The Haifa District Court on Tuesday ruled against the family of Rachel Corrie, the American pro-Palestinian activist struck and killed by a bulldozer in Gaza.
In the verdict, Judge Oded Gershon invoked the principle of the combatant activities exception, noting that IDF forces had been attacked in the same area Corrie was killed just hours earlier.
Corrie, 23, from Olympia, Washington, died in Rafah, in the southern Gaza Strip, on March 16, 2003, when an IDF bulldozer struck her during a protest by pro-Palestinian group the International Solidarity Movement.
NBC is reporting the story here. What's scary is that most of the comments are anti-Israel and anti-Jewish, with people not caring that Ms. Corrie was fomenting terrorism.
Craig and Cindy lost a child. That is a tragedy for them. However she brought about her own demise through reckless self-endangerment. They are not going to get an apology or a settlement.
In the verdict, Judge Oded Gershon invoked the principle of the combatant activities exception, noting that IDF forces had been attacked in the same area Corrie was killed just hours earlier.
So she was killed by a combat bulldozer?
By the way, pulling down houses in Gaza as a collective punishment and collective punishment is a war crime.
NBC is reporting the story here. What's scary is that most of the comments are anti-Israel and anti-Jewish, with people not caring that Ms. Corrie was fomenting terrorism.
Is that photo on the page one of those faux "Rachel Corrie was here" photos that were debunked "re-enactments"?
She was working with Palestinians who were busy operating smuggling tunnels, and she put herself in a position where the driver of the bulldozer could not see her. But for her own actions, she would not have died.
The military was doing what it had to do to protect Israeli citizens from further terror attacks. You'd rather blame Israel for protecting its own citizens rather than Corrie who was busy protecting terrorists operating in Gaza.
She was working with Palestinians who were busy operating smuggling tunnels, and she put herself in a position where the driver of the bulldozer could not see her. But for her own actions, she would not have died.
The military was doing what it had to do to protect Israeli citizens from further terror attacks. You'd rather blame Israel for protecting its own citizens rather than Corrie who was busy protecting terrorists operating in Gaza.
Collective punishment is a war crime. Both sides in this conflict have been faulted for war crimes.
Hamas calls for Israel's extermination. Echoing the same calls by Iran, Hizbullah, and other Islamic terror groups. Palestinians routinely claim that Israel's existence is a naqba - a disaster for them, ignoring that Palestinians have had multiple chances to make peace with Israel but haven't even had the courtesy of a counter proposal and that Israel's statehood could have been accompanied by a Palestinian state had their fellow Arabs not thwarted that effort and kept them in a state of misery ever since (refusing to grant Palestinians citizenship in countries where they sought refuge - including Transjordan, which was carved away from Palestine and which captured the West Bank for its own until Israel wrested control in 1967.
Israel has every right to defend itself against terrorists, who operate from within civilian areas. Israel takes great pains to prevent the loss of life to civilians on both sides.
The same can't be said of Hamas or the other terror groups - PRCs, Islamic Jihad, etc. Those terror groups purposefully put their terror operations (tunnels, weapons/bomb factories, kassam launchers, in civilian areas so as to maximize the casualties.
If civilians die in Gaza as a result of Israel defending itself, the fault resides with those terrorists who openly flaunt international law and human rights.
But for the terrorists operating in such a manner, Israel would not have to carry out military operations against those terror groups. Israel withdrew from Gaza in 2005 and left it to its own devices. Instead of using the opportunity to create a vibrant state, the Palestinians destroyed those chances by turning Gaza into a terror state - launching thousands of kassams, mortars, and grad rockets against Israel - and continue doing so to this day. Israel's restraint in going after those responsible for those attacks has been amazing. No other country in the world would endure rockets on a near daily basis without carrying out massive attacks against those responsible.
If only you were as serious about enforcing human rights against the Palestinians as you are about Israel.
Sigh. There's no hope for The Middle East. You are either on one side or the other. There is and can be no nuance. Those on the other side must die and no pity shall be spared for them.
It is not the Israelis who have promised genocide for decades.
To put matters in context, the Palestinians have been the biggest victims of their leadership's dysfunction. They are responsible for teaching this hate for a very long time and the result is evident.
Imagine a school that gave each student a glass of alcohol every day. Each day, beginning at tender nursery school age, the child was encouraged to drink the beverage that would come to poison his mind. Suppose that beverage was from the well aged bottle of anti Semitism.
Suppose once that glass of alcohol was consumed by young dutiful children, the glass was immediately refilled with the beverage from the bottle of anti western and anti democratic values.
After decades, these children, now adults, go home every day, turn on the television and read the newspapers- and they are fed more alcohol. They get more when their kids come home from school, and share the same familiar poisoned ‘fire water.’ They poison they are fed gets the God’s seal of approval when fed to them from the pulpit- or so they desperately need to believe. (When the state pays the clerics, is any wonder the clerics parrot the state?)
Of course, to keep a drunk or a junkie hooked, it takes an ever increasing amount of poison to induce the same stupor that blinds the drunk or the junkie to his own surroundings and dysfunction. The supply of poison never ends.
After years of such ‘education,’ it would be reasonable to expect that there would be a lot of alcoholics in the PA and the Arab world, poisoned by the hate and ideologies of dysfunctional and corrupt leaders. Like alcoholics and substance abusers, they will tell you they ‘have it under control‘ and that they ‘can quit anytime they want.‘ They are blind to their own dysfunction, they are blind to their own deceit and remain so by embracing hate.
First. To blame Caterpillar Inc. is as Kragar mentioned last night, like blaming Boeing for the 3,000 people that were murdered on 9/11.
Second. Even if the judge ruled in Corrie's family favor the Jew haters would still be doing their mental genuflecting.
There will be a heightened level of Antisemitism, Anti-Israelism, and general ignorance (such as the Caterpillar meme) for the next couple of days.
SNAFU
As for the Obama administration I hope they have the wherewithal to keep their mouths shut.
I'd be less cynical if the same people who want to boycott Caterpillar would also call for the boycott of Microsoft, Dell, Epson, et al, because their products were used to produce, disseminate and coordinate some of the most vicious and provocative hate and violence anywhere- hate and violence that has resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands, maybe millions- throughout the world.
I'd be less cynical if the same people who want to boycott Caterpillar would also call for the boycott of Microsoft, Dell, Epson, et al, because their products were used to produce, disseminate and coordinate some of the most vicious and provocative hate and violence anywhere- hate and violence that has resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands, maybe millions- throughout the world.
The response from the boycotters? Crickets
We should boycott Ford for all the drunk driving accident that involve Ford!
NBC is reporting the story here. What's scary is that most of the comments are anti-Israel and anti-Jewish, with people not caring that Ms. Corrie was fomenting terrorism.
Lots of hate going on at DKos and HuffPo too. They can't seem to help themselves. Unfortunately haters like Destro and others will always be around.
I'll believe that anarchism make sense when I see a medically fragile 80 year old woman say she believes in it.
Surprisingly, anarchists are usually strong young men (and sometimes women) who don't feel the need to be protected by the law. Those that know that if it came down to "might makes right," they are going to be in a pickle usually are in favor of laws and policemen.
Lots of hate going on at DKos and HuffPo too. They can't seem to help themselves. Unfortunately haters like Destro and others will always be around.
If I am to accept the concept of nation states I would hope for a 2 state solution. - though I tend to hate all states - I hate the Israeli occupation of Gaza (and now the blockade) and the West Bank and the encroaching settlements by a more powerful people against a weaker people.
I hate Palestinian islamism that makes things worse for the Palestinian people (at least a large chunk of Israelis are secular) and I hate Americans who feel it's OK to hate one group over an other and cheer their deaths.
Sometimes I have to wonder, you people do know Israelis have killed more Palestinians than the other way around, right?
It's like the old West, American settlers always feared Indian raids but in reality more Indians died at the hands of settlers than the other way around. So who was really under threat?
Not really germane, since we veto any attempt in the UN to investigate alleged Israeli warcrimes (like use of white phosphorus against civilian targets, complicity with the massacre of Muslim civilians by Christian militias in Palestine back in the early 80's)
I am convinced that Israeli armed forces have committed serious breaches of the Geneva Conventions and the Laws of land Warfare. Just for the record, I know for a fact the we (the US) have done so as well. It happens in every war. War, by its very nature, brings out inhumanity and barbarism and no human being that ever lived is entirely immune from the effects, IMO.
