Go for it brothers and sisters ...

Alberr.........all I get is...

Works fine for me.

Gazans break through Rafah crossing
Palestinians used a bulldozer to destroy a border wall between the Gaza Strip and Egypt [Reuters]

Just minutes after a deadline passed for the border between Egypt to Gaza to be officially shut down, Palestinians have again broken through.

Palestinians broke another hole in the border fence with a bulldozer on Friday, and scores of trucks and pedestrians were seen entering into Egypt.

After the 3 pm (1300 GMT) deadline set for the closure, thousands of Gazans were still believed to be on the Egyptian side of the border in the town of Rafah.

The deadline was earlier announced over megaphones on Egyptian security vehicles driving around al-Arish and Egyptian Rafah.



Speaking from the Gaza side of the crossing, Al Jazeera's correspondent Jacky Rowland said the Rafah crossing is open to business.

"The crossing has become open again. Now the Egyptian police have pulled back and the crossing is open and operating again, people are continuing to go cross the border to buy household goods".

Egyptian security forces in full riot gear were deployed along the border in an attempt to prevent Palestinians crossing over to Egypt to stock up on supplies.

Egyptian troops, in green camouflage, bullet-proof vests and helmets and armed with clubs and plastic shields, formed human chains and rolled out barbed wire to prevent more Gazan's from entering Egypt.

At the same time, Gazans were allowed back into the Strip, witnesses said.

Al Jazeera's Amr El Kahky, on the Egyptian side of the Rahaf crossing said there has been no confrontation between the Egyptian and Palestinians.

"The rules of engagement say no engagement. You can't beat the Palestinians or engage with crossfire with them. Egyptians will not use gunfire to deter Palestinians from trying to cross.

Egypt says the borders will inevitably seal, whether today or a few days later".

Israel in the meantime is on high security alert.

David Chater in Jerusalem said the opening demonstrates that Hamas is in control of the border.

"This will add to the dismay amongst the Israeli security establishment. They know the open border mean Palestinian resistance groups can infiltrate their fighters into Egypt. Israel is on a major security alert".

Egypt's decision to re-close the border followed pressure from the United States and Israel.

Human Wall

Thousands of Palestinians, many of them carrying empty fuel canisters, managed to push through several openings despite the presence of the Egyptians deployed nine rows deep in some places.

At one point, guards aimed a water cannon above the heads of people, not at them, to keep them back. Cranes were positioned next to the border, lifting crates of supplies over into Gaza.

Egyptian forces took up positions a few steps into Palestinian territory, using shields to protect themselves from some Gazans who climbed atop car roofs and threw stones at them.

Violence erupted at the Rafah border after Cairo announced it would close the crossing between Gaza and Egypt.

Palestinians have been flocking into Egypt for three days for essential supplies following Israel's blockade of the Gaza Strip.

The Egyptian government took heavy criticism from the west over the border opening.

Earlier the US congress suspended $100 million of aid to Egypt due to the border breach.

Israel might see this as an opportunity to 'get rid' of its Gaza problem
From thursday's Independent.

Thanks Damon, that's a thought, Israeli tourists wandering around Sinai with hordes of terrorists manning the hot dog stands. Or is it just one of those Israeli scare-mongering announcements ... preparing public opinion for a pre-emptive strike to protect Israeli holidaymakers from being carried off on the back of mangy old camels?



Even more interesting ... the idea that Israel might give up its brutal control of Gaza ... mind boggling.
Where else could they test their new improved night sights from the US? Or test their US smart missiles? Or just plain test their disgusting special forces personnel in cold blooded assasinations? Where else could they humiliate and taunt Palestinian people trying to cross from one part of their country to another?
Can't see it myself ... seems like a bit of late diplomatic gobbledegook from an Israeli minister trying to divert attention from their latest act of aggression against the Palestinian people.

And for some completely indecipherable super bollox on this sujbect, how about this bit of incomprehensible doublespeak from Super Jesus himself,

... a better offer eh? Like giving them back their country? Oh ... don't tell me ... he didn't really mean anything like that ... did he?

Of course, if Hamas recognised the right of the state of Israel to exist and stopped attacking Israeli civilians, Israel might not want to isolate Gaza.
And how come, if the Israelis exercise 'brutal control' of Gaza, that its residents were able to elect a Hamas administration?
And how come the Israelis are solely responsible for the isolation of Gaza? I thought that it was an Egyptian barrier, contraolled by Egyptian security forces that the Palestinians tore down...






Depends what you mean by 'giving them back their country'; if it means a two-state solution with the potential to move towards peace and genuine coexistence, fine. But I don't think that is the sort of offer Hamas envisage.

Complete and utter bullshit.

Does Israel recognize the right of Palestine to exist, incidentally?

It might benefit you to look into the actual conditions Palestinians face every single day before you spout this kind of nonsense.

I wouldn't argue about the conditions the Palestinians face; they are appalling.
However, Hamas has consistently refused to recognise the state of Israel; Israel has recognised the PLO as a legitimate voice of the Palestinian people and negotiated with both Arafat and Abbas. It has also, to all intents and purposes, recognised the Palestinian Authority. And most mainstream Israeli politicians have accepted the desirability of the two state solution.
Hundreds (and on some estimates, thousands) of rocket attacks have been launched against Israel since it withdrew from Gaza.
Every time Israel has made some gesture or practical move towards peace with the Palestinians, attacks by militants (or terrorists, or freedom fighters or the resistance) have been stepped up.

That's alright then ...

