Israel bows to pressure and agrees to ease Gaza blockade

[naomiglover]

What a failure the blockade has been.

It hasn't broken the will of Gazan civilians, it didn't curb Hamas' influence or power, it didn't stop weapons from being smuggled into the territory, and it was a huge black eye for Israel PR-wise and culminated in a terrible incident.

Hopefully this will hurt Bibi politically, because as long as he's in power Israel isn't doing anything progressive without serious pressure.

The blockade started before Bibi got into power. It seems like it doesn't matter who is in power in Israel, the influence of the extremists and settler groups usually guide Israel's policy towards the occupied territories. Bibi needs to keep the coalition happy and that means he needs to respond to extremists like Lieberman's Yisrael Beiteinu party and Shas, the ultra conservative religious party.

It's clear that the current political environment in Israel will not allow for any real progress towards a just peace. The western governments have also shown that they're unwilling to touch this issue. Much like in Apartheid South Africa, international pressure, which starts from non-governmental organizations seems to be the only solution to this. Boycotting Israel is picking up steam and looks to be what will pressure Israel into abandoning being a rogue state and will push it to follow international law.

[naomiglover]

My point is that the charges mean squat unless they are acted upon. The UN needs to enforce the rulings coming from the ICJ. If not then it's about as effective and means as much as doing nothing at all. That is my problem with this.

Yes they violated international law. Now, who is going to enforce the ruling? And how are they going to do it? These are the more important questions to answer in my view.

Economic pressure from other governments. Look at the sanctions imposed on Iran for failing to meet IAEA. Israel's economy would not be able to handle any such sanctions as their economy relies heavily on the western countries.

If there is little to no way to hold Hamas accountable for their actions or inaction (ICJ ruling that never gets enforced), then how do you expect to hold Israel's feet to the fire?

I think Hamas has been held accountable and pressure has changed their tactics. Hamas seems to have abandoned suicide attacks and they have even talked about accepting Israel within the 1967 border. They have initiated and accepted several truce. One was actually in place right before Operation Cast Lead.

I have mentioned this before that I believe the ball is in Israel's court. Israel has the power to change the direction of this mess. Most of what is happening around this situation is more of a reaction to Israel's inability to recognize the rights of the Palestinians which has been going on for well over 4 decades.

Israel violated international law. Yes I agree, I have yet to disagree with that. But now what?

Now that we recognize that they and the western governments are not willing to do anything constructive about it, we must respond the same way we responded to Apartheid South Africa.

The BDS movement continues to get bigger and larger and I believe that will be the trigger that will change Israel's treatment of Palestinians.

http://bdsmovement.net/

http://www.bigcampaign.org/

BDS campaign wants Israel to abide by international law

Boycott Divestment and Sanctions strategy arises from realisation that the occupation will not end unless Israelis understand it has a price

Guardian

[Guest American Woman]

Israel has been violating international law since well before 1967.

Hamas has been in the scene for less than a couple of decades.

The number of violations committed by Israel is so much more than what Hamas or any Palestinian group has done. Then there is also the fact that no one (at least not here) contests Hamas' violations. Everyone agrees that Hamas has violated international law by their past suicide attacks and the recent rocket attacks. There is also a universal agreement that Hamas is violating Shalit's rights by not following the standard law when it comes to prisoners.

There is no question that Hamas has violated international law in these instances.

However, the many violations that Israel has committed which considerably out number anyone else's in this conflict, never receive the same response from Israeli apologists. Apologists such as yourself, Dancer and Bonam who will go to any length to try to justify them.

Try adding up all the violations attributed to Palestine, not just Hamas. Furthermore, just because they haven't been called on everything, every individual act, doesn't mean the violations haven't been committed.

But keep minimizing what they have done, just as you did in the post I was responding to and as you continue to do here. You try so hard to downplay their role in all this as you try so hard to put Israel in the limelight. Which is why you've started a bajillion anti-Israel threads while you've started none, zero, zip, nada about Palestine, Hamas, the PLO, PFLP, et al.

As you accuse me of being an apologist and going to any length to justify Israel's violations. What a joke!

:lol:

[naomiglover]

Try adding up all the violations attributed to Palestine, not just Hamas. Furthermore, just because they haven't been called on everything, every individual act, doesn't mean the violations haven't been committed.

