Lost in the blur of slogans

[shira]

Lost in the blur of slogans
Ishmael Khaldi

Wednesday, March 4, 2009


For those who haven't heard, the first week in March has been designated as Israel Apartheid Week by activists who are either ill intentioned or misinformed. On American campuses, organizing committees are planning happenings to once again castigate Israel as the lone responsible party for all that maligns the Middle East.

Last year, at UC Berkeley, I had the opportunity to "dialogue" with some of the organizers of these events. My perspective is unique, both as the vice consul for Israel in San Francisco, and as a Bedouin and the highest-ranking Muslim representing the Israel in the United States. I was born into a Bedouin tribe in Northern Israel, one of 11 children, and began life as shepherd living in our family tent. I went on to serve in the Israeli border police, and later earned a master's degree in political science from Tel Aviv University before joining the Israel Foreign Ministry.

I am a proud Israeli - along with many other non-Jewish Israelis such as Druze, Bahai, Bedouin, Christians and Muslims, who live in one of the most culturally diversified societies and the only true democracy in the Middle East. Like America, Israeli society is far from perfect, but let us deals honestly. By any yardstick you choose - educational opportunity, economic development, women and gay's rights, freedom of speech and assembly, legislative representation - Israel's minorities fare far better than any other country in the Middle East

So, I would like to share the following with organizers of Israel Apartheid week, for those of them who are open to dialogue and not blinded by a hateful ideology:

<snip>

cont'd here:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/03/04/EDRP168GMT.DTL&hw=ishmael&sn=001&sc=1000

[Idealism]

1. I take umbrage with most of this article

On American campuses, organizing committees are planning happenings to once again castigate Israel as the lone responsible party for all that maligns the Middle East.

No one blames all the problems of the Middle East on Israel. People can partly blame the Palestinian issue on Israel, and rightly so. No one blames Sunni and Shia conflicts on Israel, which is a bigger part of history than the I/P clash is, no one blames drug addiction in the Middle East on Israel, which is a huge problem in Iran and Egypt. No one blames the support from the US towards Mubarak the dictator on Israel. I am not sure where this author finds this idea from, but it is unequivocally wrong.

You are part of the problem, not part of the solution: If you are really idealistic and committed to a better world, stop with the false rhetoric. We need moderate people to come together in good faith to help find the path to relieve the human suffering on both sides of the Israel-Palestinian conflict.

If non-violent measures are "part of the problem," what does this author suggest? Nothing, by the looks of this paragraph, only wishes to condemn those who would commit the heinous crimes of boycott and divestment! How inhumane! Perhaps they should resort to violence? Oh wait, it has been tried and does nothing good for the population, but to try something different- something that previously brought change in another apartheid situation- they are wrong too? You can't have it both ways.

This paragraph also talks about the "moderate people" on both sides, but I see fewer and fewer of these left. The next government of Israel will be much more right-wing than the previous government that took Israel to war twice. The hardliners in Hamas have been strengthened by Cast Lead and are flush with potential recruits, children who have seen their mother or father killed by IDF soldiers and are too young to understand why it happened. The moderates in this conflict either died or were voted out of office- ON BOTH SIDES.

You deny Israel the fundamental right of every society to defend itself: You condemn Israel for building a security barrier to protect its citizens from suicide bombers and for striking at buildings from which missiles are launched at its cities - but you never offer an alternative.

Perhaps if Palestinian lands weren't being annexed everyday to clear the path for Israeli settlements, explicitly against the road map to peace and the spirit of Oslo, there would be less violence. There is no justification for the Annexation Wall in the West Bank. There was very limited violence that originated from the West Bank, certainly not enough to warrant the billions of dollars being spent on the wall to hem in Palestinians who are largely non-violent. The security fence around Gaza is understandable, but don't cut off their food supply in an obvious attempt to starve the region. You can't make people think rationally by starving them to death. Keep the fence if you must, but at least allow humanitarian aid into the strip, as you agreed to in past peace talks.

Of course every nation has the right to defend itself, but you should not concientiously be allowed to call it self-defense when you inflict a thousand times more casualties than you suffered at the hands of what you were retaliating against. The line gets blurred at some point. A war is war, but do not claim righteous defense as the reason for killing hundreds of civilians and decimating entire blocks. Have the courage to call it what it is.

Do Palestinians not have the same right to "defend themselves" that Israel and every country in the world does? I think they would retaliate harshly to the assassination of their leadership that Israel has carried out dozens of times in the past. I think they would take offense to the air raids of Gaza by the IAF and the shelling of fisherman by the Israeli Navy, but if they defend themselves with the only weapons they have, they are condemned. Why do they not have the same rights?

You are betraying the moderate Muslims and Jews who are working to achieve peace: Your radicalism is undermining the forces for peace in Israel and in the Palestinian territories. We are working hard to move toward a peace agreement that recognizes the legitimate rights of both Israel and the Palestinian people, and you are tearing down by falsely vilifying one side.

This is exactly what the Israeli government did with regards to Arafat. They condemned him and the one who was unwilling to work with them, and blamed their lack of motivation to concede rights to Palestinians on him. The authors claims those who want to see non-violent measures progress toward change, because it is obvious that violence won't do it and neither will acqueiscing to Israel's desires (as the West Bank proves), are the ones undermining moderates?! That is rediculous-- the moderates are not the ones dropping bombs and shooting rockets.

This plea just sounds like more of the selfishness and myopia that I have come to see from several authors. The world must recognize what we do affects other people, and see things from their perspective- not just with Israel and Palestine, but with Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, Sudan, Somalia, etc. There are humans on both sides of the wall.

[shira]

3. responding to your umbrage

1. Since Israel isn't the cause of all problems in the mideast, and there are many, why of all the mideast nations do you support Israel being singled out for boycotts, divestment, and sanctions?

2. You say non-violent BDS is at least better than a violent alternative. But the author wants people like you to stop with the false rhetoric and start dealing in good faith. Singling out and demonizing Israel isn't honorable. It only feeds antisemites.

3. What is your alternative to the wall and Israel's military reactions to terror? Rockets have been falling on Israel from Gaza ever since the end of OCL. What should Israel do TODAY about that? Nothing militarily? And you've been corrected here several times about the wall's effectiveness in stopping thousands of terror attacks.

4. If moderate or progressive Israelis and Arabs are not calling for BDS, and they're not, then you are undermining their own peace efforts. Why not try working with them rather than against them?

[Idealism]

4. How do you propose to fix the I/P solution if not through Israel?

Seriously, I want this situation over with, I want my tax dollars stop paying for oppression and I want the two sides to stop killing each other. This won't be achieved by divesting from Saudi Arabia.

What false rhetoric? I welcome BDS against Israel because it is better than doing nothing or violence. What other measures do you think would succeed? Nothing else has.

Perhaps if Israel did not break their own cease-fire hours after January 17th, then maybe there wouldn't be rocket attacks? Maybe if they let in the thousands of trucks full of humanitarian aid into Gaza like they said they would instead of stopping them at the border, maybe there wouldn't be rocket attacks. Also, Hamas is attempting to deter Islamic Jihad and Al-Aqsa Brigades from launching rockets, but due to OCL I guess that enforcement capability isn't what it was before.

"Corrected several times in stopping thousands of attacks?"

Show me the "thousands of attacks." Thanks.

What is the Palestinian reaction to having locally revered figures like Shiek Yassin assassinated illegally? What would Hamas do in that situation? You deny them the right to retaliation, yet you don't deny Israel the same.

[pelsar]

7. ignoring history ....again....

Perhaps if Israel did not break their own cease-fire hours after January 17th, then maybe there wouldn't be rocket attacks? Maybe if they let in the thousands of trucks full of humanitarian aid into Gaza like they said they would instead of stopping them at the border, maybe there wouldn't be rocket attacks. Also, Hamas is attempting to deter Islamic Jihad and Al-Aqsa Brigades from launching rockets, but due to OCL I guess that enforcement capability isn't what it was before.

let me correct you once again...this is getting tedious isnt it?

rocket attacks against israel from gaza has been almost a daily affiair...reguardless of what israel has done: open borders, closed borders, no attacks on gaza, yes attacks on gaza....its not that distant history.

Presently hamas is talking to IJ to limit the attacks....however if they chose to, they can always do to IJ what they did to fatah...and they dont need more than some AK-47 ands RPGs to do it.

and of course you pull out the "defense"
hat is the Palestinian reaction to having locally revered figures like Shiek Yassin assassinated illegally? What would Hamas do in that situation? You deny them the right to retaliation, yet you don't deny Israel the same

as if shooting rockets in to israeli cities is some kind of "defense".....its a looser policy, and those who promote it, just promise the Palestinians more and more misery.....thats being a good 'friend" to the Palestinians, and they've got lots like you.