Of course it's not alright; it's an absolute tragedy.
But pretending that Israel is the only guilty party flies in the face of all the evidence. The Palestinians have been persecuted by other Arab nations and let down and misled by some of their own leaders. And Palestinian organisations have committed atrocities against Israelis, just as Israeli forces have attacked Palestinians.
Those in Israel who seek a just peace with Palestine are not going to win the arguments they need to win whilst the rocket attacks and threats to Israel's existence continue. And the European Left is not helping the cause of real peace by taking a view of the conflcit that refuses to acknowledge the rights of both sides, and the wrongs both have committed.

You make assumptions comrade ... I have no idea who the 'European left' are ... and I doubt if they exist as a identifiable body or organisation. (Incidentally, why European? Why not South American left? Or Middle Eastern left? Or Asian left? Perhaps you intended to say 'International', we used to have one of them.)

That tiny group of Israelis who face up to the overhewlming 'Anti Arab' culture of their society must be admired.

If you choose to justify the use of criminal violence to murder, mutiliate and terrorise civiliation populations by quoting the criminal actions of some of those civilians then your justification is as immoral as those who claim that brutal oppresion of Palestinian civilians by Israel makes it ok to fire rockets back at Israeli civilians. What a merry-go-round of immorality. I lived through nearly thirty years of listening to these sort of justifications for terrorising civilians in my country.

Using violence against civilian populations is criminal and no amount of argument can justify it.

Israel is an aggressive, violent and dangerous state. Its stocks of weapons supplied by US donations threatens the peace and stability of its neigbouring states. A 'just' peace depends on an Israel willing to unravel all that has happened since 1948 and willing to seek a just acceptance for their permanent settlement in part of Palestine. It might take a Palestinian Nelson Mandela and Desmond Tutu to appear plus international isolation of Israel before that can even begin to look possible.

All the while the US donates so much of its taxpayers income to supply Israel's rulers with such devastating military superiority and all the while the UK and the US continue to support Israel almost unreservedly, whatever crimes it commits, then peace, just or otherwise, is unlikely.

Edited for typos and an omission ...

I should have said 'elements of the Left' and probably 'British Left', though I think that similar comments can be applied to Left opinion elsewhere in Europe, and perhaps elsewhere.



I think that it's debateable whether Israeli culture is 'Anti-Arab' as a whole; and those in Israel who accept the 'land for peace' argument certainly don't constitute a 'tiny' group.



I think both are wrong; however, to suggest, as many do, that all the fault lies on one side misses the point. The origins of the conflict stretch back over decades, and for most of that time substantial sections of Arab opinion have refused to accept Israel's right to exist, whilst backing their words up with violence. I'd love to see an Israeli government that did not carry out reprisals against attacks from the Palestinian side, but I'd be even more pleased to see one that didn't need to because the attacks had stopped. And I think Hamas is too committed to Israel's destruction and to violence for the latter scenario to be likely.
As a matter of interest, which is your country?




I have no argument with that whatsoever; and Israel has to an extent sought to avoid civilain casualties (the 'targetted assassinations' were not a tactic I agreed with, but did represent an attempt to eliminate those responsible for attacks that were invariably indiscriminate).
My main point, though, is that there tends to be more condemnation of Israel's actions than of the terrorists'.



If it is, it certainly isn't the only one in that region; and unlike its neighbours, it does not have a history of refusing to accept their existence. Moreover, (and this is the tragedy), it could have been very different if the Arab nations had not launched an invasionas soon as it was established, and then pursued its destruction over a period of more than fifty years.




Indeed; and it also requires the emergence of an Israeli leadership willing to to trust the Palestinians and to take risks. I have some optimism about Abbas. However, it seems to me that one of the fundamental problems is that Israeli intransigence is the result of a perception of threat that is based on fairly compelling evidence. When Israel's government pulled out of Gaza (demolishing settlements that its own citizens had built) the result was an increase in rocket attacks on Israeli civilians.
And I'd also say that whilst many on the Left would share your aspiration for 'a just acceptance for their permanent settlement in part of Palestine', you can hardly blame Israelis for noticing that others supporting the Palestinians (and some Palestinians themselves) don't accept that Israel should exist at all.



Probably true, however, the Israeli perception (and possibly the reality) is that without that military superiority, the Israeli people would be destroyed.
And from a historical perspective, the problem is largely the result of the dynamics of the Cold War; if the Soviet Union had not armed some of the Arab nations and if France, the US and the UK had not profited (financially and politically) from arms sales to Arab nations as well as Israel, the scale of the conflict would be much reduced, and the prospects for peace better.
If you go back to the Fifties, it wasn't a foregone conclusion that the US would back Israel rather than the Arabs (Nasser was at one stage considered to be the CIA's man). The tragedy of Israel and the Palestinians might have been averted if all international powers had observed a policy of non-intervention.
And perhaps, having made significant contribution to bringing a successful settlement to Ireland (given, of course, a willingness to compromise and seek peace on both sides), Blair is exactly the right person to be trying to achieve something similar in the Middle East.

Fraternal greetings.

… ‘elements of the left’ ‘elements of the British left’. No, I’m still not convinced that there is any evidence that such bodies or organisations exist as an entity that publishes anything at all. If they do, where do they publish their one sided condemnation of Israel’s crimes while ignoring the crimes of those who use violence against Israelis.
Have you ever considered that Palestinians may well feel that there are ‘elements of the right’ even ‘elements of the British right’ that publish one sided condemnations of Palestinians while constantly praising the state of Israel. Look in any national newspapers or watch any news programme of the US or the UK, perhaps elsewhere, and see the ease with which they condemn Palestinians and turn a blind eye to the crimes of Israel.

