Editore"s Note
Tilting at Windmills

Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

May 31, 2010

ISRAEL FIRES ON GAZA AID FLOTILLA.... In a development that is as stunning as it is tragic, this actually happened this morning.

At least 10 pro-Palestinian activists were killed and dozens were wounded aboard an aid flotilla bound for the Gaza Strip when Israeli naval commandos seized control of the boats early Monday, the Israeli army said.

Some Israeli, Turkish and Arab media outlets put the death toll as high as 20 activists. The wounded were evacuated to Israeli hospitals and the ships were being led into Israel's Ashdod port, where the passengers and aid supplies are to be unloaded and screened. More than four naval personnel were also injured. [...]

Some in Israel, before the raid and after, questioned the wisdom of Israel trying to take the ships by force. Past flotillas either reached Gaza or were diverted to Israel peacefully.

There are, not surprisingly, competing versions of exactly what transpired, and Israeli officials not only defended the existing blockade policy, but said Israeli forces faced resistance on the ships. Every claim has a counter-claim, of course, and those condemning the violent raid this morning insist Israeli forces attacked peaceful civilians, including a flotilla carrying a Nobel Peace Prize laureate and 85-year-old Holocaust survivor.

Either way, as the AP noted, the pre-dawn violence has "set off worldwide condemnation and a diplomatic crisis."

This much is clearly true. The ship was unofficially sponsored by Turkey, which has long been a key Israeli ally in the regional, and which recalled its ambassador to Israel this morning in the wake of the incident. The United Nations, among others, is demanding a detailed Israeli explanation.

The White House issued a written statement, noting that the United States "deeply regrets" the loss of life and injuries, and was gathering information to understand exactly what transpired in this "tragedy."

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is scheduled to visit the White House tomorrow, but whether that meeting will still occur is unclear.

Update: I just learned that Netanyahu will tend to this crisis, and not travel to D.C. tomorrow.

Steve Benen 10:00 AM Permalink | Trackbacks | Comments (48)

Bookmark and Share
 
Comments

more Israeli imperialism... shameful!

Posted by: wilson46201 on May 31, 2010 at 10:05 AM | PERMALINK

". . .Israeli officials not only defended the existing blockade policy, but said Israeli forces faced resistance on the ships."

How many Israelis died?

Posted by: Jose Padilla on May 31, 2010 at 10:06 AM | PERMALINK

What is abundantly clear is that these ships were in INTERNATIONAL waters.

Which makes the Israeli attack piracy. Clearly and indubitably.

Posted by: an old guy on May 31, 2010 at 10:08 AM | PERMALINK

At least one report I heard this morning said it took place in international waters.

It was also interesting to hear the NPR hourly news change from say an Al Jezera (sp) on one of the boats reported the Israeli's fired first, to later just reporting the Israeli's claim they were fired upon first.

This is going to be a lovely spin cast.

Posted by: martin on May 31, 2010 at 10:11 AM | PERMALINK

Update: I just learned that Netanyahu will tend to this crisis, and not travel to D.C. tomorrow.

How convenient. Wasn't he coming here to condemn the UN for asking Israel to reveal it's nuclear weapons program?

Posted by: martin on May 31, 2010 at 10:19 AM | PERMALINK

If the Palestinians had any brains, instead of just rage, this incident would mark the beginning of a brand new campaign for Palestinian independence.

The campaign of violence against Israeli civilians ha been worse than useless -- it has given Israel and the rest of the world an excuse to continue the oppression of the Palestinians. Instead, the Palestinians need to take a page from India's successful revolution and begin a Satyagraha -- a campaign of non-violent resistance.

Instead of sneaking food and medicine into the Gaza ghetto (I use that word deliberately) through tunnels under that Egyptian border, the Palestinians should march across the border to pick up supplies the way Gandhi's supporters marched to the salt works in Dharasana. Let the would-be suicide bomber become martyrs. Have them strip down to loincloths to show the assembled media that they carry no weapons and let the media film them being beaten and shot by Israeli border guards. And let the supplies in Egypt be inspected beforehand to show that they contain no weapons.

Israel depends on the good will of the West. Images of Israeli brutality and oppression shown night after night will erode that good will.

Now the only question is, is there a Palestinian leader with any brains?

Posted by: SteveT on May 31, 2010 at 10:21 AM | PERMALINK

Will we get another whitewash, as happened when the IDF attacked the USS Liberty in 1967?

Posted by: DocAmazing on May 31, 2010 at 10:21 AM | PERMALINK

Again Israel shows its true colors. This clearly shows how brutal and violent this government really is. Predawn raids in International waters on ships carrying members of German parliament, Nobel Laureates, women, children and elderly. Clearly they have overwhelming firepower which they used against civilians. This madness must be solidly condemned by the world. Israel must be isolated and brought to justice.

Posted by: Christine Busch-Nema on May 31, 2010 at 10:34 AM | PERMALINK

The Guardian has reported 19 deaths from the assault by the Isrealis. They are, also, reporting the falsehoods of the Isreali claims that legitimate aid is being passed through to Gaza. Just love the PR from AIPAC about protestors lining up to protest in Turkey, prior to the attack.

Posted by: berttheclock on May 31, 2010 at 10:37 AM | PERMALINK

Informed Comment by Juan Cole has this front and center, this AM.

Posted by: berttheclock on May 31, 2010 at 10:40 AM | PERMALINK

First, I assume this took place in international waters. Second, why was it necessary to board the vessel with a gang of heavily armed yahoos ? Third, we all know that Israel has a permanent Get out of Jail Free card, thanks to the White House and Congress, so it's clear that no one will ever call the criminals in the Israeli out over this. There'll be much hand wringing, and then these victims will be added to Israel's revenge on the world list. Full Stop.

Posted by: rbe1 on May 31, 2010 at 10:43 AM | PERMALINK

Much as I'd love to condemn Israel for this, and as much as I'd like to say this is an overreaction on Israel's part, I'm not living in a country with neighbors that shoot rockets across the border on a regular basis.

The situation in Gaza is ridiculous, and it's largely Israel's fault. But I have a hard time condemning a country for defending its border against people who have long ago given up on non-violent protests. Not that I blame those people much, either.

I'd wish a pox on both their houses, but it's already there.

Posted by: jon on May 31, 2010 at 10:49 AM | PERMALINK

Just Nuke that fucking country.

Posted by: cwolf on May 31, 2010 at 10:52 AM | PERMALINK

The early reports said this was a night attack eighty miles offshore. Unless, the Isrealis have an Eighty One Mile limit, it was, definitely, in international waters.

Posted by: berttheclock on May 31, 2010 at 10:55 AM | PERMALINK

Don't worry. America will stand by Israel.

Posted by: Colin Laney on May 31, 2010 at 11:07 AM | PERMALINK

--"Now the only question is, is there a Palestinian leader with any brains?"

He/She was killed by IDF forces in 1967, and again in 1984 and again in 1998 and again in 2006

AIPAC... keep the campaign donations flowing to the US congress and Israel will do whatever it wants.

Note: Pubic campaign finance is all the AIPAC fears. Therefore it won't happen!

Posted by: Buford on May 31, 2010 at 11:09 AM | PERMALINK

Can we start asking every Jew/Jewish organization to formally condemn violence against innocents now, or is it still just Muslims who have to do that?

Posted by: HY on May 31, 2010 at 11:18 AM | PERMALINK

Now would be a good day for some reporters to start asking Republican leaders whether they favor cutting off US aid to Israel. We should leave charity to private organizations and individuals rather than have the government use our tax dollars, isn't that the Republican philosophy?

Posted by: Shalimar on May 31, 2010 at 11:20 AM | PERMALINK

Peaceful resistence would be the best response. Dare the Israelies to fire on clearly unarmed relief workers in front of the world.

What is it going to take before the Palestinians realize that a non-violent campaign will work. Violence only plays into the Israeli hands. The crazies on the Israeli right will fold under real international pressure and that can only be achieved by non-violent means.

It is time the world ended all this violence.

Posted by: Ron Byers on May 31, 2010 at 11:23 AM | PERMALINK

Business as usual. Will Obama continue this trend:

1972 - The USA vetoes a United Nations resolution condemning Israeli air raids by Phantoms and Skyhawks on Lebanon and Syria. In al-Hama, a suburb of Damascus, houses are bombed indiscriminately and people are machine gunned as they run for cover. Up to 500 Lebanese and Syrian civilians are killed in the air attacks.
1973 - The USA vetoes a United Nations resolution affirming the rights of Palestinians and calling on Israel to withdraw from occupied territories.
1976 - The USA vetoes four separate United Nations resolutions. The first condemns Israeli attacks against Lebanese civilians. The second condemns Israel for building settlements in the occupied territories. The third calls for self-determination for the Palestinians. The fourth affirms Palestinian rights.
1978 - The USA votes against two United Nations resolutions. The first criticizing the living conditions of the Palestinians (110 to 2 with Israel). The second condemning the Israeli human rights record in occupied territories (97 to 3 Israel & UK).
1979 - The USA votes against five United Nations resolutions concerning Israel. The first calls for the return of all inhabitants expelled by Israel (121 to 3: the three are USA, Israel and Australia). The second demands that Israel desist from human rights violations (111 to 2 w/Israel). The third is a request for a report on the living conditions of Palestinians in occupied Arab countries (120 to 2 w/Israel). The fourth offers assistance to the Palestinian people (112 to 3: the three are USA, Israel and Canada). The fifth discusses sovereignty over national resources in occupied Arab territories (118 to 2 w/Israel).
1980 - The USA votes against six United Nations resolutions concerning Israel and the Palestinians: The first requests Israel to return displaced persons (the vote is 96 to 3 with Canada being the third country). The second condemns Israeli policy regarding the living conditions of the Palestinian people (118 to 2). Three resolutions condemn Israeli human rights practices in occupied territories (votes: 118 to 2; 119 to 2; 117 to 2). The sixth endorses self-determination for the Palestinians (120 to 3 with Israel and Australia).
1981 - the USA votes against an astonishing 18 United Nations resolutions concerning Israel, including a demand that Israel cease excavations in areas of East Jerusalem considered by the United Nations to be part of the occupied territories. The vote is 114 to 2. Condemns Israel for bombing Iraqi nuclear installations (108 to 2). Two resolutions condemning Israeli policy regarding living conditions of the Palestinian people (109 to 2 and 111 to 2). To establish a nuclear weapon free zone in the Middle East (107 to 2). Demanding that Israel renounce possession of nuclear weapons (101 to 2). Two resolutions attempting to establish rights for the Palestinian people. The votes are 121 to 2, 119 to 3 (with Canada). To clarify the status of Jerusalem (139 to 2). Discusses Palestinian refugees in the Gaza Strip (141 to 2). Rights of displaced Palestinians to return to their homes (121 to 3 with Canada). Concerning revenues from Palestinian refugees' properties (117 to 2). Establishment of the University of Jerusalem for Palestinian refugees (119 to 2). Concerning Israeli human rights violations in occupied territories (111 to 2). Condemning Israel closing of universities in occupied territories (114 to 2) Opposes Israel's decision to build a canal linking the Dead Sea and the Mediterranean Sea. Concerning sovereignty over national resources in occupied Palestine and other Arab territories (115 to 2). Affirming the non-applicability of Israeli law over the occupied Golan Heights (121 to 2).
1982/1983 - Israel illegally invades the nation of Lebanon, leading to the deaths of tens of thousands of civilians, as well as the total destruction of the civilian infrastructure. The United Nations General Assembly condemns the massacre and declares it to be an act of genocide. The vote is 147 to 2 (Israel and the USA). An Israeli soldier shoots 11 Muslims worshipping on the Haram-Al-Sharif in East Jerusalem. The USA vetoes a United Nations resolution condemning the shooting. Another resolution calling for Israel to withdraw from the Golan Heights (occupied in 1967) is also vetoed by the USA. Between 1982 and 1983, six separate United Nations resolutions condemning the Israeli invasion of Lebanon are vetoed by the USA. In addition, the USA refuses to invoke its own laws prohibiting Israeli use of American weapons except in self-defense.
