So; What's really going on?
January 14, 2009 3:58 PM   Subscribe

Digging for the truth about Israel / Palestine. Why are so many people reluctant to discuss what is happening in Israel and Palestine?
Israel was born out of the ashes of the Holocaust as a beacon of hope. But to really understand the country’s troubled present, we need journalists to look beyond one sided narratives and to offer up a more accurate picture of what’s happened in the past and what’s going on today.
posted by adamvasco (90 comments total)

This post was deleted for the following reason: This seems to be turning into another yelling past each other thing. Please, next time reserve I/P threads for only something really interesting and/or new and/or not contentious -- mathowie



 
Because I like playing favorites. But to be fair, I'll flip a coin and pick sides every day, OK?
posted by filthy light thief at 4:01 PM on January 14, 2009 [1 favorite]


Why are so many people reluctant to discuss what is happening in Israel and Palestine?

Well they sure ain't talking about Metafilter.
posted by gwint at 4:02 PM on January 14, 2009 [12 favorites]


Why are so many people reluctant to discuss what is happening in Israel and Palestine?

Sphere of Deviance.
posted by sfts2 at 4:03 PM on January 14, 2009 [4 favorites]


to really understand the country’s troubled present, we need journalists to look beyond one sided narratives and to offer up a more accurate picture of what’s happened in the past and what’s going on today

And THAT'S why I get all my Gaza coverage from Joe the Plumber.
posted by billysumday at 4:05 PM on January 14, 2009 [9 favorites]


Because its like talking about that uncle nobody wants to invite to your reunion. Every story, including the one where he tried to feel up your cousin's dog, is a bitter reminder that something is severely wrong with certain people, and some won't ever get their act together, even if they're given another thousand years or so. You dry heave when it suddenly dawns on you...

...there aren't many chromosomes separating you from him/them.
posted by Bathtub Bobsled at 4:06 PM on January 14, 2009 [6 favorites]


Not sure what this about. I saw this on IFC. It's a transcript of part of the show, and then many comments?
posted by fixedgear at 4:09 PM on January 14, 2009


Why are so many people reluctant to discuss what is happening in Israel and Palestine?

For the last week at least, people have been tripping all over themselves to discuss Israel & Palestine. Also, before that, for a long time. Compare the amount of discussion given relatively to The Congo, or Timor, or Bolivia, or Thailand, or... Hell, even the Sri Lanka thread here descended into jabber abut other things. I think people LOOOVE to discuss Israel & Palestine.
posted by Devils Rancher at 4:14 PM on January 14, 2009 [8 favorites]


what a coincidence, a friend just sent me this: http://www.pppl.org/ which is about how the American media doesn't discuss it and so many Americans aren't even aware there's an occupation that's been going on for decades.
posted by sineater at 4:19 PM on January 14, 2009


Its sad.
posted by samsara at 4:20 PM on January 14, 2009 [1 favorite]


Why are so many people reluctant to discuss what is happening in Israel and Palestine?

...You've not been here in a while, have you?
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 4:27 PM on January 14, 2009 [3 favorites]


Why are so many people reluctant to discuss what is happening in Israel and Palestine?

Joe the Plumber asked us not to.
posted by terranova at 4:29 PM on January 14, 2009 [3 favorites]


first of all, "wendell".

Second, Gaza protests violate Canadian laws: Jewish Congress: will it be declared illegal to protest Israel's action in Canada? Someone call Ezra Levant. Oh, wait, he's already on the case!
posted by GuyZero at 4:37 PM on January 14, 2009


I think a large part of it is that many people believe it's a problem with no easy, satisfactory solution that respects human rights. I'm not sure there is a solution that would both respect the rights of both parties and actually stop the violence at this point.
posted by Mitrovarr at 4:38 PM on January 14, 2009


And, to clarify, Canada goes with protest, not Israel's actions. Damn my ambiguous writing. Israel hasn't invaded Canada.
posted by GuyZero at 4:38 PM on January 14, 2009


Because the issue is rarely "discussed". Silence is the appropriate course of action if the alternative is a partisan screaming-match. Look at what happens here - the sides of the "debate" are so entrenched that they don't even recognise the legitimacy of their opposite numbers, and see them instead as racist/antisemitic Likudnik/Hamas trolls/trolls. Because the two Ultra positions are so entrenched, the respective narratives that they subscribe to are mutually exclusive - it's not that they disagree on points of history, it's that they're using entirely different histories.
posted by WPW at 4:41 PM on January 14, 2009 [1 favorite]


will it be declared illegal to protest Israel's action in Canada?

Wait, they're blowing up Canadians now?
posted by Joe Beese at 4:41 PM on January 14, 2009


Good post, just for Racialicious itself. The IFC transcript selection was useful, and the comments (don't miss #6, Melissa) thread was pretty reasonable (and from the perspective of a multi-racial community). But the post is really about Digging for Truth, which, I think, many are trying to do right now.
posted by psyche7 at 4:42 PM on January 14, 2009


This morning I emailed Juan Cole, largely about will willingness to speak out on Gaza. Here's what I wrote...

Prof. Cole -

I just wanted to send you a quick thanks for your blogging of late.

I'm so heartbroken/furious/bewildered by what is going on in the Gaza strip, by the US Media's warped coverage of it, by the progressive blogosphere's avoidance of the topic,
by my own powerlessness to do anything... Thanks for speaking out.

