Stop the Massacre in Lebanon and Palestine

by hmmz Tue Jul 25, 2006 17:27

Nice piece there above--somebody with a brain and knowledge of the middle east at last comes to the fore, so much tripe posted here by people with no clue

Only Muslims do bad things

No but hezbollah does--tell me, hezbollah was founded by Iran to push Israel out of Lebabon--israel withdrew --WTF is hezbollah still doing there? And more importantly why did hezbollah go from defensive to offensive(they have fired rockets into Israel long long before this crisis erupted)

Lebanon has known peace with Israel, apart from hezbollah whos stated aim when founded was to repel Israel, has now changed to drive all jews into the sea mantra, nice nice

People are tired of terrorists like hezbollah, even their own arab brothers are saying they deserve it--Jordan, Eygpt just to name 2

by indeed rawr Tue Jul 25, 2006 15:01

How refreshing, tis a bit more complex than that but if you fancy a read and a bit of educating...

please do

http://www.danielpipes.org/article/298

by rawr Tue Jul 25, 2006 14:48

fully independent Palestinian state

their allready is one pal--its called Jordan

In 1923, the British divided the "Palestine" portion of the Ottoman Empire into two administrative districts. Jews would be permitted only west of the Jordan river. In effect, the British had "chopped off" 75% of the originally proposed Jewish Palestinian homeland to form an Arab Palestinian nation called Trans-Jordan (meaning "across the Jordan River"). This territory east of the Jordan River was given to Emir Abdullah (from Hejaz, now Saudi Arabia) who was not even an Arab-"Palestinian!" This portion of Palestine was renamed Trans-Jordan. Trans-Jordan and would again be renamed "Jordan" in 1946. In other words, the eastern 3/4 of Palestine would be renamed TWICE, in effect, erasing all connection to the name "Palestine!" However, the bottom line is that the Palestinian Arabs had THEIR "Arab Palestinian" homeland. The remaining 25% of Palestine (now WEST of the Jordan River) was to be the Jewish Palestinian homeland.

by pat c Tue Jul 25, 2006 14:30

The IPSC are calling for such a boycott. You may disagree with this but disagreement on a tactic is not grounds to attack the IPSC. Raise your differences on this with them. Was the boycott against Aphartheid South Africa an attack on the working class?

The israeli Trade Union movement is in fact deeply racist and is actually a major employer. It could not be compared to typical Trade Union Federations in free countries.

by Hmmmmactuallynonotatall Tue Jul 25, 2006 14:19

'i think you get my point '

Nope, not at all, not even slightly. Your 'point' is an unsupportable claim that the IDF is doing everything it possibly can to avoid civlian casualties. Yet somehow, for every one Israeli civilian to have been killed over the last fortnight, ten Lebanese have been killed by the IDF. But sure it's all a terrible misunderstanding isn't it? Blockading the country, bombing civilian infrastructure, dropping leaflets telling people to flee then bombing the roads on which they are fleeing - none of it is the least bit questionable. Only Muslims do bad things.

by Socialist Tue Jul 25, 2006 13:50

Can someone clarify if the Ireland-Palestine Solidarity Campaign are calling for a Boycott of Israeli Trade Unions? If this is the case then they can't be fully supported. Israeli Workers are not to blame for the atrocities of the Kadima-Labor Government.

by PaddyK Tue Jul 25, 2006 00:16

I forgot to mention Ruth Dudley Edwards contribution to the Israli massacre of Lebanese society.

She is a London Based Journalist who , yesterday, did not miss an opportunity to abuse the Irish Media with a sickening piece on the back page.She somehow managed to blame the massacre of Lebanon on "Global Islamism." You would really have to read it to grasp the depth of paranoia prevalent . Here's a quote:

"At first .....I briefly feared they [israeli military] might be acting disproportionately. Since then I've recoverd my wits. Yes , the suffering and the destruction is terrible, but the alternative is worse."

The alternative - No suffering and destruction - is worse. Wow!

This woman also pollutes the English Media, I believe.

by Charles Blondin Mon Jul 24, 2006 19:47

RTE continues to show its bias towards Israel in its reporting of the current situation in Palestine and Lebanon.