1984 - The USA votes against numerous United Nations resolutions: Cooperation between the United Nations and the League of Arab States (voted by 134 to 2 with Israel); Condemns Israeli attack against Iraqi nuclear installation (106 to 2); On the elimination of racial discrimination (145 to 1); Affirming the rights of the Palestinian people (127 to 2); Convening a Middle East peace conference (121 to 3 including Canada); Prohibition of new types of weapons of mass destruction (125 to 1); Prohibition of chemical and bacteriological weapons (84 to 1); Law of the sea (138 to 2); Israeli human rights violations in occupied territories (120 to 2); Condemns assassination attempts against Palestinian mayors (143 to 2).
1985 - The USA vetoes two separate United Nations resolutions condemning Israeli actions in Lebanon and the use of excessive force in the occupied territories.
1987 - The USA vetoes two United Nations resolutions. One condemning Israeli actions against civilians in Lebanon and the other calling on Israel to respect Muslim holy places.
1988 - the USA vetoes three United Nations resolutions condemning Israeli actions in Lebanon and urging a complete withdrawal of Israeli forces from Lebanon. Between 1983 and 1987, Israeli forces have killed over 50,000 people in Lebanon.
1988 - The USA vetoes two separate United Nations resolutions condemning Israeli practices against Palestinians in the occupied territories.
1989 - three more similar resolutions are vetoed by the USA. The PLO wishes to appeal to the General Assembly of the United Nations but the leader, Yasser Arafat is refused a visa by the USA despite being recognized by over 60 countries. The Assembly meeting is moved to Geneva (Switzerland).
1990 - In Israel, troops open fire on Palestinian demonstrators in Jerusalem killing 21 and injuring 150. An Israeli soldier shoots and kills 7 laborers at Oyon Qara; 13 Palestinians are killed while demonstrating against the killings. The USA vetoes a United Nations resolution to send three Security Council observers into the area.
1995 - The USA vetoes a United Nations resolution confirming that the expropriation of land by Israel in East Jerusalem is invalid and in violation of United Nations resolutions and the Geneva Convention.
1997 - The USA votes against two United Nations resolutions that call on Israel to cease construction of settlements in East Jerusalem and the other occupied territories. One of the votes was by 130 to 2 (USA and Israel).
2001 - On 28th March the USA vetoes a United Nations resolution calling for the deployment of unarmed monitors to the Israeli-occupied West Bank and Gaza Strip. This is the 73rd use of the veto in the United Nations by the USA since 1945. The vast majority of USA vetos were cast in support of Israel and South Africa during the apartheid era, and defending USA actions in Central America. Most of the vetos violate the spirit of United Nations Charter, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Geneva Conventions, and other documents describing basic human rights and humanitarian standards. In December the USA vetoes a United Nations Security Council Resolution condemning Israel for acts of terror against civilians in the occupied territories.
2002 - Iain Hook, a 54-year-old United Nations relief worker is shot by an Israeli soldier in a clearly marked United Nations compound in Jenin. Israeli soldiers stop the ambulance sent to attend to the injured worker. The USA vetoes a United Nations resolution condemning the killing and the destruction of a warehouse belonging to the World Food Programme.
2003 - the USA vetos a United Nations resolution condemning the continued building of a fence by Israel on Palestinian land. Condemns a decision by the Israeli parliament to "remove" the elected Palestinian president, Yasser Arafat.
2004 - Condemns the assassination of Hamas leader, Sheik Ahmad Yassin. Condemns the Israeli incursion and killings in Gaza.
2006 - Calls for an end to Israeli military incursions and attacks on Gaza.