(I do hope you post a reply to Thomas Friedman's repugnant op-ed today, but there are so many terrible things being written now by so many people... I understand that it's overwhelming)

Anyway, I'd glad that I have your blog (and Glen Greenwald's [and As'ad's Angry Arab site when I can handle all the anger and the horrors]) for some morality and clarity.

(you don't need to reply, I just wanted to thank you)

A

[he was kind enough to reply anyway]
posted by Auden at 4:43 PM on January 14, 2009 [1 favorite]


Israel and Palestine should just have sex and get it over with.
posted by Chuffy at 4:51 PM on January 14, 2009 [1 favorite]


Give the Middle East back to the Ottomans.

....there, discuss that.
posted by sammyo at 4:54 PM on January 14, 2009


I giggled when I read Racialicious. And for the record, I can't stand green gumi bears.

I'm staying out of this one.
posted by cjorgensen at 4:54 PM on January 14, 2009


We should have google pins for these six people going around in a loop.
posted by Artw at 4:55 PM on January 14, 2009




Speaking of Palestine and Israel, this was a bit of interesting reporting:

Israel's prime minister Ehud Olmert boasted that he in effect instructed George Bush not to vote for the UN resolution on a Gaza ceasefire, leaving Condoleezza Rice, who had, "cooked it up... pretty shamed".


So, that's nice.
posted by dejah420 at 5:05 PM on January 14, 2009 [1 favorite]


Israel and Palestine should just have sex and get it over with.

The ongoing non-consensual rectal examination doesn't count as sex?
posted by PeterMcDermott at 5:05 PM on January 14, 2009 [5 favorites]


Give the Middle East back to the Ottomans.

Ottomans are smarter than that.
posted by jason's_planet at 5:06 PM on January 14, 2009


On my part, I usually start looking around for heavy objects to throw whenever the subject comes up. It's not that I favor one side or another, or can't understand those that do. The opinion of most of my otherwise enlightened friends is, "they've been doing this for thousands of years and we can't stop them."

And though I have a perfectly good and reasoned rebuttal to that statement, it doesn't matter. Somehow it has become common knowledge that They Have Always Hated Each Other.

You now have seven people going around in a loop. This is my first post on the topic.
posted by kanewai at 5:16 PM on January 14, 2009 [1 favorite]


Give Carthage back to the Phoenicians!
posted by mullingitover at 5:17 PM on January 14, 2009


Second, Gaza protests violate Canadian laws: Jewish Congress: will it be declared illegal to protest Israel's action in Canada? Someone call Ezra Levant. Oh, wait, he's already on the case!

What's the matter, are you pissed that Islamists aren't the only ones trying to take advantage of the PC frenzy and the "human rights tribunals?" Or that certain unions can't seem to get away with wasting taxpayer money on racism?
posted by Krrrlson at 5:20 PM on January 14, 2009


Second, Gaza protests violate Canadian laws: Jewish Congress: will it be declared illegal to protest Israel's action in Canada?

Why not? In America, for decades it's been illegal to protest Israel's actions by boycotting Israeli companies and products.
posted by TheOnlyCoolTim at 5:20 PM on January 14, 2009 [7 favorites]


Just because some people, even on Metafilter, are particularly vocal on one side or the other of I/P doesn't mean there aren't still many people hesitant to talk about it. Aside from a few "I wish they'd get their act together"s here and there, these people (often something of the silent majority in left-leaning circles) are largely invisible.

I think comment #2 by vodalus pretty much sums it up:
"I know that I hesitate to get into any real discussion of the conflict because I’m afraid that my ignorance will come off as racist. Great post Latoya."
posted by lunit at 5:24 PM on January 14, 2009


Yes, I'm afraid that Israel vs. Palestine gets far far more coverage & thought than any number of other conflicts. Said coverage & thought often does help resolve other conflicts but obviously isn't helping here. So why do you care so much?

Well, maybe the Israel vs. Palestine conflict is progressing quite reasonably? Israel moved solidly towards the two state solution by building the wall, sure Sharon sabotaged it by building through Palestinian land, sure Hamas switched to rockets, but still major progress. Palestine also made solid progress by becoming a democracy with formalized hostilities towards Israel. It seems like both peoples are now far more in control of their destinies than before, so maybe we are closer to peace.
posted by jeffburdges at 5:27 PM on January 14, 2009 [1 favorite]


Just to put things in perspective, I'll leave this here: List of Wars 2003-Current.
posted by mullingitover at 5:31 PM on January 14, 2009 [3 favorites]


.
posted by troybob at 5:37 PM on January 14, 2009


Well, maybe the Israel vs. Palestine conflict is progressing quite reasonably? Israel moved solidly towards the two state solution by building the wall, sure Sharon sabotaged it by building through Palestinian land, sure Hamas switched to rockets, but still major progress. Palestine also made solid progress by becoming a democracy with formalized hostilities towards Israel.

I have lost the ability to distinguish between irony and analysis. Now I'm wondering whether there ought to be a difference.
posted by Joe in Australia at 5:52 PM on January 14, 2009 [2 favorites]


Imagine if the Moonies and the Scientologists had been slaughtering each other for thousands of years over the differences in their respective belief systems.