For example, tonight's Six-One News (Monday 24/7/06) played interviews with a spokesman for the Israeli Foreign Ministry and a spokesman for Mossad - the terrorist Israeli Secret Service. The UN intermediary Jan Egeland got a short soundbite along with some Lebanese refugees (interviewed in the context of the evacuation of Lebanese children to Ireland).

There was no interviewee from either the Lebanese Government, the Palestinian Authority or Hezbollah to counter the Israeli propaganda, nor for that matter any Palestinian or Lebanese victim of Israeli attrocities (other than those already mentioned who were quoted only on their evacuation, not on the actions that forced that evacuation or the persons (Israeli Defence Forces) responsible for those actions.

Even when showing graphic footage of victims on either side, RTE tends to avoid saying outright "these are children who were injured / killed by Israeli shelling", but will always blame Hezbollah where their victims are shown.

Shame on you RTE!

by PaddyK Mon Jul 24, 2006 18:38

Yesterday's Sunday Independent's coverage of the mass murder in Lebanon is repulsive.

John Lalor blames Beiruit and the UN for the Israeli bombardment of Lebanese Society.

Rory Miller, a Lecturer in London, writes a shameful piece headed "Israel's attack is for the good of all."

Another Headline : Pressure Hisbollah, Urges Bush.

Harry De Quetteville of the Telegraph tries to make us see this tragedy through the eyes of an Israeli woman bereaved by a hizbollah raid 30 years ago. Why?

Eoin Harris ridiculing Irish Politicians who try to be heard calling for Israel to be stopped and connivingly stating "Israel has a good case - it was not the initial agressor.

But the trophy of the day goes to the Editor himself in his Comment. Calling the massacre of Lebanons civilians by Israeli warplanes an "accidental war" then waffles on about Hizbollah ad naseum before idiotically concluding that the UN ensuring that the Hizbollah cant launch rockets is the "only solution on offer".

Even the letters page is polluted by some lunatic telling us "our Hopes and prayers are with the "armed democrats" in the IDF whose courage is all that the people in Lebanon must rely on to be free".
Have I died and gone to hell ? Is this reflective of Ireland's views on this outrage ? I refuse to believe that.

As usual Gene Kerrigan brings a tiny shred of hope to the apalling vista. Masterfully, showing us what a complete dunce Gerorge Bush is. What a sickening lackey Tony Blair is in seeking permission to go to the ME from Bush ( and being refused). Thanks Gene.

The Sunday Independent - Ireland's most widely distributed propaganda.

by hmmz Mon Jul 24, 2006 18:34

the difference is the israelis do not deliberately target civilians, if they did persay in Lebanon where they have said they have flown about 1,000 sorties since the start--that is 1000+ bombs for the dumb--if they dropped them indiscriminately the casualty count in civilians would be absolutely massive, the difference here is that the middle east resistance movements deliberately kill civilians because they are under the misguided notion that it is resistance, just like they used to blow up planes, slaughter an olympic team etc that was resistance in their eyes as well. In fact a body on the ground as long as its a dead Israeli is viewed as resistance and really as long as they share that view they will never get anywhere with Israel, you think one day they just might realise that.

At least Israel apoligises when they kill civilians(small comfort i know) but at least they dont break out the sweets and have a dance and a flag burning to celebrate now do they?

i think you get my point .

by bzzzz Mon Jul 24, 2006 17:32

Maybe hmmz might have a word in the ear of his friends in the Israeli Army and tell them that:

incinerating innocent families in their cars is not 'defence'

killing children who venture out of their homes is not 'defence'

flattening houses with their unarmed occupants inside is not 'defence'

confiscating and destroying farmlands is not 'defence'

shooting schoolgirls in the head is not 'defence'

killing approx. 400 civilians, half of them children, is not 'defence'

contaminating wells is not 'defence'

etc. etc. etc.

by Colm Breathnach - ISN personal capacity Mon Jul 24, 2006 17:24 breathc at hotmail dot com

As Pat said there is no contradiction between supporting a right to resist and opposing attacks on civilians. In the case of Palestine and Lebanon, the implications are clear: Palestinians and Lebanese have a right to resist occupation and invasion by the IDF by fighting back against the IDF by armed force. It also clear that, at least in the case of the ISN, the term 'resistance' does not include attacks on Israeli civilians, either by rocket or suicide bombings. Really, its not that complicated: the term 'resistance' is qualified by the exclusion of attacks on civilians.

