From Gateway:
Italian reporter Gabriele Barbati, who has now left Gaza and is no longer under direct threat of retaliation by Hamas, is telling the truth about what’s going on there. Hamas bombed the Palestinian camp in Shati – not Israel.
Wednesday, July 30, 2014
Hamas Bombed The Palestinian Refuge Camp In Shati, Not Israel
From Gateway:
“They’re not targeting children. They could target as many children as they want.”
Sam Harris, HERE
Sam is a ‘leading’ atheist, grossed out by the idea of a Jewish state, and yet…
Sam is a ‘leading’ atheist, grossed out by the idea of a Jewish state, and yet…
The current conflict, he notes, has led to terrible images that have hurt Israel’s standing worldwide:
But there is no way to look at the images coming out Gaza—especially of infants and toddlers riddled by shrapnel—and think that this is anything other than a monstrous evil. Insofar as the Israelis are the agents of this evil, it seems impossible to support them. And there is no question that the Palestinians have suffered terribly for decades under the occupation. This is where most critics of Israel appear to be stuck. They see these images, and they blame Israel for killing and maiming babies. They see the occupation, and they blame Israel for making Gaza a prison camp. I would argue that this is a kind of moral illusion, borne of a failure to look at the actual causes of this conflict, as well as of a failure to understand the intentions of the people on either side of it.[Note: I was not saying that the horror of slain children is a moral illusion; nor was I minimizing the suffering of the Palestinians under the occupation. I was claiming that Israel is not primarily to blame for all this suffering.]But then he argues there’s still a difference between the two sides, or as he puts it, “an obvious, undeniable, and hugely consequential moral difference between Israel and her enemies. The Israelis are surrounded by people who have explicitly genocidal intentions towards them.”
And this gets to the heart of the moral difference between Israel and her enemies. And this is something I discussed in The End of Faith. To see this moral difference, you have to ask what each side would do if they had the power to do it.
What would the Jews do to the Palestinians if they could do anything they wanted? Well, we know the answer to that question, because they can do more or less anything they want. The Israeli army could kill everyone in Gaza tomorrow. So what does that mean? Well, it means that, when they drop a bomb on a beach and kill four Palestinian children, as happened last week, this is almost certainly an accident. They’re not targeting children. They could target as many children as they want. Every time a Palestinian child dies, Israel edges ever closer to becoming an international pariah. So the Israelis take great pains not to kill children and other noncombatants. [Note: The word “so” in the previous sentence was regrettable and misleading. I didn’t mean to suggest that safeguarding its reputation abroad would be the only (or even primary) reason for Israel to avoid killing children. However, the point stands: Even if you want to attribute the basest motives to Israel, it is clearly in her self-interest not to kill Palestinian children.]
Not only that, we now know George Washington was Jewish
Barack Obama:
But really?
REALLY?
MUSLIMS BUILT ‘THE VERY FABRIC OF OUR NATION’
I don’t even know what to say anymoreI get it. You want to make a group feel good about itself.On Sunday, President Obama and First Lady Michelle released astatement thanking Muslim Americans for their many “achievements and contributions… to building the very fabric of our nation and strengthening the core of our democracy.”
The comments were made to mark the celebration of Eid-al-Fitr, a time of spiritual renewal for Muslims which comes at the end of the month-long fast of Ramadan. The Obamas said in their statement that Eid “celebrates the common values that unite us in our humanity” and “welcomed their commitment to giving back to their communities.” The International Business Times reports that during Eid, Muslims join in Islamic prayer, while saying “Allahu Akbar,” or “God is Great,” and feasting.
The statement further reads that the administration “wishes Muslims in the United States and around the world a blessed and joyous celebration.” The letter ended with salutation of “Eid Mubarak,” which roughly means “blessed celebration.”
But really?
REALLY?
File under ‘why Israel needs Palestine in a 2 state solution:THEY NEED THE BLOOD’
From MEMRI, without whose help, we would be aware that ignorance is more powerful than fact, savage racism more powerful than the reverse, and that in the middle east, US ideas of Jeffersonian, and Hamiltonian governance simply cannot apply, in fact may be RIDICULOUS.