That's how out of patience I am with the Israel situation.
posted by Joe Beese at 6:12 PM on January 14, 2009 [3 favorites]


Jim Kunstler and Bob Moriarity in knock-down drag-out over I/P conflict.
posted by telstar at 6:27 PM on January 14, 2009 [2 favorites]


Why are so many people reluctant to post in the existing threads?
posted by Horace Rumpole at 6:41 PM on January 14, 2009 [2 favorites]


People don't avoid it because they are intimidated, but because they don't know what the hell it is anymore. It so defies logic and rational classification that it is literally un-understandable, so pretty much everybody feels stupid when they talk about it; the ones who don't feel that way are likely gaining something from it. The conflict has nothing to do with the people, the places, or whatever land-development deal God forgot to get notarized. It is a repository and/or pretense for any number of crackpot agendas. At this point I'm even resenting the peacemakers for facilitating all the attention heaped on it. I/P is a big fucking drama queen and needs to be sent to its room for a long timeout.
posted by troybob at 6:43 PM on January 14, 2009 [5 favorites]


I enjoyed Bill Moyers's thoughts
posted by saul wright at 6:45 PM on January 14, 2009 [2 favorites]


If only Abraham had gotten a lightning flash of the future from THE LORD before he even gave Hagar the once-over.

Once again, I blame God.
posted by droplet at 6:47 PM on January 14, 2009


The loal papers where I live get letters daily representing both sides. The big demonstrations in America and in Europe have been widely covered. It is thus not true that people are reluctant to speak on the issue.
posted by Postroad at 6:50 PM on January 14, 2009


"Second, Gaza protests violate Canadian laws: Jewish Congress: will it be declared illegal to protest Israel's action in Canada?"

It's even worse in Italy. The "lying their asses off" Associated Press calls it:
Outrage in Italy at call to boycott Jews

...and the local Jewish community is going to sue the union that called for the boycott for instigation of racial hatred.

... except, of course, the union never called for a boycott of Jewish businesses. They called for a boycott of Israeli products, using this image, and this text, babelfished for your convenience:

A small gesture against politics of the slaughters to Gaza! Beloveds consumers and citizens, we ask to you with a hand on the heart for giving a contribution so that the genocidio to Gaza you stop yourself. Not there are many things to say, the images and the number of dead children they speak by themselves! We do not want to force nobody, but today we feel the moral duty to indicate a road in order to protest against the Israeli government and its military politics of slaughters. Not acquired produced that they begin with the code to bars 729, that goods has been manufactured in Israel. We stop the slaughter of Gaza… STOP to the strafings quickly!

So yes, by all means. Support humanity and defend the truth.

Boycott 729!
posted by markkraft at 6:50 PM on January 14, 2009 [1 favorite]


Jim Kunstler and Bob Moriarity in knock-down drag-out over I/P conflict.

Kunstler is never less than provocative - even when he's least persuasive. But he's hurling fireballs there.

I don't doubt that some anti-Wall Street anger is flowing through well-worn channels of anti-semitism. But I also think that, once again, his not-necessarily-unearned misanthropy is giving him tunnel vision. Because he's irritated by the Palestinians' refusal to accept what he considers the obvious inferiority of their bargaining position, he presents their firing rockets into Israel as it were a context-free act of barbarism.
posted by Joe Beese at 6:51 PM on January 14, 2009 [1 favorite]


it'd be great if we could stop personifying israel and palestine, ok? they aren't recalcitrant children or drama queens. they don't need any tough love or a spanking. they're two political entities led by adults with very definite and particular objectives in mind.
posted by klanawa at 6:53 PM on January 14, 2009 [6 favorites]


I think many people avoid it because we are really getting skewed information about what is going on over there. I know for myself, having a father that served in intelligence for that region of the world, it is very difficult to sift through the propaganda.

And, that much of the news broadcasts, IMO, is there to scare old people into voting for ridiculous laws. At least on local level. I am in my early thirties, and I do not have a firm grasp on this conflict that has been going on for pretty much sixty years. It is difficult to get consistant and reliable information from the media. The way I percieve it though, is that Palestine is being occupied by Israel- with the United States footing much of the bill. And, that the U.S. want to keep the conflict going to keep a level of legitamacy of a militarized Isreal.
posted by captainsohler at 6:53 PM on January 14, 2009


What violence was there between Muslims and Jews in Palestine from the Ottoman occupation of 1519, with the brief break of Egyptian Ottoman rule from 1831 until 1841, rule until 1917?
posted by sien at 6:54 PM on January 14, 2009 [1 favorite]


Despite being areligious, I support Israel out of what can (perhaps derisively) be described as tribal loyalty/heritage. I want Israel (read: a Jewish state) to exist, but the sense I get from reading the MeFi discussions is that this belief makes me a bad person. (Note: I do also support a Palestinian state)

I have friends and family to whom this issue means a hellluva a lot, and I have friends of Muslim backgrounds who have been attending protest rallies (NYC)

At this point all I feel is guilt and tiredness over the issue.
posted by rosswald at 7:00 PM on January 14, 2009 [3 favorites]


So, rosswald... what are your thoughts about those Germans in America who supported Germany in WWII out of tribal loyalty/heritage... at least before they knew the full gory details of how many civilians they slaughtered?

Would you question whether they let their heritage get in the way of the loyalty they owed to the truth or to the United States?

Because I'm a German-American... and I certainly would. My concern would be in addressing the humanitarian crisis and doing what's best for the United States, which are two concerns I didn't see you address here.

