Genocide In Gaza, by Ilan Pappe

[Tom Joad]

A genocide is taking place in Gaza. This morning, 2 September, another three citizens of Gaza were killed and a whole family wounded in Beit Hanoun. This is the morning reap, before the end of day many more will be massacred. An average of eight Palestinian die daily in the Israeli attacks on the Strip. Most of them are children. Hundreds are maimed, wounded and paralyzed.

The Israeli leadership is at lost of what to do with the Gaza Strip. It has vague ideas about the West Bank. The current government assumes that the West Bank, unlike the Strip, in an open space, at least on its eastern side. Hence if Israel, under the ingathering program of the government, annexes the parts it covets - half of the West Bank - and cleanse it from its native population, the other half would naturally lean towards Jordan, at least for a while and would not concern Israel. This is a fallacy, but nonetheless it won the enthusiastic vote of most of the Jews in the country. Such an arrangement can not work in the Gaza enclave - Egypt unlike Jordan has succeeded in persuading the Israelis, already in 1948, that the Gaza Strip for them is a liability and will never form part of Egypt. So a million and half Palestinians are stuck inside Israel - although geographically the Strip is located on the margins of the state, psychologically it lies in its midst.

The inhuman living conditions in the most dense area in the world, and one of the poorest human spaces in the northern hemisphere, disables the people who live it to reconcile with the imprisonment Israel had imposed on them ever since 1967. They were relative better period where movement to the West Bank and into Israel for work was allowed, but these better times are gone. Harsher realities are in place ever since 1987. Some access to the outside world was allowed as long as there were Jewish settlers in the Strip, but once they were removed the Strip was hermetically closed. Ironically, most Israelis, according to recent polls, look at Gaza as an independent Palestinian state that Israel has graciously allowed to emerge. The leadership, and particularly the army, see it as a prison with the most dangerous community of inmates, which has to be eliminated one way or another.
<snip>
There is much more of course, find it here:
http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=22&ItemID=10881

[acmavm]

1. This shit is why Israel has trouble with all the people NATIVE

to the Middle East. The barbaric and disgusting treatment the Israeli government metes out to the Palestinian populace.

[pelsar]

2. i see map reading is a real problem.....

but once they were removed the Strip was hermetically closed. .......I didnt realize that Egypt was in on the "genocide" thing....guess Mubarek wants to eliminate the palestenian as well..


so tell me....why isnt egypt opening the border?....or why dont the EU observers just live in Rafah so they can do their jobs...or are they too in on the genocide?

what a conspiracy: EU observers/Egyptians/Israelis all conspiring to keep the palestenains locked in gaza

[Tom Joad]

3. The border is often closed. By the occupying power.

There are other problems as well, but again, some here would like to say they have more expertise than
Human Rights organizations who put the responsibility on Israel
Humanitarian groups, the Red Cross, and many others who see that Israel has not lived up to its responsibilities.

what is happening in Gaza is exactly what Israel wants to happen in Gaza, that its inhabitants "go on a diet".

[pelsar]

11. I dont believe in "group think"

just because a organization says one thing, i dont automatically jump in line......some of us can read a map, and a map shows that Gaza has a border with Egypt, the same map shows egypt has ports. A bit of reading and one understands that Egypt has a road system all the way to Rafah that can carry trucks.

not hard to understand that anytime gaza is closed, the Egyptians are participating. If its genocide, then the egyptians are part of it, if there is no medicine, it can be delivered via Rafah

of course there are those that somehow believe the egyptians are not capable of delivering goods, but that sounds pretty racist to me, I believe they can, if the choose to.

[breakaleg]

26. Why isn't Gaza able to access the beach and water they are sitting on?

Who is blocking that? Who took out the airport and is blocking their airspace?

[Tom Joad]

84. gotta respect your ability to stand alone. Human Rights organizations

say one thing. You say another. Humanitarian food aid organizations say one thing, you say another.

Reminds me of our own President. He still believes the US is doing good in Iraq.

[Tom Joad]

85. Papers like Jerusalem Post and Haaretz also say these borders are

closed because due to the decisions of Israel. the IDF says that it closes the borders (due to "security") But no one, except one anonymous poster at DU, says that Israel has nothing to do with the border closings.

You are free to think otherwise. Some people may think small, invisible, but very powerful green martians are behind the closing of the borders, and they are free to think that.

I find it amazing that besides mentioning several hundred times in two months that Gaza shares a border with Egypt, you have not been able to quote from one human rights group, from one humanitarian organization, that Israel does not share a large part of the blame for the humanitarian crisis. Yes, I am sure the IDF says it doesnt, but there's got to be another source.

You may have forgotten , or just don't know. Gaza is not a sovereign state.

[mike_c]

4. classic misdirection....

Rather than address the primary point of the article-- the deliberate mistreatment of Palestinians-- your response attempts to shift the focus to a minor tangential point.

Egypt is not responsible for the oppression in Gaza. Egyptian soldiers are not roaming Gaza murdering noncombatants-- those would be Israeli IDF. Egyptians are not withholding food, water, medical treatment. Israel does that. Egyptians are not dropping bombs on Gazans. Egyptians did not destroy the power plant and water treatment facilities. Egyptians do not destroy Palestinian homes. Egypt is not the oppressor.

Gaza is an open air prison in which the IDF is running amok. Egypt is not the problem.

[pelsar]

8. then why doesnt...

egypt open up the border, send in food and medicine......if gaza is an open air prison, why is egypt participating, when they can do the opposite (can you even answer the question?)