So for anyone who sees this, and thinks this is ridiculous propaganda, but also think the Palestinians have a grievance because Israel is stolen land, ask yourselves, ‘why do I believe that propaganda?’ and do some research.
A Black Woman Speaks Out Against Students for Justice In Palestine: "You Do Not Have The Right To Invoke My People's Struggle For Your Shoddy Purposes"
From Tablet Magazine:
The student organization Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) is prominent on many college campuses, preaching a mantra of “Freeing Palestine.” It masquerades as though it were a civil rights group when it is not. Indeed, as an African-American, I am highly insulted that my people’s legacy is being pilfered for such a repugnant agenda. It is thus high time to expose its agenda and lay bare some of the fallacies they peddle.
• If you seek to promulgate the legacy of early Islamic colonialists who raped and pillaged the Middle East, subjugated the indigenous peoples living in the region, and foisted upon them a life of persecution and degradation—you do not get to claim the title of “Freedom Fighter.”
• If you support a racist doctrine of Arab supremacism and wish (as a corollary of that doctrine) to destroy the Jewish state, you do not get to claim that the prejudices you peddle are forms of legitimate “resistance.”
• If your heroes are clerics who sit in Gaza plotting the genocide of a people; who place their children on rooftops in the hopes they will get blown to bits; who heap praises upon their fellow gang members when they succeed in murdering Jewish school boys and bombing places of activity where Jews congregate—you do not get to claim that you are some Apollonian advocate of human virtue. You are not.
• If your activities include grieving over the woefully incompetent performance by Hamas rocketeers and the subsequent millions of Jewish souls who are still alive—whose children were not murdered by their rockets; whose limbs were not torn from them; and whose disembowelment did not come into fruition—you do not get to claim that you stand for justice. You profess to be irreproachable. You are categorically not.
• If your idea of a righteous cause entails targeting and intimidating Jewish students on campus, arrogating their history of exile-and-return and fashioning it in your own likeness you do not get to claim that you do so in the name of civil liberty and freedom of expression.
• You do not get to champion regimes that murder, torture, and persecute their own people, deliberately keep them impoverished, and embezzle billions of dollar from them—and claim you are “pro-Arab.” You are not.
• You do not get to champion a system wherein Jews are barred from purchasing land, traveling in certain areas, and living out such an existence merely because they are Jews—and claim that you are promoting equality for all. You do not get to enable that system by pushing a boycott of Jewish owned businesses, shops, and entities—and then claim that you are “against apartheid.” That is evil.
• You do not get to justify the calculated and deliberate bombings, beatings, and lynchings of Jewish men, women, and children by referring to such heinous occurrences as part of a noble “uprising” of the oppressed—that is racism. It is evil.
• You do not get to pretend as though you and Rosa Parks would have been great buddies in the 1960s. Rosa Parks was a real Freedom Fighter. Rosa Parks was a Zionist.
Coretta Scott King was a Zionist.
A. Phillip Randolph was a Zionist.
Bayard Rustin was a Zionist.
Count Basie was a Zionist.
Dr. Martin Luther King Sr. was a Zionist.
Indeed, they and many more men and women signed a letter in 1975 that stated: “We condemn the anti-Jewish blacklist. We have fought too long and too hard to root out discrimination from our land to sit idly while foreign interests import bigotry to America. Having suffered so greatly from such prejudice, we consider most repugnant the efforts by Arab states to use the economic power of their newly-acquired oil wealth to boycott business firms that deal with Israel or that have Jewish owners, directors, or executives, and to impose anti-Jewish preconditions for investments in this country.”
You see, my people have always been Zionists because my people have always stood for the freedom of the oppressed. So, you most certainly do not get to culturally appropriate mypeople’s history for your own. You do not have the right to invoke my people’s struggle for your shoddy purposes and you do not get to feign victimhood in our name. You do not have the right to slander my people’s good name and link your cause to that of Dr. King’s. Our two causes are diametrically opposed to each other.
Your cause is the antithesis of freedom. It has cost hundreds of thousands of lives of both Arabs and Jews. It has separated these peoples, and has fomented animosity between them. It has led to heartache, torment, death and destruction.