Do you think it's in the best interest of the United States, and that it makes U.S. citizens safer overseas for our government to support disproportionate attacks on Palestinians which have killed about a thousand Palestinians so far and wounded over 4,000?
posted by markkraft at 7:11 PM on January 14, 2009


What this world needs is a United Hebrab Republic.
posted by ZenMasterThis at 7:14 PM on January 14, 2009 [1 favorite]


Imagine if the Moonies and the Scientologists had been slaughtering each other for thousands of years over the differences in their respective belief systems.

Oh, it seems unlikely we'll really have to imagine it for too terribly long, don't you agree?
posted by mwhybark at 7:19 PM on January 14, 2009 [1 favorite]


Rosswald, I'm in very much the same boat as you (background jewish, not religious, prefer 2 states): I know why you get that sense, but don't take it to heart. The sense I get when I talk about the I-P woes1 is that every single person is horrible. That there is no right side2, that everyone's a villain.

I don't like feeling this way. It actively hurts everything I do, makes me dislike life. So, I don't talk about it.

1. Not just on Mefi, but everywhere.
2. Should that be "That there is no right side"? There is no way to tell!3
3. Let's just stop here before I keep going, no?

posted by Lemurrhea at 7:22 PM on January 14, 2009


rosswald: your comment contains the answer to the original poster's question: why the relaive silence?

We love Jews; we love Arabs. The eyeclawing is predetermined not by thousands of years of history but by the electoral politics of the West and there is no solution. Our votes have guaranteed a murderous stalemate. We are all complicit in the slaughter. It sickens us.

So, next topic?
posted by mwhybark at 7:24 PM on January 14, 2009 [1 favorite]


Markkraft, I respectfully submit that the two situations are worlds apart.

I would also add to the discussion that I often feel, as I explained to a drunken Jesus-fan who was championing Israel over NY's eve, that it's a little odd to even have an opinion on this from over here in the comfort of our homes.

Someone, somehow, is going to perform a miracle of the order that South Africa pulled off when it had it's amnesty trials. This is a blink of an eye, historically. That any of us should try to imagine the anger and fear driving the decisions of the Jews in the region is laughable. Israeli's are at most a generation removed from near-extinction. Shit, I start to bristle with rage over some fundy trying to tell me on an airplane that my Judaism will damn me to hell. Imagine what I'd feel like if a rocket landed in my cul-de-sac.

Hamas is a cancer. I imagine Israel will stop cutting away at it when they think it's debulked to the point that other, less blunt tactics can manage.
posted by docpops at 7:25 PM on January 14, 2009


Joe Beese writes "Imagine if the Moonies and the Scientologists had been slaughtering each other for thousands of years over the differences in their respective belief systems.

"That's how out of patience I am with the Israel situation."


Well, it's more like if, 60 years ago, the Moonies slaughtered a lot of Scientologists in Korea, and so Africa decided to give Los Angeles to the Scientologists as a homeland without consulting the Angelinos. Then the Scientologists got in a war with Nevada and Oregon, got their hands on nukes, and took over most of Southern California.
posted by mullingitover at 7:27 PM on January 14, 2009 [9 favorites]


Lemurrhea, there are only victims in this event.
posted by mwhybark at 7:28 PM on January 14, 2009


"Imagine if the Moonies and the Scientologists had been slaughtering each other for thousands of years over the differences in their respective belief systems."

Or, alternately, imagine that the Romans had kicked the Scientologists out of their homeland, only to have the Moonies gradually spread throughout the region and exist there for about 1300 years, only to find their land forceably settled on by a bombthrowing bunch of radical Scientologists, who blow up British hotels and trains, kick the Moonies off of their land, and who later occupy all of the surrounding land containing many of the remaining Moonies, taking whatever land and water they want. They then proceed to treat the Moonies like they're living in a giant prison, complete with a blockade on simple, ordinary things like clothes, computers, and livestock, to the extent that they have to smuggle such things in to their besieged ghettos through deep holes in the ground.

And when the majority of the Moonies are monitored by international teams so they can democratically elect their leaders, the Scientologists, with the help of the Americans and an Egyptian dictator, proceed to piss all over the election by trying to assassinate their leaders and arming the people who lost, causing a civil war... before finally invading and bombing the crap out of them, in the hope of breaking their will and getting them to accept the notion that they should acknowledge the permanent existence of a permanently Scientologist-led Scientologist state where their homes once were, and accept the fact that the people who lost the election and are being bribed by the Scientologists and the Americans should be the ones to negotiate the peace treaty.
posted by markkraft at 7:41 PM on January 14, 2009 [7 favorites]


"Why not? In America, for decades it's been illegal to protest Israel's actions by boycotting Israeli companies and products."
- posted by TheOnlyCoolTim at 5:20 PM

that is incredible! I had no idea that there was such a thing. I'm completely astounded.
posted by Auden at 7:44 PM on January 14, 2009


B/c Israel is an apartheid state that has no intention of ever allowing the existence of a Palestinian state. See The Great Middle East Peace Process Scam
posted by hooptycritter at 7:59 PM on January 14, 2009 [3 favorites]


"I respectfully submit that the two situations are worlds apart."

Somewhat different, yes. But keep in mind that when the war started in '39, there were still plenty of Americans who supported Nazi Germany, including prominent businessmen like Henry Ford.

It's absolutely the case that by any balanced viewpoint, Israel is the primary aggressor in this conflict, sending their military into Gaza and using grossly disproportionate force that is indiscriminately killing civilians, in violation of its international obligations. Both sides are committing war crimes, but Israel has to be responsible for theirs.

I'm not saying that what they are doing is any better than or worse than what Germany did by invading Poland. Both claimed recent provocations by the other side, even though neither had much of any casualties to justify such disproportionate responses.

So, when I hear someone who is Jewish say that they feel guilty about their support or their inaction re: Israel's behavior, I tend to think that they should feel that way, because ultimately they aren't thinking about whether this is a violation of international laws and agreements. They aren't thinking about how it's disproportionate and a human catastrophe... and they *AREN"T* thinking about what's best to safeguard Americans and American lives.
posted by markkraft at 8:06 PM on January 14, 2009


Second, Gaza protests violate Canadian laws: Jewish Congress: will it be declared illegal to protest Israel's action in Canada?

Excellent news, and it will serve the hypocritical leftist bastards - who mouth platitudes such as "hate speech is not free speech" where right-wing speech is concerned - right to have their pet legislation come back to bite them on the ass. Here's hoping that the Jewish Congress is successful and that suppression of anti-Israel protests triggers a backlash against hate speech laws and other PC restrictions on free speech in general. Worse is better for now.
posted by L.P. Hatecraft at 8:07 PM on January 14, 2009 [1 favorite]


I have great sympathy for both sides here. The issue is, of course, the United States. Since the US offers unlimited military power to Israel, there isn't much incentive for them to actually talk turkey and do something radical - because they win every battle.

Unfortunately, they win every battle and they are losing the war. In particular, there are tons of people like me, liberal, committed, who used to support Israel and now do not.

The only solution is some form of autonomy for the Palestinians. Until there's some Palestinian Autonomous Zone where Palestinians can really believe that they're in control - as they completely "deserve" for simply having lived in the same spot for a very long time - as long as Gaza can e.g. be deprived of medical or even food supplies on a whim of Israel, there will continue to be blood.

I would like to note at this point that you're more likely to be murdered in the US than murdered in Israel, that all of Israel's issues are police issues and not a matter for warfare. If Israel took that tack entirely and concentrated on finding and arresting the undeniably criminal individuals who are firing missiles from - and into - Gaza, while strongly preserving the civilian population, the overwhelming majority of whom (like EVERYWHERE ELSE IN THE FUCKING WORLD) just want to be left alone and have a chance to raise a family and prosper, then I would have no problem with them.

The issue is that the US and Israel are openly embarked on terrorism. They want to change the minds of a small number of combattants by killing a large number of civilians and that's the very definition of terrorism.
posted by lupus_yonderboy at 8:17 PM on January 14, 2009 [1 favorite]


"for decades it's been illegal to protest Israel's actions by boycotting Israeli companies and products..."

Of course, those laws only are about cooperation with overseas boycotts, as can be seen by the paperwork involved. They do not effect U.S. citizens who choose to boycott Israel, nor do they effect U.S. businesses who choose to honor such internal boycott requests.
posted by markkraft at 8:17 PM on January 14, 2009 [1 favorite]


Hamas is no more a "cancer" then Israel is a "cancer". That kind of thinking gets nobody anywhere except giving people permission in their own minds to "cut away at" "cancer"... which actually means murdering men and women and children.
posted by Auden at 8:21 PM on January 14, 2009 [4 favorites]


Hamas is no more a "cancer" then Israel is a "cancer".

Bullshit. Hamas is a political organization that has made clear it's intention to eradicate Israel. Israel, while possibly ill-conceived from the outset, has no such opposite intent. Stop being simplistic and/or hyperbolic.
posted by docpops at 8:25 PM on January 14, 2009


I think that in the first sentence of the post there is an implied question:
Can anyone offer an analogue from history where a similar, not exactly the same mind you, but similar situation that has been resolved and is there anything we can learn from the previous situation that might help resolve the current situation?

Please.
posted by vapidave at 8:26 PM on January 14, 2009


L.P. Hatecraft/eponysterical:

Like many other adult issues, "hate speech" is complex and neither "it should be illegal" or "all speech should be free" is a true answer to the issue.

Clearly "being able to express yourself without fear of repercussions" is important. Clearly "being able to live" is important.

A couple of years ago they tried a man around my parts for murder after the Crown Heights riots for yelling, "Get the Jew!"

(It went further, he went to some effort to organize a group of people...)

I blanked the results out due to awfulness but as the representative of the people, I do wish to emphatically preserve our right to try people for causing death in such a horrible fashion. It is possible to murder someone by only using information and similar consequences should ensue to when you pull out a gun and shoot them.
posted by lupus_yonderboy at 8:27 PM on January 14, 2009


I support Israel. One major reason I don't talk about the conflict is that I'm tired of the sort of reply that rosswald got from markkraft, which I found hostile and argumentative. I have no interest in debating. I can't change his mind. He can't change mine. Why should I bother?
posted by swerve at 8:30 PM on January 14, 2009


Of course, those laws only are about cooperation with overseas boycotts, as can be seen by the paperwork involved.

I'm sorry, I completely don't see how the link applies to your argument, could you clarify?

The form you are linking appears to me to be a way to not participate in a boycott by asking the US government to conceal information about the fact that you are actually doing business with the boycottee.
posted by lupus_yonderboy at 8:30 PM on January 14, 2009


I support Israel. One major reason I don't talk about the conflict is that I'm tired of the sort of reply that rosswald got from markkraft, which I found hostile and argumentative. I have no interest in debating. I can't change his mind. He can't change mine. Why should I bother?

