A Tiny Revolution: Death by Schumer
« Horrible Life Imitates Art |
| Ten Dollar Saturday »
Posted at June 11, 2010 06:57 PM
Those Gazans deserve what they get for supporting Hamas. Wait. . .
"Israel started Hamas, sayss Charles Freeman, the veteran U.S. diploma and former U.S. ambassador to Saudi Arabia [the Israeli domestic intelligency agency], which had a feeling that they could use it to hem in the PLO." The Devil's Game, Robert Dreyfuss at 191-192. (This page can be read in the Google Books limited preview.)
That wacky conspiracy theorist Charles Freeman! He couldn't possibly be a former U.S. ambadador to Saudi Arabia, Distinguished Fellow at the Institute for National Strategic Studies, and Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_W._Freeman,_Jr.
Posted by: N E at June 11, 2010 08:29 PM
That's fairly well known, NE.
Posted by: Donald Johnson at June 11, 2010 08:38 PM
Hm. Well, try it this way.
1. Israeli leader: "Strangle Gaza!"
2. Terrorist attack (of a sort that if the Israelis did it, it wouldn't even make the news or disturb the "peace" in the Occupied Territories) kills Israelis.
3. Terrorist group (or "plucky little freedom fighters" if they were Israelis) says, "We did it because of Israeli policy toward Gaza."
4. Israeli leader: "They did it because they hate Jews! Drive the Arab cockroaches into the sea!"
It's already a familiar pattern in that context.
Posted by: Duncan at June 11, 2010 08:52 PM
What's most interesting about this subject, NE, if you're a collector of facts that are hidden in plain sight, is the role that the US played in causing the Palestinian civil war in 2007. AFAIK the NYT has never mentioned this-Ethan Bronner scrupulously avoided mentioning it today and that's been the usual pattern. Lawrence Wright avoided mentioning it in the New Yorker article on Gaza last year. Jon talked about this in June 2007, and Tony Karon did so in the link below and David Rose went into more detail in the April 2008 issue of Vanity Fair (which you can read online), but for most of the MSM it's a non-event, something that never happened.
Posted by: Donald Johnson at June 11, 2010 09:05 PM
Getting back to Schumer, if one goes by what one sees in blog comment sections his attitude is pretty common among Americans who argue about this subject--over at Obsidian Wings there's been a long thread on this and for the Israel defenders the blockade might or might not be a humanitarian problem, but if it is then it should be loosened slightly, but for them the real issue is Hamas rocket fire. Israeli violence isn't an issue--it just doesn't seem to register with them that it is on a much larger scale and isn't just a response to Palestinian violence (often it's the reverse). Posted by: Donald Johnson at June 11, 2010 09:10 PM
So Schumer goes beyond denialism, i.e., claiming war crimes aren't happening, to actively advocating for war crimes.
And sadly I'm unsurprised.
Those that falsely claim that the blockade is simply aimed at preventing "Hamas missiles," however odious they are in their lies, are at least implicitly recognizing that collective punishment is against international law. Posted by: Rojo at June 11, 2010 09:20 PM
Having not heard much of it, I wo
A Tiny Revolution: Death by Schumer
« Horrible Life Imitates Art |
| Ten Dollar Saturday »
Posted at June 11, 2010 06:57 PM
Those Gazans deserve what they get for supporting Hamas. Wait. . .
"Israel started Hamas, sayss Charles Freeman, the veteran U.S. diploma and former U.S. ambassador to Saudi Arabia [the Israeli domestic intelligency agency], which had a feeling that they could use it to hem in the PLO." The Devil's Game, Robert Dreyfuss at 191-192. (This page can be read in the Google Books limited preview.)
That wacky conspiracy theorist Charles Freeman! He couldn't possibly be a former U.S. ambadador to Saudi Arabia, Distinguished Fellow at the Institute for National Strategic Studies, and Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_W._Freeman,_Jr.
Posted by: N E at June 11, 2010 08:29 PM
That's fairly well known, NE.
Posted by: Donald Johnson at June 11, 2010 08:38 PM
Hm. Well, try it this way.
1. Israeli leader: "Strangle Gaza!"
2. Terrorist attack (of a sort that if the Israelis did it, it wouldn't even make the news or disturb the "peace" in the Occupied Territories) kills Israelis.
3. Terrorist group (or "plucky little freedom fighters" if they were Israelis) says, "We did it because of Israeli policy toward Gaza."
4. Israeli leader: "They did it because they hate Jews! Drive the Arab cockroaches into the sea!"
It's already a familiar pattern in that context.
Posted by: Duncan at June 11, 2010 08:52 PM
What's most interesting about this subject, NE, if you're a collector of facts that are hidden in plain sight, is the role that the US played in
 causing the Palestinian civil war in 2007. AFAIK the NYT has never mentioned this-Ethan Bronner scrupulously avoided mentioning it today and that's been the usual pattern. Lawrence Wright avoided mentioning it in the New Yorker article on Gaza last year. Jon talked about this in June 2007, and Tony Karon did so in the link below and David Rose went into more detail in the April 2008 issue of Vanity Fair (which you can read online), but for most of the MSM it's a non-event, something that never happened.
Posted by: Donald Johnson at June 11, 2010 09:05 PM
Getting back to Schumer, if one goes by what one sees in blog comment sections his attitude is pretty common among Americans who argue about this subject--over at Obsidian Wings there's been a long thread on this and for the Israel defenders the blockade might or might not be a humanitarian problem, but if it is then it should be loosened slightly, but for them the real issue is Hamas rocket fire. Israeli violence isn't an issue--it just doesn't seem to register with them that it is on a much larger scale and isn't just a response to Palestinian violence (often it's the reverse). Posted by: Donald Johnson at June 11, 2010 09:10 PM
So Schumer goes beyond denialism, i.e., claiming war crimes aren't happening, to actively advocating for war crimes.
And sadly I'm unsurprised.
Those that falsely claim that the blockade is simply aimed at preventing "Hamas missiles," however odious they are in their lies, are at least implicitly recognizing that collective punishment is against international law. Posted by: Rojo at June 11, 2010 09:20 PM
Having not heard much of it, I wo