Naked Science Forum
General Discussion & Feedback => Just Chat! => Topic started by: witnesstheday on 20/01/2009 13:38:06
-
Hey guys, I've just donated £250,000 worth of marketing power to a campaign to boycott Israel's economy 100% by all countries in the world. Are there takers here who wanna help spread the word? I am ready to push this campaign in all possible directions - I need people who can help gather campaign material, and people who are ready to get boycotting, change the way they shop, in the name of Peace, and who can set an example and get others to boycott, and spread the information about what to buy and what not to buy.
So come all you peacelovers, come and join me, help me out. Lunatic people who love blood and death will come and try and disrupt our conversations, I implore you to ignore them - I don't have huge amounts of time for everyone, the campaign keeps me busy 24/7/365 now, but I want to talk personally to anyone who can and will help. Campaign materials to be released within weeks.
Take it easy. Long live peace. Remember - boycotting Israel is the only way to IMMEDIATELY HALT ALL CASUALTIES, ISRAELI ONES MOST NOTICEABLY. not a single israeli will die once the boycott has taken centre stage on the world political arena. This is the best thing you can do for innocent Israeli children. Not to mention what it will do for starving, dying palestinian children, born with nothing but despair and a world which ignores their plight.
-
I assume you will you be donating a similar amount to the effort to stop Hammas firing rockets into civilian areas of Israel.
-
If Hammas did not cowardley deliberately set off their constant barrage of rockets from within residential ares then the death toll would have been far less. It is most certainly a horrible terrible set of circumstances but what is Israel supposed to do ? Just keep receiving these rockets fired from residential areas ?..deal with suicide bombers too and just sit back and do nothing ?
Hammas's manifesto is the total annihilation of Israel. Their modus operandi is to take out every single Jew which they believe is a legitimate target in any way shape or form they can !
-
Israel has fallen into the cynical trap set by Hammas; but what else could it do? It was a foregone conclusion that there would be outrage at Israel attacking civilian areas so the launch sites were deliberately chosen by Hammas. There is no operational reason why rockets could not have been fired from outside the cities, so why has Hammas chosen built-up, civilian areas for launching?
Hammas doesn't care about the Palestinian people. If they did they would not have embarked on a course of action that would inevitably bring death & destruction to the general populace. Hammas cares about its own agenda and nothing else; that agenda being the obliteration of Israel and the death of every Jew. They are cynical hate-mongerers - nothing more, nothing less.
-
This is a complex minefield of Historic problems. I once thought that the problems in Northern Ireland was too complex to solve but because of brave people that decided to talk instead of fight the problems are slowly being solved.
Witnesstheday I'm glad you are standing up for something you believe in and in a peaceful way. However, both sides need to be willing to talk and negotiate and stop fighting. I don't think they are ready yet. Maybe this mad escalation will cause a mind set change. I doubt boycotts will work in this case but showing you disappointment like this is worth a go.
I also agree with the views of the above people. It takes two to Tango.
-
The refusal of Israel to comply with UN resolution 242 and relinquish all of the territories it has occupied, and in some cases illegally settled, gives Hammas, from it's point of view, reasonable justification for it's actions. Also, from Hammas' point of view, the fact that a huge majority of the Israeli people not only support their government's refusal to comply with UN242 but also the periodic, massively one-sided assaults upon the Palestinians, whilst at the same time keeping them in a state of development that can only be regarded as medieval poverty, is justification for attacking Israeli people in general. In Hammas' eyes, it is the wishes of the 'innocent' Israeli people that the Israeli government is enacting, and thus, it is those people whom both Hammas, and the Palestinian people in general, see to be responsible for their continued occupation and oppression.