In a rational world, since Israel appears to only exist because of massive subsidies from the United States, supporters of Israel would be eager to explain to the US taxpayers (that's me) exactly why they deserve billions of dollars a year from the US, resulting in levels of government support (like socialized medicine) that the US taxpayers themselves don't see.

If you were willing to give up all the US tax money, then by all means, feel free not to justify yourself to me. As it is, every year thousands of dollars of my money go to support your cause - as such, I feel I have a right to ask you to justify it.
posted by lupus_yonderboy at 8:36 PM on January 14, 2009 [2 favorites]


It's silly to say that the I/P conflict goes back thousands of years, when it is so typical of modern post colonial struggles present all over the globe. Without the British empire neither the concept of modern Israel or Palestine would exist.

That said it is striking how little the debate and the actors have changed in the last hundred years. For instance, Christian Zionism goes back more than 100 years and both the and the Fedayeen the Mahdi Army that U.S. is having trouble with in Iraq now, come from a long line of groups with the same names going back to Arab resistance to British colonialism and Jewish settlement.

It sucks that we ignore these cultural nuances in the west. For instance the explicitly anit colonial conotations of the names of Iraqi militias should help us to understand why the people of Iraq are not so happy the U.S. is occupying theur country.
posted by afu at 8:39 PM on January 14, 2009 [1 favorite]


People don't avoid it because they are intimidated, but because they don't know what the hell it is anymore. It so defies logic and rational classification that it is literally un-understandable, so pretty much everybody feels stupid when they talk about it;

No, it's pretty much because they don't want to offend anyone. It's not that confusing, Israel is killing hundreds (almost a thousand) palistinians in Gaza after walling them off and starving them. They've killed hundreds of children, who by the way, have stunted growth from lack of food. All of this over home-made rockets that have only killed at most one person in Israel the past year. If that were happening between any other pair of countries or intercountry groups, what do you think people would have to say about it? (If they said anything at all, just look at Sudan, Burma, etc. No one even care about those places. But then again, the U.S. isn't giving billions of dollars a year to one of the sides there either)

Also, plenty of liberal blogs are talking about this. Glenn Greenwald, Yglesias, Firedoglake at least.

Also, I'm tired of this "thousands of years" excuse. It's a complete copout and abdication of responsibility. The current crises is only a few decades old, and before that you had some terrorism as Israel sought independence from Britan, but there was never anything like the constant, persistant, year after year violence between Jews and Muslims you see now, even though both lived in the area. And even in that 60 year period there have been years of relative peace.

Bullshit. Hamas is a political organization that has made clear it's intention to eradicate Israel. Israel, while possibly ill-conceived from the outset, has no such opposite intent. Stop being simplistic and/or hyperbolic.

And Israel wants to eradicate Hamas. And besides, what someone wants is beside the point. The question is, what would they be willing to settle for to have peace? That's what negotiations are for, but Israel refuses to have them with Hamas. Anyway, that's technically off topic for this thread.
posted by delmoi at 8:50 PM on January 14, 2009 [2 favorites]


"They want to change the minds of a small number of combattants by killing a large number of civilians..."

It's not that they expect to change Hamas' minds regarding attacks on Israel. It's that they're trying to punish the civilians, so that they'll turn on Hamas.

That's why Palestinians in the West Bank can import more than basic humanitarian supplies -- even though many feel surpressed and live in fear from the corrupt, armed Palestinian Authority -- while those in Gaza have to dig tunnels 30 feet down in order to import the basics of modern living... like food, fuel, clothes, and even livestock.

Given the humanitarian crisis in Gaza that existed even before the attacks and which have already contributed to the deaths of over 2000 children with otherwise treatable ailments since the sanctions began, it effects every aspect of life. No wonder that the Gazan tunnel diggers are local patriots, akin to the pilots of the Berlin airlift.
posted by markkraft at 9:21 PM on January 14, 2009 [1 favorite]


plenty of liberal blogs are talking about this

Chris Floyd, today...

While Barack Obama was dining with rightwing agitators and Hillary Clinton was glowering with menace toward "non-state actors" (her curious -- not to mention ignorant -- term for the democratically elected government of Palestine), the killing in Gaza kept grinding on. So many have died in such a short space of time that "there is not tomb and continent enough for the slain": the Palestinians are running out of graves. ...

No doubt Israel is hoping to copy America's success in burying atrocities, mass murder and oppression behind the PR illusions of a triumphant "surge" in Gaza. Just like the bipartisan Terror War establishment in Washington, the Israelis too hope to establish a "peace of the grave" in their own military adventure. They have a long way to go to match the million innocents slaughtered in the American war on Iraq, of course -- just as their harsh sanctions seem like a pajama party compared to the 500,000 children killed by the bipartisan, Clinton-Bush sanctions regime imposed on pre-war Iraq: one of the greatest deliberate non-military inflictions of death and suffering on a people since the heyday of Hitler and Stalin. But the Israelis are certainly doing their best to follow the master's example.

There's only one problem: how can you have a "peace of the grave" -- if you run out of graves?

posted by Joe Beese at 9:26 PM on January 14, 2009


And Israel wants to eradicate Hamas. And besides, what someone wants is beside the point. The question is, what would they be willing to settle for to have peace? That's what negotiations are for, but Israel refuses to have them with Hamas. Anyway, that's technically off topic for this thread.

