Child injured in Israeli attacks. Hospital officials say she suffered white phosphorus burns. 1-19-09
Deutsche Welle: In Gaza City, residents continued sifting through the rubble left behind by Israeli air raids and heavy shelling, and rescue teams found at least 10 more bodies. At least 100 bodies were uncovered on Sunday, Gaza emergency chief Mo'aweya Hassanein told reporters.
A boy in Jebaliya. 1-19-09
They brought the Palestinian death toll in the Israeli offensive to at least 1,310, 514 of them women and minors. The actual civilian toll was likely higher, as health officials were unable to say how many of the adult men were fighters.
Ayat cries for her uncle, who was found dead in the rubble. 1-19-09
More than 5,500 people were injured, 2,650 of them women and children. Some 100,000 Gazans are said to have fled their homes.
Boy asleep on a donkey cart, 1-19-09
Thirteen Israelis, including three civilians, were also killed and dozens injured in the ground fighting and in rocket attacks.
More photos, information, analysis, and a place to give below, in this 'final' Gaza invasion diary.
In declaring a cease-fire Saturday in Gaza, Israel asserted that it had achieved its goals: hurting Hamas' military wing, discouraging rocket fire into Israel and cutting the flow of smuggled arms into Gaza. But Israel had a broader goal: sending a tough message to its arch-enemies Iran and Hezbollah.
All this is utterly delusional. But delusion is all Israel has left.
In what is surely a sign of the Apocalypse, The New York Times runs a story about a Palestinian as a human being, "Gazan Doctor and Peace Advocate Loses 3 Daughters to Israeli Fire and Asks Why":
TEL HASHOMER, Israel -- Dr. Izzeldin Abuelaish is a Gazan and a doctor who has devoted his life to medicine and reconciliation between Israelis and Palestinians.
But on Saturday, the day after three of his daughters and a niece were killed by Israeli fire in Gaza, Dr. Abuelaish, 53, struggled to hold on to the humane philosophy that has guided his life and work.
As he sat in a waiting room of the Israeli hospital where he works part time, he asked over and over, "Why did they do this?"
Elsewhere in the hospital another daughter and a niece were being treated for their wounds.
"I dedicated my life really for peace, for medicine," said Dr. Abuelaish, who does joint research projects with Israeli physicians and for years has worked as something of a one-man force to bring injured and ailing Gazans for treatment in Israel.
"This is the path I believed in and what I raised and educated my children to believe," he said.
Against this immediacy, Ezra Klein has an op-ed in Haaretz "What it means to be pro-Israel" that's a further reflection of how things have changed this time around--not enough, certainly for Dr. Izzeldin Abuelaish and his family, nor all the others who have died or lost family members in Israel's assault on Gaza, or the millions of Palestinians still deprived of a homeland, but enough to clearly signal that Israel's current path is a road to nowhere.
Reuters: Ten Israeli soldiers and three civilians have been killed in the campaign. . . .
Israeli forces have killed some 1,138 people and wounded 5,100 during the Gaza war, the Hamas-run Health Ministry said.
The Gaza/Israel and Palestine/Israel conflict is very long, very complex, and there are outrageous wrongs constantly being done by and to both sides. The game where we argue (usually by highlighting the negative facts about the 'bad guys') over and try to establish which side is (much) more to blame and then side with the other side is NOT part of a solution strategy. The immediate crisis, the Israeli invasion of Gaza, for example, does not require long and detailed arguments and a hammering out of the truth on all the points of contention and all the history that has gone on between Israel and Palestinians over the last century or so.
No, a solution -- at least a long-term 'temporary' solution -- to the Gaza crisis is exceptionally simple: do not allow military imports but otherwise end the killing siege on Gaza, in exchange for Hamas once again instituting a ceasefire on its own (feeble, mostly harmless) rocket attacks on Israel and doing its best to stop other groups' (feeble, mostly harmless) rocket attacks. Hamas is already willing to do such a deal. The hold up is that Israel (with the avid, vital, slavish support of the U.S.) wants to reinstitute the killing siege. (I say killing siege because through denial of medical supplies and care, denial of sanitation/sewage and water system repairs, and denial of food and water, the siege placed on Gaza has killed many Gaza civilians, a great many of them children.) The article below describes the Hamas ceasefire proposal as I have; they won't give in on an end to the siege.
(More below: machinations behind competing ceasefire proposals, a Jewish UK legislator says the Israelis act like Nazis, why Congress backs Israel, and Norman Finkelstein's insights on the whys of Israel's invasion.)
....but is it really a Palestinian Holocaust? Over 300 children dead. You decide.
One Israeli official promised a holocaust in Gaza; it is impossible to keep pace with the death toll.
Ellen Cantarow at AlterNet posted this essay today, January 16, 2009. It summarizes what we already know now about Gaza, but it also uses another set of words to describe what happened and is still happening in Gaza. Her worst condemnation is not for Israel; but for the world which keeps silent and the US Congress which gave an AIPAC approved green light to the Gaza massacres. The Congress overlooked the facts: that Hamas rocket fire had consistently been in retaliation for Israel's military incursions into Gaza to kill alleged militants (and civilians), and that it was Israel which broke the ceasefire conditions by continuing deadly incursions and maintaining the siege, which brought a state of malnutrition and starvation to the Gazans, and killed many medical patients not permitted to leave.
Everyone supports Israel. But who can support a concentration camp! So don't ask why Hamas will not accept as a condition of ceasefire, a continuation of Israel's siege?
Cantarow's lengthy spiel (links in the original) follows:
"It looks like phosphorus, it smells like phosphorus and it's burning like phosphorus. That's why I'm calling it phosphorus."
-- UNRWA Director John Ging
Reuters: The Palestinian death toll from the air-and-ground offensive has risen to at least 1,073 and there were more than 5,000 wounded, according to the Hamas-run Health Ministry in Gaza. A Palestinian rights group said at least 670 of the dead were civilians.
Thirteen Israelis have been killed -- 10 soldiers and three civilians hit by Hamas rocket fire since Israel launched on December 27 a military campaign it said was aimed at ending such salvoes.
CNN (warehoused version; original CNN has been modified): Israeli forces moved into Gaza City overnight. During the clash with Hamas fighters, the U.N. Relief and Works Agency headquarters complex -- located in a densely populated neighborhood -- was hit repeatedly by shrapnel and artillery.
Israel's war fantasy of destroying Hamas is having quite the opposite effect--undermining its secular rival, instead, according to a NYTnews analysis:
"War on Hamas Saps Palestinian Leaders"
By ISABEL KERSHNER
JERUSALEM - Israel hoped that the war in Gaza would not only cripple Hamas, but eventually strengthen its secular rival, the Palestinian Authority, and even allow it to claw its way back into Gaza.
But with each day, the authority, its leader, Mahmoud Abbas, and its leading party, Fatah, seem increasingly beleaguered and marginalized, even in the Palestinian cities of the West Bank, which they control. Protesters accuse Mr. Abbas of not doing enough to stop the carnage in Gaza - indeed, his own police officers have used clubs and tear gas against those same protesters.
The more bombs in Gaza, the more Hamas's support seems to be growing at the expense of the Palestinian Authority, already considered corrupt and distant from average Palestinians.
"The Palestinian Authority is one of the main losers in this war," said Ghassan Khatib, an independent Palestinian analyst in the West Bank city of Ramallah. "How can it make gains in a war in which it is one of the casualties?"
....
Ever since Hamas began its one-party rule of Gaza, in the summer of 2007, Israel and the West have tried to turn Gazans against Hamas through an economic embargo and diplomatic isolation. While there is certainly anger at Hamas among Gazans, it pales beside the anger at Israel, the West and what some see as Fatah's collusion with those enemies.
The only thing surprising about this is that the Times is publishing this analysis right in the midst of the carnage--an indication, perhaps, that the failure of Israeli policy is becoming undeniable. Of course, it's not just counter-productive for Israel, as bin Laden has issued a renewed call for Holy War.
Meanwhile, Israel attacks a hospital, UN headquarters and an international media building....
On Saturday I posted a report from the International Solidarity Movement, a nonviolent civil disobedience group with activists in the West Bank and Gaza, that the Israeli military was using a new weapon that makes no noise and fires a small caliber bullet to injure protesters. ISM was founded by American activists Adam Shapiro and Huwaida Arraf. An excerpt:
The Israeli army have shot six people with a new weapon in the West Bank villages of Jayyous and Ni'lin while the villages were demonstrating against the Israeli massacres in Gaza.
Three men have been shot in Jayyous, including a journalist in clearly marked as a press official. Two were shot in the leg and one above his hip.
Three Palestinians have also been shot by the new bullets in Ni'lin.
The new bullet is very small and makes no sound as it is fired. It is designed so that it enters the body when fired from under 50m and has been shown to cause serious internal bleeding.
Open Left commenter Richard Taylor did some research and discovered that what was most likely used against the protesters was a small-caliber suppressed sniper rifle that Israel discontinued for use against protesters in 2000 due to it being much more lethal than first thought.
In 1987, the Intifada - the Palestinian uprising against the Israeli regime in the Occupied Territories - broke out, and involved mass violent clashes between Israeli security forces and Palestinians protestors. As a result, the Israeli security forces needed a weapon with a more potent firepower then the standard riot control metal covered rubber round, but at the same time less lethal then the standard issue 5.56 mm round of the M16/Galil assault rifles. So the Israeli Defense Force (IDF) searched for a 0.22 caliber accurate rifle that will be used to take out the key protest leaders by shooting them in the legs. Link.
ISM has now released a video of Israeli snipers using the rifle on Friday against protesters in the West Bank village of Ni'lin.
Apparently, ISM activists don't read Open Left (and I don't have any contact with the group) since they are still referring to it as "the new bullet" and so seem unaware of the weapon's deadly history. Here's a link to the latest report that accompanied this video.
Avi Shlaim, a professor of international relations at Oxford University who served in the Israeli army in the mid-1960s. He is the author of numerous books, most notably The Iron Wall: Israel and the Arab World. His latest book is Lion of Jordan: King Hussein's Life in War and Peace. Avi Shlaim is widely regarded as one of the world's leading authorities on the Arab-Israeli conflict.
In the interview, Shlaim refuted a number of key lies that are fundamental to the US/Israeli propaganda line. These lies include:
(1) The conflation of Israel's post-1967 imperialist occupation of Palestinian lands with Israel's pre-1967 defensive posture. Shlaim explains that 1967 was decisive turning point, as a logic of occupation took over that continues to this day. He defends Israel's actions and positions up to 1967, while rejecting them thereafter.
(2) The misrepresentation of Ariel Sharon's withdrawal from Gaza as part of an Israeli peace effort. Shlaim explains them as a strategic shift to continue Israeli imperialist occupation more efficiently and effectively, in light of increased opposition.
(3) The lie that the Gaza ceasefire did not protect Israel. Shlaim explains how the ceasefire reduced the incidence of homemade Kassam rockets from 179 per month to just "three rockets a month, almost zero." Thus, "if Israel wanted to protect its citizens-and it had every right to protect its citizens-the way to go about it was not by launching this vicious military offensive, but by observing the ceasefire."
(4) The lie that Hamas broke the cease-fire. "It was broken not by Hamas, but by the IDF. It was broken by the IDF on the 4th of November, when it launched a raid into Gaza and killed six Hamas men."
(5) The lie that Isreali had observed and supported the cease-fire. "One of the terms of the ceasefire was that Israel would lift the blockade of Gaza, yet Israel failed to lift the blockade, and that is one issue that is also overlooked or ignored by official Israeli spokesmen. So Israel was doubly guilty of sabotaging the ceasefire, A, by launching a military attack, and B, by maintaining its very cruel siege of the people of Gaza."
BBC: Palestinian deaths in the Gaza Strip have passed 1,000 . . .
Nearly a third of the dead are reported to be children and nearly 5,000 people have been injured. . . .
The Ministry of Health in Gaza said 1,010 people have died in the conflict which started 19 days ago.
More than 300 of the dead are said to be children and about 4,700 people in Gaza have been injured.
Thirteen Israelis have been killed, including three civilians and one soldier from rockets fired from Gaza and nine soldiers killed in fighting in Gaza.
It is impossible to independently confirm casualty figures as Israel has refused to allow international journalists to enter Gaza.
Reuters: The number of Palestinians killed in a 19-day-old Israeli offensive in the Gaza Strip reached at least 1,000 on Wednesday, including hundreds of civilians, officials in the Hamas-run Health Ministry in the enclave said.
The figures, in common with previous counts, are subject to the difficulties of counting and verification in the chaos of the war. Israeli officials have given no firm casualty toll for Palestinians but say troops have killed hundreds of militants.
Gaza: ICRC president demands greater respect for civilians and humanitarian workers
Already upset with Rep. Ellision over his taking a position as vice chair of the LGBT Equality Caucus, conservatives call on the Muslim community to campaign against Ellision and Carson in 2010. "Kucinich and Ron Paul's comments were sadly much more Muslim than anything our own Muslims are capable of."
On January 9th, the House voted on Resolution 34, supporting Israel's current action in Gaza. Rep. Keith Ellison and Andre Carson, the first and second Muslim American congressional reps. in US history, voted "present" and in support of the bill. The following is an excerpt from a post at Muslimmatters.org, a well-known religiously conservative Muslim blog. It's representative of other mainstream conservative Muslim bloggers' response to the House vote. Remember that religiously conservative Muslims strongly disapprove of participating in politics, so their "buy in" and participation in the November elections was unprecedented. Many voted and contributed money for the first time.
As political support unravels for Muslim Democratic congressmen and as segments of the Muslim community vow to disengage and walk away from the democratic political process, consider this a case study of how the larger Muslim world is being radicalized by Israel's current violence in Gaza.
The question arises though - where were our Muslim congressmen?! Should our own brothers not be at the forefront in speaking out against this massacre? Speaking in support of their brothers and sisters who are falling victim to an act of oppression which is something no less than fully-fledged ethnic cleansing?
Andre Carson voted for the resolution. Meaning, he pledged his support for Israel and the furthering of their "Jewish Democratic" state through the invasion and genocide of innocent Muslims in Palestine.
Keith Ellison gave his implicit support for it, by refusing to speak against it. We are not asking him to change the world, but is it really too much to ask that as a Muslim, you have the courage to take a stand against a massacre of Muslims? Is it too much to ask that you at the least simply echo and support the statements made by some of your fellow Congressman? Do you seriously believe Israel was in the right?
It is troubling that a Muslim congressman can be so clueless about international politics. Does he really believe what he said about Israel? This is either deceit, or the height of ignorance - unacceptable either way for someone in this field, and representing the Muslim community of America. While it is true he was elected in Minnesota, he did raise funds from Muslim communities all over the country, making us believe this would make a positive difference and represent our interests.
The basic premise of Muslim involvement in these arenas predicated on the belief that we knew the system was wrong. We knew that there are many things in politics that go against our religious principles. But we have tried to take a mature stance at objectively analyzing what we can do to avert the greater evil in favor of the lesser one. Have many Muslims lost sight of that? Definitely. Many who were more enthusiastic were often given a free pass because of progress that was being made. After all, we had a Muslim in Congress now. We can make strides in defending the civil liberties of American Muslims.
It was in that vein that many of us remained silent, when our first Muslim Congressman was chosen to be the Vice chair of a Gay Rights Committee. We were uncomfortable with this as Islam's stance on homosexuality is crystal clear. However, many tried to give him the benefit of the doubt, and try to take a more 'mature' understanding that this was part of working with the system. He was making some compromises en route to achieving what we were hoping would ultimately be the greater good for the Muslim community.
Fast forward now to the recent crisis that began a few weeks ago. When it comes to Muslim issues, there is definitely a list of priorities. As a Muslim, I find it hard to place many things above an all out massacre of innocent civilians. While no one is naive enough to think that 2 Muslim congressmen will be able to put through a bill that will result in a sudden reversal of foreign policy, we do expect them to at least take a symbolic stand when afforded the opportunity.
Let's make one thing clear: No one is denying that a Muslim congressman undoubtedly faces an undue amount of pressure, probably more than most other politicians - both within the Muslim community and the microscope outside of it.
The question that I have though, is at what point do we simply say that if this is the net result of working with the system, then it's not worth it?
What is even most perplexing is that we are not asking Ellison or Carson to do something unreasonable! Kucinich and Ron Paul's comments were sadly much more Muslim than anything our own Muslims are capable of. Could Ellison not echo those same sentiments from his fellow colleagues?
If they cannot take even a symbolic stand against genocide, then there is really no hope for anything else after that.
It is seriously time that we re-evaluate our strategy on these issues. What is the real end game here? I do not disagree with the theory of making our voices and concerns heard, I am questioning the manner in which we do it, and the extreme to which we have gone. Is there benefit of working with a system in which Muslims, when finally making it to the stage, cannot stand up for what is important to us?
The Western Muslim society has slowly been getting more and more politically active (and savvy). While I do not discount political participation en masse, I feel that we have lost sight of what I understand to be our initial intention in getting involved - averting greater harms to our community.
As for those who believe that this stance is too harsh, and that trashing the system is 'throwing the baby out with the bath-water' - then I say this. If you still believe that this engagement is the proper course of action, then I ask what could have possibly motivated these Congressmen to favor Israel (one explicitly, and one implicitly)?
If it is really a case of "bad apples" and not a shortcoming with the system, then I challenge you and all the politically active Muslim organizations who backed Ellison with this: Send out emails on your email lists expressing your disapproval of what they did, in the same way that you previously encouraged people to support them. If you are a true believer in "writing your Congressman" and civic engagement - then write to Ellison, and these Muslim organizations. Let them know that you will not only refuse to re-elect them, but you will campaign against them because of this travesty.
Earlier today, Chris wrote a diary with a sober analysis of what the decades-long future holds for Israel/Palestine. But, of course, a denial of sobriety and long-range thinking is the very essence of what we see coming from Israel and it's even more extremist American "supporters," as witnessed in a demonstration this weekend in New York, that Max Blumenthal reported on. This morning he was on Democracy Now!, with footage of a video he took at the demonstration, which included, for example:
MAX BLUMENTHAL: So how many civilian casualties would it take before you questioned the attack?
ISRAEL SUPPORTER 3: There is not a number involved.
ISRAEL SUPPORTER 4: Nothing good is going to come out of it, unless they keep fighting all the way with this 'til they wipe them all out.
MAX BLUMENTHAL: Wipe them all out?
ISRAEL SUPPORTER 4: Yeah, they got to go strong with this.
ISRAEL SUPPORTER 5: There's only one way to deal with a cancer. You burn it out or you remove it. And when people don't want to talk and just want to destroy you and not allow you to live, there's only one thing you can do.
ISRAEL SUPPORTER 2: They are forcing us to kill their children to defend our children.
This is, quite simply, mass hysteria. And it is being feed on lies, half-truths and relentless propaganda. Missing entirely from this account is the fact that it was Israel who broke the cease fire in early November, that Israel had blockaded Gaza throughout the cease-fire period, directly violating not only the terms of the cease-fire, but international law as well.
These were members of a crowd that was being addressed by Senator Schumer and Governor Patterson, both of whom cheerfully fanned the flames of ignorance and hate.
The math here is simple: every innocent child you kill produces a minimum of 100 new hardline rejectionist "terrorists". A 2006 National Intelligence Estimate reached a similar conclusion about the "success" of our fighting the "war on terror" in Iraq: It was a great recruiting campaign for the jihadists.
No wonder killing them all is the only "logical" alternative.
"It was 10pm on Monday, 4 January when my father and four brothers were sitting in the yard of this house," said Ali, 27, son of Jihad Abu Jbarah who was killed along with two other sons. "They were burning a wood fire to warm up and make tea. This is the cup my father was drinking tea from."
Last Monday, Israeli warplanes hit the Abu Jbarah family home, killing three family members and wounding two others including one severely. . . .
"My brother Khaled was carrying his daughter towards her bed as the weather was getting cold and as soon as he turned his back the rockets hit the house," Ali recalled. "His daughter was about to sleep as he fell down to the ground after he sustained two shrapnel into his back." . . .
Basel, 30, Usama, 21 and their 53-year-old paralyzed father, Jihad, were all killed as the missiles dismembered them, scattering body parts in different directions.
"My father went to paradise," says Jihad, Basel's young son, as he stands near the wood stove that his father, uncle and grandfather had been sitting around when they were killed.
Deutsche Presse-Agentur: The Palestinian death toll of Israel's Gaza offensive has reached at least 947, two thirds of whom are civilians, an official in the Hamas-run Health Ministry in the strip said Tuesday.
Mo'aweya Hassanein [Health Ministry chief of emergency services] said that of the 947 killed, 635 were civilian men, women and children. Another 165 were Hamas policemen while the remaining 147 were gunmen in Hamas' armed wing and other militant factions.
The numbers could not be independently verified. Israel puts the number of militants killed at at least 400. . . .
Reuters: The Palestinian death toll in the offensive since December 27 reached 937, Palestinian medics say. The Health Minister of the Hamas-run government says close to 400 of those are women and children.
Israel's death toll since the offensive began is 10 soldiers, while three civilians were killed in rocket and mortar fire from the Gaza Strip.
OK, I am going to lay out my thoughts on Israel and Palestine.
Yesterday, as you have almost certainly heard by now, Israel's Central Election Committee banned the two major Arab political parties in the country from running in next month's elections. The ruling will probably be overturned by the Israeli supreme court, but it is still a disturbing development for the future of Israel.
In the long-term, say 30 years or so, there will be one of two possible outcomes in Israel and Palestine:
An autonomous, Jewish majority Israel bordering an autonomous, Palestinian majority Palestine, with neither under occupation or threat of invasion. Essentially, a two-state solution. This is the outcome currently desired by 60-70% of both Palestinians and Israelis.
A single, democratic state with a Palestinian majority that encompasses all of Israel, Gaza and the West Bank. This is not a commonly discussed outcome now, but it is more possible down the road than most people think.
I provide an explanation for this view in the extended entry.
Wounded baby, outside Shifah Hospital in Gaza, Jan. 11, 2009
Reuters: The Palestinian death toll in the 17-day-old Israeli offensive reached 908, more than a third of them children, the Hamas-run Health Ministry said. Thirteen Israelis have been killed -- 10 soldiers, and three civilians killed by Hamas rocket fire.
AP: The army announced Sunday that it was sending reserve units into Gaza to assist thousands of ground forces already in the territory. The use of reserves is a strong signal that Israel is planning to move the offensive, which Gaza officials say has killed some 910 Palestinians, into a new, more punishing phase.
LA Times: 1 dead, dozens injured in Gaza by suspected white phosphorus munitions
By Richard Boudreaux and Yasser Ahmad
January 12, 2009
Reporting from Jerusalem and Khan Yunis, Gaza Strip -- Palestinian villagers said the shelling came from the direction of the Israeli border, less than a mile away, scattering flaming objects in their midst and burning down 20 homes and the local United Nations-run school.
"One landed in my kitchen and caused a fire," said Zohair Mohammed abu Rejila, 35. "I went to put it out, but another one landed on Mayar, my baby daughter. It was like a block of fire, a piece of plastic on fire. When I knocked it off her, it exploded and out came this heavy white smoke with a very bad smell."
Doctors who treated Abu Rejila, his family and dozens of neighbors in southern Gaza said they were apparent victims of white phosphorus fired from Israeli artillery. One woman was killed. . . .
Yousef abu Rish, director of the Nasser Hospital in Khan Yunis, said 55 people from nearby Khoza were treated for burns, breathing difficulties, and throat and eye irritation after exposure to toxic white smoke from shells fired just after midnight Sunday.
The Israeli propaganda blitz around their attack on Gaza has been greeted with uncharacteristic skepticism by the American public and even by some of the mainstream US press. Even the Jewish American community is uneasy about this one, in a way perhaps unparalelled since the 1982 Israeli attack on Lebanon and siege of Beirut. Jews for Peace in Los Angeles are actively protesting the Gaza atrocities, and newspaper articles from around the US on local protests held this weekend often mention mixed Arab-American and Jewish-American rallies.
If it is true that Americans are greeting Israeli talking points with more criticism this time, is it because we have been intensively exposed for the past 8 years to precisely this sort of mental manipulation by Bush-Cheney and their stable of Neoconservatives?
