Israel’s shameful attack on Gaza

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

By Mike Whitney
Online Journal Contributing Writer

http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_986.shtml

<snip>

There’s no debate about the facts of Israel’s brutal siege of Gaza. The only thing in dispute is the way those facts are skewed in the American media. Pick up the New York Times and you would swear it was edited by Ariel Sharon. There’s not even an attempt at evenhandedness; just the foolish ruminations of scribes who think they can spin war crimes into hard-hitting journalism.

Israel has been pummeling Gaza for months; intentionally starving the beleaguered occupants while lobbing 6,000 artillery shells into populated areas. Isn’t that front-page news?

Meanwhile, another 50 civilians have been bumped-off in gangland-style hits ("Targeted assassinations") authorized by the Knesset’s newest Mafia don, Ehud Olmert. Olmert has put the carnage and destruction into high-gear, eliciting criticism from his very own daughter who protested in front of her father’s home with signs that said, “Stop the Killing” among other things.

The Israelis have developed “sound machines” that emit ear-piercing explosions that have been deployed in Gaza City to shatter windows, cause miscarriages, and send children into deep trauma. It is a “terror device” pure and simple; it has no other function except to produce massive fear and anxiety. It is the latest weapon in the prodigious arsenal of the “world’s most moral army” (Olmert quote)...

[Name removed]

1. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Waya]

2. Yea well......

.you'd think if we taxpayers gotta fork over the money for Israel's Aid package every damn year, we sure as hell should be able to express what we think about the action Israel is taking - which our money pays for.....:mad:

[liberalhistorian]

32. SHHHHH!!!!!! According to the

Israel-worshippers here we must just sit down and STFU and let Israel do whatever the fuck it wants to do with nary a peep in protest. Our job is just to sit down, STFU, and hand over the gazillion-dollar checks every year.

[Maat]

35. And that sure irritates me.

And I'm serious, and haven't spoken up about it on DU thus far.

[WiseButAngrySara]

36. This is a topic you can't discuss on DU! It's banned to the dungeon.

That is a policy that I've never understood, and completely disagree with. I think Skinner should have an explanatory post somewhere about all of the rationale behind this decision to exclude Israel issues from GD. It really angers me.

[Maat]

40. Agreed (n/t).

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

3. It's definitely a spirited editorial...

...I thought Mr. Whitney should be heard.

[Tom Joad]

4. Might want to check out this thread. Kucinich released a statement

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=124x132948

Here is a man who probably supports 90% of Israeli policy, and he is asking why no one is saying anything.

Dennis Kucinich has said something. See it all here.
http://www.kucinich.us/archive/home/display.php?src=k_20060706_zr_grafvbaf.cuc

"The world community, led by the United States and Israel, must see the humanitarian imperative of relieving the suffering of innocent people in Palestine who are without the most basic of human necessities such as food, water, electricity, health care, housing, and economic security, in part because they exercised their right to self determination.

"The Hamas government needs to ensure the safe return of Cpl. Shalit and renounce its previous statements calling for the destruction of Israel, and end attacks against innocent Israeli civilians.

[Scurrilous]

5. Olmert didn't call the IDF the "world's most moral army"...

...he said they were the most "ethical."

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3261303,00.html

"The IDF is the most ethical army in the world, and I reject any attempt to question its morality."

[Waya]

6. What's the difference?

Either way it's a lie.....

[bemildred]

7. Whitney tends to get carried away with himself. nt

[liberalhistorian]

33. Olmert's a weak idiot who doesn't know

what the fuck he's doing and who's going to take down the ME because of it. Even his own party and supporters don't know what the fuck to do with him.

[tocqueville]

8. sound machines ?

I think it is "ordinary" sonic bangs by low flying jets used on purpose. It has been used previously and condemned by the UN.

[cali]

9. LOL

Yikes. That is some awful writing, er, I mean, propaganda. And actually, the reporting in the NYT, has been factual and pretty extensive.

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

10. The definition of "propaganda" being...

...what? Anything you happen to disagree with? I don't suppose you could be troubled to actually make your case? What's the matter--couldn't find the word "liquidate" anywhere in there? Don't give up, I'm sure you can find something sufficiently trivial to take issue with and use to distract from matters of real substance.

"...NYT, has been factual and pretty extensive" That's rich. You mean like their factual and pretty extensive pre-invasion of Iraq reporting?--or do you mean like the factual and pretty extensive coverage of our '04 stolen presidential election and election fraud in general?--or maybe you mean the factual and pretty extensive investigative reporting they've done on 9-11?--or could you be referring to the factual and pretty extensive story of BushCo authorized illegal wire tapping they chose to sit on for OVER A YEAR??!! "Factual and pretty extensive?" That wouldn't be anything like fair and balanced would it?

[cali]

11. No, I love reading anything that's thoughtful and

well written. That piece was just heavy breathing and stock outrage. There wasn't one reflective moment or original thought in it.

As far as the NYT goes; yes they screwed up with Miller- terribly, but they have, bar none, the best Iraq reporting day to day. Burns, Wong, Filkins and others are doing a supurb job, and frankly, if you're not reading it, you don't know as much as you could about Iraq. I read the NYT in hard copy every day, and it undoubtedly has its failing, but it's the best source for information. Do you even read it? I mean consistently.

[pelsar]

13. come on cali

that was a "brilliant piece of nonsense"..i tend to look for the new and original accuations...this one had the israeli developed "sound machine". It was almost as good as the disappearing bullets that the good palestinean doctor found. Wasnt as good as the Aids candy dropped by israel a few years ago, but still it was original.

[abester]

21. yes i hear you

palestinians live in heaven, and all they can do is bitch and throw rocks and blame the saintly Jewish people. After all, we all know they're savages, don't we? Saintly Israeli's would NEVER carry out wanton assisinations or drive tanks in homes of innocents. Only a fool would believe that liberal media elite nonsense.

No seriously, the part about using radioactive and chemical weapons is implausible, as is the sound machine. But don't forget that while you're lounging away so comfortably with a beer in your hand lobbing your disbeliefs in the ether, palastinians are starving and dying over there. I can sure understand edgy doctors who have their stumach full of the maimed bodies think up ever more terrifying weapons. I don't blame them.

[Name removed]

39. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[abester]

41. dont bother reasoning with savages

I think you are underestimating the severity of the situation.

You talk about suicide bombers? Well geee.... why would they do that? 60 years ago my country as brutally occupied and some countrymen engaged in acts of terror against the enemy.

Of course I don't approve of suicide bombers nor of kidnapping Israeli soldiers and neither do I of shooting unarmed men in wheelchairs.

But you seem to have a very naiive view of the matter. I'm done trying to reason with unreasonable people.

[pelsar]

42. your wrote:

I can sure understand edgy doctors who have their stumach full of the maimed bodies think up ever more terrifying weapons. I don't blame them.

______

that translates to: doctors can make up things and lie to the press because they've see maimed bodies. I've never heard of such nonsense.....i'm just wondering if you would complain if US doctors in iraq did the same.

[hoboken123]

47. What country was occupied 60 years ago?

Are you talking about Jordan seizing all that land in the late 40s?

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

14. If you wish to take issue with the content...

...of Mr. Whitney's piece, why not dissect it and offer some kind of rebuttal? To simply dismiss it as propaganda or claim that it's not thoughtful is not the least bit compelling. Why is it you never support your dismissive statements with well reasoned argument?

To characterize the NYT's willful, unabashed, shilling for BushCo over the past five years as a screw up is like describing Jack the Ripper's back alley vivisectional transgressions as a failure to follow proper dating protocol---it's disingenuous and dishonest, and I think you know that.

Neither the NYT nor the U.S. MSM in general have proven to be good sources of unbiased, comprehensive reporting on what's actually happening in Iraq.

[Jim Sagle]

15. It's a liquid stew of poison and filth, not really amenable to dissection

He needs new meds.

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

16. Now THIS is the kind of stuff I'm talking about...

...solid, well reasoned, thoroughly researched intellectual argument. You could take a lesson from Jim here, Cali.

I see the error in my ways now, thanks for straightening me out, Jim.

[cali]

17. Quite bluntly,

If you can't see that this piece is heavy handed propaganda of the most banal sort, it's pointless to dissect it. Really, it's just laughable. I'd be embarrassed as all get out to EVER post anything so trashy;

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

18. I'd be embarrassed to...

...post one lame distraction followed by the next under the guise of argument. How is it you determine this thread to be worth your time when you judge the editorial to be not even worth your constructing a well reasoned counter argument to? Are there no other threads with editorials you deem to be of sufficient merit that you actually do something besides cry propaganda?

[Jim Sagle]

19. Was Whitney any better? Not that I noticed.

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

20. I'd say he was substantially better, Jim,...

...but if you don't think so, why not take issue with the specifics of his editorial and make your case. If it's worth bothering to post a response to the OP why not make it a substantive response that speaks to the message/content of his piece?

[Jim Sagle]

23. Sure.

We are sure that Israel is using a new chemical or radioactive weapon in their operation . . . When we try to X-ray dead bodies, we find no trace of shrapnel that hit the person killed,” said Dr. al-Saqqa, Shifa Hospital, Gaza; following the examination of the “completely burnt” bodies of dead Palestinians killed in Israeli air raids.

I wouldn't trust anyone who can try to pass off such sci-fi vomit as fact in his very first paragraph if he said 2 + 2 is 4.

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

24. That's a start, Jim. Congratulations!!! How does it feel?

Are you saying you doubt that X-rays don't show shrapnel in these bodies?
Whitney's making this up or has been misinformed?

Whitney didn't elaborate on the chemical or radioactive nature of the weapons. It sounds to me like he may be jumping to this prematurely in the absence of an explanation for the X-rays not showing shrapnel.

Do you doubt Israel would test new weapons technology on Palestinians? I don't find it hard to believe that they would, but am not claiming that they have. I'll reserve judgement and wait for some kind of corroboration. Do you ever reserve judgement, Jim? Do you ever question Israel's militaristic approach to dealing with Palestine? Do you really think Israel sincerely wants a negotiated peace? Do you think the Geneva Conventions should apply to Israel? If so, do you think Israel is in compliance?

Just askin'

[Jim Sagle]

25. Yes, yes, yes, yes, and (mostly) yes.

No one ever said ANY nation is innocent.

But why doesn't Hamas release the prisoner. This could be over so quickly and so easily.

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

26. They should. And kidnapping him to begin with...

...was wrong. And thanks for answering my questions, you're a good sport.

If you'll entertain this hypothetical (and you certainly don't have to): If it's true, as I suspect, that Israeli leadership, unlike the majority of Israeli citizens, doesn't really want a fair and even-handed negotioated peace, what should Palestinian leadership do? I mean aside from ceasing all hostilities, that's a given, I know they should do this.

It seems to me every time there is a lull in violence Israel pursues tactics designed to escalate rather than ameliorate tensions. Perhaps I'm wrong about this, but it certainly seems to be the case to me. If this is true, and further that it is done, as I also suspect, for the purpose of getting a response from Hamas or Palestinian militants to be used as a pretext for pressing further into occupied territory and destabilizing their government and infrastructure, what should Paletinian leadership do? What good options do they have?

I think this is what they're faced with.

[Jim Sagle]

28. I'm sorry, but I just don't see that as a fair reading of Israeli motives.

I'm not the one to speculate along those lines. (And there are so many others who will be glad to.)

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

29. What would you consider a fair...

...reading/interpretation of Israeli leadership's motivation/purpose? What would you say they're trying to accomplish? What do you honestly believe they want for the Palestinian people?

[Jim Sagle]

30. How could I, typing away in Chicagoland, make an informed assessment of

that? But I'll try.

I don't think they give anywhere near the thought to the Palestinian people that they give to their own. I know I would want Hamas to concentrate on governing and stopping the rocket attacks and kidnappings. If Hamas would go ahead and declare a state, it would be a plus for the Israelis as they they would have a state enemy to punish for such transgressions.

