Start A Petition

State Terrorism and the New World Order. "Man's Stupidity Has No Bounds"

World  (tags: Marvi Marmara, Freedom Flotilla Massacre, Israeli State Terrorism, Talmudic Tyrants, Zionist Gangster Ideology )

- 3052 days ago -
"On board (the Marvi Marmara) was a consignment of marbles, for the children of the tiny twenty five miles long, by seven mile wide, besieged territory. One could be forgiven for thinking there are some in high places in Israel, who have lost theirs. . ."


We hate spam. We do not sell or share the email addresses you provide.


Mack David (100)
Saturday June 12, 2010, 9:12 am
This article has truly made me cry........
a very well-written article......

Saturday June 12, 2010, 9:53 am
Dave, thank you so much for posting this.

The opinion of the absolutist pro-Israel faction, including the United States, will continue to use lame expressions, such as regret rather than calling this Israel attack on the Mavi Marmara state sanctioned terrorism. Their defense which lies in the ties to Al Queda (which they now have completely removed themselves from saying) or Hamas or terrorists which is highly unlikely still does not provide Israel with any legal right to do what they did. You can have a boat filled with those who will not recognize the State of Israel, but with no weapons onboard, it doesn't matter.

Their defense diverts from the primary problem which is lays in the siege on Gaza. They will not address the failure of the siege, as it has not muzzled Hamas whatsoever, nor the criminal, immoral and inhumane nature of the blockade. International law clearly states that the collective punishment on a civilian population is illegal and deemed criminal.


Teresa W (782)
Saturday June 12, 2010, 10:11 am
noted, thank you

Yvonne White (229)
Saturday June 12, 2010, 10:26 am
"The Israeli image took a mortal blow ..... deep in international waters (rendering) Israel a pirate state", commented Ben Caspit, in the Israeli daily, Maariv.
Israel is a young state, throwing juvenile tantrums, and engaging in dangerous & childish behavior.. it Must be Disciplined for it's crimes before the World decides to destroy it.

Yvonne Mendes Siblini (218)
Saturday June 12, 2010, 10:27 am
Whats next???????

Luisa Fox (144)
Saturday June 12, 2010, 11:25 am
Thank you Dave. Excellent article and follow-up to the issues. I'm posting to my Facebook wall...


. (0)
Saturday June 12, 2010, 11:34 am
noted~ Thanks Dave!!
Have a good weekend!!

Chris McCabe (35)
Saturday June 12, 2010, 11:54 am
The passengers on the MV Rachel Corrie from Ireland were ill-treated, robbed of their credit cards, mobile phones, & personal effects, but they survived.......

Eleanor B (909)
Saturday June 12, 2010, 1:30 pm
Thanks, Dave. Noted and posted on Facebook. I am so glad that there was no loss of life on the Rachel Corrie. My heart is with the families of the Turkish people who were slaughtered. Turkey has had its eyes opened to the brutality of the Israeli regime and hopefully will break all ties though why it was ever friendly with Israel I do not understand. The fact that the US and most of the rest of the world do not condemn Israel for this atrocity is sickening. Ordinary people everywhere though must be horrified, except the brainwashed and the heartless.

Saturday June 12, 2010, 2:07 pm
Considering the US is often Israel's collaborator, this does not surprise me at all. If you compare what is considered terrorism on Israel by Hamas to what Israel has done to Gaza since it invaded the Egypt Sinai and occupied Gaza (the first time) in October 1956, you wonder who truly is the terrorist.

Matloob ul Hasan (81)
Saturday June 12, 2010, 8:24 pm
Noted, thanks.

Christoffer B (18)
Sunday June 13, 2010, 3:24 am
Yes, the people who believe in the"new World Order" are indeed stupid.

Louise Munk Aakesson (3)
Sunday June 13, 2010, 3:34 am
Noted and all!

kasaija n. (0)
Sunday June 13, 2010, 3:39 am
what does israel real want. it has palestinia in its hands.they act like cats playing with their pray.

Denise Lucas (6)
Sunday June 13, 2010, 3:53 am
This region of the world has been at battle for thousands of years. It is sad and shameful that world leaders cannot come to an agreement, work and live together peacefully.

pete O (242)
Sunday June 13, 2010, 7:29 am
people who have not being paying attention -as they have been to busy defending tyranny, are walking about in the dark.

Sunday June 13, 2010, 7:42 am
Actually, the Jews and Palestinians actually lived and worked together side by side for a long time. Their conflict with each other basically began in the 20th century.

corinne ramsden (5)
Sunday June 13, 2010, 9:15 am

Mary M (29)
Sunday June 13, 2010, 1:14 pm
There is always a conflict in the middle east for centuries. This is not in the least suprising even though the people in Palestine need these supplies to rebuild after the Israelis attacked the Gaza over 2 yrs.ago.

Frank Lornitzo (8)
Sunday June 13, 2010, 3:39 pm
it would seem therefore that the result of the U.S. ally action would be crossing of the Hamas over to assist the Taliban in Afghanistan and Pakistan. It would not take much to make it impossible for Karzai to get the people over to him and cause the U.S. mission to abort and jeopardize whatever has been accomplished in Iraq as well.
What it amounts to is the stupidity gave a big boosts to th Shi-tes wherever they are. If anyone has different from such an analysis lets hear it now.

Rita Walpole A (10)
Sunday June 13, 2010, 3:53 pm
Evil is nothing new. Neither is power and greed addiction. 'Tis heartless, brutal and harder beyond beleift to interfere with and end. And what do all addicts share in common, including the billionaire rulers of the U.S. and Israel? Lying to themselves and others re. their evil ways, and manipulation ability beyond belief. We sheeple, worldwide, need to take off the blinders, quit being enablers (i.e.patriotically flying our flags and stupidly approving of endless, 'profitable for the coup crowd' wars, etc.). Revolution's going to be rough, no doubt about it. But we gotta do what we gotta do for our kids, grandkids, and generations to come (a.k.a. civilization).

Adam G (10)
Sunday June 13, 2010, 4:57 pm
I'm all for sending medical aid to Gaza, but marbles?? what a ridiculous thing to do.

that alone could be used as justification for Israel to attack. for those who don't realise it, marbles make excellent & sometimes lethal projectiles. I've used them effectively for hunting before with a high powered slingshot that I made myself. I guarantee they can kill.

all Israel needs is proof of "weapons smuggling" and the raid was instantly justified.

I'm still stunned that someone would be so idiotic.

Teresa K (33)
Sunday June 13, 2010, 4:58 pm
noted and thank you

Sunday June 13, 2010, 5:01 pm

Mary Donnelly (47)
Sunday June 13, 2010, 5:46 pm
Thanks Dave.

Locan Sleeping-Squirrel (209)
Sunday June 13, 2010, 7:00 pm
I agree with Adam, the marbles raised a red flag with me. It appears there is plenty of stupidity to go all around.

Mary T (178)
Sunday June 13, 2010, 7:04 pm

Jerry C (16)
Sunday June 13, 2010, 7:16 pm
@adam g - You said: "for those who don't realise it, marbles make excellent & sometimes lethal projectiles. I've used them effectively for hunting before with a high powered slingshot that I made myself. I guarantee they can kill. "

Thank you so much for saying that. We've been having a similar discussion elsewhere and many people were ridiculing me for pointing out that attacking the israeli soldiers with slingshots did, in fact, amount to a deadly attack. In case you weren't aware, the "activists" on the Marvi Marmara were firing on the Israelis with slingshots, among other things. This was happening BEFORE the Israelis boarded the ship. Gotta wonder if those marbles were ever intended to reach Gaza at all.

