Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Israel's Latest Violation
Every time Israel's right-wing government engages in yet another outrageous violation of international legal norms, it is easy to think, "No way are they going to get away with it this time!" And yet, thanks to the White House, Congress and leading American pundits, somehow, they do.
Israel's attack on an unarmed flotilla of humanitarian aid vessels in the eastern Mediterranean — resulting in more than a dozen fatalities, the wounding of scores of passengers and crew, and the kidnapping of 750 others — has so far not proven any different.
Violation of Maritime Law
The bottom line is that under no circumstances does Israel, or any other country, have the right to board humanitarian aid vessels, guns blazing, in international waters. By most definitions, this is piracy, pure and simple. International maritime law gives the crew of ships attacked in international waters the right to defend themselves. Certainly it would have been better if the largely Turkish crew of the ship where most of the fatalities took place had not fought back. But it was well within their legal right to do so.
Israel's actions raise a number of questions. Why didn't the Israelis simply disable the rudders and guide the ships to port? Why did they have to board the ships with the guns blazing — according to eyewitnesses, before some members of the crew picked up their "weapons" of wrenches and poles — unless they intended to kill people?
In any case, now that Israel is finally releasing the first few humanitarian aid volunteers that they captured, the Israeli version that the commandoes acted in self-defense — repeatedly cited without question in the mainstream U.S. media — turns out to be false. "No one in the world will believe the lies and excuses which the government and army spokesmen come up with," observed Uri Avnery, journalist and former Israeli Knesset member.
However, apologists in Washington for Israel's right-wing government are already repeating the Israeli line that the nonviolent activists were "terrorists" and that they had "weapons" they found on board, such as a wrench, a come-along winch, and other items commonly found on ships. The Israeli government has withdrawn their earlier claims that they had found pistols and other guns on board, but its U.S. supporters are still repeating this lie. In reality, the "Freedom Flotilla" — a convoy of six ships organized by a coalition of human rights activists from Europe, North America, the Middle East, and elsewhere — allowed people to take part in the "Freedom Flotilla," only on the grounds that they "agree to adhere to the principles of non-violence and non-violent resistance in word and deed at all times."
Rep. Gary Ackerman (D-NY), whom the Democrats have chosen to lead the House Subcommittee on the Middle East, claimed that the killings were “wholly the fault and responsibility of the organizers of the effort to break through Israel and Egypt’s legitimate closure of terrorist-controlled Gaza.” Insisting that Israel’s act of piracy on the high seas was “a legal mission,” he claimed the humanitarian relief effort was actually “for the benefit of Hamas and as part of the international effort to delegitimize Israel’s existence.”
Critics of the flotilla are partially correct in observing that the purpose of the voyage was not just to deliver badly needed aid, but to "provoke a confrontation." This, however, is part of the great tradition of nonviolent direct action. For example, civil rights activists in the 1960s were similarly criticized for provoking confrontation by sitting in at lunch counters, marching across Selma's Edmund Pettus Bridge, and demonstrating in downtown Birmingham. It was only through such confrontations, revealing the brutality of the oppressor, that change was made.
Washington's Tepid Response
The Obama administration does not appear to be very interested in making change when it comes to its policies toward Israel. Indeed, the U.S. response to this tragedy is very reminiscent of the U.S.-backed Salvadoran junta's atrocities in the 1980s. For example, when the U.S.-backed Salvadoran military murdered three American nuns and a Catholic lay worker involved in humanitarian relief efforts, the Reagan administration claimed that they were actually "political activists" who may have engaged in "an exchange of fire" with the Salvadoran soldiers, resulting in their deaths. Similarly, when the junta arrested 60 humanitarian aid workers, the Reagan administration defended the mass kidnapping on the grounds that the army had found such "weapons" as sharp sticks and gasoline, in the church basement where some of these aid workers had created a sanctuary for peasants seeking refuge from government-backed death squads. That such objects might have civilian uses was deemed irrelevant in an effort to depict the church workers as supporters of terrorism.
