Israel continues its merciless pounding of the defenceless.

[Park Life 70]

[Park Life 70]

The Quasi-Western and Jewish hegemony that has cost the West billions and billions in its short sightedness and cruelty to mostly the innocent around the Arab and Muslim world (Iraq, Afghanistan, Palestine) is coming to an end, it is essentially militarily and secondly ethically unsustainable. It also won't be forgotten the role the lapdog media has played (owned as it is by multinational congrlomorates and banking interests) and how for so long they have kept the people occluded from the truth of the cruelty inflicted on civilian populaitons in the disputed and occupied zones. The shear flagrant terror unleashed on parts of the Arab world will as often is the case in history come with its own particular and nasty blowback. And that blowback is coming.

[Dr Gloom 19735]

the boats were offered safe landing on israeli territory in order to be first checked for weapons. the blockade exists because weapons are being brought to hamas and used against israel.

 

the idf's reaction was excessive but i can't believe for a moment that at a time of global crisis and with its reputation at an all time low, the idf would just storm and attack a peaceful activists on an aid boat. the bat should have docked and allowed the aid to be transported to gaza.

 

it's pretty clear from this footage that the soldiers were attacked. they responded with a heavy hand but they were provoked, no doubt.

 

[Park Life 70]

Just think you're coming across a bit naive about Israel's agenda. It routinely blocks aid from the Red Cross, Medicines Sans Frontiers etc..IDF shoot at ambulances, water trucks and anything that moves. Israel is carrying out genocide by stealth against the Palestinian people.

 

 

From NO

 

IDF have released images of some of the weapons they found on board. Turns out the metadata confirms said images are from 2006 Laughing

 

http://s3.amazonaws.com/ember/tTl8z3PwzxcD...LXslrOrIu_o.png

Edited June 2, 2010 by Park Life

[Dr Gloom 19735]

CNN: Hamas stops flotilla aid delivered by Israel

http://edition.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/meast/06....aid/index.html

[Billy Castell 0]

It's probably poisoned or something.

 

Honestly, the Israelis have been showing themselves as nowt but ethnic cleansers playing the long game. The whole settlement issue etc. is just a creeping version of what Mugabe did with the white farmers, what the Serbs did in Bosnia and what the Germans did in Poland. I don't subscribe to the 'Palestinians have done nothing wrong' line, but Israel has used any excuse to use disproportionate force to kill civilians.

[Rob W 0]

The Quasi-Western and Jewish hegemony that has cost the West billions and billions in its short sightedness and cruelty to mostly the innocent around the Arab and Muslim world (Iraq, Afghanistan, Palestine) is coming to an end, it is essentially militarily and secondly ethically unsustainable. It also won't be forgotten the role the lapdog media has played (owned as it is by multinational congrlomorates and banking interests) and how for so long they have kept the people occluded from the truth of the cruelty inflicted on civilian populaitons in the disputed and occupied zones. The shear flagrant terror unleashed on parts of the Arab world will as often is the case in history come with its own particular and nasty blowback. And that blowback is coming.

 

 

(whispers) "Horst Wessel"

[Dr Gloom 19735]

It's probably poisoned or something.

 

Honestly, the Israelis have been showing themselves as nowt but ethnic cleansers playing the long game. The whole settlement issue etc. is just a creeping version of what Mugabe did with the white farmers, what the Serbs did in Bosnia and what the Germans did in Poland. I don't subscribe to the 'Palestinians have done nothing wrong' line, but Israel has used any excuse to use disproportionate force to kill civilians.

 

i'd say hamas are just as big players in the ethnic cleansing game as israel.

[Rob W 0]

the boats were offered safe landing on israeli territory in order to be first checked for weapons. the blockade exists because weapons are being brought to hamas and used against israel.

 

the idf's reaction was excessive but i can't believe for a moment that at a time of global crisis and with its reputation at an all time low, the idf would just storm and attack a peaceful activists on an aid boat. the bat should have docked and allowed the aid to be transported to gaza.

 

it's pretty clear from this footage that the soldiers were attacked. they responded with a heavy hand but they were provoked, no doubt.

 

 

 

you assume that they are competent - the reord shows that while Israel can deploy massive force and kill people (even in Dubai) it backfires on them because there is never any sense of proportion

 

It's the equivalent of the Glaswegian "Who you lookin' at Jimmie?"

[Dr Gloom 19735]

the boats were offered safe landing on israeli territory in order to be first checked for weapons. the blockade exists because weapons are being brought to hamas and used against israel.

 

the idf's reaction was excessive but i can't believe for a moment that at a time of global crisis and with its reputation at an all time low, the idf would just storm and attack a peaceful activists on an aid boat. the bat should have docked and allowed the aid to be transported to gaza.

 

it's pretty clear from this footage that the soldiers were attacked. they responded with a heavy hand but they were provoked, no doubt.

 

 

 

you assume that they are competent - the reord shows that while Israel can deploy massive force and kill people (even in Dubai) it backfires on them because there is never any sense of proportion

 

It's the equivalent of the Glaswegian "Who you lookin' at Jimmie?"

 

no, i agree that they often get it wrong. my point is that they over-reacted but it they were provoked. many on here think the international media is biased towards the israeli cause. i think these days the opposite is true. there are two sides to this story

[Guest alex]

the boats were offered safe landing on israeli territory in order to be first checked for weapons.... the bat should have docked and allowed the aid to be transported to gaza.

Thing is though Dan, the Israelis only consider Medical Aid to be 'humanitarian' therefore any educational supplies, building materials (like concrete), clothes etc. wouldn't have been allowed through.

[Happy Face 29]

"Peace activists" on Mavi Marmara attacking with metal batons

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0nRbcwnp-la...player_embedded

I don't doubt there were a few people up for a ruck but lets not pretend the poor little Israeli soldiers had no option but to defend themselves with Mac-10s. The videos are edited for a reason.

 

the israeli soilders reacted, but there is no doubt at all that they were provoked. were the majority of those on board really peace activists?

 

this is an interesting report. most of the idf that landed on the boat were armed with paint ball guns

 

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=1213...121348851234252

There's 9 dead and many more injured isn't there?

 

Dr Gloom, are you on the wind up?

 

The Israeli army approached peaceful vessels carrying no weapons in international waters, boarded, killed 9 people, injured 60 and kidnapped 600 because they were "provoked"....anyone videoed defending themselves from the illegal attack were "provoking" them and deserved to be shot to death.

 

Undoubtedly this is how some are portraying it, I can't imagine anyone with an ounce of intelligence or integrity (by which i mean people without a vested interest in keeping Israeli relations sweet) going along with it though.

 

no, i'm not on the wind up. as always though there are two sides to this story. i agree that there was an over reaction from the idf but i'm not as quick to condem israel as some others.

 

as far as israel is concerned the blockade needs to exist to stop weapons getting into gaza. remember that hamas wants israel wiped off the face of the planet. opinion in israel is divided but remember that many normal israelis back a two state solution.

 

but putting politics and whether you're for or against israel aside, the point of discussion is how the israeli soldiers acted. i agree they were heavy handed but to say those on the boat came in peace is questionable.

 

How much longer is this lie going to be repeated? That's not the case.

 

It doesn't matter what the majority of people want. I have no problem with the Israeli majority. The majority of Palestinians back a two state solution too...as do their leaders. The problem is the Israeli leadership don't....why would they when America fully support them whatever war crimes they commit.

 

 

i agree that netanyahu is the worst possible leader israel can have when you look at the prospects for the peace process, worse than sharon even.

 

why do you say that's a lie? this from wikipedia:

 

Hamas's 1988 charter calls for replacing the State of Israel with a Palestinian Islamic state in the area that is now Israel, the West Bank, and the Gaza Strip. After the elections, in April, 2006, Hamas co-founder Mahmoud Al-Zahar did not rule out the possibility of accepting a temporary two-state solution, but also stated that he dreamed "of hanging a huge map of the world on the wall at my Gaza home which does not show Israel on it . . . . I hope that our dream to have our independent state on all historic Palestine (will materialize). . . . This dream will become real one day. I'm certain of this because there is no place for the state of Israel on this land.

 

When you use language like "wipe them off the map" it harks back to the false claims made against dinner jacket and Iran which get repeated ad infinitum, rather than any of the less emotive quotes like you've provided. If he'd ever said something like that as an elected leader it would be contemptable. Similarly if the current leader of Hamas said it, or if the Hamas manifesto that got them into power said it. But none of those did.

 

The 1988 charter is 22 years old. Back then we supported Saddam Hussein. Things change. Their ultimate aim at that time was the restoration of 'ancient palestinian', but they've shown willing to compromise on that since. We have ex-IRA getting elected to parliament so we can have peace in the UK. We (collectively) don't hold a grudge about things that happened quarter of a century ago which perpetuates the violence.

[Guest alex]

A good point well made, HF.

[Park Life 70]

Sarah Colborne, director of campaigns and operations at the Palestine Solidarity Campaign, was also on board the Mavi Marmara.

 

Insisting that no one on board the boat was armed, she said the attack was an act of piracy and a "massacre".

 

At one point, she saw a man being shot dead by an Israeli commando.

 

"We still don't know how many people were actually murdered because there are still many missing," she said.

 

"When I was on the upper deck I saw an injured person being brought to the back of the deck being tended to by a doctor and someone who is trained in first aid. He was shot in the head. It was clear it was not some paint ball. It was a bullet." Ms Colborne described scenes of chaos on the ship in the moments after the Israelis boarded.

 

"As I walked up, the dinghies the Israelis used were bristling with arms. I couldn't even count how many ships there were in the water. It was just literally bristling with ships, helicopters, gunfire. The whole thing was just horrific.

 

"All I know is that there was gunfire everywhere around." The people on board the ship had no idea that the Israelis might use deadly force, she said.

 

"We had no weapons. We were on a peaceful humanitarian mission. We knew there might be problems with the Israelis because of the way they treated previous convoys in the past and because of the way they treat the Palestinian people.

 

"We never considered that they would murder so many people on a humanitarian mission. It was very clear there was no way we could have been carrying weapons on board. Yet we were attacked with live gunfire."

[Ketsbaia 0]

the boats were offered safe landing on israeli territory in order to be first checked for weapons. the blockade exists because weapons are being brought to hamas and used against israel.

 

the idf's reaction was excessive but i can't believe for a moment that at a time of global crisis and with its reputation at an all time low, the idf would just storm and attack a peaceful activists on an aid boat. the bat should have docked and allowed the aid to be transported to gaza.

 

it's pretty clear from this footage that the soldiers were attacked. they responded with a heavy hand but they were provoked, no doubt.

 

 

 

you assume that they are competent - the reord shows that while Israel can deploy massive force and kill people (even in Dubai) it backfires on them because there is never any sense of proportion

 

It's the equivalent of the Glaswegian "Who you lookin' at Jimmie?"

 

no, i agree that they often get it wrong. my point is that they over-reacted but it they were provoked. many on here think the international media is biased towards the israeli cause. i think these days the opposite is true. there are two sides to this story

 

Hardly. Israel still gets away with murder ('scuse the pun) and the western media continue to let them. The news reports don't focus on the murdered, which could number over a dozen, but instead the "PR disaster for Israel" as if it was a marketing campaign gone wrong. The dead have almost been pushed to one side.

[Park Life 70]

the boats were offered safe landing on israeli territory in order to be first checked for weapons. the blockade exists because weapons are being brought to hamas and used against israel.

 

the idf's reaction was excessive but i can't believe for a moment that at a time of global crisis and with its reputation at an all time low, the idf would just storm and attack a peaceful activists on an aid boat. the bat should have docked and allowed the aid to be transported to gaza.

 

it's pretty clear from this footage that the soldiers were attacked. they responded with a heavy hand but they were provoked, no doubt.

 

 

 

you assume that they are competent - the reord shows that while Israel can deploy massive force and kill people (even in Dubai) it backfires on them because there is never any sense of proportion

 

It's the equivalent of the Glaswegian "Who you lookin' at Jimmie?"

 

no, i agree that they often get it wrong. my point is that they over-reacted but it they were provoked. many on here think the international media is biased towards the israeli cause. i think these days the opposite is true. there are two sides to this story

 

Hardly. Israel still gets away with murder ('scuse the pun) and the western media continue to let them. The news reports don't focus on the murdered, which could number over a dozen, but instead the "PR disaster for Israel" as if it was a marketing campaign gone wrong. The dead have almost been pushed to one side.

 

I was thinking the exact same thing this morning.

[Guest alex]

There was some bloke on Radio 5 last night arguing that Israel weren't treated the same as anyone else by the UN. But he was arguing they got unfair treatment compared to the rest of the world and quoted the example of North Korea. You couldn't make it up. Worse than Scousers.

Edited June 3, 2010 by alex

[Ketsbaia 0]

There was some bloke on Radio 5 last night arguing that Israel weren't treated the same as anyone else by the UN. But he was arguing they got unfair treatment compared to the rest of the world and quoted the example of North Korea. You couldn't make it up. Worse than Scousers.

 

Fuck me sideways.

 

It genuinely infuriates me when I hear people say Israel get unfair treatment, I've never known a nation given carte blanche to act the dick like it has.

 

As an aside I'd love to twat that Mark Regev

[Park Life 70]

Israel's premeditated murder of activists was no mistake

by Ahmed Amr

(Monday, May 31, 2010)

 

"Israel’s has a well established record of planning and executing premeditated atrocities. They’ve shot Libyan passenger planes out of the sky and carpet bombed Gaza, South Lebanon and Beirut. One can go down the list of infamous massacres from Sabra and Shatilla to Jenin to Deir El Yassin, Qibya and a hundred other places where they’ve slaughtered innocents. Aside from the attack on the Liberty, the only thing that distinguishes this latest war crime is that the victims were not Palestinians or Arabs. With the assistance of the Jewish Lobby and their well-placed partisans at FOX noise and CNnothing, Israel always manages to wipe the incriminatory blood stains off its garments and make a miraculous recovery as the perpetual victim."

 

If you think about it, Israel’s calculated murder of peace activists in international waters [1] on a mission to break the siege of Gaza makes perfect sense. A lot of observers were baffled that Netanyahu’s government inflated the importance of the Gaza Freedom Flotilla which was delivering vital humanitarian aid to the largest concentration camp in the world but had the secondary mission of publicizing the brutal and illegal siege of Gaza. To casual observers, it seemed like Israel’s belligerent posture was amplifying the international media attention given to the flotilla. It seemed so counter- productive for the Israelis to hand the peace activists what amounted to a nuclear powered bull horn.

 

The only excuse that Netanyahu and Lieberman could make for their seemingly irrational obsession with the supply ships was that the peace activists on board were delegitimizing Israel. The Israelis couldn’t make the usual ‘security’ arguments about terrorist threats - not with so many unarmed European Parliamentarians and peace activists on board. So they dreamed up a new category of criminals nobody has ever heard of before - de-legitimizers. There are millions of decent people who abhor Zionism and view Israel as a racist Jewish supremacist state. Israel and her supporters can argue with that, but since when has delegitimizing Israel been a capital crime that justified piracy on the high seas?

 

The flotilla was in international waters when it was assaulted - seventy miles from its destination.[2] It was a pre-dawn raid and, in an operation of this sort, the darkness elevated the risk of inflicting unnecessary casualties. Quite a few journalists were on board and the dark offered the Israelis a veil to ward off any cameras that could clearly document that the violence was premeditated.

 

The overwhelming evidence suggests that this Israeli raid was planned, perfectly timed and achieved its desired objective - to scuttle a scheduled meeting with Obama. What else would explain the hurry? Was there a clock ticking away? The answer to that question is yes. Only a few precious hours remained for Netanyahu to weasel his way out of an appointment at the White House. That might help explain the smug self-satisfied look on Netanyahu’s face when he announced the cancelation of the visit.

The scheduled meeting at the White House was no ordinary tête-à-tête. It was a carefully orchestrated event. A week earlier, Obama had dispatched Rohm Emanuel to Jerusalem to butter up Netanyahu. According to news reports, Israel's prime minister was given "unequivocal assurances" from the US President that an accord agreeing to talks on a nuclear weapons-free Mideast would not endanger the Jewish state. The assurances included a significant upgrade of Israel's strategic and deterrent capabilities and a promise that no UN resolutions would be adopted that would hurt Israel’s ‘vital interests.’ One has to presume that Obama’s promises included blanket amnesty for last year’s war crimes in Gaza. As a bonus, Netanyahu stopped in Europe to pick up membership in the OEDC - making Israel the only wealthy country in the world to get lavish American aid.

 

Of course, Obama and the Europeans expected a little reciprocity and a more flexible Israeli posture in the proximity talks with the Palestinians. It was Netanyahu’s turn to give a little. There was talk in the press of a love fest where a ‘new and improved’ Netanyahu would make an appearance and be willing to make a few hard choices to end the interminable conflict. The Lithuanian-Israeli Prime Minister who opposed Camp David, the Oslo agreement and the withdrawal from Gaza was under pressure to deliver the goods.

 

Sabotaging peace initiatives is something the Israelis excel at and Netanyahu is a skilled practitioner of obstructionism. Lest we forget, he secured the position of Prime Minister by putting together the most right wing coalition in Israeli history. He leads a government that is made up of pro-settler parties and outright expultionists. Freezing settlements or withdrawing from the West Bank or making any kinds of concessions on East Jerusalem would unravel his government.

 

Netanyahu didn’t have much of a choice in the matter. There was a strategic imperative to create a crisis to justify cancelling the meeting with Obama. Murdering the peace activists on the high seas was a high risk maneuver and it came at a well calibrated cost. Let’s first dispel the rumor that Israel is or has ever been concerned with its international reputation. Notice that it was Netanyahu who cancelled the White House appointment. Why the rush to get back to Israel? Was there any better way to do a little damage control than by making a few concessions in Washington in front of the fawning lenses of pro-Israeli CNN cameras? But the White House was the last place the Israeli Prime Minister wanted to be. And if all it took was piracy and murder on the high seas, it was a price Netanyahu was willing to pay.

 

Israel’s has a well established record of planning and executing premeditated atrocities. They’ve shot Libyan passenger planes out of the sky and carpet bombed Gaza, South Lebanon and Beirut. One can go down the list of infamous massacres from Sabra and Shatilla to Jenin to Deir El Yassin, Qibya and a hundred other places where they’ve slaughtered innocents. Aside from the attack on the Liberty, the only thing that distinguishes this latest war crime is that the victims were not Palestinians or Arabs. With the assistance of the Jewish Lobby and their well-placed partisans at FOX noise and CNnothing, Israel always manages to wipe the incriminatory blood stains off its garments and make a miraculous recovery as the perpetual victim.

 

Anybody with half a brain should be able to figure out that this most recent Israeli atrocity was premeditated. Netanyahu will pay a price and there will be a price to pay but it will be paid in short term currency. Obama might or might not figure out that he gave away the store and walked away empty handed but with mid-term elections on the horizon, he’ll still shield Israeli leaders from accountability for their war crimes. Relationships with Turkey will be strained and a few European foreign ministers will fume. The United States had no problem figuring out how to react to piracy with the Achille Lauro, but all they can muster up in response to this latest act of Israeli state terrorism is a benign statement of ‘concern.’ Washington might even work up the courage to ask the Israelis to conduct an inquiry. Israel will be ostracized for a few weeks but Netanyahu will have accomplished his goal by derailing yet another peace initiative and winning additional time to continue building settlements and dispossess the Palestinians of their native soil.

Edited June 3, 2010 by Park Life

[Dr Gloom 19735]

"Peace activists" on Mavi Marmara attacking with metal batons

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0nRbcwnp-la...player_embedded

I don't doubt there were a few people up for a ruck but lets not pretend the poor little Israeli soldiers had no option but to defend themselves with Mac-10s. The videos are edited for a reason.

 

the israeli soilders reacted, but there is no doubt at all that they were provoked. were the majority of those on board really peace activists?

 

this is an interesting report. most of the idf that landed on the boat were armed with paint ball guns

 

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=1213...121348851234252

There's 9 dead and many more injured isn't there?

 

Dr Gloom, are you on the wind up?

 

The Israeli army approached peaceful vessels carrying no weapons in international waters, boarded, killed 9 people, injured 60 and kidnapped 600 because they were "provoked"....anyone videoed defending themselves from the illegal attack were "provoking" them and deserved to be shot to death.

 

Undoubtedly this is how some are portraying it, I can't imagine anyone with an ounce of intelligence or integrity (by which i mean people without a vested interest in keeping Israeli relations sweet) going along with it though.

 

no, i'm not on the wind up. as always though there are two sides to this story. i agree that there was an over reaction from the idf but i'm not as quick to condem israel as some others.

 

as far as israel is concerned the blockade needs to exist to stop weapons getting into gaza. remember that hamas wants israel wiped off the face of the planet. opinion in israel is divided but remember that many normal israelis back a two state solution.

 

but putting politics and whether you're for or against israel aside, the point of discussion is how the israeli soldiers acted. i agree they were heavy handed but to say those on the boat came in peace is questionable.

 

How much longer is this lie going to be repeated? That's not the case.

 

It doesn't matter what the majority of people want. I have no problem with the Israeli majority. The majority of Palestinians back a two state solution too...as do their leaders. The problem is the Israeli leadership don't....why would they when America fully support them whatever war crimes they commit.

 

 

i agree that netanyahu is the worst possible leader israel can have when you look at the prospects for the peace process, worse than sharon even.

 

why do you say that's a lie? this from wikipedia:

 

Hamas's 1988 charter calls for replacing the State of Israel with a Palestinian Islamic state in the area that is now Israel, the West Bank, and the Gaza Strip. After the elections, in April, 2006, Hamas co-founder Mahmoud Al-Zahar did not rule out the possibility of accepting a temporary two-state solution, but also stated that he dreamed "of hanging a huge map of the world on the wall at my Gaza home which does not show Israel on it . . . . I hope that our dream to have our independent state on all historic Palestine (will materialize). . . . This dream will become real one day. I'm certain of this because there is no place for the state of Israel on this land.

 

When you use language like "wipe them off the map" it harks back to the false claims made against dinner jacket and Iran which get repeated ad infinitum, rather than any of the less emotive quotes like you've provided. If he'd ever said something like that as an elected leader it would be contemptable. Similarly if the current leader of Hamas said it, or if the Hamas manifesto that got them into power said it. But none of those did.

 

The 1988 charter is 22 years old. Back then we supported Saddam Hussein. Things change. Their ultimate aim at that time was the restoration of 'ancient palestinian', but they've shown willing to compromise on that since. We have ex-IRA getting elected to parliament so we can have peace in the UK. We (collectively) don't hold a grudge about things that happened quarter of a century ago which perpetuates the violence.

 

i don't see hamas willing to compromise. they want israel gone. that's why israel has to defend itself and its borders against it.

 

you can argue that hamas are terrorists, you can argue that their freedom fighters. likewise for israel, they're either defending their borders or they're occupying palestine. depends on which side you;re on. as far as i can tell from reading this thread, most on here are on the side of the palestinians.

[Happy Face 29]

"Peace activists" on Mavi Marmara attacking with metal batons

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0nRbcwnp-la...player_embedded

I don't doubt there were a few people up for a ruck but lets not pretend the poor little Israeli soldiers had no option but to defend themselves with Mac-10s. The videos are edited for a reason.

 

the israeli soilders reacted, but there is no doubt at all that they were provoked. were the majority of those on board really peace activists?

 

this is an interesting report. most of the idf that landed on the boat were armed with paint ball guns

 

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=1213...121348851234252

There's 9 dead and many more injured isn't there?

 

Dr Gloom, are you on the wind up?

 

The Israeli army approached peaceful vessels carrying no weapons in international waters, boarded, killed 9 people, injured 60 and kidnapped 600 because they were "provoked"....anyone videoed defending themselves from the illegal attack were "provoking" them and deserved to be shot to death.

 

Undoubtedly this is how some are portraying it, I can't imagine anyone with an ounce of intelligence or integrity (by which i mean people without a vested interest in keeping Israeli relations sweet) going along with it though.

 

no, i'm not on the wind up. as always though there are two sides to this story. i agree that there was an over reaction from the idf but i'm not as quick to condem israel as some others.

 

as far as israel is concerned the blockade needs to exist to stop weapons getting into gaza. remember that hamas wants israel wiped off the face of the planet. opinion in israel is divided but remember that many normal israelis back a two state solution.

 

but putting politics and whether you're for or against israel aside, the point of discussion is how the israeli soldiers acted. i agree they were heavy handed but to say those on the boat came in peace is questionable.

 

How much longer is this lie going to be repeated? That's not the case.

 

It doesn't matter what the majority of people want. I have no problem with the Israeli majority. The majority of Palestinians back a two state solution too...as do their leaders. The problem is the Israeli leadership don't....why would they when America fully support them whatever war crimes they commit.

 

 

i agree that netanyahu is the worst possible leader israel can have when you look at the prospects for the peace process, worse than sharon even.

 

why do you say that's a lie? this from wikipedia:

 

Hamas's 1988 charter calls for replacing the State of Israel with a Palestinian Islamic state in the area that is now Israel, the West Bank, and the Gaza Strip. After the elections, in April, 2006, Hamas co-founder Mahmoud Al-Zahar did not rule out the possibility of accepting a temporary two-state solution, but also stated that he dreamed "of hanging a huge map of the world on the wall at my Gaza home which does not show Israel on it . . . . I hope that our dream to have our independent state on all historic Palestine (will materialize). . . . This dream will become real one day. I'm certain of this because there is no place for the state of Israel on this land.

 

When you use language like "wipe them off the map" it harks back to the false claims made against dinner jacket and Iran which get repeated ad infinitum, rather than any of the less emotive quotes like you've provided. If he'd ever said something like that as an elected leader it would be contemptable. Similarly if the current leader of Hamas said it, or if the Hamas manifesto that got them into power said it. But none of those did.

 

The 1988 charter is 22 years old. Back then we supported Saddam Hussein. Things change. Their ultimate aim at that time was the restoration of 'ancient palestinian', but they've shown willing to compromise on that since. We have ex-IRA getting elected to parliament so we can have peace in the UK. We (collectively) don't hold a grudge about things that happened quarter of a century ago which perpetuates the violence.

 

i don't see hamas willing to compromise. they want israel gone. that's why israel has to defend itself and its borders against it.

 

you can argue that hamas are terrorists, you can argue that their freedom fighters. likewise for israel, they're either defending their borders or they're occupying palestine. depends on which side you;re on. as far as i can tell from reading this thread, most on here are on the side of the palestinians.

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/jan/12/israel

[Park Life 70]

‘Those who’ve suffered least compromise least’

Mary Wakefield

21 March 2009

 

Mary Wakefield takes a postwar tour through Gaza and surveys a psychological landscape warped by conflict and suffering — and hear whispers of a further Israeli incursion

 

The border control at Erez, separating Israel from Gaza, was built in a happier age. It looks more like an airport than a checkpoint, a vast glass hangar designed with streams of Palestinian commuters in mind. Only a handful have made it through in the two years since Hamas took over. Now, two months after Israel’s 22-day war (Operation Cast Lead), there’s barely a soul in sight. One vicar outside, perspiring in the car park; one girl soldier inside checking passports. After that, just an eerie unmanned security process. Wait. Proceed to a steel holding pen. Wait. Walk down to a revolving zoo-style gate. Wait. Wait. Despair. Yell: ‘Hello?! Anybody?’ Then another door, another corridor, through a warehouse to a turnstile then out, abruptly, into no-man’s-land.

 

It takes a few seconds to adjust to what looks like the aftermath of apocalypse — Lego-lumps of broken concrete, pylons, a deserted, bomb-pocked track. It’s like a metaphor for the whole peace process: abandoned by Israel, whose Prime Minister designate, Bibi Netanyahu, sees no need for a separate Palestinian state; shunned by the Islamists, whose guru Osama reinforced the party line last week: ‘We must not tolerate the Gaza holocaust or collaborate with the Crusader–Zionist alliance.’ Ignored even by America, who finds it easiest now to throw hush money at both sides. As I reach the Palestinian checkpoint (three men drinking mint tea) and meet Hamada, my guide for the day, I think about a conversation with an Israeli official in a dark bar in Jerusalem: ‘The truth is, we can live with Gaza like this. It doesn’t have to be a one-state or a two-state solution, there’s a third state: occupation. Realistically, why would we want anything else?’

 

 

http://www.spectator.co.uk/essays/all/3453...ise-least.thtml

[Park Life 70]

Promoting Democracy after Hamas’ Victory

Marina Ottaway Web Commentary, February 30, 2006

 

The victory of Hamas in the Palestinian elections has given rise to much soul searching in Washington about who lost Palestine. Although the George W. Bush administration continues to defend its decision to “allow” elections to take place in Palestine, rather than acceding to Israeli demands to stop the process, a growing number of voices is joining a chorus of doubts about the U.S. policy of promoting democracy in the Middle East.

 

 

Edited June 3, 2010 by Park Life

[Park Life 70]

On August 13, the Foreign Affairs Committee (FAC) of the British House of Commons urged all parties to exercise maximum efforts to form a national unity government in the occupied Palestinian territories that will include Hamas. The report further recommended that the British government engage moderate elements within the movement.

 

The day before that, the Italian prime minister, Romano Prodi, stressed "the need to conduct a dialogue with Hamas so as to help Hamas develop politically, in view of the fact that Hamas is a fact on the ground." And on August 2, the International Crisis Group issued a report in which it questioned the feasibility of enforcing law and order and bringing about a political settlement based on a two-state solution in the absence of national unity among the Palestinians. That report cast doubt about the ability of Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas to secure a cease-fire with Israel and reach a political settlement in the absence of Hamas.

 

These attempts and these calls have not been launched in a vacuum. Rather, they were preceded by many meetings, behind the scenes, in different European capitals. Western participants in those meetings were introduced to the political thinking of Hamas and to the movement's most senior leaders. If these meetings demonstrate anything, they demonstrate the fact that many in the West genuinely believe that the international community can do business with Hamas.

 

Hamas is an integral part of the Palestinian political landscape. It is a mainstream Islamic movement that is committed to the principles of democracy and legitimate and peaceful political participation on an equal footing for all Palestinian groups. The movement has deep roots in various sectors of Palestinian society. Isolating Hamas is not a feasible political option because the movement represents a very wide segment of Palestinian society, a fact that was clearly manifested in the elections of January 2006. Former secretary of state Colin Powell recognized this when he called, in a recent interview with National Public Radio, for the need to find a way to engage with Hamas.

Edited June 3, 2010 by Park Life

[Dr Gloom 19735]

"Peace activists" on Mavi Marmara attacking with metal batons

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0nRbcwnp-la...player_embedded

I don't doubt there were a few people up for a ruck but lets not pretend the poor little Israeli soldiers had no option but to defend themselves with Mac-10s. The videos are edited for a reason.

 

the israeli soilders reacted, but there is no doubt at all that they were provoked. were the majority of those on board really peace activists?

 

this is an interesting report. most of the idf that landed on the boat were armed with paint ball guns

 

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=1213...121348851234252

There's 9 dead and many more injured isn't there?

 

Dr Gloom, are you on the wind up?

 

The Israeli army approached peaceful vessels carrying no weapons in international waters, boarded, killed 9 people, injured 60 and kidnapped 600 because they were "provoked"....anyone videoed defending themselves from the illegal attack were "provoking" them and deserved to be shot to death.

 

Undoubtedly this is how some are portraying it, I can't imagine anyone with an ounce of intelligence or integrity (by which i mean people without a vested interest in keeping Israeli relations sweet) going along with it though.

 

no, i'm not on the wind up. as always though there are two sides to this story. i agree that there was an over reaction from the idf but i'm not as quick to condem israel as some others.

 

as far as israel is concerned the blockade needs to exist to stop weapons getting into gaza. remember that hamas wants israel wiped off the face of the planet. opinion in israel is divided but remember that many normal israelis back a two state solution.

 

but putting politics and whether you're for or against israel aside, the point of discussion is how the israeli soldiers acted. i agree they were heavy handed but to say those on the boat came in peace is questionable.

 

How much longer is this lie going to be repeated? That's not the case.

 

It doesn't matter what the majority of people want. I have no problem with the Israeli majority. The majority of Palestinians back a two state solution too...as do their leaders. The problem is the Israeli leadership don't....why would they when America fully support them whatever war crimes they commit.

 

 

i agree that netanyahu is the worst possible leader israel can have when you look at the prospects for the peace process, worse than sharon even.

 

why do you say that's a lie? this from wikipedia:

 

Hamas's 1988 charter calls for replacing the State of Israel with a Palestinian Islamic state in the area that is now Israel, the West Bank, and the Gaza Strip. After the elections, in April, 2006, Hamas co-founder Mahmoud Al-Zahar did not rule out the possibility of accepting a temporary two-state solution, but also stated that he dreamed "of hanging a huge map of the world on the wall at my Gaza home which does not show Israel on it . . . . I hope that our dream to have our independent state on all historic Palestine (will materialize). . . . This dream will become real one day. I'm certain of this because there is no place for the state of Israel on this land.

 

When you use language like "wipe them off the map" it harks back to the false claims made against dinner jacket and Iran which get repeated ad infinitum, rather than any of the less emotive quotes like you've provided. If he'd ever said something like that as an elected leader it would be contemptable. Similarly if the current leader of Hamas said it, or if the Hamas manifesto that got them into power said it. But none of those did.

 

The 1988 charter is 22 years old. Back then we supported Saddam Hussein. Things change. Their ultimate aim at that time was the restoration of 'ancient palestinian', but they've shown willing to compromise on that since. We have ex-IRA getting elected to parliament so we can have peace in the UK. We (collectively) don't hold a grudge about things that happened quarter of a century ago which perpetuates the violence.

 

i don't see hamas willing to compromise. they want israel gone. that's why israel has to defend itself and its borders against it.

 

you can argue that hamas are terrorists, you can argue that their freedom fighters. likewise for israel, they're either defending their borders or they're occupying palestine. depends on which side you;re on. as far as i can tell from reading this thread, most on here are on the side of the palestinians.

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/jan/12/israel

 

flimsy pre-electioneering, the sentiment is still the same. quotes from that article include this from Gazi Hamad, a Hamas candidate in the Gaza Strip:

 

"Hamas is still not ready to recognise the right of Israel to exist,"

 

as long as they take that view and don't consider the possibility of a two state solution, this situation will continue.

 

that said, there are those on the right in israel who are just as bad in my eyes. the right ring orthodox cronies and those idiots who won't withdraw from the settlements.

 

it's those same right wing nutcases that were behind the assasination of rabin, which ultimately led to defeat in the election in the mid 90s to netanyahu, the failure of the oslo accord and the hopeless situation we find ourselves in today.