Israel On Killing Spree In Gaza

[Magda Hassan]

and the local GAZA press (evidently the ONLY press in there at the moment) reliable-valuable disinterested resource?

Some threads just need a bit perspective (this case, the bashed side of the conflict speaks out...)

What perspective is that? The Israeli government party line is being spread all over the MSM. It's not like they haven't got an outlet for their propaganda. I don't feel inclined to give them any more space here especially given their relationship to the truth is debatable and can only be maintained through sophistry and much sommersaulting mentally and ethically.

Well, its the Israeli military keeping out the media. If they want a different perspective they better let others in there to observe what has been happening. They cannot complain about the coverage if they are not letting in any one to cover the crimes. They wont even let the Red Cross in. As for the Gaza press they are at least there (well they can't even leave) and are eye witnesses to the horror.

Even with out the media coverage it is clear the actions of the IDF amount to genocide. The people of Gaza are being starved, terrorised, ghettoised, economically impoverished and blockaded, imprisoned, threatened with extermination, denied medical treatment.

Hamas is not my idea of a representative government either but that is who the Palestinians chose to represent them in fair and open elections in 2006 observed by outsiders and they do at least put food on the tables of Palestinians. Hamas are also a creation of the Israeli secret services. They were used to create divisions in PLO/Fatah to weaken and split the Palestinian political leadership. Successfully. Israel reaps what it sowed both what it wanted and the unintended outcomes. The realitiy is that Hamas and the Palestinians can and will live with Israelis and Jews as people but they cannot be denied their own future to determine in their own homeland. The Palestinians have been continuously resident in this area for several thousand years and aren't going anywhere. Israel just has to deal that that tiny fact.

[Myra Bronstein]

What perspective is that? The Israeli government party line is being spread all over the MSM. It's not like they haven't got an outlet for their propaganda. I don't feel inclined to give them any more space here especially given their relationship to the truth is debatable and can only be maintained through sophistry and much sommersaulting mentally and ethically.

Well, its the Israeli military keeping out the media. If they want a different perspective they better let others in there to observe what has been happening. They cannot complain about the coverage if they are not letting in any one to cover the crimes. ...

Perfectly said Maggie.

[David Guyatt]

The London Times is as MSM as it gets, so I think the following report from the ICRC on page 3 today is relevant (btw, I don't read the Times normally but coincidence has intervened). Having once worked for the ICRC in an unpaid consultancy role, I have the great respect for their modern work -- a long way from the days of WWII.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/wo...478395.ece

From The Times
January 9, 2009
Red Cross accuses Israel of 'unacceptable' conduct in Gaza
Martin Fletcher and Azmi Keshawi
For four days Red Cross officials pressed the Israeli military for access to bomb-shattered homes in the Zaytun neighbourhood of Gaza City. Finally Israel promised safe passage with the help of a Red Cross rescue team and four ambulances from the Palestine Red Crescent Society. What they found exceeded their worst fears.

In one house they discovered four small children - alive but terrified, emaciated and too weak to stand – lying on mattresses next to 12 corpses including those of their mothers. In a second house they found three dead bodies. In a third they found 15 survivors of the Israeli bombardment, several of them wounded.

“I never expected to see such a horrifying scene. I never saw anything like it in my life,” Abed el-Aziz Abu Aisha, 22, told The Times. “It was like a very ugly scene from a horror movie.”

They had to drag the injured to the ambulances in a cart because barriers erected by the Israeli army made it impossible to bring the vehicles close enough. The rescuers evacuated 18 of the wounded and 12 others who were suffering from exhaustion. They took away two corpses and planned to return later to fetch 13 others.

The International Committee of the Red Cross did not mince its words. In an unusually blunt public statement yesterday it accused the Israeli military of “unacceptable” conduct and of breaching international humanitarian law. It demanded immediate access to the area to search for more wounded survivors sheltering in ruined houses.

“This is a shocking incident,” said Pierre Wettach, the ICRC’s head of delegation. “The Israeli military must have been aware of the situation but did not assist the wounded. Neither did they make it possible for us or the Palestine Red Crescent to assist the wounded.”