The Israelis confiscated all of the passengers' cameras, laptops, cell phones, and other personal devices. The world, therefore, can only see some carefully edited versions from cameramen that accompanied the Israeli commandos. What won't be seen, for example, will be the accounts of eyewitnesses of commandos with stun guns assaulting passengers who nonviolently formed a ring around the ship's bridge, the savage beatings of elderly pacifists as they lay on the ground, and other acts of excessive violence.
Russia, Turkey, India, China, Brazil, France, Spain, and many other countries quickly and categorically condemned the attack on the humanitarian convoy. By stark contrast, the White House issued a statement that simply "expressed deep regret at the loss of life in today's incident, and concern for the wounded." The White House did not criticize Israel's actions. Meanwhile, the State Department appeared to condemn the multinational effort to deliver medical supplies and other humanitarian aid, saying that ""expanding the flow of goods to the people of Gaza…must be done in a spirit of cooperation, not confrontation."
Similarly, Obama's ambassador to the United Nations insisted that those wishing to aid the people of Gaza should use "non-provocative and non-confrontational mechanisms" and that "direct delivery by sea is neither appropriate nor responsible." Given that Israel has steadfastly refused efforts by the international community to provide aid through "non-provocative and non-confrontational mechanisms," it is unclear what the Obama administration suggests doing instead.
Had Barack Obama been in office at the time of the 1948 Soviet blockade of Berlin instead of Harry Truman, would he have rejected launching the airlift because he felt that addressing the humanitarian crisis in West Berlin "must be done in a spirit of cooperation, not confrontation," and that the West should use "non-provocative and non-confrontational mechanisms?"
Perhaps a more revealing analogy would be this: Imagine how the Obama administration would have reacted if the attack on the vessels had been done by Iranians instead of the Israelis. Imagine if the Iranians had killed the passengers and crew, kidnapped hundreds of people on the ships, brought them to Iran, and held them incommunicado. It's not likely that the White House would give the Iranians a free ride for such a blatant violation of international law. Nor would the media and Washington pundits be spewing out the Iranian account of events before the hostages even had a chance to tell their side of the story.
At the United Nations, the United States successfully blocked the Security Council from passing a resolution on the issue, accepting only an endorsement of a statement by the Security Council president, and then only after watering the statement down significantly. The original draft statement condemned Israel for violating international law, demanded an investigation by the United Nations, and insisted that Israel prosecute those responsible for the raid and pay compensation to the victims. However, the Obama administration refused to accept such wording. Instead, the statement simply condemned "those acts" that resulted in deaths, without naming Israel, implying that the victims on board the ships shared responsibility for getting killed when the Israelis engaged in an unprovoked attack on their ships in international waters. Indeed, when White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs was specifically asked whether the United States condemned Israeli conduct, he said that there was not enough information to make such a determination.
The Security Council president's statement also called for "a credible, impartial, and transparent investigation." The United States, however, insisted that such an investigation should only be done by the Israeli government itself. According to Deputy Permanent Representative Alejandro Wolff, "We are convinced and support an Israeli investigation...and have every confidence that Israel can conduct a credible and impartial and transparent, prompt investigation internally." However, according to recent reports by Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, the Netanyahu government has failed miserably at conducting such credible investigations regarding violations of human rights and international legal norms by their forces. Surely, the Obama administration is aware of this. As a result, this raises questions as to whether the Obama administration even wants the truth to be known.
Indeed, Obama's response to this tragedy underscores the phoniness of 'his advocacy for human rights elsewhere in the Middle East. He is quite willing to criticize the Iranian regime for killing nonviolent activists on the streets of Tehran. But he excuses Israel for killing nonviolent activists on the high seas.
Continued Siege of Gaza
In the meantime, Israel's siege on the Gaza Strip continues to take its toll. Maintaining a strict embargo on arms and related materiel, which could be used by Hamas against Israeli civilians, is quite reasonable. But Israel's severe restriction on medicines, food, and construction material needed to rebuild the thousands of homes — as well as schools and medical facilities — destroyed in Israel's three-week military offensive two and a half years ago is not.
The results have been tragic. For example, a report by more than 80 UN and aid agencies notes how "the formal economy in Gaza has collapsed." The UN Food and Agricultural Organization reported that "61 percent of people in the Gaza Strip are…food insecure," of which "65 percent are children under 18 years." The UN Relief Works Agency reports that "the number of Palestine refugees unable to access food and lacking the means to purchase even the most basic items, such as soap, school stationery and safe drinking water, has tripled" in the past three years, and the level of anemia in babies (9-12 months) was as high as 65.5 percent."
The flotilla activists wanted to help relieve this suffering through providing humanitarian aid. Instead of responding to the crisis in Gaza, the Obama administration is shielding those responsible for the murder, beatings, and kidnapping of the humanitarian activists.
The very people defending Israel's right to intercept these vessels are the same ones who have been insisting that Israel no longer occupies the Gaza Strip since the withdrawal of its colonists and occupation forces from the territory in 2005. If that were really the case, however, Israel would have no legal right to prevent ships entering Gaza's waters. They can't have it both ways. They can either acknowledge that the Gaza Strip remains occupied territory since Israel has it under a sea blockade, or they can acknowledge that the ships have a right to enter Gaza's port unimpeded.
Sunday's tragic incident is beginning to mobilize an outpouring of opposition to continued U.S. support for Israel's right-wing government. Polls show a majority of registered Democrats opposing such unconditional support for Netanyahu's rightist government. We must make clear to Democratic congressional candidates that we will not support them in November unless they insist that Israeli government — no more or less than any other government — be held responsible for such egregious violence against civilians.
39 Comments so far
Show All>>The Israeli government has withdrawn their earlier claims that they had found pistols and other guns on board, but its U.S. supporters are still repeating this lie.
I do not know whether this tactic learned by the ISraelis from the US or vice versa , but it well used.
LIE when the initial story released and the media runs with the lie . Once out there out there the lie becomes "Truth".
If they LIED about finding guns on board, then it very likely they lied about a whole lot of other things.
>>We are convinced and support an Israeli investigation...and have every confidence that Israel can conduct a credible and impartial and transparent, prompt investigation internally."
The Israelis exonerated themselves after Qana. They exonerated themselves after the attacks on Gaza. They even exonerated a commander that emptied the clip of his assault rifle into the body of a schoolgirl who was lying on the ground bleeding from other injuries.
Thus the US Government not only knew the attack would take place, they are fully complicit in the coverup.
Of course the u.s. involved. It always is.
Cheney dreams of being Netanyahu.
"The Israelis confiscated all of the passengers' cameras, laptops, cell phones, and other personal devices."
I'm not too worried about this. There's a good chance someone secreted evidence that the Israelis failed to find; and/or, someone with a conscience within the Israeli establishment will leak damning footage, just like the video of the US helicopter attack on innocent Iraqis that Wikileaks got hold of recently.
I'm sure that the Defenders of the Indefensible already have pat rationalizations to justify the disabling and confiscation of all of the flotilla's electronic equipment, especially personal communications and recording equipment-- not to mention the wholesale incommunicado detention of the activists.
You know, they might be smuggling nuclear bombs and other WMD inside those cellphones, etc. It has nothing to do with Total Information Control for the purposes of manufacturing consent!
I don't know if you caught Glenn Greenwald's appearance on MSNBC yesterday with, of all people, Elliott Spitzer holding the pro-Zionist moderator's chair.
Glenn, though outnumbered, did a good job punching through Spitzer & Co.'s lame Hasbara defense of Israel and the IDF, so much so that Spitzer waited until Glenn was gone to drag another guest back on to do Hasbara damage control without fear of further rebuttal.
Hey, Spitzer's a classy guy!
Anyway, your "Wikileaks" reference is apropos, but I'm not hopeful that even unauthorized videos will burst the propaganda bubble; as I wrote in a comment on Greenwald's site following the MSNBC appearance:
... But I can already see that, like the infamous Apache helicopter operation popularized by Wikileaks, this exercise can and will be sorted out by a gamut of "experts" in a narrow technical or legalistic manner with the goal of establishing that what looks to careless, premature, and wildly subjective observers like a heinous atrocity is really more of a Merry Mixup, à la Operation Eagle Claw.
Who ya gonna believe, Elliott Spitzer or your lyin' eyes? Cultivate the Doubt!
And cultivate the doubt is exactly what the Paper of Record has done. I think it was yesterday's front page of the NYT that discussed how the "different sides" in this case are both using Web 2.0 technology to spin the "debate." The paper couldn't actually discuss the actual incident, because it's pretty obvious to anyone with two neurons to rub together that sending armed soldiers to attack unarmed civilians in international waters isn't a debate with "different sides." So instead, they talked about the pseudo-debate, thereby muddying the crystal clear waters and attempting to exonerate the guilty. Sadly, one day the folks in Israel who are innocent of these crimes or who actively object to them are going to pay for what the right-wingers are doing in their names.
"Sadly, one day the folks in Israel who are innocent of these crimes or who actively object to them are going to pay for what the right-wingers are doing in their names."
That is a serious concern that Jews the world over need to be addressing.
Israel is being flooded with extremist fundamentalists from the US, Canada, France, and who knows where else, who are driven by their racist obsession to clear all the territories of Arabs as far as the Jordan River. These new colonizers are not only being set up in illegal settlements but they are being protected by the IDF and allowed/enabled to terrorize the neighbouring Arab population, poisoning their farm animals, tearing out their centuries-old olive trees, stoning their women and children, burning or desecrating their mosques...
They are an armed militia increasing in numbers, while the number of extremist bigots in the IDF is increasing too, leading to more vicious racist treatment of Arabs.
If and when the time does come for Israel to hand over territory, the moderates and progressives will be facing a majority of terrorists armed to the teeth. Which means civil war. Then who gets hold of the 200-300 nukes?
The Middle East will be facing something akin to Pakistan, that other powder keg sitting on nukes.
Meanwhile, Jews the world over, regardless of whether they support or oppose Israel, may once more become targets of rage and frustration. And anti-semitism thrives even more -- Mein Kamp and the Protocol of the Elders of Zion are best-sellers in Latin America and the Middle East; right-wing kooks are emboldened with their anti-ZOG message in the US; there's the fake morphing of neonazis in the UK, Europe etc. into pro-Arab activists...
And so the mess gets worse and worse for Diaspora Jews as those nazi clones in Israel are unmasked and the mad dog Avi Lieberman is let loose. The f***g sleazeballs tell us it's our sacred duty to support Israel wherever we live (even to the point of acting against the interests of the country of our residence and citizenship), but when things get really hairy they offer us protection from antisemitism if we migrate to Israel under the "right of return" which is denied to Palestinians.
Wants to make me spit bile.
Hoodeet, tell me about it........
And it isn't just coming from 'right wingers' either.
What wasn't learned will be repeated. Humanity needs to grow the hell up or it's all over for everyone quite soon.
Israel wants to be the official "Other" of the planet, meaning the goal is to be hated.
Hey USA/Israel, how many new "terrorists" have you created today?
Finally a new chant for our protests...thanks (i love your name,by the way).
But it will need to be "Hey israel/usa....." So that it rhymns.....
Peace.
how many atrocities must this state commit before people in the united states finally see the light? they blew up the king david hotel, killed swedish ambassador count folke bernadotte, raped arab women at deir yassin, purposefully killed 41 u.s. sailors on june 8, 1967 in international waters, slaughtered more palestinians at shattilla and sabra, bombed and strafed a traffic jam in beirut, lied to j.f.k. about their a-bomb production at dimona, tortured the christain israeli mordechai vununu, and threatrened to use their a -bombs when they were losing to egypt in the 1973 war. had the u.s. not materially resupplied their army, golda meir would have struck egypt and syria with the nuclear payload she had already ordered to be added to their missles. i can't believe what cowards our congresspeople are, the 9/10 of them who cower before the madness that is israel. 7 million people armed with 700 nuclear warheads are allowed to rule the world. amazing!
"how many atrocities must this state commit before people in the united states finally see the light?"
Those who have been blinded and those who have willingly put out their own eyes will never see the light.
I haven't thought this out completely, but the statement "Certainly it would have been better if the largely Turkish crew of the ship where most of the fatalities took place had not fought back." does not sit properly at all.
I have seen at least oen report (bu an Israeli MP who was onboard) saying that Israel intended to kill many people to scare off other ships in the future -- and Israel has also been killing activists and reporters in Palestine (not to mention Palestinians). Perhaps if people had not resisted the death toll would have been higher -- Israel fires on the ship even before boarding. The destroy the ships or kill everyone would have looked bad, but it may well be that they had already decided to kill some large number.
There is also the problem of thinking that absolute pacifism is either needed or desirable. Engaging in an activity with no plans of violence and restraint when encountered can also be thought of as non-violent. If I non-violently walk down the street but deend myslef if violently mugged, does that mean I am violent or not a pacifist - must everything be seen in terms of 'black or white'? Switzerland was neutral during WW2 -- if they had been invaded by a squad of Nazi soldiers and repelled them, would that have meant their declaration of neutrality was false?
No -- there is much more to this, philosophically, ethically, and practically, then 'all or nothing' thinking. I don't think Bush's 'with us or with the terrorists' statement was any intellectually profound position either. Thie is something which needs to be thought about some more.
If I non-violently walk down the street but defend myself if violently mugged, does that mean I am violent or not a pacifist - must everything be seen in terms of 'black or white'?
----------------------------------
Excellent point.
People need to understand that aggressors are goal-directed. Even the "randomly" violent have the goal of confirming their own power at no cost to themselves.
So not resisting simply makes it easier for them to achieve their goal. It's almost like adopting a sort of dual role in their crime: victim and passive accomplice.
If I recall correctly, the non-violent Buddhist monks of Shaolin Temple developed their gongfu mastery as a way to defend themselves from violent criminals such as bandits and soldiers.
gnken
So much for Israel being disgraceful for what they did. Now the US Govt under pressure of the Israeli Lobby will now cave and say that Israel is a victim. I dont see many comments on this article. I see that story of what Happened on Sunday has left the front pages. Where can I send money to fund more humanitarian Aid to Gaza?
gnken1
Where can I send money to fund more humanitarian Aid to Gaza?
Log on to www.freegaza.org
Waraqah
Just what will it take for the American people, (I am one) to realise Washington DC is occupied Israeli territory? How many more Israeli injustices justified by our own government will it take? As I have said before, in the last 10 years we've lost rights that we took for granted 20 years ago. At this rate it will not be long before we like the Gazans will feel the oppression of Zionism. You can not wake people up when their only concern is who will win Dancing with the stars, or American Idol. In America the truth and the news are two different things. I see around the corner and it's not pretty! Stand up, shake it off, and realise inhumanity to any is inhumanity to all.
76-water. Sorry, i am not a big fan of u.s. policy in............oh, heck. Just name a place. Any place.
If you really believe that israel is responsible for all of u.s. empire atrocities then you are really in denial about the 'homeland'.
The big unreported story is this:
Israel declared their intentions to attack the Flotilla at least a week before.
We, America, and the rest of the world DID NOTHING.
We, America, Israel's 'special friend' could have tried to talk Israel out of it, provided sea/air cover, placed officials and monitors on board, or at least turned it into a BIG NEWS STORY.
Instead, we, America, went out to recess.
We should be ashamed that we, America, and the rest of the world allowed this to happen, and then pretended surprise that it happened.
On April 21, 2008, former US President Jimmy Carter met with Hamas Leader Khaled Meshal and reached an agreement that Hamas would respect the creation of a Palestinian state in the territory seized by Israel in the Six-Day War of 1967, provided this be ratified by the Palestinian people in a referendum. Hamas later publicly offered a long-term hudna (truce) with Israel if Israel agreed to return to its 1967 borders and to grant the "right of return" to all Palestinian refugees. Israel has not responded to the offer...
Dear U.S government and Israeli government:
Just what is it that you are governing? It's nothing for the good of any people, is it?
O.k. I've said it before, and i'll say it again. The U.S. is now saying that using the sea was a bad idea, o.k. then airlift humanitarian supplies in ( aka. the Berlin airlift) The Russians didn't shoot you down back then , did they? Let's see if Israel will shoot Americans down, which apparently was done way back in 1967 to the U.S sailors! Maybe then people would notice that there's something rotten in the definition of terrorism.
Oh wait, I forgot the media is owned by 5, or is it 7 people, and they all have the same POV. Gawd, William Randolph Hearst is alive and well..."Remember the Maine:" Your bible for spin doctoring!
NO! America and Israel, REMEMBER THE PEOPLE, because that's what BOTH of you keep forgetting! IS there a nation WITHOUT PEOPLE? No! unless you want to count those dead statues on Easter Island.. See, you actually have to have people to have a nation, otherwise you just have World of Warcraft.
I just read the most insane thing from the Israeli consulate( suitable for American consumption and translated from Herbrew) I have a Jewish friend, who wanted me to see the official government response.
Netanyahu actually said of his soldiers, 'THEY WERE ALMOST LYNCHED." Wow, I thought they might have to have a tree to do that; were there trees on the ship? Oh, maybe... to make up for the bombed and burned ones that used to be on Palestinain land. Nah, I don't think there were trees. Hmmm what is "almost lynched" mean? I loved the shot of the confiscated 'knives." what did the soldiers do, rob the ship's galley for a photo opp?
Were there guns... oh yeah, a few of the attacked aid workers were said to have grabbed the soldiers' guns. really? Non- threatening aid workers, descended upon by helicopters and armed soldiers at 2 am in the morning, don't have a right to react? So you, Israel have a right to OVER-react in international waters, but no one attacked can defend themselves? Israel, you weren't defending yourselves, you were ATTACKING! Oh yeah, Netanyahu didn't mention any paint ball guns either. What's up with that?
Sweden, would you please invite Obama out into international waters, and ask him to give the Peace prize back? There is neither HOPE nor CHANGE to deserve it.
America and Israel, the twins of agression, like Romulus and Remus ( oh wait, Romulus killed Remus, didn't he? ) How can we tell who is who?
What is this "norms" meme that has been floating around since this latest installment in serial murder has taken place? "Gee. We didn't just slaughter a bunch of people wholesale, we just were a couple of sigmas outside of the 'norms.'"
Question everything and everybody.
Israel’s present government, like its predecessors, is determined to annex the West Bank - biblical Judea and Samaria - so Israel will become Greater Israel.
Ultra-Orthodox Jews, who maintain a powerful role in Israeli politics, believe the Jewish Messiah will not come until Greater Israel is a reality. Although a minority in Israel, they are committed, aggressive, and influential.
Because of deep religious conviction, they are determined to prevent Palestinians from gaining statehood on any part of the West Bank.
--U.S. Senator Ernest F. Hollings, May 6, 2004, Charleston Post and Courier
ground round, i think you are confusing "christian" doctrine with orthodox jewish thinking. The messiah, in certain christian quarters cannot return until the jews are back in the "greater israel". Then they are all killed anyway. By the messiah's army.
In fact. The idea of a messiah coming, in jewish thinking (and it isn't even something very important or even discussed among jews), is that there must first be peace - brought by human beings. *We* need to do it and *then* the messiah comes.
Not a rescuer paradigm. Ironically, i find it much more mature and intelligent. Too bad it isn't taken too seriously. Not that a 'messiah' is even a sophisticated concept. Children waiting for daddy to come and bail them out. And i don't see that it ever has worked that way.
It isn't gonna happen. Time to grow up.
For anyone who wishes to educate themselves on this conflict, here's an excerpt from Anna Baltzer's self-narrated documentary:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-rCBJjCiLGc
Two days prior to this event, an acquaintance who is now staying in the DC area had just gotten back from several months in Gaza. An american activist. She had been there a few times.
She said that in fact, many Gazans were not very supportive of the flotilla action. To be honest, she said that they wanted the blockades lifted. Period.
The idea of people coming to give them charity, etc. did not sit well with many people she knows there.
This is a different subject to discuss. However, i could understand it. I guess they aren't looking for a 'saviour'. They want the dignity and respect of saving themselves.
Thought it was time i shared that.
Until that happens, they have to eat. Yes, charity is humiliating, but sometimes a stop-gap is necessary. Many hope the flotilla action will create enough of a row globally to force a lift of the blockade.
Let's wait 2 weeks, see what happens. The fuss is already settling down, and Gazans will still need food and building materials.
Ah, that Audacity of Hope. I don't know who this Hope chick is, but she's long ago left the building.
.
WAKE-UP !!!!!!!!!!!
The State of Israel is out of control. (with over 700 NUCLEAR WEAPONS of MASS DESTRUCTION).
This insane group of Fascists/Zionists are a CLEAR and PRESENT DANGER to the rest of Planet Earth.
This Regime in Israel must resign immediately,...or be forcefully removed. Netanyahu leads a gang of thugs.
/
Majority of registered democrats may oppose such unconditional support of Israel’s policy, but the politicians in Washington D.C surely do not.
Poor little Israel. Accrding to Biden, Israel is defending demselves and is absolutely justified to board the ship to serch for weapons. He says “What's the big deal?” He says if the ship dock somehwere in Isreal, Isreal will theliver the cargo to Gaza. He seems to be implying that the Gaza flotilla is connected to Hamas. Basically he is paraphrasing Israeli government’s lines.
So this is the US position. Shameful!
http://www.politico.com/blogs/laurarozen/0610/Biden_on_Gaza_raid_Israel_has_a_right_to_know_if_arms_being_smuggled.html?showall
” Joe Biden: Look, you can argue whether Israel should have dropped people onto that ship or not and the – but the truth of the matter is, Israel has a right to know – they're at war with Hamas – has a right to know whether or not arms are being smuggled in. And up to now, Charlie, what's happened? They've said, "Here you go. You're in the Mediterranean. This ship – if you divert slightly north you can unload it and we'll get the stuff into Gaza." So what's the big deal here? What's the big deal of insisting it go straight to Gaza? Well, it's legitimate for Israel to say, "I don't know what's on that ship. These guys are dropping eight – 3,000 rockets on my people." Now, the one thing we have to do is not forget the plight of these Palestinians there, not Hamas – they're in bad shape. So we have put as much pressure and as much cajoling on Israel as we can to allow them to get building materials in, glass...
Charlie Rose: That's what they're trying to bring in, building materials.
Biden: Yes, we know that, but they could have easily brought it in here and we'd get it through. And so now the question is what do we do? Well, we had made it clear, the President of the United States has spoken three times, yesterday with Bibi, or the day before yesterday, he's spoken once yesterday with a guy that I have spent a fair amount of time with, with Prime Minister Erdogan in Turkey; the Turks, we passed a resolution in the UN saying we need a transparent and open investigation of what happened. It looks like things are...
Rose: International investigation?
Biden: Well, an investigation run by the Israelis, but we're open to international participation, just like the investigation run on the sunken sub in – off the coast of Korea. That was run by South Korea, but the international community joined in that investigation. And so that is very possible here as well. I might add by the way for all those who say the Israelis, you know, you know, you can't trust them, the Israeli Supreme Court ruled today that every one of the people on those ships had to be released immediately.”
When reading what Biden said it just shows how important it is to ask where the USA gets such an idiot from.
Is he stupid, or bought, or both?
If Israel had reason to believe a cargo of weapons and wanted to inspect the ships all they needed to do was give Biden's reason and insist. They may have been refused. Negotiations would have introduced a third party. Maybe even the USA. (Ironic)All permutations are covered here. End of problem.
Then the matter of the investigation run by South Korea with international cooperation. South Korea was the victim. In the case of the attack on the aid convoy in question the equivalent of North Korea is running the investigation. (Of course it could be that the torpedo was fired by the USA. There are reasons to support this: most convincing is the measured course of the inquiry. That the USA and allies have no credit is a simple fact. The truth is a foreigner to the USA. Don't kill the messenger)
I have a feeling these arguments is are too difficult for most US citizens to follow. So be it.
One thing seems certain: Biden has serious intellectual difficulties. Then of course, possibly Obama has, that is if he is not a prisoner in the White House. After all hindsight makes it a certainty that GW Bush has and Reagan had and that the Clintons are also of this level. It follows that US citizens who accept these politicians have serious intellectual difficulties.
The few Israelis I know see this as a certainty. There is another problem there: they are crooks.
No, Biden isn't stupid. He's using a tactic.
Caught up in real-time negotiation, most people can't immediately spot discrepancies like the one you point out (SKorea was the victim; the Zionists are the perps), so if the one talking proposes such a thing with sufficiently bland self-assurance, people will accept it. They might figure out later that they've been had, but then it'll be too late. (I speak from bitter personal experience here).
Dishonest tactics like that are the reason that the best textbook on negotiation (Fisher & Ury, _Getting To Yes_) tells us *never* to agree to a proposal immediately. Always have some excuse why it's impossible to say yes or no that day.
Did you have a bad day Ardent?
Nobody is correct all the time. Much of what Zunes writes is undeniably true.
If he is a troll show us.
"Biden: Well, an investigation run by the Israelis, but we're open to international participation, just like the investigation run on the sunken sub in – off the coast of Korea. That was run by South Korea, but the international community joined in that investigation."
What sunken sub? Biden seems spread a little thin.
"An investigation run by the Israelis"? What investigation?
My bet is that the assault in international waters was a calculated decision. Had Israel waited until the flotilla entered the Gazan water blockade area, that would have been a stickier wicket.
Once again, Israel "transcends the context" by escalation. They do it with American military equipment paid for by American taxpayers.
-30-
With this latest U.S. backed Israeli atrocity they're going to hate us more than ever. It's not as if any additional proof of our government's bias towards Israel were needed, but just in case it is, the Arab/Islamic masses are going to look upon this watered down Security Council resolution as further evidence of America's complicity in Israel's crimes against them. Which will translate into fresh recruits, count on it, for the violent messianic movements of the Mideast. Central Asia and elsewhere, At least that's what none other than Generals David Petreaus and Paul McChrystal, Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton said a couple of months ago in regard to U.S. bias towards Israel. A position that our Vice President, at least. now appears to be walking away from, based on his statements on the Charlie Rose show (see Chrism's post to this thread, June 3rd at 12:12 pm). Actually he's walking in the wrong direction, because if the administration is serious about ending the threat from Islamic terrorism, there's nothing that could be more effective than doing away with this special relationship with Israel, and demanding justice for Palestine. That, and getting the hell out of Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen, Somalia and Pakistan would dry up the reservoirs of angry and disenchanted young Muslems, without whom terrorist movements will cease to exist. What's holding our so-called leaders back? They depend upon fear, real ot imsginary, to keep us down, that's what.
Many jewish liberal politicians in the democratic party will defend any crime committed by Israel and this is sickening. Israel can undermine US security interests and even hire US citizens to spy on the United States and still have blind support from the media and government in the United States. I guess this is what they call a special relationship.
Of course, Israel doesn't need any justification -- the mere existence of resistance to Israeli oppression, murder & expropriation of land is, in Zio-speak, anti-semitism -- as one of the ziopologists wrote on another forum, Israel answers to the 'higher' law, by which Israeli and Israel-supporting Jews are Higher Humans.
Note the internal inconsistency in Israel's story: if the people on the flotilla were really covert terrorists, Israel would not have let them go. Israel would not let a bunch of "terrorists" go. Unless they've suddenly turned suicidal.