I think its really that Hamas does not want to negotiate with Israel (according to news reports out of Damascus where the "leaders" safely reside). It's easy to condemn the immediate facts on the ground in one direction or another, but the fact is that political and military decisions are being made in terms of regional power jockeying ON BOTH SIDES. Really the Hamas leadership needs to shut the fuck up and stop holding out for insane demands so that everyone else can treat them as good faith actors in the negotiation process.

The intervening humanitarian catastrophe is just a sad result of politicians playing brinksmanship games with each other, and pointing out narrow instances of OMG DYING BABIES isn't going to help the situation any.
posted by sandking at 9:29 PM on January 14, 2009


Yeah, the "thousands of years" thing is ahistorical and not helpful. While it was a beautiful thing for the Jewish people to get a homeland in 1948 after 2000 years of wandering, there were people already living in Palestine, who had to be displaced.

Who would like their land back, please, and would like to have basic human rights.

The actions of the Palestinian leadership since that time, with regards to terrorism, leaves quite a lot to be desired, however.

There are so many beautiful things about the Israeli state, but how they have treated the Palestinians over the years is just abysmal, and tragic, and pulls everyone down.

What would have been better, in 1948, would have been to have given the Jewish people some land where no one lived, rather than land that was already occupied. Alaska, or northern Canada, maybe.

Maybe a big chunk of Germany. At least then there would be some logic to who the displaced people would be.
posted by MythMaker at 9:32 PM on January 14, 2009


Bullshit. Hamas is a political organization that has made clear it's intention to eradicate Israel. Israel, while possibly ill-conceived from the outset, has no such opposite intent. Stop being simplistic and/or hyperbolic.

The State of Israel absolutely wants to kill every last member of the democratically elected government of Gaza. Why? Because their charter calls for a democratic one-state solution and does not recognize the borders as enforced by the IDF. At best the Israelis will parse this as 'not recognizing the State of Israel' or 'not recognizing Israel's right to exist', but usually it's just simplified to the usual 'death to Israel'.

If a one-state solution with universal suffrage for all residents and no racial/religious basis for 'right of return' == 'death to Israel', count me in!
posted by blasdelf at 9:34 PM on January 14, 2009


"Hamas is a political organization that has made clear it's intention to eradicate Israel. Israel, while possibly ill-conceived from the outset, has no such opposite intent."

Oh, really?! Obviously, "dismantle Hamas completely" isn't the same as destroy in your book. And only awhile back, Barak said that the conflict with Hamas was to "the bitter end".

As for Hamas' intent to eradicate Israel, I discussed the matter in depth both here and here.

Ultimately, it's an overblown claim that pro-Israel pundits repeat ad nauseum to convince those who are too lazy to do basic factchecking that they should support them.
posted by markkraft at 9:41 PM on January 14, 2009


Keep in mind that Hamas won the last election with 56% of the vote.

It's not just foolhardy militarism try to exclude 56% of the Palestinian people from representation in peace negotiations. It's undemocratic.

How can someone consider themselves an American and still support such a thing?

If Great Britain was like Israel, then "Give me liberty or give me death!" would've been seen as justification for any crime against the colonists they could possibly think up.
posted by markkraft at 9:48 PM on January 14, 2009


Can't we all just accept that the I/P conflict will never be fully resolved until the adoption of IPv6 and move on?
posted by humanfont at 9:53 PM on January 14, 2009 [1 favorite]


From your first link:

The Islamist faction, responsible for a long campaign of suicide bombings and other attacks on Israelis, still calls for the maintenance of the armed struggle against occupation. But it steps back from Hamas's 1988 charter demanding Israel's eradication and the establishment of a Palestinian state in its place.

Wow, it's almost like they're shouting it from the rooftops. Hard to imagine that Israel has a measure of distrust after a gesture as meaningful as revising the "charter".

And yeah, I misspoke. Of course Israel is interested in the eradication of Hamas. They're going about it the most barbaric ways imaginable, but I'm still hard pressed to see why anyone cares two shits about them. All the anger about civilian deaths still doesn't acknowledge a basic problem of a hostile government at your border. It doesn't matter that it was "just a few rockets" and only minimal Israeli casualties were incurred. Why would they modulate their firepower and risk casualties on their side? We established that paradigm with the atom bomb, I'm afraid. Israel doesn't care about your anger. They care about their existence. But this isn't going to change anyone's opinions, of course, so we'll all go on having them and they'll keep on killing each other.
posted by docpops at 9:55 PM on January 14, 2009


"All the anger about civilian deaths still doesn't acknowledge a basic problem of a hostile government at your border."

Except, of course, that Israel won't let them be sovereign, which is what any real government is. Gaza is a very large prison under a permanent embargo more restrictive than anything that Iraq ever had to live with, run, essentially, by the the biggest, most popular prison gang.

Israel runs Palestine like a prison, taking whatever they want and leaving the rest to spiral downward unless they kiss some warden ass, and they're surprised they occasionally get prison riots? That makes no sense at all.

You seem to write Palestinian anger off as crazy cultural hoodoo, rather than, say, something which is justified after decades of mistreatment. What's more, you seem to think that antagonizing Palestinians before foisting a peace treaty / land grab on them is beneficial to the people of the United States.

It's not that I love Hamas. I don't. I think they're thuggish. That said, they're arguably less corrupt than Fatah, and they are the true democratically elected representatives of the Palestinian people. And if you want peace with the Palestinians, it might just perhaps be a good idea to acknowledge that fact.