[mike_c]

9. LOL-- you're still trying to misdirect-- play that game...

...with someone else.

[pelsar]

12. cant play can you...

because it would imply that Egypt is involved..and w wouldnt want that now would we?

[breakaleg]

27. Is Egypt the occupying power in Gaza? funny, I thought it was Israel

and it was Israel's responsibility as THE occupying power to ensure the basic needs of the people the have in a cage.

[pelsar]

30. gaza the prison...

this is a question, see if you can answer it:

if gaza is considered a prison by many here (or concentation camp)...and the southern border is an egyptian/gaza border, with EU observers....and they close it

doesnt it make them responsable for the "prison"....after all all they have to do is open the gates....

[breakaleg]

32. you make it seem like Israel has no control over that border.

that's incorrect.

"Israel ordered the Gaza-Egypt border crossing closed Thursday afternoon, just hours after it was partially opened for the first time in weeks, EU and Palestinian officials said."

http://web.israelinsider.com/Articles/Briefs/9131.htm

[pelsar]

56. it varies.....since the kidnapping

and israels reinvasion...when the IDF are on the "Philadelphia strip (that divides rafah and is the border, israel in fact controls the Rafah crossing as well. This is has been only after the kidnapping for short periods, previous to that israel had no control over it.

and once the IDF leaves the border area it reverts back to egyptian/palestenain/EU control.

Infact much of its closure has not been because of the IDF, as the IDF is not camped out there, but because the European Observers cant get to it via the kern shalom, which is closed for security alerts), there are other options.... like entering via Erez (up north) or via Egytian Rafah....but the EO observers for reasons of their own (probably personal security) prefer not to.

but those aside, its an off an on thing since the kidnapping.

dumb idea, kassams and kidnapping, they would have been better off concentrating on their economy and welfare instead of trying to kill israelis

[newyorican]

7. Ian Pappe

...is a history professor at Haifa University. He publishes his opinions with his real name attached.

You are an anonymous poster on an Internet blog, with the huge credibility gap that has as baggage.

Need I say more?


P.S. Perhaps the EU observers would live in Rafah, if the IDF didn't use the area as a missile/bombing range.

[pelsar]

29. Rafah..

has an egyptian side to it.....its split in two....
PS. they could live there.....

[Violet_Crumble]

61. I see addressing the actual OP is a real problem n/t

[oblivious]

70. Why are you posting this rubbish? Just read the news once in a while.

1. It is Israel that is closing the border, not Egypt.

2. EU observers don't live in Rafah and do their jobs because Israel won't let them. Israel has complete control over what they are allowed to do.

You can argue about the justification for closing the border crossing, but arguing that it is fault of Egypt or the UN observers is just plain dishonest.

You are just wasting people's time here, trying to hijack threads. You have no credibility here.

OPT: Palestinians in Gaza largely cut off from outside world
06 Sep 2006 14:08:52 GMT
Source: IRIN

RAFAH, 6 September (IRIN) - Israel's continued closure of the Gaza Strip's only international border crossing is isolating Gaza's 1.4 million residents.

...However, when Palestinian militants captured an Israeli soldier at the nearby Kerem Shalom crossing on 25 June, Israel shut Rafah immediately.

Israel is able to decide when and how the crossing opens, because when it closes Kerem Shalom, it effectively prevents the EU observers reaching the Rafah crossing to monitor movement through it.

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/IRIN/e13eb7376d19a4e2448776a398004b46.htm

EU monitors may opt to leave Gaza crossing, Israel
05 Sep 2006 15:18:21 GMT
Source: Reuters
JERUSALEM, Sept 5 (Reuters) - European monitors could be withdrawn from the border between Gaza and Egypt later this year amid concerns about Israeli restrictions on performing their duties, European officials said on Tuesday.

"We cannot continue like this," a European official said.

The Rafah border crossing has been closed for all but 7 days since an Israeli soldier was captured by Palestinian militants on a cross-border raid on June 25.

...Western diplomats say Israel has prevented Rafah from opening by keeping European monitors from getting to the terminal, citing security concerns.

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L05517577.htm

[breakaleg]

5. That there can be any defense of this action is unreal.

What does it say about the world that we turn a blind eye to this?

[pelsar]

6. who want facts? anybody here?

lets start off withe Gaza closure?

anybody want to tell me why trucks cant travel from egypt to gaza carrying food, medicine?...anybody here dare to actually answer with what is actually happening at the rafah border crossing?..why wont the EU observers stay in rafah and open it?...anybody here have an answer

1)



IDF troops in gaza...true there are now, there werent before...anybody here want to suggest what israel should have done to stop the kassams from flying into israel...anybody with some real suggestions?......been asking for about a year now...none here seem to even suggest something that will stop them.

1)

anybody want to explain why isnt egypt doing more?...why are they opening up their ports to palestenian vegis?

1)

if israel is practicing genoicde on the palestenains....anybody here want to look up the word in the dictionary?


come on guys..how about some real suggestions and answers ...all of israel is listening.....

[mike_c]

10. misdirection-- you want some "real answers," but what you really want...

...is to change the subject.

[pelsar]

13. on the contrary...

i'll answer any question of yours anything....but can you answer mine? (somehow i dont think so....)

[Name removed]

22. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[pelsar]

21. nothing makes a poster "disappear" faster....

than asking a few pertinent questions...I'm still amazed at how so many simply cant even try.....

do you realize in the years that i've been here except for a single 'brave person"....anytime i start asking questions about: realistic options, (that wont be considered a war crime, genocide etc) i get nothing....or in term of gaza, just bringing up the Egyptians is enough to "poof" have posters go away. Magic word: Egyptians...

[mike_c]

24. I haven't disappeared-- I'm simply not going to play...

...the "change the subject" game with pelsar. Egypt is not the topic of the OP-- pelsar seeks to misdirect attention to another topic, thus undermining the OP. It's a classic technique, but I'm not playing.

[Name removed]

31. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[mike_c]

38. start another thread if you want to talk about Egypt....

Answering your questions in this thread would allow you to change the subject. This thread is about Israeli genocide against Palestinians in Gaza. If you wish to discuss Egypt, you should start a thread rather than thread-jacking this one.

[Name removed]

43. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Douglas Carpenter]

14. I do agree that genocide is not the correct word

but they could stop committing war crimes



link:

http://www.btselem.org/English/

76 Palestinians killed in August - over half did not participate in the hostilities
Since the abduction of Cpl. Gilad Shalit, in late June, until the end of August, Israeli security forces killed 226 Palestinians, 54 of them minors, in the Gaza Strip. 114 of whom (among them 46 minors), did not take part in the hostilities when killed.

B'Tselem to Defense Minister: Stop using Rafah Crossing to pressure Gaza civilians
On 30 August 2006, B'Tselem wrote to the Defense Minister, Amir Peretz, and informed him there was reason to believe that the security establishment has been using the Rafah crossing to put pressure on Palestinians in the Gaza Strip. The organization demanded that the minister order the IDF to cease its illegal policy.

Beatings and abuse in the shadow of war
According to B'Tselem's research, since the beginning of Operation Summer Rains in the Gaza Strip, on 28 June 2006, there has been a substantial increase in cases in which Israeli soldiers and Border Police in the West Bank beat, abuse, and humiliate Palestinians. The increase in incidents has been particularly evident since the outbreak of the war in Lebanon, on 12 July.

29 Aug. 2006: B'Tselem demands Military Police investigation of firing at journalists in Gaza

On Sunday <27 August>, the Israeli air force fired at a Reuter press vehicle near the Shaja'iyah neighborhood in Gaza . Two journalists in the vehicle were injured, one of them severely.

An IDF spokesperson stated that the vehicle was attacked during an IDF operation because the vehicle "was driving suspiciously near IDF forces operating in the area." The spokesperson contended that the soldiers did not identify the vehicle as one that belonged to the press agency, and regretted that the journalists were injured. According to Reuters, and from photos that appeared in the media, the vehicle was clearly marked as a press vehicle on all sides and on its roof.

July 20 Soldiers used Palestinians as human shields in Gaza

B'Tselem investigation indicates that Israeli soldiers used Palestinian civilians, including minors, as human shields during the military operation in Beit Hanun.


July 12 Killing of 9 family members in Gaza: Grave suspicion of a war crime

The Israeli air force bombed a residential building in Gaza city before dawn on July 12, killing a couple and 7 of their children, the youngest a 4-year old boy. The IDF stated that the building was a hideout for senior operatives of the Hamas military wing.


July 11 Appeal to Israeli High Court: Stop the harm to the civilian population in Gaza

On July 11, 2006, six human rights groups petitioned the Israeli High Court demanding that the crossings in Gaza be opened to allow for the steady and regular supply of fuel, food, medicine, and equipment, including spare parts needed to operate generators.

[pelsar]

15. i may not agree with much of what the IDF is doing...

but theres a very very very gaping difference between that and genocide.....and those who use such words have no excuse other then attempting to dehumanize the israelis....


....this is after all " progressive site".....

[Douglas Carpenter]

16. unfortunately people don't always use correct words

on the other side people will use the word terrorist or terrorism way too broadly and frankly selectively. Sometimes or at least the way it comes off--it sounds as if some people wed the word terrorist and Palestinian together.

Now I ABSOLUTELY do NOT believe that it would be sensible for the Palestinians to use armed struggle as a means for their liberation. It would be counterproductive.

However, under the fourth Geneva convention it is the right of occupied people to resist their occupation by armed struggle provided it is directed against legitimate military targets. It might be stupid, counterproductive and/or immoral given the reality of the circumstances. But it does not meet a definition of terrorism.

If an action is vengeful even if justifiably vengeful but directed against civilians, that can be reasonably defined as terrorism. Any intentional or indiscriminate attack, whether by a state or or a non-state political group, that is directed against civilians can be fairly called terrorism.

[pelsar]

20. the use of the word genocide..

is not only "counterproductive"...its dehumanizing to the point to where those who use are letting their true feelings for israelis out....(if there are other options, i'm interesting in hearing....)

[Spinoza]

28. Well, one thing is for sure.

Considering the Palestinian population increase from 1967 (or 1948) to today, Israel is certainly the most INCOMPETENT genocidist (is that a word?) in history.

You are precisely correct that throwing out words like 'genocide' or 'Nazi' or 'terrorist' to describe Israel is an obvious manifestation of....something else. (Which is NOT necessarily Anti-Semitism in motivation--I don't believe any DU posters feel an emotional hatred for Jews--but is akin to it in result. And genuine Jew haters, of course, make the same accusations.) These hysterical and deranged descriptions of a refugee nation, which more than any other nation-state has valid reasons to fear a GENUINE genocide, and which is populated by the survivors and their children of an ACTUAL genocide are-literally-insane.

[Violet_Crumble]

57. I agree that it's not genocide, but what you said is totally wrong....

Considering the Palestinian population increase from 1967 (or 1948) to today, Israel is certainly the most INCOMPETENT genocidist (is that a word?) in history.

A declining population is NOT one of the indicators of genocide and I don't know where some people get the idea it is.

You are precisely correct that throwing out words like 'genocide' or 'Nazi' or 'terrorist' to describe Israel is an obvious manifestation of....something else. (Which is NOT necessarily Anti-Semitism in motivation--I don't believe any DU posters feel an emotional hatred for Jews--but is akin to it in result.

Y'know what I find totally hypocritical about this sort of stuff? It's that those who carry on the loudest about it are the ones who regularly throw out words like 'genocide' or 'Nazi' or 'terrorist' to describe various Arab states and the Palestinians. So if it's something akin in result to an emotional hatred for Jews when it's aimed at Israel, then why isn't it also a manifestation of the same thing about Arabs when it's aimed at Arab states?

[msmcghee]

62. You are describing the reality of life in the mind . .

. . of an ideologue. Their external reality is shaped and colored to reflect their internal emotions. The enigma is that ideologues are comletely unaware that it is happening. To them their own views seem perfectly rational and those who provide arguments of reason and logic - insofar as they dispute their ideology - are seen as the most irrational of all possible views.

(This has been verified by EMR scans of brains during ideological vs. rational debate.)

The only useful indicator is for each person to honestly ask themselves about the strength of the emotions they feel when "carrying the banner" for their position - which is what most of the posts in these threads amount to. Reason does not cause high emotional states to arise. It is pretty mundane - cold logic, so to speak.

But, this is further confused by the personal attacks and defenses that go on in the midst of this "banner waving". To an ideologue, any disputation of facts can seem like a personal attack - and so it escalates - obscuring the ideology from the fight around it and about it. In fact, just my description of this neuronal process will seem like a grave attack against some here (if you are feeling that then the ideological emotions I am describing are apt) and I suspect this post has already received several "alerts" for that reason.

A positive outcome is only possible when all parties accept the responsibility to use reason rather than emotion in their posts and admit when their argument fails that test. Unfortunately, because many here hold strong ideological positions on the matter, and are here to "win" for their ideology rather than discuss the pro's and con's - discussion here without high emotion is not possible.

[Marrak]

17. all of israel is listening...

to what? their collective conscience? When does Israel listen to anybody? (I remember a quote from a decade or so ago by an Israeli officer speaking about the U.S.: We'll take your guns, we'll take your money, but we won't take your advice"):shrug:

I would thus suggest the U.S. call on the U.N. to apply military and economic sanctions on "Israel" in light of the war crimes they committed in Lebanon and the genocide they are committing in Gaza. The U.S. would be much better off calling out this unreliable "ally". It would do much toward restoring our credibility in the world. We could then sit-down and broker a deal with the Iranians on their nuke program. :patriot:

[cali]

18. So the US,

undoubtedly guilty of greater war crimes than Israel should call on the UN to sanction Israel? LOL! As far as Gaza goes, much as I condemn the actions of Israel in Gaza and do believe that some of those actions do indeed qualify as war crimes, Prof. Pappe does nothing but harm when he incorrectly applies the word genocide. Sad that he should choose to use that word. It descredits his standing as a historian.

[Douglas Carpenter]

19. I admire Professor Pappe a great deal. But I did cringe over the use of

that word. The truth is horrible enough.

But I also cringe when the word terrorism is used so selectively.

[lumpy]

23. 'Picking fly shit out of the mayo'.

The ingredients of war consist of bombs and bombast.

[mike_c]

34. genocide is defined by article II of the 1948...

...Convention on the Punishment andPrevention of the Crime of Genocide:

Article II

In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

(a) Killing members of the group;

(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;

(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;

(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;

(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

(emphasis is mine)

Conditions a-c certainly apply to Israel's treatment of Palestinians, constituting genocide. Those are sufficient to justify use of the term. Would you care to explain how you believe they are not? Condition (d) follows from the limitations imposed on food, water, and medical treatment, although it is debatable whether the intent of those restrictions is to prevent births. Certainly the public statements some Israeli politicians have made suggest an intent to limit Palestinian reproduction, but I won't argue whether that is explicit policy. Only condition (e) is missing, although again Israeli politicians have advocated forced relocation of Palestinians, including children. However barbaric that solution might be, it falls short of genocidal on the question of intent. However, conditions a-c remain sufficient to justify the charge, IMO.

Genocide is NOT restricted to attempts to completely wipe out a group. It is defined by harmful actions taken based on group membership alone. That certainly describes Israeli mistreatment of Palestinians.

I believe this has been discussed on numerous occasions in this forum. Perhaps you haven't seen those discussions?

[The Magistrate]

36. You Misread The Regulation, Sir

It remains an item of scale. You seem to be reading it line with a tendency of analysis which would, because after all a single individual is "a part" of a group, consider a single death to be "genocide". But that is not the way the law you cite has been interpreted, and it is not going to be interpreted as you would have it done by any competent court. If you were to look into the results of the tribunals concerned with the late Balkan wars, you will find that convictions on genocide charges have been pretty infrequent, even in situations where it was quite clear that large numbers of people were being killed and driven out on no other basis than ethnicity and religion. What is required for the crime is a fixed intention to utterly destroy the entire group, or the whole part of it within your power. That is quite absent in the current events fo the Middle East.

