Politics Aside...

[buffycat]

Politics Aside, a Human Rights Crime is Happening In Gaza

The world is witnessing a terrible human rights crime in Gaza, where 1.5 million human beings are being imprisoned with almost no access to the outside world by sea, air, or land. An entire population is being brutally punished.

This gross mistreatment of the Palestinians in Gaza was escalated dramatically by Israel, with United States backing, after political candidates representing Hamas won a majority of seats in the Palestinian Authority Parliament in 2006. The election was unanimously judged to be honest and fair by all international observers, including a joint team I led from the Carter Center and the National Democratic Institute.

Israel and the US refused to accept the right of Palestinians to form a unity government with Hamas and Fatah and now, after internal strife, Hamas alone controls Gaza. Forty-one of the 43 victorious Hamas candidates who lived in the Occupied West Bank are now imprisoned by Israel, plus an additional 10 who assumed positions in the short-lived coalition Cabinet.

A very good article, which sadly will never see the light of day here in the NA MSM.

It shouldn't, as fellow human beings matter about the 'politics'. What is going on in Gaza, is without a doubt a humanitarian crisis brought about by overt war crimes and collective punishment.

106 Palestinians were killed between February 27 and March 3. Fifty-four of them were civilians who didn't take part in the fighting, and 25 were under 18 years of age

.

In April, many more can be added to this, women and children, innocent bystanders and yes sometimes a troublemaker. Is this really acceptable?

They (Hamas) responded that such previous action by them had not been reciprocated, and they reminded me that Hamas had previously insisted on a cease-fire throughout Palestine including both Gaza and the Occupied West Bank, which Israel had refused. Hamas then made a public proposal of a mutual cease-fire restricted to Gaza, which the Israelis considered and also rejected.

So, who is really saying 'no' to peace?

[HisSelf]

Too bad a post like this has to start with the words 'Politics aside...' Maybe 'Idiots aside' would be more appropriate.

[buffycat]

Too bad a post like this has to start with the words 'Politics aside...' Maybe 'Idiots aside' would be more appropriate.

Yeah, perhaps... certainly accurate.

Your thoughts?

For me, while not an overt fan of Carter's policies while in office, I certainly do respect what he is trying to do here. Dialogue - not sabre rattling is the only way there will be a fruitful peace. By that I mean, not a dead zone - which is certainly peaceful, just not in a 'human' way.

The extremists on all sides need to be turfed. That includes the less savory of the Palestinian factions, as well as the less savoury of the Israeli factions - like the radical Settlers (gosh I hate that name - call them what they are - terrorists - no better than those on the other side).

Anyway - one can hope. Even though it sometimes seems futile.

What's happening now in Lebanon is not a good indicator - nor the worsening siege in Gaza - as mentioned by Carter above. (Rather tamely I might add).

[sharkman]

Yeah, those Israelis are just brutal, aren't they? Imagine wanting Palestinians to frickin stop sending over bombers and missiles! And you just know they are war hungry zealots, why take a look at the alarming situation with the only one of their enemies who they signed a peace treaty with, Egypt. Oh wait, that's not such a good example, they have been largely ignoring each other.

Kind of funny, that.

[Rue]

Yeah, those Israelis are just brutal, aren't they? Imagine wanting Palestinians to frickin stop sending over bombers and missiles! And you just know they are war hungry zealots, why take a look at the alarming situation with the only one of their enemies who they signed a peace treaty with, Egypt. Oh wait, that's not such a good example, they have been largely ignoring each other.

Kind of funny, that.

But it does feed her need to keep defining this conflict as a WWE wrestling match with an obvious bad guy to scapegoat and throw scorn at. I find that kind of sad. I wish she would challenge herself to for once break out of her comfort zone and question whether its possible Mr. Carter is wrong and is doing what he's doing based on an agenda that has nothing to do with Palestine and the Gaza and everything to do with his ego and the need to try get back at Bill Clinton.

Perhaps if she tried to read the history between Carter and Clinton she would understand this sudden interest in Hamas at this time came about for a specific reason.

She might also want to question how it is the same day Jimmy told the world Hamas wants peace, the very same Hamas leader was ridiculing him in the Muslim press and telling everyone the truce would provide a time to gather more arms and weapons so they could stock up to then finish the war to rid Palestine of Israel and Jordan.

One sees and hears what they want to sometimes and I fear Ms. Buffy is so convinced she sees the virgin Mary in that gravy stain that anything you are I say means nothing. I have tried to assure her given my age I am an expert on what causes stains but she does not believe me.

[HisSelf]

Yeah right. So what's a helicopter with a missile as opposed to a ground-based missle? 'We are better because we have a helicopter and spiffy uniforms.'? Israel so often declares that it is at war with Hamas but when Hamas behaves like an army, Israel whines about terrorism. What a crock.

I think Carter did the best with the hand he was dealt. Look at interest rates when he came into office. The Iranians took hostages as soon as he took office. This happened on somebody else's watch. Guess who?

[bush_cheney2004]

...I think Carter did the best with the hand he was dealt. Look at interest rates when he came into office. The Iranians took hostages as soon as he took office. This happened on somebody else's watch. Guess who?

The Iranian hostage crisis started in early November 1979. I remember this because we were putting the finishing touches on an old US diesel boat (slated for the Shah's navy) in Groton, CT. President Carter was inaugurated in January, 1977.

Edited May 9, 2008 by bush_cheney2004

[M.Dancer]

Israel so often declares that it is at war with Hamas but when Hamas behaves like an army, Israel whines about terrorism. What a crock.

Crook indeed. Hamas has never behaved like an army. Well, some have described al capones men as an army..so maybe. They day Hamas behaves like am army will be the day they surrender honourably.

[scribblet]

Yup, let's go hug a terrorist, too bad Israel doesn't sit back and take it, you know, lie down and play dead... then some folks would be more than happy.

[buffycat]

But ...it does feed her need ....to keep defining this conflict as a WWE wrestling match with an obvious bad guy to scapegoat and throw scorn at. I find that kind of sad. I wish she would challenge herself to for once break out of her comfort zone and question whether its possible Mr. Carter is wrong and is doing what he's doing based on an agenda that has nothing to do with Palestine and the Gaza and everything to do with his ego and the need to try get back at Bill Clinton.

Perhaps if she tried to read the history between Carter and Clinton she would understand this sudden interest in Hamas at this time came about for a specific reason.

She might also want to question how it is the same day Jimmy told the world Hamas wants peace, the very same Hamas leader was ridiculing him in the Muslim press and telling everyone the truce would provide a time to gather more arms and weapons so they could stock up to then finish the war to rid Palestine of Israel and Jordan.

One sees and hears what they want to sometimes and I fear Ms. Buffy is so convinced she sees the virgin Mary in that gravy stain that anything you are I say means nothing. I have tried to assure her given my age I am an expert on what causes stains but she does not believe me.

Nice long stupid and pointless post Rue, as usual.

Do you not think that talking to your enemies is better than ignoring them, whilst enacting a siege on a good quarter of them, and bombing, kidnapping and assassinating them?

Is this really working for you?

Oh, never mind - I don't want you to go to the trouble of writing another verbal onslaught against my character, while oh now nicely ignoring and making NO comment on the topic of the post. Good G-d spare me please!!

Personally, as I stated until the 'bullies' and 'trolls' showed up, I think that discourse and talking and agreeing to ceasefires (which btw I notice that NONE of you firsters deny) is a far wiser way to go for both the Palestinian peoples and their Israeli counterparts.

But... whatever - go ahead and insult me and be patronising if it gives you a thrill... whatever rocks your boat Ruesy.

[HisSelf]

Yup, let's go hug a terrorist, too bad Israel doesn't sit back and take it, you know, lie down and play dead... then some folks would be more than happy.

You have Israel confused with somebody who HAS A LEGAL DEED TO THEIR LAND and is being screwed out of their rights.

[buffycat]

Yeah, those Israelis are just brutal, aren't they? Imagine wanting Palestinians to frickin stop sending over bombers and missiles! And you just know they are war hungry zealots, why take a look at the alarming situation with the only one of their enemies who they signed a peace treaty with, Egypt. Oh wait, that's not such a good example, they have been largely ignoring each other.

Kind of funny, that.

Please go here and educate yourself about the casualites of innocent peoples on both sides of this conflict

Thanks.

[buffycat]

Yup, let's go hug a terrorist, too bad Israel doesn't sit back and take it, you know, lie down and play dead... then some folks would be more than happy.

Don't be ridiculous.

Oh sorry - forgot who I was talking to!

Seriously though Scribblet, no one is hugging a terrorist - I wouldn't want to nor should anyone else - whether they are Arab or Israeli. Or anyone for that matter. And as for folks being happy about Israeli lying down and playing dead - lol another over the top attack on whoever doesn't agree with you eh??

Some things never change.

Oh and I notice too - the you have simply disregarded offering anything about the posted topic.

What would you do? In this situation?

Do you condone the treatment of all of the civilians in Gaza? Do you even know how bad it has become? The vast majority of those who are innocent, poor and under siege?

Do you even have a clue???

[HisSelf]

The Iranian hostage crisis started in early November 1979. I remember this because we were putting the finishing touches on an old US diesel boat (slated for the Shah's navy) in Groton, CT. President Carter was inaugurated in January, 1977.

I love it. So you were building weapons for torturers. You have an economic interest. Right up there with landmines. You're finished here. What are you doing here on a CANADIAN site, eh? Why don't you just p!ss off. Go away.

I am very proud to say that you are now on my ignore list. I'd talk to people like you, but George Bush says it's better not to. LOL.

[M.Dancer]

I love it. So you were building weapons for torturers. You have an economic interest. Right up there with landmines. You're finished here. What are you doing here on a CANADIAN site, eh? Why don't you just p!ss off. Go away.

I am very proud to say that you are now on my ignore list. I'd talk to people like you, but George Bush says it's better not to. LOL.

I think I'll put you on mine...you haven't shown a shred of insight and you generally sound like a 16 year old twerp anfry at his parents for grounding him.

[sharkman]

Don't be ridiculous.

Oh sorry - forgot who I was talking to!

Do you condone the treatment of all of the civilians in Gaza? Do you even know how bad it has become? The vast majority of those who are innocent, poor and under siege?

Do you even have a clue???

Buff, you are so devoid of brain matter in that empty head of yours. Why don't you move to Israel and learn something. Seriously.

[sharkman]

I love it. So you were building weapons for torturers. You have an economic interest. Right up there with landmines. You're finished here. What are you doing here on a CANADIAN site, eh? Why don't you just p!ss off. Go away.

Got it all figured out, eh? Well at least you know this is a Canadian site. Keep trying.

[AngusThermopyle]

Do you not think that talking to your enemies is better than ignoring them

In my opinion the answer to this question would be yes and no. It is better if the enemy is actually sincere about extracting positive results from such talks. However if the enemy is not sincere and the desired results are negative then talking is just foolish.

In this case I have my doubts as to the sincerity of certain involved parties. especially since, as has been mentioned, one of the parties appears to view these talks as an opportunity to regroup and prepare before the next onslaught.

Given that I must fall back on an answer of yes or no. If all parties are sincere then obviously a yes.

[bush_cheney2004]

I love it. So you were building weapons for torturers. You have an economic interest. Right up there with landmines. You're finished here. What are you doing here on a CANADIAN site, eh? Why don't you just p!ss off. Go away.

In other words, you don't have a clue about the hostage crisis timeline. We build weapons for Canada too. Stop the torture....oh the humanity! (sobbing)

I am very proud to say that you are now on my ignore list. I'd talk to people like you, but George Bush says it's better not to. LOL.

You've claimed this before, only to come back again, like a moth to a flame.

[HisSelf]

Huh? Did I hear a high-pitched whine? Is a whiner about to self-destruct? Once again my whine deflector has saved my tender eardrums from insufferable insult lol.

[bush_cheney2004]

Huh? Did I hear a high-pitched whine? Is a whiner about to self-destruct? Once again my whine deflector has saved my tender eardrums from insufferable insult lol.

Jeezuz ...you can't even get ignore right!

[HisSelf]

Yeah but it was worth it.

[buffycat]

In my opinion the answer to this question would be yes and no. It is better if the enemy is actually sincere about extracting positive results from such talks. However if the enemy is not sincere and the desired results are negative then talking is just foolish.

In this case I have my doubts as to the sincerity of certain involved parties. especially since, as has been mentioned, one of the parties appears to view these talks as an opportunity to regroup and prepare before the next onslaught.

Given that I must fall back on an answer of yes or no. If all parties are sincere then obviously a yes.

Hi Angus,

Thank you for your honest answer - it is appreciated more than you probably know!

Correct me if I'm mistaken, but are you not ex-military?

If so, please take the time to check out these links - you may find it interesting as these are all military men, most still in service of the IDF, who refuse to fight in the occupied territories:

Breaking the Silence

and here is a very good article about them.

I'd be curious to hear your thoughts.

Just one more comment, IMO neither 'side' feels that they have anyone to talk to - this is a two way street. Israel has not honoured her own promises either.

[sharkman]

Angus is right, of course. The motive of the parties involved is crucial. Jimmy Carter forever ruined his reputation when he got North Korea to sign the treaty around '94 to not make nuclear weapons for large sums of cash. Then they used the large sums of cash to make nuclear weapons. Buf, this is what happens when you enter negotiations with a party who doesn't want what you are selling.

Hamas does not want peace. They want the destruction of Israel. Until you realize this, you are not able to grasp the situation over there.

[Shady]

Yeah right. So what's a helicopter with a missile as opposed to a ground-based missle? 'We are better because we have a helicopter and spiffy uniforms.'? Israel so often declares that it is at war with Hamas but when Hamas behaves like an army, Israel whines about terrorism. What a crock.

I think Carter did the best with the hand he was dealt. Look at interest rates when he came into office. The Iranians took hostages as soon as he took office. This happened on somebody else's watch. Guess who?

I see, so is "somebody else" to blame for Carter demanding the Shah of Iran step down and turn over power to the Ayatollah Khomeini? That worked out well didn't it? Yes, we all continue to reap the benefits of that decision.