I also think that Israel has done a fairly decent job of investigating and prosecuting individual soldiers who commit crimes, but tends to shrug off accusations of systemic culpability (decisions to destroy entire neighborhoods IE "collective punishment" and the use of white phosphorus)
Unfortunately, we are pretty damned guilty of that as well...as are Great Britain and many other countries (especially see the role of the British Army in the the North Ireland "troubles". Torture, killings of innocent civilians, sexualized torture)
France sure has no room to talk. Just mention "Algeria".
I would argue that this is the kind of soft logic that eventually leads to The King's Torah where the racist Shapira argues that it's alright to kill non-jewish children if there is an assumption that a child will grow up to become an enemy of the Jewish people.
It also completely discounts the chance for any sort of popular (ie non-governemental) reconciliation between Israelis and Palestinians; they've all been poisoned, them a-rabs, so there's no reasoning with them. But reconciliation is happening at the grassroots level across Palestine/Israel.
Outside of the fact that it's been published, what kind of authority do you think the King's Torah has in Halachic rulings?
Speaking of soft logic, and this is a generous term for this juxtaposition--
It also completely discounts the chance for any sort of popular (ie non-governemental) reconciliation between Israelis and Palestinians; they've all been poisoned, them a-rabs, so there's no reasoning with them.But reconciliation is happening at the grassroots level across Palestine/Israel.
Aren't you just belligerently agreeing with researchok's point?
I think you're referring to the Sabra and Shatilla massacres that were in Lebanon during the Israeli occupation of Southern Lebanon, not within what was either Mandate Palestine or territories that now comprise Israel and the territories since 1948.
Not really germane, since we veto any attempt in the UN to investigate alleged Israeli warcrimes (like use of white phosphorus against civilian targets, complicity with the massacre of Muslim civilians by Christian militias in Palestine back in the early 80's)
I am convinced that Israeli armed forces have committed serious breaches of the Geneva Conventions and the Laws of land Warfare. Just for the record, I know for a fact the we (the US) have done so as well. It happens in every war. War, by its very nature, brings out inhumanity and barbarism and no human being that ever lived is entirely immune from the effects, IMO.
I also think that Israel has done a fairly decent job of investigating and prosecuting individual soldiers who commit crimes, but tends to shrug off accusations of systemic culpability (decisions to destroy entire neighborhoods IE "collective punishment" and the use of white phosphorus)
Unfortunately, we are pretty damned guilty of that as well...as are Great Britain and many other countries (especially see the role of the British Army in the the North Ireland "troubles". Torture, killings of innocent civilians, sexualized torture)
France sure has no room to talk. Just mention "Algeria".
This is bullshit. All this talk about how she's fostering terrorism by blocking a bulldozer?
Ask any construction foreman in the country and they'll tell you they don't drive heavy equipment around a site when there are people walking around. This was completely avoidable with a bit of due diligence.
Is it dangerous to walk around heavy equipment, yes. Should a driver of a 10 ton bulldozer ignore the fact that their are people walking around his job site? No.
Do I hear a single person "speaking for Israel" who actually seems to give a shit that a person died vs a chance to slam the other side? No.
This is bullshit. All this talk about how she's fostering terrorism by blocking a bulldozer?
Ask any construction foreman in the country and they'll tell you they don't drive heavy equipment around a site when there are people walking around. This was completely avoidable with a bit of due diligence.
Is it dangerous to walk around heavy equipment, yes. Should a driver of a 10 ton bulldozer ignore the fact that their are people walking around his job site? No.
Do I hear a single person "speaking for Israel" who actually seems to give a shit that a person died vs a chance to slam the other side? No.
This... is bullshit.
Do you think it might be possible that the driver didn't see her near the bulldozer? It is possible and true.
Well, here are some sad facts. First, if all of us speakers for Israel would be sitting in some nice pub, then you would indeed hear sadness and sympathy, for a girl who was essentially used by politicos all around her to take a position--based on hatred. That's a sad fact.
Second, those little Caterpillars, during the housing boom, were always at work in our neighborhood, surrounded by people--fellow workers. Us dog walkers knew to stay away. We wouldn't dare get close enough to try to stop their work. That's what she did. She tried to stop their work. She assumed that driver would see her. Personally, I would never make that assumption.
In the aftermath, she has become a symbol, not a human being to people who wish to annihilate the State of Israel. They care less about her than the hypothetical pub group.
So the subtext of all of this is that we're not even talking about Rachel Corrie.
There are some who take this court decision as further evidence that the State of Israel should not exist, and hence the present residents must somehow vanish (Jews know what this means), and there are many others who, quite frankly, really resent this position.
actually, they take more extreme positions that the government wouldn't touch. The fascist "rabbi" Shapira Dorshei Yihudcha yeshiva in the illegal West Bank settlement of Yitzhar receives more then 150 thousand dollars in 2007 (current figures I cannot find), and the settlement itself received more then a million. (I'm sure that he is teach peace and reconciliation in his schools...)
In America, we realize that people have an inflatable right to freedom of speech. One can for anything, what is important is the actions one take. The fact is that Hamas, Hezbollah, hell, even Iran doesn't have the ability to actually commit genocide on anyone. So let them call till there faces turn blue.
Do you think that if Travon Martin said to George Zimmerman "I think you should die, cracker" that gives George Zimmerman the right to shoot Travon Martin? That is pretty much what you are saying; a bunch of nutty chatter by the "leadership" gives Israel the right to bomb out of existence the palestinian population, because "there is no disproportionate response".
The question is, should one stop genocide though genocide?
But I am surprised at the reasoning. The facts are that she was not visible to the driver because she was sitting in front of the bulldozer, instead of standing. This much is proven not just by eyewitness accounts (& logic), but the fact that the driver stopped every time she stood in front of the bulldozer.
By the way, pulling down houses in Gaza as a collective punishment and collective punishment is a war crime.
By the way, this is a strawman. The house was being pulled down because the authorities had a reason to believe that was one of many arms-smuggling tunnels under it.
Hamas, Hezbollah, hell, even Iran doesn't have the ability to actually commit genocide on anyone
What was it that the revolutionary guards were doing in Iraq during the war and after? Quds force is in every country near Iran, and they cause a lot of needless death to keep Iran's neighbors destabilized.
Before I decided to take issue with this, you might want to footnote those figures. The gist of my argument would be, what's your point? You initially responded to a comment by researchok, by making a point with which you just disagreed.
He's also equating rocket fire, arms-smuggling tunnels & stated aims of total destruction (bolstered by instances of actual attacks that could only be considered deliberate murder - best example: the Fogel Family), with racial slurs & threats. Nice.
George Zimmerman is an individual. He is not the US government. Dr. Tiller's murderer was also not the US government. But Hamas is the duly elected government of the PA, &, as such, does, indeed, speak for them. I am the first to say just how hard it would be for any of them to actually speak out against it, but, the actions of their government give the rest of the world no real choice but to take them at their word.
What was it that the revolutionary guards were doing in Iraq during the war and after? Quds force is in every country near Iran, and they cause a lot of needless death to keep Iran's neighbors destabilized.
Decades of promising to 'Finish what Hitler started' and calls to 'Gas the Jews!' are pretty indicative of the results of institutionalized hate
Calls to genocide are a policy and ideology.
Deaths can come one at a one bullet or knife attack at a time, a busload at a time, a rocket at a time, a guided missile at a time or as a result of nuclear, biological or chemical attack.
Not really germane, since we veto any attempt in the UN to investigate alleged Israeli warcrimes (like use of white phosphorus against civilian targets,
Completely false.
Not only did the US do no such thing, the Red Cross (which even you would not dare to say is pro-Israel) was forced to admit that Israel was NOT "using WP against civilians" but only using it in the prescribed manner: lighting up military targets.
complicity with the massacre of Muslim civilians by Christian militias in Palestine back in the early 80's)
Dig deeper. That one is also a no-go; Sharon is being judged guilty for not knowing that Israel's allies would so something like that. That's petty at best.
I am convinced that Israeli armed forces have committed serious breaches of the Geneva Conventions and the Laws of land Warfare.
Yeah, I see that you are. Luckily, you are not an autocrat.
Just for the record, I know for a fact the we (the US) have done so as well. It happens in every war. War, by its very nature, brings out inhumanity and barbarism and no human being that ever lived is entirely immune from the effects, IMO.