Quite frankly, I'm surprised that nearly all the responses so far seem to have accepted the Western propaganda portraying Hammas as a purely terrorist organisation without question. Within Palestine, Hammas is clearly not viewed as such, but as one of the few organisations that is not only trying to do something to restore the freedom and dignity of the Palestinian people, but on a more practical level, also as one of the few effective aid agencies, providing support and assistance for the many ordinary Palestinians who have been made homeless by the regular and periodic assaults by Israel. This aspect of Hammas' work is rarely reported by the mainstream Western media though, as it spoils the efforts of western governments to distract their populace from their own incompetencies by distracting them with the threat of global terrorism(tm). This is one of the cleverest ruses ever thought up by governments who seek to rule their citizens, as opposed to serve them, as it's a threat that can never be entirely removed; any military action against idealogically motivated terrorist groups will inevitably result in more supporters for that group. It's a war that can never be won, but then winning it isn't the real aim. Perpetuating it is the objective.
While some elements of Hammas may publically claim that it's aim is the total destruction of Israel, achievement of that aim is not only clearly impossible but also undesirable to anyone who simply wants to live their life with any degree of stability, and both the Palestinian people and Hammas know this; it's not a serious aim but a bargaining chip that can be given up in negotiations so that the other side can claim they have gained something in return for giving up something. Regarding Hammas' aim of the total destruction of Israel as being serious is as nonsensical as the aim itself. It'll never happen and basing your approach upon it just guarantees that your approach will not fit reality.
As for the accusation that Hammas cynically bases it's forces in civilian areas behind a human shield; there are no areas open to Hammas that are not over-populated, short of moving out in to areas where there is no cover at all, which would just be suicidal. This arguement just comes down to accusing Hammas of being inhumane because they are not suicidal. At the same time there has been little fuss made about the documented incidents where Israeli military forces have used Palestinian civilians as human shields; which of these two behaviours is really the most cynical?
In the end, when I compare the degree of rationality behind the actions of Israel and the Palestinians, in pursuing their respected claimed aims, it is the Palestinians, through Hammas these days, that actually makes more sense; they see their state as being occupied by a hostile and oppressive foreign power that has failed to bring them any benefits whatsoever. Even the Romans did better than that. The Israeli approach on the other hand, and which has been followed for over forty years, is clearly irrational as it has simply not worked, and furthermore, shows no sign of working in the foreseeable future. Indeed, the only way that the Israeli approach can work is by the total genocide of the Palestinian people.
-
I didn't come down on any side, to do so is folly in this difficult and complex situation. I see fault on both sides and justification on both sides. To recognise this would be a step towards peace but I can't see it any time soon. All we can do is voice our disapproval of anything we see as injust.
-
Perhaps you should allocate money in proportion to the number of people who died. I think the tally is running roughly 100 to 1 at the moment.
I predict that, notwithstanding a new US president, the problem that has essentially been running for 4000 years isn't going to stop any time soon.
-
I was quite impressed with Obamas speech. It was promising.
-
LeeE - I agree with what you say in general. To say that Hamas launching rockets from non-built-up areas would be suicidal is true. But, what do they gain by launching from built-up areas? Oh, of course - Hamas rocketeers may escape when the Israelis bomb where the rockets were launched from and it will only be innocent Palestinians who die. That's alright then.
I am not saying that Israel is blameless and, yes, measures should be taken to ensure compliance with U.N. resolutions. But to say that Israel should just sit back and let Hamas kill Israeli citizens at will is absurd.
Also, has there been a U.N. resolution about Hamas's actions? If so, I've not heard of it.
Your point about the desctruction of Israel being no more than a bargaining chip, I'm not so sure. That is also the stated aim of, among others, the Iranian government and indications are that it is mainly the Iranians who are sponsoring Hamas. Although it is true that Hamas could not by itself achieve such an aim, the Iranians do appear to be trying to develop the capability to do so. If they succeed in developing an atomic bomb, it would be an organisation such as Hamas that would most iikely deliver it.
P.S. I apologise for my earlier mis-spelling of Hamas.
-
Would you like to donate £250k to the Naked Scientists for more peaceful and probably more beneficial endeavours?
-
Would you like to donate £250k to the Naked Scientists for more peaceful and probably more beneficial endeavours?
And more beer! (https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fbestsmileys.com%2Fthumbs%2F3.gif&hash=02c7799e545a77dfc1a9dae2111f9745)
-
Oops - I mis-spelled it too.
But, what do they gain by launching from built-up areas?
I think it comes down to finding some way of fighting back, or just giving up entirely. If the Israeli approach also provided some benefits to the Palestinians and allowed them to retain some degree of dignity then giving up entirely wouldn't seem so bad; this is what the Roman's learned, and which the Israelis seem to have completely overlooked. If the Palestinians aren't prepared to give up every last vestige of self-respect they have to find some way of resisting. It's not a good solution, but it seems to be the best one they can find. Flawed logic could also argue that the people are going to be killed by Israeli military action anyway, if not in this campaign then in the ones that are likely to follow. Now, I'm not claiming that this is the logic behind their strategy, but under the conditions that have existed in Palestine for a very long time now, I'd find it quite amazing that anyone is capable of rational reasoning.
If Israel complied with UN242 neither Hamas, nor anyone else, would have any justification for any attacks of any form upon Israel. If they then did so, they might actually qualify as the fanatical nihilist terrorists that they are made out to be, but until then assuming that they are irrational by definition just isn't going to work. Whom is to say who is mad and who is not, especially when the conditions aren't the same for both?
I'm not aware of any UN resolutions regarding the actions of Hamas, but then there's a lot of resistance to actually recognising it in the first place. It could be difficult to make a resolution about an organisation whose existence you deny.
I'm quite sure that an awful lot of people in the middle east would like to see the total destruction Israel, but that doesn't mean that anyone, other than the relatively few real fanatics, would be actually be prepared to do anything about it, for it would be suicidal. Unless you're going to claim that an entire country is prepared to die itself, as a consequence of such an annihilating attack, no one is actually going to try it; where's the profit in ending up dead? It's only the real fanatics who would see this as a reward in itself, and I think we can all agree that this is irrational.
-
It's really not my field, but a quick look on Google earth seems to indicate that most of Gaza is a built up area. Where are Hamas meant to fire rockets from?
Also, assuming you are not suicidal, would you really take a rocket launcer into the middle of a big emty space to launce missiles at an enemy with much better technology than yours?
-
I launch rockets from school fields but mine are TEP rockets made out of A4 paper and don't kill anyone. The safest thing to do is to not launch any dangerous rockets.
-
Also, assuming you are not suicidal, would you really take a rocket launcer into the middle of a big emty space to launce missiles at an enemy with much better technology than yours?
So you think that causing the almost certain death of innocent civilians is preferable to suicide. I can't say I agree with that point of view.
-
Also, assuming you are not suicidal, would you really take a rocket launcer into the middle of a big emty space to launce missiles at an enemy with much better technology than yours?
So you think that causing the almost certain death of innocent civilians is preferable to suicide. I can't say I agree with that point of view.
It is not the launching of the rockets from built-up areas that kills the civilians in those areas. The people in those built-up areas are killed by munitions fired in to those areas. The argument that it is the launching of rockets from those built-up areas that causes the death of the people in those areas only holds true if you believe that it is fair and reasonable to kill people who have not hurt you because you can't kill the people who did.
Perhaps the people launching those rockets just erroneously assumed that the Israelis had more humanity than turned out to be the case. What is is clear beyond dispute though, is that in deciding to fire munitions in to an area mostly occupied by non-combatant civilians it would be inevitable that the majority of people killed by those munitions would be non-combatant civilians. There was nothing accidental about the deaths of the non-combatant civilians in those built-up areas.
I'm not sure that 'ironic' is really an adequate description, but this strategy is almost identical to the one used by the Nazis in WW2, in several places around the world, but notably in France, where quite a few communities of innocent civilians were summarily executed following actions by the French Resistance because the Resistance people themselves could not be caught. It was considered to be a war-crime then, although of course, 'war-crime' may have since been re-defined, just as 'torture' and 'inhumane treatment' appear to have been.
-
The argument that it is the launching of rockets from those built-up areas that causes the death of the people in those areas only holds true if you believe that it is fair and reasonable to kill people who have not hurt you because you can't kill the people who did.
Is that why Hamas targets civilian areas with its rockets?
Perhaps the people launching those rockets just erroneously assumed that the Israelis had more humanity than turned out to be the case.
More humanity than those firing the rockets into civilian areas?
What is is clear beyond dispute though, is that in deciding to fire munitions in to an area mostly occupied by non-combatant civilians it would be inevitable that the majority of people killed by those munitions would be non-combatant civilians. There was nothing accidental about the deaths of the non-combatant civilians in those built-up areas.
The same accusation can be levelled at Hamas.
-
I'm not sure that 'ironic' is really an adequate description, but this strategy is almost identical to the one used by the Nazis in WW2, in several places around the world, but notably in France, where quite a few communities of innocent civilians were summarily executed following actions by the French Resistance because the Resistance people themselves could not be caught. It was considered to be a war-crime then, although of course, 'war-crime' may have since been re-defined, just as 'torture' and 'inhumane treatment' appear to have been.
I wasn't aware the French resistance targeted German civilians.
-
There appears to be no desire for peace on either side. When one side calls a ceasefire or for peace talks, the other seemingly deliberately pulls a stunt which it knows will scupper any such plans. Sometimes it even appears that they take it turns to disrupt or abandon any such venture.
They are hell bent on obliterating each other, always have been and always will be. All we can do is to try to keep their stupid religious based and originated war within the confines of their region.
My message to President Obama would be not to waste time and effort on seeking a solution to the Middle East situation. There is no solution. Merely try to maintain the status quo. You have more than enough on your plate as it is.
-
I suspect that Hamas targets civilian areas because a) it is slightly bonkers and b) because, rather rarely in today's world, the Israeli government is doing what it's citizens want. I believe that the most recent Israeli government's actions had over 70% general support across the general Israeli populace; it is the Israeli people who wanted the attacks. Moreover, in view of the appalling conditions that have been imposed upon the Palestinians by the Israeli government, with the wide support of the Israeli people, and for a considerable time, I can't help but consider them largely responsible for the response they're getting from the Palestinians. Treat me like sh1t and I will do anything I can think of to resist, because you have shown that you are sh1t for treating me so. Treat me with respect and allow me some dignity and perhaps we can do a deal. Just look at the conditions under which the Palestinians have had to live, for decades, and tell me that there has been any respect or dignity granted to them by the Israelis.
I'm not trying to justify one side or the other here, but trying to suggest that there is any degree of parity between the the two sets of actions is ridiculous.
-
Those who understand the truth (which is WIDELY available to those unegotistic enough to read things other than their own bigoted opinions) please don't waste time debating with morons. START boycotting today - start with Coca Cola, macdonalds, danone, l'oreal, nestle. In the UK - go with the same, plus lloyds tsb, sainsbury's, m&s, tesco - etc. learn to shop for groceries at markets not at supermarkets.
Don't worry - after 2 years of this, (I will keep on promoting day and night for at least the next 2 years solidly) there will be a lot of pressure on a lot of companies to publically denounce Israel themselves.
I am a man who, as I explained to Sir Stuart Rose (who is thinking about joining us), can yield 300,000 pounds of retail sales from 400 pounds of advertising cost. So don't be silly and egotistic those of you who want to pretend this is a nonevent. This is the beginning of the end of the israeli apartheid.
People who bleat about hamas should go see the faces of countless children who have been wounded, orphaned, even killed, by ISRAEL. Israel did NOT ALLOW THEM to leave gaza - they tried. They were not allowed out by israel.
Anyway, those on my side - don't waste your time with idiots. Please just get boycotting today and make everyone you know follow your example. Be a better person if you have to - whatever it takes to get people to follow you. Just do it. Okay? Best wishes.
Alexander Mahdi
-
I suspect that Hamas targets civilian areas because a) it is slightly bonkers
And that absolves them of any responsibility
b) because, rather rarely in today's world, the Israeli government is doing what it's citizens want. I believe that the most recent Israeli government's actions had over 70% general support across the general Israeli populace; it is the Israeli people who wanted the attacks.
And what portion of the Palestinian population do you think support Hamas.
If my end of the world is anything to go by the Palestinian side of the conflict came out the winners in the media here.
Let us not forget on what side Hamas is on they may only want to get rid of Israel but their big brothers want to get rid of all infidels.
That means both you and me LeeE unless you are of the Muslim faith.
Cheers
justaskin
-
Like most religions, the Muslims can't even agree amongst themselves. Sunny Vs Shiya.
I have often wondered if the 60's duo Sonny & Cher was a Jewish joke?!
-
LeeE you are absolutely right and very well expressed. Having spent many, many hours discussing the problems in the Middle East, and seeing how passions flare, I am not going to contribute to this subject further on this (science) website except to give this anecdote for witnesstheday's benefit.
I bought Medjool dates from Sainsburys which had place of origin as "Westbank". On subsequent research I discovered these are indeed from the Westbank but produced in illegal Israeli settlements. I wrote to the trading standards office and to Sainburys and had a reply from Sainsburys saying they are looking into it but that they are conforming to EU rules in their description (which is true). I subsequently found they had received complaints about this for several months and have done nothing so far. Tesco also imports these dates.
For the record I have been to Israel many times and love the country and its people but wholly disagree with the actions, and in many cases lack of action, of subsequent governments there over many years. They are sowing seeds for their own destruction but seem unable to see it. I also regret that the Palestinians voted in Hamas, but can understand why they did so. It needs magnaminity from Israel now, but I don't see that the present government (or the imminent new one) will have the sense to act in this way.
-
Those who understand the truth (which is WIDELY available to those unegotistic enough to read things other than their own bigoted opinions) please don't waste time debating with morons.
So pointing out that Hamas targets civilians1 and deliberately launches rockets from built-up areas1 makes me a bigoted moron, does it?
1. Both of these facts are "WIDELY available to those unegotistic enough to read things other than their own bigoted opinions"
-
The refusal of Israel to comply with UN resolution 242 and relinquish all of the territories it has occupied, and in some cases illegally settled, gives Hammas, from it's point of view, reasonable justification for it's actions.
LEE
Its not quite that simple and the wording can be interpreted in many ways depending on who is reading it.
Their is even a difference between the french and English versions.
Also Lord cardigan who authored the resolution says it didn't mention and shouldn't be interpreted as All territories.
http://www.defensibleborders.org/rosenne.htm
According to Resolution 242, there is no Israeli obligation to withdraw prior to the achievement of a comprehensive peace. Nor is there any requirement of Israel to withdraw fully from the territories it captured in 1967
http://www.palestinefacts.org/pf_1948to1967_un_242.php
UNSCR 242 calls on all parties to the conflict to negotiate a solution
It anticipates that Israel will withdraw to secure borders (not specified in the resolution) in exchange for peace guarantees from the Arab parties
-
I bought Medjool dates from Sainsburys which had place of origin as "Westbank". On subsequent research I discovered these are indeed from the Westbank but produced in illegal Israeli settlements. I wrote to the trading standards office and to Sainburys and had a reply from Sainsburys saying they are looking into it but that they are conforming to EU rules in their description (which is true). I subsequently found they had received complaints about this for several months and have done nothing so far. Tesco also imports these dates.
Graham, would you not have bought the product if you had know they were farmed by Israelies?
I may be dumb, but what is your gripe with the information on the packaging? It was correct, wasn't it?
-
I have bought dates from Israel in the past, but I would not have bought dates from the illegal Israeli settlements in the Westbank. The information was correct but I would not expect the EU to be supporting these settlements and think that just stating "Westbank" gives a false impression. Dates from Israel itself are clearly marked as such and even have Hebrew script on the packaging. I would like the information so I can make an informed choice.
-
The information was correct but I would not expect the EU to be supporting these settlements and think that just stating "Westbank" gives a false impression
I believe under international law the settlments are not actually illegal and therefore the EU have no grounds to discriminate against produce from Israeli west bank settlements .
-
According to wikipedia... "International bodies, including the United Nations Security Council, the International Court of Justice, the European Union, Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch and many legal scholars have characterized the settlements as a violation of international law".
-
According to wikipedia... "International bodies, including the United Nations Security Council, the International Court of Justice, the European Union, Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch and many legal scholars have characterized the settlements as a violation of international law".
However if you read the geneva convention word for word and apply it to the west bank you will find their is no violation.
The argument is that the conventions relating to occupied land do not apply to the Palestinian territorys because they were not under any legitimate sovereignty of any state. And going by the wording Israel is right
Also the League of Nations asked the United Kingdom to administer the area to the east of the river Jordan after of World War 1 and under the "British Mandate for Palestine" which came into force in 1922, years before the Arab Israeli Six Day War,the United Kingdom gave them the right to settle. The Mandate which still happens to be in force today recognized "the Jewish people historical connection with Palestine" and gave them the right to settle in the west bank and Gaza.
-
We were talking about the EU (today), and I also mentioned a number of other important bodies (the UN, International Court of Justice etc.), and not the legality (or otherwise) of previous decisions.
-
LeeE I can see your point here.
I don't remember the casualty figures here but I think it was something like one Israeli soldier for every hundred Palestinian, ah, person as they mostly was civilians.
And the phosphorus they spread down on the city from their helicopters is not unlike napalm when it hits people and eat through their flesh and bones.
Hamas may be quite corrupt and their way of enforcing women through rape to become suicide bombers, as recently been shown, is beyond the pale to my eyes. But that doesn't excuse the way the Israeli military have collected civilians into houses and then opened fire on them, not allowing those people to leave.
The whole war stinks, and Israel and their Arab neighbors are both to be blamed for that.
All of them are using the Palestinians as pawns, and that includes Hamas too.
That Terrorists, or as they are called after winning, freedom fighters use the population as their shield is nothing new, Israel itself fought once the British when Palestine was a British protectorate. Anyone heard of the rgun Zvai Leumi 1931-48? Look it up.
What's really sad here is that Israel too is allowing itself to be used as a 'tool' for western powers to have 'a foot' inside the Middle East. And of course, no matter what anyone want you to think, it's not about any egalitarian beliefs. It's about Geo Power and energy, Oil to be specific. They used to get a lot of the military material western countries wanted to test, and it's a popular place for some special forces to train in. Israel is famous for the quality of their spy's, but nowadays they don't have the 'material', people that is so totally comfortable and able to pose as 'Arabs' that they once used to have. That as the segregation between Israelis and their former Palestinian neighbors have grown.
And what's really terrible is that they find themselves in just that unsavory position, looking at how they treat the Palestinians, that they themselves was in during the second World War.
Treating others as 'second class citizens' that is.
And alienating themselves from them.
That was exactly how the Nazis did in the beginning, before they found their 'final solution'.
'Teaching' their 'Arian' Germans that their former friends and neighbors was 'scum'
It's a terrible situation for the Israelis, and it is a very hard thing to live like that.
Enemy's surrounding them, with the sea at their back, and themselves 'walling in' the Palestinians.
It creates a certain 'view of life' when meeting others and those not living there won't get it.
And those rockets and suicide bombers are constant reminders of their situation.
But they must go the same way as Ireland I think, violence only create more violence.
Look at those African states haunted by recent genocide that still tries to 'let be'.
They are very good examples on that there are ways out, if one is willing to forgive.
Also I would like to point out that for every one dead in a war there usually is like, what? Ten wounded.
There is statistics on that, even though I don't remember it for the moment.
Peace don't come from guns, it's when the guns are gone you can start talking.