Mr Aisha, the Palestinian Red Crescent worker, said the area was so devastated by the Israeli bombardment that he did not recognise it. He said the eight-man rescue team was taunted and threatened by Israeli soldiers as it brought out the survivors.

The wounds of the injured – some of them children – were putrefying, and the survivors were starving, parched and hysterical. “The scenes will be imprinted on my memory for ever,” Mr Aisha said.

In response the Israel Defence Forces (IDF) claimed that it was combating a terrorist organisation – Hamas – that was using civilians as human shields, and insisted that it was working closely with international aid organisations. “Any serious allegations made against the IDF’s conduct will need to be investigated properly, once such a complaint is received formally, within the constraints of the current military operation,” it stated.

Hours after the ICRC’s statement, Israel’s international standing suffered a second blow when the UN Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) suspended its operations in Gaza because of the dangers posed by the Israeli offensive. The announcement came after a Palestinian employee was killed and two others were injured when a UNflagged convoy was hit by Israeli tank shells near the Erez crossing on Gaza’s northern border. The UN insisted that the Israelis had been told of the convoy’s movements. The IDF would not comment last night.

Earlier this week the Israeli military struck a UNrun school it claimed was used by Hamas fighters, killing more than 40 Palestinians. “Operations will remain suspended until Israeli authorities can guarantee the safety and security of our staff,” Christopher Gun-ness, an UNRWA spokesman, said.

UNRWA delivers relief supplies to 750,000 Gazans, and the suspension will deepen what international aid organisations describe as a humanitarian catastrophe in the territory.

**

The mounting death toll:

[Magda Hassan]

Truely sickening. I have never heard the Red Cross speak in such a strong and pointed manner publicly before.

Now the Israeli government spokesperson is admitting that there were no Hamas rockets being fired from the UN school but they deliberately targetted it. It was actually three schools and the locals had been leafletted by the IDF to flee their homes where they then seek refuge in the school then it was bombed by the IDF. What conclusion can be drawn except that they intended to massacre civillians?

http://leninology.blogspot.com/2009/01/u...raeli.html
**************************************************************

Let's be clear about this. On 6 January, three UN-run schools in Gaza were attacked by Israeli forces, not just one. What is more, the previous day an Israeli bombing of a UN school had killed three members of the same family. This sort of killing can usually be dealt with in a perfunctory fashion ('we regret all loss of innocent life, but the responsibility belongs to those who use terror and hide among civilians...'). However, the massacre of 43 people in a UN school bearing flags and insignia and housing some 350 refugees from the fighting (many of whom had fled on orders from IDF leaflets dropped on the towns and cities), demanded a more considered explanation and justification. I just want to take a quick look at the explanations offered by Israeli spokespeople and its military.

The IDF's initial justification for the attack on the Al-Fakhura school was that Hamas had used the building to fire mortars from, and its tanks had responded. Implicit in this was an admission that they had targeted the school on purpose. The tank shells, presumably shot from quite nearby, were fired by soldiers operating under orders from command centres equipped with detailed targeting intelligence. As is now known, the Israeli military had the GPS coordinates not only of this UN school but of the other UN schools that it attacked. We also know that the UN told Israeli forces that the schools were being used as refuges for those driven out of their houses by Israel. And the first thing the IDF let us know is that it was done on purpose. Their excuse was barbaric, of course. The idea that an invading force may attack a building filled with hundreds of terrorised civilians just in order to kill two of those resisting the invasion is nothing short of grotesque. But the fact that it was barbaric was part of the point: rather than bluntly condemning a war crime, you were invited to focus on whether Hamas would be so evil as to attack Israel's brave boys from within a civilian building. Because it is so frequently repeated you might be predisposed to assume that Hamas did indeed position its 'infrastructure of terror' among unsuspecting citizens but, whether you are so predisposed or not, you are already drawn into the macabre calculus of the murderer if you even get involved in that argument. You have tacitly accepted the logic in which war crimes are not merely acceptable, but actually appropriate, if the enemy really is as evil as Israel says. The usual suspects, of course, immediately embraced Israel's excuse: Israel's killing, they expostulated, merely demonstrates the ruthless, diabolical genius of Hamas. If anything, they added, the IDF was admirably restrained in its action. But it is doubtful that many others were taken in.

