

http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=22&ItemID=4215

__________________________________________

[Behind the Aegis]

142. That does NOT support...

..."the award-winning New York Times journalist Chris Hedges reports that Israeli soldiers "entice children like mice into a trap and murder them for sport."" Except of course that your Levy article who quotes "the award-winning New York Times journalist Chris Hedges". :eyes:

[julianer]

144. Yes the Guardian is a made up site

and Britain doesn't even exist! LOL!!!

:rofl:

Those children are imaginary!

[Behind the Aegis]

147. You can't even get ridicule correct tonight/this AM.

I never said that "The Guardian" was a made up site...it was the crap YOU provided in another post.

[julianer]

151. No

you reject the story, not the site. It is noteable that you ignore the other links that you don't claim are 'made up'. What is your response to them?

Let's hear you condemn the murder of children.

And some proof that the story the 'made up site'(whatever that means) tells isn't true, would help.

Kids dead. LOL, they're imaginary and 'made up'. LMFAO. LOL LOL

[Behind the Aegis]

154. sick!

I have never said that children have not been killed! Hell, even Ha'aretz runs those stories! No, you are trying to say something I have never said! That is fucking sick!

[julianer]

156. I don't think I'm putting any words in your mouth

that don't belong there, but this is quite a heated little spat so I may have become carried away. I apologise if I have, though I don't think so.

Perhaps you could be more specific.

No doubt this subject (my supposed distortion of your words) will now occupy your sole attention on this thread. It is more important than murder of kids, after all. Distract, deny, become the victim.

Can you please refute or condemn the deliberate murder of children, then there will be no confusion about what you think about it.

[Behind the Aegis]

158. unreal!

I haven't said anything about the death of children not being real or ghastly. Yet, because I dispute your shit sites, it is supposed to imply that I support or don't believe that these deaths have occurred. That is dishonest!

[julianer]

160. All you have to do is condemn the murder of children

by the forces you support.

I don't think many people here would have as much trouble as you in doing so.

Why won't you condemn murder of children?

[Behind the Aegis]

163. Why won't you admit you used shit sources?!

[julianer]

172. Because it is unimportant

and irrelevant. As I say, there are plenty more site, and plenty more evidence. You have accepted this in another post, so it is a bit tiresome that you keep banging this broken drum.

There is no way any decent person could equate the linking of a web site to the murder of children for sport.

Only you see it this way.

[Behind the Aegis]

175. So...

...linking to a neo-Nazi site, condemning Israel, would be acceptable in your view because that the site would be "unimportant and irrelevant"?

"There is no way any decent person could equate the linking of a web site to the murder of children for sport.

Only you see it this way."

That makes no sense!

[julianer]

177. You have already admitted that the IDF

murder children. Why are you harping on trying to discredit something you've already admitted?

This discussion is finished. You have accepted my point - the IDF murder children. This can no longer be argued against and you will no longer be able to deny it.

All that is left is for you to start arguing against such murder, rather than attacking those who do so.

[Behind the Aegis]

178. what a load of crap!

So, if the IHR was correct, it should be a legitmate source of information!?

Whatever!

:eyes:

[julianer]

180. Desperate stuff now

You've already accepted my argument. What is the point in going on?

I've finished with this particular chat, I think. I've got what I wanted and I'll be able to remind you of your position if you forget it. Which is just great.

[Behind the Aegis]

181. there is no point...

I have accepted nothing from you.

[eyl]

183. I'm assuming that the Chris Hedges account referred to here,

describing how the IDF "entices children to their deaths like mice", is from "A Gaza Diary" (or "Eyeless in Gaza", I've seen it referred to by both names), which appeared in Harper's October 2001 issue. However, the account, as Hedges describes it, is not only contradicted by Palestinian-supplied statistics, but by the laws of physics; something which leads me to question if he saw what he thought he saw, or if it's even true.

The relevant portion is this:

It is still. The camp waits, as if holding its breath. And then, out of the dry furnace air, a disembodied voice crackles over a loudspeaker.

"Come on, dogs," the voice booms in Arabic. "Where are all the dogs of Khan Younis? Come! Come!"

I stand up. I walk outside the hut. The invective continues to spew: "Son of a bitch!" "Son of a whore!" "Your mother's cunt!"

The boys dart in small packs up the sloping dunes to the electric fence that separates the camp from the Jewish settlement. They lob rocks toward two armored jeeps parked on top of the dune and mounted with loudspeakers. Three ambulances line the road below the dunes in anticipation of what is to come.