But keep minimizing what they have done, just as you did in the post I was responding to and as you continue to do here. You try so hard to downplay their role in all this as you try so hard to put Israel in the limelight. Which is why you've started a bajillion anti-Israel threads while you've started none, zero, zip, nada about Palestine, Hamas, the PLO, PFLP, et al.

As you accuse me of being an apologist and going to any length to justify Israel's violations. What a joke!

:lol:

You keep missing or you keep avoiding the simple point here.

No western government (or anyone on this board) has tried to justify or minimize violations committed by Hamas or any other Palestinian group. Hamas who has violated international law has been branded a terrorist group by several key western countries and has been marginalized.

However, Israel receives very little to no condemnation and does not have to face any consequences both politically and financially for continuously violating Palestinians' Human Rights and international law.

Show me that you are not a hypocrite and an apologist by acknowledging and condemning Israel's violations.

[M.Dancer]

Show me that you are not a hypocrite and an apologist by acknowledging and condemning Israel's violations.

Show me you are n ot part of the Arab Terorist Lobby by starting a petition demanding that Gaza treats their prisoners as well as Israel does theirs and as well toi start treating palestinians and giving palestinians the same level of human rights as israel does to Israeli arabs.

[Guest American Woman]

You keep missing or you keep avoiding the simple point here.

I'm not the one "avoiding" or "missing" anything. I'm not the one posting thread after thread condemning the actions of one party in this conflict, while minimizing and purposely downplaying the actions of the other.

No western government (or anyone on this board) has tried to justify or minimize violations committed by Hamas or any other Palestinian group. Hamas who has violated international law has been branded a terrorist group by several key western countries and has been marginalized.

Again, it's not all about Hamas et al, but of course it's so much easier to restrict your criticism of Palestine/Palestinians to "Hamas" or "any other Palestinian group." You cannot bring yourself to criticize Palestine, as you do Israel. But yet you're oh-so-fair because you every now and then say "Hamas is bad too," this even as you minimize what Hamas et al has done; while you make the claim that no one on this board has tried to minimize violations committed by Hamas. You do it; you did it in this very thread. You do it by starting 35 threads condemning Israel while minimizing what Palestine has done. Not one person on this board has started a fraction of the threads condemning Palestine that you have started condemning Israel. You are the biggest hypocrite on this board.

However, Israel receives very little to no condemnation and does not have to face any consequences both politically and financially for continuously violating Palestinians' Human Rights and international law.

Only in your alternate universe. over and over again.

Show me that you are not a hypocrite and an apologist by acknowledging and condemning Israel's violations.

Show me that you're not an apologist and a hypocrite by starting 35 threads condemning Palestine.

As a side note, I'll point out that your constant reference to "the law," as if that's the beginning and the end, shows how devoid you are of critical thought. All you can say is "it's against international law." Over and over. That's all you come back with. A thread is started about Hamas destroying Palestinian homes and even then you respond with "I don't know about the legalities of it." I suppose the extent of your support of Rosa Parks would have been "she broke the law!" And you would have had them throw the books at her. All the while thinking you're morally superior to anyone who would defend her, those who, according to you, don't "respect the law," because clearly "she broke the law." And that's how much respect I have for your "Israel broke international law, therefore Israel is evil!" rhetoric.

[naomiglover]

I'm not the one "avoiding" or "missing" anything. I'm not the one posting thread after thread condemning the actions of one party in this conflict, while minimizing and purposely downplaying the actions of the other.

Again, it's not all about Hamas et al, but of course it's so much easier to restrict your criticism of Palestine/Palestinians to "Hamas" or "any other Palestinian group." You cannot bring yourself to criticize Palestine, as you do Israel. But yet you're oh-so-fair because you every now and then say "Hamas is bad too," this even as you minimize what Hamas et al has done; while you make the claim that no one on this board has tried to minimize violations committed by Hamas. You do it; you did it in this very thread. You do it by starting 35 threads condemning Israel while minimizing what Palestine has done. Not one person on this board has started a fraction of the threads condemning Palestine that you have started condemning Israel. You are the biggest hypocrite on this board.

Only in your alternate universe. over and over again.

