What’s new?

“. . Unit 101 was commanded by an aggressive and ambitious young major named Ariel Sharon. Sharon’s order was to penetrate Qibya, blow up houses, and inflict heavy casualties on its inhabitants. His success in carrying out this order surpassed all expectations. The full and macabre story of what happened at Qibya was revealed only during the morning after the attack. The village had been reduced to a pile of rubble: forty-five houses had been blown up, and sixty-nine civiliains, two-thirds of them women and children, had been killed. Sharon and his men claimed that they had no idea that anyone was hiding in the houses. The UN observer who inspected the reached a different conclusion: ‘One story was repeated time after time: the bullet splintered door, the body sprawled across the threshold, indicating that the inhabitants had been forced by heavy fire to stay inside until their homes were blown up over them.’” Source: Avi Shlaim: The Iron Wall (Penguin Books, 2000).

Avi Shlaim holds joint Israeli-British citizenship and is professor of international relations at St Anthony’s College, Oxford. He sets out his position on Zionism at some length here:
http://www.melaniephillips.com/diary/archives/Zionism%20AS.pdf

Dave – you haven’t mentioned that the flotilla was boarded in international waters. If anybody but the Israeli navy had done this then it would be called piracy immediately.

Btw the Qibya massacre reported @1 above here occurred in October 1953:

“The act was condemned by the US State Department, the UN Security Council, and by Jewish communities worldwide. As a result, aid was temporarily suspended to Israel.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qibya_massacre

Note this observation of Larry Summers when he was President of Harvard in September 2002:

“But where anti-Semitism and views that are profoundly anti-Israeli have traditionally been the primary preserve of poorly educated right-wing populists, profoundly anti-Israel views are increasingly finding support in progressive intellectual communities. Serious and thoughtful people are advocating and taking actions that are anti-Semitic in their effect if not their intent.”
http://masterstable.john812.com/archives/antisemite.htm

Plus ca change…

Plus, two of the ships attacked in international waters are Turkish and as Turkey are members of NATO this should put Israel in a very tricky situation.

The weird thing is, it’s obvious that Israel wouldn’t suffer from ending the blockade of Gaza, withdrawing from the West Bank and allowing the Palestinians self-determination. Indeed, I think it’s certain that Israel would actually benefit, and yet they persist in these ridiculous (to say the least) policies.

I tend to agree with Dave’s post. Comments that follow which criticise the aid convoy organisers are not apologies for Israeli tactics.

1. Israeli forces have been heavy handed in recent years. The organisers must have understood that their ships would have been forcefully stopped before they got to Gaza.

2. If the mission was seriously about humanitarian aid, why put 650 peace activists and journalists on the ships? A couple of token figures on each ship would have sufficed to make a political point.

3. If you are going to put 650 peace activists and journalists on the ships, make sure that you vet them in advance. When the IDF boards your ship, you don’t want a bunch of hot heads “on your side”. You want beardies, sandal wearers and vicars who will invite the invaders to share a cup of tea. Wave a white flag and demonstrate your belief in non-violent demonstration.

4. Never demonstrate sympathy with Hamas, Hezbollah et al. They are enemies of peace and freedom, not defenders of the people who deserve humanitarian aid.

5. The convoy had an easy way to make their point about insufficient humanitarian aid to Gaza. They could have sailed their convoy, relinquished their ships to the IDF, exchanged letters of protest — all performed in peace and respect.

Why did the largest Turkish “aid” ship have 500 passengers?
Sounds more like a PR/media outfit than an aid convoy.
But that couldnt possibly be the case, could it?

“Israel seemingly revels in brutality to a degree without current parallel among democratic nations.”

Without wanting to condone Israel’s actions, exactly how do they differ to the US and UK in this respect?

” Israeli forces have been heavy handed in recent years”

Recent years?

Try the sinking of SS Patria in Haifa harbour in November 1940:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patria_disaster

And the bombing of the King David Hotel in Jerusalem in July 1946:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_David_Hotel_bombing

Barak, the current Israeli “defence” minister is quoted in the news about the armed boarding of ships sailing in international waters. When he was previously leader and prime minister of Israel (1999-2000), a mission to Israel, Gaza and the West Bank by a US-based human rights group, Physicians for Human Rights (PHR), led them to make this report in November 2000:

“The PHR team found that the Israel Defense Force (IDF) has used live ammunition and rubber bullets excessively and inappropriately to control demonstrators, and that based on the high number of documented injuries to the head and thighs, soldiers appear to be shooting to inflict harm, rather than solely in self-defense. . . ”
http://physiciansforhumanrights.org/library/documents/reports/report-useofforce-israel.pdf

@7 Charlieman

The IDF seems to have happily obliged with its brutality, hasn’t it? Beardies or not, “He looked like he was angry and had a stick” isn’t justification for machine gunning someone after boarding their ship in international waters.

Which side is happiest with this outcome tonight?

It looks from film footage, that the Israeli soldiers were attacked from the moment they dropped on to one ship. If someone comes at you with a penknife and you have a rifle there are two choices.
To surrender or shoot the guy.

It looks like the Israelis have been suckered and they’re not happy.

”A Special Place in Hell / The Second Gaza War: Israel lost at sea”
http://www.haaretz.com/blogs/a-special-place-in-hell/a-special-place-in-hell-the-second-gaza-war-israel-lost-at-sea-1.293246

@10 Bob B wrt IDF heavy handedness: “Recent years?”

I wrote those words knowing that I might be a sucker for a quick rebuttal.

I could have composed a longer introduction about how the IDF were less trigger happy when Israel was engaged in multilateral discussions with Bill Clinton’s government. At times outside those discussions, Israeli forces have been very aggressive. I merely used the expression “recent years” as short hand for the period when the US and others have failed to put a friendly, restraining hand on the shoulder of Israel.

@11 Yurrzem!: “The IDF seems to have happily obliged with its brutality, hasn’t it?”

Read my words, friend. My wishes were that the aid convoy delivered its political and humanitarian objectives without conflict. The convoy should have made it clear that they did not seek violence.

Charlieman,

For an illuminating, fully documented perspective on the Palestine conflict, I thoroughly commend Avi Shlaim’s book: The Iron Wall (Penguin Books).

There’s a long history of critics of Israeli aggression being summarily dismissed by the powerful Israel lobby as anti-semitic but it is difficult to make that claim stick with Shlaim because of his scholarship, ethnicity and academic affiliation.

Try this review of his latest book: Israel and Palestine (Verso Books):
http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2009/oct/24/shlaim-israel-palestine-book-review

Try, too, Gerald Kaufman speaking in Parliament on: Israel acting like Nazis in Gaza
http://www.youtube.com/watch?gl=GB&hl=en-GB&v=qMGuYjt6CP8

Bob B: The pile of books that I will read one day is imperilous to domesticity. Thus few books can be added.

Dig up the fine Gerald Kaufman essay in the Guardian when he thinks again about Israel.

The conservatives in the coalition have a made a predictable response.
What is the view of the liberals. their voices seem silent on the issue.

Without wanting to condone Israel’s actions, exactly how do they differ to the US and UK in this respect?
Have the US and UK attacked an aid ship.

Why did the largest Turkish “aid” ship have 500 passengers?
Sounds more like a PR/media outfit than an aid convoy.
So does the Queen Elizabeth, should that be attacked.

How anyone can defend these actions is beyond me. Why can a member of the right , just once say , you know this was wrong.

“The convoy should have made it clear that they did not seek violence.”

Would not have made any difference. Israel has learned that it can do what the fuck it likes and America will do jack shit.

I echo Bob B’s recommendation of Avi Shlaim’s book “The Iron Wall”, definitely the best book I’ve read on the very tricksy subject of Palestine/Israel.

The video released that I saw, shows that Israeli soldiers were attacked before they returned fire.

Also it appears that the day before, the people on the board were recorded by Al Jazeera TV, singing songs that rejoiced in the killing of Jews by Mohammed.

And one women was interviewed saying ‘Right now we face one of two happy endings: either Martyrdom or reaching Gaza.”
http://palwatch.org/main.aspx?fi=676&fld_id=676&doc_id=2337

It only took me 2 minutes to find the above facts out – maybe the folks who were quick to condemn Israel on LC should first have done their own fact finding?

Certainly, there are some questions about what the convoy really intended, and why they approached things the way they did.

And questions why the MSM haven’t mentioned the video’s shown by Al Jazeera ?

Ten hours for the talking points to come out.

This must be bad.

Neil

forgive me being slow on the uptake – what did you intend your post to mean?

So just visiting
Lets get this straight
1. A ferry containing individuals singing racists songs
2. they are in international waters

Then we have the right to board the vessel and start shooting

Well I am not going the next England away game by P and O

Those pesky international rules eh.

The Israeli right and their supporters in this country will justify and defend any act.

Thank god for Israeli secular moderates (both Jew and Palestiian ) they are the only hope

To be fair to Israel;

1. The Israelis offered to transport the humanitarian goods by land from Ashdod aftyer checking them for weapons. The flotilla sailing on to Gaza knew it was going to be stopped, and was clearly intending to cause a problem.

2. The flotilla left Turkey singing Intifada songs, and were armed with makeshift weapons at least. Peace protestors???

3. The Israelis troops landed on the ship with paintball guns as weapons – pointing to at least an attempt at a bloodless operation. Those troops were attacked as they landed.

From my point of view, it looks like the Israelis botched the operation badly, but weren’t going out of their way to cause an international scene. The so-called peace protesters clearly were aiming to have some kind of incident or stand-off, otherwise why not let the goods they were carrying be transported by land, after checking for weapons?

To be fair to Israel;

1. The Israelis offered to transport the humanitarian goods by land from Ashdod aftyer checking them for weapons. The flotilla sailing on to Gaza knew it was going to be stopped, and was clearly intending to cause a problem.

Thats OK if the Palestinians can do the same by checking goods going into Israel

2. The flotilla left Turkey singing Intifada songs, and were armed with makeshift weapons at least. Peace protestors???
Yes and then the settlers don’t singing anti Arabic songs. Are you really saying that because they SINGING anti israeli songs they are a danger to Israel.
So any football supporter singing bigoted songs in South Africa or at the Den then the police should open fire on them.

3. The Israelis troops landed on the ship with paintball guns as weapons – pointing to at least an attempt at a bloodless operation. Those troops were attacked as they landed.
Why attack with them paint guns in the first place and the guys on the boat didn’t know that. Also for trained troops to go straight to shooting shows a blood lust

From my point of view, it looks like the Israelis botched the operation badly, but weren’t going out of their way to cause an international scene.
Why go onto the ship then
The so-called peace protesters clearly were aiming to have some kind of incident or stand-off, otherwise why not let the goods they were carrying be transported by land, after checking for weapons?
Even if they did, most protesters are looking for a reaction but you don’t shoot them. You could argue the tIananmen square protesters were looking for a reaction. Did they deserve to die