A percussion grenade explodes. The boys, most no more than ten or eleven years old, scatter, running clumsily across the heavy sand. They descend out of sight behind a sandbank in front of me. There are no sounds of gunfire. The soldiers shoot with silencers. The bullets from the M-16 rifles tumble end over end through the children's slight bodies. Later, in the hospital, I will see the destruction: the stomachs ripped out, the gaping holes in limbs and torsos.

Yesterday at this spot the Israelis shot eight young men, six of whom were under the age of eighteen. One was twelve. This afternoon they kill an eleven-year-old boy, Ali Murad, and seriously wound four more, three of whom are under eighteen. Children have been shot in other conflicts I have covered—death squads gunned them down in El Salvador and Guatemala, mothers with infants were lined up and massacred in Algeria, and Serb snipers put children in their sights and watched them crumple onto the pavement in Sarajevo—but I have never before watched soldiers entice children like mice into a trap and murder them for sport

There are three problems with the account, all of which can be seen in the bold section

1) Hedges explicitly says the children in question were out of his sight when the shootings occured. Despite this, he describes how the soldiers shoot them. Furthermore, in a later radio interview, he claims he did see the shootings themselves. This is the primary point which leads me to question his honesty in this account (as opposed to his gulliblity).

2) Hedges describes how the soldiers used silencers. Presumably, he could identify that those were indeed silencers by the fact that no noise was heard (also, I'm not sure if this version of the account has been slightly edited or not, because ISTR in the original article he described the bullets as "tumbling silently", but I may be misremembering). However, there are several problems with this claim. First of all, silencers are hardly standard IDF combat equipment. More importantly, movies to the contrary, it's impossible to silence an M16 assault rifle (which is most likely what the soldiers were equipped with; if not, they had a Galil or its variants, which have the same muzzle velocity as the M16). The M16 has a muzzle velocity of Mach 3 - a considerable portion of the noise is the supersonic boom the bullet makes travelling through the air. While there are silencers intended for the M16, these do not silence the shot - instead, they are intended to muffle the shot in the shooters ears, and to make it more difficult to locate him by the sound.
I suppose, in theory, you could make a special subsonic bullet, but you'd lose both range and power, and you'd need to recalibrate your sights - which means you'd be in real trouble if you got into a combat situation. What Hedges saw were most likely rubber bullet dispensers (which look kind of like movie silencers), but given his supposed experience - and the resulting sounds - I puzzled how he mistook them for silencers.

3) Lastly, Hedges describes, with great pathos, how

The bullets from the M-16 rifles tumble end over end through the children's slight bodies. Later, in the hospital, I will see the destruction: the stomachs ripped out, the gaping holes in limbs and torsos".

Later, he writes

Yesterday at this spot the Israelis shot eight young men, six of whom were under the age of eighteen. One was twelve. This afternoon they kill an eleven-year-old boy, Ali Murad, and seriously wound four more, three of whom are under eighteen

This section is dated June 17th, so we have one dead child in Khan Younis plus 4 injured (note that Hedges claims he saw the injured, not just that he was told about them). In addition, we have 8 people killed/injured (he doesn't specify) the day before. Note that these are just events in Khan Younis, not taking into account events elsewhere in the Territories.
Now, according to B'Tselem's detailed list of fatalities*, there was indeed on boy killed in Khan Younis that day, though his personal details (name/age) are a bit different than Hedges describes. However, the Palestinian Red Crescent Society maintains a list of Palestinian fatalities/injuries per day (though without a breakdown by age, gender, location, or circumstances). Looking at the page for June 2001, you can see that on June 17th there was one fatality and no injuries; and on the previous day, there were a total of 6 injuries - and again, these figures are totaled across Gaza and the West Bank. So either Hedges invented the 4 injured children (as well as 2 injured the day before, even assuming all 6 of the wounded were in Khan Younis), or someone deceived him. Neither possibility speaks well of the veracity of his account. And if he was deceived - how does he know what the soldiers were calling out? If he speaks Arabic, surely he could have determined whether someone was injured or not (unless the doctors and children were lying); if not, he's dependent on someone else's translation - quite possibly the same persion who deceived him.

*Unfortunately, I have no link; I haven't been able to find that page since they reorganized their website.

