Bristolians, Gordon Brown spat on our call for a cease-fire in Gaza.

by Congrats Mon Jan 05, 2009 09:43

So Indymedia serves up the usual selection of unreferenced, unverifiable and highly dubious claims alongside outright lies. Well done.

For example

'Palestine has repeatedly said that it will recognise Israel of pre-1967 borders in return for a sovereign Palestinian state'

When has this been said and by whom exactly? In 1948 when the Palestinians chose civil war rather than accept the UN partition plan that the Israelis accepted?

In 1996 when Arafat declined a peace plan that offered a sovereign Palestinian state composed of Gaza and 98% of the West bank plus a small part of what was Israel to compensate for the 2%?

Or perhaps you got it from the Hamas charter where it says

'"Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it."

"The Islamic Resistance Movement believes that the land of Palestine is an Islamic Waqf consecrated for future Moslem generations until Judgement Day. It, or any part of it, should not be squandered: it, or any part of it, should not be given up. "

"There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad. Initiatives, proposals and international conferences are all a waste of time and vain endeavors."

How such peaceful and caring words can be met with violence and force is truly sickening huh.

Or maybe I'm just dense and don't understand how stating your intent to obliterate a people and claiming that the whole of another state is land which god gave you and using this as justification for trying to remove the sovereignty of another group of people is peaceful behaviour.

by response Mon Jan 05, 2009 11:49

I think your interpretation of history for your own ends does you no favours when you are arguing against a poorly researched article.

Israel proclaimed itself a state in a land where there already WAS a state (or a protectorate, which was always defined as geographically the same thing). The Zionists had agreed a situation where the US would immediately recognise them, which then gave them the authority to request a geographical settlement, which the US duly pushed in the UN.

Meanwhile the Palestinians (faced with a situation similar to Tibetans buying 80% of the land in the Westcountry, unleashing a terror campaign against the other inhabitants to drive them out, and then getting China to recognise them as a nation state) never engaged in any of this politicking - they had been betrayed by the Balfour declaration, and the breaking of the Sykes Picot promises by Britain, and realised that they were the victims of a con-job. They went straight to their equally shocked Arab allies and prepared for war, as they saw it as their only option, and they were right.

How you can try and present the UN as the ultimate arbiter to be respected, when the US has repeatedly vetoed any anti-Isreali resolution despite a sizeable majority for it, and the ones that do get proclaimed (like Resolution 242) are ignored by Israel, shows another example of poor responding.

Israel is a vicious rogue state and its leadership is in the clutches of right wing racists. The original Zionists envisioned a socialist utopia for their land (wherever it was) - they must be turning in their graves.

To the original poster - you say that politicians have let you down, ignored your marching, yet your only commitment seems to be not buying Israeli goods, which is just as questionable in its morality and effectiveness. Don't you think we've gone beyond all that? You should look to the ongoing animal rights campaign to see how to effectively combat oppression - its not nice, not pretty, it requires a lot more commitment than marches or boycotts, but its the only thing that will work.

by Anarchist606 Mon Jan 05, 2009 12:55

You hear a lot about Hamas and the destruction of Israel in its charter - and there is no doubt this has to change for peace - the question is when and how. We have plenty of examples of this process - one not too far away....

The unification of Ireland was a stumbling block - that the Unionists feared would result the the destruction of their culture and identity. However it was solved during - not before- the process of negotiations. Just as the talks started (secretly at first) during - not after - the violence and continued while it sporadically broke out. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Ireland

Only negotiation is going to end the killing. In Ireland the settlers came about 400 years ago and we are still living with the fallout. Unless all sides get real about talking will it be 2409 before we see peace in the middle east? I hope not.

by DN Mon Jan 05, 2009 15:29

'Congrats' in the first comment repeats the Zionist lies being circulated by Israel's and the US's PR operations and promoted unquestioningly by the corporate media.

Firstly the idea that the Palestinians "chose war" in 1948 is so far beyond credible that it's not worth addressing. It does however demonstrate the ideological perspective of the writer.

Israel's supporters like to hark on about the HAMAS charter, which dates from the late 1980s, as evidence of their fanaticism and intransigence.

In reality HAMAS is a broad social movement with deep roots in all parts of Palestinian society. It encompasses hard-line theologians, academics, political and social activists and thousands of ordinary Palestinians.

HAMAS' leadership have signalled on numerous occasions since the beginning of the Second Intifada (1999) a willingness to accept a two-state solution on pre-1967 borders. It has accepted in deeds the right of Israel to exist.

HAMAS has show remarkable pragmatism in the face of a fundamentalist Israeli regime dedicated to destroying their movement and any hope of a viable Palestinian state.

