CONNED – STILL!
Since the October 7th Hamas attacks on Israeli military positions and civilian settlements it’s become the norm for any debate on Israel’s overwhelming response, to open with a requirement that anyone supportive of the Palestinians, first damn the actions of Hamas on that day.
Clearly intended to put any support for Palestinians on the back foot, the tactic springs a “Catch 22” moral conundrum trap, in which to either condone or condemn the Hamas attacks risks tarnishing any case promoting the Palestinians’ position.
And, feeling trapped by moral principle, many feel obliged to concede, at which point Israel is then promptly presented as having acted strictly in accordance with international law, and so the debate is effectively over before its begun.
This is a gross and deliberate perversion of both the facts on the ground and that of any reasonable interpretation of the principles inherent in the international legal statute justifying war waged in self-defence.
It’s the same as if it was argued that the 1943 razing of the Warsaw Ghetto, the slaughter of its defenders and the transportation of the survivors to death camps was justified, because the Jews there rose up and attacked their oppressors.
That aside, for any state to invoke the international law of “self-defence”, as justification for it waging war against an attacker, that state must surely, in the first instance, be at peace.
But the state of Israel hasn’t been at peace with Palestinians for a single day of its 75-year existence, in fact longer. The state of Israel illegally occupies or otherwise controls Palestine in its entirety, and in perpetuation and defence of that occupation it kills Palestinians every day.
However much we have been seduced by our amoral media, to believe Israel represents a haven of democracy, peace and virtue besieged by “subhuman terrorists” bent on its destruction, current events prove to all but those too blind to see that it is Israel which is the state bent on destruction of the other.
Make no mistake, whether by armed physical occupation, absolute control of all essential infrastructure, walled and fenced confinement on land and blockaded from the sea and subject to constant electronic supervision, Israel controls Palestinians lock, stock and barrel. And any perceived semblance of a peaceful coexistence is only allowed to the extent it serves Israel’s ultimate purpose.
Hamas forces did not attack Israel on October 7, so triggering Israel’s claimed “right of self-defence”. Rather, Hamas rose up against the seventy-five-year-long attack which Israel’s vastly superior armed forces have been waging on recognized Palestinian territory, in defiance of international law and a myriad of UN resolutions, for all that time.
So, if any state has the right to invoke international law allowing retaliatory war to be waged in its own self-defence, it must surely be the Palestinians.
But, with its dead hand firmly in control of the news narrative all the while clouding our comprehension of real events with stories so sickeningly puerile as to defy humanity, the mass media makes a mockery of its mission, shames true Jewish history, and makes us complicit in the genocide of innocents.
Would that there was an international legal statute that allowed for any institution found waging war on our understanding of the truth of events, so making us complicit in war crimes, to be arraigned before the international court of justice for crimes against humanity.
“But, with its dead hand firmly in control of the news narrative all the while clouding our comprehension of real events ”
The name of the game of the corporate controlled, mass-media is to con us all. The Palestinian-Israel plight is but a snap shot of this. Serving the interests of its corporate string-pullers, of the powerful (Pollies) and of its advertisers, is its core business. We are being conned!
The sooner we all move away from mainstream media, towards independent, typically, user-funded media, the sooner we see the world for what it really is…
“…to be arraigned before the international court of justice for crimes against humanity.” Malcolm Evans
Agreed; Israel needs to be arraigned before the International Court of Justice to face charges of committing genocide.
Israel is a signatory to the UN convention on the prevention and punishment of the crime of genocide. The United Nations International Court of Justice was founded by the United Nations to hear cases related to breaches of the United Nations convention on the prevention and punishment of the crime of genocide.
Unlike the ICC to which Israel is not a signatory, Israel is as a member nation of the UN subject to the International Court of justice, the ICJ.
The ICJ is a branch of the United Nations and has power to sanction member nations found guilty of breaching the UN genocide convention, and even suspend their membership of the United Nations.
Israel needs to be arraigned before the ICJ as soon as possible.
Either that or make a complete farce of the United Nations so called post world war “Rules-Based International Order”
Palestinians are the civilian wing of Hamas as the German people were to the Nazis.
Malcolm, you need to read a history book.
I read little else Andrew, but happy to read another – which one would you recommend?
“… – which one would you recommend?” Malcolm Evans
If Andrew doesn’t want to recommend you a book.
I recommend you this one;
The Impossible Revolution
by Yassin al-Haj Saleh
https://www.hurstpublishers.com/book/the-impossible-revolution/
And this one;
Burning Country
by Robin Yassin-Kassab
https://www.wob.com/en-au/books/robin-yassin-kassab/burning-country-old-edition/9780745336220/GOR010881772?
Try Lenni Brenner Zionism in the Age of Dictators.
https://www.marxists.org/history/etol/document/mideast/agedict/index.htm
Look Guys,
If in your view, my opinion is contrary to truth of the matter, then disregard it. Ignore it! Cast it from your mind entirely, and instead take the time to listen, very carefully, to the view of someone far more qualified, far more eloquent and eminent, than me, and then tell me where we differ.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I_Sh-ERypMA
Not actually sure what “the media” are trying to get me to believe about this latest war, and since I use the BBC, it seems they don’t either. One of their latest offering is that Israel knew before Hamas attacked that there would be an attack, and, so… what exactly? They didn’t say. However, despite the insane media environment they work in (the vicious rivalry between news outlets in UK) and their famous bias that switches every five minutes, they do manage to compile a live chronological list of basic facts. These people went over there, that rocket went over there, that event happened then.
Since the beginning of the war I have deliberately dodged hysterical claims by any particular faction, which to my surprise now includes the UN and it’s various divisions. War is quite obviously hell, we know. Truth is the first casualty, we know. From what I can read, the IDF are one of the more straight-up military sources when it comes to telling anyone what they have done or will do. I think Netanyahu thinks of this when he offers his “most moral army in the world” statement. I’ve also managed to piece together that Hamas and whoever supports them are a seriously dangerous and unhinged bunch, who lie with great vigor if a journalist is anywhere nearby.
Despite this, I cannot say I am “pro-Israel”, and not for political reasons, though I am surely “anti-Hamas”. As I understand it, it is not possible to be pro-Israel during a time of war if you are not in Israel and Israeli. History shows us that they will shoot anyone in the vicinity, ally or not, with utmost prejudice – even Americans. They will apologise profusely and genuinely later, offering monetary compensation to families for personal loss. I am convinced they do this with the greatest solemn regret. I do not understand Israeli culture or their collective psyche, so I cannot be as equally honest and say I am pro-Israeli. This may be the motivation for Biden’s slow backing away towards the metaphorical door over the last few weeks. From this far away, there seems to be a cultural aspect where once a war starts, any well-meaning individual should immediately step far away from the nearest IDF soldier. Wave from behind the barricade, shout encouraging words, but do not lift you head up! I understand the general idea that everyone hates them and is trying to kill them at every opportunity. It could cause severe paranoia. And then Israel will say something like, “We didnt take as much care as we could have,” and here is me already thinking they have taken more care than the Americans would have. Do they even know what is happening? I don’t understand what it is that Israel’s enemies are connecting with in order to be that hateful. To me, it is the most baseless, dumbest – and yet most vicious – prejudice I’ve ever heard.
This strange cultural and geographical aspect has me entirely baffled as to how to understand any of it, honestly, truthfully. Israel’s neighbours sound like a real nice bunch. They’re all solidarity and “my people” when the bombs are falling on Palestinians, but ask them if they will contribute to governing Gaza after the war and they give a straight, “NO”. With friends like that, etc etc. They obviously aren’t working to the same text as us in NZ.
Look at the geographical location of the West Bank. If you can for a moment, forget it is Israel, and think of it as a piece of land inside a hostile territory, surrounded by beligerent states: could you gaurantee security in a region that is basically cut in half and just waiting for a small armed force to seperate the halves before conquoring the nation? Impossible. Whether you think their methods a crime or not, how is it possible for Israel to have a secure nation without controlling the West Bank? That being the case, there are only two options, neither are particularly peaceful at the beginning.
Back in NZ, Jewish and Palestinian youth organisations help each other out after political attacks, and say, “Leave all that stuff back in Israel. If you want to help, go there.” They know, and won’t touch it with a barge pole.
Is it possible to get an absolute moral grasp on the situation without living there? In my opinion, no. Yes, Hamas are terrorists. Yes they did what they did, and triggered a war that Palestinians have been baying for as long as you like. Yes killing 1200 people to make a political point is morally wrong, let alone the “kidnapping” which no legitimate army will do. No I don’t believe Gaza was a “segregated prison state”.
But I get the impression that there is so much that can’t be understood about the situation, without having spent some of my life there – really there, not as a spectator. Falling into the trap of over simplification, desperately making incorrect comparisons, personal projections, even claiming basic moral standards, all fall short.
One of the spouses of a hostage recently said something along the lines of, “I do not have the luxury of commenting on the situation because it causes such a disturbance in me.” The media often treat all these wars like a rugby game – whose side are you on? Who do you like the best? Who do you idenitfy with? Which team has the best uniforms? Is your skin colour similar to this team? They’re your team! yay!
Almost no one in NZ has experienced the social aptmosphere of war, or constant impending war. The closest collective distortion we’ve had is covid lockdowns. Not nearly as severe an effect. If we want to compare Free Palestine politics to maori struggles, why is it maori haven’t killed 1200 pakeha recently? I mean, haven’t they struggled for longer and suffered equal humiliations? There’s something about the place, and the culture and the people that doesn’t translate to a NZ reality. There’s a disconnect I cannot bridge with certainty.
I wait for the return of all the hostages, alive, I very much hope. After that I have to leave them to it. It exceeds my capability to understand.
You have a clearer understanding of this calamity than you realize.
On the one hand, we have a beleaguered nation with a ‘straight-up’, arguably ‘moral’ military tasked with defending this nation from a horde of ‘belligerent’ states. This volatile circumstance often leads to ‘paranoia’, thus mistakes, that this military, to say the least, is contrite about afterwards. Still, they ‘control’ what they can, but again, only out of necessity – being surrounded by hostiles tends to lend itself to controlling behavior, it appears.
And on the other hand, we have the hostiles, the hysterical, the hateful, the terrorists, the immoral, the bloodthirsty, the unhinged, the liars, and more, be it Hamas, Palestinians, their supporters and various UN and UN-like factions, not to mention neighboring states. This side killed 1200 people to boot, the other side, well, diddly squat it appears.
Well, your post is a poster-person refection of the media you read.