The Israel-Palestine conflict

American support for Israel has increased immensely and it has contributed or even caused recent problems. What worries me is that Americans but also others may be informed wrong about this.

The dead Palestinians deserve better.

In America's news headlines, Palestinians die mysterious deaths

It’s almost as if bullets just hang in the air, waiting for Palestinians to walk deliberately into them

It is the peculiar fate of oppressed people everywhere that when they are killed, they are killed twice: first by bullet or bomb, and next by the language used to describe their deaths. A common condition of oppression, after all, is to be blamed for being the victim, and that blame gets meted out in language designed to rob the oppressed of their very struggle.

Such a situation has for decades been the tragic destiny of the Palestinians, who are themselves so routinely assigned the blame when they are killed by Israel – and not just by the Israeli government but by the American media and political establishment – that we have now basically come to expect it.

But we don’t have to accept it. By paying close attention to the language of the media, we can see how this double death of the oppressed occurs, and we can learn how to resist such an insidious way of framing the Palestinian struggle.

Consider the headlines. On Monday, the Israeli military killed more than 60 protesters in Gaza. The deadly violence was one-sided – no Israelis were killed – and disproportionate. In the midst of the carnage, the New York Times sent out a tweet about its story on the bloody events. “Dozens of Palestinians have died in protests as the US prepares to open its Jerusalem Embassy,” read the tweet.

Have died? Really? We should note how the passive voice in this tweet hides the one performing the action, which is exactly what passive voice constructions can do. In this tweet, Israel is assigned no responsibility for killing protesters. On the contrary, Palestinians appear, simply and almost mysteriously, to “have died”. ...


and:
... The Washington Post’s lead story on the massacre is headlined “Gaza buries its dead as death toll from protests at fence with Israel rises to at least 60.” Again, the headline leaves us wondering who killed the people of Gaza? Are we to assume that the protests – and not the Israeli military – killed these people?

The Wall Street Journal has a video on its website with the headline “Clashes Over New US Embassy in Jerusalem Leave Dozens Dead”. Frankly, this headline is even worse than the others. To label this massacre as “clashes” is not only disingenuous but also grossly misleading, as is the idea that the Palestinians were only protesting against the new US embassy in Jerusalem. Gaza’s Great Return March was organized in significant measure to draw attention to the plight of Palestinian refugees, who make up around 70% of the population of the Gaza Strip.

And then there’s the ever-present “leave dozens dead” in the headline, which again tells us nothing about who shot whom, suggesting instead that “clashes” rather than people kill while insinuating that Palestinians are, once again, basically responsible for their own slaughter.

... read on.
 
I want to hand the author of that article a brown paper bag to breathe in and out into. No matter how worked up you get about this, nothing will ever change.
 
The actual "Gaza massacre" won't change anything since Hamas admitted 50 of their personnel died in a body count of 62. There is nothing official from Iranian side but 3 are suspected to be on their payroll. In any case, Palestinian bystander death counts at 9-12 which against 62 is called "collateral damage". Nobody ever got charged for that. You are never going to get a clean charge on a single Israeli "incident" because they always dance on the razor of what is universally acceptable in the unwritten rulebook of urban warfare.

Croatia was scrutinized for its territorial restoration operations. Every component of the tactic was deeply analyzed at the ICTY, the command chain and the orders, damage done to civilian objects, NATO aerial surveillance data mined for any details, gunnery logs inspected, airforce combat reports, everything. They wanted to find something tangible that Croatian Army et al were going into genocide. Finally after a decade long process, for a comparably short and low-intensity conflict, they found nothing. Just to make clear I'm not talking about conflict in Bosnia per se.

Good luck pulling Israel into something like that. It would be a matter of their pride, reporting to some old hats in Hague from their perspective. Until you have proof that they have a lebensraum of their own going down there majority of the incidents will be deemed as collateral damage and victims of terrorism. If there is a big picture you'll need access to their own data, which you won't get because it is a sovereignty issue. It is so because every of these world police countries acting on their own behalf in the middle east performed grave violations of Geneva convention fairly recently.

In short words, you can't mandate IDF use expensive tooling and high precision weaponry to minimize bystander loss when you were happy to carpet bomb insurgency zones yesterday.
 
Any more info on this?

Here's the report from Haaretz, a liberal Israeli news source. [EDIT: correcting the link: https://www.haaretz.com/middle-east...hamas-activists-says-hamas-official-1.6094899] 50 Hamas, 3 Islamic Jihad.

That Guardian article is a shameful piece of dishonest propaganda. It was not a "protest," it was a paramilitary operation to breach the border fence so militants could make incursions into Israel and kidnap Jewish civilians to use as bargaining chips. They were not "unarmed"; they attacked IDF with rocks, Molotov cocktails, grenades, and inciendary devices. And who gives a shit if the killing was "disproportionate" when Gaza initiated the violence? Self-defense does not require the defender to let the aggressor take a few free casualties before responding with force; the aggressor assumes the risk that the defender is a lot more capable. And Hamas is disgusting for using human shields with the intent of making a sympathy play to the world when they're inevitably hurt. If anybody's oppressing the people of Gaza, it's their sick murderous leadership.

https://www.jpost.com/Arab-Israeli-...55-Palestinians-dead-thousands-wounded-556424
https://www.timesofisrael.com/idf-c...d-insists-it-followed-rules-as-dozens-killed/
 
Last edited:
The first link leads me to a 2010 article. The other sources I do not trust.

The Jerusalem Post. Times of Israel? Nope, not a good idea.

A paramilitary operation? And men did not land on the moon too, right?
 
Last edited:
Thanks. I'm also reading:

"Palestinians, including Hamas officials, say protesters are being shot while posing no threat to soldiers and there have been international calls for an independent probe into the deaths."

= = = = = = =



@AlexS
On Gaza:
"Haaretz, the most respected of Israel's newspapers referred to the Palestinian ghetto" watch below:

@Perun watch (at least) the last two minutes. He said "there isn't a solution" but he doesn't give up and does a suggestion.

Who is Norman Finkelstein?
Norman Finkelstein is among the leading scholars on the Israel-Palestine conflict in the United States. His work primarily focuses on the history of the Israel-Palestine conflict and the Nazi Holocaust. For decades, he has advocated for a two state solution on the June 1967 borders, a “just solution to the refugee question,” an end to the Israeli settlements in Palestine, the deconstruction of the border wall, the right to clean water, and an end to the occupation, the Gaza blockade, and the use of force against the Palestinians.

About eleven years ago, after a debate with Alan Dershowitz on Democracy Now!, in which Finkelstein discredited Dershowitz’s book, The Case for Israel, Dershowitz launched a smear campaign against Finkelstein, complete with wholesale lies. Many believe this resulted in the denial of Finkelstein’s tenure around that time at DePaul University, a move that Dershowitz petitioned the university to make.

Despite his widely acknowledged expertise and accomplishments, and praise from his students and readers, Finkelstein remains without a job today. His books are rarely reviewed. source
 
Last edited:
Well our society has declared Hamas a terrorist group and as such any people mingling with them have discarded their civilian rights, at least from our legal viewpoint.
 
It sounds accurate. The issue with Israeli military response as ever is heavy handedness, and zero care (some would argue bloody mindedness) in who else might get hit. Plus the deep suspicion that genocidal sentiments are widespread in security services and military.

The Guardian etc go for an overly moralising stance. However, I find it quite disturbing that another popular Western stance to Israel and Palestine at the moment is about cheering on anything that's seen as striking back against Muslims in general.
 
You can have the best solution for Israeli and Palestinian cohabitation on the same piece of land. I say solution are like arses, everybody has one and they're all but useless. When people think about solution they picture the end scenario and not the road, not the migration process between situation A and B.

Think about it this way; if there were random people left on a remote island, without any personal belongings, and with a finite stash of high-value resources for everyone, those people could split them up, allocate the land, and start with a just system for everyone. Good luck transforming something already in place and unjust.

Everyone has his own private interests regardless of keeping up with national aspirations. Those Israeli "settlers" in Gaza got an OK from their gov't. They live there. If they can't live there no more they're going to ask questions and demand answers. Most people do not care about geopolitical stuff. If you were a young family struggling and state comes up with a housing subvention which is in the disputed territory I would ask you would you deny it? I'm sure some do, but most don't.

Two-state solution equals territory/resource loss for Israel. Why would they accept it today, it is beyond me. You need to understand Israelis feel like they've been engaged in war for 70 years. You cannot start from six day war you need to start from British Palestine, to see how many times world powers tried to install a peace plan down there and how many times it backlashes leaving Israelis defending themselves against an all-out Arab coalitions.
 
I was talking about Gaza especially. Look at it from the people who live in these conditions and cannot get out, have no perspective on improvement. Let's see it from their point of view.

You cannot keep arguing that it is good to imprison two million people. Not like this. It is very logical that people get angry about it.
 
There's absolutely no good solution to this. :( It's as unreasonable to move settler families as it is to move Palestinians. Peace and status quo territory-wise would be the best anyone could hope for, but then there are Hamas extremists who are committed to war/terrorism, and there are Israelis who feel totally justified in their military's actions as self defence. However, pressure from the rest of the world to come to a peaceful solution, rather than being seen to choose sides, could help a lot. It was sad that just when things appeared to be calming down (early 90s I think it was), radicals emerged on both sides.
 
It is not unreasonable to lift the blockade.
Or provide a chance for Palestinians to move out of there.
 
An Israeli sniper shot a Canadian doctor, properly identified, on the Palestinian side of the border. I don't believe Israel is for a moment innocent and "just defending themselves".
 
Back
Top