Sunday June 13, 2010, 7:32 pm
Give me a break. If they wanted to bring a lethal weapon, I am sure it wouldn't have been marbles. Besides, what difference does it make. The underlying issue is Gaza which Israel claims is not a humanitarian crisis. Every single Human Rights Organization, along with the WHO and anyone who has visited basically has said the situation is dire. It is also illegal under International Law. Now, what is going to be done about this? A lot more than 9 people are dying in Gaza.

Bracha Katz (31)
Sunday June 13, 2010, 8:31 pm
what israel did was perfectly legal,
San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea, 12 June 1994

tt is permissible under rule 67(a) to attack neutral vessels on the high seas
when the vessels "are believed on reasonable grounds to be carrying contraband
or breaching a blockade, and after prior warning they intentionally and clearly
refuse to stop, or intentionally and clearly resist visit, search or capture."

this IHH organization that was so involved with the flotilla is a terrorist organization hiding behind some legitimate humanitarian causes that the IHH is involved in

it seems quite funny that of all the ships on the flotilla, and the rachel corrie ship that came after, the only ship with such violence was the marmara. why would israeli soldiers just pick on one ship? probablly because they were such peaceful, non-violent activists on the marmara, right?

these are specific members on the flotilla linked to terrorist organizations and israel's enemies:
Fatimah Mahmadi (born 1979), is a United States resident of Iranian origin, and an active member of the organization “Viva Palestine”, she attempted to smuggle forbidden electronic components into the Gaza Strip.

Ken O’Keefe (Born 1969), an American and British citizen, is a radical anti-Israel activist and operative of the Hamas Terror organization. He attempted to enter the Gaza Strip in order to form and train a commando unit for the Palestinian terror organization.

Hassan Iynasi (born 1982), a Turkish citizen and activist in a Turkish charity organization, is known of providing financial support to the Palestinian Islamic Jihad Terror organization.

Hussein Urosh, a Turkish citizen and activist in the IHH organization, was on his way to the Gaza Strip in order to assist in smuggling Al-Qaeda operatives via Turkey into the Strip.

Ahmad Umimon (born 1959), is a French citizen of Moroccan origin, and an operative of the Hamas Terrorist organization

israel does let in a lot of aid into gaza, about 15,000 tons each week. 2009: 30,894 trucks and 738,576 tons of aid imported into Gaza

2010 (as of June 3rd): 11,972 trucks and 287,110 tons of aid imported into Gaza

the article said that there was babies and elderly people on the boat, well this boat was to bread the blockade, greta berlin said so herself. now why would someone bring a baby along with them on their way to bread a blockade? that generally isn't the most peaceful, safe thing to do.

there were turkish red-cross members in the hospitals with the detainees, and they said that they would be willing to testify that the israelis treated them alright.

the most ridiculous part of this whole story is that when israel was delivering the aid from the ships into gaza, hamas decided not to take it. i don't know the latest news on that, but last i heard was the israel has unloaded about 30 trucks, and then they weren't allowed to unload any more.
may god bless us with peace.

Bracha Katz (31)
Sunday June 13, 2010, 8:35 pm
and i forgot to mention, the death threats are totally wrong. i am very angry at zoabi, but there are many ways to express anger.

Sunday June 13, 2010, 8:58 pm
"Ken O’Keefe (Born 1969), an American and British citizen, is a radical anti-Israel activis" I think you better tell Ken that, I don't think he knows that he is an operative.

Tara, the siege on Gaza is illegal, thus the Naval blockade is just as illegal. As for interpretation of International Law, I would think that Human Rights Organizations which are staffed with lawyers would maybe have a better understanding.

As for what Greta Berlin said, yes everyone knows it is to break the blockade. This is not new news. This is what Human Rights Organizations do, they try to advocate for those who cannot advocate for themselves. Are suggesting is that Israel should continue on with its' useless, illegal siege on the Palestinian people of Gaza so they can die a slow death. Considering 50% of Gaza consists of children, we'll just sit on the sidelines and let them have no life, no hope and no dreams.

As for it not being a peaceful, safe thing to do, well the majority of the world didn't think lunatic Israel would shoot people. Are you in denial that Gaza is a humanitarian's nightmare? This siege has not accomplished a damn thing, except create a whole group of desperate, angry people.

John Farnham (52)
Sunday June 13, 2010, 9:37 pm
"The real issue, to my mind, is the question of damage to the civilian population. If you have UN agencies saying insufficient aid is getting through to Gaza - and I've seen one BBC report saying what's getting through is less than one-quarter what they need on a daily basis - that alone, to my mind, raises serious concerns about the legality of the blockade, even if the formal requirements for notification have been complied with."
Where do you see this going now? Is there any point in anybody pursuing this legally, given the fact that, as many of us know, Israel has ignored countless UN resolutions over the course of the last 30-40 years?
That's a difficult question. I think... what speaking [about the] law does, in this situation, is it forms a channel through which political pressure is applied. And it certainly seems there's been an awful lot more pressure arising out of this incident in the international community, and it would seem within Israel itself.
So maybe this is an occasion we might see some kind of breakthrough, or at least a lessening of the blockade that is in place.
Charles Krauthammer: Legal blockade is fallback so Israel can defend itself
If a neutral ship contains admittedly enemy's cargo, the captain must submit to have his goods transhipped.
The Gaza Flotilla and the Legal Maritime Blockade of Gaza
Israel is currently in a state of armed conflict with the Hamas regime that controls Gaza. Act of War
John Farnham
So basically. if I understand Israel's position, is that 'war' with Hamas allows Israel to perform whatever acts it likes which result in deaths in Gaza...because of the state of war.
The question of killing Turkish citizens in international waters is a complication in that Turkey is a NATO signatory entitled to protect its merchant shipping : interference risks the activation of NATO mutual defense agreements falling upon Israel.
Question : Can war meeting agreements exist with an 'enemy' possessed of dubious offensive capacity or which has honoured terms of ceasefire? When dealing with prisoners interned in their homes the question is especially poignant.

Kevin Miller (26)
Monday June 14, 2010, 12:28 am
marbles as a weapon of mass destruction...havent heard of that before. Anything can be used to kill a man. Hell a fist or foot can end ones life if enough of the proper force is executed. anything picking up off a boat unless it is a little dingy (yet even those have oars, but wait those can kill, so should the humanitarian aid boats not have them either?) can be used as a "weapon of opportunity" if need be to fight for ones life. the knit-picking over weapons on the boat have basically been pointed to stone-age style weaponry (marbles, iron poles, sticks, etc) Have heard nothing of landmines being smuggled in, or UAV/Predator drone technology given away, or even a cache of AKs.
This was illegal, and Israel with AIPAC and its droves of lobbyists and propagandists have stolen the media airwaves attention as always. It is no surprise though because all you have to do is look at TV execs and politicians to see that they are either Jewish or Jewish sympathizers themselves, without trying to take an independent persepective.

TERRORISM:the calculated use of violence (or the threat of violence) against civilians in order to attain goals that are political or religious or ideological in nature; this is done through intimidation or coercion or instilling fear

(So this is the definition of Terrorism, anyone question that Israel uses terrorism as a tactic now?)

Bon L (0)
Monday June 14, 2010, 1:06 am
Thanks for the info.

Alamzeb Khan (401)
Monday June 14, 2010, 1:46 am
thanks for the information

Alamzeb Khan (401)
Monday June 14, 2010, 1:48 am

Alamzeb Khan (401)
Monday June 14, 2010, 1:51 am

Alamzeb Khan (401)
Monday June 14, 2010, 1:54 am

Alamzeb Khan (401)
Monday June 14, 2010, 1:57 am

Alamzeb Khan (401)
Monday June 14, 2010, 1:58 am

Alamzeb Khan (401)
Monday June 14, 2010, 2:00 am

Alamzeb Khan (401)
Monday June 14, 2010, 2:02 am

Jerry C (16)
Monday June 14, 2010, 2:55 am
Kevin said- "marbles as a weapon of mass destruction"

-- That is a silly statement. Who said it?