[pelsar]

184. oh gosh eyl...

you just ruined a great claim on how we bait children to kill them:...seems its so easy to make stuff up. Hey i got one:

it was march 2003, i watch a palestenian force a needle into a 12 year old kid, i believe it was his brother, after the child was half awake he put on a backpack that was rather heavy and stumbled toward the group of israeli children having a picknick. These were special children all paralysed, so they couldnt move.....as the 12yr old closed in on the israeli children a soldier ordered him to stop...at that point the brother pressed the button that blew up his younger brother..

now all i need to do is get i published somewhere, spread it around on the internet and Presto: instant demonization!!!

[eyl]

186. Sorry n/t

[Violet_Crumble]

189. Are you trying to claim it's never, ever happened?

Not even once??

[eyl]

190. That what happened?

That IDF soldiers killed Palestinian children? Much as I hate to admit it, it's happened - both under justified and unjustified circumstances - and more than once

That IDF soldiers deliberately enticed Palestinian children to run out so as to shoot them? All such allegations I've seen rely on Hedges as a source - so no, I don't believe it.

[eyl]

185. Just a correction

since the edit period's expired - I typed this up mainly from memory from a previous occasion, just pausing to verify the details; looking over the bold section again, I see I missed that Hedges specifically states "There are no sounds of gunfire". This just stengthens point #2

[Englander]

193. I~heart~the innernets;

Case closed, I think, Hedges' account is corroborated, the names, dates
& details are all confirmed by this report from PCHR;

'Weekly Report
On Israeli Human Rights Violations in the Occupied
Palestinian Territories

June 14-20, 2001

>snip

Saturday, June 16, 2001

At approximately 15:00 local time, Israeli occupation soldiers positioned at the entrance to a settlement road to the south of Al-Mentar (Karni) Outlet, east of Gaza City, fired at a number of Palestinian demonstrators, wounding Ibrahim Sa’di Fa’our ‘Ayyad, 25, from Al-Shojaeya neighbourhood in Gaza City, with a live bullet to the left shoulder. In his testimony to PCHR, ‘Ayyad said that he had not participated in any protests against the Israeli forces. PCHR’s field officer in Gaza City reported that Israeli soldiers used guns equipped with silencers to fire at Palestinian demonstrators from a distance of approximately 150m.

At approximately 17:00 local time, dozens of Palestinian young men and children gathered in the southwest of Khan Yunis and threw stones at Israeli occupation soldiers positioned in the vicinity of “Gani Tal” settlement. Those soldiers fired live bullets and tear gas canisters at demonstrators from a distance of approximately 150m. PCHR’s field officer in Khan Yunis reported that Israeli soldiers used guns equipped with silencers to fire at Palestinian demonstrators. Eight demonstrators were wounded as follows:

1) Mohammed Amin Shakshak, 17, wounded by a live bullet in the right foot;

2) Mohammed Riadh Abu ‘Oudeh, 14, wounded by a live bullet in the right foot;

3) Shadi Bashir Qeitah, 18, wounded by a live bullet in the left leg;

4) Ahmed Mohammed Shehdeh, 17, wounded by a live bullet in the buttocks;

5) Hazem Smir Abu Dalal, 14, wounded by a live bullet in the left foot;

6) Jihad Sa’id El-Ghandour, 12, wounded by a live bullet in the left leg;

7) Ismail Mahmoud El-‘Aaour, 15, wounded by a live bullet in the right thigh; and

8) Salah Mohammed Muheisen, 18, wounded by two live bullets in the thighs.

Sunday, June 17, 2001

At approximately 18:30 local time, Israeli occupation soldiers, positioned in the vicinity of “Gani Tal” settlement to the west of Khan Yunis, opened fire on a number of Palestinian civilians, killing an 11-year-old child, ‘Ali Murad Abu Shawish, and wounding four, two of whom were in serious condition. According to PCHR’s investigations and eyewitnesses’ testimonies, around 100 Palestinian civilians, aged 11 to 18, had gathered to the west of the fence of “Gani Tal” settlement since 15:00 local time, throwing stones at two Israeli military jeeps in the vicinity of the mentioned settlement. Israeli soldiers fired tear gas canisters against demonstrators who were taking cover behind sacks of sand approximately 50m away from the route of Israeli patrols. Demonstrators fled when they inhaled tear gas, and jeeps moved back towards a military site 300m away. This scene continued until 18:30 local time when an Israeli military jeep stopped and a soldier opened fire on demonstrators, killing the child Abu Shawish and injuring four other demonstrators. According to eyewitnesses, the Israeli soldier fired at demonstrators from a gun equipped with a silencer. Abu Shawish died on the way to Nasser hospital in Khan Yunis. According to medical sources at Nasser Hospital, he received a live bullet that entered the back and settled in the chest. The wounded were:

1) ‘Aadel Hussein El-Muqannan, 16, seriously wounded by a live bullet in the abdomen;

2) Jasser Akram El-Sa’ei, 18, seriously wounded by a live bullet in the abdomen;

3) Ramzi Mahmoud Qannan, 16, wounded by a live bullet in the abdomen; and

4) Jihad Majdi Abu Jamous, 15, wounded by a live bullet in the left leg.

http://www.pchrgaza.org/files/W_report/English/21-06-2001.htm

__________________________


Suppressors, or silencers, *are* available for M16 rifles, maybe that's
what the witnesses saw;

Take yer pick from this Google search;


http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&safe=off&c2coff=1&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial&q=m16+suppressor+&btnG=Search

[eyl]

194. So the Palestinian Red Crescent

has no idea how many people it treats? What's the theory - are they lying, incompetent, or in the pay of Israel?

Besides that, even the description of the incident given in your own link

According to PCHR’s investigations and eyewitnesses’ testimonies, around 100 Palestinian civilians, aged 11 to 18, had gathered to the west of the fence of “Gani Tal” settlement since 15:00 local time, throwing stones at two Israeli military jeeps in the vicinity of the mentioned settlement. Israeli soldiers fired tear gas canisters against demonstrators who were taking cover behind sacks of sand approximately 50m away from the route of Israeli patrols. Demonstrators fled when they inhaled tear gas, and jeeps moved back towards a military site 300m away. This scene continued until 18:30 local time when an Israeli military jeep stopped and a soldier opened fire on demonstrators, killing the child Abu Shawish and injuring four other demonstrators

is drastically different from Hedges account.

As for suppressors, if you carefully read the links you provided, you'll see that - as I noted in my original post - they are intended to attenuate the muzzle blast - the sound the bullet makes as it's expelled from the bullet - in order to make it harder to localize the shooter and to prevent deafening (especially in enclosed areas); they do not do anything to silence the bullet. Once again, that would require a subsonic round, which is otherwise relatively ineffective (given that the soldiers were in plain sight, I'm also at a loss to explain why they would bother to use silencers in any event) - its supersonic nature makes a standard bullet physically impossible to silence - again, in contradiction to Hedges description. And using those suppressors would require recalibrating the rifle sights, which means it'll be inaccurate in ordinary combat (and unless it's a special rifle with an integral silencer, you wouldn't want to fight with the silencer if you could avoid it, because the longer the gun is the harder it is to handle on the move). In addition, I've never seen a silencer in the IDF, nor have I ever heard of one; while I suppose such could exist in SpecOps units, those units are not going to be running patrols.

EDIT - and frankly, your other thread show the PCHR isn't above some padding of the casualty figures.

[pelsar]

195. eyl...tsk tsk tsk....

your confusing the issue with facts....and worse using the palesteanian stats to prove your point...not to mention simple facts about "silencers".

and btw your right about the IDF patrols never carrying such things....never saw, nor heard anyone carrying a "silencer..."

[Englander]

198. Oh, dear.

Facts = not opinion.

Opinion = not facts.

Try this fun game, see if you tell the difference between fact/opinion,
it's fun!

http://www.manatee.k12.fl.us/sites/elementary/palmasola/rcfo1.htm

[Englander]

197. I have no no idea what you're talking about, really.

You can carry on doing what yer doing, completely missing the point,
& doing yer best to avoid, ignore, &/or try to explain how the murder
of kids really isn't a matter of concern, or how the deliberate shooting
of kids isn't anything to be alarmed by, but if you choose to pass over
that detail, then I really don't want to continue this discussion.
Since I can't see any comments that acknowledge that the murder of kids
is a matter of concern, I'm not going to continue this, as it doesn't
seem to be of any merit. Arguing over what happened doesn't really move
the debate forward, I've provided links that support Hedges' claims,
nothing you've posted falsifies those claims, & simply denying his report
on the basis of "I say so" isn't sufficient.

[Lithos]

202. Locking

Thread has gone past point of viability.

Lithos
I/P Forum Moderator