The second thing that the IDF claimed was that there were Hamas troops hiding inside the building, nestling among the refugees, thereby forcing the Israelis to slaughter the innocent. This is quite a different claim, and the first thing that would occur to any reasonable observer would be that the sudden embellishment reflected some sort of dishonesty ('the elaborations of a bad liar', as Hannibal Lecter would put it). Or perhaps there had been a failure by everyone to get their stories straight and stick to them. At any rate, the logic of the astounding claim that Israel acted in self-defense remained as tortuous as it had been. But Israel claimed to have identified the bodies of Hamas members, and even fed two names to the media, (so once again you were invited to get bogged down in the merits of Israel's claim rather than decide on an appropriate response to the slaughter).

The next part of the story is the most interesting. In order to get around the absurd idea that Hamas military operatives had sneaked into the building and launched mortars without anyone in the school noticing, Israel's spokespeople claimed that Hamas gunmen had taken over the UN building, taken the civilians hostage and used the base to fire mortars at Israeli soldiers. Mark Regev said it was a "very extreme example of how Hamas operates". Such a claim was obviously checkable in a matter of minutes. Any UN personnel present in the school at the time could easily say whether in fact they had all been suffering under Hamas captivity until Israel 'liberated' the building. The UN produced an emphatic denial, based on its own investigations, that there was ever any Hamas fighter in the building. By now, the fact that Israel has never provided any real evidence for its claims, which continue to shapeshift, comes into sharp focus. Moreover, since Israeli troops didn't visit the building or have access to the records of the deceased, it would be highly improbable that they would be able to not only name two of the dead, but also gather intelligence that proved they were members of Hamas' military wing, within such a short space of time.

So, the Israeli government topped that brazenness with a stroke of effrontery that is somehow not adequately captured by the word 'chutzpah'. Israel announced that as it was lodging a complaint with the UN for allowing the building to be secretly used by Hamas. Now it appears that Israeli diplomats admit that no rockets were fired from the school. They are now briefing that there was some mortar fire, but that it came from outside the school. Now, there is no evidence that there was any mortar fire at all, but perhaps you aren't really supposed to believe it. Actually, you were never supposed to believe any of it. There was no way that you were ever expected to be taken in by this pitiful subterfuge. They didn't even present a very convincing lie, or a very good case. What they did was tell you up front that they attacked a clearly marked UN school building filled with civilians on purpose, and then follow it up with a flimsy cover-story followed by an even more flimsy revised cover story and an outlandish allegation against the UN that they have dropped in a matter of hours in such a way as to undermine their previous cover-stories. This is obviously contemptuous, but it isn't just a sensational flip-off to 'world opinion'. They are saying they killed civilians on purpose, that nowhere in Gaza is safe, and that they reserve their right to do it again and offer the same risible mitigations and alibis as before.

[David Healy]

Magda:

from your source blog....

"An extremist minority who should be ostracised. posted by lenin

Here's something to chew over. If you have participated in a public demonstration supporting Israel's operation in Gaza (such as this one or this one), you are a moral idiot... "

posted by a lenin? LMFAO!

Frankly, I'd prefer the following from a latter-day lenin: should we expect a latter-day Jane Fonda type to make her way to GAZA? Maybe carry the message of Hamas terrorists to the world, that being (Hey, its just a few hundred rockets we're lobbing into Israelii cities, what's the problem)? Have same latter-day Fonda type have a photo (or two) taken with Hamas terrorists? Pose having a cup of coffee by a missile or rocket launcher...

You know in the late 60's and early 70's here in the USofA protesters had a way of demonstrating for effect. It worked, on US streets and universities!

Quoting 'biased', not to mention moronic blogger's (with the name lenin no less) seems a bit, er, empty at the moment.