Show me that you're not an apologist and a hypocrite by starting 35 threads condemning Palestine.

As a side note, I'll point out that your constant reference to "the law," as if that's the beginning and the end, shows how devoid you are of critical thought. All you can say is "it's against international law." Over and over. That's all you come back with. A thread is started about Hamas destroying Palestinian homes and even then you respond with "I don't know about the legalities of it." I suppose the extent of your support of Rosa Parks would have been "she broke the law!" And you would have had them throw the books at her. All the while thinking you're morally superior to anyone who would defend her, those who, according to you, don't "respect the law," because clearly "she broke the law." And that's how much respect I have for your "Israel broke international law, therefore Israel is evil!" rhetoric.

Okay. You were given an opportunity but you failed to wash the hypocrisy and Israeli apologist label you have created for yourself.

[Guest American Woman]

Okay. You were given an opportunity but you failed to wash the hypocrisy and Israeli apologist label you have created for yourself.

How did I know you'd have nothing to say in response to my post? Yet again. When all else fails, assign a label, eh? Then pretend it means something, and move on. You are hilarious.

FYI, your "label" means as much to me as the infidel label bin Laden/al Qaeda et al has put on me, and I'll care enough to prove what you ask of me the day I care enough to prove to them that I'm not infidel because I don't follow Islam.

Good day, naomiglover. And I look forward to your next anti-Israel thread the way royalty looked forward to an appearance by the court jester.

Edited July 13, 2010 by American Woman

[naomiglover]

How did I know you'd have nothing to say in response to my post? Yet again. When all else fails, assign a label, eh? Then pretend it means something, and move on. You are hilarious.

FYI, your "label" means as much to me as the infidel label bin Laden/al Qaeda et al has put on me, and I'll care enough to prove what you ask of me the day I care enough to prove to them that I'm not infidel because I don't follow Islam.

Good day, naomiglover. And I look forward to your next anti-Israel thread the way royalty looked forward to an appearance by the court jester.

So you're unable to admit that Israel violates international law.

That's fine. Put yourself on the same list as others like Dancer, Bonam, jbg and other war crimes apologists.

[GostHacked]

Economic pressure from other governments. Look at the sanctions imposed on Iran for failing to meet IAEA. Israel's economy would not be able to handle any such sanctions as their economy relies heavily on the western countries.

You mean Iraq, not Iran. There are tabled items that could bring sanctions to Iran. But we have yet to really see that get implemented.

I think Hamas has been held accountable and pressure has changed their tactics. Hamas seems to have abandoned suicide attacks and they have even talked about accepting Israel within the 1967 border. They have initiated and accepted several truce. One was actually in place right before Operation Cast Lead.

You are a broken record Naomi.

I have mentioned this before that I believe the ball is in Israel's court. Israel has the power to change the direction of this mess. Most of what is happening around this situation is more of a reaction to Israel's inability to recognize the rights of the Palestinians which has been going on for well over 4 decades.

Israel will not change. That is the thing. Unless someone like the US or other close friends of Israel get on their case and put pressure on Israel. We don't see that. Israel will continue it's path unless someone like the US steps in and tells them to stop.

How did 'we' respond to South Africa?

[jbg]

As the ICRC has stressed repeatedly, the dire situation in Gaza cannot be resolved by providing humanitarian aid. The closure imposed on the Gaza Strip is about to enter its fourth year, choking off any real possibility of economic development. Gazans continue to suffer from unemployment, poverty and warfare, while the quality of Gaza's health care system has reached an all-time low.

They can decide to end the war. If "ending the war" means unilateral surrender so be it. The "peace protesters" against the Viet Nam and Iraq wars in the U.S. seem to be O.K. with unilateral surrender, under the pseudonym of "ending the war".

The whole of Gaza's civilian population is being punished for acts for which they bear no responsibility. The closure therefore constitutes a collective punishment imposed in clear violation of Israel's obligations under international humanitarian law.[/b]

International Committee of the Red Cross

Gee whiz, didn't the Gazans vote Hamas in? Where are there antiwar protesters?

[Guest American Woman]

Israel will not change. That is the thing. Unless someone like the US or other close friends of Israel get on their case and put pressure on Israel. We don't see that. Israel will continue it's path unless someone like the US steps in and tells them to stop.

