"We reject the killing of innocent men, women and children" BARAK OBAMA 4 June 2009
'308 innocent children killed by Israeli forces' HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH January 2009
What is the world to do now about the IDF that kills innocent civilians as a matter of policy?
Continue to trade with a state that employs terror?
AIPAC is BAD for democracy - BAD for Jewish Americans - BAD for America and, ultimately, BAD for Israel.
Democracy is about the will of the majority - not the vested interest of a minority pulling strings in high places.
No matter how many threats emanate from AIPAC's high command and issued to media outlets worldwide - the plain truth is that Israel is a small state of just 6 million in a world of 6 billion, trying to punch way above its weight. But that was prior to a man becoming President who cannot be bought by a self-serving lobby of just a few thousand.
Jewish Americans will dump AIPAC because it's now crystal clear who's boss. And its certainly not little Netanyahu with stories from the Spanish Inquisition and a chip on his shoulder.
We're now in 2009 not 1478. Wake up, this is democratic America!
Thinking Jewish Americans Will (hopefully) Dump AIPAC
From The Nation, Robert
Dreyfuss
'Middle-of-the-road,
moderate, and especially liberal Jews are likely to back Obama. That's a
dynamic that can isolate AIPAC, the central player in the
Leonard Doyle writing for the Telegraph said it all:
'The era of the blank cheque is over - from now on Israel must earn its privileged relationship with the United States - Mr Obama will make it clear that he will not allow his foreign policy objectives to be dictated by Israel and that Israel must resume working for peace with the Palestinians.'
'The President has already fired warning shots across the bow of the Israeli government to signal that he will not be pushed around by Mr Netanyahu's new Right-wing coalition.'
So that's about the size of it. Either negotiate genuinely for peace and a two state solution - or find another sponsor elsewhere.
MJR is no more 'anti-Israel' than a pork chop is kosher. He is explicitly pro-human-rights and believes, as I do, that all life is of value - not merely the lives of those Israelis and their families who support Likud.
There WILL be a Palestinian state in Palestine - but what other statal entity there will be extant 20 years hence, is a matter of conjecture.
If Israel is allowed to attack Iran then then an EMBARGO SHOULD BE IMMEDIATELY IMPLEMENTED ON ALL BILATERAL TRADE.
Furthermore, All U.S. military and civil aid should be immediately stopped and finally a UNSC resolution should be considered to expel Israel from the UN.
If Israel is allowed to carry out such an unprovoked attack on a UN member state, then the world must take appropriate action.
As a British Jew I am astonished that the world could countenance such aggression. Israel certainly does not act in the name of world Jewry.
We had a family seder last night, as we do each Passover, and we recited the hope of 'next year in Jerusalem' and the children asked the 'four questions' and we drank the wine and we enumerated the plagues and we dipped the parsley in the salt water and ate the matzo with bitter herbs and thanked God for our 'deliverance' or rather for the deliverance of our ancestors from Egypt - and then we 'partook of the repast', a huge 5 course meal, and we sang the songs of Pesach and we basked in the knowledge that we were continuing a tradition that goes back many centuries - and we felt good.
That is if we forgot to remember our neighbours in Gaza living under the iron fist of the IDF - although living is not the word that adequately describes their existence and the brutality and humiliation they suffer day after day from an illegal occupying force that the world is paid by America to ignore - lest their aid be cut or cancelled. As Egypt sells its soul for the mighty dollar - the rest of the world is little different. We ignore the killings and the beatings, the razing of homes and the diverting of essential water to fill Israeli swimming pools. 'Next year in Jerusalem' is an empty phrase. Who would want to live in the capital of a brutal occupier. Not me, nor my family, nor anyone I know. Passover is about deliverance from oppression and that is my hope this Pesach for the Palestinian people.
Hannah Arendt believed that, ultimately, the survival of the state is the first priority - and human rights have to take second place to that, and most of us agree to that premise.
However, in the case of Gaza, in January, Israel's survival was not in any sense, at stake or at risk. The rockets that were fired by militants into northern Israel was and is a warlike act and Israel has to take appropriate action to nullify that threat.
But the murder of over 500 women and children by heavily armed troops was a cowardly and obscene atrocity that had no link with the militant rockets or with any other military objective. It was killing for killing's sake by an army that has been brutalized into believing that Arabs are sub-human and not worthy of life.
That is why Olmert and Barak have to be brought before the International Court to answer charges of war crimes.
The mindset of a soldier is determined by his training and the mindset of a young soldier is extraordinarily easy to control.
The IDF are trained to believe that their 'enemy' in Gaza (or Lebanon) is sub-human and can therefore be killed without compunction or regret - (or subsequent nightmares at home with their wives and children in Bat Yam or Herzalia). Dehumanization is a necessary pre-requisite when training men to kill. Germany, Poland, Russia, Rwanda ... That's how the military works. Subvert the the mind and you have an automaton willing to kill or torture without question but with extraordinary zeal. Any soldier will confirm this, in his later years, for initially during combat he is unaware of the fact that he is but a killing tool of his political masters.
Of course, Jewish ex-servicemen like myself in the Diaspora remain incredulous that the 2nd generation offspring of Holocaust survivors could act in this way. We have had to painfully accept that they, and therefore we, are no better than the brutal killers in any conflict, carrying out the orders of our temporary masters. And it is those masters who need to be identified and dealt with, and that is why the international community has established the ICC to bring to justice those who subvert the minds of young people to dehumanize and murder hundreds of men women and children, in this case on the pretext of self-defence.
PIOTR - out of the literally
thousands of words I have read over recent years regarding the fast
deteriorating position in Israel, in actuality, and in the eyes of the world -
the evocative points you have posted are extraordinarily perceptive - in an
otherwise sea of invective and plain Hasbara propaganda. They are worth
repeating.
"The last little dirty war was basically high-tech hunting
expedition ---
"In some places settlements are mere land grab (or water grab). But
in many they are so much more. They are daily spectator sports. Hundreds little
or not so little ways of humiliating Palestinians. Several thousands armed
civilians engages in that sport, supervised by the military, so most of the
young people can join the fun. Fun punctuated by moments of
"hopelessness" that "concessions will make no difference".
"Righteous sadism is deeply addictive. We know a recent American
edition. We are somewhat less aware of our traditional American edition like
surprising tolerance of rape in prisons in a society otherwise obsessed with
sexual crimes. Once a group gets the tag "bad people" then doing bad
things to them does not have negative moral value. While doing something good
to them either borders with criminal, or is outright criminal."
"Israeli Jews are much superior to Arabs who are backward,
homophobic, lack Western logic, lack regard for life, anti-feminist, breed to
fast, sympathize with Hitler and what not. And it is not the case that all of
that is groundless. But once you internalize all of that as a justification
that no shit done to people so vile is morally bad, you are in a trap.
Basically, you are incapable of making rational policy choices."
If it were possible, I would print
the above and send it to every senator, every congressman and every politician
around the world who thinks it is still a good, sound, moral, effective,
practical strategy to destabilize the world to satisfy the aims of a tiny
minority of religious and political zealots who live in a 20,000 sq m enclave
on the eastern Mediterranean. To stand 'outside the box' and observe how all
our everyday lives are circumscribed and influenced directly or indirectly by
the Sharons, Olmerts and Netanyahus of this tiny enclave, is to stand in utter
amazement at such a surreal situation - virtually the entire globe dependent on
the whim of a few dozen local politicians belonging to something called Likud.
As I write, I cannot actually believe it.
Posted by COLINDALE London
March 23, 2009 3:30 AM |
On the first of what is expected to be many visits to the Holy Land, Hillary Clinton, the new US Secretary of State, unambiguously declared: "The United States will be vigorously engaged in the pursuit of a two-state solution every step of the way. It is our assessment that, eventually, the inevitability of working towards a two-state solution is inescapable." Compare this with Mr Netanyahu's limited proposal of an "economic peace", in which Palestinians are allowed to have a semblance of economic development but certainly no sovereignty or political rights. Mr Netanyahu continues to have a hard time accepting that the Palestinians are a proud, committed people, let alone that they deserve a viable, independent state.
Put simply, Israeli intransigence no longer squares with US ambition. The Obama administration has made it a priority to repair the damage done by eight years of neglect of an issue that continues to move hearts and radicalise minds across the Arab world. On Day 1 Mr Obama appointed a high-level emissary, the former senator George Mitchell, with a broad negotiating mandate.
Oblivious to that clear signal of intent, the Israeli side has retreated into stubbornness. The performance of right-wing parties and the defeat of peace-leaning movements during the February elections reflect a deep shift in mood inside Israel that will eventually benefit the hardliners, settlers and other religious fanatics. After losing faith in the two-state solution, the Israeli public is now embracing the delusion that a combination of coercion and isolation will tame the Palestinian people forever. Worse, the expansionist intentions of the Israeli government persist: new plans have been exposed to expand settlements beyond the wall.
This time, though, settlements and their debilitating impact on the peace process, and the viability of a future Palestinian state, are front and centre. Reports that Israeli officials worry about economic sanctions by the US administration if settlement building continues are good news. Such menace can be effective: it was the Bush administration that in 1991 suspended financial guarantees to twist Israel's arm and force it to sit at the negotiating table. The political cost for the elder George Bush was certainly severe, but such leadership is badly needed today.
America is increasingly irritated at seeing its wider interests endangered by lingering conflicts in the Middle East: the Obama administration should leverage that into a more forceful and frank dialogue with Israel. Mr Netanyahu will resist on the ground that he owes his election to his hardline position, but the US administration might retort that, in doing so, he only sabotages the prospect of a better Middle East for everyone'.
Is there any effective method to limit the patent propaganda pushed into every internet blog column by Hasbara minions of the Israel Foreign Affairs Ministry. The answer is probably not. The only way to limit the damage to gullible readers who believe the written word to be truth is to make everyone fully aware of the agenda to control and shape the opinion of Internet users worldwide by the recruitment and indoctrination of thousands of impressionable dogsbodies who are willing to believe in the misinformation themselves.
They then search every blog on
every site and immediately refute, deny, condemn, dismiss or otherwise rubbish
any criticism of
The purpose of the above comment is to reiterate THAT THE RECENT KILLING OF HUNDREDS OF CHILDREN IN GAZA WAS A WAR CRIME AND THAT THOSE ALLEGED RESPONSIBLE SHOULD BE BROUGHT BEFORE THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT TO ANSWER SUCH CHARGES.
No amount of verbiage, or misinformation, or screaming and shouting about 'human shields' will alter the facts. Massive tanks, armoured vehicles, guided missiles and cluster bombs cannot be threatened by small children and they were most certainly not killed 'in self-defence'. The very idea is senseless. Killing is killing. Children are children. Death is death and subterfuge is exactly that.
Following: 1
Followers: 1
Posts
Comments & Recommends
I agree on freezing settlements but am unsure you are consistent on the two-state solution. Isn't calling on Israel to accept the 2-state solution comparable to calling on the PA to recognize Israel as a Jewish state in so far as that is the basis for having two independent states? Shouldn't we either call on both sides to agree before starting negotiations that the deal will leave a Jewish state Israel and a Palestinian state Palestine or demand it of neither and just proceed to negotiations? The other question is what to do regarding Hamas's more explicit rejection of a permanent two-state solution - maxing out on a 10-year Hudna which Israel would never accept. Interestingly, though he's in the employ of the state department, George Mitchell has discussed minimizing preconditions as part of his success in mediating peace in Ireland.
May 22, 2009 4:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
MJ, I'm betting Cheney is whispering in Bibi's ear, telling him to ignore the White House and egging him on to attack Iran.
May 22, 2009 5:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is a fine, clear, and outspoken bit of overdue common sense. Thank you for it.
Two further observations:
1. There are two fundamental issues here that overlap yet are distinct: (a) the denial of the fundamental right of self-determination to Palestinians and (b) the lack of a stable peaceful coexistence between Palestinians and Israelis. A Palestinian state without peace is undesirable, but the world can tolerate it, as it has tolerated an Israeli state without peace for many decades. The Palestinians cannot be expected to accept peace without a state any more than Jewish terrorists in 1947 did.
2. There can be no legitimate equation between the cessation of Palestinian terrorism and of Israeli settlements as preconditions for peace negotiations until the Palestinians actually have a sovereign state with the full authority to act against terrorism (as the Israeli state has the full authority to stop -or in the case of Gaza, remove- settlements). Allowing such an equation amounts to a recipe by which terrorists can torpedo peace negotiations.
May 22, 2009 6:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
>MJR
Sound, common sense. I have a feeling that this President will be the catalyst for change. He cut his political teeth in Chicago. He knows the score. IMHO he's not subject to corruption or threat from the Israel lobby. During the first term of this presidency we will see a dramatic new political paradigm whereby Israel will cease to be on the front page every day and there will be substantive improvements in Middle East stability. He is as aware as the rest of us that the status quo is leading us into a third world war, this time with WMD that will decimate the world. He wants as we want a world where his children can grow and prosper and to achieve that aim he must alter the balance in Washington and root out those who are intent on damaging our democratic principles for personal gain. I believe Obama is the man to do just that.
May 23, 2009 12:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
All fine and well, but how on earth can Obama stop the settlements? What do you suggest he do? What makes Netanyahu (and the rest of the Israeli government) change course on settlements--something they haven't done for forty years?
MJ talks a lot about what should or shouldn't be done, but I see absolutely no plan for action. Wishful thinking and pleading won't change a thing. That's all I see from MJ.
How about lobbying for sanctions against Israel until settlements stop, MJ? Until you're ready to take some action with similar force, no one will--or should--take you or your Israel Policy Forum very seriously. There's no bite and very little bark--just a whole lot of pathetic whimpering.
(Meanwhile AIPAC--an organization that really knows how to snarl and tear flesh--will continue to rip to bits any American politician who tries to put any pressure at all on Israel to do anything to stop settlements or end occupation.)
May 23, 2009 7:51 AM | Reply | Permalink
You're not wrong, PS, but dont assume there cannot be a paradigm shift just because the status quo on settlements has lasted for 40 years. Nothing lasts for ever. Not Sharon, not Arafat and certainly not Likud.
This president is no patsy. He knows right-wing Jewish politicians intimately from his Chicago days - and is more than a match for them. Never forget he is the President and he has the ability to knock heads together and change mindsets - and he will, I have little doubt!
They may dismiss him as just another politician to be bought - but they make a grave error. This one is different. This one has balls. And this one believes in democracy for America not Zionist stratagems that enable House members to relax on the beach at Herzalia twice a year.
These are the years that the great American public from NY to LA and all states in between will finally use their voice and their voting power to elect representatives who will really look after their interests and eject those who do not. The time is past in America, as in the UK, where elected politicians are merely self-serving, puffed-up caricatures holding office merely to enrich themselves and to vote tax dollars to foreign states on the pretext of US security.
Have faith. Things DO change. Think apartheid South Africa just 20 years ago.
May 23, 2009 8:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
Maybe things will change, Colindale. I do think Obama is more thoughtful, more original--and possibly (though not yet certainly) more effective--than recent past Presidents. But he's also proving to be a staunch pragmatist--both in policy and politics. So I suspect our policies toward Israel and Palestine will change only if there's a pragmatic reason and way to do so. This means several things, I think:
I have concerns that none of these conditions can be met.
So . . . I guess I remain skeptical, but you are right about Obama's potential and maybe he will surprise me even on this most perplexing issue.
May 23, 2009 10:25 AM | Reply | Permalink
All of the points you raise have a validity. But you ignore the fact that I have already made: unless there is dramatic change, there is every possibility of a nuclear war that will start in the ME and then spread to Europe.
The event that can trigger that scenario is an unprovoked attack on the sovereign state of Iran. The consequences of which are at present unknown not only to me but also to President Obama - but they would be severe and globally extensive.
We are not dealing here with a few thousand unarmed civilians in Gaza or the Lebanon. Iran has a real army with real missiles and other armaments and she will not just lay down and die for an aggressor. Her defence could endanger not only the attacker, but many other states, in reprisal.
We are living in an exceedingly fraught and dangerous time and a war with WMD that would not only be nuclear but chemical and biological, would contaminate huge areas of our planet. To ignore this threat would be foolish. And this US administration knows that very well.
May 23, 2009 10:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
Obama has indeed stated that he thinks a solution to the Israel-Palestinian feud will help defuse the Iranian nuclear problem, and that the "linkage" goes in that direction, not the opposite direction as asserted by Netanyahu. I am not sure, however, how greatly the already unsettling risk of nuclear war will be increased by Iran going nuclear. China, India, Pakistan, North Korea, all have nukes now. And so has Israel, for years. The key issue is not the highly desirable goal of reversing nuclear proliferation, or of Obama's intelligent commitment to addressing it. The central question, hinted at by Purple State above, is whether Obama will hedge, fudge, waffle, and ultimate back way off from this goal in response to domestic political pressure. In order for that NOT to happen, it may take something like an anti-AIPAC with the tenacity and funding of an AIPAC itself. The organizations of Rosenberg and other columnists on TPM are very worthy and welcome steps towards that, but a long way from comparable in scale, focus, and effectiveness.
May 23, 2009 12:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree. What is required is a public enquiry into the activities of AIPAC and other lobby groups and whether these organizations work to the benefit of the US or to its detriment. There is a contention that their activities are unAmerican and undemocratic that charge needs to be investigated and resolved.
The previous House Committee on Un-American Activities was concerned, or overly concerned, with a threat to the Federation that turned out to be imaginary. Today there is a threat which is very real indeed to our democratic institutions.
Democracy is concerned with the will of the people and the welfare of the people. Unelected minority groups with enormous power in the legislature are a threat not only to America but by extension, to the world.
Let us have a strong spotlight into the workings of these groups and an investigation into whose benefit they exist.
May 23, 2009 12:35 PM | Reply | Permalink