I also think that Israel has done a fairly decent job of investigating and prosecuting individual soldiers who commit crimes, but tends to shrug off accusations of systemic culpability (decisions to destroy entire neighborhoods IE "collective punishment" and the use of white phosphorus)
As I shrug off accusations that I'm a lesbian when I speak up for gay rights, or a man-hater when I speak up for women's rights.
Unfortunately, we are pretty damned guilty of that as well...as are Great Britain and many other countries (especially see the role of the British Army in the the North Ireland "troubles". Torture, killings of innocent civilians, sexualized torture)
France sure has no room to talk. Just mention "Algeria".
It is nice to see that your condemnations are not all one-sided!!
Sometimes I have to wonder, you people do know Israelis have killed more Palestinians than the other way around, right?
Sometimes, I have to wonder: you do know that Israel is world-renowned in military circles for being a leader in minimizing civilian casualties, & that the only reason said casualties are so high is that Hamas makes sandbags & shields out of their women & children? That they BRAG about this?
It's like the old West, American settlers always feared Indian raids but in reality more Indians died at the hands of settlers than the other way around. So who was really under threat?
It's NOTHING like the Old West because Israel stole nothing! The administrators of the area gave Israel to the Jews, who asked all the locals to stay. 60% of them refused to listen & have been fighting ever since. False equivalencies aren't just irritating, they're dangerous.
I think you're referring to the Sabra and Shatilla massacres that were in Lebanon during the Israeli occupation of Southern Lebanon, not within what was either Mandate Palestine or territories that now comprise Israel and the territories since 1948.
Sometimes, I have to wonder: you do know that Israel is world-renowned in military circles for being a leader in minimizing civilian casualties, & that the only reason said casualties are so high is that Hamas makes sandbags & shields out of their women & children? That they BRAG about this?
It's NOTHING like the Old West because Israel stole nothing! The administrators of the area gave Israel to the Jews, who asked all the locals to stay. 60% of them refused to listen & have been fighting ever since. False equivalencies aren't just irritating, they're dangerous.
No, just rockets, guns, and suicide vests. They been able to kill plenty of Jews but still want more. For each suicide bombing the kids get to go out and pass around candy.
Actually, we block the investigations and the resolutions. To be sure, China and Russia play the same game when we try to investigate the bullshit that Hamas et al have been up to.
I would rather let the chips fall as they may and call out the bullshit from all sides involved: Racist (IMO) Israeli policies that are self destructive and drive Palestinians into the opposition on one side...
...and genocidal (yes, genocidal) policies endorsed by Hamas and Hezbollah accompanied by murders of helpless Israeli children (including one horrific incident in which an infiltrator actually broke into a settlers home and cut kids throats in their sleep...I don't know to even fucking respond to that), using marked ambulances to ferry troops and weapons etc etc.
I am not going to play magical balance faerie here. I think that the crimes of Hamas et al far outweigh those of Israel. I will not agree to ignoring Israeli malfeasance just because the other side is worse.
I'm sure if they did Israel would have nothing to worry about.
//
So you bring up a bullshit example and ignore the real world fact, Palestinians are in no position to destroy Israel. More Palestinians have been killed by WMD holding Israel than vise versa.
So how is exactly this genocide of Israelis going to happen at the hands of Palestinians?
The American Indians wanted to genocide the white man but had no power - they did a Ghost Dance to make the White man vanish instead. They were massacred by the Union forces at Wounded Knee.
JERUSALEM (AP) — A Hamas leader said Thursday that if his militant group came to power in a future Palestinian state, it would not abide by any previous Palestinian peace deals with Israel.
Moussa Abu Marzouk, the Islamic militant group's number two figure, said any potential deal between Israel and the Palestinian Authority, even if ratified in a Palestinian referendum, would be considered only as a temporary truce.
"We will not recognize Israel as a state," he told the Jewish Daily Forward, a Jewish-American newspaper in an interview published Thursday. It was the first such interview by a senior Hamas leader to a Jewish publication. Israeli newspapers reported it on Friday.
So you bring up a bullshit example and ignore the real world fact, Palestinians are in no position to destroy Israel. More Palestinians have been killed by WMD holding Israel than vise versa.
So how is exactly this genocide of Israelis going to happen at the hands of Palestinians?
The American Indians wanted to genocide the white man but had no power - they did a Ghost Dance to make the White man vanish instead. They were massacred by the Union forces at Wounded Knee.
True- and it could be a part of Palestine, if only the Palestinians would accept the three conditions for peace agreed to by the international communuity.
*Cessation of terror
*Secure and recognized boundaries
*Diplomatic recognition.
Which exactly of those three things are too onerous a burden for the Palestinians?
True- and it could be a part of Palestine, if only the Palestinians would accept the three conditions for peace agreed to by the international communuity.
*Cessation of terror
*Secure and recognized boundaries
*Diplomatic recognition.
Which exactly of those three things are too onerous a burden for the Palestinians?
The Palestinians are not well served by their leadership.
We are talking about foreigners here. Israel is not an American outpost in the Middle East, so I don't get the knee jerk reaction.
That's the American problem with the Israel/Palestinian conflict. The USA does not have the political will to impose a peace and the stronger side, Israel is not in a mood to meet Palestinian demands - especially when those in power are linked to religiously minded settlers with a manifest destiny outlook towards the Occupied Territories.
I'm sure had the judge ruled in the Corrie's family favor the Hamas apologists would have responded calmly to it all and have nothing but kind words for Jews and Israel for the rest of time. Palestine would have finally recognized Israel. Flowers would bloom and birds would sing.
So you bring up a bullshit example and ignore the real world fact, Palestinians are in no position to destroy Israel. More Palestinians have been killed by WMD holding Israel than vise versa.
So how is exactly this genocide of Israelis going to happen at the hands of Palestinians?
The American Indians wanted to genocide the white man but had no power - they did a Ghost Dance to make the White man vanish instead. They were massacred by the Union forces at Wounded Knee.
If Iran was able to get a nuke into Gaza, they will have no problem setting it off in Israel. You can bet money on it.
Yea and if aliens from Mars attacked we would be screwed but what does Iran and her non existing nukes have to do with Palestinians getting their homes bulldozered as part of Israel's collective punishment of them?
Yea and if aliens from Mars attacked we would be screwed but what does Iran and her non existing nukes have to do with Palestinians getting their homes bulldozered as part of Israel's collective punishment of them?
You were the one whining about the US and Israel having nukes. You also are sure Israel has nukes but Iran has non existing nukes. Interesting thought process.
Yes. So much so the BDS crowd is calling for a boycott of Caterpillar, Inc. I didn't see them calling for a boycott of Caterpillar after the attacks in Israel.
The role of Caterpillar machines in Israel’s violations of the basic rights of the Palestinians is yet another reason for socially responsible investors to divest from the company.
You were the one whining about the US and Israel having nukes. You also are sure Israel has nukes but Iran has non existing nukes. Interesting thought process.
I bring it up because claims that Israel is doing what it does to hold off a genocide is bullshit used to shut up debate. Israel is a nuclear power and there is no nation or people that are capable of threatening the nation's existence now or into the near future.
I bring it up because claims that Israel is doing what it does to hold off a genocide is bullshit used to shut up debate. Israel is a nuclear power and there is no nation or people that are capable of threatening the nation's existence now or into the near future.
Because nuclear weapons are sooo effective fighting an enemy 3 blocks away.
Unless Israel has the Fatman from Fallout 3 or some shit.
I bring it up because claims that Israel is doing what it does to hold off a genocide is bullshit used to shut up debate. Israel is a nuclear power and there is no nation or people that are capable of threatening the nation's existence now or into the near future.
???
Sorry, but I disagree. We were a nuclear power, yet we spent the 60's, 70's and 80's afraid that Russia could start a war that would destroy both nations. Having nukes doesn't mean you're invincible. It means you have nukes.
True- and it could be a part of Palestine, if only the Palestinians would accept the three conditions for peace agreed to by the international communuity.
*Cessation of terror *Secure and recognized boundaries
*Diplomatic recognition.
Which exactly of those three things are too onerous a burden for the Palestinians?
can you tell me what are Israels recognized boarders?
I bring it up because claims that Israel is doing what it does to hold off a genocide is bullshit used to shut up debate. Israel is a nuclear power and there is no nation or people that are capable of threatening the nation's existence now or into the near future.