It is of course your prerogative to continue to utilize platitudes for your cause. You are entirely within your rights to chant words like “equality” “justice” and “freedom fighter.”
You can keep using those words for as long as you like. But I do not think you know what they mean.
Al Qaeda and Islamic State Flags in London's Tunnels
How would you like to be stuck in this traffic jam?
Jeff Beck & Imelda May
Rock n Roll Party Honoring Les Paul 2010
1. Baby Let's Play House
2. Double Talkin' Baby
3. Cruisin'
4. Train Kept A Rollin'
5. Poor Boy
6. Cry Me A River
7. My Baby Left Me
8. How High The Moon
9. Sitting On Top Of The World
10. Bye Bye Blues
11. The World Is Waiting For The Sunrise
12. Vaya Con Dios
13. Mockin' Bird Hill
14. I'm A Fool To Care
15. Tiger Rag
16. Peter Gunn
17. Rocking Is Our Business
18. Apache
19. Sleep Walk
20. New Orleans
21. Walking In The Sand
22. Please Mr Jailer
23. Casting My Spell On You
24. Twenty Flight Rock
25. The Girl Can't Help It
26. Rock Around The Clock
27. Shake, Rattle & Roll
Jeff Beck (Guitars)
Imelda May (Vocals)
Darrel Higham (Guitars, Vocals)
Al Gare (Bass)
Jason Rebello (Keyboards)
Stephen Rushton (Drums, Backing Vocals)
Dave Priseman (Trumpet)
Leo Green (Saxophone)
Blue Lou Marini (Baritone Saxophone)
Brian Setzer (Guitar, Vocals)
Gary U.S. Bonds (Vocals)
Troy Andrews (Trombone)
WHAT WAS KERRY DOING?
From Paul Mirgenoff at Powerline:
Harsanyi thus concludes that “we either have an incompetent Secretary of State or a momentous shift in Middle East policy.”
We do, indeed, have an incompetent Secretary of State. And under President Obama, our Middle East policy has shifted momentously. But neither phenomenon seems sufficient to explain Kerry’s proposal.
Incompetence is one thing; stupidity another. And the U.S. could have manifested its tilt away from Israel without presenting a proposal it knew would be rejected so emphatically.
My theory is that the Obama administration expected some within the Israeli government to go ballistic, and wanted that reaction.
Why would the American administration want to generate openly expressed outrage against its Secretary of State? To create leverage.
Team Obama could respond to Israeli outrage with outrage of its own. Israel, fearing a deterioration in relations with its traditional ally, would then feel pressure to “make nice” by offering concessions.
Tuesday, July 29, 2014
It's An Open Secret That Hamas Maintains Its Command Center Below Al-Shifa Hospital, But The Media Won't Report That
The idea that one of Hamas' main command bunkers is located beneath Shifa Hospital in Gaza City is one of the worst-kept secrets of the Gaza war. So why aren't reporters in Gaza ferreting it out? The precise location of a large underground bunker equipped with sophisticated communications equipment and housing some part of the leadership of a major terrorist organization beneath a major hospital would seem to qualify as a world-class scoop--the kind that might merit a Pulitzer, or at least a Polk.
GO READ THE WHOLE THING.
Dutch Islamists Waving ISIS Flags Call For Killing “Dirty Jews From The Sewers” During Anti-Israel Protest
From Algermeiner:
Jewish human rights group The Simon Wiesenthal Center on Friday called on Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte to rescind approval for a rally in support of ISIS in the Hague, after protesters, yelling in Arabic and Dutch, proclaimed that “dirty Jews from the sewers” should be killed.
In a fiery letter to Rutte, Dr. Shimon Samuels, SWC Director for International Relations, said similar calls of violence were reported at a rally on July 4, and show that rather than even expressing support for Hamas militants in Gaza, the true intention of the rallies have been to call for the death of Jews.
“Yesterday, the call in Arabic and Dutch was for ‘dirty Jews from the sewers to be killed,’” Samuels said. “This rally had little to do with Gaza solidarity. It was unambiguously targeted against Jews, but also according to the Dutch press sought to lynch journalists, who were pulled to safety by the police, otherwise serving as silent spectators.”
