Antiwar protests in Israel

by PaddyK Tue Jul 18, 2006 11:58

That's great news. It cant be easy to come out on the streets of Israel in the current climate of Hostility.Those people are to be commended.
In a similar vein Raymod Deane of IPSC should be commended for his level headed rebuttal of Michael Herzog's diatribe last night on The Last Word. Not an easy thing to do well either.

Well done.

by eastern eye Tue Jul 18, 2006 12:46

It's wasn't 2,000. they were about 100-200 people. media said they were several handreds, and Ynet said they were 500 and than reported they were 1,000.

by PaddyK Tue Jul 18, 2006 13:36

http://zope.gush-shalom.org/home/en

An interesting precedent was set in 1982 , however:

"The veterans among the demonstrators were reminded of the first demonstration not far from there which took place on the first day of Ariel Sharon's invasion of Lebanon in 1982. That time, also about 200 activists gathered - but their number grew within a few weeks to ten thousand, until the 400 thousand gathered to protest the Sabra and Shatila massacre. "

Will we see Half a million Israelis on the Streets this time ?

by eastern eye Tue Jul 18, 2006 15:20

Back then it wasn't Hisbulla fireing missiles all over the Galilee, aiming Haifa's chemical factories, and threatening to fire Tel Aviv.

by Ali H. Tue Jul 18, 2006 19:16

why Hizbollah have acquired missiles is for defence against Israel given that even killing 1000 Israeli troops it took them 20 years to kick the IDF out last time round. Bringing the war home to the Israeli public is a sure way to end the war sooner rather than later.

by MichaelY - iawm Tue Jul 18, 2006 23:21

No comment necessary - thanks to Jean for sending me the pics.

Israeli Contribution to Lebanese Democracy I

Israeli Contribution to Lebanese Democracy II

Israeli Contribution to Lebanese Democracy III

by PaddyK Wed Jul 19, 2006 00:07

" Back then it wasn't Hisbulla fireing missiles all over the Galilee, "

Thats right , back then it wasnt anybody firing missiles all over Galilee. There was a Palestinian ceasefire on, try as Israeli Government might to get them to attack they remained quiet. So they did the same back then as they do now. Make something up :

"Having failed to elicit the desired PLO reaction, Israel simply manufactured a pretext for its long-planned invasion of June 1982, claiming that it was in retaliation for an attempt to assassinate the Israeli Ambassador to London; the attempt, as Israel was aware, was carried out by the terrorist Abu Nidal organization that had been at war with the PLO for years and did not so much as have an office in Lebanon."

http://www.chomsky.info/articles/199309--.htm

Lebanon: The Invasion Riddle

http://www.washington-report.org/backissues/050382/8205...2.htm

by MichaelY - iawm Wed Jul 19, 2006 13:16

It is unfortunately not possible to have a debate, civilised or otherwise, with people whose ideology and interest imprisons them into a frame of mind and a stance that is immovable. For the Right reference to hidden post (of persistent abuser) deleted who resurfaces every time the Empire or its allies, see the Israeli or the British Government (and please focus on the distinction - not the people of Israel or the people of England, Scotland or Wales), carry out either an illegal act, like the invasion of Iraq, or now the invasion of Gaza followed by that of Lebanon, or are condemned by the international community....the answer is FINE, we have to do what we have to do and if a couple of hundred civilians (so far) are murdered (accidentally?) in Lebanon, or 500,000 children under the age of 6 perish in Iraq because of the sanctions during the '90s before Shock and Awe started exterminating people....so what?

We have the power to do it - we have done it - we will continue to do it!!!

The problem is that this type of politics not only provokes disgust and anger but also empowers equally fundamentalist opposition.....engenders arguments about whose killing is more just than the others.....it swells the ranks of the extremists on both sides.
And the cycle of violence goes on...but then we know the answer of the RP and his ilk - So bloody what? It's only Arabs after all whose lives, as we well know, are not of the same value as those of Christian soldiers and their clients.
Israel has invaded Lebanon a number of times over the last 25 years. In alliance with the Christian Maronite militias exterminated Palestinian camps - destroyed the infrastructure of the country . Every time though they had to withdraw with their tails in their mouths - will they ever learn? What was left behind was devastation and hatred. Will they ever wise up? Not if one draws a lesson from the rants of the RP.....Pity!!

by Mr. T. Wed Jul 19, 2006 13:38

Speaking of not being able to have a sensible debate with people who have entrenched ideologies, you yourself are a model for exactly this profile.

You say:
500,000 children under the age of 6 perish in Iraq because of the sanctions during the '90s before Shock and Awe started

While I opposed the invasion of Iraq I was in favour of the sanctions against them, and have no second thoughts about its efficacy or morality. But the numbers you provide are in fact only mortality estimates from a UN report that does not in fact level any blame upon sanctions as the sole cause. To believe the sanctions were the only reason for increased mortality is to ignore the fact that during sanctions time-frame, Saddam built 48 palaces at a total cost in excess of $1.5 billion. That's $30,000 for each child who died of starvation. That would have paid for a hell of a lot of food and medicine, far beyond the needs of the 500K who died.

How can you ignore that the children's' deaths due to malnutrition are attributable to the actions of his regime? How can you not admit that it was in Saddam's interest for those children starve to death for the sole purpose of propaganda - which he milked with his funeral marches to no end? Nevermind, I'll answer my the question myself: Pure, unadulterated, blind, hypocrisy.

by hmmz Wed Jul 19, 2006 13:51

carry out either an illegal act, like the invasion of Iraq, or now the invasion of Gaza followed by that of Lebanon

now how exactly is Israeli troops going into Lebanon or Gaza classed illegal?

see how most arab states have also asked hezbollah to stop--unheard of ehh for them not to support anything against Israel--its because there is something bigger going on here---most of them are sunni dictatorships with majority Shia populations, shia being Syria and Iraq and Iran majority population centres also, they are the ones playing games here as the US by doing Afghanistan and Iraq has unleashed massive shia populations from minority rule to positions of power and the sunni dictatorships are afraid of revolution in their own backyards

Since when have hezbollah been supporters of hamas? never, read between the lines my friends

just my 2 cents worth :)

by pat c Wed Jul 19, 2006 13:54

I agree with Sean here. There is a difference between the violence of the oppressed and the violence of the oppressor. Israel had 6 years to release the Lebanese prisoners but it didnt. Instead the Israelis vindictively held on to Lebanese POWs. When the Israelis release the Lebanese prisoners then Hezbollah will release the Israeli POWs.

As you know I have no love of Islamists but when it comes to a situation where Israel is deliberately bombing civilian targets, even deliberately targetting children, then I am on side of Hezbollah. I just wish Hezbollah would aim their missiles at military targets. But I guess they have learned too much from the Israeli war of terror against civilians. They can only respond.

by Ali H. Wed Jul 19, 2006 14:16

exactly are Hezbollah destroying Israeli infrastructure?

You need guided weapons systems to do this and satellite photos neither of which Hezbollah has.

Martin Rowson's cartoon in todays Guardian pretty much sums up what Israel is up to.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/cartoons/martinrowson/0,,1823....html

As for attempts by Israeli representatives to draw parallels between the IRA and Hezbollah the Brits did not destroy civilian infrastructure and displace 10s of thousands of refugees (or even 700,000 as in the case of Lebanon) in the Irish Republic in response to the kidnapping and murder of SAS spy Captain Nirac.

Did they?

by MichaelY - iawm Wed Jul 19, 2006 14:20

Another anonymous defender of savagery.

You are obviously a more erudite friend of atrocities....never heard of D. Halliday, the Irish UN Commissioner - never heard of his reaons for resigning? Never heard of the US and the UK stopping anti-diabetes, anti-malaria, anti-pneumonia drugs - never heard of depleted uranium ravaging the young?
As for Saddam, never heard of Rumsfeld befriending him when he was attacking Iran? Never heard of the provision of his chemicals by the US and France - the ones he used against the Iraqui people? And where did he get his Scuds from? Don't know what hole you were hiding in when here in Ireland we were demonstrating against the Irish Government helping Goodman selling beef to Saddam.....
So quit the funny word games and tell those whose interests you serve that it doesn't work!
An atrocity is an atrocity and barbarism is barbarism - irrespective of whether it is Israel, the US, the UK or Saddam.....
At the end it's the innocent of this world, particularly the women and the children who suffer....
And people like you and the RP who laugh.....

by Mr. T. Wed Jul 19, 2006 14:22

you say:

There is a difference between the violence of the oppressed and the violence of the oppressor

Feed that relativistic argument to those slaughtered by or who have lost loved ones as a result of "violence of the oppressor". I'm sure they'll feel much better about their plight.

I don't buy the nonsense that there is one morality for those in positions of power and a far more flexible morality for those who have little or no power. Frankly, I think a war-crime is a war-crime is a war-crime... and to elevate one cold-blooded murderer above another because of a few subjective circumstantial factors is a gilded-framed masterpiece of bad faith.

by pat c Wed Jul 19, 2006 14:27

People have the right to fight back against aggressors. Israel is clearly the aggressor here and is committing mass murder. Kill 12 civilians you are a terrorist. Kill 250 civilians you are the legitimate army of the state of Israel defending itself.

by Tony Wed Jul 19, 2006 15:12

I'm glad to be able to support Pat C and other posters against Mr T.
There IS a difference between the violence of the opressed and that of the opressors.
The former is part of the solution to opression, the latter is the problem itself. I'm not ashamed to say "victory to Hezbollah" (although I realise that militarily they are completely outgunned). Israel can still be defeated if a big enough movement can be built against them in countries like Ireland and Australia (where I live)

by Chekov Wed Jul 19, 2006 15:33

Hizbollah have been basically indiscriminately lobbing rockets towards civilian areas in Israel. The greatest casualty count was when a train depot was hit during a union meeting - killing 8 and injuring scores.

That's not fighting back, it's simply replicating the war crimes of the Israelis on a smaller scale.

Hizbollah also must have had some idea of what they were likely to stir up as a result of their border raid. It seems highly likely that they are playing their own game focused towards the larger conflicts in the region and are largely using the Lebanese population as pawns.

Not to excuse the war crimes of anybody, but it is really difficult to describe Hizbollah's actions at the moment as defending the Lebanon against the Israelis. The border raid wasn't defence, the lobbing of rockets isn't either.

by pat c Wed Jul 19, 2006 15:40

I dont agree with Hezbollah targetting civilian areas but Its going to happen when the Israelis are committing mass murder of Lebanese civilians. How could Hezbollah have known a union meeting was taking place in the station?

The initial raid into Israel was carried out by Hezbollah soldiers who attack Israeli soldiers. The Hezbollah soldiers killed 8 Israrli soldiers and took 2 POWs. The Israelis have attacked civilian targets in response.

I'm just wondering if that comment was really by chekov?

by PaddyK Wed Jul 19, 2006 15:46

http://foreignaffairs.gov.ie/embassies/display.asp

Above is the Contact details for the Irish Ambassador in Tel Aviv, below is a standard letter that can be copied and pasted and altered as desired, (keep it clean) to be emailed or posted to his offices.

Name
Address
Email

Your Excellency,

I am an Irish citizen and therefore look to the offices of his Excellency the Ambassador of Ireland in Israel to represent to the Israeli Government the sentiments of the Irish people. It is apparent that the vast majority of the Irish people is horrified by the actions of the Israeli military currently unfolding in Lebanon and in Gaza. It is clear that Israel at this point in time has no intention in observing its legal responsibility of care to those people suffering it’s occupation in Gaza and it's obligations to minimise civilian suffering in it's tragic offensive in Lebanon.
I beseech His Excellency to convey the sentiments of the People of the Irish Republic to the leadership of the Israeli Government that it immediately cease the mass killing of civilians in Lebanon, stop targeting social infrastructure in Lebanon and Gaza and withdraw without delay to the Internationally recognised borders and Armistice lines.
I urge the Ambassador's office to advise the Israeli Government that in compliance with the will of the majority of Irish people and this country's responsibilities under Human Rights Laws all diplomatic relations between the Irish Republic and the State of Israel will be withdrawn immediately if Israel continues to flout international law and promote the destruction of the land and the people of Lebanon and the Palestinian territory.
I trust in the good morals and the sound judgment of his Excellency and the office he represents to ensure that everything that can possibly be done to bring to an immediate end to the suffering of these helpless people will be done as matter of urgency.

Yours Faithfully.

Name

by Chekov Wed Jul 19, 2006 15:47

but Its going to happen when the Israelis are committing mass murder of Lebanese civilians. How could Hezbollah have known a union meeting was taking place in the station?

It's only going to happen if somebody is going to do it. Hezbollah could not have known a union meeting was taking place, but they would have known that their indiscriminate rocket attacks were only really likely to kill 'soft' targets - innocent civilians, some of whom may well be among those who are demonstrating for peace. It's exactly the same argument that the Israelis use to justify their criminal targetting of civilian infrastructure. How could they have known that there would be civilians in that power station / bridge / etc?

To put it simply, targetting civilians is never progressive, never likely to help matters and this doesn't change just because the other side is doing it.

by hmmz Wed Jul 19, 2006 15:54

No, the Israelis have targetted the infrastructure used to move those rockets around--btw those rockets have no guidance system so the plain cold facts are hezbollah are indiscriminately slaughtering Israeli citizens, how anyone can defend an organisation thats objective is to wipe a nation off the map is beyond me

israel has been given a green light by the us and the arab world to eradicate syria and irans defacto army camped in south lebanon. The arabs wish to avoid a shia centralisation of power thus threatening their minority sunni rule, us wants the same and also to send message to iran. Israel want to eradicate a problem that they created and left unchecked for years, by the time they are finished with hezbollah, id doubt they will pose much of a threat to anyone, they pulled the first straw and they have gotten the shortest that they will ever get, they gave Israel the excuse they needed to march over there and slap them in the face hard

by pat c Wed Jul 19, 2006 15:55

i dont think targetting civilians is progressive but neither do i think that Hezbollah are terrorists.

Hezbollah provoked nothing. They carried out a justified military action against a military target. Killed members of the Israeli army and took POWS. This action was justified because the Israelis were holding Lebanese prisoners 6 years after they pulled out of Lebanon.

To use the argument that Hezbollah should have known what would happen could also have been used against the Maquis when France was occupied by Germany. Should they have stayed quiet?

Victory for Hezbollah will not result in Lebanon becoming an Islamic State. Defeat for Israel will be a blow against US/UK/Israeli Imperialism.

by Caoimhain Wed Jul 19, 2006 16:04

'Unfortunately the so-called free press in Israel did not cover the event and in the so-called democracy of Israel, three protesters were arrested under the guise of having a demonstration without a permit. '

This just goes to show how fascist a state Israel really is, you need a 'permit' to protest. Doesn't that defeat the purpose? There's no point in protesting if the state is going to administer how that protest is carried out and if it is carried out at all. In essence protesting in Israel is illegal yet they won't put that in writing, they'll just make it so hard for you that you can't.

The state's power is total and that is final and how dare you say otherwise. This is the perfect example of a small elite number of people ruling the masses with an iron fist. Shame on Israel for STARTING this war. If they didn't blame it on Hezbollah, I'm sure they'd have a million other reasons and other people to blame it on.

Fascists will always place blame elsewhere. Try and find an instance ANYWHERE where a head of state takes blame for anything. I bet you can't.

by Mr. T. Wed Jul 19, 2006 16:04

pat c.:

You said:

Hezbollah soldiers killed 8 Israrli soldiers and took 2 POWs

POW's, .as we'll all very well aware of on Indymedia, are entitled to specific status that includes certain human rights and standards of treatment as outlined by the Geneva Convention. I haven't checked lately but I don't think Hezbollah has signed this treaty. Therefore, I believe a more accurate term instead of "POW" is "hostage".

by pat c Wed Jul 19, 2006 16:11

The Israelis do not treat captured Palestinian or Hezbollah soldiers as POWS. They treat them as if they are criminals. Israel is in breach of the Geneva Convention. I hope Hamas and Hezbollah treat their POWs well. I mean that it.

I'm not displaying flexible morality. In a perfect world there would be no states. In a somewhat better world than ours there would be a Democratic Israel/Palestine state. I have to live in the real world so I accept that Israel has the right to exist peacefully within its pre 1967 borders. But that also means that Israel will have to release thousands of prisoners. Israel says these prisoners have blood on their hands. Well so do thousands of Israelis who killed Arab civilians.

by Tony Thu Jul 20, 2006 09:20

Many people posting on this thread appear to think (or pretend, in some cases) that Lebanon is a completely Muslim country.
It is not. There are three main religious and ethnic groupings - Muslim, Christian (many kinds), and Druze, which is a strange blend of Islam and Greek philosophy.
And some people may not be aware that Lebanese Christian organisations are also fighting against the Israeli invasion, and the Lebanese left is also part of the resistance to Israel.
Then there is the question of fascism. It's a word flung about far too freely, but in Lebanon's case there is a substantial fascist organisation - the Phalange, which is NOT an ally of any Muslim grouping, but is in fact a Christian paramilitary organization, which was an ally of the Israelis in their last two invasions, and carried out the terrible massacres in Sabra and Shatila refugee camps while the Israeli army literally stood by and watched.
There are other extrem right wing organisations, such as Guardians of the Cedars , which have also carried killings of Palestinians and the left.
I should also point out Hezbollah has a very large civilian wing, which exists to carry out reconstruction, provide free hospitals, free education and other welfare-type activities.
There is no doubt that Hezbollah has some very nasty links with the Iranian and Syrian regimes, but they are also very popular in Lebanon. I should point out also that I am not claiming Hezbollah are a model to be admired, but it is clear that they should be supported in their fight against Israel.

by Mr. T. Thu Jul 20, 2006 11:42

The US, Israel and UK often come under heavy criticism (deserved) here on Indy for flagrant disregard of International Laws.

In order to kidnap the Israeli soldiers, Hezbollah had to cross the UN blue line - a clear violation of international law. So my question is: how important is international law to you? For International Law to be effective it must be respected, administered and enforced without subjectivity - otherwise it's just lip-service: a sham.

Hezbollah clearly violated International Law. Yet you continue to support their action.

I dislike ambiguity and subjectivity, especially as applied to International Law. Either you support International Law, or you do not. There is no room for grey area.

by Ali H. Thu Jul 20, 2006 12:27

More Zionist whining about international law. Talk about calling the pot black. The capture of the 2 Israelis wouldn't have anything to do with the Mossad terror cell assassinating members of Hezbollah discovered a few weeks ago, would it?

http://www.aljazeera.com/me.asp?service_ID=11556

A "nice" way to get a reaction from Hezbollah and create a pretext for the genocide (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocide).

The IOF of course have being using assasinations as a goad to provoke the Palestinians for years, extending to the assassination of Palestinians in countries such as Jordan.

So you can shut it when it comes to pious Israeli bleatings on International law ,as Israeli interests will always come first!

by john Thu Jul 20, 2006 12:40

disturbing photo's

by huanita Thu Jul 20, 2006 14:39

See
How to demonize Israel

http://adloyada.typepad.com/adloyada/2006/07/how_to_dem....html

Secondly-
biddyk posted link to 13 years old article by chlompsky, which have nothing to do with the current conflict.

by Read it all Thu Jul 20, 2006 14:55

The blog you lifted that from asks this pertinent question. Care to answer it.

"Why were the children allowed to get near the shells anyway? Does the IDF have some responsibility there?"

It even goes on to discredit the sandmonkey link and back up the story.

by redjade Thu Jul 20, 2006 15:14

from the adloyada link above:
''...kids were in bomb shelters for days. city is a ghost town.
only poor people stayed
a new army unit arrived, kids were bored, went out with
parents to look...''

must be nice to have bomb shelters. quite a privilege in that part of the world.
is it too much wish for a world where all kids had bomb shelters?

one still wonders why the IDF would allow children so close to a military target

those bombs/shells/whatever they are - how do they defend those children?

[answer: they don't they make them a target]

by John Thu Jul 20, 2006 15:43

huanita accuses me of being anti Jewish! It just goes to show his twisted (Zionist) logic. I checked the so called 'story' behind the photo and, sorry, but accusations of it being 'staged' are beyond belief.

On another matter entirely huanita might like to check the accuracy of this article entitled "The real resistance" Popular opposition to anti-semitism saved thousands of Jews under Nazi occupation, writes Tony Greenstein in this concluding article - despite rather than because of Zionism.

read in full at link attached

I suppose it is just another anti jewish attack

by Mr. T. Thu Jul 20, 2006 15:52

and I'm not supporting Israel's illegal actions.

But I'm hardly going to pretend that the criminal islamist Hizbollah terrorists are some sort of angelic freedom fighters entitled to break international laws then behind these same laws for protection.

If you do not yourself respect international law you have no basis for envoking it against an adversary.

by pat c Thu Jul 20, 2006 16:22

When the Israelis obey International Law then I will condemn Hizbollah if they breach International Law. Many of the POWS held by Israel were captured in illegal cross border raids.

by Mr. T. Thu Jul 20, 2006 16:43

As I understand your statement, international laws should only be observed if both parties play fair - right? So when one party breaks the law or ignores it, the other is granted a "free kick"?

In the early stages of the US invasion of Iraq, Saddam's Fedayeen broke international law by not wearing uniforms. Applying your logic,, Fedayeen's actions mean the US would no longer be obliged to respect international law? So their attrocities at Abu Graib did not break international law, right? I'm aware that the US invasion itself probably broke international laws, but from the moment the Fedayeen broke international law it seems by your rules the US gets a "get-out-of-gaol-free" card, no?

So what's the point of establishing international laws at all if the moment one party breaks them, the other is then entitled to a free pass to commit crimes as well? International law based on these parameters seems pointless.

by pat c Thu Jul 20, 2006 16:49

Apples are not oranges. IMHO you are just obfuscating the issue. Anyway Israel is not just targetting Hizbollah, its targetting the State of Lebanon, destroying its infrastructure and murdering its civilians. 98% of the casualities in Lebanon have been innocent civilians.

by MG Thu Jul 20, 2006 17:00

The IDF have been training with live ammunition at the Lebanese border for a month preceeding the invasion. Lebanese farmers were killed "accidentaly". Also remember that days before Hama's captured the Israeli soldier the IDF shelled a beach in Gaza killing innocent civilians. Interestingly the Israeli Prime Ministers daughter has joined in anti war protests outside her fathers house.

There seems to have been a plan in place which some analysts believe is now being enacted, the IDF were just looking for an excuse. As for international law, collective punishment is a war crime but we can expect no charges brought against any Israeli.

by Mr. T. Thu Jul 20, 2006 17:21

Pat c -

I don't question that Israel (and probably the US) is breaking international laws. I believe they should be brought to justice for their infraction. But equally so should the Hezbollah, Lebanese Gov't (for inaction against the militias), Iran and Syria (for material and tactical support of the terrorists).

I question your assertion that international law only applies in certain contexts - to punish or contain the US, UK, and Israel - and is purely optional for any groups or nations you certify subjectively as "oppressed". One mans oppressed party is another man's agressor. I don't trust your objectivity to make that call - it should be through objective and fair application of international law.

International Law should be observed and applied objectively - anything short of that makes international law into just an instrument of propaganda.

by pat c Thu Jul 20, 2006 17:51

No. Sometimes the law is an ass. I fear that the way the law stands at the moment, if I were to raise funds in Ireland or Britain or even the US for the Iranian armed opposition, then I would be committing a criminal offence. An international terrorist offence. Yes, I fear that the Iranian Kurds, WPI, etc count as terrorists under laws which were rushed through.

by Tony Thu Jul 20, 2006 17:54

Mr T., what a comedian you are.
You say:
"International Law should be observed and applied objectively - anything short of that makes international law into just an instrument of propaganda."
Doesn't it matter who MAKES international law in the first place? After all, if I make a law that I can stamp on your face any time I want, and I have the power to do so, doesn't that mean "international law"
is "just an instrument of propaganda"?
Besides, all this cant about "international law" is a bit rich coming from someone who advocates carpet-bombing (your words) Iran

by Read It All Thu Jul 20, 2006 18:12

You were the one who provided the link. And the link states:
"It seems the parents, and not the photographers, were encouraging the children to draw flags and doodles on the shells, not messages, which were written by the parents."

by Mr. T. Thu Jul 20, 2006 18:21

Laws have no meaning or relevance if they're subjectively applied. If you don't like the laws then get onto your local, national or government's UN representative to express your views. Work within the parameters of the law in order to change any laws you deem unfair.

On Indy there have been uncountable criticisms of US Torture flights, Illegal Rendition, Illegal Detention Camps etc. The basis for condemning these practices is that the US (or UK, or whoever) flouts International Law. When International Law judges US practices by these standards but more "popular" causes are exempt, that is the very definition of hypocrisy and bad faith.

As for carpet bombing Iran, Tony, you know very well that my comment was in the context of a the international community's last ditch effort to prevent Iran from deploying nuclear weapons. I certainly hope the mullah's decide to take the package of incentives rather than escalate the crisis to the level where that would have to be considered. This is, however, more appropriate discussion for a different topic.

by Ali H. Thu Jul 20, 2006 19:51

"I certainly hope the mullah's decide to take the package of incentives rather than escalate the crisis to the level where that would have to be considered"

How generous of you to "consider" what level of escalation to employ.

Have you given any "consideration" to how these "judgments" are made?

If we go by the Israeli rationale which you appear to support without question, then any excuse will do. In other words you simply provoke a minor response by whatever means and then use it to raze an entire country.

On this basis little if any excuse would be required by the Americans and their lackeys to go on to raze the whole of Syria and Iran too.

So much for international law which has been made a nonsense of by the Americans and their boot-lickers ignoring it systematically.

I hope the Israelis get taken to the financial cleaners for what they've done to Lebanon as this will deprive them of billions of $ they would otherwise spend on weapons, extra-judicial killings, landgrabing "security" fences and rent-a-mob ethnic-cleansing "settlers" (read theives).

by Mr. T. Thu Jul 20, 2006 20:13

You say -

If we go by the Israeli rationale which you appear to support without question, then any excuse will do. In other words you simply provoke a minor response by whatever means and then use it to raze an entire country.


I've clearly indicated that I do no support Israel. Why don't you read my previous posts and point out to me where I "support [Israel] without question".

You just don't like the fact that I won't side with the butchering Hizbollah, who depending upon whose timelines you believe may or may not have started the present shitstorm with their illegal kidnapping.

The other shit in your post is not worthy of moving my fingers to respond to.

by Ali H. Fri Jul 21, 2006 12:25

Count yourself lucky that only bile and not guided missiles are being aimed at you.

On one side are Hezbollah who want their kidnapped colleagues to be released from illegal captivity in Israel.

They take 2 Israeli hostages in the course of a cross-border raid of a type regularly used by the IDF and their Mossad-linked proxies in southern Lebanon and rarely engaged in by Hezbollah.

In response to the taking of 2 hostages Israel starts an outright war against the civilian population of the whole of Lebanon.

Hezbollah are using unguided weapons against Israel where Israeli Jews have hardened bunkers in their homes and 1st world infrastructure including emergency care, nothing wrong with that except that they don't give the same facilities to their Israeli Muslim co-citizens and have effectively deprived the Lebanese of same.

On the other side the so-called "most moral army in the world" have systematically destroyed pretty much all of Lebanon's infrastructure and target all civilian vehicles in the full knowledge that the civilian population if injured will either be blown up or die of their injuries along the way.

There is a clear difference between the 2 parties in this conflict whether you like it or not and at least Hezbollah are honest in that they make no claims about morality.

The biggest difference of course is that Israel is a so-called democracy claiming moral superiority when they are quite obviously the worst offender and hypocrites to boot.

by Mr. T. Fri Jul 21, 2006 13:15

You are trolling for a response to your criticism of Israel. You won't get it from me.

However, I won't tolerate lies and bullshit propagated in the defense of murderous muslim religious fanatics. As a progressive and athiest, Hezbollah and their puppet masters are my mortal enemy. To wit you lay this pile of shite on me:

like it or not and at least Hezbollah are honest in that they make no claims about morality.


Hezbollah literally means "Party of God" how much more fucking self-righteously moral can you get?

by Ali H. Fri Jul 21, 2006 14:23

But you will tolerate lies and bullshit in the defence of Israeli fanatics that we are being subjected to from every media orifice including Indymedia?

I repeat my assertion that Hezbollah make no claims as to being the "most moral army in the world".

Perhaps you are unconcerned given your "mortal" armchair-general opposition to Hezbollah and acquiesce to the "greater good" of holding back a ceasefire in order to allow the Israelis to raze the whole of Lebanon and displace all of its population?

Because of the butchery of 350 Lebanese and the displacement of 500-700 thousand more of them by the same army it does nothing to enhance Israel's security.

In fact it is already having the opposite effect and is bolstering support for Hezbollah.

In fact the latest news reports suggest that the Lebanese government army will fight alongside Hezbollah in the case of a large scale Israeli invasion.

This is far from the simple religious fanaticism you suggest and has more to do with national self-determination than anything.

Much as Ho Chi Minh and Castro had no alternative but to embrace communism to free their nations the Palestinians and Lebanese have had to embrace Islamist fundamentalism as the only way to free themselves from Israeli occupation.

I would remind you and other apologists for Israel that prior to 1982 Hezbollah did not even exist and only came into being during the 20 years of brutal Israeli occupation in which no one including Irish UN peacekeepers and those under their protection (Qana) was spared from IDF butchery.

The Palestinians got nowhere with secular resistance and secular organisations such as the PLO were deliberately undermined by the Israelis who helped to set up and fund Hamas so they could consolidate their illegal settlements in the West Bank.

by Mr. T. Fri Jul 21, 2006 14:38

"Perhaps you are unconcerned given your "mortal" armchair-general opposition to Hezbollah"

For the moment Hezbollah are not in my sphere of influence and I choose not to bring them into deeper levels of my sphere of interest. However, there may come a time when I - and many millions of others like me in the Europe - will have no choice for our survival but to get up out of our armchairs and physically defend against islamists using guns or even bare hands. I don't look forward to that day but I am ready to accept that fate should it come to pass.

Again, I don't know what your problem is with reading comprehension, but I am not defending Israel. They must stop killing civilians in Lebanon and exit to UN borders immediately. FULL STOP.

Hezbollah and their masters should be dealth with by the international community, not Israel - the UN should be sending heavily armed troops to Lebanon to bring calm to the region and disarm the terrorists.

by pat c Fri Jul 21, 2006 14:47

the UN should be sending heavily armed troops to Lebanon to bring calm to the region and disarm the terrorists.

I take it that you include the IDF in that? The killing of over 300 civilians can only be regarded as an act of terrorism.

I share your abhorrence of Islamists but this is not the usual situation. A victory for Hezbollah will not result in Lebanon becoming an Islamic State. By victory I mean that Lebanese prisoners held by Israel will be released and the IDF soldiers will also be released.

There is a natural limit to the growth of Hamas, it only gets its membership and support from the Shia community. The Iranian Mullahs may be the paymasters of Hezbollah but they might not be around for much longer. Actually the only thing that would guarantee the mullahs remaining in power is US aggression. Support the Iranian Opposition, only internal action will topple the Theocracy.

by Mr. T. Fri Jul 21, 2006 15:10

If any IDF cross the UN blue line into Lebanon they should be disarmed. Hezbollah militia are considered criminals by the Lebanese government and have no brief as a military force and they should be disarmed.

And what exactly do you mean by a "Hezbollah victory"? What would that look like? That Hezbollah successfully overthrows and occupies Israel? Or that they force Israel to hand over the Hezbollah prisoners?

I don't share your optimism about the overthrow of the mullah's. They're entrenched and hold all the keys to power in the region. I hardly see any evidence that their power is waning.

by Mr. T. Fri Jul 21, 2006 15:32

I overlooked your statement on what victory means... apologies.

In light of events I think the only way to defuse the immediate military confrontation is for Israel to release the Hezbollah prisoners and Hezbollah to release the IDF hostages. Pressure from international community must be applied to Israel.

For the longer term, the UN must take a more active and hands-on stand in the region, disarming all the illegal militias in Lebanon and enforcing the blue line. Israel's military and covert ops must be reined in as well - through UN based reprimands or sanctions, as well as by active UN peacekeeping.

by Tony Fri Jul 21, 2006 16:29

Mr T says:
"As for carpet bombing Iran, Tony, you know very well that my comment was in the context of a the international community's last ditch effort to prevent Iran from deploying nuclear weapons"
Well, that's ok then, eh. The international community (we know who that means US, Britain and so on) have your approval to carpet bomb Iran if they tell you they have to. Sort of like they did in Vietnam, I suppose.
It's an aside, but interesting choice of words you have when you talk about Arab hostages kidnapped by the Israeli colonialists, and the Israeli gunmen arrested by Lebanese. You, of course, get it the other way around.
Let's spell it out - the Israeli regime is the cause of war and slaughter in the middle east, and is based on racism.

by @ Fri Jul 21, 2006 17:34

You can only talk "Geopolitics" upto a point without involving the arms trade in your conversation. For example many people are talking about Israel & Hezbollah at the moment. Hezbollah don't have an inexhaustible supply of arms just as Israel has now proven it doesn't have an inexhaustible list of targets. So this last week I've been examining the order books from European states to Israel.
Both France & Switzerland are still supplying arms. Odd when you consider that both those states are now evacuating their citizens because of the threat posed by use of those arms....

by neil delaney Fri Jul 21, 2006 18:31

Here is the email of the Israeli ambassador to Ireland
I would urge everyone opposed to Israel's war crimes in Palestine and Lebanon
to contact him immediately and voice your objections.
H.E. Daniel Megidd
ambsec@dublin.mfa.gov.il

by Ali H. Fri Jul 21, 2006 20:08

"The Hezbollah missile threat to Israel has expanded not only in quantity but also in quality. In recent years, the group's operational artillery reach has grown. Experts and analysts generally put the Hezbollah rocket force somewhere between 10,000 and 12,000 missiles.[3] The heart of this arsenal remains rooted in Hezbollah's massive stocks—perhaps 7,000 to 8,000—of 107mm and 122mm Katyusha rockets, virtually all of which were supplied directly from existing Iranian army stocks.[4]"

http://www.meforum.org/article/806

At todays rate of fire (85 missiles) Hezbollah could keep it up for 120-140 days (over 4 months!), far too long for the Olmert government to survive even assuming the IDF were successful in wiping out Hezbollahs stocks, and secondly that the stocks were not replenished.

Doesn't look too good for Israel and eventually they will have to trade Hezbollah prisoners and call off their attacks.

by Ali H. Fri Jul 21, 2006 20:15

For armchair generals such as Mr. T I'd reccomend reading http://www.meforum.org/article/806 before signing up to fight Hezbollah:

"Hezbollah has faced concentrated artillery and air attacks from Israel before and has had little difficulty in further expanding its power and strategic reach."

by Mr. T. Fri Jul 21, 2006 21:45

the nazi's were a difficult adversary but were defeated and hezbollah have nothing on the nazis.

let's hope we don't have to prove out either of our theories. hopefully a diplomatic solution will arise and military action by UN or anyone else will be unnecessary and israel and hezbollah will exchange prisoners and leave lebanon to live in peace. i don't have much optimism for peace but i have hope.

by Ali H. Sat Jul 22, 2006 14:52

Hezbollah to the Nazis is ridiculous ziobull with no basis in reality. Only the most ardent Zionists and the etremely gullible are likely to beliee such claims.

by Mr. T. Sat Jul 22, 2006 15:48

you said hezbollah would be a difficult adversary in a military conflict.

I was responding to that suggestion by comparing Hezbollah to Nazi's - that the Nazi's were a difficult enemy but were ultimately defeated. The point being that for a worthy cause how difficult the battle with the enemy may be is irrelevant and not an pre-indicator of outcome.

But now that you brought it up, there are many parallels between Hezbollah ideology and that of Nazis - particularly in reference to anti-semitism. The difference is that for the moment is that Hezbollah are not in control of a state with any significant Jewish population and therefore have not had the opportunity to commit genocide. Given a chance, Hezbollah's public statements and track record suggest they would likely outclass the Nazi's in terms of genocidal enthusiasm and efficiency.

by sylvia - none Sat Jul 22, 2006 15:53

an e-mail to me last night from Rafah (southern tip of Gaza and crossing point into Egypt) says there is now no food and no water.
Israel is, again, guilty of war crimes.

by Ali H. Sun Jul 23, 2006 09:39

How exactly is there a parallel between Hezbollah and the Nazis?

Iran and presumably Hezbollah allow the practice of other religions such as Zoroastrianism, Christianity and the Jewish faith and these faiths also have a political representative.

There are also 25000 Jews still resident in Iran who own businesses land etc.

How do you explain their presence if the Iranians/Hezbollah are Nazis.

If making the Muslim religion the state religion makes the Iranians Nazis then they are as Nazi as the Israelis are.

In any case Iranian Jews are subject to the same regieme as all other non-Muslims.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iranian_Jews

In fact probably less so in that land ownership in Israel is essentially limited to Jews only and there are laws preventing free movement of Muslims including effective restrictions on whom they can marry!

http://www.palestinefacts.org/pf_1991to_now_israel_land.php

http://www.counterpunch.org/cook05192006.html

by Mr. T. Sun Jul 23, 2006 13:36

Hitler during the second great war, deluded his people into believing that the Jews were at the centre of all of their problems. When the brainwashing of his minions was at its peak he focused the blind ignorant rage into a catalyst for both his militaristic adventures as well as genocide of Jews, Homosexuals, Gypsies, and eastern-european "mud people".

Iran and it's puppet terrorists are parroting the same anti-semitic slogans and myths as the German nazi's before them. That there is a very small insignificant Jewish population in Iran (30,000) is not relevent - their target is the annihilation of the Jewish state and eventually the establishment of the Caliphate throughout Europe. Many Jews lived in Germany without fear for the initial stages of Hitler's rule, not believing he would be capable of any great harm.

Ahmadinejad in his own words questions the Holocaust and calls for Jews to be returned to Europe or elsewhere:

Ahmadinejad: Look here, my views are quite clear. We are saying that if the Holocaust occurred, then Europe must draw the consequences and that it is not Palestine that should pay the price for it. If it did not occur, then the Jews have to go back to where they came from. I believe that the German people today are also prisoners of the Holocaust. Sixty million people died in the Second World War. World War II was a gigantic crime. We condemn it all. We are against bloodshed, regardless of whether a crime was committed against a Muslim or against a Christian or a Jew. But the question is: Why among these 60 million victims are only the Jews the center of attention?

from: http://service.spiegel.de/cache/international/0,1518,41....html

Ahmadinejad further denies Holocaust and calls it a myth:

"They have created a myth today that they call the massacre of Jews and they consider it a principle above God, religions and the prophets," he said.

from: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4527142.stm

Hezbollah as well as Hamas and other islamist terrorist organisations all work with the Muslim Brotherhood, whose objectives are global domination:

The Muslim Brotherhood has historically and continues to actively pursue the establishment of a Muslim regime that will serve as the basis to re-establish the Caliphate, not only by defending violence against civilians, The current leader of the international Muslim Brotherhood, Mohammad Mahdi Akef,[7] "recently issued a new strategy calling on all its member organizations to serve its global agenda of defeating the West. He called on individual members of the Muslim Brotherhood worldwide to not only join the "resistance" to the U.S. financially, but also through active participation."[8] In the MB Project (1982), Point of Departure[9] instructs members," To use diverse and varied surveillance systems, in several places, to gather information and adopt a single effective warning system serving the worldwide Islamic movement. In fact, surveillance, policy decisions and effective communications complement each other."
[...]

Among the many permanent, negative features of Shari'a is a system that subjugates and oppresses non-Muslims. It requires non-Muslims to convert to Islam or pay the jizya [154] tax, a form of extortion, creating a "contract" (dhimma) that "guarantees" the infidels' lives and possessions. In a recent essay [155] Dr. Andrew Bostom quotes the Arabic scholar, E.W. Lane, who bluntly calls the tax on "free non-Muslim subjects …compensation for not being slain."

The system's "obligations" institutionalize discrimination (dhimmitude) that targets Jews and Christians. Others, like such Hindus, and Buddhists ostensibly have a choice to convert or to be slaughtered, although historically, they were often offered an even more degrading dhimma than the "People of the Book." [156] These regulations prohibit dhimmis from possessing arms, ringing church bells, testifying in courts, building and restoring houses of worship while restricting many other civil rights as well. Like Nazi regulations, the Islamic rules also require non-Muslims to wear special, identifying clothes. These key features of the Shari'a and Islamic ideology are political, not merely religious.


from: http://www.aina.org/news/20060616105850.htm

by Ali H. Mon Jul 24, 2006 10:37

I find this hard to believe. I would suggest it is more likely than secular German Jews found it impossible to believe that their co-citizens were gearing up to annihilate them.

Your comparison with Iran is simply ridiculous.

Surely if the Iranians and their allies were hell bent on eliminating all Jews as you claim, then they would have gotten around to doing something about in the 27 YEARS since the Iranian revolution?

During the same 27 years the Israelis have managed to devastate Lebanon twice and kill tens of thousands of Lebanese and Palestinians.

During this time they who have the means to comit genocide have been quitely ethnically cleansing and settling Palestinian land, not making rabble rousing statements which they have no means to carry out.

by Bad Goy Mon Jul 24, 2006 11:24

"In Israel's actions today we can detect many of the elements of hubris: an imperial arrogance, a distortion of reality, an awareness of its military superiority, the self-righteousness with which it wrecks the social infrastructure of weaker states, and a belief in its racial superiority. The loss of many civilian lives in Gaza and Lebanon matters less than the capture or death of a single Israeli soldier. In this, Israeli actions are validated by the US."