At its most narrow point, Israel is about 13 miles wide. Not exactly a huge country. A couple well placed nukes could have a pretty dramatic affect on the country...
It would take as few as 4-5 nuclear weapons to obliterate Israel, which is smaller than the state of New Jersey. You can drive across Israel in 45 minutes (from the Tel Aviv coast to Jerusalem). It's another 45 minutes to the Jordanian border. From north to south, you're talking about 4-5 hours, depending on the route. It's a tiny country, and Israel's nuclear arsenal (which it has kept ambiguous and never admitted to actually having nukes) has been somewhat of a deterrent to military attack by its enemies.
By comparison, you've got Iran that has repeatedly stated that if it obtains nukes that it would use them - on Israel. Not for self-defense. Not to balance power, but to destroy Israel. That's not morally equivalent. That's ignoring the rhetoric and reality coming from Iran's government, religious leaders, and political structure. They're vested in seeing Israel destroyed, and while they're busy working on obtaining nuclear weapons, they're using their proxy armies in Hamas and Hizbullah to wear down Israel and exploiting vulnerabilities where possible.
Israel has recognized borders with Egypt and Jordan. The border with Lebanon is still disputed by Hizbullah in Southern Lebanon (they claim Israel occupies Sheba Farms, but the UN says Israel's not).
The border region with Syria is still in flux. The ceasefire lines have Israel occupying the Golan Heights with a DMZ between Israeli and Syrian forces with a UN force patroling.
There's a Green Line that demarcates where the West Bank and pre 1967 Israel boundaries are located. There's a further boundary line between Gaza and Israel.
Since those other lines are still in dispute by the Palestinians/Syrians/Hizbullah, then those borders are still open to final peace deals.
If the PA wanted, they could have a state tomorrow since land for peace can involve land swaps between the West Bank and land within the Green Line to improve territorial integrity. There had been some discussion about that a few years back, but the Palestinians wants Jerusalem for itself, plus right of return, so all is for naught. And Hamas wants all of Israel - regardless of whatever boundaries you provide. Since Hamas is part of the PA, that means no deal no matter how much paper diplomats throw in the air.
...If the PA wanted, they could have a state tomorrow since land for peace can involve land swaps between the West Bank and land within the Green Line to improve territorial integrity. There had been some discussion about that a few years back, but the Palestinians wants Jerusalem for itself, plus right of return, so all is for naught. And Hamas wants all of Israel - regardless of whatever boundaries you provide. Since Hamas is part of the PA, that means no deal no matter how much paper diplomats throw in the air.
That's absolutely true. The disproportionate attention does not concern merely Corrie's death or the plight of the Palestinians rather it's because she died in an effort to assist those trying to murder Jews. Her failure in that effort is what is most upsetting to her supporters.
Interesting. The response to this has been louder than anything I've ever seen regarding Assad and Syria.
Assad murders dozens a day in wanton airstrikes, commits mass murder and there are the mass graves to prove it, and there's an incomparable silence.
An Israeli court, after weighing the evidence and testimony from those involved on both sides finds that Israel wasn't responsible for Corrie's death, and the shrieks of genocide and war crimes begin anew.
Assad murders dozens a day in wanton airstrikes, commits mass murder and there are the mass graves to prove it, and there's an incomparable silence.
An Israeli court, after weighing the evidence and testimony from those involved on both sides finds that Israel wasn't responsible for Corrie's death, and the shrieks of genocide and war crimes begin anew.
Right. A decision that was handed down by one judge, in one court; and a decision that can and will be appealed according to news reports.
She was working with the ISM to block Israel from going after smuggling tunnels used by terrorists to regroup and rearm. She wasn't helping kids learn their ABCs or math skills. She wasn't teaching peace and tolerance.
And she was being used by the Palestinians as a useful idiot for their own cause. Her death was a propaganda tool for the Palestinians.
She wasn't some innocent bystander in all this. She was an active participant who was aiding and abetting terrorists through her actions to block the demolition of smuggling tunnels.
Imagine now if one were to, say, compromise and think of this as negligence on the part of the bulldozer operator. To the effect of involuntary manslaughter. What would be the response?
I see that the subject of the death of Rachel Corrie still evokes a rather heated emotional response from some individuals here.
A note for our more recent members: A couple of years ago, several people were banned from LGF for ridiculing Corrie's death, and more than a few people were publicly warned as well for statements made.
Unfortunately, those feelings don't seem to have changed one bit.
I see that the subject of the death of Rachel Corrie still evokes a rather heated emotional response from some individuals here.
A note for our more recent members: A couple of years ago, several people were banned from LGF for ridiculing Corrie's death, and more than a few people were publicly warned as well for statements made.
Unfortunately, those feelings don't seem to have changed one bit.
Can you please show me where people are ridiculing her death?
Can you please show me where people are ridiculing her death?
Not saying that there has been open ridicule here, however the fact that there are almost 150 responses on a LGF User Page that isn't main-paged says that it is still a bit of a hot-button issue around here.
Not saying that there has been open ridicule here, however the fact that there are almost 150 responses on a LGF User Page that isn't main-paged says that it is still a bit of a hot-button issue around here.
There was a time- not that long ago- when if someone set you straight or gave you factual information (instead of the bullshit masquerading to be factual) you'd say. 'Thanks for setting me straight' -or 'Sorry, I didn't know that[ or anything along those lines.
Now, some people just hunker down and propagate their bullshit with even more ferocity.
There was a time- not that long ago- when if someone set you straight or gave you factual information (instead of the bullshit masquerading to be factual) you'd say. 'Thanks for setting me straight' -or 'Sorry, I didn't know that[ or anything along those lines.
Now, some people just hunker down and propagate their bullshit with even more ferocity.
I don't know if that is more sad or pathetic.
I blame the "Jesus General School of Foreign Policy."
Actually, I think that if the professional provocateurs weren't in the discussion, I'd say the thread wouldn't be longer than 10 comments. If you read the thread, there are very few comments about Rachel Corrie.
Imagine now if one were to, say, compromise and think of this as negligence on the part of the bulldozer operator. To the effect of involuntary manslaughter. What would be the response?
Operators of heavy machinery usually use the assumption that nobody is purposefully trying to throw themselves under the machinery.
Actually, I think that if the professional provocateurs weren't in the discussion, I'd say the thread wouldn't be longer than 10 comments. If you read the thread, there are very few comments about Rachel Corrie.
I see a lot of excusing away the death of Rachel Corrie.
It would take as few as 4-5 nuclear weapons to obliterate Israel, which is smaller than the state of New Jersey. You can drive across Israel in 45 minutes (from the Tel Aviv coast to Jerusalem). It's another 45 minutes to the Jordanian border. From north to south, you're talking about 4-5 hours, depending on the route. It's a tiny country, and Israel's nuclear arsenal (which it has kept ambiguous and never admitted to actually having nukes) has been somewhat of a deterrent to military attack by its enemies.
By comparison, you've got Iran that has repeatedly stated that if it obtains nukes that it would use them - on Israel. Not for self-defense. Not to balance power, but to destroy Israel. That's not morally equivalent. That's ignoring the rhetoric and reality coming from Iran's government, religious leaders, and political structure. They're vested in seeing Israel destroyed, and while they're busy working on obtaining nuclear weapons, they're using their proxy armies in Hamas and Hizbullah to wear down Israel and exploiting vulnerabilities where possible.
Iran is nowhere near having nukes. There is a greater chance Israel and the earth will be hit my a meteor than Iran nuking Israel in the next 30 years.
Iran is nowhere near having nukes. There is a greater chance Israel and the earth will be hit my a meteor than Iran nuking Israel in the next 30 years.
Really? Care to provide the statistical probability report? Is there a link you can provide?
And how does that changes Iran's stated call to genocide?
At its most narrow point, Israel is about 13 miles wide. Not exactly a huge country. A couple well placed nukes could have a pretty dramatic affect on the country...
What fictional army's tank division is going to drive into that 13 mile wide area of Israel?
The only nuclear power in the Middle East is Israel and Iran is nowhere near getting a nuclear weapon in our lifetime.
Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak acknowledged that Iran neither has nuclear weapons nor is trying to make them.
If Iran has no nukes - how will they carry out this genocide you claim they call for? Will they march through American occupied Iraq? Then Jordan? By prayer?
Iran's nuclear weapons program has suffered some setbacks- some of the scientists working on the project are no longer affilated with the project.
Bummer.
Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak is a traitor then? If Iran has nukes or about to and he saying they don't? GASP!!!!!!
Now, Barak has admitted an important point that has been widely accepted by U.S. officials and even by many in Israel, which is that Iran has no nuclear weapon program, a point that has been emphasized over the last year by Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, CIA Director David Petraeus, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Martin Dempsey, and National Intelligence Director James Clapper.
You were the one whining about the US and Israel having nukes. You also are sure Israel has nukes but Iran has non existing nukes. Interesting thought process.
Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak acknowledged that Iran neither has nuclear weapons nor has an order been given to make them.
BLITZER: What -- what does that mean, that the ayatollah has not given the order to build a nuclear bomb?
BARAK: It's something technical. He did not tell his people start and build it -- a weapon on -- an explodable device. We think that we understand why he -- the -- he does not give this order.
Really? Who's is it? Who is the rightful owner of the land taken from the Ottoman Empire after WW1? What country holds the legal deed to the land?
Israel does. The land was returned to the Jews in 1920. Britain was given a Mandate to help return the land to the Jews. No one can give that land to someone else.
At the same time that this land was returned to the Jews by the Allies of WW1, the league of nations and later the UN... Lebanon was given their land, Syria was given their land. No one disputes those land transfers. Why do you only dispute the transfer of land (from the Ottoman Empire) to the Jews?
I was thinking about the word genocide. I wish Sergey was here. All I want to say is that there is no genocide of any sort going on within Israel and within Palestine. There is a conflict and mane people have been killed. Yet no genocide. It is the incorrect use of the word. In fact there is no genocide going on currently, in Syria. And always remember when you utter genocide in this context, it causes a Spock eyebrow.
When has Israel ever even admitted having nuclear weapons?
If I had no arms or legs I could count the times on my fingers how many Israel has threatened to nuke anyone, especially the Palestinians.
You are right, iran [sic] at least signed the non nuclear weapon proliferation treaty and renounced nuclear weapons. Israel has not.
Did you think that no one would notice that you dodged ABSOLUTELY EVERY being made to you? I have to suppose this is some very strong naivete at work here, given the "Iran... renounced nuclear weapons" belief. The ONLY thing their reactor is capabler of producing is weapons grade materials.
Really? Who's is it? Who is the rightful owner of the land taken from the Ottoman Empire after WW1? What country holds the legal deed to the land?
Israel does. The land was returned to the Jews in 1920. Britain was given a Mandate to help return the land to the Jews. No one can give that land to someone else.
At the same time that this land was returned to the Jews by the Allies of WW1, the league of nations and later the UN... Lebanon was given their land, Syria was given their land. No one disputes those land transfers. Why do you only dispute the transfer of land (from the Ottoman Empire) to the Jews?
It actually does belong to Israel.
The West Bank is considered occupied territory both by the Israeli courts and under international law.
Did you think that no one would notice that you dodged ABSOLUTELY EVERY being made to you? I have to suppose this is some very strong naivete at work here, given the "Iran... renounced nuclear weapons" belief. The ONLY thing their reactor is capabler of producing is weapons grade materials.
Who should I believe, cast offs from the Pamela Geller, pro George Bush invade Iraq types like you? Or the experts? Have not your type been discredited enough?
BLITZER: What -- what does that mean, that the ayatollah has not given the order to build a nuclear bomb?
BARAK: It's something technical. He did not tell his people start and build it -- a weapon on -- an explodable device. We think that we understand why he -- the -- he does not give this order.
Defense Minister Ehud Barak was quoted on Thursday as saying he does not view Iran as a threat to Israel's existence, a view that would seem to depart from Israeli statements of the recent past.
Israel's mass-circulation Yedioth Ahronoth daily quoted Barak, the head of Israel's centre-left Labour party, as saying "Iran does not constitute an existential threat against Israel."
So the only nation in the Middle East with a nuclear weapon is Israel. Iran does not have a nuclear weapon nor have they, per Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak begun such a program. So how will this "genocide" by Iran be carried out? It is your zombie apocalypse fantasy at work here so you tell us? Absent nuclear weapons how will Iran, a Shia, non Arab power 2 nations removed from Israel with a US army in between Israel and Iran (in Iraq) and a US naval fleet in the Iranian Gulf, how will they carry out this genocide of Israel? By the power of prayer?
How long do we have to listen to your sides crazy talk? I mean we still have crazy old coots in DC that think the Russians are the USSR and will invade West Germany any minute now so I get old people like you are stuck in some sort of paranoid dungeon of the mind. But there is no reason we need to listen to your sides dementia.
There is a conflict and mane people have been killed. Yet no genocide.
But there have been definite calls for genocide. And the group being threatened with that genocide has experienced actual genocide in the last 80 years. They have learned to take what the enemy says seriously.
The point is that once they have them, and all indications are that they seek them, it is too late.
Israel cannot wait until it is too late. The stakes are too high.
Iran has threatened Israel's existence and seeks the weapon to wipe her off the map.
History shows us that the threat cannot be ignored until it is too late.
You really believe that a country sitting on an ocean of oil needs nuclear power so badly that they are willing to create this huge international threat? They need it so badly that they are willing to spend the millions of dollars they don't have (should be spent domestically)?
No. Sorry. When the enemy says they want to kill you, and they are creating the weapon capable of that clearly stated goal, then you have to be suicidal to ignore it.
Iran is nowhere near having nukes. There is a greater chance Israel and the earth will be hit my a meteor than Iran nuking Israel in the next 30 years.
And you know this how? Because you know what the Iranians are doing at Parchin or Natanz? You believe what the mullahs are saying? Intuition? Wishful thinking?
This is what we do know. Iran has several thousand centrifuges operating. They are IR1 and IR2 designs, which are based on Pakistani designs. They've already enriched quantities to LEU. It's a function of time to enrich. The more time you have, the higher the enrichment levels can be accomplished. Therefore, it's a function of time until they have sufficient quantities for a nuclear device.
Also, if Iran isn't seeking nuclear weapons, why are they doing tests at Parchin - a military complex - for triggers?
Indeed. Genocide means specifically targeting a population based on race, ethnicity, culture, religion and engaging in mass murder.
Democide is a more generalized term to describe murdering of groups, including those in the subcategory of genocide by a state actor.
Syria is currently engulfed in a civil war and war crimes and crimes against humanity are underway, but it isn't a genocide. It isn't a democide. The situation could still turn into a democide - say if Assad gains the upper hand and then wipes out entire civilian populations of former rebel-held territories - say Hama, Aleppo, or Daraa because of their support of the rebels.
But as you note - Israel has not now, nor ever, engaged in genocide. Several thousand casualties plus hundreds killed (the overwhelming majority terrorists) among Palestinians over the span of decades isn't genocide by any definition. Palestinian propagandists expropriated the language for their own terms. That's why they'll refer to any kind of casualties inflicted by Israel as a Holocaust or genocide. It not only minimizes what really happened in the Holocaust (the systematic destruction of the Jewish people across Europe by the Germans), but undermines one of the rationales for establishing Israel in the first place.
And basing your entire view of Iran's nuclear intentions on the language of Israeli Minister Barak? There's a wide range of views on Iran and its nuclear program, let alone whether Israel should unilaterally carry out attacks against Iran to stop its nuclear program. Even those opposed to an Israeli unilateral strike note that Iran is developing the nuclear weapons capabilities.
PM Netenyahu says Iran's developing the capabilities. Iran's shown a willingness to work on long range missiles capable of hitting Israel (as well as every other Arab capital through the Middle East). Other countries, including Saudi Arabia are concerned about Iran's nuclear program because it threatens them as much as it does Israel. In fact, Saudi Arabia had announced that they'd obtain nuclear weapons from Pakistan should Iran declare itself to have obtained nuclear weapons to deter Iran. That's rather telling - the Saudis aren't concerned about Israel's nuclear capabilities but Iran.
But there have been definite calls for genocide. And the group being threatened with that genocide has experienced actual genocide in the last 80 years. They have learned to take what the enemy says seriously.
Iran is nowhere near the power Germany was, which carried out a genocide on territories it conquered by force of arms. How many divisions do you think Iran - if we accept your assertions that that is what Iran wants - genocide - can get over the Euphrates and Tigris rivers? I say zero.
The point is that once they have them, and all indications are that they seek them, it is too late.
Israel cannot wait until it is too late. The stakes are too high.
Iran has threatened Israel's existence and seeks the weapon to wipe her off the map.
History shows us that the threat cannot be ignored until it is too late.
You really believe that a country sitting on an ocean of oil needs nuclear power so badly that they are willing to create this huge international threat? They need it so badly that they are willing to spend the millions of dollars they don't have (should be spent domestically)?
No. Sorry. When the enemy says they want to kill you, and they are creating the weapon capable of that clearly stated goal, then you have to be suicidal to ignore it.
That is like the stupid 1% Doctrine argument Cheney gave Bush to justify the Iraq invasion against non-existing Iraq WMD.
And basing your entire view of Iran's nuclear intentions on the language of Israeli Minister Barak?
Whose view should we base it on if the mother fucking Israeli Defense Minister is not good enough? Is "Curveball" available? See #179.
[Link: transcripts.cnn.com...]
BLITZER: What -- what does that mean, that the ayatollah has not given the order to build a nuclear bomb?
BARAK: It's something technical. He did not tell his people start and build it -- a weapon on -- an explodable device. We think that we understand why he -- the -- he does not give this order.
Defense Minister Ehud Barak was quoted on Thursday as saying he does not view Iran as a threat to Israel's existence, a view that would seem to depart from Israeli statements of the recent past.
Israel's mass-circulation Yedioth Ahronoth daily quoted Barak, the head of Israel's centre-left Labour party, as saying "Iran does not constitute an existential threat against Israel."
You can play pick and choose all you want. Barak's not infalliable, even if he's the Defense Minister. Others in Israel's defense and intel establishment think Iran is working on nukes, including the Mossad and Shin Bet (both are part of the intel side whose job it is to find out what Iran's up to).
Moreover, Barak views can be justified as an attempt to downplay the possibility of an Israeli strike against Iran because he doesn't think Israel has the pieces in place to make one work - a view shared by others who do think that Iran is working on a nuclear weapon.
But there have been definite calls for genocide. And the group being threatened with that genocide has experienced actual genocide in the last 80 years. They have learned to take what the enemy says seriously.
You can play pick and choose all you want. Barak's not infalliable, even if he's the Defense Minister. Others in Israel's defense and intel establishment think Iran is working on nukes, including the Mossad and Shin Bet (both are part of the intel side whose job it is to find out what Iran's up to).
Moreover, Barak views can be justified as an attempt to downplay the possibility of an Israeli strike against Iran because he doesn't think Israel has the pieces in place to make one work - a view shared by others who do think that Iran is working on a nuclear weapon.
Nice try though.
Pick and choose? Barak is the Israeli Defense Minister! It's his job! You are the one who is picking and choosing sources to back your position rather than accept reality as it is. That is just like the Bushies did to justify their Iraq war, pick and chose intelligence that backed their assertions.
You are right, there was a shift from calling it "occupied to disputed" in an attempt to legitimize a land grab but international law says otherwise.
That is YOUR biased opinion on why.
However you are only entitled to your opinion not your own facts.
The land was returned to the Jews. It was occupied by Jordan in 1948 and real ethnic cleansing took place. An actual war crime. The land was recovered by Israel in 1967. At no time was the title or deed transferred to anyone else. According to international law, it is Israel. It was part of the land that Britain had a mandate to help the Jews turn into a country.
There is nothing in international law that says otherwise.
No UN resolution, no judgement.
In fact International law says what is done cannot be undone. That land was in 1920 transferred (returned) to the historical owners.
After that time, many Arabs immigrated en masse to the desolate region to take advantage of the economic development created by the Zionists. Arabs constituted 37 percent of the total immigration to pre-state Israel. The descendants of Arabs who immigrated in pursuit of jobs and economic opportunity are not the indigenous people of the region. The Jews are.
Why is it that in your opinion only Jews are not allowed to live there? How can you justify rewarding a continuing a policy of ethnic cleansing?
AND most importantly, you hang your hat on "Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak acknowledged that Iran neither has nuclear weapons nor is trying to make them."
YET no where in your PBS link does Ehud Barak actually say ANYTHING like that. In fact he does exactly the opposite. Clearly saying that Iran is trying to do enough work to try and make nuclear weapons before the world can realize it. Hoping to get past the line (into "the zone of immunity, beyond which Israel might not be technically capable of launching a surgical operation").
So please stop putting words into Ehud Baraks mouth.
Here is a fact for you. Israel was recognized as a UN member. The official borders of Israel as far as the international community is concerned are those at the time it entered the UN. Now it is a negotiation between Israel, her neighbors and the Palestinian Authority about what those borders will end up being but to claim that the West Bank was always Israel's is false.
AND most importantly, you hang your hat on "Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak acknowledged that Iran neither has nuclear weapons nor is trying to make them."
YET no where in your PBS link does Ehud Barak actually say ANYTHING like that. In fact he does exactly the opposite. Clearly saying that Iran is trying to do enough work to try and make nuclear weapons before the world can realize it. Hoping to get past the line (into "the zone of immunity, beyond which Israel might not be technically capable of launching a surgical operation").
So please stop putting words into Ehud Baraks mouth.
Here you go PBS link had the exact same transcript from CNN:
BLITZER: What -- what does that mean, that the ayatollah has not given the order to build a nuclear bomb?
BARAK: It's something technical. He did not tell his people start and build it -- a weapon on -- an explodable device. We think that we understand why he -- the -- he does not give this order.
Here is a fact for you. Israel was recognized as a UN member. The official borders of Israel as far as the international community is concerned are those at the time it entered the UN. Now it is a negotiation between Israel, her neighbors and the Palestinian Authority about what those borders will end up being but to claim that the West Bank was always Israel's is false.
Again false. There is nothing in International Law that says anything like that.
In fact one of the first things that the UN did is accept all the resolutions and agreements of the League of Nations.
AND that was a Mandate to return that land to the Jews.
Here you go PBS link had the exact same transcript from CNN:
BARAK: It's something technical. He did not tell his people start and build it -- a weapon on -- an explodable device. We think that we understand why he -- the -- he does not give this order.
That the Supreme leader has not publicly given the order doesn't mean anything even close to the same thing as "Iran neither has nuclear weapons nor is trying to make them."
Not even close to the same thing.
The rest of the quote makes clear that Ehud Barak believes that Iran is going forward anyway.
Imagine that a drug house is to be demolished by the appropriate authorities.
A group of people who think they are doing right send a young girl to go inside the demolition area and in front of the bulldozer hoping that someone will notice and stop.
They don't, and a tragic death occurs.
I blame the people who sent her into the dangerous area.
Now Destro might think that the evil Israelis were just going around demolishing random houses without any authority in law. And maybe Corrie thought so as well.
However some of us know better. We know not to give that view any credence.
Israel is a true democracy, with an independent legal system and a free press. The Palestinian Arabs of Gaza? Not so much.
You can play pick and choose all you want. Barak's not infalliable, even if he's the Defense Minister. Others in Israel's defense and intel establishment think Iran is working on nukes, including the Mossad and Shin Bet (both are part of the intel side whose job it is to find out what Iran's up to).
And in the end Barak never actually said anything even close to what Destro is saying that he did.
You know what Destro, you miss the entire context of what Barak said to Blitzer in that CNN transcript.
How about a fuller reading:
BARAK: I think that in general terms about the intelligence, we are on the same page. In the rhetoric and the -- I don't know how to call it, observation, we are on the same page. We both know that Iran is determined to turn nuclear. We both know that Khamenei did not yet ordered, actually, to give a weapon, but that he is determined to deceit and defy the whole world.
We all are convinced and say publicly that Iran should not be allowed to turn nuclear and that all options should remain on the table.
BLITZER: What -- what does that mean, that the ayatollah has not given the order to build a nuclear bomb?
BARAK: It's something technical. He did not tell his people start and build it -- a weapon on -- an explodable device. We think that we understand why he -- the -- he does not give this order.
He believes that he is penetrated through our intelligence and he strongly feels that if he tries to order, we will know it, we and you and some other intelligence services will know about it and it might end up with a physical action against it.
In other words, Israel and Barak believe that Iran's obfuscating and hiding its intentions because Iran believes that it's been penetrated by Mossad or others who would signal back to Israel that such activities have been undertaken at the order from the highest level. Israel isn't buying the Iranian claims one iota. That includes Barak. So, Israel believes that Iran's doing whatever it can without an express order to build X nuclear devices. It undertakes tests on trigger devices, individual components, etc., all while it gains expertise on enrichment - where time + material = nuclear device.