I'm not so sure Israel would listen to the U.S., and really, why should they? They didn't tell us how to respond to 9-11, and if they had, do you think we would have listened? Not likely. By the same token, I don't think Israel is any more likely to set aside what they feel they must do for their self-preservation to appease us.

Gee whiz, didn't the Gazans vote Hamas in?

It amazes me how that fact is continually ignored. When we vote our government in, we're held accountable. But evidently when Palestinians votes Hamas in, they bear no responsibility for it.

Edited July 14, 2010 by American Woman

[bush_cheney2004]

I'm not so sure Israel would listen to the U.S., and really, why should they? They didn't tell us how to respond to 9-11, and if they had, do you think we would have listened? Not likely. By the same token, I don't think Israel is any more likely to set aside what they feel they must do for their self-preservation to appease us.

This is a very good point...because Israel's detractors question its legitimacy as a sovereign state, they are quick to assume that Israel's actions are not/should not be considered as consistent with those of other nation states. That's why I like to point out that Israel does not have military forces in far away Afghanistan killing potential enemies, but rather is engaged in its own region killing actual enemies.

Edited July 14, 2010 by bush_cheney2004

[GostHacked]

I'm not so sure Israel would listen to the U.S., and really, why should they?

I think the US would be the most effective at putting some pressure on Israel. As unlikely as it would be. The US gives a a lot of support for Israel in several ways, technology, weapons and money. Killing almost every motion put on the UN floor against Israel with a single veto also indicates that the US won't be putting pressure on them anytime soon.

If anyone was to put effective pressure on Israel to change it would be the US.

Not likely. By the same token, I don't think Israel is any more likely to set aside what they feel they must do for their self-preservation to appease us.

But here is what I don't get, I'll call it The Jewish Persecution Complex. No matter what the argument is, this is brought up somewhere. It's used in almost the same fashion as calling someone an anti-semite. Well, now that they have their own country again, and managed to stay alive and prosper during the process, can we drop the anti-semite angle and TJPC?

[naomiglover]

You mean Iraq, not Iran. There are tabled items that could bring sanctions to Iran. But we have yet to really see that get implemented.

I meant Iran. Most countries have imposed sanctions on Iran for decades in different degrees. Recently, more sanctions have been initiated through the UN. The latest sanctions focus more on the people in power which includes their bank accounts and financial dealings outside of Iran.

You are a broken record Naomi.

You're right. I find myself repeating a lot of the same things. For example; I believe all sides should follow international law. Despite this, I get accused of supporting Hamas by mostly those who believe Israel is above following international law.

Israel will not change. That is the thing. Unless someone like the US or other close friends of Israel get on their case and put pressure on Israel. We don't see that. Israel will continue it's path unless someone like the US steps in and tells them to stop.

I agree. That can be started by taking away the $3 billion a year the U.S. taxpayers pays Israel every year. Most in congress do not want to lose the funding they receive from groups like AIPAC, so they will continue to put U.S' interests second to Israel's. The only way for it to happen is if there is a movement amongst the Americans and they, first, realize that they're paying Israel $3 billion a year, and second, realize that, as General David Pateaus has said, this support for Israel is not in the best interest of U.S.

How did 'we' respond to South Africa?

It started with boycotts by people around the world. It eventually got big enough that governments who once supported Apartheid South Africa were forced to withdraw their support. More and more countries began to boycott South Africa as well and the regime finally fell.

We're starting to see a similar movement towards Israel.

[bush_cheney2004]

I agree. That can be started by taking away the $3 billion a year the U.S. taxpayers pays Israel every year. Most in congress do not want to lose the funding they receive from groups like AIPAC, so they will continue to put U.S' interests second to Israel's. The only way for it to happen is if there is a movement amongst the Americans and they, first, realize that they're paying Israel $3 billion a year, and second, realize that, as General David Pateaus has said, this support for Israel is not in the best interest of U.S.

The Americans spend about $15 billion each year on foreign aid (economic, humanitarian, and military). The price for peace between Israel, Egypt, Jordan, and Palestine included such long term funding. I can guarantee you that most Americans will support Israel over General Pateaus [sic] or the desires of Israel's enemies in Canada. The best interests of the U.S. will be determined by the U.S.