There is no left wing conspiracy to destroy Israel. It’s all in the mind comrade …




Yes it is debatable whether Israel culture is ‘Anti-Arab’ as a whole. And we are debating it. But the few Israelis who have spoken out against the inhuman treatment of Arabs at border crossings and the few who challenge the dehumanising propaganda against Arabs in the Israeli press have for years claimed that the state of Israel encourages an ‘anti Arab’ culture.
There are some different laws for Arabs in Israel. The first sign of a culture that encourages racist culture is to install laws that restrict a particular race.
Did you know that Arabs must not drive vehicles in some parts of Israel? That they cannot receive compensation if they suffer from terrorist attacks?
There are even segregated health services according to some Israeli doctors.
There are some discriminatory laws against Arab property ownership.
These examples demonstrate an ‘Anti Arab’ culture in my book.




Israel’s right to exist is to some extent a historical conundrum overcome by ‘squatters rights’. I might cling to the belief that their occupation of Palestine is immoral and wrong but where can I go from there? There are several million Jews living in Palestine and to forcibly remove them would be as great a crime against humanity as driving the 700,000 Palestinians out of their homes in 1948.
A Palestinian Nelson Mandela and Bishop Tutu seemed the appropriate models to me for people needed to lead the Palestinians to a peaceful conclusion and also allow Israel to remain on part of their land.
Despite the historical European invasion and occupation of their land and despite the despicable massacres and murders carried out by the apartheid regime, both against the native population and the populations of surrounding countries, Nelson and Tutu did not drive the minority white population from South Africa. But Mandela and Tutu wouldn’t have had a chance of putting their radical philosophy of ‘Truth and Reconciliation’ to the test if the rest of the world hadn’t stopped making apologies for apartheid and finally cut off the supply of arms and money.
This won’t happen in Palestine as long as Israel continues to use military reprisals against the Palestinians. It will continue to use military reprisals as long as it has an inexhaustible supply of arms and money from the US.
The reprisals have to be condemned by the rest of the world, not excused. The arms supply has to stop. Then the peace process might have a chance.




What is your country?




A ‘targeted assassination’ is a crime, in my opinion that is a simple fact. ‘Targeted assassination’ has no court of law, no charges made, no crime stated, no defence allowed, and no jury; just a non discriminatory piece of military hardware falling out of the sky, killing and maiming people within a certain radius.
What person or body of people decides who lives and who dies in these attacks? Does the Israel justice system even support the death penalty? Far from condemning Israel’s crimes in these so called ‘targeted assassinations’ there is little, if any, challenge to them, let alone ‘more condemnation’ as you claim. Certainly, Israel should be condemned for these crimes but it hardly ever gets even minimal criticism from the US or the UK governments.
In the eyes of the Palestinians they may think that Israel always gets away with it.




Israel has a bigger and more powerful military arsenal, including atomic weapons, than all of its neighbours put together. That is why it is dangerous.
A peaceful democratic process did not establish the Israel state; nor was it established with the agreement of the incumbents. The state of Israel was created with guns, bombs and the violent ethnic cleansing of Palestinian land. The Arabs tried to defend their people from an invasion and occupation that they considered wrong.
Didn’t the UK do that in the Falklands?
China has occupied Tibet for more than fifty years and most countries in the world do not support their right to be there and have sought to have that occupation destroyed.




Abbas, but not Fatah, is supported by Israel and of course, the US and the UK. Hamas say Abbas is only able to survive in the West Bank because of supportive Israeli incursions and the ‘targeted assassinations’ of Hamas supporters in the West Bank. It’s difficult to look at both sides of the argument isn’t it? Some of us regard Hamas and Fatah with equal dismay; only Israel benefits from their antagonism towards each other. So long as Israel benefits it will not change direction.

Incidentally, as you mention it, why did Israel destroy all those beautiful holiday chalets when they moved the illegals from Gaza? There are tens of thousands of homeless Palestinians, living in the most dire circumstances who could have benefited from moving into those homes. Why destroy them. Wasn’t that just spiteful? More of that ‘Anti Arab’ culture do you think?

There will always be people who will not accept that Israel has a right to exist at all. There will always be Israelis who will not accept that Palestine has a right to exist at all. After fifty years of violence, ethnic cleansing, murder and massacre these beliefs have grown deep roots.
There are several million people in the world who do not accept the continued British occupation of part of Ireland. But there is a, ‘sort of’ peace in the offing
It’s probably not too difficult to find the odd one or two Native Americans who do not accept the European and African occupation of their country. It is not acceptable to say the only good injun is a dead injun anymore and wagon trains can pass peacefully. No peace treaty there, just fantastic military superiority. Is that what Israel expects to happen in Palestine?

The world is full of injustice and the deep-rooted bitterness it causes. Israel has to accept its responsibility in causing injustice and then recognise that it needs a negotiated agreement with the Palestinians to define a permanent site for the Israeli State before any real prospect of a peaceful solution begins to appear. That will not be possible all the while they get all those billions of dollars of taxpayers money from the US.





I agree with your statement, “The tragedy of Israel and the Palestinians might have been averted if all international powers had observed a policy of non-intervention.”





When I see Blair walking down Baghdad High Street in sack cloth and ashes chanting “Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea culpa” then I might just allow a small measure of my charity to surface and postpone seeking a fatwa on the little rat.

There, I think I’ve responded to the main points, my apologies if I missed anything.

If you think that it's debatable whether Jewish Israeli culture is anti-arab as a whole, to me that shows how little you know about the whole situation. (The reason I specify "jewish" is that I want to acknowledge that there are non-jewish israelis who have just as much right to their homes as anyone else.)

