According to the New York Times, a quarter of the passengers on the U.S. Boat to Gaza are Jewish.
What does it mean that the U.S. Boat to Gaza is a quarter Jewish? According to the noted American Jewish commentator Adam Sandler, a quarter Jewish is "not too shabby!" Maybe the U.S. Boat to Gaza will be mentioned in Adam's next Hanukkah song.
What does it mean that the U.S. Boat to Gaza is a quarter Jewish? Maybe it means that the Israeli authorities will have some compunction about shooting up our boat. After all, isn't the official story of Zionism all about making a "safe harbor" for Jews in Palestine? We're not trying to make aliyah. We just want to visit. Should we be shot for trying to do so? Wouldn't it be a mitzvah to let us pass unharmed?
What does it mean that the U.S. Boat to Gaza is a quarter Jewish? Maybe it means that we can openly contest a construction of Jewish identity based on supporting the obstruction of Palestinian freedom, with a Jewish counter-narrative of universal human liberation.
U.S. Boat to Gaza passenger Hedy Epstein, an 86-year-old whose parents died in the Holocaust, told the New York Times,
"The American Jewish community and Israel both say that they speak for all Jews. They don't speak for me. They don't speak for the Jews in this country who are going to be on the U.S. boat, and the many others standing behind us."
Of course, in referring to "the American Jewish community," Hedy meant organizations commonly presented in the media as representing American Jews on the question of Palestine, even though the leadership of these institutions isn't elected by American Jews as a whole and even though key policies that these institutions support, such as Israeli settlement expansion in the West Bank and opposition to Israel's internationally-recognized 1967 borders being the basis of a peace deal, don't represent the opinions of the majority of American Jews.
In a March 2009 poll commissioned by J Street, 60% of American Jews opposed Israeli settlement expansion in the West Bank, 76% supported a peace agreement on the 1967 borders with negotiated land swaps (the position recently articulated by President Obama), and 69% supported the U.S. working with a unified Fatah-Hamas Palestinian Authority government to achieve a peace agreement with Israel.
To act as if Bibi Netanyahu has been anointed to speak for all Jews on the question of Palestine is preposterous. Even Meir Dagan, the former head of Mossad, has said that Israel's top leaders lack judgment and has criticized the Israeli government for failing to put forward a peace initiative with the Palestinians and for ignoring the Saudi peace initiative promising full diplomatic relations in exchange for a return to the 1967 border lines, as the New York Times noted last week.
In the 2009 poll, 65% of American Jews agreed with the statement,
Israel has the right to defend itself, but it must also take into account humanitarian considerations and avoid collective punishment of the entire Palestinian population by closing the borders and causing major civilian hardship.
I have previously noted that in challenging the blockade of Gaza, we are acting consistently with the policy advocated by President Obama in June 2010, when he said that external restrictions on Gaza's travel and commerce should be "focusing narrowly on arms shipments" rather than a general blockade of goods and persons, to which some exceptions are permitted.
But we are also acting consistently with the policy advocated by 65% of American Jews in March 2009: no to "collective punishment of the entire Palestinian population."
It will be a great day when the opinions of the majority of American Jews matter more than the tired right-wing slogans recycled to try to maintain the destructive status quo. Letting our peaceful boat reach Gaza unmolested would be a great place to start. If you agree, tell Secretary of State Clinton, whose job duties include the protection of Americans traveling abroad.
Follow Robert Naiman on Twitter: www.twitter.com/naiman
re-quoted for posterity
According to Hamas, hospitals in Gaza had ran out of medications, even most generic. Now hospitals might stop any kind of medical services. But ... and that is priceless ... the blame is on the PNA. For some reason Hamas is not responsible for anything that goes on in Gaza! Or they only can build rockets and mortars? My congratulations and condolences to people of Gaza on voting for Hamas.
Of course, ignoring the illegal blockade of, according to ICRC Gaza Deputy Head Mathilde De Riedmatten, medical supplies. (http://tinyurl.com/3gcpxvn)
Of course, ignoring that the majority of Gaza civilians are under 18.
Pretending anything other than mirth and joy at the continued slaughter of innocents.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=XMu3MNasH7I
65% of Jews agree in a poll with the statement;
"Israel has the right to defend itself, but it must also take into account humanitarian considerations and avoid collective punishment of the entire Palestinian population by closing the borders and causing major civilian hardship."
I bet 65% would also agree with
"Palestinian human right should be respected by all parites, but when they elect violent leadership, Palestinians must also accept that the rocket attacks and human rights violations caused by that leadership to Israelis may result in measures that will diminish Palestinians' degrees of freedom."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Obama's above comments were made right after the Mavi Marmara incident, and since the U.S. has good relations with both Israel and Turkey both long time allies, he was doing his best not to say anything antagonistic that may tip the scales in either direction.
Couple weeks after Obamas comments:
On June 17, Prime Minister Netanyahu’s office announced that the Israeli security
cabinet had agreed to “liberalize the system by which civilian goods enter Gaza; expand the
inflow of materials for civilian projects that are under international supervision; continue existing
security procedures to prevent the inflow of weapons and war materiel; and to decide in the
coming days on additional steps to implement this policy.”
However, the naval blockade would not be lifted.
The White House welcomed the move as a step in the right direction.
The White House responded, “Once implemented, we believe these arrangements should
significantly improve conditions for Palestinians in Gaza, while preventing the entry of
weapons.” It also wanted to “explore additional ways to improve the situation in Gaza, including
freedom of movement and commerce between Gaza and the West Bank.
You can find official lists of banned items very easily ... Concrete and building supplies are prohibited and, at times, the banned items are so punitive as to be ridiculous... last year, tea and tahini were both on the banned list as were many necessary medical aids. Spices and fabric, chocolate and fishing rods...
There is no need for it. Per the Red Cross, there is no humanitarian crisis in gaza.
Then there is the fact that if the intent was to deliver "aid", then the participants could dock in Egypt and have this "aid" transferred directly to Gaza.
With the well publicized permanent opening of the border between Egypt and Gaza, the alleged cause of the floitilla is exposed for what it is, a planned confrontation with Israeli forces.
They should at least be honest about their intent.
Of course it is a confrontation--you're right there, at least.
And nonviolent confrontation is exactly what Ghandi was about--he knew it sometimes would provoke a violent response. That is what happens in a moral argument when one side is wrong--it resprts to violence.
THe Freedom Riders learned this lesson well.
Running a declared naval blockade is an act of war -- nothing "non-violent" about that. In similar circumstances, any of the 22 Arab countries would send the ship to the bottom of the sea with no second thought. Israel will probably not sink it (though that would be legal provided the ship has been warned and refuses to stop and be boarded). That is the "lesson" that the "freedom riders" learned. That is the reason they direct their "protest" against Israel -- and not Egypt.
I believe this: ‘There is no humanitarian crisis in Gaza’ is what you are referring to as ‘per the ICRC.’ You, of course, neglect to mention that this is a statement by the IDF, supposedly quoting the ICRC rep in Gaza. Of course, they couldn’t get her name right, spelling it ‘Mathilde Redmatn’. Of course, they also were lying in their teeth.
Here’s what Mathilde De Riedmatten actually says, ON THE ICRC WEBSITE: http://www.icrc.org/eng/resources/documents/interview/2011/palestine-israel-interview-2011-05-19.htm
Highlights:
‘Gaza is more dependent than ever on outside aid.’
‘The strict limits on imports and the almost absolute ban on exports imposed by Israel make economic recovery impossible.’
‘[T]he actual level of exports from the Gaza Strip remains close to zero.’
‘Imports of construction supplies and raw materials are still mostly banned.’
Will we ever live to see the day when you actually make an honest post, tallen?
For those who are still able of independent thought processes: in a war, the only obligation a beligerent has is to allow supply of food and other products INSOFAR AS THEY ARE ESSENTIAL for the survival of civilian population. Nothing more; nothing less. Even that minimal supply is supposed to be tightly controlled and distributed by a trustworthy organization, to insure it ONLY goes to civilian population.
I have no doubt that haters will now try to re-invent the meaning of "essential for survival". I have no doubt that they will find a way to bash Israel for not providing Hamas with rockets to shoot at Israel. After all, poor Hamas is forced to work hard to smuggle them in -- that's a humanitarian crisis!
Timeline of the Mavi Marmara Incident
latest video thoroughly explaining what occurred. Uploaded May 22, 2011. A must watch!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z31GesVrBjc
The violence by those "peaceful humanitarians" against the naval boat officers trying to board the ship, plus the violence against first, second helicopter crew descending down the ropes, took place before any shots were fired by israeli commandos.
http://www.jpost.com/MiddleEast/Article.aspx?id=224123
Let us delve a bit more in the results of the opinion poll that the blog so selectively quotes (and which J-Street "spins" in its analysis):
% who do NOT support Israel -- 3%;
Single biggest reason for support:
-I am Jewish and Israel is the Jewish homeland 35%
-Israel is an American ally in the Middle East & strengthens our national security interests 31%
-Israel is a democracy which shares my values 19%
Oppinions on Cast Lead:
-Strongly approve 47%
-Somewhat approve 28%
-Somewhat disapprove 16%
-Strongly disapprove 9%
If Palestinians block a peace agreement, USA should support Israel's blockade of Gaza:
-Total approve 75%
-Total disapprove 25%
Well, psychologists have an answer to your question: it's called The Misplaced Jewish Guilt Syndrome (TMJGS). It's when Jews feel a need to apologize for "causing" people to hate them. And believing that THAT will cause such people to love them.
I am sure Hamas will gratefully acknowledge their gesture (while secretly despising them). While the ship will of course not reach Gaza, it will still provide help to Hamas. A couple of thousand years ago, some wise people remarked: "He who is merciful to the cruel is destined to be cruel to the merciful." The people on board the ship should know that they will bear a portion of responsibility in Hamas's next terrorist attack.
Please list for me all the countries where the average temperature is above 10 degree celsius a year and below 40 that would accept this form of hostile immigration?
Please
So please list for us all the countries with any temperature would be such a bully!
And maybe it will mean that the boat occupants won't attack IDF boarding to enforce the blockade.
And I wonder how Jewish, male in particular, passengers of the boat are planning to identify themselves?
Gaza is not a part of Israel, so visitors to Gaza would not be "trespassing" in Israel, so your "point" is pointless.