Let's take some of the basic techniques of propaganda practiced by Bush and compare them to those deployed by the Israeli leadership in the past 8 days.
Well, of course, Jaun had no difficulty at all drawing parallels between the neocon propaganda and what's going on now in Israel vis-a-vis Gaza. But the important point is rather the flip side: not that an expert critic can see all these connections, but that even a wannabee dittohead can't avoid them. They can just feel their unspoken 5-0, 40-love advantage slipping away. The fate awaiting them all is that of Martin Indyk in the Democracy Now!interchange with Norman Finklestein that I wrote about earlier this week.
But that's only the tip of the iceberg. Because, you see, I've got a little secret to share with you all: Empires Fall.
Reuters: A total of 846 Palestinians and thirteen Israelis --- three civilians killed by rocket fire and 10 soldiers --- have been killed since the offensive began on Dec. 27.
Al Jazeera: The Palestinian death toll in the Gaza Strip has risen to 854 and more than 3,350 injured as the Israeli offensive entered its third week.
CNN: More than 800 Palestinians have been killed in the attacks, including 235 children, and about 3,300 people have been wounded, according to Palestinian medical sources. Thirteen Israelis, including 10 soldiers, have died since the operation began.
Mads Gilbert, a Norwegian doctor working at Shifa hospital in Gaza City, told Al Jazeera: "We have been to many war zones, but the special thing is that the 1.5 million Gaza population are completely locked in.
"The civilian population has no way to hide. The population density is so high you can not do attacks like this without knowing that you are attacking the civilians.
As dissenting Jewish voices in America are increasingly being heard, as they have long been heard in Israel, the hawkish, rightwing-oriented establishment epitomized by AIPIC is growing increasingly irrational. A rational discussion is trying to break through, but a rational discussion is the last thing that AIPAC establishment wants. There are demonstrations against Israel's attack on across the country tomorrow, in Washington, Los Angeles, San Francisco, New York, Portland, OR, Sacramento, CA, Urbana, Ill as well as around the world.
Even Time magazine's cover proclaims, "Why Israel Can't Win", while the accompanying cover story asks, "Can Israel Survive Its Assault on Gaza?" As with the Wall Street meltdown, the old ideology has visibly self-destructed, yet it's defenders still fight on, not realizing they've already lost. Unfortunately, in neither instance does that mean that sanity has yet won. But debate is spreading where there was only silence before. And the growing outspokenness of Jewish-American opposition to what is being done in our name--as well as to Israel--is a heartening sign. Some examples:
An article in the New York Jewish Week, "Fresh Rift Emerges Over War Response", emailed out by J Street, discussed the heightened level of controversy that J Street has elicited:
"Other peace groups issued statements, but they're not seen as serious people," said the leader of a major pro-Israel group this week. "But J Street includes serious people with serious connections with the new administration, and people are very worried. They don't have much power now, but there's a feeling that they could gain a lot of influence in the new Congress and with the new administration."
Rosanne Barr, loudmouth Jew extraordinaire, kicked off her new local radio show on KPFK Pacifica with a blistering attack on warmongering and bigotry of all kinds taking primary aim on how she feels her faith has been distorted and abused. (Listen here.) It was truly refreshing to hear a pro-peace, anti-imperialist Jewish voice without one second of defensiveness in a 60-minute program. How soon can they start syndicating her?
On Democracy Now!yesterday, Amy and Juan had Former Ambassador to Israel Martin Indyk on to discuss his new book, Innocent Abroad: An Intimate Account of American Peace Diplomacy in the Middle East. But they also had on Norman Finkelstein, author of several books, including The Holocaust Industry and Beyond Chutzpah, and Martin Indyk just about had a cow. He was, quite literally, incapable of arguing with Finklestein, and tried to make a virtue of necessity by presenting it as a matter of honor and principle that he would not debate Finklestein. But he lost embarrassingly, anyway. Details--or should I say, morsels--on the flip.
As an anti-spam measure, there is a 24-hour waiting period after registering before new users can comment. blog advertising is good for you
blog advertising is good for you