Now lets hear what the supporters of Israeli state have to say: any qualifications to your support of the IDF? Of all the material I have read on indymedia and elsewhere I have only read one Israeli state supporter who qualified their support for the IDF by stating that killing of hundreds of Lebanese/Palestinians was wrong.

by hmmz Mon Jul 24, 2006 17:14

maybe as a concerned supporter of the cause then you should meander over and politely tell them that generating suicidebombers and running into a crowded public square and exploding is not **resistance**, or mortar fire into housing estates is not **resistance** or rockets from gaza into residential areas is not **resistance**, shooting unarmed settlers is not **resistance** bombing public buses is not **resistance**, i could go on and on and on

iF THEY EVER WANTED TO BE VIEWED AS **RESISTANCE FIGHTERS**

they would target soldiers, the fact is they rarely do, even funnier is that they got back some of gaza and straight away they start firing rockets from there, no wonder the Israelis sent in troops again

by pat c Mon Jul 24, 2006 16:52

I see no contradiction, honestly. Like the ISN I support the right of Palestinians and Lebanese to defend themselves against IDF or Armed Settler attack. But I do not support attacks on civilian targets by anyone.

Where is the contradiction? The ISNs second sentence qualified the first one.

by Interested Mon Jul 24, 2006 16:50

" With the encouragement of its backers in Washington and London, the Israeli state continues its murderous campaign of bombings and assassinations in Lebanon and Palestine. "
The above is from the first contribution. Did I do something wrong by referring to Iran and Syria as backers of murderous campaigns? Or am I just ignorant as per Caobhin's post ?

by hmmz Mon Jul 24, 2006 16:49

. The ISN supports the right of the Palestinian and Lebanese people to resist occupation and invasion. We condemn all attacks on civilians, regardless of whether they are Lebanese, Palestinian or Israeli.

those two sentences do not go hand in hand as far as Lebanon is concerned as resistance by Hizbollah consists of firing rockets into towns indiscriminately--also gaza militants do this on a regular basis as **resistance** or else its a suicide bomber---in fact all their resistance methods pretty much target civilians

should rethink what you condemn and support because once you define the resistance going on in the middle east most of it involves blowing up civilians

by Caobhin Mon Jul 24, 2006 16:41

Is your omission of an allusion to US backers deliberate or just down to ignorance?

by Interested Mon Jul 24, 2006 16:20

Surely the piece should be titled " Stop the massacre in Lebanon, Palestine and Israel", and allude to the backers in Iran and Syria also ????

by PW Mon Jul 24, 2006 13:29

This website carries up-to-date news and analysis pieces on Palestine. Its one of the best Middle East sites.

http://www.imemc.org/

by PW Sun Jul 23, 2006 13:25

The following link is for an interview with the Lebanese socialist Gilbert Achar on the current situation in Lebanon.

http://212.67.202.147/%7Eivnet05/article.php3?id_articl...=1090

by Fred Belkin - ICOWASH Sat Jul 22, 2006 23:58

Hmm.. aptly named for looking in mirrors I suppose?, by the way, where does the ISN specifically call for Hezzbollah? to stop their rocket attacks? I see deploring & hand wringing, not much else of substance?

by IdiotWatch Sat Jul 22, 2006 21:54

I know you want to believe that everyone who opposes the IDF massacre specialists is a mad anti-semitic terrorist etc etc but for once in your life read the statement rather than showing your ignorance. The ISN clearly condemn attacks on all civilians and specifically include Israeli civilians in that condemnation. No if or buts.

by Popsiq Sat Jul 22, 2006 19:43

Did the irish socialist network protest the Hezzie rocket attacks on fellow arabs living in Israel? no, that would obviously be Un-Hypocritical.