In the end, this is all about Israel refusing to return to their 1967 borders. They could have a fair chance at peace next week if they did what's legal under international law, but instead, they acted -- with a wink and a nod from the Bush administration -- to either make peace impossible, or with a larger wink-and-nod to both American parties, to try forcing a land grab upon the Palestinians.

And yes, it does matter than it was "just a few rockets". The fact is, these rockets are homemade -- meaning anyone with a grudge, sugar, fertilizer, bullets, and metal pipe can make them -- and, as a result, break any peace treaty that gets in the way of their revenge. There are numerous rocket makers in Gaza, including Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Fatah, and presumably other independent operations.

Under such circumstances, it certainly does matter that it was "just a few rockets", especially when Israel violated the latest cease-fire in November, the day after US elections... and prior to that, they violated the letter of the treaty by not fully removing sanctions.

100% peace cannot be guaranteed in a situation where there are so many factions and individuals involved. The only thing that can be aimed for is more peace, fewer rockets, and fewer Israeli strikes and sanctions.
posted by markkraft at 10:26 PM on January 14, 2009


Hamas is a political organization that has made clear it's intention to eradicate Israel. Israel, while possibly ill-conceived from the outset, has no such opposite intent.
funny, that. hamas wants to eradicate israel and has nothing resembling the means to do so. israel has no such opposite intent, and yet has the means and appears to be doing so as we speak.
posted by klanawa at 10:39 PM on January 14, 2009 [1 favorite]


I think its really that Hamas does not want to negotiate with Israel

Why do you think that?

Anyway, it's interesting and instructive how in this thread Israel is being criticized for killing nearly a thousand people, hundreds of children in the past few weeks while Hamas is being criticized for discrepancies between their 2006 manifesto and 1988 charter and whether the less belligerent language in the former overrides the more belligerent language in the latter.

It's not about what they're doing, it's what they want, based on some Talmudic reading of historical paperwork.
posted by delmoi at 10:40 PM on January 14, 2009 [1 favorite]


Why are so many people reluctant to poke a hornet's nest with their dick?
posted by Eideteker at 10:49 PM on January 14, 2009


lupus_yonderboy,

I blanked the results out due to awfulness but as the representative of the people, I do wish to emphatically preserve our right to try people for causing death in such a horrible fashion. It is possible to murder someone by only using information and similar consequences should ensue to when you pull out a gun and shoot them.

I agree that some restrictions should apply to free speech, but the problem is that once people who want to control and censor debate get a foot in the door, the argument becomes "well, you accept there have to be some restrictions, it's just a matter of where to draw the line". In the absence of any simple principle that provides a hard edge to distinguish between acceptable and non-acceptable speech, this invites a slippery slope of gradually restricted speech rights. For example, I think that the precedent of categorising porn as a "free speech" issue is one thing that has contributed to muddying the waters since then child porn becomes a precedent for eroding political speech, which is ridiculous. IMO direct incitement to violence should be prosecuted (libel, slander etc is for civil courts), but vague crimes like "vilification" should not be.

If someone publicizes news reports of civilian casualties in Gaza and some hothead hears it and gets pissed off enough to put a brick through a synagogue window, that is the fault of the brick-tosser, not the bearer-of-bad-news. Likewise if some right-wing anti-immigration group publicizes immigrant crime statistics (and provided they are truthful, and the group does not advocate violence) then they should not be held responsible for some skinhead thug who reads them, comes to his own retarded conclusions and decides to go beating up random immigrants. This holds public discourse hostage to the worst elements of society. Better just to punish the individuals responsible for specific criminal acts and leave free speech free.
posted by L.P. Hatecraft at 10:49 PM on January 14, 2009


On another depressing note, it looks like Hillary Clinton is essentially supporting Bush policy on Palestine, including the US policy of arming and training the Palestinian Authority.

"The Palestinian National Security Force and Presidential Guard members who have been trained in Jordan under the auspices of the United States Security Coordinator have performed well in early tests in Jenin and Hebron."

and this beauty...

""I think on Israel, you cannot negotiate with Hamas until it renounces violence, recognizes Israel and agrees to abide by past agreements..."

...which basically means that it needs to reject fighting for liberation, recognize Israel as a Jewish state on Palestinian land, and it needs to support all prior agreements and treaties negotiated by the Palestinian Authority, essentially making Hamas' role in any negotiation negligible.

These are ridiculous, arrogant demands, guaranteed to lead to a bad, sorely resented peace foisted upon the Palestinian people, followed by rocket attacks for the next 100 years. Think of the conflict between the IRA and those in Northern Ireland, without the benefit of a common language and culture.

At some point, someone who supports Palestine will likely get ahold of a particularly nasty weapon to use against Israel... and then all hell will break loose.

I would like to think that Barack Obama wouldn't allow things to go down this path, but ultimately, I doubt it. Israel knows the U.S. leadership is completely whipped.
posted by markkraft at 10:58 PM on January 14, 2009 [1 favorite]


markkraft: Both sides are committing war crimes, but Israel has to be responsible for theirs.

Why do Hamas and their backers get a free pass?
posted by PenDevil at 10:59 PM on January 14, 2009




Gaza crisis spills onto the web.
posted by terranova at 11:16 PM on January 14, 2009


« Older succinct   |   Brings new meaning to "Hurry up and wait." Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments