Legitimacy crisis: Netanyahu acknowledges Israeli assault lacked legitimacy

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

http://mondoweiss.net/2014/07/legitimacy-netanyahu-acknowledges.html

Jumping on Hamas’s rejection of the bogus cease-fire offer on Tuesday, July 15, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said, “Hamas’s rejection of the cease-fire gives Israel full legitimacy (http://mfa.gov.il/MFA/ForeignPolicy/Terrorism/Pages/Rise-in-rocket-fire-from-Gaza-3-Jul-2014.aspx) to expand the operation to protect our people.”

Thus, Netanyahu implicitly admitted that the Israeli government otherwise lacked “full legitimacy.” And Netanyahu acknowledged just how much his government craves legitimacy.

The cease-fire offer was not the result of negotiations that included input from Hamas. It was take it or leave it.

Graphs presented on the website of the “Meir Amit Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center” (ITIC), a private think tank that “has close ties with the country’s military leadership,” show that an effective cease-fire was put in place after the Israeli government’s last massive assault on Gaza ended in November 2012. In addition, a May 2013 article in the Jerusalem Post, “IDF source: Hamas working to stop Gaza rockets,” reported that Hamas was policing other groups to prevent rocket fire.

So my fellow DUers has Bibi Netanyahu actually made public the information that he says he has about Hamas being begind the abduction and murder of three Israeli settlers? He used that insinuation as his pretext for an assault on Gaza and Hamas, but I have not seen anything yet to validate his claims.

Bibi has no legitimacy. He's as legitimate as a three dollar bill.

[The Magistrate]

1. That Is Kind Of A Stretch, Sir

Rather like, if someone begins a statement by saying 'Frankly...', you were to respond by announcing he was just dissembling in everything he said before that.

The actual meaning of the statement is that he feels Hamas rejecting a cease-fire removes any ground for people to criticize Israel for pressing on with its campaign, since Israel accepted the cease-fire offer and Hamas did not. Thus to his view the desire of Hamas that fighting continue is obvious, and makes them the responsible party.

[Fozzledick]

2. Welcome back, Sir. Allow me to hold your coat.

I think you'll find this one is quite a dancer...

[The Magistrate]

3. I Am Just Passing Through, Sir....

It is almost dinnertime.

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

4. There is no stretch in the fact that Netanyahu says he has proof that Hamas

was responsible for the murder of three Israeli settlers yes he has not provided any proof.

There is no stretch in the fact that Netanyahu used that phantom statement for a widespread arrest of Hamas leadership and members; inflaming the situation to where they are today in the conflict.

If Netanyahu wants to act legitimately then he should have provided any evidence that he had of Hamas culpability to these murders, but instead he chose a ham-handed approach and decided to bomb targets with civilians..

I don't expect anything much from Hamas, but the so-called only democracy in the Mid East has a buffoon for a leader.

So no, I don't believe that it is a stretch.

[The Magistrate]

5. None Of Which Has Anything To Do With Your Claim, Sir

Which was that Netanyahu had announced Israel's action before now were illegitimate, and that accordingly Israel faced and acknowledged a 'crisis in legitimacy'. That was just an attempt at semantic subterfuge of a particularly low order.

The other is pretty cold cheese by now. The people suspected have been named. I rather doubt you would support an Israeli operation to bring them under arrest before a court in Israel for trial, and suspect you denounce their arrest by Arab Palestinian authorities, and their being handed over to Israel, as boot-licking collaboration....

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

6. Firstly, you need to re-read the article.

(1) The people suspected have been named. (2) I rather doubt you would support an Israeli operation to bring them under arrest before a court in Israel for trial, and suspect you denounce their arrest by Arab Palestinian authorities, and their being handed over to Israel, as boot-licking collaboration....

(1) They were named as suspects. It still does not change the fact that if charges are to be brought then Israel has a responsibility to provide evidence that Hamas was responsible. If Israel has evidence then they need to make it public.

(2) Sadly you are wrong. I do not cheer for the deaths of anyone for any reason, and if there is evidence that the suspects were responsible then they should be caught and tried in a court of law. Your suspicions are unfounded and dubious for one with your moniker.

[The Magistrate]

7. No, Sir, I Do Not

I engaged your head-line and opener, calling it what it is: something of a stretch, and an attempt at a very low grade of semantic subterfuge.

Israel has no such obligation until trial is held.

I suppose you have stated on numerous occasions during the previous weeks that the people sought should turn themselves in, or that P.A. or Hamas authorities should apprehend them, and had no objection to Israel searching for them?

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

8. Since you were dreadfully wrong about your other assumptions of me, sir, I would have

expected more from you.

Israel has no such obligation until trial is held.

Curious, indeed. You write that Israel has no such obligation, but they didn't bother in arresting members of Hamas wholesale, may I add, without expecting a retort from them? Seriously? Again, your reasoning is dubious. You may claim what you wish WRT motives by Israel, but if they are going to up the ante, heading into a conflict that they know will happen because of it, then they have a moral obligation to themselves and the world to provide facts for their actions in Gaza and the arrests of Hamas members.

The United States went to great lengths at the UN during the Cuban Missal Crisis to show the world what the Soviets were up to. Israel should have done the same...if they have the evidence that they say they have. If.

I suppose you have stated on numerous occasions during the previous weeks that the people sought should turn themselves in, or that P.A. or Hamas authorities should apprehend them, and had no objection to Israel searching for them?

Why should have I on numerous occasions? Did I say the murderers of the Palestinian youth, burned alive, should have turned themselves in as well? How about the two Palestinian youth killed on Nakba day? I was pretty clear about that what my belief was: that the IDF may have been very responsible and that there should have been an investigation. It should go without saying for those who follow the rule of law that they don't need to wear their hearts on their sleeve every time a crime is committed and an accusation is made.

It should also go without saying that those who have evidence of a crime should actually provide proof of that evidence instead of turning it into a political event: knowing that blood sport is soon to follow.

You assumptions are misguided and disappointing.

[The Magistrate]

9. In Short, Sir, No, You Did Not

You did not make any statements urging the prompt arrest of the persons charged with killing three Israeli teens, and expressed no support for their being sought and apprehended.

The point is worth making, because the partisanship you display in this matter is clearly evident. Statements against IDF members or extremist settlers from you are only to be expected, they amount to little more than static, white noise. A statement of sympathy with Israeli victims, and denunciation of those who victimized them, would stand out, and go some ways towards validating your pretense of being concerned only that rule of law hold. I did state that I held Israeli authorities responsible for quick arrest of the youth abducted and beaten and burned, immediately, and was very glad to see an arrest made. I do not like, and have stated so in the past, the white-wash Israel often applies to clear misbehavior by its soldiers, and the blank check given settler extremists. I do my best to apply a single standard to both sides. I see no sign of your doing so, and certainly see no sign of your doing so in this exchange.

Nor do your attempts at side-tracking and moving on to fresh topics interest me much, You said something which was simply absurd, that Netanyahu had confessed in a statement that Israel's behavior in recent days had not been fully legitimate. He did no such thing. I suspect you really know he did no such thing, but could not resist the chance to be what in my day we used to call a wise-ass, and as I still tell my grandsons on occasion 'nobody likes a wise-ass, kid....'

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

11. Nonsense.

You did not make any statements urging the prompt arrest of the persons charged with killing three Israeli teens, and expressed no support for their being sought and apprehended.

To which I have already replied...that which you have curiously ignored.

Why should have I on numerous occasions? Did I say the murderers of the Palestinian youth, burned alive, should have turned themselves in as well? How about the two Palestinian youth killed on Nakba day? I was pretty clear about that what my belief was: that the IDF may have been very responsible and that there should have been an investigation. It should go without saying for those who follow the rule of law that they don't need to wear their hearts on their sleeve every time a crime is committed and an accusation is made.

The point is worth making, because the partisanship you display in this matter is clearly evident. Statements against IDF members or extremist settlers from you are only to be expected, they amount to little more than static, white noise. A statement of sympathy with Israeli victims, and denunciation of those who victimized them, would stand out, and go some ways towards validating your pretense of being concerned only that rule of law hold. I did state that I held Israeli authorities responsible for quick arrest of the youth abducted and beaten and burned, immediately, and was very glad to see an arrest made. I do not like, and have stated so in the past, the white-wash Israel often applies to clear misbehavior by its soldiers, and the blank check given settler extremists. I do my best to apply a single standard to both sides. I see no sign of your doing so, and certainly see no sign of your doing so in this exchange.

It goes without saying that I hold a position in opposition to Israeli policies WRT the treatment of Palestinians, extremist illegal Israeli settlers, brutish murderous IDF members, occupation, colonization and apartheid since these things all run afoul of the rule of law. Any magistrate, or three year old would realize that.

Furthermore...

A statement of sympathy with Israeli victims, and denunciation of those who victimized them, would stand out, and go some ways towards validating your pretense of being concerned only that rule of law hold.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/113465890

Not Israeli or Palestinian. All victims.

I do my best to apply a single standard to both sides.

That's strange since one side has its boot on the neck of the other, but let's keep a single standard about both of them.

Nor do your attempts at side-tracking and moving on to fresh topics interest me much, You said something which was simply absurd, that Netanyahu had confessed in a statement that Israel's behavior in recent days had not been fully legitimate. He did no such thing. I suspect you really know he did no such thing, but could not resist the chance to be what in my day we used to call a wise-ass, and as I still tell my grandsons on occasion 'nobody likes a wise-ass, kid....'

I don't care if you wish to view Israel through rose coloured glasses and subtly defend them. Frankly, you don't have to agree with the article. If you had left it at that perhaps there would have been no need for me to respond.

Everything that I have written ( http://www.democraticunderground.com/113470047#post4 )is in relation to the events at hand. Whether you have the ability to make a cogent argument regarding that is up to you. Instead of going off on a tangent to see if I have condemned the accused, without evidence mind you, or sympathized with Israeli victims (I love how you have left out all the other Palestinians murdered by the IDF in recent history but point out one specifically) perhaps you would have been better off asking me if I had shown sympathy for the missing.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/113464358

http://www.democraticunderground.com/113464925#post2


So getting back to the topic at hand. Israel should release any information that it has...Proof...that Hamas is responsible instead of expecting the world to just "Trust them" as they bomb and kill more people.

Without evidence it is murder. With evidence it is still murder.

Where's you outrage over that?

[The Magistrate]

12. A Lot Of Words, Sir, None Of Which Refutes Anything In My Comment

You are a committed partisan, loyal to one side, and so cannot really hope to carry off the posture of affronted neutrality concerned only for the law and decency which you are trying to pull off. Your comments demonstrate this far more eloquently than any poor effort of mine could hope to achieve, so I shall simply leave you to your nakedness and move on....

I will add only this bit of repetition. You began this by saying something which was simply absurd, that Netanyahu had confessed in a statement that Israel's behavior in recent days had not been fully legitimate. He did no such thing. I suspect you really know he did no such thing, but could not resist the chance to be what in my day we used to call a wise-ass, and as I still tell my grandsons on occasion 'nobody likes a wise-ass, kid....'

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

13. Actually you have now entered the realm of the disingenuous.

From your last dubious post.

You did not make any statements urging the prompt arrest of the persons charged with killing three Israeli teens, and expressed no support for their being sought and apprehended.

And yet I voiced hope that they would be found alive. I'm sorry it doesn't come up to the level of your loyalty oath nonsense where I had to write from a prepared script. Perhaps you missed the posted links, or you didn't read them at all?

Here they are again.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/113465890

There has been a lot of back and forth on the internet about all these murders, and nobody can claim the moral high ground or that somehow the deceased deserved it.

The families of all these youth grieve and more killing, as self-righteous and self-justified as it may sound, will not change that.

It really does not matter if the deceased were 10, 15, 22 or 40. When a parent loses a child it is always a tragedy, and it doesn't matter what age they are. They are always look upon as their babies.

For the parents, for the families of those lost to violence.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/113464358

I would like to make two points.

Firstly, I hope that the three youth make it home safe. Violence of any kind is never the answer.

Secondly, I honestly have to add that the difference in press coverage between the three missing Israeli youth and the two murdered Palestinian youth on Nakba day is startling in its uneven coverage.

I just thought I would mention that. Apparently, IMHO, Palestinians are worth nothing to the world.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/113464925#post2

Strange that not brining the three youths back is seen as a success.

Almost pitiful, really.

And if you get rid on one group another will take its place.

I do hope that the Israeli youth are found alive and well and return home.

Now on to your other nonsense.

You are a committed partisan, loyal to one side, and so cannot really hope to carry off the posture of affronted neutrality concerned only for the law and decency which you are trying to pull off. Your comments demonstrate this far more eloquently than any poor effort of mine could hope to achieve, so I shall simply leave you to your nakedness and move on....

I am committed to human rights where nobody is abused: Palestinian or Israeli. I am loyal to that Weltanschauung. There is also no "neutrality" any longer for anybody that can actually see, without a callous eye, the treatment that the Palestinians have been dealt at the hands of the Israeli government, IDF and *illegal Israeli Settlers. And to the contrary HOPE is very much in the forefront of my rational since hope is all that the Palestinians have right now. As to decency? Well, you have demonstrated a lack of it WRT your defamation of my character: portraying me as cold and indifferent to the rule of law and seeing justice served when that is not the case. A lack of evidence is not evidence.

I will add only this bit of repetition. You began this by saying something which was simply absurd, that Netanyahu had confessed in a statement that Israel's behavior in recent days had not been fully legitimate. He did no such thing. I suspect you really know he did no such thing, but could not resist the chance to be what in my day we used to call a wise-ass, and as I still tell my grandsons on occasion 'nobody likes a wise-ass, kid....'

Well, the title was Legitimacy crisis: Netanyahu acknowledges Israeli assault lacked legitimacy

So no, I never wrote confessed. That is your spin and misleading point. You were right in saying that "He did no such thing" since that is not what the article pointed out. Why you wish to change words hence the meaning is dubious...for a magistrate.

Speaking of being wise here is a little wisdom for you.

I'm not a robot. You're not a magistrate. You're an actor and a bad one at that.

Come back when you have an argument of substance.

[The Magistrate]

14. I Do Appreciate, Sir, Your Driving Home My Points For Me So Thoroughly

It lets me devote my attention to late night housework while you take care of demonstrating the onesidedness of your view and comments and sympathies.

"I'm going home now. Someone get me some frogs and some bourbon."

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

15. Thank you for ignoring the truth. Goodnight.