[Idealism]

8. Too bad there is plenty of evidence that Israel broke it first.

This is getting tedious, is it not?

http://www.alternet.org/audits/123063/israel_broke_%22ceasefire%22_hours_after_it_went_into_effect/

Israel Broke "Ceasefire" Hours After it Went Into Effect

GAZA CITY, Jan 26 -- At 7.30 a.m. Jan. 22, five days after Israeli authorities declared a 'ceasefire' following their 22-day air, land and sea bombardment of the Gaza Strip, Israeli gunboats renewed shelling off the Gaza city coast, injuring at least six, including four children.

Mu'awiyah Hassanain, director of Ambulance and Emergency Services, reported more shelling in the north-western coastal area As Sudaniya the same morning. Five fishermen were injured in the attacks, he said.

About 9.45 a.m. that morning in Sheyjaiee district to the east of Gaza city, seven-year-old Ahmed Hassanian was outside his house with friends when Israeli soldiers fired from the eastern border. A bullet lodged in his brain, causing brain haemorrhage. Dr. Fawzi Nablusi, director of the ICU at Shifa hospital, says the boy is not expected to survive.

Three Palestinians have been killed since the ceasefire and 15 injured, including the ten injured Jan. 22, according to both Mu'awiyah Hassanain and Dr. Hassan Khalaf.

Hours after the ceasefire was said to have come into effect Jan. 18, Israeli warplanes flew extremely low over areas of Gaza. Drones capable both of photographing and of dropping targeted missiles continued to circle overhead. At 8.30 am Jan. 18, one of these drones dropped two missiles in the Amal area east of Beit Hanoun, killing 11-year-old Angham Ra'fat al-Masri and injuring her mother.

The Palestinian Center for Human Rights (PCHR) reports further violations of the ceasefire, including the killing of Maher abu Rjaila, 23, shot in the chest by Israeli troops at 10.40 am Jan. 18 as he walked on his land east of Khan Younis city.

Israeli soldiers fired on residents of Al-Qarara, near Khan Younis, at 1 pm Jan. 20, shooting Waleed Al-Astal, 42, in his right foot.

In Shifa hospital, Yasser Abed, 15, from Gaza's Beach camp, explained how he received a shard of shrapnel in his forehead. "I went out of my house to see what was happening," he said. "I didn't see the gunboat, didn't see anything." His father explains that Yasser was rushed to Shifa after the shrapnel hit him, and that there was a girl nearby aged about four who was also hit by a piece of shrapnel.

In another room at Shifa, 11-year-old Nisreen Al-Quqa tells how she was out walking on the beach with her brother when the Israeli navy began to fire upon Palestinian fishermen. A piece of shrapnel from the shelling got lodged in her right calf muscle. "What ceasefire?" the girl's mother said, looking down at her daughter. But she knows Nisreen is lucky to have only a minor leg injury; it could have been much worse.

Others injured after the ceasefire include a 14-year-old boy hit in the thigh by shrapnel fragments, and a 35-year-old man also with shrapnel injury.

Israel's assault on Gaza killed at least 1,330 people, with as many as 200 more bodies expected to be recovered from under the rubble of more than 4,000 destroyed houses and 20,000 buildings.

Ninety percent of the cases in Shifa's ICU are civilian, and of these half are women and children, says Dr. Fawzi.

Ceasefire violations are not new. During the six-month ceasefire that began Jun. 19, Israeli forces killed 22 Palestinians, many of them members of resistance groups. Thirty-eight 38 fishermen and farmers were abducted.

Israeli soldiers routinely fired upon fishermen and farmers along Gaza's eastern and northern borders, injuring 62, according to Palestinian sources.

[shira]

9. 5 days after......and how many rockets did Hamas launch in that 5 days of ceasefire?

[Idealism]

10. The cease-fire was broke hours after, not 5 days later.

As for rocket attacks in that time of a few hours, there were none. I haven't found any that say otherwise, perhaps you have some?

And the first incident isn't on January 22nd.

"The Palestinian Center for Human Rights (PCHR) reports further violations of the ceasefire, including the killing of Maher abu Rjaila, 23, shot in the chest by Israeli troops at 10.40 am Jan. 18 as he walked on his land east of Khan Younis city."

"Hours after the ceasefire was said to have come into effect Jan. 18, Israeli warplanes flew extremely low over areas of Gaza. Drones capable both of photographing and of dropping targeted missiles continued to circle overhead. At 8.30 am Jan. 18, one of these drones dropped two missiles in the Amal area east of Beit Hanoun, killing 11-year-old Angham Ra'fat al-Masri and injuring her mother."

You do like to read selectively, don't you?

[shira]

11. how many times do you need to be corrected

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3657876,00.html

[Idealism]

13. Why can't you READ?

"Shortly after 2 pm" - from one YNet account of rockets launched.


From PCHR, on Sunday January 18th at 10:40 a.m.

"The Palestinian Center for Human Rights (PCHR) reports further violations of the ceasefire, including the killing of Maher abu Rjaila, 23, shot in the chest by Israeli troops at 10.40 am Jan. 18 as he walked on his land east of Khan Younis city."

The first incident: Sunday January 18th at 8:30 a.m.

"Hours after the ceasefire was said to have come into effect Jan. 18, Israeli warplanes flew extremely low over areas of Gaza. Drones capable both of photographing and of dropping targeted missiles continued to circle overhead. At 8.30 am Jan. 18, one of these drones dropped two missiles in the Amal area east of Beit Hanoun, killing 11-year-old Angham Ra'fat al-Masri and injuring her mother."


Why can't you read?

[shira]

15. here's some reading from that same Ynet article

The first incident since the ceasefire was recorded Sunday morning, when Palestinian gunmen opened fire at Israel Defense Forces soldiers in the northern Gaza Strip, about six hours after the unilateral ceasefire declared by Israel took effect. The soldiers fired back.

The army reported that the troops had spotted the source of the fire and fired back with a tank aided by an Air Force aircraft. The gunmen were reportedly hit. There were no injuries among the soldiers.

Your quest to demonize Israel with one bogus accusation after another is repugnant.

[Idealism]

18. Coincidences, here is are incidents that happened prior to that

At approximately 00:05 on Sunday, 18 January 2009, IOF helicopter gunships bombarded open areas in the west of Khan Yunis.

At approximately 01:30, IOF warplanes fired two missiles at the vicinity of Science and Technology College in the south of Khan Yunis. No casualties were reported.

http://www.pchrgaza.org/files/PressR/English/2008/18-2009.html

Meaning 5 minutes after midnight on Sunday, meaning before the other incidents.

[Behind the Aegis]

And still before the ceasefire

[Idealism]

22. Post #20 has tons of incidents that happened after, as well

And the article you posted did not give a time frame other than "rockets launched after." Seemingly implied that these rockets were launched upon Israel declaring a cease-fire, but they weren't, nor does the article point out at which time these were launched. The ambiguity is mysterious and I question why this would be left up to the imagination...

[Behind the Aegis]

25. Do you make stuff up as you go?

Seriously, you run around accusing other posters of being unable to read, perhaps you are suffering from "projectionism." You are entitled to your own opinions, not your own facts.

[Idealism]

30. Are you kidding me? You don't understand what "ambiguity" means?

From your article, this is what I mean about "ambiguity."

"Seventeen rockets hit southern Israel after Olmert declared an end to the hostilities at 2am (midnight GMT). Israel responded with two air strikes against launching sites, and medical workers said a Palestinian civilian was killed.

At least three rockets struck southern Israel after Hamas said it was halting attacks, Israeli police said."

What does "after" mean? Directly after? Hours after? It is an ambiguous term. Why did they leave the time these things happened out?

Ambiguous:

Main Entry:
am·big·u·ous Listen to the pronunciation of ambiguous
Pronunciation:
\am-ˈbi-gyə-wəs\
Function:
adjective
Etymology:
Latin ambiguus, from ambigere to be undecided, from ambi- + agere to drive — more at agent
Date:
1528

1 a: doubtful or uncertain especially from obscurity or indistinctness <eyes of an ambiguous color> b: inexplicable2: capable of being understood in two or more possible senses or ways <an ambiguous smile> <an ambiguous term> <a deliberately ambiguous reply>
synonyms see obscure

[Behind the Aegis]

33. LOL! A vocabulary lesson from one who doesn't know the word "after?"

It doesn't matter if it was minutes, hours or days, it was AFTER the ceasefire!

[Idealism]

35. Yes, and these incidents mysteriously happened "after" the cease-fire too!

And here is another coincidence: They happened "before" the rocket attacks!

At approximately 00:05 on Sunday, 18 January 2009, IOF helicopter gunships bombarded open areas in the west of Khan Yunis.

At approximately 01:30, IOF warplanes fired two missiles at the vicinity of Science and Technology College in the south of Khan Yunis. No casualties were reported.

In the early morning, IOF withdrew from al-Fukhari area after they had demolished at least 30 houses and razed large areas of agricultural land.

At approximately 10:40, IOF troops positioned at the border between the Gaza Strip and Israel opened fire at Palestinian civilians who were checking their homes and agricultural land following the declaration of the ceasefire. As a result, Maher 'Abdul 'Azim Abu Rjaila, 23, was killed by a gunshot to the chest and shrapnel to the limbs.