HAMAS is signed up to the Arab Peace Initiative of 2002 which offered Israel acceptance of its right to exist, normal relations with all the Arab states, acceptance that the conflict is over for a return to the pre-1967 borders

HAMAS has repeatedly signalled a willingness to accept a two state solution, has imposed unilateral ceasefires and recently offered a 10 year ceasefire in return for Israeli acceptance of pre-1967 borders.

The most recent ceasefire was not broken by HAMAS but by Israel who tightened their siege of Gaza throughout the 6 months in contravention of the ceasefire terms and then on NOVEMBER 4TH sealed the Strip and began a series of raids into Gaza.

Israel is dedicated to the destruction of the Palestinians.

Israel refuses to recognise the right of the Palestinians to self-determination.

Israel refuses to negotiate with the Palestinians' elected leadership.

Israel is an illegitimate terrorist state.

http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2974
http://leninology.blogspot.com/2008/12/myth-of-hamas-re....html
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24235665/

by Congrats Tue Jan 06, 2009 10:45

Regarding the offer of a 10 year ceasefire which you hold up as evidence that Hamas are willing to accept a peaceful two state solution...

Well the first thing to point out is that a ceasefire is not a peaceful solution, it is a temporary relent in violence. Everyone else who wants peace in the middle east wants a lasting peace, not a temporary agreement, so why should Hamas be any different?

Perhaps this is best explained by Dr Abdel Aziz Rantisi, a Hamas leader, who in an interview with the Reuters news agency discussing the possibility of 10 year truce said that '"it is difficult to liberate all our land at this stage, so we accept a phased liberation.'

To anyone interested in lasting peace, for Israel to cede Gaza and the West Bank (including Jerusalem) and accept the return and recompense of all refugees (while the neighbouring Arab states which saw a comparable number of jewish refugees between 1948 and 1952 do nothing) so that Hamas can gain strength before the next phase of their liberation en route to removing Israel from the map is clearly unacceptable.

For you however it seems reasonable, but this can only be because you are not interested in a peaceful two state solution.

In case you are still confused, here are some more recent quotes from Hamas leaders which very clearly explain their position.

Mahmud az-Zahar, Hamas's foreign minister said in 2006 to the Chinese news agency Xinhua that he

"dreams of hanging a huge map of the world on the wall at my Gaza home which does not show Israel on it...I hope that our dream to have our independent state on all historic Palestine (including Israel). This dream will become real one day. I'm certain of this because there is no place for the state of Israel on this land'

Hamas statement (March 12, 2007)

"We will not betray promises we made to God to continue the path of Jihad and resistance until the liberation of Palestine, all of Palestine,"

Muhammed Deif, leader of the Izz al-Din Al Qassam Brigade, the so-called 'military wing' of Hamas, August 2005 (from statement posted on their website on 27 August 2005).

"To the Zionists who plundered our land.... we promise you that tomorrow all of Palestine will be hell for you, with Allah's help..."

Khaled Mashal, Damascus-based leader of Hamas, December 2005, speaking in Damascus.

"Hamas will continue to wield its weapons and to claim its right to resist. Resistance will continue to be a strategic option until the last piece of Palestinian land is liberated, until the last refugee returns...."

But then I suppose in your eyes a source free misled rant by a Bristolian is more likely to give a correct impression of Hamas then actually listening to what their leaders say. Mainly because the disconnect between what you say about them, and what they say about themselves is enormous.

by Anarchist606 Tue Jan 06, 2009 11:52

Sadly, all the death and carnage Israel has wrought will be for nothing, says Jane's Defence Analyst; "With a military victory for Israel over Hamas not possible, the security situation in southern Israel and Gaza will not improve, even in the longer term." - and the view is echoed by Gary Younge;

"The trouble is that over the last seven years, the war on terror has been thoroughly discredited - not only morally, but militarily and strategically....Meanwhile, Israel has been busy implementing the very tenets of the war on terror that have served the US so badly, primarily that intractable political problems can be solved solely by military means with the aim of not simply bombing your enemies into submission, but eliminating them altogether and then creating resolution on your own terms from the rubble."

You may (or may not) know that Israel has banned the press from Gaza (though reports are coming out thick and fast anyway) but that is not the only media 'management' they are up to. Evidence has emerged that the Israeli government is looking to recruiting volunteers to 'sell' their message on forums and websites. The recruitment email looks like this;

Dear friends,

We hold the military supremacy, yet fail the battle over the international media. We need to buy time for the IDF to succeed, and the least we can do is spare some (additional) minutes on the net. The ministry of foreign affairs is putting great efforts in balancing the media, but we all know it’s a battle of numbers. The more we post, blog, talkback, vote - the more likely we gain positive sentiment.


Of course, governments manipulating the media in war is nothing new - witness our own governments shameful activities over Iraq and Afghanistan - however this is the network media version of that struggle.