In a letter to President Barack Obama dated June 17, 329 out of 435 members of the U.S. House of Representatives referred to Israel's May 31 attack on a humanitarian aid flotilla in international waters -- which resulted in the deaths of nine passengers and crew and injuries to scores of others -- as an act of "self-defense" which they "strongly support." Similarly, a June 21 Senate letter -- signed by 87 out of 100 senators -- went on record "fully" supporting what it called "Israel's right to self-defense," claiming that the widely supported effort to relieve critical shortages of food and medicine in the besieged Gaza Strip was simply part of a "clever tactical and diplomatic ploy" by "Israel's opponents" to "challenge its international standing."
The House letter urged President Obama "to remain steadfast in defense of Israel" in the face of the near-universal international condemnation of this blatant violation of international maritime law and other legal statutes, which the signatories referred to as "a rush to unfairly judge and defend Israel." The Senate letter condemned the near-unanimous vote of the UN Human Rights Council for what it called "singling out" Israel, even though no other country in recent memory has attacked a humanitarian aid flotilla in international waters. Both letters called upon the United States to veto any resolution in the UN Security Council criticizing the Israeli attack.
What is perhaps most disturbing is that many of the key arguments in the letters were misleading and, in some cases, factually inaccurate.
The Israeli government had acknowledged prior to the writing of the letter that the extensive blockade of humanitarian goods was not necessary for their security, but as a means of pressuring the civilian population to end their support for Hamas, which won a majority of legislative seats in the most recent Palestinian election. In addition, the Israeli government announced a significant relaxation of the embargo two days after the letter was written. Despite this, the House letter claimed that the purpose of the blockade was "to stop terrorists from smuggling weapons to kill innocent civilians," thereby placing this large bipartisan majority of the House even further to the right than Israeli Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu's rightist coalition.
There was no mention in the letter that no such weapons were found on board any of the six ships hijacked by the Israelis nor on the previous eight ships the Free Gaza Campaign had sailed or attempted to sail to the Gaza Strip. In addition, even though the ships had been thoroughly inspected by customs officials prior to their disembarkation, the House letter claimed that had the Israelis not hijacked the ships, they would have "sailed unchecked into Gaza."
Similarly, according to the Senate letter, Israel's naval blockade was necessary "to keep dangerous goods from entering Gaza by sea" and falsely claimed that the intent of the Israeli blockade was "to protect Israel, while allowing humanitarian aid into Gaza." Particularly striking is the fact that, despite that the International Committee on the Red Cross and a broad consensus of international legal experts recognize that the Israeli blockade of humanitarian goods is illegal, the Senate letter insisted that the blockade "is legal under international law."
The House letter insisted, despite the fact that several of those killed on the Mavi Marmara were shot at point blank range in the back or the back of the head and a video showing a 19-year-old U.S. citizen shot execution style on the ground, that "Israeli forces used necessary force as an act of self-defense and of last resort." Similarly, the Senate letter refers to the murders of passengers and crew resisting the illegal boarding of their vessel in international waters as a situation where the Israeli raiders were "forced to respond to that attack" when they "arrived" on the ship.
The House letter also claimed that the other ships were "commandeered peacefully and without incident," even though on the other ships, despite completely nonviolent resistance, passengers were tasered and brutally beaten and were attacked with tear gas and rubber bullets. Similarly, the Senate letter insisted that, in spite of these potentially fatal beatings and other assaults, "Israeli forces were able to safely divert five of the six ships challenging the blockade."
Even though the Israeli government has never entered Gaza to disperse aid to the people of that territory since the start of the siege years earlier and reputable relief organizations have documented that the Israelis had routinely refused to allow humanitarian aid to enter the Gaza Strip, these House members claimed that Israel had offered to "disperse the aid . . . directly to the people of Gaza." And, despite the fact that the five aid ships that Israel had allowed to dock in Gaza in previous months had distributed their humanitarian cargo directly to those in need, the senators claimed that it would have otherwise gone "into the hands of corrupt Gaza officials."
Learning what actually transpired in the tragic incident was apparently of little interest to the 87 senators who signed the letter defending the attack. Despite the apparent whitewash forthcoming in the internal Israeli investigation, the senate letter supported Israel's alleged intention to carry out "a thorough investigation of the incident," insisting that Israel "has the right to determine how its investigation is conducted." This comes in spite of a recent public opinion poll shows a clear majority of Americans -- including 65 percent of Democrats -- favor an international inquiry over allowing Israel alone to investigate the circumstances of the attack.
Ironically, a number of progressive organizations, web sites and list serves have called on the peace and human rights community to support the re-election of some of the very senators who signed this letter, including Barbara Boxer, Ron Wyden, and Russell Feingold. MoveOn, Council for a Livable World, and other progressive groups with PAC money are calling on their members, many of whom are peace and human rights activists, to donate their money to Democrats who defend attacking peace and human rights activists. They have no problems with supporting the re-election of those who make inaccurate statements in order to defend illegal actions by allied right-wing governments, even when they kill and injure participants in a humanitarian flotilla on the high seas.
There may be an underlying current of racism at work here. It is unlikely MoveOn, Council for a Livable World and other groups would defend such actions if, for example, the activists were helping those under siege in Sarajevo in the 1990s or West Berlin in the 1940s, who happened to be white Europeans.
It is important to remember that the majority of Democrats joined in with Republicans in supporting the Salvadoran junta in the early 1980s and the Suharto regime in the 1990s until voters made clear they would withdraw their support from them if they did not change their policy. AIPAC and other right-wing "pro-Israel" groups are only as powerful as the absence of counter-pressure from the peace and human rights community. Letters like these will continue to be supported by most Democrats only as long they know they can get away with it.
Some in Congress and the WH have dual citizenship. They can be close to another country, have been born there or lived there, educated, etc., but when holding a position in the US government with access to confidential or high security files, like someone working with a Senator on the Pentagon committee, they should absolutely be committed to only one country, the US. They should give up their other citizenship or be fired.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/haggai-carmon/perhaps-gaza-should-send_b_636903.html
Nicholas D. Kristof of the New York Times, wrote just last week, "Visiting Gaza persuaded me, to my surprise, that Israel is correct when it denies that there is any full-fledged humanitarian crisis in Gaza."
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/04/opinion/04kristof.html
"I wish Israeli and American officials could see these tunnels, too. They might realize how counterproductive the siege of Gaza has been, arguably empowering Hamas rather than undercutting it. And while it’s not clear how far Israel’s relaxation will go, my reporting here leaves me convinced that Israel should lift the siege altogether."
Kristol goes on to argue that the tunneling business creates a dependency on Hama, corruption and was with Israel.
Why do you, hmp49, believe that the siege should be maintained?
They've brought in weapons be ship before (as has Hezbollah)
http://www.waronline.org/en/analysis/pal_weapons.htm
That was the point of the flotilla - not to bring in aid, but rather to create an incident that would turn public opinion against Israel's blockade. I have to hand it to them, they were quite successful in their stated purpose.
As I've said in other posts, corruption is a long term problem - the Palestinian leaders have stolen BILLIONS (Arafat alone amassed a personal fortune of $6 billion, his wife and daughter lived in Paris on a $100,000/month allowance).
Aid is used for patronage purposes as well.
Until Hamas renounces violence and recognizes Israel (both violence and the destruction of Israel are important points of their charter) no peace is possible. It's preposterous to tie renouncing violence or recognition of Israel on any conditions - the Palestinians are already required by the Quartet to meet these conditions.
Kristol goes on to argue that the tunneling business creates a dependency on Hamas, corruption and war with Israel.
http://www.daylife.com/search/photos/2?q=Gaza+market
These are pictures taken in Gaza by Gazans. Of course, the selection is different from what the Palestinians use for propaganda purposes.
The problem is not a lack of consumer goods in Gaza:
"Branded products such as Coca-Cola, Nescafé, Snickers and Heinz ketchup - long absent as a result of the Israeli blockade - are both cheap and widely available."
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/4c51267a-66ca-11df-aeb1-00144feab49a.html
Oxfam gives a disproportionate amount of funds to Palestinians compared to far needier populations in Africa. In fact, Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza Strip have historically received one of the highest levels of aid in the world - and continue to be even now:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_aid_to_Palestinians#2007-2009
The problem is corruption, patronage, and diversion of aid to weapons purchases.
Many of the problems of Palestinians have been and continue to be of their own making, including many issues with human rights abuse that have nothing to do with Israel. Amnesty has dozens of complaints about Hamas, for example:
http://www.amnesty.org/en/news-and-updates/report/hamas-waged-deadly-campaign-war-devastated-gaza-20090212
The amount of aid the Israelis let in was a tiny fraction of what was needed and caused sever hardship and malnutrition.
Don't peddle that "threw its Fatah rivals off the roof" Hasbara. The U.S. and Israel armed the Fatah strongman, Dahlan, to impose a violent coup against Hamas who won a fair election in Gaza and the West Bank. Hamas took preemptive action against an illegal coup attempt instigated by Israel and the U.S. So much for the defense of democratic elections. In Israeli eyes elections are only valid when their puppets are elected.
Using half truths to support indefensible policies does not support your case
Take it up with Amnesty International:
Hamas waged a deadly campaign as war devastated Gaza
http://www.amnesty.org/en/news-and-updates/report/hamas-waged-deadly-campaign-war-devastated-gaza-20090212
Amnesty International Calls Executions by Hamas in Gaza 'Deplorable'
http://www.amnestyusa.org/document.php?id=ENGUSA20100415001&lang=e
Most of us are uncomfortable when people do this to animals in a zoo.
As to whether the Israeli-delivered "aid" is enough, note that the amount and type has fluctuated wildly over the past four or five years. It has decreased when the tunnels were open and when they were closed. It has decreased when Gazans could fish and now when they cannot. Only the Red Cross, Amnesty and similar organization in place there seem to care about this. We, on the other hand, are fascinated by frightening tales of aerial attack and dark men with masks -- who speak Hebrew.
the united states of israel....!!!
*video showing a 19-year-old U.S. citizen shot execution style on the ground (I've seen the video with someone's interpretation and sub-titles, it was never verified by any credible agency as factual, nor was it picked up by any news agency that I'm aware of)
*even though on the other ships, despite completely nonviolent resistance, passengers were tasered and brutally beaten and were attacked with tear gas and rubber bullets.
*This comes in spite of a recent public opinion poll shows a clear majority of Americans -- including 65 percent of Democrats -- favor an international inquiry
Thank you kindly!
- beatings on other ships: http://btlonline.org/2010/btlqawright072310.html -- but only if you feel that victim testimony is a credible source.
- 65 per cent? Not a clue. Any takers?
I like the word disinterested! that was good.
Again, I sincerely thank you.
Not saying that the claims are credible, only that one does not have anything to do with the other.
I found a reference to a report on the "Missing Peace" site:
http://missingpeace.eu/en/
which I would generally describe as pro-Palestinian. They said one of their members saw first hand the contents of the ship.
The original version seems to be missing, apparently they decided it didn't suit their agenda, but the google cached version is still available:
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:OVs8LtBLbBEJ:missingpeace.eu/%3Flang%3Den+marmara&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&sitesearch=missingpeace.eu&q=marmara&cts=1279224723189&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=
"The "Marmara": carried only passengers and their personal belongings. Many passengers carried large sums of money on their body. There was no Humanitarian aid on this ship."
So what was it that the Israeli government unloaded in Ashdod and placed in trucks that was refused entry into Gaza until the flotilla passengers were released? And what is it that remains in Ashdod? And when will Israel give up the ships?
http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Government/Communiques/2010/Equipment_aid_Gaza_flotilla_7-Jun-2010.htm
In the past, weapons, including rockets have been smuggled into Gaza by ship.
http://www.waronline.org/en/analysis/pal_weapons.htm
http://www.haaretz.com/news/man-behind-karine-a-arms-ship-sentenced-to-20-years-in-jail-1.282928
Israel has also intercepted ships with rockets sent from Iran to Lebanon:
http://www.terrorism-info.org.il/malam_multimedia/English/eng_n/html/iran_e035.htm
http://www.haaretz.com/news/israel-navy-chief-hezbollah-bound-iran-ship-carried-hundreds-of-tons-of-arms-1.4791
Some dare call it treason.
There are many ways a point could be made w/o resorting to violence.
It was a sad waste of human life and in this case guilt falls on the flotilla organizers.
Poor planing and execution.
juancole.com has some news.
The reason the entire incident is fading is that the videos speak for themselves.
Even the UN canceled its session concerning this.
The reason is, that when you have the evidence for all to see (ie. the Turkish ships' jihadists pledging martyrdom, and plotting a violent incident before they even set sail as well as their armed reception of the Israelis) it's kind of hard to convince people that these were innocents whose only intent was to provide "aid".
He/she uses tactic 1: keep other side on defensive/place burden of proof on them.
He/she uses tactic 2: they are all "terrorists"
See how simple their arguments are. If everyone just looks at their remarks, they almost always fall into one of those categories. It would be nice if everytime one of these handful of people get on these threats (in their highly organized manner to espouse their unconditional pro-Israel position), that we call out which tactic they are using.
tactic 1: rebuttal
tactic 2: facts
tactic 3: conclusion
not hard, try it.
But please don't speak for "people"; speak for yourself.
People should notice the very specific tactics that a handful of unconditional pro-Israel supporters on this blog use. They go from thread to thread on anything relating to this topic and respond to as many "pro-Palestinian" posts as possible. They stay on threads for hours at a time responding; almost as if it has been organized. Here are 8 tactics I notice they continually use:
Keep other side on defensive; place burden of proof on them (prove Palestinians want peace; it’s a given Israelis do)
Deflection (use conflicts/examples to justify position; e.g. US aid to Israel: “but Egypt and Saudi Arabia are dictatorships and they receive aid”)
Use “History” (deny existence of Palestine/Palestinians; claim Palestinians were never capable of peace: point to UN partition plan and Camp David, without honest explanation)
Push security theme (everything Israel does is for security; “what would America do if Mexico was firing rockets?!”)
Deny, Deny, Deny (it’s not “occupied” territory, it’s “disputed;” no humanitarian crisis in Gaza, settlements in the West Bank/ land confiscation in Jerusalem are not an obstacles to peace)
Terrorism card (scream “Hamas!;” Flotilla ship full of terrorists, etc)
Victim card (Israelis suffer because of Palestinians; Palestinians suffer because of Palestinians)
Anti-Semitism (the trump card, of course)
I also notice they often fail to cite sources
Notice in this case how some try to delegitimize Dr. Zunes.
So, disagree with you is now a "talking point"?
ICRC.
Oxfam.
World Bank.
WHO.
Unicef.
UNCHR.
Amnesty International.
GISHA.
and on, and on, and on and on.
Google "Failing Gaza" (for the nth time) just to begin a little essential learning. AND READ IT, and then progress to reading some of the hundreds of other reports that are equally easily accesible through that marvellous engine.
How many timers for youand your "brother" need to be reminded that the illegal land grabs and illegal buildings have been repeatedly identified by individual and groups of countries as direct obstacles to any possibility of constructive discussions, and have been condemned, roundly, by just about every country in the world as well as by the Palestinians? If they are not an obstacle, why have the Palestinians been demanding that they stop for years?
American support for Israel is as strong as it has ever been.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/israel_the_middle_east/49_say_pro_palestinian_activists_to_blame_in_gaza_ship_incident
Dems and Reps....enemys of America.