Along with everyone else in the Israeli political and intel/defense establishment. The difference is how to address the problem.
Israel's defence minister Ehud Barak restated the case for a military strike on Iran's nuclear programme before it reaches the "immunity zone", dismissing criticism from the country's former intelligence chief that political leaders were misleading the public over the consequences of action.
"I believe it is well understood in Washington, as well as in Jerusalem, that as long as there is an existential threat to our people, all options to prevent Iran from getting nuclear weapons should remain on the table," Barak told a meeting of the Foreign Press Association.
But in a clear reference to former Shin Bet chief Yuval Diskin's comments, he added: "Parts of the world, including some politically motivated Israeli figures, prefer to bury their heads in the sand."
Meanwhile, UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon is in Tehran, and he's called on Iran to not only stop its incendiary language about destroying Israel, but to come clean about its nuclear program.
U.S. teenager Abigail Leitel, 14, was killed that same week. She was a victim of an arab Palestinian. She was not trying to stop anyone from doing anything. She was just riding the bus. In fact, Abigail was on her way to a friend's house from her school when a person stepped on the same bus, looked at her, and decided that it was at that moment that they wanted to murder and maim the people around them.
It is in fact the ongoing Palestinian and Muslim extremist violence against civilians that has driven the cycle of violence for the last 50 years.
This is bullshit. All this talk about how she's fostering terrorism by blocking a bulldozer?
Ask any construction foreman in the country and they'll tell you they don't drive heavy equipment around a site when there are people walking around. This was completely avoidable with a bit of due diligence.
Is it dangerous to walk around heavy equipment, yes. Should a driver of a 10 ton bulldozer ignore the fact that their are people walking around his job site? No.
Do I hear a single person "speaking for Israel" who actually seems to give a shit that a person died vs a chance to slam the other side? No.
This... is bullshit.
What's bull is your rant.
Yes, she was fostering terrorism by trying to safeguard an arms-smuggling tunnel. Did you really ignore what the IDF was doing their in the first place.
The "due diligence" should have been for the protestors to not be stupid.
You seem to be suggesting that Israel should stop looking for/destroying arms-smuggling tunnels because people are trying to stop them. Rather counter-productive to safeguarding their own citizens, which is the job of any country. Add to this the fact that, when she STOOD in front of the bulldozer, the driver saw her & stopped. This is a major point that most people seem to forget.
I haven't heard anyone "speaking for Israel" who has acted as if /she don't care that someone got killed; we're just irritated about where the blame is getting placed.
Between citing Juan Cole & calling me senile & demented, you have lost any right to have anyone speak to you with any degree of politeness on this or any other subject.
Between citing Juan Cole & calling me senile & demented, you have lost any right to have anyone speak to you with any degree of politeness on this or any other subject.
Juan Cole is the devil? In any case the link to Juan Cole's website is for another link to an Israeli website.
So why don't you like primary sources?
And let's not forget Israel's Defense Minister Ehud Barak telling CNN's Wolf Blitzer Iran has not started a nuclear weapons program. I would think Israel's Defense Minister trumps all other sources you cling to.
And let's not forget Israel's Defense Minister Ehud Barak telling CNN's Wolf Blitzer Iran has not started a nuclear weapons program. I would think Israel's Defense Minister trumps all other sources you cling to.
It has been shown to you how incredibly untrue that is.
No where does Israel's Defense Minister Ehud Barak tell CNN's Wolf Blitzer ( or anyone else) Iran has not started a nuclear weapons program.
That the Supreme leader has not publicly given the order doesn't mean anything even close to the same thing as "Iran has not started a nuclear weapons program."
Not even close to the same thing.
The rest of the quote makes clear that Ehud Barak believes that Iran is going forward anyway. He is clear that he believes Iran has started a nuclear weapons program.
Israel military chief: Iran not pursuing nuclear weapon
Israel’s military chief toned down the rhetoric over Iran’s nuclear programme on Wednesday, describing the Iranian leadership as “very rational” and unlikely to take the decision to build a bomb.
Speaking to the left-leaning Haaretz newspaper, Lieutenant General Benny Gantz said Iran was systematically approaching the point at which it would be able to decide on whether to build a bomb, but had not yet made that decision.
“It still hasn’t decided yet whether to go the extra mile,” he said.
Barak, it said, does not categorically oppose 20 percent enrichment of uranium by Iran under complete supervision and is willing to accept 3.5 percent enrichment, while Netanyahu “opposes any enrichment of uranium by Iran.”
Reports of an apparent rift were confirmed by a senior Israeli official, who spoke to AFP on condition of anonymity.
“General Gantz is only repeating publicly what military leaders, including his predecessor General Gabi Ashkenazi, have continuously told the politicians in the last few years,” he said.
“Ehud Barak has evolved and seems more moderate. And (Foreign Minister) Avigdor Lieberman recently told Israeli reporters it was necessary to give a chance to the economic sanctions and diplomatic pressure, that we must give it time and not hurry,” he said.
“In fact, the prime minister is somewhat isolated on Iran,” he said.
Israel military chief: Iran not pursuing nuclear weapon
Israel’s military chief toned down the rhetoric over Iran’s nuclear programme on Wednesday, describing the Iranian leadership as “very rational” and unlikely to take the decision to build a bomb.
Speaking to the left-leaning Haaretz newspaper, Lieutenant General Benny Gantz said Iran was systematically approaching the point at which it would be able to decide on whether to build a bomb, but had not yet made that decision.
“It still hasn’t decided yet whether to go the extra mile,” he said.
Barak, it said, does not categorically oppose 20 percent enrichment of uranium by Iran under complete supervision and is willing to accept 3.5 percent enrichment, while Netanyahu “opposes any enrichment of uranium by Iran.”
Reports of an apparent rift were confirmed by a senior Israeli official, who spoke to AFP on condition of anonymity.
“General Gantz is only repeating publicly what military leaders, including his predecessor General Gabi Ashkenazi, have continuously told the politicians in the last few years,” he said.
“Ehud Barak has evolved and seems more moderate. And (Foreign Minister) Avigdor Lieberman recently told Israeli reporters it was necessary to give a chance to the economic sanctions and diplomatic pressure, that we must give it time and not hurry,” he said.
“In fact, the prime minister is somewhat isolated on Iran,” he said.
I liked this comment by Peter No Tail:
First, Iraq had WMDs.
No WMDs, so then Iraq had WMD programs.
No WMD programs, so then Iraq had WMD material.
No WMD material, so then Iraq had WMD-related program activities (whatever that means).
First, Iran had nukes.
No nukes, so then Iran had a nuclear bomb program.
No nuke program, so then Iran was close to developing material for nukes.
Now, Iran [is] systematically approaching the point at which it would be able to decide on whether to build a bomb, but had not yet made that decision. (Whatever that means. i guess it means "Iran does not have nukes BUT they might possibly, sometime in the future, reach a point where they'll be able decide whether or not to build one.")
Look, we are going to limit the use of quotes to actual quotes. Maybe there are people who will let you use mind reading, but we need to agree that HERE you will use actual quotes when you quote someone.
This applies to Peter Tail as well.
There is no pattern there because that is not what people are saying.
You mean like the above article's quotes to actual quote? "Speaking to the left-leaning Haaretz newspaper, Lieutenant General Benny Gantz"
Cognitive Dissonance is a strong force to counter act if you are an advocate rather than an independent.
Correct. No actual quote from Lieutenant General Benny Gantz. You have CNN and NPR all making up their mind reading of Ehud Barak. It is very likely that this left leaning newspaper does not actually provide a quote or context because they are playing with words.
So, for example, I assemble all the things I need to build a bomb. I get the Van, I fill the barrels with the fertilizer. I buy the diesel fuel and store it. I threaten people that I think they will be dead soon enough, and that I think they should be wiped from the planet.
Now you might try and read my mind that I am not planning to build a bomb. After all I don't have all the elements in one place yet.
However you agree that once I assemble the detonators, load everything up in the van and park it in the parking structure of the skyscraper it is too late to stop me. Of course only then will you really know that I was all along planning to build a bomb. However you can safely say that there was no proof I had really decided to go through with it.
First, Iraq had WMDs.
No WMDs, so then Iraq had WMD programs.
No WMD programs, so then Iraq had WMD material.
No WMD material, so then Iraq had WMD-related program activities (whatever that means).