etc.

Posted by: tommybones on May 31, 2010 at 11:26 AM | PERMALINK

Peaceful resistence would be the best response. Dare the Israelies to fire on clearly unarmed relief workers in front of the world.


I wish I could believe that, Ron, but non-violence only works against an adversary that has a conscience at the center of their moral core. Gandhi was successful against the British empire because the Brits retained a shred of humanity and conscience. Against the Third Reich, his tactics would have failed. It pains me to say it but Israel today, as evidenced by their actions this morning, show that the Israeli government has no conscience, no respect for humanity outside their own ethnic group.

Posted by: on May 31, 2010 at 11:33 AM | PERMALINK

The United States government holds equal responsibility for this criminal act, as does the ignorant and apathetic American population, who rally against wasteful spending when it goes to teachers and firemen, but remain silent as we fund the criminal conspiracy known as the State of Israel.

Posted by: tommybones on May 31, 2010 at 11:36 AM | PERMALINK

The audience for the peaceful resistence wouldn't be the criminals running Israel. The audience would be the rest of the world, especially America. Without American support, Israel would knuckle under in zero flat. The only think keeping Israel from becoming a peaceful nation is the United States Congress. Give congressmen something to fear when they support the far right in Israel and we will see peace within months.

Violence on Israel props up American support. It benefits the war faction in Israel as much as it hurts the Palestinians. Peaceful resistance will show the rest of the world just who is leading Israel.

Posted by: Ron Byers on May 31, 2010 at 11:45 AM | PERMALINK

Sydney Morning Herald (smh.com.au) has death toll up to 19.

Posted by: jhill on May 31, 2010 at 12:13 PM | PERMALINK

I had an Israeli friend back in grad school who had been in the unit that liberated the Wailing Wall in 1967. He told me that as they gathered there and prayed, his commander prayed "God, help us, we won."

What has happened since 1967 is proof that Napoleon was right when he said the most dangerous time was when victory was attained - the same problem we have had since 1991.

Sadly, the Jewish Nazis now running Israel have destroyed all morality that was ever associated with Zionism, turning it into an aggressive, racist force, and the fascism that formed the basis of the organization of what became the Likud is now dominant.

The Israelis need to be reined in, and the best way to do it would be to cut off their American welfare check. Cutting off the money is a message those people would definitely understand.

Posted by: TCinLA on May 31, 2010 at 12:18 PM | PERMALINK

I am sure that the US Navy would have handled this with nonlethal weapons. The Israeli state of mind is in a very strange, sad place these days.

I really wonder whether Obama can afford to see Netanyahu when he does show up.

Posted by: bob h on May 31, 2010 at 12:19 PM | PERMALINK

I don't think Israel would collapse without US aid. Israel would have a harder time, but it's difficult to see a scenario in which Israel would stop being Israel. They're just not going to go away with or without our assistance.

Israel, like South Korea, Germany, Japan, and many others, is perfectly capable of blowing lots of its enemies into very small bits. Our military aid helps them in this endeavor, but it is largely to help our own industries. Whether that money can be better spent is one question, but whether that money is what's keeping Israel in existence isn't a question at all: Israel still exists because Israelis continue to make it exist.

As for peaceful resistance, that's a good way to get shot by your own people. Just ask Yitzhak Rabin after you interview the leaders of the moderate Palestinian parties.

Posted by: jon on May 31, 2010 at 12:26 PM | PERMALINK

Not only does SteveT's comment betray an ignorance of the history of this conflict, as evidenced nicely by the list of assassination dates posted by Buford, but he presumes both that the American media would show these images, which they would not, and that they would shock the American conscience, which is highly debatable, and that the shock to the American conscience would compel a lasting change in American foreign policy, which is difficult to imagine.

I won't argue that the Palestinians are misplaying their hand, but that doesn't change the fact that they've been dealt a really crappy one.

Posted by: dob on May 31, 2010 at 12:30 PM | PERMALINK

Killing innocent/unarmed people on the high seas is a criminal act, and should be punished accordingly.
The sympathy the Jews once enjoyed shortly after WW2
is waining, and the fanatical Zionists are no better than the fanatical Muslims. Keep in mind it happened in international waters!! If the UN has any self-respect it should condemn this murderous action.

Posted by: joop on May 31, 2010 at 12:34 PM | PERMALINK

TommyBones - thank you for the extensive list of U.N. Resolutions that the U.S. has vetoed. And Joop - I have no doubt that the U.N. will condemn this action. I also have no doubt that the U.S. would veto any U.N. resolution regarding it. And no doubt we can look forward to hearing from our esteemed Congressmen and Senators, on both sides of the aisles, condemnation of the peace activists on the flotilla. There will be absolutely no peace in the Middle-East unless the U.S. stops defending Israel and demands accountability. I expect that to happen when hell freezes over.

Posted by: winddancer on May 31, 2010 at 12:56 PM | PERMALINK

The reason for the violence is that the Israelis thought that the people onboard would actually be peaceful. They refrained from dropping teargas or smoke onto the ship and when the troops landed armed with paint ball guns they were mobbed and only then did they use sidearms to defend themselves.

Hopefully the Israelis videotaped all this so that the truth will be known.

Posted by: Mark F on May 31, 2010 at 1:12 PM | PERMALINK

"If the Palestinians had any brains, instead of just rage"

Why would anyone begin an argument for non-violence with an insult on a people?

An inspired and brilliant non-violence movement, led by a leader on the level of Gandhi or King, might actually work. Leading such a movement would require a leader who can talk his people down from violence.

It would take a charismatic moral genius. If we are very lucky one might come on the scene.

Hezbollah and Hamas are pretty dedicated groups. Imagine persuading them to stand down. Could even Gandhi or a King come into this situation this far developed? Both of those leaders preached non-violence to movements that had not yet committed themselves to violence.

Posted by: tomtom on May 31, 2010 at 1:17 PM | PERMALINK

Without attempting to respond to the various comments to which I disagree, I just wanted to point out that the title of the post seems to imply that Israel's navy opened fire upon the flotilla with its ships. Since the incident involved small arms with commandos during a boarding action, I think that the title is misleading. How about "Israel Raids Gaza aid Flotilla" or "Israeli Commadoes Open Fire in Gaza Flotilla Boarding"

Posted by: Adiv on May 31, 2010 at 1:18 PM | PERMALINK

Mark F - and just where are you getting this information that the Israeli commandos were armed with only paintball guns and side-arms? Sorry, but I've seen some of the video taken on board during the raid, and those commandos were carrying full armament.

Posted by: winddancer on May 31, 2010 at 1:38 PM | PERMALINK

Israel has the best example it its biggest supporter, Imperialism is king!

As you sew..

Posted by: Trollop on May 31, 2010 at 1:51 PM | PERMALINK

Oops, "in"

Posted by: Tori's Spelling on May 31, 2010 at 1:52 PM | PERMALINK

winddancer: Here's one spot: http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3896796,00.html

Lacking video proof, I trust it as well anything you can find to the contrary.

Posted by: Mark F on May 31, 2010 at 2:07 PM | PERMALINK

I'll condemn the Israelis actions just as soon as Egypt opens its' border with the Gaza and the Arab countries on Israel's borders secularize their schools and remove the anti-semitic texts from the classrooms.
Of course, that would mean recognizing that the Arab countries also deserve some of the blame for the present situation in Middle East and I doubt that will ever happen.

Posted by: Doug on May 31, 2010 at 4:14 PM | PERMALINK

"I just wanted to point out that the title of the post seems to imply that Israel's navy opened fire upon the flotilla with its ships"

Good point, Adiv

"ISRAEL FIRES ON GAZA AID FLOTILLA" is extremely misleading. C'mon, Steve Benen.

Posted by: tomtom on May 31, 2010 at 4:43 PM | PERMALINK

The ynetnews thing read like a parody, almost an onion piece of how overboard (so to speak) Israel sympathizers would spin such a thing - but just maybe that's a false impression. But sure, we need to distinguish firing ship to ship, from close tussle upon boarding. But let's not use Palestinian misbehavior, which is substantial, to excuse treatment of a mixed group from all over the World.

BTW I knew a guy that was on the Liberty. He told me:
1. Yes ship was in International waters
2. Yes ship was spying on Israel (etc.)
3. Yes attack was deliberate

Posted by: N B on May 31, 2010 at 5:06 PM | PERMALINK

jon,

Much as I'd love to condemn Israel for this, and as much as I'd like to say this is an overreaction on Israel's part, I'm not living in a country with neighbors that shoot rockets across the border on a regular basis.

That’s what happens when you have a “neighbor” under illegal military occupation. The citizenry has a tendency to fight back.

Article 51 of the UN Charter details the right of people, individually or collectively, to self-defense when they come under military aggression.

Additionally, the Geneva Declaration on Terrorism states:

"As repeatedly recognized by the United Nations General Assembly, peoples who are fighting against colonial domination and alien occupation and against racist regimes in the exercise of their right of self-determination have the right to use force to accomplish their objectives within the framework of international humanitarian law. Such lawful uses of force must not be confused with acts of international terrorism."
Posted by: Joe Friday on May 31, 2010 at 8:24 PM | PERMALINK

Just when the world (minus Turkey and Brazil) is going after Iran for nuclear proliferation, we find Iran's associates and enemies of Israel calling for world focus on Israel on nuclear issues. Also, allegations of abuse of Palestinian youth. And now Hamas (Muslim brotherhood) and IHH types and of course deceived persons on a flotilla to break the blockade of Gaza. Why not be realistic and say Iran/Hamas were able to con many with an effective propaganda/political action ploy. Wake up world. Terrorist and gangsters are using Gaza suffering for their own advantage. Did Hamas stop firing rockets into Israel?. No. Did they release the kidnapped soldier? No. Does Iran threaten to destroy Israel. Yes. Get the idea. Smell the flowers.

Posted by: R. Bender on June 1, 2010 at 1:16 AM | PERMALINK

micro usb charger

the Virginia Republican Party screwed up. It can happen to anyone. They got a little lazy, chose not to do their due diligence, and ended up looking stupid. They can just pull the dishonest attack ad, and go after Boucher and Perriello over something else.

Posted by: moisesronchi on June 1, 2010 at 3:32 AM | PERMALINK

A regretful Bloody Black Monday Gaza Tragedy, a very unnecessary use of military forces against International Humanitarian Aids. Morally speaking, such tragedy could have been avoided if Flotilla have listen to the IDF calls to Ashdod, however this would not have achieved the main virtue of Flotilla�s International Humanitarian Rights Mission � to end the counterproductive and international human right violation to the three years blockaded of Gaza Strip which the whole world have ignored. No words will justified such suffering, I challenge any statement as for the real facts is that to see the suffering to people of Gaza including woman and children yourself first due to such counterproductive and international human right violation of the three years blockaded of Gaza Strip by Israel which the whole world politician and UU have ignored. Such tragedy will escalate to new levels by both sides, unless the whole world politician and UU take a prompt appropriate action and not to forget the UU calls on Israel to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

Posted by: Ferhat on June 1, 2010 at 5:44 AM | PERMALINK

'That’s what happens when you have a “neighbor” under illegal military occupation. The citizenry has a tendency to fight back.'--Joe Friday

I don't see the point. If that same "cohabitant", or however you choose to refer to the Palestinians, is attacking you, you get to defend yourself as well, right? Welcome back to Square One. And defending using a blockade seems as defensible as would the use of missiles into the areas from which said rockets derive, right? If I was a Gazan, I might agree with that logic.

As for the "illegal occupation" bit, what part of "Arabs invaded Israel and failed, Israel counterattacked and kicked ass" did you not learn about 1967? Israeli belligerence is one thing, but the illegal occupation I see is the one that didn't happen. And I'm glad, because Holocaust II isn't something I would have celebrated.

The whole situation between Israel and Palestine is one of illegality and corruption and violence and oppression. And since Israel is the more powerful, they're the more responsible. Still, after 43 years or so, it's about time the two quarreling brothers figured this out on their own. I'm tired of each sides' excesses, each sides' call for justice, and each sides' insistence that history is behind them. History is what they make it, and they've made it this mess.

Posted by: jon on June 1, 2010 at 8:16 AM | PERMALINK

Well, put, Jon.

I too am tired of this. I see no illegal occupation, and Israeli Arabs have far more freedom than in any of the 23 Arab nations. That Arabs don't even put Israel on their maps of the Middle East says all it has to say about these countries, which thrill that the Palestinian-Israeli conflict continues so that their monarchies aren't overthrown by masses of the poor or women who might one day be assertive enough to wish to be treated as other than property.

Posted by: Clem on June 1, 2010 at 9:36 AM | PERMALINK

jon,

I don't see the point. If that same "cohabitant", or however you choose to refer to the Palestinians, is attacking you, you get to defend yourself as well, right?

NO !

You don’t get to claim “self-defense” against those who are fighting back against your illegal military occupation.

You would have the Nazis claiming “self-defense” when the French resistance fought back against their illgal military occupation ???

Posted by: Joe Friday on June 1, 2010 at 10:09 AM | PERMALINK

Clem,

I see no illegal occupation

The United Nations, the Geneva Conventions, and all other international treaties we are signatories to disagree with you.

Posted by: Joe Friday on June 1, 2010 at 10:11 AM | PERMALINK




 

 

Read Jonathan Rowe remembrance and articles
Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

Advertise in WM



buy from Amazon and
support the Monthly