Those who give sinister motives for Israel's over-response tend to give little or no evidence.

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

31. What kinds of actions would Israeli...

...military forces have to have taken over the last, let's say 10 years, against the Palestinians in order to raise doubt with you as to Israeli leadership's true motivation? What would they need to have done? What are the telltale signs of a country abusing it's position of strength to persecute/oppress a weaker neighboring state as opposed to pursuing good faith efforts to establish a negotiated peace? What should we be looking for to make this assessment, Jim?

[pelsar]

44. let me join in...

lets start with some short history:

intifada I brough oslo and israel pulling out of many areas and let the PA organize and rule.....and the shootings from the PA areas and then the suicide bombers appeared.

israel reacted but did not instigate:

jump over to gaza...israel LEFT gaza, the whole idea being unlike the westbank the palestenians would not have the IDF on their necks....the palestenians promptly let off 30 kassams at israel, destroyed the greenhouses and killed two egyptians.

the kassams kept going and israeli response was at first nothing, then helicopters, then shelling empty areas, then closer to the kassm launchers and civilians and finally the reinvasion.

all during that the kassams kept on being fired....perhaps the palestenians should have stopped trying to kill israelis?...maybe the problem lies with their reaction? For reasons unclear you seem to ignore that (and the 60+ attempts at sneaking around the fence to enter israel)

the palestenians had an incredible option in gaza....that was their option and instead of doing something good, they used it as a launching pad for more violence

[Name removed]

34. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Violet_Crumble]

45. Just curious, Cali...

but after seeing you accuse Gideon Levy of being a heavy breather as well, I'm wondering if you could give some examples of anything written on the I/P conflict that you consider to be thoughtful and well written....

[Violet_Crumble]

48. Kick for Cali...

n/t

[MrPrax]

12. Well I thought

Judith Miller's coverage of the WMDs in Iraq was 'fair and balanced'? Didn't you?
Why do you hate Israel?

:sarcasm:

[occuserpens]

22. From Israeli corporal to Peace for Galilee-2.0?

2006-07-12 From Israeli corporal to Peace for Galilee-2.0?

[bobby911]

27. ok I call bull

anyone have a link to this new sound weopen that causes miscarriages?

[Mojorabbit]

37. Well we have a sound weapon so it would not

surprise me. http://www.defense-aerospace.com/cgi-bin/client/modele.pl?prod=35072&session=dae.21786500.1152765989.RLXQJcOa9dUAAFelPEE&modele=jc_1
We also have high powered microwaves which may or may not explain the burned people without shrapnel. I am not well informed about weapons.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/09/19/wirq319.xml

[Mojorabbit]

38. re the microwave weapon

There is no definitive answer on whether it will be possible to raise the 'beam' power output to the point where it will inflict severe and instantaneous burns on its targets. Although it's certain to run afoul of international conventions on warfare, such weapon could be very effective against human targets and un-shielded electronic devices, making it attractive to nations who are willing to disregard the said conventions.
from
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Active_Denial_System

[abester]

43. its bull

there are no 'beam' weapons. There exists only one weapon, one alone, that inflicts these kinds of severe burnings from 'beaming', and those are atomic bombs (they incinerate people by thermal radiation, IR, the same kind you feel when you look at an oven or the sun, just millions of times more intense)


And microwave?? Thats just hilarious!! Microwave radiation does very, very little to you. The only way it succeeds in cooking something is because you have a SMALL mass inside a SEALED reasonance chamber. In the air, the radiation escapes and spreads quickly.

To incinerate people takes a huge amount of energy, and there are no clear ways of how to emit huge amounts of thermal radiation from an explosive device. So to do that you need weapons powerful enough they match atomic weapons.

So I think its more likely severe burning is caused by second sources, like burning ground debris, or possibly napalm.

[Mojorabbit]

46. Well there are a gazillion links re the weapon that say different.

I for one would not be surprised if it is so. The mad scientists who make a living off such things seem to have fertile minds developing these horrors.