[David Healy]

further.... the below works for me

The War Prayer
by Mark Twain

It was a time of great exulting and excitement. The country was up in arms, the war was on, in every breast burned the holy fire of patriotism; the drums were beating, the bands playing, the toy pistols popping, the bunched firecrackers hissing and sputtering; on every hand and far down the receding and fading spread of roofs and balconies a fluttering wilderness of flags flashed in the sun; daily the young volunteers marched down the wide avenue gay and fine in their new uniforms, the proud fathers and mothers and sisters and sweethearts cheering them with voices choked with happy emotion as they swung by; nightly the packed mass meetings listened, panting, to patriot oratory which stirred the deepest depths of their hearts, and which they interrupted at briefest intervals with cyclones of applause, the tears running down their cheeks the while; in the churches the pastors preached devotion to flag and country, and invoked the God of Battles, beseeching His aid in our good cause in outpourings of fervid eloquence which moved every listener. It was indeed a glad and gracious time, and the half dozen rash spirits that ventured to disapprove of the war and cast doubt upon its righteousness straight way got such a stern and angry warning that for their personal safety's sake they quickly shrank out of sight and offended no more in that way.

Sunday morning came – next day the battalions would leave for the front; the church was filled; the volunteers were there, their young faces alight with martial dreams – visions of the stern advance, the gathering momentum, the rushing charge, the flashing sabers, the flight of the foe, the tumult, the enveloping smoke, the fierce pursuit, the surrender! – then home from the war, bronzed heroes, welcomed, adored, submerged in golden seas of glory! With the volunteers sat their dear ones, proud, happy, and envied by the neighbors and friends who had no sons and brothers to send forth to the field of honor, there to win for the flag, or failing, die the noblest of noble deaths. The service proceeded; a war chapter from the Old Testament was read; the first prayer was said; it was followed by an organ burst that shook the building, and with one impulse the house rose, with glowing eyes and beating hearts, and poured out that tremendous invocation:

"God the all-terrible! Thou who ordainest, Thunder thy clarion and lightning thy sword!"

Then came the "long" prayer. None could remember the like of it for passionate pleading and moving and beautiful language. The burden of its supplication was, that an ever-merciful and benignant Father of us all would watch over our noble young soldiers, and aid, comfort, and encourage them in their patriotic work; bless them, shield them in the day of battle and the hour of peril, bear them in His mighty hand, make them strong and confident, invincible in the bloody onset; help them to crush the foe, grant to them and to their flag and country imperishable honor and glory.

An aged stranger entered and moved with slow and noiseless step up the main aisle, his eyes fixed upon the minister, his long body clothed in a robe that reached to his feet, his head bare, his white hair descending in a frothy cataract to his shoulders, his seamy face unnaturally pale, pale even to ghastliness. With all eyes following and wondering, he made his silent way; without pausing, he ascended to the preacher's side and stood there, waiting.

With shut lids the preacher, unconscious of his presence, continued his moving prayer, and at last finished it with the words, uttered in fervent appeal,

"Bless our arms, grant us victory, O Lord our God, Father and Protector of our land and flag!"

The stranger touched his arm, motioned him to step aside – which the startled minister did – and took his place. During some moments he surveyed the spellbound audience with solemn eyes, in which burned an uncanny light; then in a deep voice he said:

"I come from the Throne – bearing a message from Almighty God!"

The words smote the house with a shock; if the stranger perceived it he gave no attention.

"He has heard the prayer of His servant your shepherd, and will grant it if such be your desire after I, His messenger, shall have explained to you its import – that is to say, its full import. For it is like unto many of the prayers of men, in that it asks for more than he who utters it is aware of – except he pause and think.

"God's servant and yours has prayed his prayer. Has he paused and taken thought? Is it one prayer? No, it is two – one uttered, the other not. Both have reached the ear of Him Who heareth all supplications, the spoken and the unspoken. Ponder this – keep it in mind. If you would beseech a blessing upon yourself, beware! lest without intent you invoke a curse upon a neighbor at the same time. If you pray for the blessing of rain upon your crop which needs it, by that act you are possibly praying for a curse upon some neighbor's crop which may not need rain and can be injured by it.

"You have heard your servant's prayer – the uttered part of it. I am commissioned of God to put into words the other part of it – that part which the pastor – and also you in your hearts – fervently prayed silently. And ignorantly and unthinkingly? God grant that it was so!

You heard these words: 'Grant us victory, O Lord our God!' That is sufficient. The whole of the uttered prayer is compact into those pregnant words. Elaborations were not necessary. When you have prayed for victory you have prayed for many unmentioned results which follow victory – must follow it, cannot help but follow it. Upon the listening spirit of God the Father fell also the unspoken part of the prayer. He commandeth me to put it into words. Listen!

"O Lord our Father, our young patriots, idols of our hearts, go forth to battle – be Thou near them! With them – in spirit – we also go forth from the sweet peace of our beloved firesides to smite the foe. O Lord our God, help us to tear their soldiers to bloody shreds with our shells; help us to cover their smiling fields with the pale forms of their patriot dead; help us to drown the thunder of the guns with shrieks of their wounded, writhing in pain; help us to lay waste their humble homes with hurricanes of fire; help us to wring the hearts of their unoffending widows with unavailing grief; help us to turn them out roofless with their little children to wander unfriended the wastes of their desolated land in rags and hunger and thirst, sports of the sun flames of summer and the icy winds of winter, broken in spirit, worn with travail, imploring Thee for the refuge of the grave and denied it – for our sakes who adore Thee, Lord, blast their hopes, blight their lives, protract their bitter pilgrimage, make heavy their steps, water their way with tears, stain the white snow with the blood of their wounded feet! We ask it, in the spirit of love, of Him Who is the Source of Love, and Who is the ever-faithful refuge and friend of all that are sore beset and seek His aid with humble and contrite hearts. Amen."

[After a pause.] "Ye have prayed it; if ye still desire it, speak! The messenger of the Most High waits."

not bad for the author of Huck Finn, huh?

Might someone pass this on to the bloggster: lenin

[Mark Stapleton]

You know in the late 60's and early 70's here in the USofA protesters had a way of demonstrating for effect. It worked, on US streets and universities!

Americans in the 60's and 70's weren't starving and imprisoned like present day Gazans, you ignorant knucklehead.

Made bold by The Moderators to indicate the sort of language that in most instances -- including this post -- has no redeeming value. In the future, please choose eloquence over malevolence.

-- CD

[Richard Welser]

Not only is the analogy inaccurate but the general flavor is wrong. Palestinians have suffered, at the very least, ethnic cleansing for 60 years. Twain, I imagine, was thinking of the War Between the States. Further, 60’s demonstrators, as noted above, were not particularly deprived. I know. I was one at Kent State.
But Gaza, in spite of the debatable issue of Hamas, clearly has the moral high ground here. In spite of the obvious bias of MSM. Of course, when isn’t it biased?
I’ve always liked that passage from Twain. But the Weltanschaunng in which he existed is not the one we experience.
It’s kind a strange, you know, looking at this portion of our ‘New World’ being formed before our eyes.…. (and its essence expressed in front of our eyes). Of course, because I relate the right wing controllers in Israel to the Likud sympathizers here … and see that small whole as part of a larger whole … with which I do not sympathize, I cannot wish well towards Israel. A lot of good people in Israel. But neither do I wish well towards the American Empire. A lotta good people here too.….

But not enough. There are never enough.

[Magda Hassan]

"An extremist minority who should be ostracised. posted by lenin

Here's something to chew over. If you have participated in a public demonstration supporting Israel's operation in Gaza (such as this one or this one), you are a moral idiot... "

posted by a lenin? LMFAO!

David, this is not what I posted. If you want to know the context of this though the poster is referring to some group who claim to be for peace but are out there supporting Israel government actions (which are military and not peaceful) S/He seems to be saying they have not thought their actions through and doesn't want to be associated with them. But this is just differences of opinion between some left factions and is not of interest to me and I don't know why it is of interest to you.

Frankly, I'd prefer the following from a latter-day lenin: should we expect a latter-day Jane Fonda type to make her way to GAZA? Maybe carry the message of Hamas terrorists to the world, that being (Hey, its just a few hundred rockets we're lobbing into Israelii cities, what's the problem)? Have same latter-day Fonda type have a photo (or two) taken with Hamas terrorists? Pose having a cup of coffee by a missile or rocket launcher...

You know in the late 60's and early 70's here in the USofA protesters had a way of demonstrating for effect. It worked, on US streets and universities!

I have NO idea what you are trying to say here. Are you saying that protesting is good as it works so there should be a Jane Fonda type to go and pose with tanks and protest? What exactly are you protesting for or against? Hamas or Israel? Or Palestinians or Jews? Or war in general? Jane Fonda? Sorry David. I just have no idea what you are trying to say here. Or even if it is a joke.

Quoting 'biased', not to mention moronic blogger's (with the name lenin no less) seems a bit, er, empty at the moment.

Don't allow yourself to be distracted by shiny things David. Who cares what a blogger calls him or her self. Look at the book not the cover. Did you read what they said? Did you check out the links in the article?

In case you didn't here is the link where the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (the part of the UN that look after the worlds refugees and who ran the school that the Israeli military bombed) speaks officially of how Israel has retracted their statement that there were hamas rockets fired from the school. http://leninology.blogspot.com/2009/01/u...raeli.html

Here is the link where it says that 3 UN run schools were hit on Tuesday. Well, to paraphrase Oscar Wilde to lose one school is a misfortune but to lose two looks like carelessness. What does that make three? Looks like deliberate targeting to me.

http://www.nowlebanon.com/NewsArticleDet...x?ID=73907

A strike near the Al-Fakhura school in Jabaliya in northern Gaza, where at least 40 people were killed, according to medics, was Israel’s third deadly attack near United Nations-run schools on Tuesday.

Here is the link from the UN about the family killed at the school a designated refuge centre:
http://reliefweb.int/rw/rwb.nsf/db900SID...c=3&cc=pse

Three members of the same Palestinian family were killed last night whilst taking shelter in an UNRWA school designated as a temporary refuge from the violence. Well before the current fighting, the UN had given to the Israeli authorities the GPS co-ordinates of all its installations in Gaza, including the UNRWA school which was struck. In addition yesterday, an entire family of five children and their parents were killed when the Israeli army shelled their home. These deaths highlight the tragic reality of the situation in Gaza that for civilians, neither homes nor UN shelters are safe. Nearly one and a half million civilians are dangerously exposed to the fighting around them. There are no safe places to flee. We call on all parties to uphold international humanitarian law and protect civilians.

Here is the link from the UN stating that there were no Hamas in the school either refugees or casualties: http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0...87,00.html

United Nations investigators say they have uncovered no evidence to support a claim by the Israeli military that Hamas fighters were holed up in a Gaza school, prompting a deadly attack by Israeli forces that killed 40 civilians, many of them children....
But Israeli military officials insist that the mortars were fired from within the crowded schoolyard and that Hamas is using civilians as human shields. The IDF gave the names of two Hamas combatants it says were killed inside the school — Imad and Hassan Abu Askar — who allegedly fired the mortars. But the IDF did not explain how it was able to identify them among the many casualties. Troops did not visit the school after the attack, nor did the IDF have access to a casualty list from Gaza's hospitals.

Here is the link showing Israeli arrogance (and displacement activity) in wanting to charge the UN with harboring Hamas in it buildings. It also shows that Israel’s ability to discern friendly and hostile targets seems to be in considerable doubt as they shot up a building containing their own military. Very professional.
http://news.antiwar.com/2009/01/06/israe...-killings/

And just to make sure here is another link that shows that Israel is admitting that there were no rockets fired from the school by Hamas or any one else. http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/...chool.html

Now, I know that links above are only from the MSM and eyewitnesses to the events and not from or approved by the AIPAC newsletter editor and are there fore biased but I think Lenin or Fifi or Mambo No5 or what ever s/he likes to call themselves has put a respectable bit of work together. Try reading it. Then comment.

[David Healy]

Americans in the 60's and 70's weren't starving and imprisoned like present day Gazans, you ignorant knucklehead.

now Mark, just because Hamas is getting its ass kicked in GAZA there's no sense in you getting riled up -- they're the enemy....

Gazans imprisoned? To bad all those Arab nations in the vicinity can't (better yet: WON'T) open their checkbooks. Gaza should be an oasis what with all that A-RAB oil money floating around. Perhaps you can take up donations.... then the Israelis can put their checkbook away....

So, wake up ignorant dufus... your hand-wringing is noted.... you ever serve, Mark? Or did you come by your bravado out of a box?


Made bold by The Moderators to indicate the sort of language that in most instances -- including this post -- has no redeeming value. In the future, please choose eloquence over malevolence.

-- CD