In the morning, IOF troops opened fire at Wadi al-Salqa village, southeast of Deir al-Balah. Palestinian civilians who had fled their homes during the IOF offensive on the Gaza Strip have not been able to come back to their houses in the village.

At approximately 02:00 on Sunday, 19 January 2009, IOF redeployed outside al-Shouka village, east of Rafah. According to information available to PCHR, during their incursion into the areas, IOF demolished a number of houses, damaged others, razed areas of agricultural land and destroyed the civilian infrastructure.

At approximately 08:30, an IOF drone fired two missiles at a number of Palestinian civilians in al-Amal quarter in the east of Beit Hanoun. As a result, a woman and a child were seriously wounded. The child, 11-year-old Angham Ra'fat al-Masri, died of her wound later. The woman's leg was amputated.

At approximately 10:00, IOF gunboats bombarded the headquarters of the Palestinian General Intelligence (the Ship).

[Behind the Aegis]

43. Yes, and as usual, there is nothing to say why they occured....

...talk about ambiguous. You do know the meaning, right? When an often anti-Israel source like The Guardian, especially when the author is a complete anti-Israel tool, disputes what you have written, there is a HUGE problem.

[Idealism]

45. Sorry, the Israeli military doesn't provide reasons for why every bullet is fired.

Perhaps you should take that up with the MFA.

The Guardian article does not mention any of the incidents PCHR does save one farmer getting shot and killed at 10am. There was violence before and after this time. Odd that an omnipotent source like The Guardian didn't report that, given their new-found demigod status in your eyes. Funny how you have no problem using an "anti-Israel source" if in your mind it helps make a point, but the same source will be riddled with errors tomorrow...

The Guardian article does not contradict in any way PCHR. They omit events, but it is understandable. There is only so much people care about the situation to go into detail about every Palestinian maimed, especially after so many just died. What language in the article do you find that says anything to the effect of these rocket attacks being completely unprovoked and that these were the first incident of violence since Olmert announced the cease-fire? There is none in that article.

[Behind the Aegis]

48. You really should learn the difference between facts and fantasy.

"...given their new-found demigod status in your eyes. Funny how you have no problem using an "anti-Israel source" if in your mind it helps make a point,..." These two statements show how far gone you are.

"The Guardian article does not contradict in any way PCHR." Don't you start with your fucking strawmen! I know it is your way, but I am telling you now, stop making up shit!

"There is none in that article." Of course not, because you made it up.

[Idealism]

49. Lets go over this again, because you can't accept the fact that you are wrong.

"Not like I am surprised by this," as I often hear you say...

Here is the article snippet. Nothing else in the article talks about violence since the cease-fire began.

"Seventeen rockets hit southern Israel after Olmert declared an end to the hostilities at 2am (midnight GMT). Israel responded with two air strikes against launching sites, and medical workers said a Palestinian civilian was killed.

At least three rockets struck southern Israel after Hamas said it was halting attacks, Israeli police said.

A statement issued by Hamas in Syria said Palestinian factions were willing to respond to efforts by Egypt and others to broker an agreement for the "final lifting" of Israel's blockade of the Gaza Strip.

A Palestinian civilian was killed by Israeli forces near the Gazan town of Khan Younis after mortar bombs were fired from the area, medical workers said. He was the first fatality on either side of the frontier since Israel declared its ceasefire last night.In another incident, militants fired small arms at an Israeli infantry patrol, which directed artillery and aircraft to strike back."

Just to make it easier for you to understand, I highlight important details. "After" could mean any point following the cease-fire, and because it does not list the time of which any of these rocket attacks occur, and the YNet article states that the rockets were fired around 2pm on the 18th, there is no evidence that Palestinians broke the cease-fire first. There is evidence that Israel has.

PCHR mentions the person who was shot near Khan Younis, but also mentions incidents before and after this, down to the minute when these things occurred. It lists names of people hurt or killed, their whereabouts, and what they were doing while killed- ALL more details than what the Guardian article mentions, yet you call it propaganda? That is so twisted and it exemplifies why you are beyond hope.

[Behind the Aegis]

51. Read more slowly...take it all in...

...you just proved yourself wrong and don't even know it. You are so mired in your hate of Israel you can't even see what you have posted.

[Idealism]

53. Way to refute facts! Wait, all that you posted were more ad-hom attacks...

Anything substantive to say, or just more nonsense with nothing to back it up?

[Behind the Aegis]

55. I can't be held responsible for your lack of reading comprehension...

...especially when I make it elementary for you, using your own posts as sources.

[Idealism]

57. To review: You are proven wrong, then resort to ad-homs that degenerate into personal insults.

Heckuva job Brownie!

:rofl:

[Behind the Aegis]

58. Seems you are writing about yourself and are still to dense to know it.

It would be funny, were it not so sad.

[Idealism]

61. Oooh thats a good one! The "I know you are but what I am" defense!

At least that is more logical than your previous defense. You lost the debate, move along.

[Behind the Aegis]

63. Considering that is about the level at which you understand discourse,

, I haven't much choice.

[Idealism]

65. "Oh look what you made me do" is now your plea... you are advanced!

[Name removed]

68. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

71. Deleted message

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

[Behind the Aegis]

73. I haven't seen you post anything to warrant it.

[Idealism]

74. Anti-Israel propagandist is an acceptable slur, but you hesistate with anti-Semite eh?

Way to stick to your guns.

[Behind the Aegis]

76. You do know the difference, don't you?

Given your glib response, I wager not. So let me help you...

Anti-Israel propagandist = a person who uses propaganda against Israel in a repeated fashion. This indivdiual will usually follow a pattern of "Israel is always in the wrong" or "It is somehow Israel's fault."

Anti-Semite = a person who is prejudiced against Jews. They often hate Jews for simply being Jews.

[Idealism]

78. Question

Is Israel not a Jewish state? So would that not conflate the two? Or do you want to back out of your slur...

[Behind the Aegis]

80. I thought that was very simple, even you could understand. I guess not.

Therefore, I will even further simplify:

Anti-Israel propagandist = exhibit strong dislike or hate for Israel and use propaganda to "back up" their "points." They may or may not also hate Jews (i.e. be anti-Semites).

Anti-Semite = hates Jews

"So would that not conflate the two?"

Isn't that what your kind screech and yell my kind does?

The NAACP is an African-American group. Anti-NAACP propagandists aren't necessarily racists for their dislike of the NAACP. This is the same with anti-Israel propagandists, though some are anti-Semites.

[Idealism]

81. It is much too bad for your fantasy that I am not "anti-Israel"

I strongly dislike several of their policies. I hold law above all else. Israel has broken many laws, unfortunately so has every other country in the world. Perhaps if you ever venture outside of the I/P forum, you would see me denouncing other countries just as vehemently as I denounce some of Israel's policies.

[Behind the Aegis]

83. Oh, but you are.

And your little "aren't you gonna call me a Jew-hater" backs up that suspicion. Too bad you don't hold truth above all else, then we might get some where.

[Idealism]

85. Strawmen attacks and still no evidence.

I am glad you don't similarly claim to hold truth above else.

[Behind the Aegis]

86. Not strawmen. Do you need that definition again?

You have being batted all over this board with your ignorant propaganda, time and time again. This isn't the first time it has happened.

[Idealism]

88. Ignorant propaganda is what you call it when Israel is guilty of something?

I suppose if I talked about the settlements, it is of course more of this ignorant propaganda. Or perhaps the settlements aren't illegal because the UN is too biased against Israel?

[Behind the Aegis]

90. Strawmen and red herrings.

Another typical response.

[Idealism]

91. Why do you refuse hold the Israeli government account for when they do ill?

Why in your eyes are they above breaking their word? No government deserves that much faith.

[Behind the Aegis]

93. Why do you continue to make up shit (a.k.a strawman)?

[Idealism]

95. You have yet to denounce Israel's actions

no matter how egregious. I have yet to see you condemn the settlements, or settlement expansion. I have seen you try to justify international law violations such as extrajudicial assassinations. You even try to exonerate Israel when human rights groups claim otherwise-- why?

[Behind the Aegis]

98. Again, do not make stuff up.

I know you are fond of strawmen, but they don't make for good logic.

[Idealism]

101. whatever you say, BTA. this is the first conversation I suppose

[Behind the Aegis]

102. You have nothing but useless personal attacks against me (ad homs and strawmen).

When you are able to rely on facts, then we can discuss.

[Idealism]

105. One dubious article does not make it fact

Odd how no one else repeated this BS claim, odd how their own website took the claim down.

Question for you: There are Palestinian gunmen AND IDF troops milling about at "around" 6 a.m. in a combat zone? Questionable.

[Behind the Aegis]

106. And yet, it still doesn't prove your case. Pity.

"There are Palestinian gunmen AND IDF troops milling about at "around" 6 a.m. in a combat zone? "

Apparently so. I don't find that unusual at all, considering I see the National Guard milling around my city at that time. What a bizarre "question."

