PLEASE NOTE: This video essay contains images of the Israeli and Palestinian casualties - including children - in Gaza as well as the Pulitzer prize-winning photo of the nude Vietnamese girl running from napalm bombing. Some viewers may find the images disturbing, but they are in context and germane to the subject matter.
"I and the public know
What all schoolchildren learn
Those to whom evil is done
Do evil in return."
W.H. Auden, "September 1, 1939"
Versailles is full of almost nothing but fools. And those who are not fools are forced to spend almost all their time responding to fools. So what would it be like if, instead of wall-to-wall fools chattering endlessly about the Mideast on one channel after another, we instead had an intelligence discourse to guide us? Well, we don't have the TV network infrastructure--at least not here in the US. But we do have the content available, and potential content-providers out the wazoo. To pick up on one channel, in particular, one need only look to the London Review of Books, which has a page, "LRB contributors react to events in Gaza", first put up on January 15, which it has continued to update.
This is page where one can read the views of historians and historically-informed commentators who know that history is always at least a double fabrication--fabricated first by those who act in its midst, and fabricated again by those who pick and chose how the initial fabrication is made sense of, which pieces are kept and which discarded, which kept together, which separated, which disappeared, and which created out of nothing.
Here, to entice you, are a few excerpts of a few contributions, to give you a flavor of what it might be to watch an intelligent discussion on tv for a change. The excerpts are not intended to represent the full views of those quoted, only to reflect some of the kinds of ideas, insights and perspectives they put into play.
Of all of Israel's apologists over the years, none surpasses Alan Dershowitz. In this article posted on Huffington Post this morning, The Phony War Crimes Accusation Against Israel, Dershowitz has gone overboard, comparing Israel's minor massacres in Gaza with the more extensive killings of civilians in Chechnya in Russia, and Sudan's of its Darfurian population. Fewer kills deserves consideration and should not be considered war crimes.
"Everything has got to come in; that is one of the things we will be insisting on strongly." -- John Holmes, UN humanitarian chief
The way to de facto peace between Israel and Hamas is obvious: end Israel's blockade on civilian goods and people going into and out of Gaza. Anyone who cares about peace, the security of Israel, and the security and welfare of Gaza should be pushing Israel - or the U.S., Israel's main and essential supporter - to lift its siege. Pushing hard, like the UN, CARE, and Save the Children did today and yesterday.
AFP: The United Nations urged Israel on Thursday to reopen Gaza crossings as senior officials assessed war damage . . .
"If you want to have reconstruction, you have to have cement and construction materials and pipes and spare parts," said UN humanitarian chief John Holmes at a UN-run school hit by an Israeli missile in the northern town of Beit Lahiya.
"Everything has got to come in; that is one of the things we will be insisting on strongly" in discussions with Israel, said Holmes who was touring Gaza along with UN Middle East envoy Robert Serry.
Gaza's 1.5 million residents are struggling to cope without electricity and other basic necessities on the fourth day of an Israeli blockade. Hospitals have begun to run short of fuel for generators, and sewage has spilled out onto the streets. Jacky Rowland reports.
Here's the background to Israel's deadly siege. . .
. . . for those who seek to advance their aims by inducing terror and slaughtering innocents, we say to you now that our spirit is stronger and cannot be broken; you cannot outlast us, and we will defeat you. . . .
Aftermath of Tel Aviv suicide bombing attack.
Gaza, mother and injured child.
. . . because we have tasted the bitter swill of civil war and segregation, and emerged from that dark chapter stronger and more united, we cannot help but believe that the old hatreds shall someday pass; that the lines of tribe shall soon dissolve. . . .
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.
"Terrorism" is probably the single most elastic and easily manipulated term in our political lexicon. Who the perpetrators and victims are of "terrorism" is almost always a function of who is wielding the term rather than some objective assessment.
Therefore, we are told that Hamas is a "terrorist" organization, and the Arabs in Gaza accuse Israel of Zionist "Terrorism."
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.
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