What I (and Adam G.) pointed out is that a slingshot is a DEADLY weapon. You shoot at me with one, I have the right to defend myself.

Kevin said -"Have heard nothing of landmines being smuggled in, or UAV/Predator drone technology given away, or even a cache of AKs. "

-- Not on this flotilla. Ak-47s, explosives and rockets are are coming into Gaza from Egypt, through the tunnels that both Egypt and Israel are trying to close. It's a very slow process, only small amounts are currently getting in. That appears to be the whole goal, from Hamas' point of view, of "breaking the blockade". Smuggling opportunities will increase exponentially. The rearm rate for Hamas will go back to pre-blockade levels. And the attacks on Israel from Gaza will increase exponentially... again.

Kevin said - "TERRORISM:the calculated use of violence (or the threat of violence) against civilians in order to attain goals that are political or religious or ideological in nature; this is done through intimidation or coercion or instilling fear "

-- That's a pretty poor definition of terrorism. If I don't pay my taxes the IRS will show up and use violence against me, (a civilian) for political purposes (the collection of money to be spent by the politicians in Congress). They will, and do, use fear and coercion as tactics. Also guns, sticks and handcuffs. Is the IRS a terrorist organization?

Jerry C (16)
Monday June 14, 2010, 2:59 am
Sorry, Kevin, I left out, in my first answer to you "and marbles can be, and are, used as ammunition for the slingshots".

gerlinde p (161)
Monday June 14, 2010, 3:46 am
very good article thanks

Mike L (59)
Monday June 14, 2010, 3:53 am

Monday June 14, 2010, 4:36 am
"2010 (as of June 3rd): 11,972 trucks and 287,110 tons of aid imported into Gaza "

It is not enough. There are 1.5 million people. Did you look at the list of restricted goods. It is laughable. Gaza children suffer from malnutrition and anemia. Don't you realize that this is a humanitarian crisis? Also if we are talking legalities, it is criminal to collectively punish a population which is what is being done. The siege has done nothing, but to oppress and starve the Gazans.

Kevin Miller (26)
Monday June 14, 2010, 7:33 am
**-- That's a pretty poor definition of terrorism. If I don't pay my taxes the IRS will show up and use violence against me, (a civilian) for political purposes (the collection of money to be spent by the politicians in Congress). They will, and do, use fear and coercion as tactics. Also guns, sticks and handcuffs. Is the IRS a terrorist organization?**
POOR EXCUSE...not only is that the standard dicitionary definition of terrorism, it is the definition that was embedded in my mind when I was in the Marine Corps. That POOR EXCUSE, and defintion is the formal definition of terrorism by the U.S. Govt if you didnt know. In my statement, I only tried to clarify you can use anything as a weapon to inflict deadly force. I did not even divulge into the topic of tunnels and weapons smuggling through them. This in fact is true. The fact on the flotilla raid is that there were not modern-day weapons (like those you said smuggled in the tunnels) found on the ships. The big difference between the tunnels and the boat incident as well, is the fact it occurred on International Waters. (No one is saying Israel cant defend least I am not...the tunnels they do stop, however, our not on international land. They are either in eygpt, israel, or gaza. Now, they can stop those legally with proper coordination. The raid on the boat, however, you see it is a BLACK EYE for Israel.
Oh course Marbles can be used as slingshots, so can rocks. I have been pelted by rocks when I was machine gunner in Iraq, I did not go shooting people who threw them at me. There is a thing called escalation of deadly force, those who have served either in the military or law enforcement know it. Most civilians dont.
As, for the IRS, view them how you want, that is a totally different topic for a different thread.

Jerry C (16)
Monday June 14, 2010, 8:21 am
Kevin - you said "That POOR EXCUSE, and defintion is the formal definition of terrorism by the U.S. Govt if you didnt know."

-- Actually I didn't know that was the official definition. Thank you for clarifying that.

Kevin - you said "Oh course Marbles can be used as slingshots, so can rocks. I have been pelted by rocks when I was machine gunner in Iraq, I did not go shooting people who threw them at me."

-- First, thank you for your service. I greatly appreciate the sacrifice of your time and the difficulties you endured. Thank you also for your restraint while under potentially deadly attack.

Kevin - you said "There is a thing called escalation of deadly force, those who have served either in the military or law enforcement know it."

I am actually aware of this concept. I never heard of a police officer being charged with murder for shooting a guy who was attacking him with a knife. In fact, I know of cases of cops shooting unarmed men who presented a credible threat. Both of those cases represent escalation of deadly force. Both are perfectly acceptable.

Let me give another example of where I am coming from. Consider the case of the recent pirates from Somalia. They were in tow behind an American warship, they had lethal weapons in their hands, but were not using them. They provided literally zero threat to anybody on the ship. SEAL snipers killed them. Was that an unacceptable escalation of force? I don't think so.

The "activists" on the Marvi Marmara, however, were actively attacking the Israeli commandos BEFORE they boarded the ship. (I'll be happy to provide links to video evidence if you want them.) At the risk of attempting sounding knowledgeable about something I am not knowledgeable about, let me ask, if you were injured by one of those rocks or slingshot rounds in Iraq, would you have been abandoned by your buddies? HELL NO!!

But in the Marvi Marmara environment, an injured commando could have easily gone overboard, not intentionally abandoned, but effectively lost. In that environment therefore, chains, slingshots, stun grenades were all potentially lethal attacks, even more so than they would have been on the ground in Iraq. That's why I don't view the Israeli commando's actions as an unacceptable escalation.

Let me ask your opinion. Why didn't the Israelis wait and perform the raid in their own territorial waters?


Kevin Miller (26)
Monday June 14, 2010, 8:39 am
now we have a good debate going on, i have watched the videos, and the one thing about them, and you know these the videos all depend on who shot them and when. that is why i believe there needs to be an investigation by an independent source, to clarify the whole situation.

the one thing no one has talked about is the ROEs, the Israeli commandoes had. (rules of engagement) I know from experience, I was not allowed to engaged unless they pointed an AK at, and sometimes only if they they have shot first, then we can engage. (i know its ridiculous) My opinion on the whole matter, is if they waiting til it was on their waters, we wouldnt have had such an issue. I figure we wont know all the facts til an investigation. (anyways we'll continue another day got to go camping now for the next 4) maybe some more evidence on either side will be revealed by then. (doubt it though)

Jerry C (16)
Monday June 14, 2010, 8:48 am
the videos I am talking about were shot by the activists, from the Marvi Marmara. I don't think they even realize that they were giving away information by posting them.

On this page look at the second video, at the 1:55 mark. Clearly shows the "activists" firing on the helicopter and, I presume, descending commandos.

Clearly shows attacks on commandos in boats:

With regards to ROEs, would you be willing to risk your life by attacking an Israeli soldier and hoping that his ROE prevented him from responding with lethal fire? I suspect not. In my limited experience, the Israelis tend to be a lot more practical about such things than we are.


pete O (242)
Monday June 14, 2010, 10:10 am
So the children of Gaza should not be allowed marbells as they present a risk. Should the Ashkanazies be allowed weapons then ?

Kimberly Crane (36)
Monday June 14, 2010, 10:44 am
Ironic that they call people who want JUSTICE terrorists, when they are the REAL terrorists!

Jerry C (16)
Monday June 14, 2010, 12:10 pm
Margaret - you said "As for interpretation of International Law, I would think that Human Rights Organizations which are staffed with lawyers would maybe have a better understanding. "

-- So we're not allowed to read the laws and interpret them ourselves? I've found that pretty much all organizations that are involved in this have already chosen sides and will only cite the portions of international law that support their side.

I have to agree with Tara. The interdiction of Gaza is legal and so was the interception of the flotilla. The blockade has a clear military goal, irrespective of the hardship that it imposes on the Palestinian people and it is working. It is keeping guns, explosives and rockets out of the hands of Hamas. Some are getting through, but not nearly as many as before the blockade began. While many people are angered by the fact that Israel is allowing ONLY humanitarian aid in, and not luxuries (can be sold for cash to buy weapons) or building materials (can be used to harden defenses), both of these points have cut down on Hamas' ability to wage war against Israel, so they are legal. For them to be illegal under international law, the sole purpose of the blockade would have to be the starvation of the Palestinians (it isn't) or the civilian damage would have to outweigh the military advantage (it doesn't). Yes, it sucks to live in Palestine. Agreed. See my next reply...

Margaret - you said "Are you in denial that Gaza is a humanitarian's nightmare? This siege has not accomplished a damn thing, except create a whole group of desperate, angry people."

-- I think everybody agrees that Gaza is a horrible place. We disagree as to why. You seem to be saying that it is all Israel's fault. Others, myself included, say that Hamas (and any other organization like it) is the problem. The charter of Hamas clearly states that they will not stop until Israel is gone. Israel has no such language in their constitution regarding the Palestinians. Hamas has clearly shown that they are willing to use the Palestinian people as human shields and really don't care how many have to die, as long as Israelis die too. Me, personally? I think if you remove Hamas, and organizations like them, the Palestinians and Jews have a chance to live together in peace. I doubt that you will accept that, but it seems pretty clear to me. In any case, Hamas is waging war on Israel, Israel has the right to defend itself. The blockade, in partnership with Egypt, is part of that defense.


Frank G (211)
Monday June 14, 2010, 12:58 pm
Jerry's claim that the civilian damage caused by Israel's banning of non-military supplies - which are in fact largely humanitarian supplies - is not excessive in relation to its "concrete and direct military advantage" (to use the legal phrase) is merely his own opinion is quite ridiculous, given the severe extent of the blockade. Jerry points out for example that building supplies can be used to harden defenses. Indeed, they can hardly be used for attack, and Gaza's overall attacking capacity is quite limited.

Israel's draconian blockade extends far beyond military supplies to even mundane articles needed for minimal living standards, such as household appliances such as refrigerators and washing machines, sewing machines and fabric, blankets, paper and writing utensils, construction wood, fishing nets, fresh meat, canned food, livestock, seeds and nuts, etc.. The blockade causes terrible suffering among Gazans and is plainly designed to do so.

Humanitarian Crisis in the Gaza Strip

Restrictions on the transfer of goods to Gaza: Obstruction and obfuscation, Gisha - Legal Center for Freedom of Movement, January 2010

What exactly is the blockade of Gaza?

Human crisis in Gaza 'is worst for 40 years'

Why won't Israel allow Gazans to import coriander?

Israel bans books, music and clothes from entering Gaza

Israel blocks pasta shipment to Gaza, and tensions boil

Partial List of Items Prohibited/Permitted into the Gaza Strip

Israel likes to publicize what supplies they arbitrarily and inconsistently allow into Gaza. But the reality is that the blockade is severe and has devastating consequences:

Imports of needed supplies to Gaza have been reduced to 25% of pre-blockade levels. Subsequent to the devastation wrought by Cast Lead, the ban on construction materials has created a severe housing shortage, with Gazans unable to repair thousands of homes and buildings. Fifteen of Gaza's 27 hospitals and 43 of its 110 primary care facilities were damaged or destroyed, and most could not be rebuilt due to the blockade.

Gaza's economy has been devastated by a near complete ban on exports of all kinds, as well as an extensive ban on import of raw materials and equipment. About 90% of Gaza's factories are closed or are functioning at less than 10% capacity. Only 258 industrial establishments in Gaza were operational in 2009 compared with over 2,400 in 2006. Gaza's agricultural and fishing industries have also been greatly diminished due to the blockade and the restrictions on movement. Unemployment exceeds 40%.

Gaza's power plant has been denied the materials it needs to rebuild after an Israeli strike and is allowed only 70 percent of the weekly fuel supply it requires. It can only operate one turbine producing 30 megawatts compared to its average of 60-65 megawatts in 2009. Most of the population faces power cuts of 6-8 hours per day for 4-5 days each week. Gazans are allowed only about half of their required amount of cooking gas.

Gaza's population suffers from contaminated drinking water due to unrepaired and undersupplied wells, reservoirs, and treatment plants, and from poor sanitation due to unrepaired and undersupplied sewage systems, which causes infectious diseases. Amnesty International reports that 90-95 percent of the drinking water in Gaza is contaminated and unfit for consumption. Nearly 10% of the population does not have a proper water supply.

Over 50% of Gazans live below the poverty line. 61% of Gazans are considered to be food insecure and are reliant on food assistance from humanitarian agencies, with an additional 16.2% considered vulnerable. The rate of anemia in babies (9-12 months) is over 60%, and is 37.5% in pregnant women. Acute malnutrition rates among children under five years of age has now reached 10.2%.

Restrictions on the transfer of goods to Gaza: Obstruction and obfuscation, Gisha - Legal Center for Freedom of Movement, January 2010

Health conditions in the occupied Palestinian territory, Report by the Secretariat 13 May 2010

UN Humanitarian Coordinator: Gaza Blockade Suffocating Agriculture Sector, Creating Food Insecurity 25 May 2010

Amnesty: 4 of 5 Gazans dependent on aid due to blockade 05.27.10

WHO: Gaza Health Fact Sheet 20 January 2010

Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO): Farming without Land, Fishing without Water: Gaza Agriculture Sector Struggles to Survive May 2010

Occupied Palestinian Territories: Signs of worsening malnutrition among children; UN Report 21 April 2009

While Israel's ban on military materials is debatably legal, the ban on humanitarian aid isn't. Israel's apologists imply that Israel is at liberty to ban whatever humanitarian aid it pleases due to the value of its ban on military materials. Assuming that there is a big military value to the ban on military materials, this cannot justify the cruel ban on humanitarian aid, which has little military value. These bans are separate acts involving separate objects. Israel could obviously enforce a ban on military materials without enforcing a ban on humanitarian supplies. This is why Israel's claim that its draconian blockade of humanitarian supplies is justified by military aims is soundly rejected by most international authorities. When world leaders condemn this blockade, they are condemning the ban on humanitarian supplies. Any impartial observer can recognize collective punishment (Geneva 33) and excessive damage to civilians (San Remo 102) when he sees it.

Jerry C (16)
Monday June 14, 2010, 1:54 pm
As always, Frank, I enjoy reading your posts. We have agreed to disagree in another thread, I won't re-open the argument with you here. We obviously disagree on the question of "collective punishment".

Obviously Frank's points are well thought out and worthy of consideration.

Jerry C (16)
Monday June 14, 2010, 2:02 pm
I do have a question for you, Frank. Can the items that Israel is not allowing in be brought in through the Gaza/Egypt border, or is Egypt embargoing them also? Not the military items, but the non-military.

Frank G (211)
Monday June 14, 2010, 2:31 pm
I'm not going to research that specific question, Jerry. As I've said before, I believe that Egypt bears partial responsibility for the blockade and the consequent suffering to civilians, having made some agreements with Israel to close and patrol their portion of the border. Israel is however the main driving force behind it.

Jerry C (16)
Monday June 14, 2010, 2:38 pm
Yeah, I thought I had asked it before, but couldn't remember what the answer was. And I was too lazy to look it up. Thanks.

Monday June 14, 2010, 4:24 pm

In response to your post(s)

"There is a thing called escalation of deadly force, those who have served either in the military or law enforcement know it." "

Actually, Israel uses the specific method of escalation dominance and has used it in prior conflicts. They used it in Lebanon, with Egypt and with Gaza. In "The Holy Land: A Critical Analysis of Israel’s National Security and Foreign Policy, Zeev Maov, a well respected military Israeli historian, states “Israel low-intensity strategy was based on escalation dominance, that is disproportionate responses to provocations, as well as military initiatives not in response to specific provocations. At that same time, Israeli strategy tried to walk a fine line between outmatching the challenge with excessive force, on one hand and deflecting blame for escalating minor incidents to all-out wars”.