It started with boycotts by people around the world. It eventually got big enough that governments who once supported Apartheid South Africa were forced to withdraw their support. More and more countries began to boycott South Africa as well and the regime finally fell.

Almost true....South Africa's support rose and fell in the context of Cold War politics in addition to apartheid policies.

We're starting to see a similar movement towards Israel.

Iran is already there.

[Bonam]

You're right. I find myself repeating a lot of the same things. For example; I believe all sides should follow international law. Despite this, I get accused of supporting Hamas by mostly those who believe Israel is above following international law.

And yet you have repeatedly failed to show that Israel is in fact not following international law. Out of all the hundreds of threads in which you have asserted that Israel is breaking international law, only one such accusation (regarding the wall) is actually backed up by a court of law. The rest is slander.

I agree. That can be started by taking away the $3 billion a year the U.S. taxpayers pays Israel every year. Most in congress do not want to lose the funding they receive from groups like AIPAC, so they will continue to put U.S' interests second to Israel's. The only way for it to happen is if there is a movement amongst the Americans and they, first, realize that they're paying Israel $3 billion a year, and second, realize that, as General David Pateaus has said, this support for Israel is not in the best interest of U.S.

First, Petraeus did not say that. He said:

"Arab anger over the Palestinian question limits the strength and depth of U.S. partnerships with governments and peoples [in the region],"

"enduring hostilities between Israel and some of its neighbors present distinct challenges to our ability to advance our interests in the area of responsibility."

He speaks of the enduring hostilities, and of the Palestinian question. His point is that these issues must be resolved for the US to be able to advance its interests in the area more easily.

Second, the US provides substantial aid to all its allies in the region, not just Israel.

It started with boycotts by people around the world. It eventually got big enough that governments who once supported Apartheid South Africa were forced to withdraw their support. More and more countries began to boycott South Africa as well and the regime finally fell.

We're starting to see a similar movement towards Israel.

Comparing Israel to Apartheid South Africa is an exercise in intellectual dishonesty, nothing more.

Edited July 14, 2010 by Bonam

[naomiglover]

And yet you have repeatedly failed to show that Israel is in fact not following international law. Out of all the hundreds of threads in which you have asserted that Israel is breaking international law, only one such accusation (regarding the wall) is actually backed up by a court of law. The rest is slander.

The Red Cross, Goldstone Report and many other human rights organizations are not in the business of slander. They're professionals and experts in international law and have covered other violations across the world with the same professionalism.

By the way, how has Israel responded to ICJ's conclusion on the wall?

First, Petraeus did not say that. He said:

"Arab anger over the Palestinian question limits the strength and depth of U.S. partnerships with governments and peoples [in the region],"

"enduring hostilities between Israel and some of its neighbors present distinct challenges to our ability to advance our interests in the area of responsibility."

He speaks of the enduring hostilities, and of the Palestinian question. His point is that these issues must be resolved for the US to be able to advance its interests in the area more easily.

Here is a more detailed version of it:

"Insufficient progress toward a comprehensive Middle East peace. The enduring hostilities between Israel and some of its neighbors present distinct challenges to our ability to advance our interests in the AOR [CentCom Area of Responsibility]. Israeli-Palestinian tensions often flare into violence and large-scale armed confrontations. The conflict foments anti-American sentiment, due to a perception of U.S. favoritism for Israel. Arab anger over the Palestinian question limits the strength and depth of U.S. partnerships with governments and peoples in the AOR and weakens the legitimacy of moderate regimes in the Arab world. Meanwhile, al-Qaeda and other militant groups exploit that anger to mobilize support. The conflict also gives Iran influence in the Arab world through its clients, Lebanese Hizballah and Hamas."

Senate Hearing

There is nothing new there. Everyone already knows this. It's just that it's rare to see someone in the U.S. administration being truthful about what U.S.' favouritism and what seems to be unconditional support for Israel. As Patraeus said: "The conflict foments anti-American sentiment, due to a perception of U.S. favoritism for Israel. Arab anger over the Palestinian question limits the strength and depth of U.S. partnerships with governments and peoples in the AOR and weakens the legitimacy of moderate regimes in the Arab world."

Second, the US provides substantial aid to all its allies in the region, not just Israel.

The aid that Israel receives yearly is above what the neighbours (Egypt and Jordan) receive to cooperate with Israel's policies. Mobarak, a dictator for many decades and hated by his own people is also to be blamed for participating in the blockade. How is Egypt's cooperation any help to the U.S.? This policy is also a negative to Americans.

Comparing Israel to Apartheid South Africa is an exercise in intellectual dishonesty, nothing more.

Not really. Many see the comparison. Here is some intellectual honesty for you:

Israelis have always been horrified at the idea of parallels between their country, a democracy risen from the ashes of genocide, and the racist system that ruled the old South Africa. Yet even within Israel itself, accusations persist that the web of controls affecting every aspect of Palestinian life bears a disturbing resemblance to apartheid. After four years reporting from Jerusalem and more than a decade from Johannesburg before that, the Guardian's award-winning Middle East correspondent Chris McGreal is exceptionally well placed to assess this explosive comparison. Here we publish the first part of his two-day special report

The Guardian - Part 1

The Guardian - Part 2

[jbg]

Some of them for a good reason, Israel is not very popular in the middle east,or other areas of the world...

For the same reason that those supporting women's rights and racial integration weren't very popular in the United States in the 1910's and 1950's respectively. Israel is a beacon of hope and freedom in an otherwise strife and hatred-torn part of the world. That's reason enough to be disliked.

[dre]

For the same reason that those supporting women's rights and racial integration weren't very popular in the United States in the 1910's and 1950's respectively. Israel is a beacon of hope and freedom in an otherwise strife and hatred-torn part of the world. That's reason enough to be disliked.

For the same reason that those supporting women's rights and racial integration weren't very popular in the United States in the 1910's and 1950's respectively.

Yeah... it has nothing to do with the occupation, the water quotas, blockades, assasinations, state sanctioned identity fraud, and all of that stuff.

Jesus fuckin christ.

[Guest American Woman]

But here is what I don't get, I'll call it The Jewish Persecution Complex. No matter what the argument is, this is brought up somewhere. It's used in almost the same fashion as calling someone an anti-semite. Well, now that they have their own country again, and managed to stay alive and prosper during the process, can we drop the anti-semite angle and TJPC?

Why are you bringing that up in response to me? I've never used either "angle" in my posts. I've certainly been accused of a lot of similar things -- which evidently is ok? -- but I certainly don't play the anti-semite or TJPC card.

Yes, Israel has managed to survive and prosper, by doing what they've felt they had to do in order to survive and prosper. Which has been my only point. If you think that's some sort of Jewish Persecution Complex, think again. I would say it about any democratic nation that's managed to thrive and prosper under the same circumstances. I've said it before and I'll say it again-- I wouldn't want to be the only democratic nation in the middle east. I'm glad the U.S. has the neighbors it does. It certainly makes life easier than having neighbors who would like to kill us.

[Guest American Woman]

Comparing Israel to Apartheid South Africa is an exercise in intellectual dishonesty, nothing more.

I think there's a lot of ignorance involved, too.

[jbg]

You were hoping a thread started by naomi about Israel would be a positive one? Heh. No comment.

There is one thread not about Israel...

[jbg]

You're right. I find myself repeating a lot of the same things. For example; I believe all sides should follow international law. Despite this, I get accused of supporting Hamas by mostly those who believe Israel is above following international law.

That is a fatuous but facially appealing position.

Israel does not use people dressed in civilian clothes who are set to explode either by remote-controlled or self-operated devices. Israel does not lob missiles in a random manner.

International law is not a suicide pact. Where one side doesn't even come close to compliance why should Israel waste the lives of its own civilians on vain prayers of compliance by Hamas.

[naomiglover]

That is a fatuous but facially appealing position.

Israel does not use people dressed in civilian clothes who are set to explode either by remote-controlled or self-operated devices. Israel does not lob missiles in a random manner.

Suicide attacks are wrong and illegal. Killing civilians indiscriminatory with military weapons is also wrong and illegal.

I support neither. Why do you support one?

International law is not a suicide pact. Where one side doesn't even come close to compliance why should Israel waste the lives of its own civilians on vain prayers of compliance by Hamas.

You've used this same type of empty statement many times even after being reminded how it makes no sense. Israel following international law does not jeopardize its security.