No one is excusing violent attacks on anyone, but it's is my impression again and again that Israel actually welcomes, to some degree, attacks by Palestinians so they have an "excuse"--in their minds--to attack back--and far more harshly than has been done to them. I know the Holocaust was terrible beyond words, but that doesn't give you free reign to oppress anyone who you disagree with or who gets in your way for the rest of time (or ever, in fact.) A small part of my family narrowly survived the Armenian Genocide, and many more were slaughtered, but that doesn't mean I get to go around abusing, attacking, and assaulting Turks for the rest of my life, does it?

I wish the Palestinian violence would stop, but it in no way excuses the pervasive, soul-crushing, destruction of their lives, their culture, their livelihoods (what excuse is there for ripping up olive orchards that are hundreds of years old?) their families, and their homes as conducted by Israel?

And yes, those few Jewish Israelis who what spoken up against this have needed to be very, very brave in order to do so, and have suffered greatly. They are to be greatly admired for their courage and decency.

I agree with you here. While my ancestors didn't suffer genocide at the hands of the British, things weren't entirely comfortable. Even so, I resisted the urge to tweak Martyn's ear the first time I met him!

I noticed that restraint...

In fact, a better analogy on my part would be to say that I don't get to abuse, harass, and through out of their homes anyone who gets in my way and/or I decide I don't like.

I have seen a lot of literature and web content from the likes of the SWP, Respect, the Palestine Solidarity Campaign, and whilst it consistently condemns Israeli actions, there is little if any reference to attacks on Israeli civilians. Then there are comments ranging from Galloway’s ‘we are all Hizbollah now’ to Jenny Tonge’s expressions of sympathy for suicide bombers. In contrast, the pro-Palestinian Left (and I'm not 'anti-Palestinian') consistently ignores attacks such as the ones on Sderot, where an eight year old Israeli boy lost a leg to a rocket attack from Gaza a couple of weeks ago. If you can show me an example of the Left showing more balance, I'd be interested.

I didn't say that there was a conspiracy to destroy Israel; however, I think that there are some on the Left who want to see Israel cease to exist, and many more who fail to recognise that that agenda exists. And that is one reason why I think that the Left is contributing very little to the cause of peace.


I'm sure Palestinians would take exactly that view, and with some justification, although the British Right has often been rather ambivalent about Israel; the Far Right, of course, has always tended to side against Israel because of its anti-semitism, and there is a tradition of ‘Arabism’ within some sections of the British establishment that goes back to T.E. Lawrence and John Glubb and beyond.




I'm not going to defend everything Israel does; however I think that most of the discriminatory measures are a response to Arab attacks on Israelis. And it also has to be said that attacks by Arabs on Jews predated the foundation of the State of Israel, or any of the policies you identify as discriminatory or oppressive. The attacks in the early 1920s and the Palestine Revolt of 1936 led to hundreds of Jewish deaths. It was during that period that the Irgun, and similar organisations were founded - primarily to defend Jewish settlements. To consider the Israeli repression of Palestinians whilst ignoring the real threat that Palestinian action has posed to Israelis since before Israel actually came into existence shows a bias that cannot be justified. It also overlooks the fact that Arabs have equal citizenship rights under Israeli law, and whilst discrimination is always wrong, it is certainly not unique to Israel.



The Israeli Peace movement has been a consistent and important presence; at the time of Sabra and Chatila, it held demonstrations that mobilised a far greater percentage of the Israeli population than (for example) the proportion of the British population who marched against the War in Iraq. Gush Shalom has campaigned unswervingly for peace and is not insignificant as a political force in Israel. I do not understand what is to be gained by pretending that the internal opposition to Israel’s policy towards the Arabs is the preserve of ‘a few’, when there is clear evidence to the contrary.
In my experience, most Israelis want to live in peace with Arabs both in Israel and beyond; the essential problem is that they do not believe that desire is reciprocated.





This is the classic view that sees the Jewish settlement of Israel in the Twentieth Century as an act of colonisation; it ignores the fact that the land that is now Israel was a Jewish national homeland for many centuries 2000 years ago; the tendency of the Left to equate Israel with Apartheid South Africa or Ireland overlooks the reality that the Jewish people inhabited Palestine more than a thousand years before the Afrikaners or the Ulster Protestants colonised the countries that they now inhabit, and that their settlement predated that of the Palestinian Arabs by several hundred years; that there is an unbroken history of Jewish habitation of Palestine since the Roman Empire, with jewish immigration at various points in history dependent on events in Eurpe and the Middle East; that many of the Zionist settlers of the Twentieth Century actually bought the land they now occupy from Arab landowners; and that many others fled to Israel from Arab countries to escape persecution and murder. It also ignores the fact that many Arabs living in Palestine in 1948 had actually migrated there from elsewhere during the Twenties.
At the time of partition the areas of Palestine allotted to the jews had Jewish majorities (including Jerusalem, which had a Jewish majority in the late 19th century). The Jewish population of the mandate was about 1/3 of the total. Partition was supported by a majority of nations with only the British and the Arab states opposing it. The ‘violent ethnic cleansing’ of Palestinian land was part of a conflict in which both sides engaged in acts of brutality and violence and which stretched back to the First World War. Deir Yassin and the ethnic cleansing carried out by the Israelis are rightly condemned, but the fact that massacres of Jewish settlers had been taking place for twenty years previously, and that the Arab nations were committed to 'driving the Israelis into the sea' should also be acknowledged.


I agree that the reprisals should stop; however, I think that the rest of the World also has to condemn attacks on Israel. And, for what it’s worth, it also has to be said that Israel’s reprisals for attacks on its civilians predate funding from the US.
Supporters of the targeted assassinations’ would argue that they represent legitimate self-defence. The Hizbollah leader killed last week, Imad Mughniyeh, was widely held to be responsible for attacks on civilians in Argentina. If you are going to persuade the Israelis to stop the reprisals, you have to offer them an alternate means of defending their civilians or ensure that the attacks on Israeli citizens stop (clearly the latter option would be the better one). And whilst the US arms Israel, the weapons of Hamas and the Fatah militants don’t grow on trees.



England, though I try to think and act as an Internationalist. And incidentally, I only asked because of your reference to ‘my country’ in an earlier post (which did not specify the country in question).

Israel’s perception is that without its arsenal it would be destroyed; as for your description of the process that led to Israel’s foundation, I’m afraid that I think that it bears no relation to the reality of history. The Jewish population did not ‘invade’ Palestine. Most of them settled there over a period of thirty years, although even before that time, there was already a significant Jewish minority in Palestine. There was a degree of cooperation between Jews and Arabs in the Twenties and Thirties (the Arab population actually increased through immigration because of the economic growth that jewish settlement stimulated). And the partition of 1948 was supported by the US (under a Democrat President), the Soviet Union and most of the international community. Only Britain (and sadly, what I would consider in all other respects to be the finest ever government of this country behaved duplicitously and irresponsibly) and the Arab nations, several of which claimed the Palestinian territory themselves, opposed it. Israel’s right to exist was recognised by both the League of Nations and the UN.
Are you saying that the UK was right about the Falklands?
And I think that China’s occupation of Tibet is entirely different.



I don’t think that it’s impossible to look at both sides of an argument; in fact I think it’s essential to achieve peace. I’d like to see a strong, united Palestinian leadership that was committed to a two-state solution and to peace. Palestine needs a Gerry Adams, in my view.


There may have been an element of gratuitous destructiveness; however, there was also cooperation between the Israelis and Palestinians in the demolitions in Gaza; the Palestinian leadership wanted the homes destroyed because they did not consider them an efficient use of land.




I have always sympathised with Irish Nationalism (though not the methods of the IRA). From a historical point of view, the Jewish presence in Israel/Palestine probably predates the Kingdom of Ireland, so I would regard the Jewish state as the equivalent of the Irish Republic or a hypothetical native American state. And, no, that’s not what Israel expects or wants; I think most Israelis want a two-state solution, and accept Arab citizenship within Israel.
If descendants of the Irish diaspora began to settle in large numbers in the North of Ireland (perhaps in response to persecution in the countries in which they had been born) so that the Unionists became a minority in the Six Counties, wouldn't the rights of the Nationalists/Republicans to self-determination become more widely accepted?


I think that the lesson of Ireland is that a one-sided settlement will never work. Peace will only come if both sides move beyond blaming each other and start looking at how to stop the fighting and build something better.
Israel has shown itself willing to trade land for peace, but only from a position of security. Having spoken to many Israelis over the years, I think that the prevailing view is not hostility to the Arabs, but mistrust and a fundamental conviction that the Arabs are seeking Israel’s destruction.



And I would include the other Middle Eastern states in that.
I think you have to ask why in 1948, the establishment of Israel was seen as a victory for anti-imperialism and why the international Left supported it. Harry S. Truman was instrumental in Israel's foundation and JFK was the first US president to provide surface-to-air missiles to Israel. The history of the Middle East over the last half century was shaped by the Cold War - some have argued that the US would not have armed Israel to the same extent if it had not also been arming her Arab neighbours as well.
This may all seem to be of primarily academic and historical significance, but I want to see peace and justice in Palestine/Israel, and I think that the Left by assuming an anti-Israeli position is as guilty of failing to contribute to that as the Neo-Cons are in adopting the opposite stance.

Again, I can only say that whilst there is discrimination and racism within Israel (against some Jewish groups as well as Arabs), to say that Israeli culture is 'anti-Arab as a whole' contradicts the evidence I've seen - unless you define 'anti-arab' in such a way that almost every country on the planet comes to be seen as discriminating against its minority communities (which may actually be a reasonable point). And saying that if someone disagrees with you that shows that they don't understand shuts down any debate completely.
As for the Holocaust, of course it is central episode in Israel's history and one reason for the Israeli belief that a national homeland is so essential; however, Zionism predated the Holocaust by half a century and was in some ways a response to centuries of anti-semitism, which did not end with the Holocaust. And to say that Israel uses the Holocaust as some kind of justification for its policy towards the Arabs misses the point: it is the attacks on Jews in Palestine that began long before Israel was even established and which have continued on and off for eighty years that have shaped that policy.
So the analogy with the Armenian Genocide, which was also an appalling and tragic crime, isn't with attitudes to the Turks; if there is a parallel with Armenia, I'd suggest that it might be with the conflict with Azerbaijan over Nagorno-Karabakh, though I don't know enough about the history of that area to have an opinion on it, other than that it's another region where there has been violence and allegations of atrocities on both sides.

But Israel does use the Holocaust as a justification, just as they cry "anti-semitism" at every criticism.

And why isn't my opinion that you aren't fully aware of the extent of discrimination and anti-arab sentiment in Israel a valid one? I wish I could put it better, but time is short these days and it's my genuine belief. Certainly based on typical news coverage I don't think most people have any idea how bad things are for Palestinians.
The typical Israeli seems to view Palestinians as less than human and treat them worse than animals.

I don't care who started what anymore, either.

Israel has the power and they are abusing it, and then they make excuses for their brutality. They blame the victim over and over and over. Remember James Miller and Rachel Corrie? If they were this callous with these white westerners, how do you think they will be with a lowly arab?

And where did they expect the Arabs they displaced to go?

Of course, they need to defend themselves from children playing football.

I am sorry, but I don't come across references by Israeli politicians or the Israeli media to the holocaust in their approach to the Palestinian question (or indeed to anti-semitism) to any significant extent; their focus is on the situation now. Maybe you are judging them on what is said by American supporters of Israel in the USA? (And I know very little about that).



With all due respect, you have no idea of how much I know about Israel and the Palestinians - I don't know how much you know either. My point was that that sort of comment leads nowhere.
I do know that things are lousy for the Palestinians, and that innocent people are dying, and I find that desperately sad.



I think that each sides regards the other as untrustworthy, brutal and capable of acts of savage cruelty. The recent attacks of Gaza give Palestinians reason to believe that; the rocket attacks on Sderot and Ashkelon and the shootings tonight in Jerusalem are reasons for Israelis to hold the same view.
I think that a balanced view is essential to move things forward. And, incidentally, I think that Barak Obama seems to be putting forward a view of the situation in Israel-Palestine that I have a lot of sympathy with.


Fair enough; I believe that understanding the history is essential to dealing with the present.


If Israel has so much power, why have so many Israeli civilians lost their lives?
I genuinely don't believe that Israelis regard arabs as 'inferior', on the whole; but I do think that they regard them as potentially dangerous.



If you're referring to 1948, I don't think that they really thought about it; however, given that hundreds of thosuands of Jews were fleeing to Israel from Arab lands, I think they probably assumed that the Palestinian Arabs would be accommodated in those countries.

It doesn't take much searching to uncover the fact that Israelis have died at a fraction of the rate of Palestinians.

No one is more valuable than anyone else, but the Israelis are in power. It is their country. They get HUGE amounts of money from the US. Do you not think they have more power to make a difference?

And are you suggesting that expecting people to just up and get out of the way and move to another country because they were in the way of Jews who wanted to come to Israel is ok?

If so, why don't you go to another english speaking country, because I want to live in your house, and hey, they'll be room for you here because I'll be gone. Don't want to? Say your family and livelihood and culture is all there? Too bad, because what I want is more important.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3694350.stm

Here's just one report on casualties from the BBC. Conditions for the ordinary Palestinian have dramatically worsened since then.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7280026.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7191359.stm

There is an interesting book, a few years old now, called My Enemy, My self by a Jewish israeli who pretends to be a Palestinian. I know it's only one source, but read it and then tell me Israelis don't think Palestinians are subhuman.

You probably will, but that tells me more about your willingness to see and/or your judgment than anything else.

I agree entirely with that.


Yes, in one sense, the Israelis are more powerful than the Palestinians; however, they do not have sufficient power to stop terrorist attacks against their people within the current framework if the Palestinians continue to commit them. Israel was not forced to withdraw from Gaza; it did so as part of a peace process that has not been respected by the other side.
And you have to ask whether the pattern of attacks by Palestinian elements are not intended to provoke a more brutal response and to derail the peace process. That is exactly what happened in Northern Ireland.
The fact that the Palestinian extremists deliberately locate their bases in civilian population centres is also significant.



That's not actually what happened; Jewish immigration to Palestine in the Twenties and Thirties didn't displace anyone (in fact it led to an increase in Arab immigration). The Palestinian refugees were displaced because their representatives were attacking the Jewish settlers.

This is factually incorrect.

The Israeli 'Disengagement Plan' was unilateral and was not part of the peace process/road map in any way.

He's right JB. The Israeli's pulling out of Gaza had nothing to do with any peace process.
I walked back and forth between the Israeli/Gaza border at Erez and Gaza City in 2000.





That's a war zone now. Back then it seemed like a quiet(ish) back road. Very sandy if I remember right.
Plant covered sandunes is what I remenber.
The firing of rockets from Gaza into Israel was always going to end in a bloodbath.
The talk from Hamas, that they are defending themselves is bollocks.
Somewhat like the IRA's claims that their actions defended the Catholic population of Northen Ireland.

I agree with Maria (that Israel sucks) - but because of history, they are between a rock and a hard place.

Actually it isn't; it is however badly worded and open to misinterpretation.
I meant that the withdrawal from Gaza was part of a wider series of actions both unilateral and multilateral that have aimed at establishing peace, rather than a specific initiative (hence 'a' rather than 'the').
The actual point was that the withdrawal was voluntary.

Israel sucks for it's disproportunate use of force in Gaza. Outrageous.

This YouTube from a demonstration outside the Israeli embassy in London yesterday could just have easily been put in the ''Terrorism - why they're angry'' thread.

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=FME8U6mduwA

Notas:

(1) Hossam El-Hamalawy: "La resistencia en Egipto" http://www.nodo50.org/ceprid/spip.php?article265

Alberto Cruz is a journalist, political analyst and writer, specializing in international relations - albercruz@eresmas.com

Centro de Estudios Políticos para las Relaciones Internacionales y el Desarrollo (www.nodo50.org/ceprid)

The problem for Israel is that when it responds with less force (by targetting those who authorise attacks on Israelis civilians) it gets criticised for 'assassinations'.

How many of those who are protesting now protested about Hamas lobbing rockets into Israeli towns, or deciding not to renew the ceasefire?

There are, I understand from reading widely on the subject, a lot of Jews in Israel who do not support their government's position vis-a-vis Hamas/The Palestinians. They protest loudly at their governments actions at great personal risk to themselves.

The only personal contact I have with Jewish people is by talking with my brother, a convert to Judaism and his wife.

To avoid a complete breakdown of relations between my brother and myself I rarely if ever discuss Palestine with him. The last time I spoke to my sister in law, who is Jewish by birth, we discussed in some detail US foreign policy and began to address the question of how peace might prevail in the middle east between Israel and it's neighbours.

It became abundantly clear that in her opinion, and I strongly suspect in the opinion of a majority of American Jews, peace will only come to the middle east when all Arabs, not just Palestinians, but all Arabs no longer exist on the earth.
Since this is not going to happen in anybody's lifetime, the alternative must be a state of perpetual war in which Israel dominates the region on behalf of the United States and Palestinians must live their lives in an endless state of subordination and fear.

It may come as a surprise to learn, it did to me, that no Arab can be trusted and that allowing them any leeway in terms of concessions merely demonstrates to them that you are weak and thus easy prey.

There is also a strongly held belief amongst many Jews in Israel and the US that Palestinians are something slightly less than human, their ultimate goal and reason for living being the destruction of the state of Israel, which might have been a view once held by a tiny reactionary and militant minority but, thanks to years of Israeli intimidation and menace, is obviously now more widely held. Palestinians will achieve this end in numerous ways, not the least of which is by breeding themselves into a dominant majority.
It's something that simply cannot be allowed to happen.

It is therefore very easy, having reduced your enemy to the level of being sub human, to engage in a systematic removal of that enemy from the very face of the earth. Killing children becomes that little bit easier to stomach. After all if they are not killed now they will obviously grow up to become AK47 wielding militiamen or suicide bombers.

The extreme hard line zionists are in a win win situation. Defeat at the hands of Hamas would almost certainly result in increased military and financial assistance form the US as well as a serious discussion about surgical strikes using tactical nuclear weapons. In the event that they were dissuaded from this course they would be free to indulge their sado masochistic penchant for war indefinitely.

Victory over Hamas will lead simply to the emergence of further anti-Israeli Palestinian paramilitary organisations with a similar result.

The most powerful members of Israeli society, those that have the influence and the muscle, also have no interest in compromise and conciliation. A thousand crudely constructed rockets fired from Gaza might kill less than a handful of Israelis but they represent the kick at the shins of the prison guard by the prisoner lying beaten and bloodied on the prison cell floor and they legitimise the behaviour of the guard and his mates when they think nobody cares anyway. And that's as far as I'll go toward conceding that Hamas bears any responsibility for what is happening in Gaza tonight or tomorrow.

Of all the people of the world who have suffered at the hands of fellow humans in the most despicable and grotesque ways it beggars belief that some Jews would resort to this kind of behaviour in the early 21st century.

Whilst freely acknowledging the achievements of a select few brave, artistic, gifted and skilled individuals who through their work and deeds have brought their fellow earth dwellers immense pleasure I cannot help but conclude - and I've thought this for years and said so on more than one occasion on this forum and elsewhere - that Earth would be a far better place without Homo sapiens.

Probably none. Hamas is shite too. And it really depresses me when I hear spokespeople who claim to speak for Palestinians, going on about ''the right to self defence''. Suicide vests and these crude rockets bring nothing to this situation but death and myth making machismo (and actually lets Israel off the hook).

Better shell the area and if a few kiddies get wasted all the better for the future of Israel.

Note that they came under fire. Not that anybody was killed by Hamas snipers.



What are the implications of this statement?

Worst case scenario - if you're associated with Hamas in any way - Israel is going to kill you. Man, woman, child, it doesn't matter. You have to die so that Israel can be safe.

Have I got this completely wrong?

Work fatah into it.

Until very recently I think Fatah were content to let Israel do their thing at the expense of Hamas.

I imagine they're thinking a little differently now.

That's a completely uninformed off the cuff view, BTW.

But it works Fatah in. Perhaps there are well informed members of the forum able to put me right on this?

In the meantime...



At least one National leader has some balls...



My most recent thought on this awful mess; I'm sick to my stomach that I'm unable to express my outrage at this genocidal behaviour without being accused of anti semitism.

I'm an Obama supporting left wing socialist leaning toward communism yet the US congress decision to endorse Israel's actions instead of condemning them leaves me feeling that the uber cynics who maintain that Obama will essentially display no discernible difference from every US President that has gone before, may have a point. (See also the reversal of opinion vis a vis the appointemnt of Burris to the Senate)

We should demand a cease fire now ... btw can I remind people that a cease fire means BOTH sides stop firing ... from his posts above Martyn appears to think that Isreal should stop but Hammas can keep firing

I think what many people fail to see that actually this war is exactly what Hamas want.

I can't watch the news any more, it's just too sad. Imagine being trapped in Gaza with your kids and being bombed like that with nowhere to run.

This isn't war, this is a crime. And I'm sure there are plenty of shit stirrers in the Palestinian camp who are overjoyed at the prospect of so many more bitter and angry young palestinians.

After all Israels military efforts over the past century... I feel a dr. Phil moment coming on: 'how is that working for you?' You'd think they'd be up for trying something else, like talking peace....

As do the Israeli Zionists.

From what I've been reading I gather that many Israelis are angry at their own administration for repeatedly stepping up attacks on Gaza - prior to this invasion - each time the pitiful home made mortar and rocket firings dwindled to almost nothing.

For Israel it was essential that Hamas and the Palestinians were seen as the terrorists in this vile affair.

I have grown up listening to white westerners - people who look and sound just like me - explaining that Arabs can't be trusted, that they would kill their own granny for a ciggy. They are, after all, a bunch of filthy wogs.

Now here we are in the 21st century and Arabs are being portrayed in just the same foul, inexcusable way.

It stems, I imagine, from centuries of European armies marching into Arab countries - mainly Palestine - and killing lots of Arabs so as to secure the area for Christ. I suspect that at the time Arabs didn't like people from England, France and Germany wandering all over their desserts and oases killing them because they weren't christian.

The US and the British, anti Semitic almost to a man, were only too happy to capitulate to the Zionist terrorists and facilitate the birth of Israel. Another opportunity, thought Washington and London, to let the Arabs know who was boss in the world and at the same time create a place for all the Jews to go so that they wouldn't keep trying to join the Golf and Country clubs at home.

I did fail to see that Hamas wants the war. I probably don't now. I think that, like my parents and grandparents, I have been worn down by decades of US and, I was going to say Israeli but I mean Zionist propaganda, that we're still believing everything the Israeli leaders trot out, that we must accept without question that everything any Arab says or does in relation to Israel is by definition evil and represents a desire to see the country destroyed. Since nobody, least of all the US and Israel, is truly, genuinely, sincerely willing to talk to any Palestinians about anything other than getting them to admit that they are the agrressor and not the victim, it's unlikely that they will ever do what the Israeli administration wants which is to lie down and die.

I think what most people don't realise is that for over 60 years Palestinians have been trying to simply live, work and raise their families in Palestine in the face of a policy of ethnic cleansing, the roots of which can be traced back to the last 40 years of the 19th century.



Simply looking back at recent history, most of which is completely new to me, leaves me wondering why I should continue to believe that a rag-tag bunch of poorly funded, ill equipped palestinian men and boys can possibly pose a threat to the - so I'm led to believe - 4th most powerful military force on earth.

I've just been reading Chris Hedges, he makes this point...

QUOTE

It comes from that period before Hamas assumed power, and after because, what did Hamas do when they assumed power?





They started acting like Saddam Hussein. They rounded up especially Fatah officials - especially senior security officials and executed them, they took over the Judiciary. They fired all sorts of civil service people.





They unleashed a sort of Taliban like oppression within Gaza, which still remains predominantly a secular culture. And you're right, that after they took power, their popularity or their approval ratings plummeted and I would say that before this invasion - you know, I'm guessing, but 80 or 90% of most Palestinians and Gazans hated Hamas, and longed for return to normalcy. What happens now, I don't know. And I think this was a terrible miscalculation on the part of Israel

He goes on, sparing nobody in his indictment and condemnation of the most appalling behaviour...





Enough Israeli's are sickened by the years of lies and distortion that their voices cannot be ignored no matter how much Ehud Barak and his terrorist buddies try to silence them.

You probably know all this anyway Rob, but it's news to me because the "news" here isn't really news it's "ignore" and "pretend it's not happening".

So, let's see...

In two days I've come to understand that Hamas, whilst on the one hand were responsible for keeping Palestinians alive in Gaza with their charity food, education and medical supplies were also tolerated and actively encouraged, if not funded, by Israel because they were a thorn in the side of Fatah and Yasser Arafat. Once elected Hamas almost instantly frittered away their political capital with Palestinians and would have been easy prey for a concerted diplomatic effort by Israel and any interested party.

Israel however, decides to resort to the tried and consistently failed method of total war which will have the effect of bolstering support for Hamas. Or any other bunch of anti Israeli palestinian freedom fighters that crop up.

And in the course of responding to one line I've found out more about the complete untrustworthyness of Zionist Israelis than I ever thought possible and am even more pro palestinian than I was two hours ago.

Having said that my admiration - such as it was - for Hamas is diminsished to the point negligibility and my sorrow for the ordinary Palestinians going through a hell that cannot be imagined by people who've never been attacked by tanks, F16s and Apache gunships, swells a thousandfold.

Just back from the London protest. It was a big turnout from what I could see - a bit of trouble near the Israeli embassy where it just came to a grinding halt for ages. The police really make you not want to defy them too much, (they will hurt you), so I think it was just shoes and flimsy placard sticks being thrown.
Was a bit disappointed with the diversity of the marchers (sorry but I can't help it) - from what I could tell just by observing, it was basicly muslims and white liberals.

hooray for shay

oh damon, you are such a laugh.

My thoughts exactly. It's all so so sad. FWIW: there has only been an unofficial protest over here so far which consisted of young muslim men shouting: "hamas hamas, joden aan het gas". They make me so angry.

and still it goes on......

I've just been to a meeting with my local M.P and he basically said the attrocities will stop when HAMAS stop firing rockets. Let's just say the Chair had to call order!

Jeremy Corbyn told of how a grandfather called all his family into the front room, thinking they would be safe there and a bomb came through the ceiling and wiped out the entire family.

He was on the phone to one of his friends who was out in the street running when shells came and killed two people near him.

Meanwhile, local M.P is bleating on about how he c'ant possibly support economic sanctions against Israel.

I also wonder why Bush and Co were so very quick to send in troops to Iraq and yet, Palestine has basically been left with no support atall. I also wonder why the fuck Israel are getting away with flouting International Law and how the law of "reasonable response" doesn't appear to apply to them. Of course, I know these questions and I am just so fucking dam angry about what's going on.

Did people know they can email their local mps about what's going on? Heres the link

I've merged two threads on Palestine/Gaza

Ditto, but it's a card the Israelis have been playing for decades. Anti-Zionist and ant-genocide is NOT anti-Semitism.

That I spoke of this 18 months ago I know means nothing on here. Leontien, nevski, Jon? It's all the same same to them.

....... But if a person was ever to actually give this radio programme about a neighbourhood in Amsterdam a listen, they might think that nevski wasn't much better than a heckler.
''Gas the Jews'' shouted ignorant minorities from in The Netherlands?
I tried my best to talk about and bring up this stuff, while Leontien and nevski just got abusivly personal.

Agree.

more fucking bleating.

you fucking baby.