We tend to easily label the violent terrorists, Hamas, but if you look at both intifadas, the armed violence actually began with Israel and is supported by their own words.

The first intifada was civil resistance and revolt with very no armed violence. As Israeli premiere historian, Benny Morris, recalled “it was not an armed rebellion but a massive, persistent campaigning of civil resistance, with strikes and commercial shutdowns, accompanied by violent, though unarmed demonstrations against the occupying forces. The stone and occasionally, the Molotov cocktail and knife were its symbols of weapons, not guns and bombs.”

He comments on Israel's response to this which was “almost everything was tried: shooting to kill, shooting to injure, beatings, mass arrests, torture, trials, administrative detention, and economic sanctions.” and,

“A large population of the Palestinian dead were not shot in life-threatening situations, and a great many of these were children. Only a small minority of the IDF malefactors were brought to book by the army’s legal machinery - and were almost always let off with ludicrously light sentences”

As for the second intifada, different day same story. It also began with with civil resistance. The first suicide bombing did not occur until 5 months after the second intifada was borne, yet Israel spent 1,000,000 rounds of ammunition within the first few days of the uprising.

Shlomo Ben-Ami, has quoted in his book "“Israel’s disproportionate response to what had started as a popular uprising with young, unarmed men confronting Israeli soldiers armed with lethal weapons fuelled the [second] intifada beyond control and turned it into an all out war. "

Also, we often believe that Israel was giving up Gaza and that was such a sacrifice to do so. Even back during Oslo, Rabin was quoted "if only it [Gaza] would sink into the sea. Dov Weisglass laid out the rationale behind withdrawing from Gaza as "it would relieve international, especially American, pressure on Israel, thereby “freezing . . . the political process. And when you freeze that process you prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state.” The Israelis can now state that they no longer occupy Gaza, but by controlling its' periphery, it has preserved near total domination of it.

As for Gaza, this was the military confronting the civil population, plain and simple. There was no military component, it just killed off approximately 1,400 people, including 300 children. In addition, both countries had agreed to ceasefire, but Israel continued its’ raids into Gaza, almost as bad as the same nightly raids they performed on Egypt, in order to incite a response from Gaza. Perfect usage of dominant escalation. “There is not too much glory and valor involved in flying over a giant prison and firing at its people using helicopters and fighter jets.”

Monday June 14, 2010, 5:14 pm
In response to the question of legality or illegality of the Naval blockade and Tara's comment:
"what israel did was perfectly legal,
San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea, 12 June 1994 "

Her quote was taken from the International Committee of the Red Cross (link above), yet today's headline in BBC read the following.

"Israel's blockade of Gaza is a clear violation of international humanitarian law, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) has said."

Jerry, this is what I meant by allowing lawyers not laymen to interpret the law. That's why they go to law school.

The Care2 link for this is or directly to the BBC website

Jerry C (16)
Monday June 14, 2010, 6:43 pm
Margaret, thank you for your well-thought out response. i appreciate it very much.

A point of order. Your first quote was something Kevin said, and I quoted him in my post. Not a big deal.

Margaret said "Actually, Israel uses the specific method of escalation dominance and has used it in prior conflicts"

-- I won't argue that point. I will say that a police officer who kills an unarmed man who is attacking him might be accused of the same thing. Proportionality of response is a much misunderstood term, especially in the context of low-intensity conflict. What it does NOT mean is that if you hit me with a stick or a thrown stone I can only respond in kind. I'm not arguing that Israel doesn't push the limits. They do. Annoying them is a very bad idea, and that's the impression they want any enemy to take away from any conflict. "Wow, I sure wish I had never annoyed THOSE guys!"

Regarding the intifadas:

Margaret said " Benny Morris, recalled “it was not an armed rebellion but a massive, persistent campaigning of civil resistance, with strikes and commercial shutdowns, accompanied by VIOLENT, though unarmed demonstrations against the occupying forces. The STONE and occasionally, the MOLOTOV COCKTAIL and KNIFE were its symbols of weapons, not guns and bombs.” (my emphasis)

-- In other words, an armed rebellion. Just not armed with guns. Sorry, you won't get much sympathy from me by claiming that you only attacked someone with a knife and he shot you. In fact your own post says that Israel tried "almost everything", much of it non-lethal.

Margaret said "A large population of the Palestinian dead were not shot in life-threatening situations, and a great many of these were children."

-- And what were children doing attacking Israeli soldiers? Why weren't they in school? Well, let me see, if I remember correctly the PLO, who was running things at that time, CLOSED THE SCHOOLS so the kids could get out, try to provoke the Israelis and stop bullets. Again, were you looking for sympathy from me? Sympathy for the kids who were used as human shields, yes. Sympathy for the parents and leaders who sent them out to die? Nope.

Margaret said "Israel’s disproportionate response to what had started as a popular uprising with young, unarmed men confronting Israeli soldiers armed with lethal weapons fuelled the [second] intifada beyond control and turned it into an all out war. "

-- Again, poke that hornet's nest with a stick and see if you don't get hurt.

Margaret said "Jerry, this is what I meant by allowing lawyers not laymen to interpret the law. That's why they go to law school."

--Actually, in law school they learn to quote only the portions of the law that help their clients. I don't know of a single system of justice practiced in the world today that is not contention-based. I think Confucian law wasn't, but I don't think China practices that anymore. Lawyers don't interpret the law, the interpret the law to their client's best interest. It is up to the opposing lawyer to poke holes in what they are saying. That is what I have been doing.

Margaret said ""

-- I checked out the site. It just says Israel was wrong. No legal reasoning there whatsoever. Sorry, "Israel is wrong, just trust us, we're the ICRC" doesn't carry much weight with me. Tell me what portions of international law they've broken and why you think they apply. For example, most people who hate Israel will tell you that this incident is governed by the rules of "jus ad belllum" (roughly - justice in the initiation of hostilities) since Israel is not at war with Turkey or any other country whose flag was flying over those ships. That is a fallacy. This incident is governed by the rules of "jus in bello" (roughly - justice in the course of war) since Israel is already at war with Hamas. The flotilla's stated goal was to interfere in that war. Israel did not start hostilities, they prevented interference in ongoing hostilities. They prevented the breaking of a blockade. If you took the first choice, jus ad bellum, Israel had no right to board the ships. If you take the second choice, Israel had every right to board the ships.

Monday June 14, 2010, 6:48 pm

Thank you for responding for the green star. I am going to read through your response and once I have all kids in bed, I will reply. This is an excellent debate!

Jerry C (16)
Monday June 14, 2010, 7:16 pm
Frank G. - a quote from the ICRC article "In a statement, the ICRC describes the situation in Gaza as dire, saying the only sustainable solution is a lifting of the blockade."

A relevant quote from your post "When world leaders condemn this blockade, they are condemning the ban on humanitarian supplies."

Those two don't match. Not a criticism or you or your position, but this is one of the issues I have with your position. While you are perfectly capable of understanding the difference between the various portions of the blockade; which parts you support and which parts you don't, the 10 second newsbite just can't carry that level of sophistication. What the average joe is going hear is "lift the blockade". In my opinion that means more dead Israelis, since Hamas will rearm and will not quit attacking. More dead Israelis means more dead Palestinians.

Margaret - could you put my kids in bed, too? They won't listen to me.

Frank Lornitzo (8)
Monday June 14, 2010, 7:24 pm
There is a good discussion going on. But the analogy of a police officer against and unarmed man makes
me a sick if Israel is called the police officer. No way does Israel have the legitimacy of a police officer. Both sides have to recognize that the war of Israel and Hamas is not winnable. The Hamas has an empty slogan about pushing Israel into the sea when they can't even push the settlers out of the settlements that some Jews claim their legitimacy as a line of defense. On the other hand putting the Palestinian Arabs the Zionists
called "Treyf" to death would bring about the total annihilation of Israel that even the U.S. could not prevent.
I can't imagine any end game for Netanyiu and what he could envision is a mystery to me outside of some Biblical myth.
I'll repeat that outside intervention by neutral parties is they only way this bleeding inhumanity can be stopped.

Jerry C (16)
Monday June 14, 2010, 7:31 pm
Frank L. "But the analogy of a police officer against and unarmed man makes
me a sick if Israel is called the police officer. No way does Israel have the legitimacy of a police officer."

-- I think you are reading more into that analogy than I intended. It was just a example of "escalation of force" not a description of the relative morality of the two sides. Sorry if it came across wrong.

You said: "intervention by neutral parties is they only way this bleeding inhumanity can be stopped. "

-- Good luck finding neutral parties!

Best regards.


Monday June 14, 2010, 7:50 pm
Regarding your point of order - I was actually quoting it to tie it in with Israel's self admitted escalation dominance which purposely uses this by using a diproportionate response to incite or provote the situation, well knowing the other party will respond. They then deflect blame and respond with excessive force.

On to the intifadas - One quick question, why was there an intifada? The second intifada actually started over an incident (involving vehicles, some say accident, others don't) where 4 Palestinans were killed. It wouldn't have mattered what the precursor would have been, but considering the Occupied Territories have been occupied for 43 years (except Gaza was previously occupied prior to 1967 for about six months), have had their homes demolished, their livelihood taken away from them, their movements controlled, it surprises me that it took so long. If you violate peoples human rights, they will eventually revolt.

Everyone quotes Ghandi for their peace quotes and role models, but what did Ganhi actually say about peace and violence, “Fight violence with nonviolence if you can, and if you can’t do that, fight violence by any means, even if it means your utter extinction. But in no case should you leave your hearths and homes to be looted and burnt.” Should the Palestinians just lie down and die, even though the occupation is illegal and stinks to high heaven.

I think that by the time of the first intifada (1987), the Palestinan people were already oppressed for 20 years. Also, the occupation is illegal, wouldn't you resist against me, for instance, barging into your home and forcing you to my will? As for armed rebellion, I throw a stone at you and you shoot me, not quite the same thing.

My understanding is that you are taking the Benny Morris quote as they tried everything to contain the resistance, finally to force. In other words, they tried everything the possibly and in order to gain control restored to lethal force. Correct me if I am wrong in my reading of this portion. I take this quote as they were willing to try almost anything, in other words acted without restraint. I have read a lot of Benny Morris's words, more in the earlier days until in my humble opinion he became a little nutty. He is often very, very clear on the force used and almost prideful of their willingness to be brutal.

The poke at the hornet's nest could very well be applied to Israel. Again, illegal occupation of land aquired through war. By international law, reaffirmed in 2004 by the International Court of Justice, East Jerusalem, Gaza and West Bank are occupied. If you are illegally occupying my home, I am going to do something about it, as would you.

The International Law on illegality of the Naval blockade - maybe interpretation was a poor word. The gist of what I am attempting to convey, is that taking a portion of the San Remo Manual ...., without having knowledge of other laws within the same document which bear on the portion Tara quoted, is the problem. I don't think any of us (layman) have enough knowledge to determine this, but I find it coincidental that she found it on the site everyone was quoting actually is saying it is illegal. This is a news story, not a legal brief, thus I would not expect much in the way of legalese. I do believe though that the Red Cross calls it like they see it, not be playing favourites. Also, the Red Cross is not the only ones saying it. At any rate, until this is investigated, I think that it is a waste of time to argue this one. I again must say though, the occupation is illegal which has already been determined under international law.

Just for you to understand my negativity towards Israel, it is not Israel itself to me, it is the government's actions with which I have a problem. I actually, at one time, supported Israel absolutely, no matter what they did. My support was not based on any true knowledge of the conflict, but just because that is what I was supposed to believe. Once when I was questioned on my absolute support of Israel's actions and couldn't answer, I started to read anything I could get my hands on that was credible. My criticism of Israel is not based on reading material written by those who do not support it. My criticism of Israel is based on Israel's words and actions. I, for most part, read Israeli news, publications, etc., not that of Israel's "enemies".

The ball is now in your court. If there are any typos or anything, I apologize. My touchpad on my laptop is possessed and keeps moving all over.

Jerry C (16)
Monday June 14, 2010, 7:59 pm
OK, Margaret. One quick response, then I must be off to bed.

You said "My understanding is that you are taking the Benny Morris quote as they tried everything to contain the resistance, finally to force."

-- Not what I was trying to say. I meant to point out that a lot of what was listed was non-lethal. They did try other things than killing people.

OK one more. You said "I, for most part, read Israeli news, publications, etc., not that of Israel's "enemies"

-- I, for the most part, read what Israel's enemies have to say. Mostly right here on Care2. ;^)

Gotta run. I'll do a more substantive response tomorrow.

Frank G (211)
Monday June 14, 2010, 8:04 pm
Jerry, as you know, when I point out the positions of international authorities (the U.N. Secretary-General and Security Council, the Human Rights Council, national governments, etc.), I'm not speaking of newsbites. As you say, a newsbite is not necessarily going to distinguish what parts of the blockade (humanitarian supplies) are being condemned, though I think most people have a pretty good idea. I can see how there might be some confusion when no distinction is made, and you are free to point out this distinction and argue that Israel has a right to bar military materials. Again, the present blockade extends far beyond military materials.

As for the ICRC, their full report is here:

ICRC Report: Gaza closure 14-06-2010

The discussion therein is of course entirely about the barring of humanitarian supplies, which is what is regarded as illegal.

Monday June 14, 2010, 8:23 pm
Jerry C. - they kids would probably have listened better to you than me!

Frank L - I am not, by any means, not suggesting Policemen analogous to the Israeli IDF. I didn't argue this, because basically I was running out of space. The other element I didn't really address was the Hamas = Terrorist. I am undecided about Hamas as a terrorist organization. I firmly believe they were democratically elected. I also have read much on Israel's escalation dominance policy and think it works quite effectively. If you consider my above post, where I mentioned that the first suicide bomb attack was not until 5 months after the beginning of the 2nd intifada, but Israel had already used 1 million rounds within the first few days. Jerry considered any type of attack as a lethal threat and the actual quote I used from Benny Morris did not illustrate the point I wanted to make. If you look at Shlomo Ben-Ami, he clearly stated on more than one occasion, that the intifadas were basically non violent with the occasional show of any armed violence whereas Morris makes it a little more ambiguous with his calling it violent, but not armed violence.

Along the same vein, I would like Jerry to comment on IDF violence on complete peaceful protest. We have many examples of attacks with rubber bullets (with steel cores, tear gas cannisters, etc.) used in completely non violent demonstrations. What is the justification there?

Your comment on neutral parties is noted. Could there be a reason for the other parties (non Israeli stance) to be against Israel's behaviour? I find that it is because of their track record and their actions. It is not anti-Israel to not support qhat they are doing. It is like one of my children, I love them, but if one of them is travelling down the wrong path, I can't stand by and say "Good Job".

Dave C (867)
Monday June 14, 2010, 11:18 pm
Israel’s Cult Of Victimhood

By Jonathan Cook

10 June, 2010

Why are Israelis so indignant at the international outrage that has greeted their country’s lethal attack last week on a flotilla of civilian ships taking aid to Gaza?

Israelis have not responded in any of the ways we might have expected. There has been little soul-searching about the morality, let alone legality, of soldiers invading ships in international waters and killing civilians. In the main, Israelis have not been interested in asking tough questions of their political and military leaders about why the incident was handled so badly. And only a few commentators appear concerned about the diplomatic fall-out.

Instead, Israelis are engaged in a Kafkaesque conversation in which the military attack on the civilian ships is characterised as a legitimate “act of self-defence”, as Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu called it, and the killing of nine aid activists is transformed into an attempted “lynching of our soldiers” by terrorists.

Benny Begin, a government minister whose famous father, Menachem, became an Israeli prime minister after being what today would be called a terrorist as the leader of the notorious Irgun militia, told BBC World TV that the commandos had been viciously assaulted after “arriving almost barefoot”. Ynet, Israel’s most popular news website, meanwhile, reported that the commandos had been “ambushed”.

This strange discourse can only be deciphered if we understand the two apparently contradictory themes that have come to dominate the emotional landscape of Israel. The first is a trenchant belief that Israel exists to realise Jewish power; the second is an equally strong sense that Israel embodies the Jewish people’s collective experience as the eternal victims of history.

Israelis are not entirely unaware of this paradoxical state of mind, sometimes referring to it as the “shooting and crying” syndrome.

It is the reason, for example, that most believe their army is the “most moral in the world”. The “soldier as victim” has been given dramatic form in Gilad Shalit, the “innocent” soldier held by Hamas for the past four years who, when he was captured, was enforcing Israel’s illegal occupation of Gaza.

One commentator in Israel’s Haaretz newspaper summed up the feelings of Israelis brought to the fore by the flotilla episode as the “helplessness of a poor lonely victim, confronting the rage of a lynch mob and frantically realising that these are his last moments”. This “psychosis”, as he called it, is not surprising: it derives from the sanctified place of the Holocaust in the Israeli education system.

The Holocaust’s lesson for most Israelis is not a universal one that might inspire them to oppose racism, or fanatical dictators or the bullying herd mentality that can all too quickly grip nations, or even state-sponsored genocide.

Instead, Israelis have been taught to see in the Holocaust a different message: that the world is plagued by a unique and ineradicable hatred of Jews, and that the only safety for the Jewish people is to be found in the creation of a super-power Jewish state that answers to no one. Put bluntly, Israel’s motto is: only Jewish power can prevent Jewish victimhood.

That is why Israel acquired a nuclear weapon as fast it could, and why it is now marshalling every effort to stop any other state in the region from breaking its nuclear monopoly. It is also why the Israeli programme’s sole whistle-blower, Mordechai Vanunu, is a pariah 24 years after committing his “offence”. Six years on from his release to a form of loose house arrest, his hounding by the authorities -- he was jailed again last month for talking to foreigners -- has attracted absolutely no interest or sympathy in Israel.

If Mr Vanunu’s continuing abuse highlights Israel’s oppressive desire for Jewish power, Israelis’ self-righteousness about their navy’s attack on the Gaza flotilla reveals the flipside of this pyschosis.

The angry demonstrations sweeping the country against the world’s denunciations; the calls to revoke the citizenship of the Israeli Arab MP on board -- or worse, to execute her -- for treason; and the local media’s endless recycling of the soldiers’ testimonies of being “bullied” by the activists demonstrate the desperate need of Israelis to justify every injustice or atrocity while clinging to the illusion of victimhood.

The lessons imbibed from this episode -- like the lessons Israelis learnt from the Goldstone report last year into the war crimes committed during Israel’s attack on Gaza, or the international criticisms of the massive firepower unleashed on Lebanon before that -- are the same: that the world hates us, and that we are alone.

If the confrontation with the activists on the flotilla has proved to Israelis that the unarmed passengers were really terrorists, the world’s refusal to stay quiet has confirmed what Israelis already knew: that, deep down, non-Jews are all really anti-Semites.

Meanwhile, the lesson the rest of us need to draw from the deadly commando raid is that the world can no longer afford to indulge these delusions.

Locan Sleeping-Squirrel (209)
Monday June 14, 2010, 11:36 pm
Thanks Dave, I couldn't agree more and I really think it is that simple.

Abo r (107)
Tuesday June 15, 2010, 2:51 pm
Israel and its supporters think that they can cover the sun and polish their faces to appear as nice legal persons... they will never hide the sun and their crimes are clear and known to the majority of the earth inhabitance the rest soon will know it they are so now as the facts are hidden the media is under pressure not to publish the truth and publish the Israelis' stories and claims which is a lies and false ones.
If Israel is legal and not crime of murder and not genocide apartheid WHY YAHOOD BARAK CANCELLED HIS VISIT TO FRANCE FEW DAYS AGO?? IT IS KNOWN AND CLEAR < WHY SEBI LIVNI ESCAPED FROM ENGLAND FEW MONTHS AGO AS STATED in the media and others said did not go cancelled its visit till now?! why can they say the truth?! WHY Israel is rejecting the NEUTRAL INTERNATIONAL INVESTIGATION COMMITTE and wants a local one and tied with conditions??
Why Israel ( why the properties of the civilians passengers with humanitarian aids to GAZA stolen cameras. Mobiles and laptops, why till now did not announce the names of those murdered at the freedom ships and still hides others and Why Israel and its supporters hide GOlden Stone report ??? if they are legal and not criminals why they are afraid and fear of the results of the committees and the Goldenstone report?? and so many previous reports and crimes of murder in sabra and Shatella , Qena in Lebanon ... genine in west Bank Palestine , and Gaza Palestine .... if you are right and not violating why you are afraid of justice to take its place? DOES RAHEAL CORRIEE guilty why she was murdered by crushing by the US bulldozers in RAFEAH one of GAZA CITY.???
Using the DAEM and Phosphorus in GAZA war is a crime of murder, preventing the rebuild of the demolished houses destructed by the Israeli rockets and missiles is by itself is a crime of murder.
How the siege and blockage be legal who made it legal??? (SHAM SHAM), who says so is violating human rights and criminal of murder as the siege caused malnutrition and anemia for 75% of GAZA population according to international org. reports, deterioration of education violation too.
supplying GAZA with 20% of its essentials for life is gradual killing and its apartheid...providing GAZA with 20% of the needs for the fuel to the electricity power generators which results turning the electricity off 10-12 hours daily and stay without it in dark cold nights at winter and without refrigerators, fans in hot days in summer.
LAKE OF DRUGS and medical tools and supplies and Preventing patients from getting treatment outside GAZA caused murdering 500 patients in 1000 days is a crime of murder... the death of prisoners if will name them so in the Israelis prisons due to medical care neglect ion ( 199 murdered) is a crime ... there are 100s of tragedies and disasters Israel did in GAZA and west Bank and EAST JERUSALEM ... Being in GAZA and west Bank and EAST JERUSALEM ( Recognized occupied territories since 1967 6 days war) is a crime by itself , steeling the Palestinian land is a crime destructing the olive trees the symbol of peace is a peace crime, the apartheid separation wall in WEST BANK AND EAST JERUSALEM IS A CRIME.
Take off the black dark eyes glasses and look clearly and see the facts ...
Does Israel wants the Palestinians to pay the bill and taxes of the HOLLOCUST do the Palestinian guilty and did it???
President OBAMA the peace man with the prize passed the health care project how by BARGAINING with the building of SETTLEMENTS ON THE PALESTINIAN LANDS which means that the PALESTINIANS PAID THE BILL: US people that's it , sham on the good people and taxpayers
US stop supporting Israel crimes by donating money, bullets, rockets bulldozers and the VITO ( 72 times US used the VITO to protect ISRAEL.
Wake up presidents people on the earth and see who violates the earth and the creatures humans and animals as well... Do you want to sleep ok you will wake up when Israel become the world EMPIRE and finish you all...

Tuesday June 15, 2010, 3:45 pm
Dave, thanks. This articulates exactly what i feel. I couldn't agree more and as Locan says, it is that simple.

Past Member (0)
Tuesday June 15, 2010, 5:42 pm
Marbles are used in the making of IED’s. after the blast and at the hospital they cannot detect the glass with x-rays.

Frank Lornitzo (8)
Tuesday June 15, 2010, 6:00 pm
Do you think they had the marbles because they knew to make IEDs from them or they didn't know IEDs are made from them? As a note the Israel intelligence initially thought the mission was nonviolent which was the quirky reason they came down from helicopters (pretending to ghosts or something?) LOL

Tuesday June 15, 2010, 6:14 pm
I wonder if they use the jam and coffee (that is on the restricted list) used in the making of IED's? Maybe the crayons, former Senator Cynthia McKinley, tried to smuggle into Gaza. Maybe, we should realize that the bullets and toys the US sells and gives to Israel does show up on X-rays and is definitely linked to mortality.

Jerry C (16)
Tuesday June 15, 2010, 7:20 pm
Hey, Margaret. Sorry, I'm going to have to drop out of any lengthy discussions for a while. I was looking forward to continuing to discuss with you, but work has just picked up immensely. I'll be in and out, but don't have the time that a well-thought out response requires.Rain check?

Past Member (0)
Tuesday June 15, 2010, 7:48 pm
Someone further up asked how marbles were dangerous, I posted how they can be.
Margaret, did I say anything about crayons, jam and coffee? Insert your foot in your mouth and go on with your life.

Tuesday June 15, 2010, 8:23 pm
Jerry C. No problem. I'll catch you later.

Tuesday June 15, 2010, 8:28 pm
Rodney, I was not in the least suggesting that you were doing anything, but providing information. You did not in anyway even try to argue or justify anything with this fact. I was just commenting in general, it was not directed to you or as a reaction to your post. If this offended you, I apologize. Your response to the question posted above was appreciated.

Jerry C (16)
Wednesday June 16, 2010, 5:28 am
You cannot currently send a star to Margaret because you have done so within the last week.


Jerry C (16)
Wednesday June 16, 2010, 5:30 am
Let's try that again... this textbox filters out html codes

^green^ STAR ^/green^

Kevin Miller (26)
Wednesday June 16, 2010, 6:59 am
IM back from the mountains, and we actually have a good debate going. I am impressed.

**FYI Marbles are used in the making of IED’s. after the blast and at the hospital they cannot detect the glass with x-rays**
This statement is indeed true. The thing about IED's though is it says in the name Improvished (key word) explosive devices. That means they come in all shapes, sizes, make, etc. It is also true glass is not detectable by X-ray. The fact, behind that is though we or Israeli dont use or should not use X-rays as the only mean of detection for IEDs and contraband. The most effective methods have always been Canine searches (those dogs are the greatest asset to the military hands down) and searches down by personal themselves. Yes, its a little more risky but there are things like freq. jammers and what not that will give enough time for the search party to react.

*Jerry C, and ROEs** I dont want to get into what I would do personal in that situation or what the Israeli commando should have done, just wanted state how absurd some ROEs are in the world. Everyone does have the right to defend their lives even if it does break ROEs. (Even in those cases, there are investigations done by JAG in the military) On our side, any time we fire our weapon in combat. We we go back to our base we our debrief, and have to write up reports on the whole engagement. Other officials then will determine later if ROEs were violated or any international law, etc. It can be a painful process of paperwork, but it does limit collateral damage from incidents like these.
We just need independent investigations to this matter or we will all just keep hitting our points. At least, this is in a constructive matter though.

Wednesday June 16, 2010, 3:48 pm
Hi Kevin! Thanks for more marble info. I now know what not to buy my very precocious, 8 year old! Jerry C. Thank you for sending the virtual green star!

Jerry C (16)
Thursday June 17, 2010, 4:26 pm
Margaret, if I told you some of the things my brother and I made weapons out of when we were children, it would make your hair fall out. It scares me to death when I think about it now!

Hey, Kevin. I've gotten caught up in work and haven't been able to be out here much. Enjoyed the discussion we DID have, though.

Jerry C (16)
Thursday June 17, 2010, 4:27 pm
Kevin - you said: "The most effective methods have always been Canine searches (those dogs are the greatest asset to the military hands down)"

"Marble Sniffing Dogs"! That would be a GREAT name for a rock band!

Thursday June 17, 2010, 5:03 pm
Jerry. This is the child that took off all of the door knobs off on the upstairs level doors when he was not even 3 years old. So nothing would surprise me.

Thursday June 17, 2010, 5:04 pm
I just read your marble sniffing dogs band idea. Good name, but don't quit your day job!

Frank Lornitzo (8)
Thursday June 17, 2010, 5:26 pm
"The things my brother and I made weapons out of. . ." Thank the dear goodness you are alive with all the fingers on your hands

Jerry C (16)
Friday June 18, 2010, 4:17 am
Frank - Why do you think I type so slow?

Not really, but there were some close calls.

Margaret - I would definitely wrap that kid in bubble wrap.

Friday June 18, 2010, 4:54 am
I am wondering who will be bubble wrapped????

Kevin Miller (26)
Friday June 18, 2010, 9:47 am
im confused now...the dogs dont sniff the marbles...the explosives. dang we need like a special symbol to anotate if its sarcasm or not...but marble sniffing dogs, definitely sounds like a 90s grunge rock band.

Jerry C (16)
Friday June 18, 2010, 1:48 pm
Just a joke. Not sarcasm.

Cindy B (61)
Friday June 25, 2010, 2:59 am
MY MY MY -- all this sure makes for interesting reading! I want to thank the people (M. Meyer et al) who've provided such detailed documentation, discussion & links. Up to this point my own anger and chagrin re Israel's actions have mainly been based on what I know about human nature (it's obvious their punitive actions against the Palestinians are what's creating the situation they then decry and use to justify further actions!... and my observation of the Jewish "zeitgeist" up close and personal (so much in their personal presentations is indicative of their political/military stances...) I spent some months studying the personalities of the Jews and Palestinians as I travelled around Israel. Across the board: where the Arabs were friendly, laid back, rather humble, always pleasant to be around, the Jews were intense, often rude and demanding, and seemed driven by the notion that Jewishness was more important than anything else on earth... that even ONE DROP of Jewish blood screamed manifest destiny. I made a tongue-in-cheek comment that maybe I had "a drop of 2" of Jewish blood (simply because I'd gotten so deeply into "Exodus" as a kid)... And suffice to say they were NOT amused at such blasphemy. Sheesh, what a tongue-lashing! Anyway, it's very late... I will return tomorrow to read all info more carefully. (except maybe all that stuff about the marbles)

Friday June 25, 2010, 4:25 am
Hi Cindy: You may be interested in this post ( which Carole was kind enough to find. Also, Richard Lorer's most recent article is also an interesting read, the link is (

Jerry C (16)
Friday June 25, 2010, 6:19 am
Cindy - you also might find this one interesting:


Mack David (100)
Friday June 25, 2010, 6:27 am
I agree with Adam and Locan about the marbles............

Frank Lornitzo (8)
Friday June 25, 2010, 8:54 am
'"One drop of blood . . . and "Manifest destiny" How do the thumpers read what they thump? Does it not say , " All nations will be blessed by the seed of Abraham"? Then what about the Arabs?
Or, log in with your
Facebook account:
Please add your comment: (plain text only please. Allowable HTML: <a>)

Track Comments: Notify me with a personal message when other people comment on this story

Loading Noted By...Please Wait


butterfly credits on the news network

  • credits for vetting a newly submitted story
  • credits for vetting any other story
  • credits for leaving a comment
learn more

Most Active Today in World

Content and comments expressed here are the opinions of Care2 users and not necessarily that of or its affiliates.

New to Care2? Start Here.