First, Iran had nukes.
No nukes, so then Iran had a nuclear bomb program.
No nuke program, so then Iran was close to developing material for nukes.
Now, Iran [is] systematically approaching the point at which it would be able to decide on whether to build a bomb, but had not yet made that decision. (Whatever that means. i guess it means "Iran does not have nukes BUT they might possibly, sometime in the future, reach a point where they'll be able decide whether or not to build one.")
WMD equipment was found buried and hidden away in various locationbs.
Iraq had used WMD's.
Now you can pivot and attack.
Seriously? You are claiming Iraq had WMD stockpiles with the odd rusting forgotten shell here and there? What next? The Russkies helped Saddam smuggle his WMD stockpile to Syria?
That is right out of the Bush right wing defense squad handbook bullshit.
Saddam Hussein did not possess stockpiles of illicit weapons at the time of the U.S. invasion in March 2003 and had not begun any program to produce them, a CIA report concludes.
This is taking a strange turn. You can't say that these two things are the same. Just because Saddam fooled a lot of people into thinking he had more WMD capability than he really did has absolutely nothing to do with Iran.
From your link:
The massive report does say, however, that Iraq worked hard to cheat on United Nations-imposed sanctions and retain the capability to resume production of weapons of mass destruction at some time in the future.
"[Saddam] wanted to end sanctions while preserving the capability to reconstitute his weapons of mass destruction when sanctions were lifted," a summary of the report says.
This is a serious warning. Yes, he didn't have the ability to deliver actual WMD at that moment. He had demonstrated that IF he did, he would use it. He did so in the past, and there was no reason to think he wouldn't in the future. AND he was making sure not to give up the ability to assemble it as soon as sanctions were lifted.
The real lesson from the report is that "Iraq's WMD program was essentially destroyed in 1991 and Saddam ended Iraq's nuclear program after the 1991 Gulf War." Why was it destroyed? Because it existed. How was it destroyed? With a military solution.
This is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title and text already filled in.
Earlier this year, the Republican National Committee released a 100-page report detailing how the GOP needed to retrofit its agenda and soften its tone. But if Republican officials had wanted to save time, they could have issued a shorthand summary that read: Be less like Steve King. The Iowa congressman's outspoken conservatism embodies the kind of politics that, in the RNC's own words, alienates ...
The always-on, simultaneous society in which we have found ourselves has altered our relationship to culture, media, news, politics, economics, and power. We are living in a digital temporal landscape, but instead of exploiting its asynchronous biases, we are misguidedly attempting to extend the time-is-money agenda of the Industrial Age into the current era. The result is a disorienting and dehumanizing mess, where the ...
He's in Texas, of course. A Texas pastor is being accused of "blasphemy" after he sent out a fundraising plea promising that God would give a new car in "52 days or 52 weeks" to anyone who chipped in $52 to fix his helicopter. "Do you need better transportation?" New Light Church Bishop Ira V. Hilliard asks in a letter obtained by The Smoking ...
Another contender for douchebag of the year: Sean Parker Is Sad Over His $4.5 Million Wedding Because of 'Eco-Terrorists' Parker doesn't understand this visceral reaction to the happiest day of his life. It wasn't even "tasteless" or even over-the-top, he argues. "I had a forest wedding where I made everyone wear silly outfits," said Parker, referring to his not-Game of Thrones fairy themed wedding. ...
James Gandolfini, who rose to fame as the agonized mob boss on HBO's groundbreaking drama "The Sopranos," has died, the network confirmed late Wednesday.
Gandolfini, who was 51, was stricken during a stay in Italy, according to reports.
More: James Gandolfini, Former 'Sopranos' Star, Dead at 51
Charlie Sheen's meltdown, Kim Kardashian's sex tape, and Anthony Weiner's sexting are but three examples of how "evil is running amok in our country and all over the globe."
YouTube
More: Beck: 'God Is Openly Mocked' by Charlie Sheen, Kim Kardashian, & Anthony Weiner
WASHINGTON — Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, said Wednesday she's changed her views and now supports gay marriage, becoming the third Senate Republican to do so. Murkowski declared as recently as her 2010 re-election campaign that she believes marriage should be legally defined as between a man and woman. She's voted to amend the Constitution to forbid gay marriage. But she said Wednesday she's changed ...
More: Meet America's Most Shameless Defender of the 1 Percent, Harvard Economist Greg Mankiw It’s not really news that America’s economics departments, particularly at elite institutions, are stuffed with people whose careers are founded on protecting monied interests. But it’s pretty rare when someone just comes straight out and announces the fact. Meet Greg Mankiw, chairman and professor of economics at Harvard, one of ...
n an effort to show how weak our food-stamp programs are, 26 members of Congress have decided to reduce their grocery budgets to $4.50 per day, the going rate for recipients of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). Accordingly, the feat has been named the "SNAP Challenge," and is essentially a way for these 26 Democratic representatives to publicize how poor the availability of ...
As a child, I didn't understand most of the midnight phone calls to my mom, or the times women would come over with children in tow, sometimes even in pajamas, and I would be told to go entertain them while Mama ensconced herself in her bedroom with their mother. Once, my mom spotted a bruised woman with three children holding a cardboard sign in ...
Because the Parasitical Congress Critter has obviously never been to the grocery and seen the little tags that say 'SNAP" next to some food items. As the government determines what is eligible to be purchased under the program. Conservative firebrand Rep. Steve Stockman (R-TX) argued in a press release on Tuesday that the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) provides cushy benefits to recipients and ...
Never in a million years would I intentionally hurt another person. Yet, here I sit having hurt so many by failing to acknowledge the pain some affiliated with Exodus International caused, and by failing to share the whole truth about my own story. My good intentions matter very little and fail to diminish the pain and hurt others have experienced on my watch. The ...
Phoenix police said they arrested a man Wednesday morning for allegedly having sexual contact with three young girls. Police said they arrested Christopher Allen Simcox, 52, in the area of Van Buren Street and 51st Avenue at around 10 a.m. Police have not released any details about the allegations, saying only that detectives with the Family Investigations Bureau of the Phoenix Police Department had ...
Conservative actor John Ratzenberger, who is best known as the character "Cliff" from the television sitcom Cheers, on Friday called for former Rep. Allen West (R-FL) to take "something from his gene pool" and "put it everywhere across this great country." Ratzenberger was introducing West at the Faith and Freedom Coalition's Road to Majority conference. He also called West a "real American." "We should ...
From feministing.com Turns out Reddit - home of pedophiles, ephibists and other "Jelly Belly" lovers now is putting out a book! Advice offered? Get CLOSE to her, damn it! To quote Rob Judge, “Personal space is for pussies.” I already told you that the most successful seducers are those who can’t keep their hands off of women. Well you’re not gonna be able to ...
It's particularly heavy baggage for Republicans. While Democrats and civil rights groups stand largely united behind the broadest interpretations of the Voting Rights Act, for Republicans it's a trickier matter. On one hand, they are eager to reach out to minority voters. They eagerly tout their charismatic, high-profile minority officeholders like Sens. Tim Scott or South Carolina and Ted Cruz of Texas, Nikki Haley ...
Reuters: But even the press in aggregate is not a friend to whistle-blowers, as its recent treatment of Snowden attests, what with the deep dives into his teen years (including photos), his education and employment history, his reputation as a loner and a “brainiac,” his pants-down hijinks, his online scribblings, his dancer girlfriend, his predilection for (in his own words) “post-coital Krispy Kremes.” Squeezing ...
Senior bankers guilty of reckless misconduct should be jailed, a long-awaited report on banking commissioned by the government has recommended. The Parliamentary Commission on Banking Standards was set up by Chancellor George Osborne last year after a number of scandals involving the industry. Jail reckless bankers, standards commission urgesThe cross-party group's fifth report attacked the lack of accountability of bankers and also said some ...
LE BOURGET, France — Boeing Co. won major orders from five customers for a stretched-out version of its popular 787 Dreamliner jet at the Paris Air Show Tuesday, further evidence of a strengthening market for more expensive long-haul jets.Boeing announced the formal launch of its 787-10 program at the Paris Air Show on Tuesday and says it already has commitments for 102 jets from ...
I wrote a song about dental floss but did anyone's teeth get cleaner? -- In response to Tipper Gore's allegations that music incites people towards deviant behavior, or influences their behavior in general.
Randall Gross
Follow @Tarkloon
Frank says:
