General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsChris Hedges: Why Israel Lies
from truthdig:
Why Israel Lies
Posted on Aug 3, 2014
By Chris Hedges
All governments lie, as I.F. Stone pointed out, including Israel and Hamas. But Israel engages in the kinds of jaw-dropping lies that characterize despotic and totalitarian regimes. It does not deform the truth; it inverts it. It routinely paints a picture for the outside world that is diametrically opposed to reality. And all of us reporters who have covered the occupied territories have run into Israel’s Alice-in-Wonderland narratives, which we dutifully insert into our stories—required under the rules of American journalism—although we know they are untrue.
I saw small boys baited and killed by Israeli soldiers in the Gaza refugee camp of Khan Younis. The soldiers swore at the boys in Arabic over the loudspeakers of their armored jeep. The boys, about 10 years old, then threw stones at an Israeli vehicle and the soldiers opened fire, killing some, wounding others. I was present more than once as Israeli troops drew out and shot Palestinian children in this way. Such incidents, in the Israeli lexicon, become children caught in crossfire. I was in Gaza when F-16 attack jets dropped 1,000-pound iron fragmentation bombs on overcrowded hovels in Gaza City. I saw the corpses of the victims, including children. This became a surgical strike on a bomb-making factory. I have watched Israel demolish homes and entire apartment blocks to create wide buffer zones between the Palestinians and the Israeli troops that ring Gaza. I have interviewed the destitute and homeless families, some camped out in crude shelters erected in the rubble. The destruction becomes the demolition of the homes of terrorists. I have stood in the remains of schools—Israel struck two United Nations schools in the last six days, causing at least 10 fatalities at one in Rafah on Sunday and at least 19 at one in the Jebaliya refugee camp Wednesday—as well as medical clinics and mosques. I have heard Israel claim that errant rockets or mortar fire from the Palestinians caused these and other deaths, or that the attacked spots were being used as arms depots or launching sites. I, along with every other reporter I know who has worked in Gaza, have never seen any evidence that Hamas uses civilians as “human shields.”
There is a perverted logic to Israel’s repeated use of the Big Lie—Große Lüge—the lie favored by tyrants from Adolf Hitler and Josef Stalin to Saddam Hussein. The Big Lie feeds the two reactions Israel seeks to elicit—racism among its supporters and terror among its victims.
By painting a picture of an army that never attacks civilians, that indeed goes out of its way to protect them, the Big Lie says Israelis are civilized and humane, and their Palestinian opponents are inhuman monsters. The Big Lie serves the idea that the slaughter in Gaza is a clash of civilizations, a war between democracy, decency and honor on one side and Islamic barbarism on the other. And in the uncommon cases when news of atrocities penetrates to the wider public, Israel blames the destruction and casualties on Hamas. .....................(more)
The complete piece is at: http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/why_israel_lies_20140803
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
closeupready
(29,503 posts)in my mind part of the intransigence of Israelis in coming to settlement talks in good faith. When you have committed the crimes such as he recounts, you'd need to have a way of mentally 'whitewashing' your crimes or else it would eventually destroy you. Thus, the continued claims that Palestinians are figuratively eating puppies for breakfast and are alien body-snatchers in disguise, etc.
Separately, how could you be a journalist and NOT report these crimes? What the fuck does he mean, "required under the rules of American journalism"??? The essential universal rule of journalism is to report the TRUTH. Is it any wonder so many have contempt for much of what passes for American journalism today?
Uncle Joe
(58,349 posts)http://www.fair.org/blog/2013/09/18/inform-the-public-not-my-job-says-chuck-todd/
Appearing on MSNBC's Morning Joe today (9/18/13), Todd responded to Ed Rendell's claim that Obamacare opponents are full of misinformation about the program by explaining that this was because Republicans "have successfully messaged against it." But wasn't journalism's job to expose misinformation? No, Todd insisted; if the public was misinformed about the Affordable Care Act, it was the president's fault for not pushing back:
What I always love is people say, "Well, it's you folks' fault in the media." No, it's the president of the United States' fault for not selling it.
It's sad that NBC's White House correspondent thinks his job is merely to convey politicians pronouncements, with no care about whether they are true or false. In fact, scrutinizing claims, particularly those from powerful officials, is an essential part of journalism. It's embarrassing to have to cite elementary principles to one the nation's most influential reporters, but Todd should consider reviewing the Society of Professional Journalists' Code of Ethics, where, under the heading "Seek Truth and Report It," the very first tenet implores journalists to "test the accuracy of information from all sources."
Todd isn't alone among influential journalists claiming that factchecking sources is outside their job purview. In 2004, NPR's Ron Elving declared that journalism was incapable of calling out the lies about John Kerry's military record spread by the Swift Boat Veteran's for Truth, claiming: "There is no way that journalism can satisfy those who think that Kerry is a liar or that Swift Boat Veterans for Truth are liars." Journalists' throwing up their hands when it came to the distortion of Kerry's military record may have determined the outcome of the 2004 election.
(snip)
More on link.
closeupready
(29,503 posts)
Well, what they will discover, over time, is that money can't buy you respect, reputation, or Pulitzers.
Octafish
(55,745 posts)Journalism by and for the 0.01 Percent
By Peter Hart
FAIR, July 1, 2013
Mainstream journalism is, we’re often told, in a state of severe crisis. Newsroom employment began to decline as a result of corporate takeovers in the 1990s. Then the digital revolution destroyed the advertising market, plunging the industry into serious doubt about its very business model.
But times aren’t rough all around. There are many pundits and TV anchors who are doing very well in the media world, racking up millions of dollars from their media contracts, book deals and lucrative speaking fees. Though they don’t generally approach the compensation packages awarded to network morning show hosts like Matt Lauer or evening anchors like Diane Sawyer, they’re not exactly hurting.
Of course, being the boss means the biggest payday—and media company CEOs have been posting unbelievable incomes. In 2012, CBS head Les Moonves made $62 million, Disney’s Robert Iger made $37 million and Rupert Murdoch of Fox took home a comparatively modest $22 million (New York Times, 5/5/13). Don’t feel sorry for Murdoch, though; as No. 91 on Forbes’ list of the world’s richest people, with an estimated net worth of $11.2 billion, he’s unlikely to go to bed hungry.
The media business outstrips other industries in generously compensating its top executives (New York Times, 5/5/13), and those resources could of course be put to better use by hiring reporters. But that’s not the way the system works. And it’s not just the bosses getting rich. Indeed, many high-profile members of the media elite live a rather charmed life. The journalism business looks to be in a disastrous state—but the view from the top is just fine.
Thomas Friedman
New York Times foreign affairs columnist Tom Friedman has written a number of bestsellers, and regularly holds forth on outlets like public TV’s Charlie Rose show. All of the globe-trotting and yearning for a “radical centrism” in American politics—where sensible climate policies could be paired with cuts to social spending—have paid off handsomely.
CONTINUED...
http://fair.org/slider/cover-story-media-millionaires/
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)What a great article! Thanks, Octafish!
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)pathetic shitheel for the rest of his days.
Dark n Stormy Knight
(9,760 posts)And the failure of so-called-journalists today to do so is one of the biggest problems we have.
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)Thank you, Uncle Joe. Excellent article.
Uncle Joe
(58,349 posts)Peace to you. 
CtDemoFarmer
(32 posts)They are into genocide and ethnic cleansing. They give the world the finger everyday and the US a shiv in our front and our leaders smile as they do it.
russspeakeasy
(6,539 posts)
muriel_volestrangler
(101,306 posts)Yesterday, I reported that Hamas fighters had captured 2nd Lt. Hadar Goldin in a Gaza ambush. I also reported that Hamas said it had lost contact with the team that captured Goldin and that the team and Goldin were presumed dead. My Israeli source revealed that the IDF survivors of the ambush had shot both Goldin and the Palestinian who tried to drag his wounded body away. The Hannibal Directive had been invoked, meaning the army used every means at its disposal including murder to prevent the taking of its soldiers. Today, Walla confirmed via the IDF that Goldin is dead.
In the hours following his capture, the IDF bombarded Rafah with heavy artillery and from the air in order to both take vengeance for the ambush which killed two senior officers; and to kill Goldin. Over 60 Gazans died. Though the IDF conceded Godin is dead. But it did not concede that it killed him and did so deliberately. That is why the army censor warned the Times about its reporting. Here is how the Times public editor reported it today:
"After the initial publication of this article, the military’s censor informed The New York Times that further information related to Lieutenant Goldin would have to be submitted for prior review. Journalists for foreign news organizations must agree in writing to the military censorship system to work in Israel. This was the first censorship notification The Times had received in more than six years.”
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025329904
seveneyes
(4,631 posts)"I, along with every other reporter I know who has worked in Gaza, have never seen any evidence that Hamas uses civilians as “human shields.” "
There are none so blind as those who refuse to see.
sibelian
(7,804 posts)You know better, do you?
marmar
(77,073 posts)Umm, I think that's Chris Hedges' point. N'est-ce pas?
kelliekat44
(7,759 posts)
bemildred
(90,061 posts)
ChairmanAgnostic
(28,017 posts)magical thyme
(14,881 posts)There is no place Hamas could be without being among civilians.
And you are right. There are none so blind as those who refuse to see. It has been the Zionist goal to drive the Palestinian people out of the region since the late 1800s. The UN gave them a foothold in 1948. We have been aiding and abetting their goal ever since, although why I simply cannot fathom.
upaloopa
(11,417 posts)No matter where someone is in Gaza they are surrounded by civilians. You need to get out from behind your mind set and see reality. Your kind of ignorance helps support the killing in my opinion.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)Rather than rehash all the stories of the violence, rather than take sides for Israel or for Palestine, I think we should all try to support Kerry's attempts along with Egypt and any other arbitrator courageous enough to take on the task with our good thoughts and good wishes.
There is blame enough on both sides.
The positive view is that Israel is a country with tremendous positive energy and technological know-how. Palestinians have enormous potential and desperately want a better life and independence.
That is actually a good match.
It occurred to me when I woke up this morning that accounts like that of Chris Hedges and the list of Palestinian terror acts should be set aside. It's always tit for tat. There are lots of arguments on each side for why the other side is evil and wrong.
Focus on how they could work together to make all their lives better. That is the way to resolve the problems and help the Palestinian and Israeli children.
What is needed is trauma therapy, not side-taking. Both sides include large numbers of people with post-traumatic stress. We don't need to exacerbate the anger.
That is what has bothered me so much about the discussion on DU of this problem. People write posts with righteous indignation about how awful the Israelis are. If you ever meet any of them, you will realize that they are just like everyone else. The two peoples need to be encouraged to help each other, not hurt each other.
The commentary on the situation is counterproductive. Both sides need support at this time. Israel is at the moment militarily stronger, but it is strategically in an extremely tenuous position. Palestinians are under terrible pressure, but they are geographically and culturally, in some respects, in the long run better situated, and they know it.
Both sides need support toward finding non-violent ways to solve their problems.
Please. Don't aggravate the situation. It isn't about who is right and who is wrong. It is about finding solutions and improving the lives of all in the area.
The Second Stone
(2,900 posts)Nothing at all except to excuse murder. Israel is engaged in genocide and so is the US when we pay for it. Gaza is the same as the Warsaw Ghetto except slower. Apparently the lesson of the Nazis and the Holocaust is that it is only a crime to do these things to us. As long as we lie to ourselves and others about the motives, it is okay to do them to 10 year old "Palestinian terrorists." "Untermenchen" means it is happening to others.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)terrorists. That was a step toward peace, not an excuse for murder.
The Palestinians shot rockets into Israel. That was an act of war, but Israel responded with a missile shield -- also a step toward peace, not an act of war.
So what did the Palestinians do? They built up a network of tunnels, one of which started in Palestine right near a major hospital.
And Israel answered with the current horror in Palestine.
Palestinians have to control their extremists. If they do it for say ten years, Israelis will elect a different government and things will get much better.
There is lots of blame on both sides. Palestinians are clever at wheedling the Israelis. If they used their cleverness to improve their lives, they would have less to complain about.
Israel is not entirely to blame and certainly has not been seeking genocide for Palestinians. Not with their wall and missile shield.
A missile shield is only good for protecting against aggression -- against missiles. It costs a lot of money. It certainly does not suggest aggressive intentions under the circumstances in Israel.
The Second Stone
(2,900 posts)So please stop trying to change the subject and denying genocide. Nothing justifies the murder of 10 year old boys as described by Mr. Hedges. Comparisons to Nazis and Eichmann are entirely appropriate.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)The Second Stone
(2,900 posts)the people carrying them out and the propagandists helping to deny the reality of it.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)
MFM008
(19,805 posts)dont worry things will be better in say....... 10 years, what would your reaction be? That is not a satisfactory answer when your kids homes, schools, hospitals and playgrounds are blown up. Better lives begin now or Israel will continue to sleep with one eye open.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)the people of Palestine?
Why can't Hamas simply ask for help without all the anger?
Many people all over the world would help out if Hamas gave up the anger and the insistence that Israel should not exist. There is room for everyone who wants to live there. Everyone there deserves a good life.
Revenge is not sweet at all. It just causes more strife and results in more revenge.
Israel put up a wall, then a missile shield and still was given no peace. In the US, Jewish charities are incredibly generous to all kinds of groups, not just Jewish ones. If Hamas dropped the violence and stopped the violent culture, Israelis would help them, I feel certain.
I am not Jewish, but I know people of all religions. Jewish people are among the kindest and most generous. One of my Jewish friends started a shelter for homeless people.
I think that Palestinians need to ask for help and not for weapons. The whole area needs to be free of weapons and violence. Palestinians and Israelis alike need to be able to live and sleep without fear.
The wall and the shield -- those are defensive, not offensive structures. It makes no sense to continue the fighting. None whatsoever.
I just watched a video on another thread about life in Gaza. Gentle women do not have enough influence. We have the same problem here. The people of Gaza need to put the women in charge. Maybe they would bring peace.
In America, people of all religions live together in peace. It's a choice we make.
arikara
(5,562 posts)They didn't put the damned wall on their own territory. They stole the land by force to put their own settlements in then built the gigantic wall in front of that. On Palestinian land. Hardly an act of peace.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)area? Because if they are to do so, they have to negotiate peace, and then the peace has to be enforced. The result of negotiation will not please either side, but it will have to be enforced. That's the way negotiated settlements work.
The alternative is that the stronger military force wins and crushes the weaker one. That's the way wars work. The results can be tragic so it is ALWAYS better to negotiate a peace and then enforce it.
lofty1
(62 posts)Yes, Israel is the stronger one militarily. With that going for them, they should be the ones to extend the olive branch first.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)responded with violence.
Think of it. Israel opened up its society to Palestinians. They were permitted to come into Israel for all sorts of reasons. When Sharon challenged the commitment of Palestinians to religious tolerance. (Remember how people complain that Israel is a Jewish state?) by simply marching around the Temple Mount, the Palestinians started the Second Intifada, committing a lot of terror acts within Israel.
So, Israel built a wall. A wall is ugly, but it is non-violent. Israel of course was accused of apartheid. But the wall saved lives on both sides of it.
Then Palestinian extremists started shooting rockets into Israel, many, many, many of them.
So Israel built a missile defense shield which has provided increased security in Israel and discouraged rocket attacks from Palestinians.
Again, Israel used a non-violent method to deal with Palestinian violence.
And guess what? Palestinians found a way to avoid the wall and the missile shield, a way to get into Israel to kidnap or harm Israelis -- a complex network of tunnels.
The attacks on Palestinians that are taking place now are horrific, but there is a long history of Palestinian terror. Understandably, the Israelis are fearful and frustrated -- at the end of their patience. Can you imagine the money and effort that went into building the wall and the missile shield?
That is why I find that there is blame on both sides and we should work toward figuring out how to help both sides work toward peace.
As I see it, Israel's wall and missile shield indicate a will for peace. We shall see whether Palestinians can also indicate a will for peace. Some of the aggression of the Palestinians if by individuals and not by Hamas or any other known group. A good place for Palestinians to start would be with punishing those in its population who attack Israelis.
seveneyes
(4,631 posts)And no truth will ever penetrate it.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)no answer. Here goes.
After WWII, there were hundreds of thousands if not millions of refugees. They were called "displaced persons," and homes and countries had to be found for all of them.
Borders were changed. People were forced to move almost the world over.
Should all these refugees be forced to move back to where they came from?
Or should just Jews be forced to move back to where they came from?
No answers yet. That is the crux of the matter in my view.
And I am not Jewish.
happyslug
(14,779 posts)This is set forth in Paragraph 11 of Resolution 194 passed in 1948:
http://unispal.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/C758572B78D1CD0085256BCF0077E51A
Thus it is NOT Israel that decides if these people can return or not, but those people themselves and they all say they want to return.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)Israel was founded as a safe place for Israeli refugees after WWII.
My question is whether all of the WWII refugees should be returned by force to their former homes or whether just the Jewish refugees should be returned.
I get no answer. Generally, short-term refugees from, say national disasters, return to their homes. Political refugees do not. Perhaps paying reparations to Palestinians in exchange for peace would be fair. But the reparations would have to be paid by an international group because the UN is responsible for the formation of Israel. Israelis wanted it, but they did not cause it. The original Israelis were themselves refugees. And many of the later immigrants to Israel were also refugees. Libya and Tunesia for example had many Jewish citizens before WWII.
These issues need to be negotiated. That is why I say there are two sides to this complex issue.
happyslug
(14,779 posts)The Refugee decides to go elsewhere. In the case if European Jews, many opted for Israel, but they had the option of going back home. Many did, many did not.
The point is the decision is up to the refugee NOT the country they fled from. In the case if Israel, they have the right to return.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)Europe. Lived in Europe and I know.
happyslug
(14,779 posts)no text (N/T)
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)They had just been killed in the millions by Europeans. They did not have the option to go back to Europe. A few stayed, but they were big exceptions. I lived in several European countries. It was not safe for Jewish people to live in Europe.
I am not Jewish, so the local people were very free with me. I met vicious anti-Jewish people in all countries except, ironically, Germany. In Britain, France, Austria and other countries. I was so shocked.
One day I sat across from a man who recited to me during the whole trip from Vienna to the town in which we lived the NAZI anti-Jewish propaganda. I guess people thought they could talk like that to me because I am so obviously not Jewish. What ugly experiences I had. There is a lot of hate against Jewish people in Europe, and most of it is the result of the Catholic and other religions. It is just awful.
Imagine, 6,000,000 Jews died in the Holocaust and I met up with Europeans who still hated Jews. I hope it is better now.
happyslug
(14,779 posts)Thus Palestinians had no option to go back to Europe? Sorry I am lost, we are discussing the Palestinians right to return. If they do NOT want to return, they also have that right.
As to killing of Palestinians, the only records I can find is of Israeli forces doing so as they drove Palestinians out of various Palestinians towns during the 1948 War of Independence.
As to 6 million Jews bring killed by the Nazis (Total Death Camps deaths were about 13 million, but no one cares about the Gypsy/Roma or other people through into those camps), what has that to do with Palestinians? Did the Jews have the right to kick out Palestinians because Nazis killed Jews? That is what you are saying, that since Europeans hate Jews, Palestinians should be kicked out of their lands so the Jews can have that land for free.
At least the Right Wing in Israel are smart enough NOT to use the Holocaust as an excuse for kicking out the Palestinians, they are least cite the massive discrimination against Jews in various Arab Nations as justification. That such Middle Eastern Jews were forced out of their own countries is undisputed (Through they are indications that some of the violent acts were done by Jews from Israel to encourage movement of such Middle Eastern Jews to Israel). The Right wing in Israel cite such expulsions without compensation grounds to do the same to the Palestinians. The come back on such statements is that such acts were NOT the acts of the people of Palestine and why should the people of Palestine suffer for the crimes of others.
I can NOT find the right wing Israeli web cite I read yesterday and its reliance of the expulsion of Jews from various Middle Easterns States but here are other cites on the right to return:
http://unitedwithisrael.org/why-international-law-doesnt-support-a-palestinian-right-of-return/
http://www.ucl.ac.uk/~uctytho/PalIsrGans.html
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)Did the Jews have the right to kick out Palestinians because Nazis killed Jews?
Yes. The UN founded Israel. It was intended as a refuge for Jewish people from the persecution to which they were subjected for at least 2000 years.
So, yes. The UN partitioned Palestine/Israel. The Israelis did not do it. The Palestinians refused the deal and in subsequent wars and conflicts lost more and more land.
Sorry. But Palestine was not a nation at the time of the partition. The area was under British rule -- the British Mandate. Prior to that time. prior to 1921 or the end of WWI when the Ottoman Empire was defeated, the people now called Palestinians were part of the Ottoman Empire - - which was reduced to what is now Turkey.
Palestine was never really a separate country. It is now developing the institutions that a nation needs, closer to being a functioning nation than it has ever been. The partition awarded land to the Palestinians and other land to the Israelis.
What land which side should possess seems to me should be negotiated. But there have never been successful negotiations . . . .
It's time for successful negotiations.
happyslug
(14,779 posts)The UN did approve a division of Palestine into two states, but never approved of removal of anyone, for such removal would require the use of force, and it was violence the UN was trying to stop.
Your interpretation would permit any government to kick out anyone from their home for the simple reason of having a "better" person in that home. The whole post WWII era was a rejection of that rule with the exception of Russia and the Eastern Europe in regards to Germans living in Eastern Europe. Stalin in the post WWII era did a lot of Ethnic Cleaning.
This was the complaint of the Arabs, the Jews were given control over lands not only lands that were Majority Jewish but lands that had majority Arabs living in them (The Israelis then removed most such Arabs during the War of independence).
As to negotiations, the problems of the Refugees must be addressed, and that means settlement of them someplace. Who do you want to impose such Palestinians on? The only place they want to go, is back "home" to Palestine, but Israel rejects that solution. No one wants to PAY the Palestinians to move elsewhere (especially true of Israel). Thus what is they to negotiate? Israel's position is such "Arabs" can be moved into the rest of the Arab world, the rest of the Arab World says, Arab is like Indo-European, so does Israel supports requiring Europe to take in Indo-Europeans from India that were displaced by others in India? No, Israel does not, but it is the same logic Israel is using as to the Palestinians, i.e. Palestinians are Arabs, just like people in India are Indo-Europeans. Thus the rest of the Arab World should take in the Palestinians, just like Europe should take in refugees from India.
To give it an American Slant, why not have Israel pay for the cost of moving and integrating such Palestinians, even ones accused of terrorism, to the US? Lets just take you home town, remove all of its current residents, and move the Palestinians in. That is what Israel did with the Jews from Europe and if it was fair and legal for Israel, the US can do it to its own Citizens to. Minimize costs that way.
As to your home town present residents, just tell them they are on they own, and it was good that they lost their homes without compensation to solve the problems of the Palestinians Refugees.
Ask yourself, how would your neighbor feel. Remember this would be without any compensation, they just lose their home. We have to keep the costs to the US Government down and all Israel is willing to pay is the cost to move the Palestinians.
The opposition to such a displacement would be immense, but that is what the Israelis did to the Palestinians in those camps. My example is to show the solution is NOT easy or cost free. Someone has to pay for moving the Palestinians but to integrate them into a society that would accept them AND at a cost that everyone finds acceptable. Given no one wants the Palestinians, the subject of what to do with them is just not discussed. Thus no negotiations.
Thus the issue quickly becomes what to do with the Palestinians, and I have heard none. Israel is caught in a position that Hitler found himself in the 1930s, Hitler did NOT want to keep the Jews in Germany, but Hitler could not just kill them either. Thus Hitler was the number 1 smuggler of Jews into Palestine in the 1930s. Such smuggling removed the Jews from Germany without killing them. It is only when that option was cut off by the British Navy in 1940 and the Invasion of Russia in 1941, did Hitler order the Death Camps. i.e when any other option was closed, then and only then did Hitler turn to Mass Murder.
Now, Hitler did not go avoid mass murder in the 1930s this out of the kindness of his heart, but fear of any back lash from outside Germany when Germany was still trading with most of Europe, and the US. Thus as long as Germany was at "peace" such peace prevented Hitler from Mass Murder. When Germany could no longer trade for Germany was at war with almost everyone in Europe, then and only then was Hitler able to do what he really wanted to do, Kill off all of the Jews.
I bring this up, for the present Right wing Government of Israel is in many ways in the same mind set. i.e. they want to get rid of the Palestinians, but dare NOT do mass murder for fear of a foreign backlash AND that is the only reason it is NOT done. On the other hand, if such restriction ever disappears, I fear for the Palestinians, for then they will be in the same position as the Jews were to Hitler during WWII.
Remember Hitler only reverted to mass murder when all the world was at war with Hitler. As long as Hitler had to take into consideration foreign opinion, Hitler had his followers harass Jews and occasionally kill a Jew (and required the wearing of the Star of David), restricted what Jews could do and drive as many Jews out of Germany as he could, but no actual mass murder (I did not say life was good for German Jews, but that they were permitted to live). When Hitler no longer had to take into consideration Foreign Public Opinion is when he started the Death Camps.
I bring this up, for the present Government of Israel is similar to Nazi Germany in the 1930s, hostile to the Palestinians but not willing to risk foreign out rage if mass murder is done. As long as we can discuss the Palestinians and that discussion is a factor on US support of Israel, the Palestinians are in a similar situation as where the German Jews of the 1930s, not a pleasant world, but one where they can survive. On the other hand, if the situation changes so that killing off the Palestinians would have NO affect on Israel, the right wing of Israel would jump at the chance. Thus I fear for the Palestinians.
Thus what is the solution to the problems of the Palestinian Refugees? Do we wait around for some sort of "Final Solution" or do we actual discuss what to do with them? The only solution actually on the table is to return home, i.e return to the present state is Israel, but that solution is rejected by Israel. No one has even mentioned another solution, and I would like to hear one. I mention moving them to the US, but will the American Right Wing support or oppose such a solution? If the solution is movement to other Arab States, how is that to be done and who is to pay for it? The Palestinian can not pay for it, thus someone has to. Given the tribal nature of most Middle Eastern States, movement of another "tribe" into their home country would be disruptive, for many people of the Middle East membership in their Tribe is more important then what country they are in. Egypt is an exception to that rule, but Egypt is the Nile and whoever controls the water of the Nile is the most important "Leader" in most Egyptian's lives. Thus to move Jews into Egypt except in the big cities would be so disruptive that it is a no go from the state. Jews in the Major Cities are different, but that means moving in people who have little connections with the rest of the people in that neighborhood and that would be disruptive as while.
Sorry, the problem of Resettlement of the Palestinians Refugees is the key to settlement of the Middle East, but to resettle them is to upset someone and no one wants to do that, thus the present system lasts from year to year. Resettlement of the Palestinians Refugee is the issue no one wants to address, but unless it is address they can be no peace.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)Not even subtle.
"the present Government of Israel is similar to Nazi Germany in the 1930s"
"I fear for the Palestinians, for then they will be in the same position as the Jews were to Hitler during WWII."
On and on and on.
This post is sickening.
happyslug
(14,779 posts)My comments, including the comparison with the Nazis of the 1930s, had to do with the single biggest obstacle to peace in the Middle East, what to do with the Palestinian Refugees? What to do about the Palestinians living in the West Bank and Gaza? My comparison with the Nazis reflects that the present Government of Israel view these people in the same light as the Nazis viewed the Jews of Germany, people they want OUT OF THEIR COUNTRY.
Until the problems of the Palestinians are resolved, including either
1. giving the Palestinians complete control over the West Bank (i.e. closing down all of the Israeli Settlements in the West Bank), Gaza AND resettlement of Palestinians someplace (either in the West Bank, Gaza or even the US) OR'
2. The right to return to Israel proper is permitted and the Refugees get to return to Israel,
You will have constant conflicts. Just permitting such refugees back will require Israel to resolve they claims to their ancestral lands, much of which were sold to Jewish owners after 1947 by the Israeli Government. Under International Law, you can NOT sell the land of Refugees, just because you do NOT want them back.
So what is your solution to the problems of the Palestinians? That is where the present Government of Israel and the Nazis of the 1930s are being compared. Neither government wanted or wants a minority in their country, but such a minority is in that country. Israel wants the West Bank and that is where most of its efforts have been directed to, but the Palestinians of the West Bank refuse to move out. Thus do you support Israel's policy of Settlements in the West Bank (and thus the expulsion of the Palestinians from the West Bank), or do you support giving the West Bank to the exclusive control of the Palestinians living in the West Bank (and thus the expulsion of the Israeli Settlers in the Settlements)? You have to support one or the other, to support neither or both is to leave this problem fester, and a resolution is needed.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)Many Palestinians settled down in the metropolitan areas of New York City and Paterson[3][4] in Northern New Jersey, as well as California, Phoenix, Miami, Chicago, Detroit, and Cleveland alongside other Mediterranean communities, including the Lebanese, Syrians, Turks, Greeks, Italians, and Egyptians.
According to the 2000 United States Census, there were 72,112 people of Palestinian ancestry living in the United States, increasing to 83,241 by the 2006-2010 American Community Survey.[1]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_American
After WWII, there were so many war refugees. They went all over the world -- Australia, the US, Canada, the British Protectorate, all over the world. That is what usually happens to refugees from wars.
Remember, the British Protectorate was divided to find a place to live for Jewish refugees from WWII.
The US took a lot of refugees after WWII.
President Harry S. Truman favored a liberal immigration policy toward DPs. Faced with congressional inaction, he issued an executive order, the "Truman Directive," on December 22, 1945. The directive required that existing immigration quotas be designated for displaced persons. While overall immigration into the United States did not increase, more DPs were admitted than before. About 22,950 DPs, of whom two-thirds were Jewish, entered the United States between December 22, 1945, and 1947 under provisions of the Truman Directive.
. . . .
President Harry S. Truman favored a liberal immigration policy toward DPs. Faced with congressional inaction, he issued an executive order, the "Truman Directive," on December 22, 1945. The directive required that existing immigration quotas be designated for displaced persons. While overall immigration into the United States did not increase, more DPs were admitted than before. About 22,950 DPs, of whom two-thirds were Jewish, entered the United States between December 22, 1945, and 1947 under provisions of the Truman Directive.
Congressional action was needed before existing immigration quotas could be increased. In 1948, following intense lobbying by the American Jewish community, Congress passed legislation to admit 400,000 DPs to the United States. Nearly 80,000 of these, or about 20 percent, were Jewish DPs. The rest were Christians from Eastern Europe and the Baltics, many of whom had been forced laborers in Germany. The entry requirements favored agricultural laborers to such an extent, however, that President Truman called the law "flagrantly discriminatory against Jews." Congress amended the law in 1950, but by that time most of the Jewish DPs in Europe had gone to the newly established state of Israel (founded on May 14, 1948).
By 1952, 137,450 Jewish refugees (including close to 100,000 DPs) had settled in the United States. The amended 1948 law was a turning point in American immigration policy and established a precedent for later refugee crises.
http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10007094
The United States provides refuge to persons who have been persecuted or have a well-founded
fear of persecution through two programs: a refugee program for persons outside the U.S. and their
immediate relatives and an asylum program for persons in the U.S. and their immediate relatives.
This Office of Immigration Statistics
Annual Flow Report
provides information on the number of
persons admitted to the United States as refugees or granted asylum in the United States in 2012.
1
A total of 58,179 persons
2
were admitted to the United
States as refugees during 2012 (see Figure 1). The lead
-
ing countries of nationality for refugees were Bhutan,
Burma, and Iraq. During 2012, 29,484 individuals were
granted asylum,
3
including 17,506 who were granted
asylum affirmatively by the Department of Homeland
Security
4
(DHS) and 11,978 who were granted asylum
defensively by the Department of Justice (see Figure 2).
The leading countries of nationality for persons granted
either affirmative or defensive asylum were China,
Egypt, and Ethiopia. Documents for travel to the United
States were issued to 13,049 individuals who were
approved for derivative asylum status while located
abroad. The leading countries of nationality for the
recipients of follow-to-join travel documents were
China, Haiti, and Nepal. In addition to those approved
overseas, 1,028 individuals were approved for derivative
asylum status while residing in the United Stat
http://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/ois_rfa_fr_2012.pdf
There are two WWII refugees in my family in my generation. (By marriage.) We are not that large a family.
We have family members from Asia, South America and Africa. Married into our family.
The US probably would not take any refugee who was associated with a terrorist group.
So, you never know what kind of a deal would be worked out.
happyslug
(14,779 posts)Worse, most of the Palestinians that migrated to the US were Christians (I meet one in Collage in the 1970s). They are as anti-Israeli as any Moslem, but having a slightly higher level of Income were able to move to the US. Most were NOT refugees, they came from the West Bank.
So we are talking of 5 MILLION people as Refugees not the 137,450 Jews the US took in in 1952 (From your report) or the 58,179 that came to the US and were granted asylum in 2012.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_refugee#Jordan
The PLO estimates there are 10.7 Million Palestinians:
The Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics (PCBS) estimated Palestinians at mid year 2009 as 10.7 million persons as follows: 3.9 million in the Palestinian Territory (36.6%), 1.2 million (11.5%) in Israel; 5.0 million in Arab countries (46.2%), 0.6 million in foreign countries (5.7%)
http://www.ochaopt.org/documents/ochaopt_atlas_opt_general_december2011.pdf
The 5 Million in Arab Countries, include 2 million in Jordan and another 1/2 million in Lebanon. the rest are in various Persian Gulf nations where they are tolerated as laborers not as permanent residents.
http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/.premium-1.577997
As to the West Bank, it is presently divided into four types of lands:
A - Under Palestinian Control
B - Under joint Palestinians and Israeli Control
C - Under Exclusive Israeli control:
------Jerusalem, annexed into Israel.
http://rahimk.tumblr.com/post/69484087110/mandela-is-gone-but-the-struggle-is-still-here
As you can see MOST of the West Bank in under Israeli Control, even through over 300,000 Palestinian live in Area C:
http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/.premium-1.577997
Thus it would be a tremendous influx of people into which country takes in these Palestinians. Most countries will reject such an influx, and given the policy of the Palestinians themselves, they first choice is to go to their ancestral homes in present day Israel.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)Germany has a population of 80,716,000.
The area of Germany is 357,168 km2 (63rd) or
137,847 sq miles.
That is 226 per km2 (58th) or 583 per square mile.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germany
Here is what Wikipedia says about Israel.
The population of Israel, as defined by the Israel Central Bureau of Statistics, was estimated in 2014 to be 8,146,300 people. 6,110,600 citizens, or 75.3% of Israelis, are Jewish, 61% of whom are of Mizrahi Jewish ancestry.[23] The country's second largest group of citizens are designated as Arabs, with 1,686,000 people (including the Druze and most East Jerusalem Arabs).[1][24] The great majority of Israeli Arabs are settled Muslims, with smaller but significant numbers of semi-settled Negev Bedouins; the rest are Christians and Druze. Other minorities include Maronites, Samaritans, Dom people, Black Hebrew Israelites, other Sub-Saharan Africans,[25] Armenians, Circassians, Roma and others. Israel also hosts a significant population of non-citizen foreign workers and asylum seekers from Africa and Asia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel
Wikipedia shows the population of Israel to be 20,770 / 22,072 (153rd) km2 or 8,019 / 8,522 square miles.
The population density in Israel is 387.63 per km2 (34th) or
1,004.00 per square mile.
The population density of Israel is already greater than that of Germany.
I cite that just as a comparison. Germany is not one of the most densely populated countries in the world, but it is by no means sparsely populated.
Israel is already pretty heavily populated. This is a terrible problem for the entire world. It's very sad.
Palestinian density within the Palestinian territories:
According to an article in Guardian (2008) using PCBS census figures, the Palestinian territories have one of the fastest growing populations in the world, with numbers surging 30% in the past decade (2008). There were 3.76 million Palestinians in the West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem, up from 2.89 million 10 years earlier.[7]
According to the U.S. Census population growth mid-1990-2008 in Gaza and West Bank was 106% from 1.9 million (1990) to 3.9 million persons.[8]
According to UN (2010) Palestinian population is 4.4 million.[9] According to the Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics (PCBS) population density in 2009 was 654 capita/km2, of which 433 capita/km2 in the West Bank including Jerusalem and 4,073 capita/km2 in Gaza Strip.[10] In the mid-2009 the share of population less than 15 years was 41.9% and above 65 years 3%.[10]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_Palestinian_territories
A high birth rate is a problem in any country and in the Palestinian territories, it really complicates things.
Here are the birth rates per the CIA:
United States (150th) 13.42
Germany (219th) 8.42
Israel (101) 18.44
West Bank (67) 23.41
Gaza Strip (35) 32.20
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2054rank.html
The Palestinians face very difficult problems. Fighting wars is not the way to solve them. It would be crowded in Israel/Palestine even if all the Israelis left.
happyslug
(14,779 posts)or be FORCED to accept them. The alternative is to leave these camps fester and that breeds even more violence. Make up your mind, who do you want FORCE to live with these Palestinians?
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)Israel/Palestine is not large enough either. It's a horror story.
If you look at the list of countries ranked by the rate of population growth. Some of the poorest countries have the highest rates. We really need an international campaign for population control but the more fanatical religious leaders in some religions won't hear of it. That is the problem.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)areas already designated for them, where they now live?
A fairly considerable number of Palestinians already live in what is considered Israeli territory. If those Palestinians who have left the area are given citizenship in the countries in which they now live, the population at issue would be less than 3.9 million.
Since 2007, the number of immigrants given permanent residence in the US has averaged around one million per year (if I am reading this website correctly; it is late so please correct me if I am wrong).
http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/opinion/neighbors-won-t-be-serving-1.171577
Canadian immigration:
Since 2001, immigration has ranged between 221,352 and 262,236 immigrants per annum.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_Canada
Australian visas:
The Humanitarian program for 2012–13 is set at 20,000 places, an increase of 6,250 from the previous year. This category includes a 12 per cent target for Woman at Risk visas. This allocation also includes Onshore Protection visas granted to people who apply for protection in Australia and are found to be refugees.[16] In 2010–11, a total of 13,799 visas were granted under the Humanitarian Program. A total of 5,998 visas were granted under the offshore component, including 759 Woman at Risk visas. In addition, 2,973 Special Humanitarian Program visas were granted to people outside Australia. A total of 4,828 visas were granted to people in Australia.[17]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_Australia
When I look at the birthrate among Palestinians and Israelis, it is depressingly high for such a small area of the earth.
Generally, poor nations have high birth rates. That applies to the West Bank and to Gaza Strip.
There are several lists regarding birth rates. Here is one.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_and_dependent_territories_by_birth_rate
Regardless of the dispute between Palestinians and Israel, the birth rates in the area and in Africa in general make me pessimistic about the economic future in the Middle East and Africa.
The Second Stone
(2,900 posts)"The" what? There is no country they are dealing with. There are people whose land has been stolen, some of whom are committing acts of violence in retaliation, and some of whom are not. You've lumped them all together and then say "the Israelis would respond". Well the Israelis are not responding here, you are. The Israelis are murdering and you don't even have the courage of your convictions anymore to say that you are on their side. You are. Accessory after the fact and accomplice.
lofty1
(62 posts)Apparently, there was something about what the Israelis offered that didn't sit right with the Palestinians. Perhaps certain Israelis have not been honest all along and the ones that are, have been silent. I'm sure many on the Israeli side, given their history,are paranoid and fearful and feel they need to be dishonest in order to survive.
elehhhhna
(32,076 posts)M. Python
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)from the history. The killings are horrible regardless who commits them.
But I have to remind DUers that the Israelis built the wall and the missile shield to avoid violent conflict with Palestinians. So the Palestinians built the tunnels.
The killings are horrible. But they would be no less horrible if they were on the other side of that wall and missile shield. How is Israel to defend against the tunnels without killing people? That is the question.
Both sides need peace.
truedelphi
(32,324 posts)the Palestinians would not be spending their time building tunnels.
Or throwing rocks. Or shooting rockets.
They have been treated as less than human by the Israeli people, for decade after decade, while the Israelis deny that an Occupation took place.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)Palestinian territory.
As I have watched over the years, Palestine has attacked Israel and then lost territory to Israel.
Here is an example of Israel destroying illegal settlements.
Israeli security forces have demolished 10 illegal houses in the West Bank outpost of Ma'ale Rehavam, after Israel's high court court rejected settlers' claims to have purchased the land legally from Palestinians.
The demolitions followed a an order for the destruction of 28 illegal buildings in three different settlements, in what Israeli media described as one of the biggest "evacuations" in recent years.
In Ramat Gilad, six buildings and a synagogue, built on private land, are earmarked for destruction while seven buildings are expected to be destroyed in Givat Yosef, before Thursday evening. Meanwhile in Mitzpe Yitzhar – where agreement was reached last week - one building was voluntarily demolished.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/may/14/israeli-forces-illegal-west-bank-settlement-destroy-houses
Palestine needs to negotiate peace for land. That's what needs to happen. But Israel makes a good argument that it needs the land as a buffer to its larger cities as long as the Palestinians are intent on getting the land back by violent means.
There is blame on both sides. But further violence is not the answer.
The danger is that now with all the deaths in Gaza, the Gazans will try to avenge those deaths and end up with more and more dead.
I am just praying for peace, but goading one or the other side on to fight is wrong. Both sides have to be willing to give up things they would like in order to have peace.
If they don't negotiate for peace, I hate to think what might happen in the Gaza Strip because Israel's technology so outdoes the Palestinian's.
Peace, a negotiated peace is the only answer.
truedelphi
(32,324 posts)The United Nations stating that legally the Jewish displaced persons could enter Israel and set the nation up as their nation, this "legal decision" was at its very essence an immoral allowing of an immoral taking. And from that "legal decision" came the immoral taking of lives, the immoral taking of property, and the immoral taking of an entire way of life.
When property, lives and right to governance are taken from a people, irregardless of whom those people are (Be they American Native Peoples, Jewish people living in Europe during the Third Reich, or the Palestinians) what needs to happen is a restitution. Period.
And of course restitution cannot come about because so many Israelis are in denial that anything immoral happened. The attitude of most Jewish people, at least the friends i have in the USA whoa re Jewish, seems to be: of course, it was totally immoral that Jewish people suffered the Holocaust in Europe, but since Palestinians are not Jews, too bad for them!
The takings are at its most basic a most willful ignoring of realities: the most important of which was how the territory was already inhabited by a plethora of people, such as Muslims, Christians, Sufis, and others, all of whom had to accept that a religious nation state now was stripping away the existence, in total, of Palestine.
Anyway, I can't think of how Jewish people here in the USA can justify just exactly how it was okay for the Jewish displaced people to land in Israel, and re-claim the homes and land, lives and entire nation state of Palestine. Meanwhile they are very liberal in terms of their expressing sympathy for the Native Peoples here in the Americas and how awful it was that the takings of property and life, in terms of the various Indian tribes, occurred.
But as someone who has spent over five hundred hours of my life dealing with the Holocaust, I clearly remember how when Albert Speer asked Hitler about the Third Reich's subjugation of the Jewish people (a question that was asked in the very early days of Hitler's reign) Hitler replied that the precedent for his doing what he was doing to the Jewish people happened to be the American government's treatment of the American Indians.
If what happened to the American Indians from 1620 on to Wounded Knee, and if what happened to the Jewish people during the Third Reich until the Allies' victory in 1945, were indeed immoral activities, then what has happened to the Palestinians, from 1948 on until this moment right now, can certainly be viewed as immoral activities.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)Israel opened its borders to Palestinians. That was intended to be a step toward peace. The Palestinians responded by protesting Sharon's walking around the Temple Mount (that is the justification I have been getting here) with the Second Intifada.
Israel has to protect itself.
There has to be a negotiated settlement. That is the only way. Of course the return of land would be part of the settlement. I would suggest a settlement that would take place in increments over years and that would reward peace and enforcement of the settlement agreement on both sides.
The most difficult problems could be resolved at the end after the sides build up enough trust in each other to resolve them peacefully. That includes access to holy places and ownership of certain hotly contested sites.
The ideal would be one nation in which all groups enjoy the freedom to practice their religions and live in peace. But that would take a long, long time.
I have so often written about living in Alsace-Lorraine in the 1960s. People who have long opposed each other in war and treated each other like dirt can live together in peace. It takes hard work on both sides.
I suspect that Israel will focus on developing its relationship with the West Bank and then when that is greatly improved, the Gaza Strip will join in the effort for peace. That's just my guess.
truedelphi
(32,324 posts)To take a peace settlement when it was offered to them. (Link:
http://www.democracynow.org/2014/7/30/henry_siegman_leading_voice_of_us )
This points out one of the biggest problems: politics. And while politics can gum up the works when it is merely power and money at stake, in a situation like Israel (or two decades back, the UK and the Irish) politics ends up using bloodshed to achieve the politicians' aims.
In Israel, the making of sausage er, politics, is especially dicey. After all, in this territory, butchering those who actively make political campaigns and political candidates ineffective is the chosen way of destroying such opposition.
Between 1980 and 1999, there were over 18 moderate groups that were pushed out of existence by the fact the leaders of the groups were simply murdered. First the PLO and now a days, Hamas, are often blamed for such murderous activities, but cynics state that it is sometimes quite likely that the more extreme arm of the Likkud is behind the assassinations.
kiranon
(1,727 posts)
Marrah_G
(28,581 posts)seveneyes
(4,631 posts)Marrah_G
(28,581 posts)Mostly civilians, about a quarter children. Running out of water, food, the sounds of drones and explosions night and day. Bombs falling on UN shelters. Hospitals gone, schools gone, universities gone, factories that employed hundreds gone, medicine stores blown up.... I've watched the bombing for a couple weeks now, via live streaming. It is horrific.
Destruction and death at the hands of Israel.
Electric Monk
(13,869 posts)I can barely imagine what that must be like, living like that, day in and day out, with no reprieve.
demigoddess
(6,640 posts)when did you visit Gaza and view the Hamas attacks?
I'll bet I've been to Gaza 3 times more than you have and I've never been.
Look at some photos of the destruction. Look at the body counts. Look at Hamas still in action.
This is genocide, not a war.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)'catapulted' by Israeli govt officials, is not a 'glowing' report, it is simply a report of facts.
Do you have something that contradicts his report?
oberliner
(58,724 posts)Impressive.
Orrex
(63,203 posts)Since Israel employs the propaganda strategy common among dictators, it's hardly inappropriate to call them out for it.
MNBrewer
(8,462 posts)nor do such comparisons necessarily invalidate either the article in which they are made.
Nor do they necessarily mean that the author is insane.
reACTIONary
(5,770 posts)Rozlee
(2,529 posts)Israelis have the latest US technology at their disposal and are fighting an enemy that makes homemade weapons. IDF soldiers were proudly wearing T-shirts that showed a pregnant Arab woman in gun sights with the slogan, "One shot, two kills." Just google "IDF T-shirts of shooting pregnant women." Many of them don't even make excuses for the fact that they have no qualms about killing children. I got a previous post hidden for comparing the atrocities of Nazi Germany to current day Israel, which incidentally is what this whole article is about. I don't care if this post is hidden too. I'll say it anyway. What Israel is doing now against the Palestinians is a full on pogrom.
whathehell
(29,067 posts)I think I'm going to scream.
Good God, it's the PALESTINIANS that "have to protect themselves"!
Israel is armed to the teeth, and DEFENDED to the teeth with those
lovely, multi-million dollare shields, American Taxpayers, whose roads
and bridges are crumbling, because "We can't afford it", have so
generously paid for. 
intaglio
(8,170 posts)Perhaps you missed the other comparisons in the same line.
The truth is that the propaganda effort being deployed by Israel and it's supporters owes much to the work of hate mongers such as Goebels just as the propaganda used by the US and other nations owes much to that source. Pointing this out does not accuse Israel of Nazi-ism, it highlights that Israel is guilty of demagoguery of the worst sort. If Israel stoops to borrowing the methods of oppressors then it must invite comparison with those oppressors.
All you seem to be doing is flailing about seeking dust motes in the eyes of others whilst ignoring the suppurating sores in the "eyes" of Israel.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)Hedges is quite keen on bringing Nazi Germany into his articles about Israel. Usually they are in the first couple of paragraphs.
Much like how Netanyahu likes to use Hitler as his go-to comparison for various Iranian leaders and other folks he doesn't like.
Voice for Peace
(13,141 posts)and other current Israeli government stances?
oberliner
(58,724 posts)Israel is clearly conducting itself with a callous disregard for Palestinian civilian life, but this notion that Israel is just ordering the "mass murder of women and children" or the "genocide of the Palestinian people" or anything of that nature is just absolutely preposterous.
Question the motives for the Israeli incursion, certainly – call right-wing nutty Netanyahu out on his bs and lies and his dehumanizing statements about Palestinians. Speak out against the killing of children, the bombing of civilian buildings, mosques, schools. All condemnable.
But Israel is not just on some kind of sadistic quest to slaughter large numbers of Palestinian women and children. That's just not what is happening.
Israel is trying to destroy tunnels, hit rocket launchers, destroy munitions, kill Hamas leaders (and active members). The problem is that they don't particularly care if they end up killing some civilians who are in the area of a target.
If a rocket is launched by Hamas from near a school- Israel will shoot back at that rocket launcher and if they hit the school and kill some innocent people there, Israel's attitude is "so be it".
If there is a tunnel, Israel will bomb the the tunnel - with a half-assed warning to the people who might be living in the homes around the tunnel. If there are some civilians who are killed in the process, the Israeli government attitude is "oh well".
This is the fundamental problem with what Israel is doing and why they should be condemned. The hyperbole found on DU, and elsewhere, is not necessary. Israel is doing enough actual bad things right now that they should be taken to task for.
upaloopa
(11,417 posts)You see men women and children being killed and you tell yourself it is something else that you can justify.
Until we all can accept the fact that killing is just that, killing, this thing is allowed to go on.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)Finding the truth about exactly what is going on is paramount.
DetlefK
(16,423 posts)If Israel WERE TRYING to kill a huge amount of palestinian civilians, and at the same time WERE TRYING to set up plausible deniability about its intentional mass-murder, would Israel wage this campaign in a different way?
Benefit of the doubt, okay, but if it looks like a war-crime and is covered up like a war-crime, then maybe it's a war-crime.
Are we really splitting hairs between INTENTIONAL mass-murder and ACCIDENTAL mass-murder?
oberliner
(58,724 posts)What is the point, from the Israeli perspective? Are you saying they are just sadistic murderers?
DetlefK
(16,423 posts)People kill not only for fun. That could be political reasons (e.g. facts on the ground), racist reasons (e.g. they are barbarians), religious reasons (e.g. their land is really our land because our Holy Book says so), sociopathic reasons (e.g. they don't deserve better) ...
oberliner
(58,724 posts)What is your take on it?
DetlefK
(16,423 posts)I think, various parts of the Israeli population have their own reason.
My guess:
For example, those who are subjected to rocket-attacks and lost someone to palestinian terrorism would go for "an-eye-for-an-eye".
The jewish extremists, particularly among the settlers in the Westbank, go for religious reasons.
A one-sided media can dehumanize the "others".
And the Israeli government definitely has some longterm-plan and schemes to fulfill it.
JoeyT
(6,785 posts)Find some other, dehumanize them as much as possible, then turn the guns on them and kill just enough to satisfy your supporters' bloodlust.
Israeli's aren't sadistic murderers. A few of their leaders and some unknown portion of their military is. Which has been true about us a few times too. I have little doubt that if the right wing in the US were unopposed, they'd have artillery aimed at the border of Mexico and be blasting people trying to cross to smithereens.
Voice for Peace
(13,141 posts)reACTIONary
(5,770 posts)intaglio
(8,170 posts)Moving into "blame the messenger" territory
oberliner
(58,724 posts)He has a particular perspective on things as everyone writing about this conflict does. I just noted sarcastically that he brought Nazi Germany into his piece like he and others are wont to do. Personally, I think that is less than productive in getting one's message across - but I realize a lot of people disagree with me and feel it is an apt and/or useful analogy to use.
A Simple Game
(9,214 posts)The Second Stone
(2,900 posts)You don't murder 10 year old boys to stop rockets. It's genocide, pure and simple and anyone glossing over the murder of 10 year old boys to pretend that the real outrage is a comparison to Nazis is supporting genocide. You are outraged at an apt verbal comparison? Well too bad. The world is outraged at the systematic pre-meditated murder of 10 year old boys and the lies and rhetoric genocidal enablers tell as accomplices after the fact.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)But it is not apt and it is not genocide.
That you would actually describe the situation as: "the systematic pre-meditated murder of 10 year old boys" demonstrates a lack of understanding of reality.
The Second Stone
(2,900 posts)and your refusal to condemn it is Holocaust denial and lacks an understanding of what murder and genocide are. Mr. Hedges accurately described a routine Israeli practice of baiting and murdering 10 year old boys.
Israelis are committing crime against humanity in Gaza, and their defenders are accessories after the fact. I hope they are all brought to justice the same way Eichmann was.
The denial of these murders and the criminal oppression of all the people who live in Gaza is a crime against humanity.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)And you are comfortable making the accusation of "Holocaust denial" towards someone who disagrees?
You also believe that Mr. Hedges's article indicates that Israel is engaged in "the systematic pre-meditated murder of 10 year old boys" in the service of genocide?
You think the defenders of Israel should be brought to justice "the same way Eichmann was"?
Can you honestly feel this way or are you just using hyperbole for rhetorical effect?
The Second Stone
(2,900 posts)for their murderous and thieving and lying ways. There is a difference between Israel and Luxembourg. Routine baiting and murdering of 10 year old boys, running Lord of the Flies embargoed ghettos is quite a bit more like how the Nazis ran the Warsaw Ghetto than selling postage stamps and running coffee houses.
And let's be clear, if I had lived in Europe during the 30s and early 40s, my ancestry would have earned me a one way train ticket to a Nazi death camp.
The people giving the orders, carrying out the orders, the intermediaries and the propagandists are all guilty of murder, genocide and attempted genocide. The biggest differences between modern Israel and Nazi Germany is that Israel is carrying out its final solution over a period of many decades and that the participants in Israel are all volunteers, none of whom would be punished or sent to the Russian front if they refused.
The vast majority of the people of the world have seen through the past several decades of Israeli abuse of the natives and denounced it for what it is. It is murder. Cold, nasty and premeditated murder.
Uncle Joe
(58,349 posts)Thanks for the thread, marmar.
- His most salient point:
''The Big Lie feeds the two reactions Israel seeks to elicit—racism among its supporters and terror among its victims.''
2banon
(7,321 posts)L0oniX
(31,493 posts)2banon
(7,321 posts)Before that, wars (genocides) of Native Americans. It's arguably the most important/effective tool to wage offensive warfare against another people/nation.
L0oniX
(31,493 posts)truedelphi
(32,324 posts)The Death Squads were sometimes trained by Israeli Army operatives.
2banon
(7,321 posts)thanks for the enlightenment...
Purveyor
(29,876 posts)RufusTFirefly
(8,812 posts)Those who think that all of us are experiencing some sort of schadenfreude are very sadly mistaken.
malaise
(268,930 posts)but you can only cry wolf (blitzer too) for so long before no one believes a word.
xchrom
(108,903 posts)
mwrguy
(3,245 posts)
Laelth
(32,017 posts)-Laelth
BelgianMadCow
(5,379 posts)but it looks like a major war is about to break out. How do you read this? The outrage here is pretty palpable, and goes across boundaries. The only reason that what is happening is allowed to happen is the US hand over Israel. Things are heading south.
truedelphi
(32,324 posts)two comments could be made.
One is that in the USA, our officials "hand over" a perpetual supply of monies and armaments, such that Israel really doesn't have to worry about where such items will come from.
Secondly, is it the US hand over Israel, or Israel's hand over the US? You really cannot run for the US Senate or for Congress unless you join AIPAC. And once inside AIPAC, you are only as good as your last vote for monetary appropriations or weaponry appropriations indicates.
This situation was bad enough several decades ago. But now there is a "Christian" counterpart to the Jewish hold on so many people. This is the fact that RW "Christian" ministers preach a weekly sermon on the despicable and scary aspects of Muslims, and the Godliness of the Israeli people, the problem of expecting elected officials to be firmly in the Zionist camp has only gotten progressively worse.
Laelth
(32,017 posts)The best we can do is to attempt to restrain our ally's more egregious behavior. I think we are doing that. I see no long-term solution that is viable at the moment, but the latest cease-fire gives me reason to hope that the current conflict can be de-escalated and that a temporary peace can be achieved.
-Laelth
Douglas Carpenter
(20,226 posts)countryjake
(8,554 posts)Let Gaza Live!
Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions
Free Palestine!
KansDem
(28,498 posts)Forget the "terror tunnels," used to "justify" Israel's actions. Those are nothing compared to this kind of inhumanity.
supercats
(429 posts)I also think Israel is doing what Hitler did to them. The analogy that comes to mind is, let's say you were molested as a young boy, when you grow up, chances are likely you will molest young boys too. Thats where I think Israel is with this. The sad thing is because of the atrocities that the Israelis faced from Hitler, America treats Israel like a patron saint, they can do no wrong, look how they suffered? And Israel knows this and plays it up every chance they get.
mokawanis
(4,440 posts)Kind of hard to blame those deaths on Hamas or the Palestinians.
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)They accuse the messenger of being an antisemite.
If it comes from an Israeli they claim it's from a "self hating Jew".
If it comes from an independent third party they claim they are "ignorant".
.....and so it goes.
randys1
(16,286 posts)I, along with every other reporter I know who has worked in Gaza, have never seen any evidence that Hamas uses civilians as “human shields.”
So the reports that Hamas does this are lies?
Does Hamas store weapons in areas where civilians are, do they launch attacks from areas where civilians are?
If they do it absolutely does NOT justify a single civilian death, that is not my point, my question is so these allegations are lies?
Every other reporter says this too?
Do we have other reporters we can ask?
Because if this is true, then there really is no way to support at all what Israel is doing at this time, but I have heard so many times the contrary.
Galraedia
(5,022 posts)So, for example, the personal homes of Palestinian political and military leaders, construed as "command and control centers," are legitimate military targets. If a Hamas functionary lives with his family of five children in an apartment building of 8 stories with 4 apartments per floor, it is perfectly legitimate to bomb that building and kill all 32 families--"human shields," after all--in order to destroy that "command and control center."
This "human shields" argument is what allows Israeli officials, as Noura Erakat points out, to "openly admit that they are deliberately and systematically bombing the family homes of suspected militants," killing whole families. It suggests an ethic that supposedly justifies an Israeli offensive which produces 75-80% civilian causalities , 33% of which are children, among the Palestinian population (and somehow renders insignificant the contrasting fact that almost 100% of Israeli casualties from Palestinian resistance operations are military). To hear it in the American media, poor, anguished Israel actually becomes the victim of all these "telegenically dead," deliberately sacrificed, Palestinian "human shields."
Source: http://www.opednews.com/articles/Israel-s-Human-Shield-Hy-by-Jim-Kavanagh-Gaza-Invasion_Human-Shield_Israel-Attacks-Gaza_Israeli-Attacks-On-Gaza-140803-679.html
randys1
(16,286 posts)as to what he thinks of this
truedelphi
(32,324 posts)The nation of Israel is rather small, if I remember correctly something like 60 by 30 miles in size.
Then factor into that metric the fact that so many Palestinians have been pushed out of other areas, and are concentrated inside Gaza, and it is rather duplicitous of Israelis to speak of this human shield concept.
Marrah_G
(28,581 posts)Gaza city has about 30,000 people per square miles. Gaza strip has 13000 per square mile.
blackspade
(10,056 posts)That the IDF has leveled as a buffer and declared a 'no go' zone.
That makes the actual density of the Strip over 32,000 per sq mi.
Marrah_G
(28,581 posts)Major Hogwash
(17,656 posts)That's all you need to know about it, right there.
MrMickeysMom
(20,453 posts)Who just cannot believe it.
Babel_17
(5,400 posts)Until it's shown on CNN these narratives don't become part of "what we know".
Iamthetruth
(487 posts)But when you reprimanded by your employer, the New York Times, and called him impartial on the subject of Palestine, his views have to be questioned.
countryjake
(8,554 posts)military force in the world, right?
Thursday, 31 July 2014
Experts ask whether poor soldiering skills and tactics are to blame, or if avoiding civilian casualties is just not a priority
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/31/gaza-civilian-death-toll-military-training-experts
The persistently high civilian death toll in Gaza has raised questions among military analysts and humanitarian law experts over the quality of training of Israeli gunners and their rules of engagement in such heavily populated areas.
The questions were given new urgency after a UN-run school was hit by five artillery shells on Wednesday, killing 16 civilians and injuring 100 more, mostly women and children, and the deaths of 17 others in a crowded market, as the Israel Defence Forces' (IDF) Operation Protective Edge against Hamas entered its 24th day. The IDF has repeatedly cited targeting errors, and blamed Hamas for operating in civilian areas.
However, Andrew Exum, a former US army officer who has studied Israel's military campaigns, said the IDF had a long history of mistakes causing many civilian casualties.
"Errant artillery and air strikes have unfortunately been something of a theme in Israel's conflicts in both southern Lebanon and Gaza over the past two decades. There are good strategic reasons to avoid using air power and artillery in these conflicts: they tend to be pretty indiscriminate in their effects and make it difficult for the population under fire to figure out what they're supposed to do to be safe," said Exum, who was a defence department special adviser on the Middle East.
Free Palestine!
Let Gaza Live!
Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions
Free Palestine!
Douglas Carpenter
(20,226 posts)You may find this hard to believe, but some people think he may have been right about that too.
Iamthetruth
(487 posts)He has been accused of plagiarism at least twice and in his July 20, 2012 interview on PBS he admitted to spinning stories to fit his point of view and a good journalist should not be objective. He has been caught in outright lies about the wells that were dug in Gaza and Israel, or as he says, spins the story to fit his point of view. As I said, no credibility.
marmar
(77,073 posts)..... even when they are reporting the views of both sides. When a reporter gets started reporting on a story, believe me, their working thesis already reflects a certain POV. It's about seeking truth, not objectivity for the sake of objectivity.
Iamthetruth
(487 posts)When a "journalists" outright admits he spins stories to fit his point of view and is know to support Palestine and dispose Israel and then rights anti Israel stories at the same time saying he has never witness hamas doing anything wrong. Well what you have is an liar pure and simple.
Douglas Carpenter
(20,226 posts)the only time he was reprimanded by the New York Times was for telling the truth - certainly not for lying
Iamthetruth
(487 posts)His PBS interview on 7/20/12 and almost every article and book he has written. The proof is on him, not me.
countryjake
(8,554 posts)This interview?
Douglas Carpenter
(20,226 posts)countryjake
(8,554 posts)Could be a case of moral-fragmentation. But that Bill Moyers' show was one hell of an interview.
It is, indeed, excellent.
"One can take sides, but one can never not tell the truth." ~ Chris Hedges on journalism
underthematrix
(5,811 posts)GoneFishin
(5,217 posts)
The importance of Chris Hedges is this: He points out Evil in this world. I capitalize the word, not because it is worthy of the upper case letter, but because it is the number one issue this world can't seem to recognize or deal with and the word needs to be emphasized. If we want to eradicate a wrong/an Evil, we have to be able to recognize what is causing it. We must be able to name Evil when it makes its appearance in our vicinity, in our world.
I think we can all agree that violence is a tool of Evil, irregardless of who uses it. Non-violence is the only way to high ground in this tragedy that unfolds between Israel and Palestinians every few years. And it doesn't take a mental giant to know that Israel with it's current right-wing government and gigantic arsenal, or any one gov't in the future, is NOT going to take the high ground and lay down its arms. I think the onus lies on the Palestinians, simply because they are isolated and really have no way to defend themselves. If they would simply turn away from violence, the world would come to their aid. The world would pressure Israel to end the siege of the Palestinians.
Palestinians need to NOT let Israel pull it down in the gutter with them. They must STOP "becoming" their enemy. Yes, that seems like it would be impossible to do. If a bully walks up and dukes you for absolutely no reason, your natural instinct is to duke them twice and twice as hard, so they will think twice about doing it again.
Violence begets violence. Someone has to declare peace, once and for all.
underthematrix
(5,811 posts)why is the Israeli government killing children? Children throwing rocks in reaction to taunts by Israeli soldiers who then respond with gunfire and bombs seems bizarre.
I'm old so I remember when people lived in peace in Israel/Palestine. What happened to change that?
whereisjustice
(2,941 posts)public opinion by lying on radio, TV, web sites, and by distributing talking points to bubbleheaded news organizations.
Israel is indiscriminately killing women and children and the US is cheering them on with money and weapons.
We are not great nations built on a framework of justice. We slaughter for the fun of it. Just look at Iraq.
If we were serious about ending terror and making the world a safer place, we would start by annihilating our own right wing, religious extremist terrorist threat, Texas.
Babel_17
(5,400 posts)It's time to organize the massive discussions, to call in the heavy hitters and give them uninterrupted time to speak. Bring on "the pros from Dover" and put them on panels.