Messages

[Beyond brainless.]

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/middle-east/israel-may-be-committing-war-crimes-un-rights-envoy-says-1.1875522

Hamas says it will keep fighting until its demands are met, including the release of several hundred supporters recently arrested in the West Bank and a freeing up of Gaza's borders.

Beyond brainless.



http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-28437626

Israel's Justice Minister, Tzipi Livni, said her country was acting according to international law.

"It is regrettable civilians are killed, but when we call on them to vacate and Hamas calls on them to stay, then that is what happens," she told Israel radio.

Ms Livni also described the UN Human Rights Council as an "anti-Israel" body.

So they issue a warning, the 'militants' leave, and Israel kills the civilians left behind. Both Hamas and Israel are guilty of war crimes imho.

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/.premium-1.606714
Israel is in a bind.
More and more cabinet ministers and senior officials are becoming convinced that the pattern we were accustomed to on previous occasions, whereby Hamas and Israel deal with each other indirectly through Egypt, producing some kind of ceasefire agreement, won't work this time. A different exit strategy needs to be found, one that Hamas will find difficult to veto.
One idea making the rounds in the defense establishment, the foreign ministry and among experts in think tanks with direct links to the Prime Minister's and Defense Minister's bureaus is to recreate the exit plan from the second Lebanon War. According to this idea, Israel, in coordination with the US and other allies, as well as with Egypt, the Palestinian Authority and the Arab League, will propose a Security Council Resolution, similar to Resolution number 1701 which ended that war in 2006.
Beyond a ceasefire, that resolution was intended to advance Israel's diplomatic objectives such as the strengthening of Lebanon's government's hold on its southern district, the international isolation of Hezbollah, the demilitarization of southern Lebanon from rockets and heavy weaponry and the stationing of international observers on the border. Resolution 1701 was a continuation of the earlier Resolution 1559, which called for the disarming of Hezbollah and other armed militias in Lebanon.
The same principles could serve Israel's diplomatic goals in the days following the fighting in Gaza. A UN resolution to end the hostilities should include the following principles:
a) A declaration that the lawful government in Gaza is that of the Palestinian Authority under President Abbas. Implicitly, this will oblige Israel to work with the Palestinian unity government.
b) A redeployment of Palestinian Authority forces along Gaza's borders and at border crossings into Israel and Egypt.
c) Erection of a mechanism that will ensure demilitarization of the Gaza Strip from rockets, tunnels and heavy weapons, along with the sending of UN inspectors to different locations throughout the Strip. These inspectors will report back to the Security Council every 3-6 months. Even if not a single rocket is dismantled, this problem will be brought to the forefront of world attention.
d) A meaningful change in Israel's policies with regard to border crossings, particularly concerning the passage of people and goods between Gaza and the West Bank.
e) A lifting of the naval siege and the construction of a deep water harbor under the supervision of the Palestinian Authority and a strong international force.
f) The rehabilitation of Gaza's economy and infrastructure under international supervision that will prevent the diversion of building materials to the construction of bunkers and tunnels by terrorist organizations.
Resolution 1701 which ended the second Lebanon war wasn't perfect

The Palestinians as well as the Jewish religion are prisoners of Zionism

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vPVTC9frqMA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQ_qCQylv-0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lixYEZ9M_dU

Meanwhile thousands of Israelis are stranded overseas as a direct result of operation Protective Edge

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/israel-gaza-conflict-2014/1.606817

The whole thing is a complete clusterfuck that makes Norn Irn look like my wee pony

Lads, Palestine has to understand that Hamas is a problem for any reasonable observer.

Look at the pros and cons of the rockets:

Pros:

None that I can see
(I note a few comments here along the lines of 'sure they have to do something' -  but this is completely absurd if it is the only argument. Leadership should be better thought out.)

Cons:

It triggers the slaughter of their own people;
It gives Israel's brutal responses gravitas with Americans which is the only public opinion that really counts;
It can distance the Palestinian cause from people otherwise likely to be on their side;
It easily allows them to be called terrorists/Islamic militants etc - a stunt which works well on the extremely dim;
It complies beautifully with the propaganda of convenient and always flexible 'The War on Terror';

Ask yourselves this question:

Would you fire a rocket knowing that it would achieve nothing and in return everyone in your house and the neighbouring houses were likely to be killed?

Israel's leadership is the problem here and always will be. In a fair world these attacks would be stopped and Netanyahu and co would be up for War Crimes.

But sometimes life is a bitch and you get w*nkers for neighbours.

The Palestinians need smarter leadership and not adolescent reactionaries. To my mind, South Africa's road to getting rid of Apartheid began when Nelson Mandela rejected violence.

Israel runs the occupation on violence. And previously made concessions under pressure- the first intifada led to Oslo and the second to the pullout of the settlers from Gaza.

What are the Palestinians supposed to do  ?
Israel won't give the Palestinians a State.

The Palestine Papers outlined Israel's position
http://www.theguardian.com/world/series/palestine-papers-documents

http://www.jpost.com/Middle-East/Abbas-We-cant-expect-Israel-to-take-in-a-million-refugees
"Livni: My problem is that of security. Some said to me that there would be violence among my people if I evacuated them, but the pressure will be less if I give the right to choose. I cannot bear the responsibility of their life in case they are exposed to danger and then the army will have to interfere. "
And here Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni insists on annexing the settlement of Ariel – which lies some 15 miles to the east of the Israeli border, deep in the West Bank: Livni: "The idea behind our desire to annex Ariel settlement was not to get more water but because thousands of people live there. We want to have an answer for those who have lived there for forty years."


http://blogs.aljazeera.net/middle-east/2011/01/27/erekat-finally-hits-mark#
"Livni is recorded confirming what Palestinians have always accused Israeli governments of doing: creating facts on the ground to prevent the possibility of a viable Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza."
When Mr Erekat asked Ms Livni: "Short of your jet fighters in my sky and your army on my territory, can I choose where I secure external defence?". She replied: "No. In order to create your state you have to agree in advance with Israel – you have to choose not to have the right of choice afterwards. These are the basic pillars."
"Israel takes more land [so] that the Palestinian state will be impossible . . . the Israel policy is to take more and more land day after day and that at the end of the day we'll say that is impossible, we already have the land and we cannot create the state". She conceded that it had been "the policy of the government for a really long time".
Another choice comment from Livni, this one from a Nov. 13, 2007 meeting, where she and Abu Ala (Qurei) were discussing what should be included in the "terms of reference" for the upcoming Annapolis meeting (the eighth meeting on this question):
AA: International law?
Livni : NO. I was the Minister of Justice. I am a lawyer...But I am against law — international law in particular. Law in general. If we want to make the agreement smaller, can we just drop some of these issues? Like international law, this will make the agreements easier.


Israel despite all the weaponry has the weakness of its reliance on international opinion and political support.

And the airport is now closed. Which is a pretty big deal.

It's a very long game of chess really. 
   

While maintaining support from these same people they're apparently ordering to stand under Israeli bombs?

Good man

Lol-you have no idea who you're dealing with here

My wife's 2 nephews served in Iraq and Afghanistan respectively. They salty with these terrorists first hand. You have no idea as to the depths these monsters will sink

How exactly does that explain how they would be able to maintain support from the very people they are ordering to stand under Israeli bombs?

Gotta get to work-apologies for posting a link and not continuing the dialogue

http://www.businessinsider.com/gaza-civilians-actually-reject-hamas-policies-2014-7

Let me get this straight - this guy went round bombsites, asked the people he found there if they'd like a ceasefire, and was surprised when they said yes?

That article is such a load of bo**ocks its hard to fathom how anyone published it with a straight face.

And it still doesnt answer my question, it actually accentuates how much of a lie your original quote was.

If the people don't support Hamas, then why would they stand under Israeli bombs for them?

Threat of force, right? If this was the case, you can bet your bottom dollar there'd be any amount of evidence for it, from palestinians who had fled, or relatives of someone Hamas killed for not doing their bidding, and I cant imagine that THAT evidence would not be all over the news, can you??

Again this is one side of the story


http://legalinsurrection.com/2014/07/israel-warns-civilians-to-stay-out-of-harms-way-hamas-sends-them-back-in/

whitey

You are ignoring the whole context. Israel is occupying Gaza, has been running a brutal siege for the last 7 years, won't grant the Palestinians independence, kills 7 Gazans aweek on average , wants to make the strip uninhabitable in a decade and is backed up by the US so acts with impunity.

What would you do if you were in Gaza? Suck it up ?

I think if Turkey or anyone else started lobbing missiles without provocation at Israel then Israel would be entitled to complain and to cry self defence BTW. But Israel is the occupying power. 



 

Will you be flying el al to tel aviv in solidarity?
Rock and troll.

The airport closure will no doubt affect the Israeli company that you work for.

No more expense paid trips with sneaky visits to the S&M clubs.

You really are nuts.

Here

Spin this for us


http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/23/gaza-crisis-plo-supports-hamas-conditions-for-ceasefire-live-updates

The Israeli Broadcasting Authority has refused to air adverts by Israeli human rights group B'Tselem (see video below), listing the names and ages of some of the children killed in Gaza, according to Elizabeth Tsurkov, project director at the Hotline for Refugees and Migrants Israel.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qcTbMOabFhg

2 quick comments

(1) the argument about the lob sidedness of the casualty count is comets BS. Hamas has fired  over 2000 rockets into Israel. 90% of them have been neutralized by the ingenious missile defense system the Israelis developed. Without that the Israeli count would be much higher.

(2) Not sure if it's true, but an Israeli spokesman was getting grilled on MSNBC this morning. He claimed that they issued an evacuation order for a specific neighborhood, but Hamas then came out and ordered everyone to stay put in order to maximize casualties

The FAA Advisory is basically telling Israel that they have lost control of the situation.
There is no going back to the status quo.
Israel's cheap occupation is over.

Will you be flying el al to tel aviv in solidarity?
Rock and troll.

Interestingly there is no sign of MikeSheehy. He only works one on one.

I only work one on one with anti-semites.

Trolling is hard when nobody agrees with you.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/stephen-m-walt/aipac-americas-israel-policy_b_5607883.html

And why did Netanyahu decide to go on another rampage in Gaza? As Nathan Thrall of the International Crisis Group points out, the real motive is neither vengeance nor a desire to protect Israel from Hamas' rocket fire, which has been virtually non-existent over the past two years and is largely ineffectual anyway. Netanyahu's real purpose was to undermine the recent agreement between Hamas and Fatah for a unity government. Given Netanyahu's personal commitment to keeping the West Bank and creating a "greater Israel," the last thing he wants is a unified Palestinian leadership that might press him to get serious about a two-state solution. Ergo, he sought to isolate and severely damage Hamas and drive a new wedge between the two Palestinian factions.

Not content with having ethnically cleansed hundreds of thousands of Palestinians in 1948 and 1967 and not satisfied with owning eighty-two percent of Mandatory Palestine, every Israeli government since 1967 has built or expanded settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem while providing generous subsidies to the 600,000-plus Jews who have moved there in violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention. Two weeks ago, Netanyahu confirmed what many have long suspected: he is dead set against a two-state solution and will never--repeat never--allow it to happen while he is in office. Given that Netanyahu is probably the most moderate member of his own Cabinet and that Israel's political system is marching steadily rightward, the two-state solution is a gone goose.

Meanwhile, U.S. politicians and policymakers continue to back a brutal military campaign whose primary purpose is not to defend Israel but rather to protect its longstanding effort to colonize the West Bank. Amazingly, they continue to support Israel unreservedly even though every U.S. president since Lyndon Johnson has opposed Israel's settlements project, and the past three American presidents--Clinton, Bush and Obama--have all worked hard for the two-state solution that Israeli policy has now made impossible.

Similarly, every member of the House and Senate--including progressives like Senator Elizabeth Warren--knows that voting for those supposedly "pro-Israel" resolutions is the smart political move. They understand that even the slightest display of independent thinking on these issues could leave them vulnerable to a well-funded opponent the next time they're up for re-election. At a minimum, they'll have to answer a flood of angry phone calls and letters, and, on top of that, they are likely to be blackballed by some of their Congressional colleagues. The safer course is to mouth the same tired litanies about alleged "shared values" between Israel and the U.S. and wait till the crisis dies down. And people wonder why no one respects Congress anymore.

This situation is a tragedy for all concerned, not least for Israel itself. A Greater Israel cannot be anything but an apartheid state, and exclusionary ethnic nationalism of this sort is not sustainable in the 21st century. Israel's Arab subjects will eventually demand equal rights, and as former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert warned back in 2007, once that happens, "the state of Israel is finished."

Sales would definitely be outside the comfort zone for most people. I would hate it although a fella in work says he loved it although he never enjoyed his holidays as always felt he should be selling.

The attraction of a sales job is totally dependent on personality
  http://www.myersbriggs.org/type-use-for-everyday-life/mbti-type-at-work/

I think they look kinda ridiculous no matter the sex.

It's an identity thing, Syf. Some people go for it. You have your Ros passion.

Interestingly there is no sign of MikeSheehy. He only works one on one.

[Do you think it is reasonable for IDF to retaliate to aggression from Hamas by targeting civilian areas for shelling (illegal in international law), target hospitals and schools with the net result that 80% of victims are civilian. Is that reasonable?]

Rossiewanderer, your argument us so incredibly stupid I'm wondering are you a troll. Let me reverse this. Do you think it is reasonable for IDF to retaliate to aggression from Hamas by targeting civilian areas for shelling (illegal in international law), target hospitals and schools with the net result that 80% of victims are civilian. Is that reasonable? You should be ashamed of yourself.

It doesn t matter what Rossiewander thinks Itchy. And it doesn t matter what I think either.

But the US media and the US president don t seem to see anything unreasonable there. Neither do the British, Irish, French, German, Italian. And they do count. Israel are obviously being given carte blanche to deal with this as they see fit. I suspect they would wipe out gaza with nukes if they could without contaminating themselves. If they did use nukes at least they would know they would remain immune from criticism from the west.

Now that flights into Israel have been cancelled, expect a step up in intensity of the Gaza gig to get the job done and get the show back on the road.

Moysider

I wonder if the FAA decision on flights from the States isn't a warning from Obama to Israel to cop on .
Israel is now reported to be looking for a dignified exit from the mess it chose to start.

I actually agree with the Dubs on this. They have been so inept over the past 30 years in building consistency. Who can ever forget the early 90s wondering would Charlie Redmond ever get his all Ireland medal.  Then there was arseboxing but that faded into obscurity.  And suddenly they have a very good team and they are going to dominate the game forever. 

Like Barcelona

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qriKhvPdA7k

2008- walloped everyone in Leinster.

Got thumped by a Tyrone side that came through the backdoor.

People think we get ahead of ourselves- the smart ones among us don't.

I had to laugh at Dublin fans leaving before the final whistle last Sunday- some of whom I know from the club scene in Dublin and wouldn't be the day trippers. There were plenty of years not so long ago we couldn't win a Leinster Championship.

And the "intinsity" of modern football. It's very hard to keep it going for more than a few years.

Rossiewanderer, your argument us so incredibly stupid I'm wondering are you a troll. Let me reverse this. Do you think it is reasonable for IDF to retaliate to aggression from Hamas by targeting civilian areas for shelling (illegal in international law), target hospitals and schools with the net result that 80% of victims are civilian. Is that reasonable? You should be ashamed of yourself.

It has to be a spoof.