He said that what was “most disturbing” was that, while press reports and photos from the rally show the mass of masked demonstrators calling for violence, the official Public Prosecutor’s press release stated “there were only 40 to 50 people present,” that “the police were present with an Arabic speaking police officer” and “the slogans overheard by this officer were not considered as crossing boundaries.
Hence no arrest was made.” Samuels told the Dutch prime minister, “The YouTube clip clearly shows many more than 50 participants and the slogans at the end of the clip were repeated and quite evident, ‘Maut al-Yahud’ (Death to the Jews), ‘Khaybar, Khaybar’ (The genocide of the Jews of Khaybar) and ‘Those who do not jump are Jews’ (All the Muslims present jumped).”
“Our Center expects you to launch an immediate inquiry into the cover-up by this police officer who betrayed his duty to faithfully translate all slogans – most of which were menacing Jews,” Samuels said, urging the Netherlands “to follow the example of the United Kingdom in banning ISIS and to forbid any further demonstrations in Holland that call for the murder of Jews or any other ‘riff-raff’.”AND THEN THERE'S THIS:
German Police Arrest Muslim Man For Throwing Firebombs At Synagogue
“Israel’s immediate Arab neighbors privately want it to succeed”
WSJ today in an article describing the latest debacle of ‘competency’
regarding our foreign policy, its authors and it’s implementation.
I used to JOKE that Israel would turn to Russia and swap SU-35 airframes 1 for 1 with avionics suited for Russki aircraft. Russia (and China) is/are amoral. They will do anything in their own interest, and Elbit or Rafale suites to go up against any enemy such as UKR, Japan, or the USA would obviously better their position.
Reading what has been said today, and listening to the KIND of TYPICAL ridiculous double-downspeak of the Obama administration makes me think some people in Tel Aviv are beginning to have the same kind of thought.
Above is the IAF of 1967, almost entirely French aircraft
Israel got along from birth until 1966 under a US arms embargo. It may not be as easy for them if they do so again as it is for them to conduct operations today ..but I have no doubt they can do it again, and the USA would be the loser.
I am EMBARASSED
What other self inflicted horrors are we going to bring upon ourselves?The Gaza Cease-Fire Fiasco
Kerry and Obama give both sides reason to keep fighting in Gaza
The question that routinely comes up regarding U.S. foreign policy these days is: What in the world were they thinking? The latest puzzlement is the weekend fiasco in which President Obama and John Kerry pressed a cease-fire that is likely to extend the war between Hamas and Israel.
As Israel’s ground incursion into Gaza enters its third week, the goal of America’s foremost ally in the region is clear. It must degrade Hamas as a military and political force to the greatest extent possible.
That means destroying the rockets the terror group hasn’t yet fired at Israel and especially collapsing the network of tunnels used for smuggling weapons and infiltrating into Israel. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu must be mindful of Palestinian civilian casualties and maintaining domestic and international support, but a victory requires achieving these strategic goals.
The irony is that Israel’s immediate Arab neighbors privately want it to succeed. Jordan wants no part of a Palestinian state run by Hamas, and neither do the Saudis or Egypt’s military government. The Fatah Palestinian faction that runs the West Bank also wants Hamas to emerge weaker. Surely the White House knows this.
Yet over the weekend Secretary of State Kerry blundered into the conflict promoting a cease-fire floated by Turkey and Qatar that was close to the terms demanded by Hamas. The U.S. hasn’t released the details, but Israel’s press has published what it says is a one-page summary. The document called on Israel to negotiate with “Palestinian factions,” meaning direct talks with Hamas, as well as an end to Israel’s military campaign while giving Hamas concessions on border crossings and outside payments. In short, it would have ended the war while leaving Hamas in a position to rebuild its terror economy.
Mr. Obama didn’t endorse the Kerry plan per se. But in a readout of his Sunday phone call to Mr. Netanyahu, the White House said in a statement that, “Building on Secretary Kerry’s efforts, the President made clear the strategic imperative of instituting an immediate, unconditional humanitarian ceasefire that ends hostilities now” and leads to a deal based on the cease-fire in November 2012. That’s the one that let Hamas rearm.
The reaction in Israel was opposition bordering on contempt. Ari Shavit, a center-left columnist for Haaretz, wrote that Mr. Kerry’s “decision to go hand in hand with Qatar and Turkey, and formulate a framework amazingly similar to the Hamas framework, was catastrophic. It put wind in the sails of Hamas’ political leader Khaled Meshal, allowed the Hamas extremists to overcome the Hamas moderates, and gave renewed life to the weakened regional alliance of the Muslim Brotherhood.”
He added that “the Obama administration proved once again that it is the best friend of its enemies, and the biggest enemy of its friends.” And you should hear what Israel’s hawks are saying. We’re told Mr. Kerry is upset about being criticized so publicly by an ally, but Israel is a free society and the U.S. doesn’t get to impose a gag order.
I used to JOKE that Israel would turn to Russia and swap SU-35 airframes 1 for 1 with avionics suited for Russki aircraft. Russia (and China) is/are amoral. They will do anything in their own interest, and Elbit or Rafale suites to go up against any enemy such as UKR, Japan, or the USA would obviously better their position.
Reading what has been said today, and listening to the KIND of TYPICAL ridiculous double-downspeak of the Obama administration makes me think some people in Tel Aviv are beginning to have the same kind of thought.
Above is the IAF of 1967, almost entirely French aircraft
Israel got along from birth until 1966 under a US arms embargo. It may not be as easy for them if they do so again as it is for them to conduct operations today ..but I have no doubt they can do it again, and the USA would be the loser.
Hey Nancy, Why Don't You Just Come Right Out and Say It?
Break this incoherent statement down sentence by sentence:
-----
NANCY PELOSI: "Let me just say that any missile that comes from some place has a return address."
"And if Israel is responding to that address, uh, then ...
"That's a shame that the Palestinians are using, der uh, are rumored to be using children and families as shields for their missiles."
"Uh, should we all, uh, first of all, avoid conflict?"
"The Hamas initiated this."
"Again this has to be something where we try to have a two-state solution."
"We have to support, we have to support Abbas and his role there."
"That we have to ..."
"We have to support Iron Dome to protect the Israelis from the missiles."
"We have to support the Palestinians in what they need."
"And we have to confer again with the Qataris who have told me over and over again that Hamas is a Humanitarian Organization."
"Maybe they could use their influence to, um, calm nerves."
CANDY CROWLEY (interjecting): "The US thinks Hamas is a terrorist organization, though. Correct? Do you?"
NANCY PELOSI: "Hmmhmm."
-----
Ok, so to me it sounds like Nancy Pelosi is like a Cotton Candy maker at a carnival, desperately trying to spin, out of a mush of sticky goop, the fluffy idea that there is an opportunity for justice and peace to prevail.
All the while, however - woven into each sentence of this incoherent statement that snakes out of her mouth - is the admission and/or outright assertion that there is no hope that justice or peace can prevail, with the facts on the ground being what they are.
She tells us Israel has the right to respond when missiles are fired at them. Yes, they do. That is justice.
She tells us that Palestinians are "rumored to be" using children and families are Human Shields. Yes that is the truth.
She tells us that Hamas started this. Yes, that's the truth.
She asserts the "two-state solution" prefacing it with the word "again", tacitly admitting that it is the same old solution to the same old problem, and that it hasn't worked before, and it won't work again.
She tells us we have to support Abbas and his role there. Whatever that role is, she is not clear.
She says, "that we have to ..." and then leaves off in the middle of the sentence. I agree completely.
She tells us we have to support Israel's defense of itself using the Iron Dome, which obviously hurts no one. Yes, that it justice.
She tells us we have to support the Palestinians "in what they need". She does not tell us what that is. We are left to assume she is just as baffled by that question as the rest of us are.
And then she reaches to pull a rabbit from a hat, saying the Qataris might have the answer. And why would the Qataris have the answer? Because the Qataris tell her Hamas is a "Humanitarian Organization."
Here I would swear Nancy Pelosi is being sarcastic. Like, "Hey, the Qataris say Hamas is a Humanitarian Organization. We know they're using children as Human Shields. We know they're firing missiles indiscriminately at the Israelis. We know they started this, but if the Qataris say they are Humanitarians, let's see if the Qataris can fix this."
How fucking absurd is that? It's like Pelosi is saying, "Hey look, I don't see a fucking solution. But the Qataris say it's cool. So, let the Qataris fix it. That ought to a fuckin' hoot."
Then Candy Crowley asks Pelosi, wait, don't you agree that Hamas is a terrorist organization.
And Pelosi responds, "umm hmm," in a meek voice suggesting, "Yeah, I know I'm making no sense. But what do you expect me to say? The Palestinians deserve to be destroyed? I mean, we all know it's true. But we have to persist in this illusion. Come on, Candy. Give me a break."
Does anyone else have any other takes on this?
I mean that's all I can come up with.
Why Ron Fournier is dreadfully wrong on Israel, and partially right (but for perceptual reasons)
Ron Fournier, who tonsorial beauty impresses one
and all has been derided by both right and left, R and D. This is a
very high recommendation.
So his analysis is always worth thinking about, and analyzing, even if one might suspect his emotional want is slightly to somewhat L of C, but well R of the New Republic’s sad state today. Fournier’s analysis is not.
So today column in the National Journal which basically says Israel is in trouble for REAL for several reasons is worth a reasoned thought process.
The analysis is laid out like a research paper with a leading abstract
That’s from a Palestinian poll VERY RECENT, done by Palestinians, and reported HERE. Now since I have been talking with hundreds of Arabs from the gulf to Jordan to Turkey for 14 years, I am compelled to say that what that poll reports is totally accurate.
It’s still 1967 as far as the Palestinians are concerned.
A dangerous minority don’t seek the destruction of Israel, a LANDSLIDE MAJORITY ***INSIST*** on it, at least until this latest spasm, but I cannot think of single reason anything that has happened since the kidnapping of the three boys which would affect this. HAMAS, remember was freely elected by >60% vote. I accept that this is the true representation of the people’s will there. And what is that?
THIS
Just take the time to read Article 13, Ron and tell me HOW you can negotiate anything but a cease fire so that in a few weeks, months years you can start all over again (with better weapons).
The most dangerous part of this for Israel is that your final two points which concern how the above REALITY is perceived are correct.
Consider these three stories and a question raised by each:
But this ‘story’ is the microcosm of the heart of your warning. And it is true. The realities of the situation have NOT CHANGED AT ALL.
There is NO Palestinian leader who will say he is ready to CONSIDER swapping right of return and recognition of Israel (exchanges of embassies, etc) for a free, sovereign Palestine (see poll above). Without that, I can tell you, having spoken with the most left leaning peacenik of Israeli foreign ministry employees (in a notable position) there is as he put it, ‘very little to discuss’.
But the PERCEPTIONS regarding this ‘story’ of Israel have changed just the press here has become more and more PROGRESSIVE in its actual makeup, and warped it’s factual actions. That a true observation, but that and it’s effect has to be dealt with.
There is no point in whining about Diana Magnay’s real ignorance, because ‘she’ has and will do more of the same, creating a different perception an Israel which in OBJECTIVE REALITY has no choice about it’s actions.
Israel, however, has TOTALLY failed in matching its military success with PR success.
Netayahu talking about terrorist this and that is a losing proposition.
He has INCREDIBLE support at home. 87% are in total agreement with him (and only 79% of the population is Jewish). That has to be used to articulate how this state which gave ALL SINAI back for a treaty, and ended the occupation of Gaza, using the IDF to forcibly remove settlers while doing it, to those who CREATE PERCEPTIONS how gargantuan existence is for the only state in which all religions can freely practice.
That is where Israel needs to spend time and money.
Peace right now and for the foreseeable future is IMPOSSIBLE. The reason is the WILL of the Palestinian people to get ALL OF ISRAEL.
Israel must match it’s campaign for how they are perceived to their intelligence in the field.
So his analysis is always worth thinking about, and analyzing, even if one might suspect his emotional want is slightly to somewhat L of C, but well R of the New Republic’s sad state today. Fournier’s analysis is not.
So today column in the National Journal which basically says Israel is in trouble for REAL for several reasons is worth a reasoned thought process.
The analysis is laid out like a research paper with a leading abstract
Every nation has a story. Israel’s is that Arabs have long been unwilling to negotiate with the Jewish state, and that terrorists among the Palestinians want to destroy it. For decades, three significant factors helped make this the dominant Middle East narrative. First, it’s correct, at least when applied to the dangerous minority of Palestinians. Second, elite opinion-makers, including journalists and politicians in the West, embraced and amplified the Israeli case. Finally, public opinion in the West, and particularly in the United States, firmly supported Israel.The problem is this contains a MAJOR FACTUAL ERROR at the outset.
at least when applied to the dangerous minority of Palestinians.
That’s from a Palestinian poll VERY RECENT, done by Palestinians, and reported HERE. Now since I have been talking with hundreds of Arabs from the gulf to Jordan to Turkey for 14 years, I am compelled to say that what that poll reports is totally accurate.
It’s still 1967 as far as the Palestinians are concerned.
A dangerous minority don’t seek the destruction of Israel, a LANDSLIDE MAJORITY ***INSIST*** on it, at least until this latest spasm, but I cannot think of single reason anything that has happened since the kidnapping of the three boys which would affect this. HAMAS, remember was freely elected by >60% vote. I accept that this is the true representation of the people’s will there. And what is that?
THIS
Just take the time to read Article 13, Ron and tell me HOW you can negotiate anything but a cease fire so that in a few weeks, months years you can start all over again (with better weapons).
The most dangerous part of this for Israel is that your final two points which concern how the above REALITY is perceived are correct.
Consider these three stories and a question raised by each:
- NBC pulled foreign correspondent Ayman Mohyeldin out of the Gaza Strip, raising questions about whether his empathetic coverage of Palestinians led to his removal. Brian Stelter, who covers the media for CNN, said his reporting "strongly suggests that this was a situation caused by network news infighting and bureaucracy." Public backlash played a role in Mohyeldin’s return to Gaza, Stelter said. Question: A decade or so ago, would a news organization receive this much pressure for a staffing decision?
- A Palestinian-American teenager accused Israeli authorities of beating him. Upon his return to Tampa Fla., 15-year-old Tariq Abu Khdeir said, “No child, whether they are Palestinian or Israeli, deserves to die.” Question: A decade or so ago, would the beating be covered at all? As much?
- CNN correspondent Diana Magnay tweeted that the Israelis cheering bombs hitting Gaza, and who had allegedly threatened her, were “scum.” The network pulled her off the story. Question: A decade or so ago, would a network correspondent broadcast her bluntly negative opinion about Israeli soldiers? (What are the chances a network reporter would even think to call Israelis scum?)
But this ‘story’ is the microcosm of the heart of your warning. And it is true. The realities of the situation have NOT CHANGED AT ALL.
There is NO Palestinian leader who will say he is ready to CONSIDER swapping right of return and recognition of Israel (exchanges of embassies, etc) for a free, sovereign Palestine (see poll above). Without that, I can tell you, having spoken with the most left leaning peacenik of Israeli foreign ministry employees (in a notable position) there is as he put it, ‘very little to discuss’.
But the PERCEPTIONS regarding this ‘story’ of Israel have changed just the press here has become more and more PROGRESSIVE in its actual makeup, and warped it’s factual actions. That a true observation, but that and it’s effect has to be dealt with.
There is no point in whining about Diana Magnay’s real ignorance, because ‘she’ has and will do more of the same, creating a different perception an Israel which in OBJECTIVE REALITY has no choice about it’s actions.
Israel, however, has TOTALLY failed in matching its military success with PR success.
Netayahu talking about terrorist this and that is a losing proposition.
He has INCREDIBLE support at home. 87% are in total agreement with him (and only 79% of the population is Jewish). That has to be used to articulate how this state which gave ALL SINAI back for a treaty, and ended the occupation of Gaza, using the IDF to forcibly remove settlers while doing it, to those who CREATE PERCEPTIONS how gargantuan existence is for the only state in which all religions can freely practice.
That is where Israel needs to spend time and money.
Peace right now and for the foreseeable future is IMPOSSIBLE. The reason is the WILL of the Palestinian people to get ALL OF ISRAEL.
Israel must match it’s campaign for how they are perceived to their intelligence in the field.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)