[Idealism]

108. Considering whenever the IAF identifies Hamas members, there is a bombing raid on them,

that these gunmen would be as I said "milling about."

It makes no sense. The time, 6 am, low visibility, in a given warzone where anything that moves that even looks like a Hamas militant is bombed, etc. Does not add up.

Again, where is the JPost, Haaretz, CNN, Al Jazeera report on this incident? Given that it is being claimed by YNet as being the first incident since the cease-fire was implemented, why isn't this on any other site? Why isn't it on a reputable site?

[Behind the Aegis]

110. So you can't find other sources it must be untrue?

That is called "poor reasoning." It is almost as ignorant as those posters who claim there isn't anti-Semitic remarks at DU because they haven't seen it. Where are you getting 6am?

[Idealism]

112. Unfortunately there are no "media watchdogs" for the Palestinians

Like so many persecuted and underprivileged groups of people, have a lacking pool of people that care about them. There is no one organization to correct the misinformation about them.

My sources tell full names, exact times, approximate locations, et al. You one dubious claim provided no names, "about" as the closest thing to a chronology, and no location.

Why does it not mention any names? Why does it not mention what brigade of the IDF? Why does it not mention the approximate time? Why is the hyperlink to their supposed story not found? Why can't you produce any CREDIBLE claim with these three things in it?

It is telling how you accept without any reinforcement the YNet article when it goes into zero specifics nor reasons, yet you will gladly condemn another article because it doesn't go into reasoning. The very definition of hypocrisy.

[Behind the Aegis]

115. LMAO!

Do you make stuff for comedic value or is itt an attempt to garner pity?

Exchanges of fire reported in northern Gaza


About six hours after unilateral ceasefire takes effect, Palestinian gunmen open fire at IDF forces, who fire back. About 170 trucks carrying fuel, food and medicines to enter Strip through border terminals Sunday

Ali Waked Published: 01.18.09, 08:31 / Israel News

First incident since ceasefire: Palestinian gunmen opened fire at Israel Defense Forces soldiers in the northern Gaza Strip on Sunday morning, about six hours after the unilateral ceasefire declared by Israel took effect. The soldiers fired back.

During the incident, which took place near the Sajaiyeh neighborhood, two gunmen fired a mortar shell and fired from small arms towards an armored force. The two were spotted by an Air Force chopper and a tank which attacked them with shells. One of the gunmen was killed and the other was injured. There were no injuries among the soldiers.

The IDF stressed that the gunmen were attacked after firing on the soldiers, and that this was not an offensive measure. Ynet

[Idealism]

117. "One of the gunmen was killed and the other was injured."

False. No Palestinians were killed until 10:40.

Bull shit article, just as I suspected. Thanks for the proof!

[Behind the Aegis]

119. Wrong!

Your own damn source proves you wrong.

You got no proof. It is bullshit in your mind because Israel isn't the "bad guy."

Still no proof from you Israel broke the ceasefire first.

[Idealism]

120. Wrong. Did you even read the PCHR report?

http://www.pchrgaza.org/files/PressR/English/2008/18-2009.html

Just in case the PCHR report is too much for your brain, here is a smaller article that leaves no doubt as to when the first death was. 10.40 GMT. Keep fighting, bta

First Palestinian shot dead after Israel's unilateral ceasefire
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2009-01/18/content_10678349.htm

[Behind the Aegis]

123. From your source:

At approximately 08:30, an IOF drone fired two missiles at a number of Palestinian civilians in al-Amal quarter in the east of Beit Hanoun. As a result, a woman and a child were seriously wounded. The child, 11-year-old Angham Ra'fat al-Masri, died of her wound later. The woman's leg was amputated.

And from the earlier source you quoted: "At 8.30 am Jan. 18, one of these drones dropped two missiles in the Amal area east of Beit Hanoun, killing 11-year-old Angham Ra'fat al-Masri and injuring her mother." http://www.alternet.org/audits/123063/israel_broke_%22ceasefire%22_hours_after_it_went_into_effect

[Idealism]

125. "died of her wound LATER"- meaning not at 8.30- How hard is it to understand?

The first Palestinian casualty is 10.40 GMT, just like these sources say.

Apparently you have a hard time reading the one or two key words in the sentence like "after" and "later." Or are you purposefully being obtuse?

[Behind the Aegis]

127. G-d in Heaven, you need help!

casualty

3 a: a military person lost through death, wounds, injury, sickness, internment, or capture or through being missing in action b: a person or thing injured, lost, or destroyed : victim <the ex-senator was a casualty of the last election>

Your own source "alertnet" says different. Which is it?

Still with all the goal post moving....When did Israel break the ceasefire first?

[Idealism]

129. Actually it was a clever bit of writing, perhaps you missed it.

"At 8.30 am Jan. 18, one of these drones dropped two missiles in the Amal area east of Beit Hanoun, killing 11-year-old Angham Ra'fat al-Masri and injuring her mother."

Did the missiles instantly kill the child? It doesn't say that. It said the missiles ended up killing her. And here is what PCHR, the report that the Alternet report drew its list of casualties and times from says:

"The child, 11-year-old Angham Ra'fat al-Masri, died of her wound later. "

Apparently you don't have as good of a grasp on English as you would like to think.

[Behind the Aegis]

131. Oh, more of your "ambiguity."

:eyes:

Though, I admit it is funny to watch you question your own source. And since PCHR doesn't list the time of her death, well....you know how that goes.

[Idealism]

133. I didn't write the article, the "ambiguity" is not mine to take credit for.

My opinion of you has been lessened greatly by your grammatical oversights today, but that is of no importance.

PCHR clearly states the first death is at 10.40 GMT, as do other sources.

Your one source says all of mine are false. Your one source has a shaky track record when it comes to this conflict. My 3 sources beat your 1 source in anyone eyes except those with a predisposition to not believe Palestinian sources and to blindly accept Israeli ones.

[Behind the Aegis]

135. So very sad.

You have no facts, so you make it up as you go.

[Idealism]

136. They are facts, backed up by several (and I can find you more) sources.

You have one source of what you believe. Where are the rest of yours?

You have beliefs, I have facts.

[Behind the Aegis]

138. You have propaganda and nothing more.

You failed to prove Israel broke the ceasefire first. Let's see something in the way of an actual news source.

[Idealism]

140. Sorry if a human rights groups, two respected news sites, and heres a fourth

Although some of the page is written in Arabic, to your kind that means its illegitimate.

http://www.imemc.org/article/58522

"Palestinian medical sources in Khan Younis, in the southern part of the Gaza Strip, reported on Sunday morning that Israeli soldiers killed one resident in Khuza'a town, east of Khan Younis. The sources added that rescue teams and medics located the bodies of 35 residents after the army withdrew from areas in the northern part of the Gaza Strip.

The slain man is the first to be killed after Israel declared its unilateral ceasefire which came in effect at 02:00 on Sunday at dawn."

Same casualty that PCHR reported, same that Alternet reported, same that the Xinhua News Agency reported.

[Behind the Aegis]

142. Your posts just grow more and more desperate and stupid.

"The army also said that soldiers were returning fire at Palestinian gunmen when the man was killed, Israeli online daily, Haaretz, reported." (A source your kind will revile.)

You are going on about something that wasn't even the real topic...bait and switch!

[Idealism]

145. Odd how the army's claim refutes your previous source

while simultaneously proving that this man WAS the first to die, and that these events (if the other even happened, still waiting on a link to something other than Ynet) were juxtaposed.

Oh and the army could NEVER lie about harming Palestinians :eyes:

After all, they didn't deny using WP on civilian areas, just like they claim they go to great lengths to "avoid civilian deaths." :eyes:

[Behind the Aegis]

147. And Palestinian sources are above reproach.

:eyes:

[Idealism]

151. The Chinese are in bed with Palestinians now?

Perhaps you should google "Uyghur's." They have been prosecuted by the Chinese government; there is no love for Muslims in China.

[shira]

26. ceasefire started at 2am, not midnight

and Ynet reports Gazans broke it first.

[Idealism]

29. I'll believe a human rights organization over Ynet

especially when YNets fact-checker has been broken in the past.

[shira]

31. PCHR has been wrong plenty of times too

They blew the recent UNRWA building story, al-Dura, Jenin, etc...with all those "eyewitness" accounts.

[Idealism]

34. Got any citation to back that up?

As long as we are trying to sully NGOs, lets at least point out their own fallacies on their websites, surely we can see to that.

The UNRWA story was blown by many in the media, when I see the NYTs correct that story I will hold PCHR accountable for it as well.

[Behind the Aegis]

17. ....

Seventeen rockets hit southern Israel after Olmert declared an end to the hostilities at 2am (midnight GMT). Israel responded with two air strikes against launching sites, and medical workers said a Palestinian civilian was killed.

At least three rockets struck southern Israel after Hamas said it was halting attacks, Israeli police said.

A statement issued by Hamas in Syria said Palestinian factions were willing to respond to efforts by Egypt and others to broker an agreement for the "final lifting" of Israel's blockade of the Gaza Strip.

A Palestinian civilian was killed by Israeli forces near the Gazan town of Khan Younis after mortar bombs were fired from the area, medical workers said. He was the first fatality on either side of the frontier since Israel declared its ceasefire last night. In another incident, militants fired small arms at an Israeli infantry patrol, which directed artillery and aircraft to strike back.

Source

[Idealism]

20. Thanks for the article

What do you make of these incidents reported by the Palestinian Center for Human Rights in the morning of Sunday 18th:

At approximately 00:05 on Sunday, 18 January 2009, IOF helicopter gunships bombarded open areas in the west of Khan Yunis.

At approximately 01:30, IOF warplanes fired two missiles at the vicinity of Science and Technology College in the south of Khan Yunis. No casualties were reported.

In the early morning, IOF withdrew from al-Fukhari area after they had demolished at least 30 houses and razed large areas of agricultural land.

At approximately 10:40, IOF troops positioned at the border between the Gaza Strip and Israel opened fire at Palestinian civilians who were checking their homes and agricultural land following the declaration of the ceasefire. As a result, Maher 'Abdul 'Azim Abu Rjaila, 23, was killed by a gunshot to the chest and shrapnel to the limbs.

In the morning, IOF troops opened fire at Wadi al-Salqa village, southeast of Deir al-Balah. Palestinian civilians who had fled their homes during the IOF offensive on the Gaza Strip have not been able to come back to their houses in the village.

At approximately 02:00 on Sunday, 19 January 2009, IOF redeployed outside al-Shouka village, east of Rafah. According to information available to PCHR, during their incursion into the areas, IOF demolished a number of houses, damaged others, razed areas of agricultural land and destroyed the civilian infrastructure.

At approximately 08:30, an IOF drone fired two missiles at a number of Palestinian civilians in al-Amal quarter in the east of Beit Hanoun. As a result, a woman and a child were seriously wounded. The child, 11-year-old Angham Ra'fat al-Masri, died of her wound later. The woman's leg was amputated.

At approximately 10:00, IOF gunboats bombarded the headquarters of the Palestinian General Intelligence (the Ship).

http://www.pchrgaza.org/files/PressR/English/2008/18-2009.html

Your article doesn't mention these incidents, unless I missed it.

[Behind the Aegis]

24. The IOF?

Yeah, I think I will stick with the anti-Israeli Guardian in this case.

I notice your article has none of the things mentioned in my article.

[Idealism]

28. Its the PCHRs words, why would they focus on rocket attacks?

[Behind the Aegis]

32. "why would they focus on rocket attacks?"

There's your real question. Ponder it for awhile.

[Idealism]

36. They are about getting the Palestinian rights talked about

just as CAMERA, HonestReporting, Middle-East Facts, etc. are about getting the Israeli side out. Are you going to fault them for not taking to the time to talk about Israeli human rights when they are a Palestinian human rights group? If they were Amnesty International or HRW, then you would have a point- but this is a specialized group, just like those I named above.

[Behind the Aegis]

42. You're beyond hope.

You have swallowed so much of the anti-Israel kool-aid it is beyond disgusting. You aren't using PHRC as a human rights group, you are using is as a news source! If they are going to be used as such, then yes, they should be held under scrutiny. Two other articles showed you there was "more to the story" than your one-sided propaganda flood. Now, in typical fashion, you move the goalposts but don't even do a good job of it. The real issue is not their overt biased position, but your using them as a news source and failing to take in the scope of the events. It is as another poster said, you are so consumed with proving the "evil" of Israel, facts be damned.

[Idealism]

44. Let me get this striaght, you oppose me using PCHR because they talk about Palestinians?

But when people use CAMERA to talk about Israel, its ok?

I gave you proof of who broke this cease-fire and now you say that there is "more to the story," trying to throw dirt on the evidence against Israel. Obviously there is more to the story, but the rockets did not get fired until after the IDF or IAF carried out attacks on Palestinians. I asked you to find me proof of events happening otherwise, and you couldn't. So now you resort to ad-hominems to deflect the argument.

I showed you facts, and you have nothing to refute them with. Talk about "drinking the kool-aid" you can't even see past your bias.

[Behind the Aegis]

46. See, beyond hope.

"Let me get this striaght, you oppose me using PCHR because they talk about Palestinians?" Not even remotely what I said or implied, but you twist it around to sound like the "victim."

"I gave you proof of who broke this cease-fire... And it was roundly destroyed by actual FACTS.

You showed propaganda and claimed to be facts. I gave you facts and you retreated into more propaganda. Your posts are nothing but disgusting anti-Israel posts worthy of the propaganda sites you love so much.

[Idealism]

47. What facts? Show me these facts

Nothing that was in that article said anything about the dozen or so events I showed you, but you still deny that Israel broke the cease-fire first.

"You aren't using PHRC as a human rights group, you are using is as a news source!"

Kindly point me to where the MSM covers Palestinians? To get their plight on television, they have to be dying in droves- and even that is routinely justified by a multitude of talking heads, if not completely ignored. No one cares, and no one reports, when they are maimed or shot at for the most part because it isn't news-worthy. Just another day under occupation.

Show me where the article says what time Palestinians fired rockets, otherwise move along.

[Behind the Aegis]

50. You need to move along. You have been shut down so many times and still...

...you continue to float down the Nile.

"The Palestinian Center for Human Rights (PCHR) reports further violations of the ceasefire, including the killing of Maher abu Rjaila, 23, shot in the chest by Israeli troops at 10.40 am Jan. 18 as he walked on his land east of Khan Younis city." Idealism post # 13

You present the above as the FIRST violation of the ceasefire.

A Palestinian civilian was killed by Israeli forces near the Gazan town of Khan Younis after mortar bombs were fired from the area, medical workers said. Behind the Aegis post # 17

"Kindly point me to where the MSM covers Palestinians?" :rofl:

[Idealism]

52. "further violations of the ceasefire" means "FIRST violation" to you! LOL

WOW You really can't read! Just because the Alternet article doesn't go in chronological order you can't understand it? Stunning ignorance! Keep digging yourself in a hole!

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[Behind the Aegis]

54. Your posts have gone beyond pathetic to indescribably ignorant.

Your ignorance and hate have so blinded you, your own sources are now getting mocked by you and you aren't even aware of it.

[Idealism]

56. You not being able to read, or jumping to conclusions, is somehow my fault? Sure pal.

You are doing a poor job of changing minds and winning hearts. I am still waiting to see "facts" that contradict PCHR reports...

[Behind the Aegis]

62. "I am still waiting to see "facts" that contradict PCHR reports... "

No you are not, they have already been provided. You don't like facts that support the Israeli narrative because your posts are so ingrained with anti-Israel bias and bigotry, any real facts cause you to move goal posts, change the subject, add red herrings, resort to ad homns and any number of sorted logical fallacies.

So, Israel broke the ceasefire? Which event was it?

[Idealism]

64. I just posted over a dozen instances of Palestinians coming under fire after the cease-fire

And you posted a Guardian article that said Palestinians fired rockets sometime "after" the cease-fire, with NO time frame provided. Great facts you rely on!

[Behind the Aegis]

66. And there was more than one example of Israel coming under fire.

Edit: grammar

[Idealism]

67. Of course, but that was after the Palestinians did. Thanks for admitting it!

That was all I wanted to make you realize, glad you could be civil about it.

[Behind the Aegis]

69. So, you can't prove Israel broke the ceasefire?

Must be nice to live in a world where you're always right and your opinions magically become facts.

[Idealism]

70. What does a "cease-fire" mean in your world?

"unilateral cease-fire" - what do you think that means?

[Behind the Aegis]

72. "ceasefire"

No longer firing.

[Idealism]

75. Very good. So when there is firing, it breaks the cease-fire yes?

[Behind the Aegis]

77. Do you know what a ceasefire is?

[Idealism]

79. It appears you do not.

What time did Palestinians fire rockets into Israel?

YNet says approximately 14:00, or 2:00 pm. Got any specific evidence otherwise?

[Behind the Aegis]

82. It appears you do not.

At least three rockets struck southern Israel after Hamas said it was halting attacks, Israeli police said.

Sunday 18 January 2009 16.55 GMT The Guardian

ETA: I will ask again. When did Israel break the ceasefire? What event?

[Idealism]

84. 16.55 GMT= 4:55pm.

Northern Gaza Strip

At approximately 15:40, the IOF artillery shelled houses near al-Juron Square in Jabalya. Two houses belonging to Ahmed Mohammed Saleh and Marwan Mohammed Shihada were hit by shells. As a result, 3 children living in the two houses were killed:

Fawzia Fawaz Saleh, 2;

Ahmed Fawaz Saleh, 10; and

Anwar Mohammed Shihada, 15.

At approximately 16:00, an IOF drone fired a missile at a number of Palestinian civilians in al-Zarqaa' area, south of Jabalya. As a result, a man and his son were killed: Na'im Mohammed Shihada, 50; and his son Mohammed, 30.

At approximately 08:30, an IOF drone fired two missiles at a number of Palestinian civilians in al-Amal quarter in the east of Beit Hanoun. As a result, a woman and a child were seriously wounded. The child, 11-year-old Angham Ra'fat al-Masri, died of her wound later. The woman's leg was amputated.

At approximately 10:00, IOF gunboats bombarded the headquarters of the Palestinian General Intelligence (the Ship).

Central Gaza Strip

In the morning, IOF troops opened fire at Wadi al-Salqa village, southeast of Deir al-Balah. Palestinian civilians who had fled their homes during the IOF offensive on the Gaza Strip have not been able to come back to their houses in the village.

Khan Yunis

At approximately 10:40, IOF troops positioned at the border between the Gaza Strip and Israel opened fire at Palestinian civilians who were checking their homes and agricultural land following the declaration of the ceasefire. As a result, Maher 'Abdul 'Azim Abu Rjaila, 23, was killed by a gunshot to the chest and shrapnel to the limbs.



All of these incidents happened prior to 16.55 GMT, but after 02.00 when the cease-fire was to take effect.

[Behind the Aegis]

87. Very good!

Still didn't answer the questions. Guess you know the truth now.

[Idealism]

89. Sorry, had to edit the post.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=124&topic_id=264026&mesg_id=264150

As it is obvious that you don't understand what 16.55=4:55pm means.

[Behind the Aegis]

92. And yet...

The first incident since the ceasefire was recorded Sunday morning, when Palestinian gunmen opened fire at Israel Defense Forces soldiers in the northern Gaza Strip, about six hours after the unilateral ceasefire declared by Israel took effect. Ynet

02:00 + 6 hours = 08:00

On edit: It is obvious you don't understand ceasefire at all. As for the time, I was well aware of what it was. I grew up in the military. You obviously missed the point, but I shouldn't be surprised.

[Idealism]

94. Ahh, Ynet. They have not taken over the Guardian as all-knowing, eh?

But I thought the Guardian article was infallible?

YNet still claims the white phosphorous hoax, why am I not surprised?

Can YNet name the IDF troops who fired at these supposed gunmen "about six hours after?" Why is it when I click on the hyperlink to more about that "six hour later, gunmen" story, it is missing? Uh oh... holes showing up here... try for yourself and see what happens.

http://www.ynetnews.com/english/articles/0,7340,L-3657857,00.html

404 Object Not Found


I can't find this incident mentioned on Haaretz or JPost, odd how YNet is the only one to post this claim, then the hyperlink to the "story" is broken.

[Behind the Aegis]

96. So, you still can't admit you are flat out wrong?

Sad. All you have are pathetic strawmen and half-truths.

[Idealism]

97. All Ynet has is an unsubstantiated, dubious, and not repeated by other outlets claim.

Surely they can provide a backup to the story?

Why is the link broken to that incident? Is that Ynets way of retracting unsubstantiated claims?

[Behind the Aegis]

99. And yet you have nothing to the contrary.

I don't work for YNet so I have no clue why the link is broken.

[Idealism]

100. Odd how the story is backed up by claims of another Ynet story.

Then that story is subsequently unavailable. Given the nature of the "about six hours" and unnamed Palestinian gunmen being engaged by unnamed IDF soldiers and in inexact time, coupled with YNets known lack of factual reporting, I have my doubts sir.

[Behind the Aegis]

103. Of course you have your doubts, it destroys your anti-Israel propaganda...

...namely, Israel broke the ceasefire. All you have shown are Israeli attacks after the ceasefire, yet nothing of the actual event. However, in your mind, this is "proof" Israel broke the ceasefire, when, in fact, all it proves is that Israel fired after the ceasefire. Do you understand the difference?

[Idealism]

104. Where is further evidence of this dubious claim then?

Instead of attacking me as an anti-Israel propagandist how about you check the validity of your own claim? No? Can't offer anything but a broken hyperlink from a known questionable source? That is not substantial evidence.

[Behind the Aegis]

107. Where is your proof?

You claimed Israel was the first to break the ceasefire; you fail to prove it, then when actual proof is shown, you demand more proof. The only one lacking evidence here is YOU!

[Idealism]

109. A broken hyperlink is not proof, sorry.

One site talking about an incident, then reinforcing the claim with their own shabby reporting, then subsequently taking the story down is NOT proof.

I have cited two sources that show the same event, where is your second source? Where is your FIRST reputable source?

[Behind the Aegis]

111. Sorry, but it was in an article.

It is just the continuation of that story wasn't found.

You still have failed to prove Israel broke the ceasefire first. Not unexpected.

[Idealism]

114. It was the "story" not some continuation of it.

[Behind the Aegis]

116. ....now what?

Exchanges of fire reported in northern Gaza


About six hours after unilateral ceasefire takes effect, Palestinian gunmen open fire at IDF forces, who fire back. About 170 trucks carrying fuel, food and medicines to enter Strip through border terminals Sunday

Ali Waked Published: 01.18.09, 08:31 / Israel News

First incident since ceasefire: Palestinian gunmen opened fire at Israel Defense Forces soldiers in the northern Gaza Strip on Sunday morning, about six hours after the unilateral ceasefire declared by Israel took effect. The soldiers fired back.

During the incident, which took place near the Sajaiyeh neighborhood, two gunmen fired a mortar shell and fired from small arms towards an armored force. The two were spotted by an Air Force chopper and a tank which attacked them with shells. One of the gunmen was killed and the other was injured. There were no injuries among the soldiers.

The IDF stressed that the gunmen were attacked after firing on the soldiers, and that this was not an offensive measure.


http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3657857,00.html

[Idealism]

118. Thank you for proving your only source to be fabricated!

There were no Palestinian deaths until 10.40 GMT.

[Behind the Aegis]

121. LOL!

Not according to your source.

You wouldn't know proof if it sat on your face!

Now, prove Israel broke the ceasefire first or admit you are doing nothing more than spreading false anti-Israel propaganda.

[Idealism]

122. I have 3 sources saying your one source is wrong.

Where are your multitude of sources to prove your own claim? You know, the dubious claim by a website known for credibility problems? The one that gets refuted by all of my sources?

Why can't you find anything but YNet backing up their own story?

[Behind the Aegis]

124. And yet, you still can't prove your bullshit allegation.

Pity.

"the dubious claim by a website known for credibility problems?" Unlike the PCHR. :eyes:

[Idealism]

126. Odd how the PCHR can document exact names, ages, time of death, and location

Yet your sources can't, but its the PCHR who has credibility problems?

The PCHR didn't claim Palestinian fired a white phosphorous projectile into Israel, YNet did. :eyes:

[Behind the Aegis]

128. Deflection. I guess it is all you have left.

Sad: Israel broke the ceasefire first -- only in the minds of those proficient in anti-Israel propaganda.

[Idealism]

130. They broke the cease-fire at 8:30am.

Your source that claims otherwise has been refuted. Care to provide me with a different source?

[Behind the Aegis]

132. Where?

You have now established a time, care to place it?

[Idealism]

134. When one of their drones dropped missiles.

time: 8:30
place: northern gaza strip, east Being Hanoun, al-Amal quarter.

[Behind the Aegis]

137. You mean after the 17 rockets?

You do know that after being fired upon, returning fire is not breaking the ceasefire first, except in your mind.

[Idealism]

139. Place the rocket attacks.

Whats the approximate time?
Where were they fired from?
Where did they land?

[Behind the Aegis]

141. Un-fucking-believable!

An actual news source and you want the who, what, when. Get a job with The Guardian or complain. This "discussion" is over. You are nothing more than an anti-Israel propagandist and this is exemplified by your use of anti-Israel propaganda and dismissing actual news sources. Your hate-inspired posts will continue as will those who will combat your ignorant remarks.

[Idealism]

143. I can tell you down to the minute, the full name of people hurt and killed, and where.

Why can you not with your omnipotent source?

What anti-Israel propaganda do you speak of? A HUMAN RIGHTS group? Do you imply that Israel does not harm Palestinians, and that their need for PCHR is unfounded?

Your refusal to see the myopia you suffer from is ironic, given how often you criticize others of the same. You are nothing more than an apologist for war crimes and the occupation.

[Behind the Aegis]

144. And you are an anti-Israel propagandist who needs no facts...

...only the fantasy that Israel is always wrong.

[Idealism]

146. Nope, I don't think Israel was wrong to act against Hamas.

I think their implementation of it was wrong. But forget I said wrote this if it harms your narrative of me being an anti-Israeli propagandist :eyes:

[Behind the Aegis]

148. Too little too late.

And it doesn't change what type of posts with which you befoul this site.

[Idealism]

149. Talk about ad-homs! You found another source yet?

Considering your Ynet one got destroyed time and time again?

[Behind the Aegis]

150. Only in your mind and we know why that is.

[Idealism]

152. Sure, chalk it up the anti-Israeli propaganda every time Israel is wrong.

Can they do no ill in your eyes? I have yet to see a statement to say otherwise out of you.

[shira]

158. Here's JPost.......Palestinians broke ceasefire first

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1232292915656&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

Violence marred the cease-fire in the Gaza Strip on Tuesday as Hamas gunmen fired mortar shells into Israel and opened fire on IDF troops who remained inside the Palestinian territory.

In the afternoon, IAF aircraft bombed a mortar launcher in the Gaza Strip that had been used hours earlier to fire some eight mortar shells into the Negev. It was the first air strike against Gaza since Israel unilaterally implemented a cease-fire there on Sunday.

Earlier in the day, Gaza gunmen fired at IDF patrols in two separate incidents that marked the first violations of the cease-fire Hamas accepted on Sunday after the IDF began withdrawing its forces from Gaza.

=======================================

[shira]

159. and here's Haaretz

http://haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1057066.html

The Israel Air Force on Tuesday evening bombed a target in the Gaza Strip used earlier in the day Palestinian militants to fire eight mortar shells at Israel.

Militants on Tuesday also opened fire at Israel Defense Forces soldiers in Gaza in two separate incidents, in the first violation of a shaky cease-fire in the coastal strip that ended Israel's 3-week offensive against Hamas.

[Idealism]

168. Tuesday. The cease-fire started Sunday.

The first violation was Sunday the 18th. This report may be the first "accepted" from Hamas, but this was after the first Palestinian death.

[pelsar]

12. the relevance?

you wrote very clearly (dont try changing the "goal posts") that maybe if israel tried......a, b, c, then maybe the hamas and friends would stop shooting...history has shown that up until now its not true

whats difficult here to understand, the history is only a few years old....

and PLEASE try to be accurate..i know to much to fall for simplistic propaganda...its just tiresome to have to read and correct you constantly

Ceasefire violations are not new. During the six-month ceasefire that began Jun. 19, ceasefire? June 19?....seems you already forgot that it wasnt a ceasefire and that hamas called off the lull

any particular reason you forget these "little facts?..other than it ruins your preferred narrative of making israel the evil one? (if your going to write it, try to write it to the Palestinian cheerleaders, they'll accept it at its face value and not wonder if its accurate or not)

[Idealism]

14. Do you not realize that was part of the article?

Reading comprehension is a bit tough, I understand, but do try to at least realize when my words end and the article begins.

Either way, your continued deflection of calling it a "lull," meaning it is okay for Israel to kill Palestinians during the time, is repugnant. Whatever you wish to call it, deaths are not okay- even during a "lull."

History has not shown this to be true, because Israel has never tried these things in conjunction, and barely tried one or two items separately.

I do like how you rant on about me "forgetting facts" when I didn't even write the article. Keep resorting to ad-hom attacks over semantics such as the different between "lull" or "cease-fire"- especially when Israeli media as well as Western media call it a cease-fire. Even Israeli politicians called it that. So you trying to obfuscate here is particularly rich.

[pelsar]

19. if you disagree with the article you post....

then mention it...

being accurate for some may be troublesome i.e. calling it a deflection/semantics but thats when accuracy doesnt fit the preferred narrative. I prefer accuracy at all times.

so semantics and accuracy are bothersome to you....so why is accuracy a problem?


and that history? i realize your a bit weak on it, so I'll help:

_________
jan, feb march 2007

http://www.phrmg.org/aqsa/fatalities_list.htm
you will notice a single israeli attack in gaza

kassams landing in israel were also very few.....
jan 5 3 kassams

borders opened as well
(this appears to be a good list....http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Qassam_rocket_attacks)

and then for reasons that are hamas and friends, they decided ( as in ending the lull) to send over a barrage

and the israeli response came afterwards.....
May 15, 2007
After more than 200 Qassam rocket attacks, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Defense Minister Amir Peretz respond with airstrikes.

_______

it was hamas that decided the trying to kill israelis was simply more important that living peacefully with israel as they also decided in dec 2008 ...nothing more than facts

[Idealism]

21. Why did 22 Palestinians die before "Hamas decided" to end the agreement?

And why does that not matter in your mind?

[pelsar]

23. because Hamas didnt mention it...

and it was their agreement....not yours....they decided, as they mentioned, not to continue it because of the borders not being open enough..but this was explained to you previously.

now that i've answered your question, you can answer mine.

why do you think you know more than hamas as to why hamas decided not to continue the agreement?

[Idealism]

27. I don't know what you are insinuating, but try to tone the irrationality down

Hamas was hemming and hawing about whether to renew the June 19th deal, and ultimately they did offer it back to Israel right before the contract was about to expire, but Israel turned them down because of numerous reason. Rocket fire played a role, but so did the elections I believe, as Israel was planning OCL for months.

I didn't claim knowledge of why Hamas does the things they do, but they were willing at the end to continue the agreement according to a few sources I read. If I were to venture a guess as to why they rejected the idea then welcomed it, I would say it was about negotiations. They incorrectly thought that if they acted like they were unhappy with the lack of adherence to the June 19th rules for the lull, perhaps if they threatened to not renew, that the Israeli government would turn into doves rather than go to war, and negotiate a better deal. Obviously this was miscalculated, but I can understand why this was perhaps the thought. Surely we can both agree and understand the political maneuvering of something like that

[pelsar]

39. there is no way your going to understand hamas reasoning...

you've shown time and time again that your reasoning is based on limited knowledge of not just the facts, but of the culture as well....

here you almost got it right...and then reverted back..

I didn't claim knowledge of why Hamas does the things they do, .......... They incorrectly thought ......

stick with the first part......its not only more accurate, but you might gain a respect for other non western cultures as well......

________

i read and hear "experts" on hamas constantly and they are never sure of the political maneuverings of hamas due to the complexity of their organization, the influence syrian hamas and hizaballa and iran....reading an english paper translated from hebrew (haaretz) is very limited.

[Idealism]

41. What reason do you think they had?

Legitimate or not, why do you think Hamas rejected the renewal then initiated a half-ass commitment to renewal?

[pelsar]

154. i wont even go there......to figure them out

not only does hamas have different sections, where some want to work with israel and have open borders, and others dont...there are also now in gaza additional groups who are even more extreme than hamas (having a young population with little work, and limited options serves as a strong driving force for extremism). Hamas has to deal with them as well, not to mention elements of Al quida, islamic Jihad and fatah still trying to prove themselves...on top of that you have the smugglers (and their clan)....those groups are not interested in a cease fire with israel, it ruins their "ideology" and for the smugglers a way to make a living.

Perhaps hamas is trying to avoid its own civil war?....perhaps they're trying to "talk them down" (as i understand they are doing with Islamic Jihad) and have to let them shoot now and then....perhaps iran who is paying for every kassam launched has turned in to a "cash cow"

there are a zillion different reasons and much of the results are based on internal politics from people who i have no idea who they are with a culture that is not my own. Its foolish to pretend one can understand their motives for any specific action, which is why when a western country meddles in their affairs, the outcome will never be as planned.

that is lesson no 1: western culture "white man" playing politics in the middle east"...never assume you understand the motives for what they are doing.

[shira]

2. Ishmael Khaldi. Bedhouin Arab. Muslim. Proud Zionist. Beneficiary of "Apartheid".

article cont'd...

You are part of the problem, not part of the solution: If you are really idealistic and committed to a better world, stop with the false rhetoric. We need moderate people to come together in good faith to help find the path to relieve the human suffering on both sides of the Israel-Palestinian conflict. Vilification and false labeling is a blind alley that is unjust and takes us nowhere.

You deny Israel the fundamental right of every society to defend itself: You condemn Israel for building a security barrier to protect its citizens from suicide bombers and for striking at buildings from which missiles are launched at its cities - but you never offer an alternative. Aren't you practicing yourself a deep form of racism by denying an entire society the right to defend itself?

Your criticism is willfully hypocritical: Do Israel's Arab citizens suffer from disadvantage? You better believe it. Do African Americans 10 minutes from the Berkeley campus suffer from disadvantage - you better believe it, too. So should we launch a Berkeley Apartheid Week, or should we seek real ways to better our societies and make opportunity more available.

You are betraying the moderate Muslims and Jews who are working to achieve peace: Your radicalism is undermining the forces for peace in Israel and in the Palestinian territories. We are working hard to move toward a peace agreement that recognizes the legitimate rights of both Israel and the Palestinian people, and you are tearing down by falsely vilifying one side.

To the organizers of Israel Apartheid Week I would like to say:

If Israel were an apartheid state, I would not have been appointed here, nor would I have chosen to take upon myself this duty. There are many Arabs, both within Israel and in the Palestinian territories who have taken great courage to walk the path of peace. You should stand with us, rather than against us.

[damntexdem]

5. There were Black apologists for South African apartheid, too.

Unequal treatment is clear in Israel; and the oppression of Palestinians not considered Israeli citizens is horrible and well-documented. Yes, there are blowhards on the pro-Palestinian side; but the major blame, and hateful ideology, comes from the Israeli side.