[mike_c]

40. not at all....

I did NOT suggest that the convention be interpreted to extend to actions against one individual based upon that individual's membership in a group-- you said that. You have mischaracterized my statement, presumably in an attempt to undermine it by misapplying it to an extreme situation. I would call the situation you describe a hate crime, and part of a pattern of genocide ONLY if it is part of a broader intent to harm THE GROUP itself rather than just the individual. I think it irrefutable that Israel directs its actions with intent to harm the residents of Gaza BECAUSE THEY ARE PALESTINIAN ARABS with legitimate claims against Israel under the U.N. Charter and the Geneva Conventions regarding refugees, and because they seek self determination.

[geek tragedy]

42. There is no intent to DESTROY any segment of the Palestinian

people.

Injustice and brutality? Hell yes. Illegality? You bet. Worthy of condemnation? I agree 100%.

An attempt to destroy an entire segment of the Palestinians? Not. even. close.

[mike_c]

47. I'd recommend that you ask the Palestinians what they think...

...about the assertion that Israel has no intent to destroy any segment of their ethnic/religous group.

[msmcghee]

49. Good idea . . here's what the Islamic world thinks about Israel . .

. . and the Jews who live there.

http://switch5.castup.net/frames/20041020_MemriTV_Popup/video_480x360.asp?ClipMediaID=60227&ak=null

Enjoy.

[geek tragedy]

54. And then we can ask Americans about Saddam and 9/11.

Of course people are going to wrongfully characterize the actions of their enemies.

[The Magistrate]

59. Utterly Meaningless, Sir

People believe a lot of things about their own circumstances that are palpably untrue. There are, for instance, in the United States, quite a number of people who sincerely believe that the chief object of discrimination and disadvantage here is the white male. You would not seriously suggest this be given weight in determining policy regarding discrimination law.

[The Magistrate]

58. Presenting The End Of A Tendency Of Analysis, Sir

Is a quite legitimate tool to demonstrate when a view if what something means is ill-founded. The term genocide arose to denominate a massive crime that in the instances which forced the deed on the attention of the world saw the killing of up to ninety percent of identifiable human communities in a space of several years' time. Trying to apply it to a situation which has, at most, a casualty rate of roughly a fortieth of a percent per year lies an awfully lot closer to the claim that the death of single individual is genocide than otherwise.

Nor it is even a remotely settled gact that Israeli actions in, say, Gaza, are carried out solely because the persons resident their are Arab Palestinians. The relations of the two peoples remain, in fact, those of war, with resort to organized violence on both sides against the other. Many, myself included, see the acts of Israel as elements in prosecution of this war, and no more or no less than that. Let the relation of war cease, and we shall be able perhaps to see what the level of hate being pressed by state agency towards extermination might be.

As a matter of cutiousity, by the way, what do you mean by "seeking self determination"? It is quite within the power of Arab Palestinian political leadership to declare a state of Arab Palestine, with the wide backing of that people in doing so.

[msmcghee]

37. The conditions you mentioned are not conditions.

The are examples of acts ( . . committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group . . ).

Those examples are preceeded by the phrase (as such).

Your task, if you are serious, is to show any evidence that Israel's intent is . . . to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group.

As Pelsar and cali have stated, and as is obvious to any rational observer of the situation - if that is Israel's intent, and armed with vastly superior firepower including nuclear weapons - then Israel is pretty damned incompetent. It's amazing she has lasted for almost sixty years with enemies on all sides trying to destroy her - while she's busy trying to "destroy, in whole or in part", the poor Palestinians. I notice the Palestinian population has increased during this time.

Also, those ideologues and religious fanatics who do engage in genocide typically believe strongly enough that they are doing "God's work" that they proclaim such to all who would listen. You'd think there'd be some statement or document, an e-mail, a memo, etc. by some Israeli leader during the last 60 years that would lend even a little credibility to that charge.

As anyone can see "Genocide" used as a description of Israel's actions is just part of the current Islamist PR campaign that so many here seem to strongly agreee with for some reason.

[mike_c]

41. perhaps we're miscommunicating our meanings....

I believe items a-e are EXAMPLES of actions which meet the definition of genocide under the Convention. "Conditions" was perhaps an unfortunately ambiguous term. However, as examples of genocide, they still justify the use of the term to describe Israel's mistreatment of Palestinian arabs. Let's not lose sight of the crimes being committed while we argue about what to call them.

[msmcghee]

44. As the defintion that you provided states . .

. . they are only examples of genocide if they are committed with the particular intention stated.

All you have to do is show that is Israel's intention and you have made your point.

Instead of scrambling away from that necessity using disingenuous rhetorical tricks - why not just prove your assertion the straightforward way? Is it because you have no hope of doing that?

[mike_c]

48. playing logic games while people suffer and die...?

No thank you.

[msmcghee]

50. Interesting that accusations of genocide are so easily . .

. . thrown about and fervently believed - but logical arguments to the contrary supported by evidence are "playing logic games while people suffer and die".

Sick.

[geek tragedy]

55. That's because if they can use 'genocide' then they can use

'Holocaust.'

[Violet_Crumble]

60. Academics and genocide...

Sad that he should choose to use that word. It descredits his standing as a historian.

There's some academics at the uni I go to who are delving into events from the past that aren't viewed as genocides and putting up the argument that they were. I'm not sure how they're discredited as historians by doing that, or does that only apply to Ilan Pappe? I did Genocide Studies last semester and we were given a list of 20th century genocides to pick from to write about. One of them was the Red Army in WWII at the hands of the Nazis, and another was the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasake. I didn't agree that either of those events were genocide, but my reaction wasn't to jump up and claim that whoever wrote that list is discredited as an academic....

[oblivious]

82. Answer to first question in post 70 above. Israel doesn't let them.

[breakaleg]

25. Another article suggesting what Israel is doing is Genocide.

http://www.mediamonitors.net/francis1.html

[pelsar]

33. well we must be pretty incompetent then.....

imagine a genocide of one of the most dense populations on earth...and the population is increasing!!!

btw...whats that definition of genocide again?

[mike_c]

35. more misdirection....

Genocide is defined SOLELY by harmful treatment based upon group membership-- wiping out a population is NOT a condition of genocide. See Article 2 of the 1948 Convention on the Punishment and Prevention of Genocide, posted up thread for your convenience.

Israel genocide against the Palestinians is very competetent indeed-- not entirely successful in achieving its policy goals yet, but proceeding very effectively otherwise.

[The Magistrate]

39. It Is Not Misdirection, Sir

It is an accurate description, if a wry one, of the situation.

Genocide is not described, and is not described in the law you cite, as actions lacking the aim of destroying a group, either entirely, or in the entirity of that part of it which is within your power.

No reasonable reading of the law on the question comes close to endorsing the view that Israel is engaged in genocide against Arab Palestinians, nor do any facts of the history of the region over the preceding decades support the view that Israel is engaged in genocide against Arab Palestinians, without engaging in hyperbole to the point of outright distortion of the facts. There is simply an insufficient quantity of corpses, and no way to get around that inconvenience in pressing the claim.

[mike_c]

45. I respectfully disagree....

All genocides start with a single victim, proceed to two, and then to three, and so on. They do not become genocide by crossing some efficiency threshold. The 1948 Convention specifically avoids any need for a "corpse threshold," or even for any corpses at all. Article 2 provides several examples that do not require even a single body, let alone any efficiency in piling them up.

[msmcghee]

46. Yes, but they do require an intent threshold.

And that is what you have failed to offer.

[The Magistrate]

52. Judges, Sir, Sitting At Trial

Have not interpreted the statute as you do. Nor are they going to in future.

The argument you present above is extraordinarily weak. You might as well say that, because every beating to death of a person involves a series of blows, a person who slaps another should be charged with murder, on the off-chance the thing might have proceeded to that end result. But even if the slap a declaration of "I could kill you!" variety, the charge will be no more than simple assault, and a prosecutor who attempted to bring it as murder would probably be cited for contempt of court, or even dis-barred, for blatant incompetence.

Genocide does not exist, either in law or in lay definition, without a fixed resolve towards extermination, evidenced by cincrete steps to put that intent into effect.

[Violet_Crumble]

63. Definitions of genocide...

They're varied and some don't focus on intent...

Mind you, I'm finding it amusing that even though the word genocide gets bandied around by the 'pro-Israel' folk when it comes to the Palestinians, I never see the strong reaction against what they say as what I've seen in this thread by people who act as though they're guardians of the definition of genocide. Which makes me think they're really not as interested in making sure people use the 'correct' definition as they make out they are, but are more interested in making sure Israel's name isn't tarnished in any way, shape or form. I'd think otherwise if I'd seen them take 'pro-Israel' posters to task for the imaginative use of the term genocide...

imo, genocide is not a thing that is being planned or carried out by Israel or the Palestinians. The related term, ethnic-cleansing, does apply when it comes to the events of 1948 if Plan D is read as intent, but genocide has not happened in this conflict, and hopefully it never will...

[The Magistrate]

64. A Couple Of Points, Ma'am

First, a number of such definitions are mere special pleadings by people who want the thing to apply somewhere it would be convenient for them if it did, in the manner of the Caterpillar's declaration that "When I use a word, it means what I say it does." Just about any politically charged term will be subject to this process, with "racism" providing some most entertaining examples of special tailoring.

Accusations of genocide against the various Arab Palestinian militant bodies are rendered nonesense by the incapacity of the organizations to carry out any such intention. But the matter is complicated by there being some declarations of more or less forthright intention on the part of such groups. A nine year old boy once announced a stick-up against me with only a hat-pin for armament, and the situation did not strike me as particularly dangerous, though the look of his eyes indicated that had he possessed a revolver, it would have been dangerous indeed. When the matter expands to something like the Iranian Almahedjian, the question grows a little more vexed: he may well mean it, and has more at his back than Hamas when he speaks.

[msmcghee]

66. Well, according to the defintion,

. . a violent act "with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group' is genocide.

It says nothing about the perpetrator's ability to carry it out. I see nothing nonsensical about such acts - any more than I would suggest small boys with hatpins attempting robbery - should be dismissed as nonsensical.

By dismissing those acts, where intent is established but where ability to carry it out may not be, I have no doubt some greater danger will result later. I consider such dismissal as irresponsible.

Intentions become part of a person's world-view - their ability to carry them out can vary considerably during their lives. I see no point in waiting until things line up well for them.

[The Magistrate]

69. Still, Sir

Crime requires both motive and action. My declaring, for example, an intention to kill you would not subject me to a charge of murder, even if the statement were accompanied by some violent act that left you alive, and if you were not seriously harmed, would not even subject me to a charge of attempted murder, though you might be able to make a decent argument it ought to: no prosecutor would bring the charge short of something that really might have brought about your death, and something showing reason to believe my attack was not pressed only because it seemed to me to have already succeeded, or my being prevented from pressing it by some intervention of bystanders or the police.

In using a term like this, it seems always best to me to maintain a focus on the reality of the situation, and not what artful pleading might present it as, whatever side is being accused.

[msmcghee]

71. I appreciate your pragmatic view . .

. . as always.

However (and I only make this argument for the sake of better understanding the consequences of applying the legal term as described), the crime of genocide is defined as a violent act with the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group. It is similar to the definition of hate crimes but on an international level. (I suspect you may think those nonsense too.)

It makes no mention of the capacity for the perpetrator to succeed nor whether the perpetrator advanced his cause appreciably or not in the attempt - it is simply a violent act that has that specific intent.

The laws were defined carefully by a legal body for the purpose of advancing the cause of peace in the world. Dismissing the application of a law designed to save millions of lives (however imperfectly it has succeeded so far) because you were once accosted by a boy with a hat pin - seems itself to be nonsensical to me.

[The Magistrate]

72. The Fact Remains, Sir

That judges sitting in tribunal to apply the law to actual cases have not applied it in any expansive sense, and it is not going to be applied to instances where only a few persons are killed, even accompanied by clear evidence of hate and desire for extermination. The results of the tribunals concerning Yugoslavia make this quite clear.

The tale from the period it is my habit to lightly refer to as "my adventurous youth" was simply an illustration of the difference between intent and capability, that must impact on sensible assessment of situations.

[msmcghee]

74. Understood. I would hope however, that if . .

. . the world bodies think that "little acts of genocide" are OK - that they revise the laws to say so.

IMO opinion however, I would prefer that they enforce the current laws more enthusiastically - and that the result would be fewer "big acts of genocide" in the world if they did.

[The Magistrate]

75. The Laws Were Written, Sir, By Serious People, Concerning Serious Matters

They were not writing with an eye to what sport might be made of the text by future posuers and propagandists and devotees of the god Hyperbole. If they thought about it at all, they probably thought people would manage to maintain a due sense of weight when the topic turned to mass murder of other human beings.

[msmcghee]

81. I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you.

Just offering a contrasting view. Those who write laws should know quite well that "future posuers and propagandists and devotees of the god Hyperbole will be making sport of the text" to suit their purposes. Every trial will have on one side of the defense an attorney whose job will be to do just that.

That's why laws should be written carefully and enforced according to the objective meaning expressed in the law. If it turns out to be impractical then it should be changed.

Laws that are enforced according to the whims of the prosecutor are worse than no law at all - because then those with enough money or connections can easily escape the consequences and those who are disliked by the prosecutor for whatever reason will be caught up in his grasp - causing the legal system itself to lose credibility.

Just offering my view. Not trying to change anyone's mind here.

[msmcghee]

65. Actually I think you've got it backward.

The op stated that Israel was engaged in genocide.

That was seen by defenders of Israel as an unfair smear.

mike_c (your side) then brought out what was defined by article II of the 1948...
...Convention on the Punishment and Prevention of the Crime of Genocide:

According to that definition, violent acts committed with the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, is the essence of "genocide".

So far, no-one who supports the position that Israel is committing genocide has offered any evidence of that intent. OTOH the internet is full of thousands of instances of Arab and Persian leaders overtly stating that their intent is to kill all Jews in the world. There are also instances of suicide attacks, airline high-jackings and thousands of other events where Islamists including numerous Palestinians have overtly declared those "intentions" while committing their violent acts.

In that way, and according to the definition of genocide, provided by mike_c, the Palestinians are definitely guilty of genocide and the Israelis are not.

However, the original OP was a statement that Israel was guilt of genocide. I'd settle for a simple admission that that assertion is incorrect. No need to admit that Palestinians are guilty of genocide according to your definition.

[geek tragedy]

68. If pro-Israel folks accuse the Palestinians of committing genocide

then they're being foolish.

[breakaleg]

53. did you read the article? because it breaks it down for you.

[newyorican]

51. Let me see if I can weigh this...

Ian Pappe (History Professor, Haifa University) vs. Anonymous Internet bloggers...

The history professor calls it genocide, and the bloggers blither here when their argument is clearly with Ian Pappe. Well, he has an address for all those that wish to "correct" him. Good luck with that.

[geek tragedy]

67. You're right. We shouldn't criticize anything said by third parties

at DU.

:silly:

[Name removed]

77. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Tom Joad]

73. And what of human rights organizations also say that Israel is

guilty of war crimes. of making the people of Gaza hungry. Israeli dissidents write essays how government officials laugh at the idea of hungry Palestinians.
Pappe may be putting it at its most extreme, but somehow he has, and the human rights organizations i hear from, have far more credibility than defenders of the Israeli policy.

[breakaleg]

78. in your comparison, who is the internet blogger? Boyle?

Francis A. Boyle
Professor

A scholar in the areas of international law and human rights, Professor Boyle ([e-mail]) received a J.D. degree magna cum laude and A.M. and Ph.D. degrees in political science from Harvard University. Prior to joining the faculty at the College of Law, he was a teaching fellow at Harvard and an associate at its Center for International Affairs. He also practiced tax and international tax with Bingham, Dana & Gould in Boston.

http://www.law.uiuc.edu/faculty/DirectoryResult.asp?Name=Boyle,+Francis

[newyorican]

79. No...

I direct those comments to those here in DU, whose entire argument comes down to, "IS NOT!" or "IS TOO!" (once again, a childs' foot stomping is the visual)

[breakaleg]

80. got it.

[geek tragedy]

83. So, you'll refrain from criticizing Alan Dershowitz then, right?

Your point is entirely without merit.

[newyorican]

86. IS TOO!

:sarcasm: :rofl:

I'll type slowly.

I am not saying one cannot criticize opinions that are published by those that have the stones to put their name to something. Far from it.

I DO say that there is a credibilty gap between the the above mentioned and anonymous bloggers whom may (or may not) be what they claim.

I DO say a good way to bridge that gap is to reference published opinions/reports/studies.

I'm not sure how Alan the torturer plays into all of this, perhaps you could tie it all in, but I have my doubts.

...and yes that is a criticizm of Alan the torturer and yes I follow my own advice in referencing a published article.

[Tom Joad]

76. Physicians for Human Rights-Israel warns of Humanitarian Disaster in Gaza

Following a Visit to the Gaza Strip, PHR-Israel warns: Humanitarian Disaster in the Gaza Strip

For the first time in six years, members of Physicians for Human Rights-Israel were granted access to the Gaza Strip to witness up close the plight of the residents of the strip in the shadow of the unrestrained Israeli attacks.

Since September 2000, the per capita income has dropped by 50%- from a new report by the World Bank.

“There is no hope” in Gaza- Jan Egeland, the United Nations Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs

A delegation of physicians and staff members from Physicians for Human Rights-Israel met with their Palestinian colleagues from the health and human rights fields in the Gaza Strip. The delegation visited hospitals in Gaza city and in Beit Lahiya, toured areas that were especially harmed in the Israeli army’s attacks, particularly in the Shaja`iya neighborhood and in the power station compound which was bombed by the Israeli air force on 29 June 2006. The delegation visited two hospitals: Kamal `Adwan in Beit Lahiya and Shifa, the main hospital of the Gaza Strip.

Kamal `Adwan Hospital as an example: This is a small and poor hospital which supplies health services to more than 40,000 residents. Since 26 June 2006 the hospital has received more than 260 cases, about 60% of these were defined as critical, mostly due to the Israeli bombing of the northern section of the strip. Because of the large number of injured and the nature of their wounds, the hospital staff is many times at a loss to treat the injuries. Due to the bombing of the power station, the hospital is subjected to power outages that last for numerous hours each day; the two generators the hospital uses cannot handle the workload and they are mostly used in the two most important wards: emergency room and the operating rooms.

The limited delegation consisted of members of the PHR-Israel board, Prof. Zvi Bentwich and Dr. Hassan Matani, together with staff members from the Occupied Territories Project. Prof. Bentwich even examined a few patients whose cases the organization handles, such as an AIDS patient who requires treatment in Israel, however he is denied entry, even after an appeal to the Israeli High Court on his behalf.

The staff and board members met with the organization’s Palestinian partners such as the Gaza Community Mental Health Programme and the Al Mezan Center for Human Rights, in addition to the medical centers. It is to be noted that the organization has been prevented from meeting with some of its colleagues for the past six years, mostly because members of the organization were not allowed to enter Gaza.

The delegation entered Gaza on Friday morning and left the strip Saturday evening.

Amongst the delegation’s findings:

* The medical staff met patients that do not have treatment in Gaza and are sentenced to a slow death as they cannot go for treatment in Israel or in Egypt.
* The Palestinian Minister of Health, Dr. Basem Na`im, said to the delegation: the lack of experts- for example, in the radiology field- and the closing of the border crossings are the most difficult problems. Indeed, Rafah Crossing has been closed almost completely, and there are patients who are afraid to go to Egypt as it is possible to be stuck at the checkpoint on the Egyptian side for months.
* A routine of collective punishment and killing of civilians. The medical staff at Shifa told the delegation that in order for an ambulance to approach a scene of an attack were there are injured people, it requires permission from the Israeli army. This can take an extended period of time. There were cases of people who were not critically injured but who died from loss of blood at the scene of the attack. Moreover, people who tried to help others were harmed themselves during the evacuation process. All this leads to an anger and despair amongst the people.
* PHR-Israel was given tissue of those harmed in Israeli military action as well as half a flachette shell and shrapnel removed from the victims.
* There is hunger in Gaza- the delegation met with women and children in states of malnutrition.
* Streets and homes were completely destroyed for no apparent reason.
* In the hospital morgues the delegation saw charcoaled and shredded bodies.

In light of the visit, Physicians for Human Rights-Israel wishes to express its position that the de-humanization of the Palestinians by Israel allows for the state to wage against the residents of the Gaza Strip an indiscriminate attack. Only a fundamental change in Israel’s attitude will bring about a change for the better for the residents of Gaza and will offer hope to the residents of Israel and the occupied territories.

For more information: Maskit Bendel, Director, Occupied Territories Project, [phone] or Shabtai Gold, Public Outreach, [phone]

[Lithos]

87. Locking

I will point out that Mr. Pappe has admitted his own use of dialectics in order to compare and contrast the Nakba, the events of 1967 and today against the Holocaust purely in order to use the language of the Holocaust with the sole intent of promoting his own activism.

Dialectics such as this may be extremely appropriate for defining philosophical systems, can also be a trap as it depends more on the use of loaded and in this case, often emotional, language to justify a thesis rather than thru pure rational means. Such language is often simplistic as well, which I feel has almost guaranteed the use of overly simplistic and stereotypical assertions about the groups involved and is thus against I/P guidelines.

Lithos
DU Moderator