[ProgressiveMuslim]

60. Try finding a Palestian nationalist who does NOT support BDS.

[pelsar]

157. maybe hes not a racist?

and prefers an imperfect democracy to what the other options are in the region...including what the PA and hamas have to offer.

Perhaps he prefers a country that has civil rights as its base as opposed to bring ruled by those who are genetically closer to his ancestors and have little use for civil rights?

[azurnoir]

6. Mr Khaldi is luckly enough to not be from the

negev region of Israel and is indeed from the Galilee he also seems to have learned the advantage in playing along and indeed has served in IDF, however Bedouins from southern Israel are not so luckly something Mr Khaldi is "oddly" silent on

Israel: End Systematic Bias Against Bedouin
Stop Demolishing Homes, Remedy Discriminatory Land Allocation

JERUSALEM - March 31 - Israel should declare an immediate moratorium on demolitions of Bedouin homes and create an independent commission to investigate pervasive land and housing discrimination against its Bedouin citizens in the Negev, Human Rights Watch said in a new report released today.

The 130-page report, “Off the Map: Land and Housing Rights Violations in Israel’s Unrecognized Bedouin Villages,” documents how discriminatory Israeli laws and practices force tens of thousands of Bedouin in the south of Israel to live in “unrecognized” shanty towns where they are under constant threat of seeing their homes demolished and their communities torn apart.

http://www.commondreams.org/news2008/0331-07.htm

why Mr Khaldi could become the Juan Williams of the Israeli Arab world

[bemildred]

16. Mr Khaldi is all about Mr Khaldi, that seems pretty clear.

http://www.ishmaelkhaldi.com/

That his name is Ishmael is sort of interesting in a literary way. "Call me Ishmael."

[shira]

37. pathetic zionist, isn't he?

[bemildred]

38. Is that a rhetorical question?

I expect he is a "When in Rome do as the Romans do" sort of person. I don't begrudge him for getting ahead in his life, but he could have had the decency to not belabor the rest of us with his shallow rationalizations for his self-advancement.

[pelsar]

156. or perhaps....

hes look around at the world and prefers living within an imperfect democracy as opposed to what his neighbors live in (knowing full well the treatment "his kind" gets under arab rule),

Rather than "shallow rationalization" i would call it intelligent choice based on real world realities. Perhaps for some the concept of being ruled by ones own genetic cousins is not the "highest goal" but living in a country thats based in civil rights is.

[bemildred]

160. Bah. I wasn't questioning his choices.

I was questioning the shallow propaganda he spouts to justify them. Self interest is more than enough to explain him and his actions. If Israel is such a wonderful haven of human rights and modernism, it is hard to explain why so few who do not live there share that view of it.

[pelsar]

162. your questioning his values.....

If Israel is such a wonderful haven of human rights and modernism, it is hard to explain why so few who do not live there share that view of it.

the question you should be asking, but obviously prefer not to, is why those who do have choices of living in israel or with its neighbors prefer israel....or why when polled arab israelis overwhelming prefer israel, no matter how many times they protest israeli govt policies......

its not hard to explain......its a solid value to prefer an imperfect democracy over a dictatorship, especially when in those dictatorship ones genetic makeup will not be looked upon as being equal.
___

but i always find it interesting here: for reasons unclear, in this DU, ruling by a similar genetic makeup is considered more important the an imperfect democracy.... why is that?

and as you so clearly point out.....anyone who prefers civil rights oriented govt to one based on genes.....is somehow considered "wrong"

[bemildred]

163. There is no mystery about why they prefer to live in Israel.

Israel is rich and they are poor, there are jobs in Israel. And Israel does not bomb itself much. It is much like the reason that Latin Americans come to the USA, or used to, they seem to be staying home more since our economy tanked.

I don't understand why you are fixated on peoples "genetic makeup" here, it's my understanding that all of the people in the region are much alike in that regard, the differences are cultural and religious.

[pelsar]

164. you were clear....

decency to not belabor the rest of us with his shallow rationalizations for his self-advancement.

you made the assumption that its not that he sees democracy as a value, as a society to raise his family with western democratic values, its that he is concerned with survival.....

i disagree: its clear he has looked around and prefers western democratic values as opposed to the various alternatives and as such his choice and advancement in israel should be celebrated by all those who prefer western democratic values and he should be wished good luck in further influencing the israeli govt to advance other minorities....

he has decided to be an active participant and to stand out as a minority who has influence and standing in israel..that should be celebrated and praised with hopes for more.....

pathetically i dont see that here

[bemildred]

165. So we disagree about his motives. Big deal.

I think he is motivated by self interest, and you think he is motivated by a high-minded affection for "western democratic values", whatever that is. Naturally, not believing in the noble selfless idealism of his motives, I do not praise them either. So sue me.

[pelsar]

166. actually i have no ideas about his motives....

i dont know him...and i doubt you do either.....i just figured if you can make up stuff about him i might as well do the same....

----seems there is lot of that in this forum...making up stuff.

[bemildred]

167. Indeed. nt

[azurnoir]

155. Wonder what his whales name is n/t

[bemildred]

161. Moby Arik?

No, that doesn't really work. We should probably leave Melville out of it. But Ishmael in Genesis is the outsider, the outcast, sort of, that works. That is why Melville chose that name, I think. Melville felt like an outsider too, I think, and he knew his Bible. And it is a good name for a man with bedouin origins, the original and consummate outsiders.

[Ken Burch]

169. Moby Schmuck?

(sorry, couldn't resist)

[Jefferson23]

40. Khaldi, "As a shepherd I learned to give in.

A shepherd is ultimately responsible for bringing the goats in from the pasture, and he
must give his all and give in. That’s the way it is in diplomacy, too:" http://www.gogalil.com/ish.html

I couldn't help but wonder, what exactly, if anything, does he believe Israel should give in to for peace.

[ProgressiveMuslim]

59. Ew. Border police are the worst of the worst!

[IndianaGreen]

113. The Fifth Annual Israeli Apartheid Week March 1 - 8, 2009

The Fifth Annual Israeli Apartheid Week March 1 - 8, 2009

Mark your calendars - the 5th Annual Israeli Apartheid Week will take place across the globe from March 1-8, 2009!

First launched in Toronto in 2005, IAW has grown to become one of the most important global events in the Palestine solidarity calendar. Last year, more than 25 cities around the world participated in the week's activities, which also commemorated 60 years since the expulsion of the Palestinian people from their homes and land in 1947-1948. IAW 2008 was launched with a live broadcast from the South African township of Soweto by Palestinian leader and former member of the Israeli Knesset, Azmi Bishara.

This year, IAW occurs in the wake of Israel's barbaric assault against the people of Gaza. Lectures, films, and actions will make the point that these latest massacres further confirm the true nature of Israeli Apartheid. IAW 2009 will continue to build and strengthen the growing Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement at a global level.

http://apartheidweek.org/

History of Israeli Apartheid Week

Israeli Apartheid Week (IAW) is an international series of events held in cities and campuses across the globe. IAW will be running for the fifth consecutive year in 2009, with events taking place between March 1-8 all over the world. The week’s events will include lectures, multimedia events, cultural performance, film screenings, demonstrations, and more.

The past few years have seen a sharp increase of literature and analysis that has sought to document and challenge Israeli apartheid, including reports issued by major international bodies and human rights organizations and findings published by political leaders, thinkers, academics, and activists. Many of these efforts have highlighted the role that could be played by people and governments across the world in providing solidarity with the Palestinian struggle by exerting urgent pressure on Israel to alter its current structure and practices as an apartheid state.

Prominent Palestinians, Jewish anti-Zionists, and South Africans have been at the forefront of this struggle. At the same time, an international divestment campaign has gained momentum in response to a statement issued in July 2005 by over 170 Palestinian civil society organizations calling for boycotts, divestments and sanctions (BDS) against apartheid Israel . Important gains have recently been made in this campaign in countries like South Africa , the United Kingdom , Canada and the United States .

The aim of IAW is to contribute to this chorus of international opposition to Israeli apartheid and to bolster support for the BDS campaign in accordance with the demands outlined in the July 2005 Statement: full equality for Arab-Palestinian citizens of Israel, an end to the occupation and colonization of all Arab lands – including the Golan Heights, the Occupied West Bank with East Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip – and dismantling the Wall, and the protection of Palestinian refugees’ right to return to their homes and properties as stipulated in U.N. resolution 194.

In previous years IAW has played an important role in raising awareness and disseminating information about Zionism, the Palestinian liberation struggle and its similarities with the indigenous sovereignty struggle in North America and the South African anti-Apartheid movement. Join us in making this a year of struggle against apartheid and for justice, equality, and peace.

http://apartheidweek.org/en/history

[iconicgnom]

153. heh. Israel has to get " the highest-ranking Muslim" to defend itself.

How the fuck can anyone contradict "the highest-ranking Muslim" in Israel?

:loveya: This is laughable. :loveya: