UC Berkeley students ask for Israel divestment

[ProgressiveMuslim]

By Matt Krupnick
Contra Costa Times
Posted: 03/18/2010 05:59:11 PM PDT
Updated: 03/18/2010 05:59:11 PM PDT

BERKELEY — UC Berkeley student leaders voted early Thursday to drop the student Senate's investments in companies doing business with Israel.

The Senate, meeting into the early hours of the morning, voted 16-4 to divest itself from Israel and to ask the University of California system to do the same.

It was not immediately known whether the Senate had any such investments. But the UC system invests millions in funds that include General Electric and United Technologies, which supply Israel with military equipment, said Emiliano Huet-Vaughn, a student senator who cowrote the bill.

The UC system, he said, should not support a country that has committed human-rights abuses in the Gaza Strip. The 10-campus university has divested itself of tobacco- and Sudan-related funds.

The students' action was condemned by the Los Angeles-based Simon Wiesenthal Center, which called the vote hypocritical and troubling, citing violence by Palestinians. A UC spokesman said the university had not yet seen the resolution and could not comment....

more...
http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-news/ci_14704225?nclick_check=1

[ProgressiveMuslim]

1. Text of the resolution

A Bill to In Support of UC DIVESTMENT FROM WAR CRIMES


Authored By: Emiliano Huet-Vaughn and Tom Pessah


Sponsored By: Senators Gaurano , Carlton, Kwon, Oatfield



1. WHEREAS, the ASUC notes the complexity of international relations in all cases, including the Middle East, and recognizes the inability of a body such as the ASUC to adjudicate matters of international law and human rights law, or to take sides on final status issues on wars and occupations throughout the world. Yet, we do note the following findings from the United Nations and other leading human rights organizations regarding the Israel/Palestine conflict, and use it as a case study; and,






2. WHEREAS, prior and subsequent to the bombing the Israeli government has engaged in collective punishment of the whole of the Palestinian population, in the view of the human rights community,<1> as exemplified by the ongoing 32 month blockade on Gaza, of which Physicians for Human Rights-Israel has written, “the prolonged siege imposed by the Israeli government on Gaza, the closing of its borders, the tightening of policies regarding permission to exit Gaza for medical purposes, and the severe shortage of medications and other medical supplies all severely damage the Palestinian health system and endanger the lives and health of thousands of Palestinian patients,”<2> and of which the Red Cross has said “the whole strip is being strangled, economically speaking” making life in Gaza “a nightmare” for the civilian population, with essential supplies, including electricity, water, and fuel, being denied to the 1.5 million inhabitants 90% of whom depend on aid to survive;<3> and




3. WHEREAS, within the occupied West Bank (including East Jerusalem), the Israeli government continues a policy of settlement expansion that, in the opinion of the United Nations Security Council, Human Rights Watch, the International Committee of the Red Cross, and numerous other organizations concerned with enforcement of international law, constitutes a direct violation of Article 49, paragraph 6 of the 4th Geneva Convention which declares “an occupying power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into territories it occupies.”<4>; and




4. WHEREAS, in the context of this bill, “occupation” refers to the current state of Palestinian life under Israeli’s military control in the West Bank and Gaza; a definition that is consistent to commonly-held international law; and



5. WHEREAS, student research<5> has revealed that, according to the most recent UC investment report<6>, within the UC Retirement Program fund and the General Endowment Program fund there exist direct investments in American companies materially and militarily supporting the Israeli government’s occupation of the Palestinian territories, including American companies General Electric and United Technologies; and


6. WHEREAS, General Electric holds engineering support and testing service contracts with the Israeli military and supplies the Israeli government with the propulsion system for its Apache Assault Helicopter fleet, which, as documented by Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, has been used in attacks on Palestinian and Lebanese civilians, including the January 4, 2009 killings of Palestinian medical aid workers<7>; and



7. WHEREAS, United Technologies supplies the Israeli government with Blackhawk helicopters and with F-15 and F-16 aircraft engines and holds an ongoing fleet management contract for these engines, and, Amnesty International has documented the Israeli government’s use of these aircraft in the bombing of the American School in Gaza, the killing of Palestinians civilians, and the destruction of hundreds of Palestinian homes;<8> therefore, be it


RESOLVED, that the ASUC will ensure that its assets, and will advocate that the UC assets, do not include holdings in General Electric and United Technologies because of their military support of the occupation of the Palestinian territories; be it further


RESOLVED, that the ASUC will further examine its assets and UC assets for funds being invested in companies that a) provide military support for or weaponry to support the occupation of the Palestinian territories or b) facilitate the building or maintenance of the illegal wall or the demolition of Palestinian homes, or c) facilitate the building, maintenance, or economic development of illegal Israeli settlements on occupied Palestinian territories; be it further


RESOLVED, that if it is found that ASUC and/or the UC funds are being invested in any of the abovementioned ways, the ASUC will divest, and will advocate that the UC divests, all stocks, securities, or other obligations from such sources with the goal of maintaining the divestment, in the case of said companies, until they cease such practices. Moreover, the ASUC will not make further investments, and will advocate that the UC not make futher investments, in any companies materially supporting or profiting from Israel’s occupation in the abovementioned ways; be it further

RESOLVED, that this ASUC resolution not be interpreted as the taking of sides in the Palestinian/Israeli conflict, but instead as a principled expression of support for universal human rights and equality; be it further


RESOLVED, that the ASUC Senate engage in education campaigns to publicize the divestment efforts and violation of international human rights law, and that furthermore, a committee of 5 members, 2 senators selected by the senate body as a whole, 2 members of or students selected by the UC Berkeley Divestment Task Force, and the ASUC President or a representative from his/her office, form at the end of this semester to monitor and promote university progress in regards to the above mentioned ethical divestment goals; be it finally


http://mondoweiss.net/2010/03/berkeley-student-senate-divestment-resolution.html

[ProgressiveMuslim]

4. To quote the immortal Sam Cooke: A Change IS Gonna Come! nt

[Donald Ian Rankin]

5. Short answer: no, it isn't. N.T.

[unabelladonna]

6. pathetic

in other words, israel is on the same level as the sudan. what naive little fools.

[aranthus]

9. The movement wouldn't exist without naive little fools. n/t

[ProgressiveMuslim]

24. Nor would the occupation without willing practitioners of violence. nt

[aranthus]

26. That's true.

Had the PLO (the legitimate representative of the Palestinian people) not fomented the 1967 war (with help from Syria and some connivance form element s in the Egyptian government), then there would not be an occupation to begin with. And had the Palestinians actually moved to make peace while more liberal israeli governments were in place, then the occupation might have been lifted by now. Sure there are some in Israel (and obviously the settlements) who don't want to give up any of the West Bank, but the Palestinians haven't given them much of a reason not to.

[ProgressiveMuslim]

28. Can victims of a violent military occupation ever "good behavior" themselves into a settlement...

with a nation that has demonstrate rapacious greed for land?

LOL!

[aranthus]

30. If that's what you want to believe, then there isn't much to talk about.

The reality (which you apparently want to ignore) is that even though the Israelis aren't innocent, the Palestinians have substantial responsibility for the current situation as well. They aren't the innocent victims of a rapacious Israel.

[ProgressiveMuslim]

31. It's outrageous and insulting for you to insinuate there would be peace today if the Palestinians

had been more cooperative victims. There was relatively no violence in the WB or Gaza until 1988. Borders were open. Gazans travelled into Israel by the tens of thousands to do Israel's dirty work. The WB border was porous.

There was no peace, no agreement.

Utter nonsense.

[oberliner]

32. Before 1988 would a peace agreement been accepted on the Palestinian side?

Do you think an agreement such as what is proposed in the recent Arab Peace Plan would have been accepted during the time period you describe?

[ProgressiveMuslim]

34. I didn't know a single Palestinian in 1988 who wasn't for 2 states. The real question is:

would the gov't of Israel have accepted it? Under Shamir? HAHA!!

[oberliner]

38. What about during the time period you described?

The period up to 1988 when the borders were "porous" and thousands of Gazans worked in Israel.

Do you think Arafat (or any other Palestinian leader) would have accepted a two-state solution at that time?

[ProgressiveMuslim]

40. Arafat made many concessions by 1988. Do you think Shamir would have offered it?

Really, the questions should be put to the people holding all the cards, power and guns, don' t you agree?

[oberliner]

41. Peres was willing to make a deal in 1986

Arafat at the time seemed to be seeking some kind of Jordanian-Palestinian confederation.

[ProgressiveMuslim]

42. You realize the point of this subthread is to say that Palestinians deserve occupation?

Do you agree with that?

[oberliner]

43. Of course not

The point of this subthread (in my opinion) is that there is a lot of blame to go around for the current situation.

Jordan and Egypt, for example, could have established an independent Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza during the time that they occupied those territories.

And if the PLO had not engaged in a campaign of terror throughout the 1970s in the name of the Palestinian people, perhaps things could have been different as well.

Israeli leaders, Palestinian leaders, Jordanian leaders, Egyptian leaders, Syrian leaders all had (and have) their roles in this over the years.

[aranthus]

45. Thank you for making the point. n/t

[ProgressiveMuslim]

96. I think that's nonsense.

No civilian populations deserves eternal disenfranchisement, eternal occupation. Period. That you guys can rationalize that so easily shocks me.

[aranthus]

115. That's the problem.

While many on the pro-Israel side are willing to accept that Israel has at least some responsibility for the current situation, there is no credible Palestinian or pro-Arab speaker that I know of who accepts that the Palestinians have even the slightest responsibility for the current situation. Thus, no peace.

[ProgressiveMuslim]

118. "at least some responsibility?" Wow... that's big of you! Were black south africans partly

responsible for their inferior legal status?

[aranthus]

119. There's no comparison to South Africa

Black South Africans didn't start a war to drive out the whites. The Palestinian did start a war to drive out the Jews.

[Douglas Carpenter]

121. many white South AFricans did see the anti-apartheid resistance as an attempt to drive out the

whites. The Palestinians fought what they quite naturally saw as an effort to usurp their homeland from them - just as indigenous people throughout history have always done.

[ProgressiveMuslim]

123. There's total comparison. White Europeans colonize indigenous land... expropriate it...

confiscate resources.. create legal system to concretize racial discrimination... pen the natives up like animals...

And ultimately justice wins out.

[Douglas Carpenter]

44. Peres, while in coalition with Likud - supported the idea of arbitration with Jordan in 1986 -

This coalition government was with Likud lead by Yitzak Shamir, an absolute hardliner. They certainly didn't even come close to accepting the two-state solution. A Jordanian-Palestinian confederation would have been the most that Israel might have considered at that time. With Likud and Shamir in the government, even that would have be highly unlikely. Certainly talking with the PLO was completely off the radar screen at that time. No specifics are known about what Peres had in mind for an agreement - as far as I know.

The closest thing to a specific border proposal from the Israelis, that I am aware of would have been the Allon Plan of 1968 - which King Hussein found unacceptable - as of course the Palestinian leadership would have as well:



http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/allonplan.html

[Jefferson23]

46. +1

[aranthus]

36. It's unrealistic and deluded bordering on insane

for you and the Palestinians to persist in the fantasy that they are innocent victims.

[Ken Burch]

107. Had the Israelis ACCEPTED FROM THE START

That the PLO were "The legitimate representatives of the Palestinian people" and not spent decades trying to replace them with leadership that wouldn't ask for a Palestinian state(despite the fact that the Israeli government always knew that NO credible Palestinian leadership would ever accept anything short of a state)and had the Israeli government not spent decades demonizing anyone who supported a "two-state solution" as "anti-Israel" (and essentially antisemitic), when the Israeli government knew that the people who supported that WEREN'T anti-Israeli, and had the Israeli government followed the advice of people like Ben-Gurion and pulled out of the West Bank quickly, rather than staying for decades and building a settler movement the Israeli government ALWAYS knew was illegal, peace would have been achieved decades ago.

BTW, the PLO didn't "foment" the 1967 war. It was actually caused by the Soviet Union's decision to panic the surrounding Arab states with the news that Israel was developing nuclear weapons. Those states then mobilized their armies as a defensive measure. This war was caused by reckless meddling on the USSR's part, not the mythical "unrelenting Arab campaign to 'destroy Israel'".

[aranthus]

109. Some facts you might have missed.

The war against Israel started in 1947. The PLO wasn't formed until about 1964. When do you think that the PLO manifested a willingness to accept a true two state solution (i.e. without the demand for RoR?) As for the PLO fomenting the 1967 war, I suggest that you read, "Six Days of War" by Michael Oren. Do you have a citation for the fantasy that the Arabs mobilized in response to the Soviets announcing that Israel was developing nukes? The truth is that Syria and the PLO had been causing trouble on the border to goad Israel into a "deliberate overreaction." When that came, the Syrians and Soviets falsely claimed that Israel was mobilizing their forces on the Syrian border, and things spiraled out of control after that. Not to minimize the Soviet responsibility, but the ultimate cause was PLO and Syrian connivance in creating a crisis.

[Ken Burch]

110. Here's one cite, from the summary of "The Soviet Union and the outbreak of the June 1967 Six Day War

An article in the Journal Of Cold War Studies(Volume 8, Number 1, Winter 2006)

"The Soviet Union's transfer of false information to Egypt about alleged Israeli troop concentrations facing Syria in May 1967 is still considered a major factor in the outbreak of the June 1967 Mideast War."

(This deals with troop concentrations, not the bomb, but the result is the same. The USSR caused a panic among the surrounding Arab countries regarding Israel's intentions. It's not clear that the USSR meant to cause a war, but they did have a lot to do with it happening.)

I'm linking here to another article, this time from the Middle East Review of International Affairs, which also substantiates the point:

http://www.gloria-center.org/meria/2003/09/ginor.html

[aranthus]

114. You've just provided evidence for my point.

If you re-read my post 109, you'll see that I am well aware of and acknowledge that the Soviets engaged in disinformation about Israel troop concentrations (a lie with which the Syrians and some Egyptians were all too happy to go along). But you initially stated that the Soviets spread information that the Israelis were attempting to develop nuclear weapons (which they certainly were), and that that was the reason for the Arab mobilization. That's simply not what happened. My point is also that the Soviet disinformation would have had no traction but for the ongoing clashes caused by the PLO and the Syrian Army.

Also to not let the point get sidetracked, when do you think that the PLO manifested an intent to abide by a true two state solution?

[Ken Burch]

117. SInce at least the late 1980's, they were willing to discuss it.

And as an absolute certainty since 1990.

A lot of time was lost by Israel's pointless insistence first on refusing to accept the PLO as the legitimate Palestinian leadership(a refusal that ended up serving no purpose but giving Hamas its chance to make an eventual breakthrough) that the PLO recognize Israel AS A PRECONDITION to the talks(they'd always said they'd recognize them as soon as the talks started, so why wasn't that enough?)and by the Israeli governments own refusal to accept the two-state idea as valid (remember Begin's absurd "autonomy" proposal? A proposal Begin knew no Palstinian leadership could ever settle for? And remember the demagogic claim by "pro-Israel" types that a "two state solution" was just a "two stage solution"? that is, that it was just another part of the mythical "unrelenting Arab campaign"?)

I clarified in my second post that it was troop movements, not nuclear weapons. Still, had Vladimir Semyonov not freaked out the Egyptians with what turned out to be false intelligence, it's extremely uniikely that any Arab troops would have massed on Israel's borders. Most of the Arabs didn't want a war at that point(except Syria, and Syria couldn't have started a war on its own).

And my interpretation of the start date of the PLO(1964)is that Palestinians, among other things, didn't want to be Jordanian, had NEVER wanted to be Jordanian, and this was, in part, a way of expressing that. The heavyhanded approach Israel had used against its own Arab minority(this was less than twenty years after all those Arab towns were destroyed, and Israeli Arabs,despite Israeli claims that they were treated as equals, were still under martial law at this point, an ethnically specific martial law may I remind you)had a lot to do with the tone the PLO would have taken towards that state at the time.

The Palestinian leadership has made mistakes. What nationalist movement hasn't, including the Zionists? But it's silly of you to keep acting as if all this is pretty much the Palestinians' fault.

And I don't have "Israel", or even, necessarily, Zionism. I do feel that that state and that movement are on a very dark path, and not only oppressed the other nation involved but did great damage to the people the state and movement purport to represent, treating their constituents' moral heritage with disrespect, pressuring all of those who identify ethnically or religiously as "Jewish" to back the state whether they wished to or not, to move there if possible whether they wished to or not, and then placing those who did arrive there in constant physical danger due to the state and the movement's instransigence, arrogance, and recklessness. This state and this nationalist movement have to change if they are to be worth the support of those they presume to represent, let alone anyone else. At this point, both the state and movement have reduced themselves to nothing more than the pointless goal of taking land for the sake of taking land. Those that Zionism claims to protect and defend deserve better than this, let alone those who are collateral damage in the process.

It's hard to imagine people like Martin Buber or Berl Katznelson approving of what's going on now.

[virgogal]

2. This annoys me,really annoys me. No further comment.

[aquart]

3. Oh, yes. Israel should not be allowed to defend itself.

Divest by all means.

Tell you what. Put that money in Gaza industries and businesses. They need help. Help them. It will be more than their Arab neighbors have done.

[proteus_lives]

8. Didn't you get the world-wide memo?

Israeli self-defense is like eating kittens on Friday. It's just not acceptable.

Arab neighbors? Help Palestine? :rofl: If help is defined as keeping them as cannon fodder against the Israelis, then yeah, the Arab states have helped the shit out of the Palestinians. :rofl:

[Dick Dastardly]

10. Well if Israel stopped defending itself we could have

peace in the ME. Israel defending itself is the main stumbling block to peace. If they really wanted peace they would stop defending themselves.

[LeftishBrit]

125. While I presume you're being sarcastic, that idea about Gaza investment is actually one of the best

I've seen!

[Name removed]

7. Deleted message

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

[shaayecanaan]

11. There's not much to divest...

The Israelis* currently maintain a naval blockade around Gaza which makes it rather difficult to get any sort of academic exchange happening - at least I'm unaware of any.

Which is rather the point. The Palestinians have to endure blockades, sanctions, and checkpoints as a matter of course. The Israelis, on the other hand, scream to the heavens because Obama claims to have been "snubbed" by them, or because they cop flak from student leaders.



*yes, I'm aware that Egypt has closed its borders to Gaza and thereby participates in the blockade as well. Thanks.

[Name removed]

13. Deleted message

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

[LeftishBrit]

16. Where do you get from one to the other?

Pointing out that Gaza is *already* isolated and to a large degree 'boycotted' is hardly an apology for the violence of Hamas.

And yes, some (though not all) of Gaza's problems are due to their own leadership.

There is of course hypocrisy here, unless they are prepared to divest from EVERYWHERE engaged in warmongering and occupation- including their own country.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

21. I disagree with the accusation of hypocricy.

The places it makes sense to divest from are *not* the ones engaged in the worst abuses; they're the ones where divestment is most likely to result in an improvement in the situation.

There are a great many countries whose governments are behaving worse than Israel.

There are few if any other countries where international sanctions are as likely to result in an improvement.

A student union trying to divest from the US would achieve nothing - the strength of the backlash would far outweigh the positive effects of the pressure.

[pelsar]

14. which i guess makes your point mute doesnt it?

20 minutes south of gaza, there is an intl airport and port..... if the egyptians let them......

of course they would have to run the gauntlet of hamas checkpoints in gaza
---

so the most interesting question is...why did you blame israel with a nice asterisk for the egyptians..and not reverse it. Blame the Egyptians for closing off a border that has seen little violence and give the asterisk to israel?

_______
the answer (if i get one) and i am just guessing...... its based on a double standard, something to the effect that the egyptians simply don't/can't understand how important education is...or something like that.

[Ken Burch]

120. Cut the crap...you know perfectly well the Egyptians are doing it under Israeli pressure

And that the fact that THEY do it doesn't let Israel off the hook.

[LeftishBrit]

15. Gaza is already pretty much 'divested' - or not invested in the first place

Which brings up the question: why don't the academic and student groups, who claim to be so keen to help the Palestinians, ever seem to start or support projects to promote Palestinian education, or establish links with Palestinian universities or schools?

[ProgressiveMuslim]

17. For once, the 40+ year violent military occupation and siege takes center stage.

Change IS gonna come. Can you say "PARIAH NATION?"

[proteus_lives]

35. Yes, Gaza is a pariah nation.

Too bad Hamas has the steering wheel.

[Violet_Crumble]

47. Gaza isn't a nation, and you need to stop blaming the Palestinians for everything...

[proteus_lives]

52. Who is blaming Palestinians?

I'm blaming Hamas. To quote an old favorite from the I/P forum, do you equate all Palestinians with Hamas?

[Violet_Crumble]

53. You are, and you do it constantly...

According to yr posts, there's nothing that Israel is ever responsible for...

[proteus_lives]

58. There is plenty that Israel is responsible for.

But I place the blame for Gaza squarely at the feet of Hamas.

"there's nothing that Israel is ever responsible for..."

That's a teapot/kettle comment. You and yours can barely bring yourselves to admit that Palestinians attack Israel let alone admit they share responsibilty for the general conflict.

[Violet_Crumble]

62. Like what? You've just said Israel's not responsible for what was done to Gaza...

Israel bombed Gaza and now refuses to let materials for reconstruction through, yet somehow it's really Hamas who's to blame for all that? Sorry, but the 'they made me do it!' excuse is one clung to by extremists on both sides of the conflict. Neither Israel nor the Palestinians are so stupid and weak that they can be made to do anything they don't want to do..

Also, yr last sentence makes absolutely no sense. I most definately have no problem admitting that there have been attacks on Israel by Palestinians and *gasp* condemn them, and I don't know of any other regulars who wouldn't admit the same. As for shared responsibility in the conflict, I've never thought there was some sort of even field of blame where both share equal blame. The Palestinians are to blame for attacks on Israeli civilians, and Israel is to blame for the ongoing occupation and oppression of the Palestinian population...

[proteus_lives]

66. Israel is responsible for attacking Gaza.

But why did they attack Gaza? Shits and giggles? No, because Hamas was attacking them.

They refuse because construction materials will be used for rocket sites.

[Violet_Crumble]

69. Yr still using the 'they made me do it!' excuse...

It's every bit as lame in the way of excuses as those I've seen from people who try to justify attacks on Israeli civilians by saying that the actions of Israel is the reason those attacks happen. Neither of those are justifications...


So, you support Israel refusing to allow building materials into Gaza and have no problem at all with civilians suffering because of it? I just want to make sure I'm understanding you here...

[proteus_lives]

73. And you're still refusing to accept that Hamas has responsiblity here.

You keep trying to twist what I say into "I want Palestinians to suffer".

I'm still shaking my head at your black and white thinking.

[Violet_Crumble]

74. Because Israel's responsible for the damage done in OCL, not Hamas..

I'm not the one doing the black and white thinking here.

I asked you a question that you've refused to answer. Asking a question isn't trying to twist anything. How about answering the question?

'So, you support Israel refusing to allow building materials into Gaza and have no problem at all with civilians suffering because of it? I just want to make sure I'm understanding you here...'

[proteus_lives]

77. I haven't refused to answer, you refuse to accept my answer.

I bring it down to a kiddie-level so you're not confused anymore.

I support Israel's restriction on materials into the Gaza Strip because of the aggression of Hamas. The Israelis cannot confirm nor can Hamas be trusted not use certain materials to resume their campaign against the state of Israel.

OCL did the damage but hamas lit the fuse. They wanted OCL to happen, the 1500+ dead was a dream come true for Hamas.

[Violet_Crumble]

78. You definately hadn't answered it...

''So, you support Israel refusing to allow building materials into Gaza and have no problem at all with civilians suffering because of it? I just want to make sure I'm understanding you here...'

You hadn't answered it at all, but you have partially answered it now. The bit you didn't answer was whether you have any problem with civilians suffering because of it. It does appear very obvious that you support the civilians suffering in order to continue the blockade. If that's not the case, can you explain how you can support something that causes great suffering to the civilian population while claiming to care about their welfare?

[proteus_lives]

80. I'll ask Hamas.

"can you explain how you can support something that causes great suffering to the civilian population while claiming to care about their welfare?"

They seem very experienced at that.

Because it's the only option the Israelis have right now because of Hamas aggression.

Why do you demand the Israelis put themselves in danger by opening the border?

[Violet_Crumble]

85. I'm asking you how you can support something that causes great suffering to civilians...

I didn't ask anything about Hamas, so I'm not sure why yr trying to change the subject away from *you* being asked how *you* can support something that causes great suffering to the civilian population while claiming to care about their welfare. correct me if I'm wrong, but you place very little value on the lives of Palestinian civilians, while placing great value on the lives of Israelis....

Sorry, but attitudes such as yrs where anyone condones or supports the mistreatment or killing of civilians are totally sickening.

[proteus_lives]

87. "I didn't ask anything about Hamas"

And there is the flaw in your thinking. Refusing to acknowledge the situation is two-sided.

And you keep say things like I "you place very little value on the lives of Palestinian civilians"

I'm not placing the Israelis civilians above the Palestinian ones by saying the Israeli government has reasons for it's decisions.

[Violet_Crumble]

89. I asked YOU a question about YOUR opinion. I didn't ask you for the opinion of Hamas...

I'm sorry, but you've admitted that you support something which causes great suffering to the civilian population of Gaza and you refuse to explain how you could support such a thing and care about the welfare of those civilians...

I didn't ask you any question that had an answer of 'the Iraeli govt has reasons for it's decisions'. Yr not a spokesman for that extreme RW govt, so I've stuck to asking YOU what YOUR opinions are. Or are you trying to say that if the Israeli govt has a reason for doing something, that's good enough for you?

[proteus_lives]

92. Allied forces bombed cities during WWII.

US forces bomb cities today.

Israel bombs the Gaza Strip but is their goal to kill Palestinian civilians? No it's not. Do Palestinians civilians die during these bombings? Yes and that's sad. I wish it didn't happen.

You keep acting like Israel decided to bomb Gaza out of the blue one day. And you act like I'm dancing on Palestinian bodies because I understand the rationale behind answering Hamas aggression. I wish you could take your blinders off and really see the horrible complexities of the situation.

[Violet_Crumble]

93. But you support the continued blockade of Gaza...

And that's the question you repeatedly refuse to answer. How can you support the blockade when you know it causes great suffering to the civilian population, yet then claim that you care about their welfare?

I didn't ask you about anything else than that, so please try on focus on what you were asked, okay? If yr not going to answer the question I asked you, I'm not wasting my time with someone who supports the continued suffering and killing of innocent civilians.

[proteus_lives]

98. The same question applies to you on the Israeli side.

You support the blockade being lifted and the fact that the weapons will flow from Syria and Iran. That puts Israeli civilians at risk. But that apparently doesn't brother you.

"I'm not wasting my time with someone who supports the continued suffering and killing of innocent civilians."

That statement applies to you as well.

[Violet_Crumble]

99. And yet again you refuse to answer what should be an easy question to answer...

How can you support the blockade when you know it causes great suffering to the civilian population, yet then claim that you care about their welfare?

[proteus_lives]

101. I'll answer (again)

It's better then the alternative. The blockade goes down and the attacks resume. More people die. The attacks resume and then the blockade goes back up. The Israelis aren't under any obligation to put their citizens in further danger.

The Strip wants the blockade down? Stop attacking Israel, stop sneaking in weapons. Every rocket or mortar over the border hardens Israeli resolve.

Your turn. Answer.

Why do you support ending the blockade when you know it will put Israeli civilians in danger and still claim to care about their welfare?

[Violet_Crumble]

103. But you didn't answer what I asked you at all...

Go back. Read what I asked you and answer that.

[proteus_lives]

105. You aren't answering either.

Teapot/kettle.

You refuse to consider the Israelis.

[Name removed]

94. Deleted message

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

[proteus_lives]

97. She chooses not to see.

She can accuse me of wanting or approving of Palestinian suffering until the cows come home but the truth isn't going to change.

It's weird how people claim to want peace but refuse to see.

[Violet_Crumble]

100. No, you've refused repeatedly to clarify yr stance...

Since when has asking you a question been accusing you?

[proteus_lives]

102. Answer my questions.

[Violet_Crumble]

104. Yr the one who has refused to answer any question I've asked you...

So don't turn around and demand I answer 'questions' from you...

[proteus_lives]

106. You are classic, "Do as I say not as I do."

Answer the question about Israelis.

[Violet_Crumble]

111. I'm not the one refusing to answer questions, then demanding mine get answered n/t

[proteus_lives]

113. I answered your question.

I support Israel's blockade of the Gaza Strip because it's less harmful for both sides then letting down.

Now please answered my question.

[Violet_Crumble]

116. No, you didn't answer the question I asked you n/t

[Donald Ian Rankin]

22. I would love to see Israel held to the same standard as Hamas.

Hamas is currently under crippling international sanctions.

And it has killed far fewer, and impoverished immeasurably fewer, innocent civilians than Israel has.

[ProgressiveMuslim]

23. 100% spot on. I'm all for enforcing the standard!

Wonder why so many liberal zionists on the DU aren't?

[pelsar]

25. no you arent...

if it was the same standard....any israeli killing of Palestinians would get only a minimum mention..in fact israel would in fact be expected to target and kill as many Palestinians as they can-somehow i doubt you would agree to that

furthermore, in case you missed it, gaza smuggles in any thing and everything they need..and the tunnelers are even taxed on it. They are supported, in terms of smuggling by iran, egypt, passively and others....that standard of actually getting anything you need would also apply to israel.

you dont want the same standard...you want a different one for israel.

[ProgressiveMuslim]

27. I'm aware that trying to portray a nuclear-armed Israel as being at the same level as a disenfran-

chised civilian population that has never had state as being "equal" "two parts of the same" or "one side in a two-sided conflict" is a popular strategy... but let's get real dude.

Do you really want to compare acts of violence, murder, kidnapping, being held illegally, land theft, property destruction?

Surely you jest.

[ProgressiveMuslim]

29. To further illustrate my point... recent book by Gabi Baramki about building Bir Zeit U thru the

occupation... sure, Israel and Palestine both have universities... but it's a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT EXPERIENCE.

YOU ARE NOT ON A LEVEL PLAYING FIELD!!!!



Book review: Higher education under occupation
Marcy Newman, The Electronic Intifada, 19 March 2010

Gabi Baramki's Peaceful Resistance: Building a Palestinian University under Occupation (Pluto Press, 2009) is a memoir of Palestine's flagship university, Birzeit, by its former acting president. The memoir is an indispensable tool for teaching Westerners about the ways in which Palestinian education exists and flourishes under a constant state of siege and the barriers to academic freedom that Palestinians experience on a daily basis.

Baramki begins his memoir by explaining why Birzeit University is a threat to the Israeli regime: "If a university subjected to continual harassment by the Israeli state, including its closure by military order for almost five years, can survive, continue to maintain its principles of freedom, respect and dignity, and even flourish, one can only imagine what would happen if it were given the space to grow. The threat is to the Zionist dream of having Palestine -- the land -- without its people, to 'spirit' the Palestinians out of Palestine as Theodor Herzl suggested. What Birzeit did was to make sure that the people stayed on the land" (1).

Although the book focuses on the history of Birzeit University, the narrative is intertwined with glimpses of Baramki's own biography beginning with his childhood in Jerusalem as a member of a Greek Orthodox family who can trace its roots back five hundred years. Born in 1929, he centers his narrative on his own educational experiences that began when he enrolled in the Birzeit Higher School in 1934, established by the Nasir family, which at the time was groundbreaking for its use of both English and Arabic as the languages of instruction.

Later, the village of Birzeit became a temporary home for the entire Baramki family, after his graduation, when the Nakba (the 1948 expulsion of Palestinians from their homeland) turned his family into refugees. In spite of this, Baramki managed to study chemistry at the American University of Beirut since there was no university in Palestine. In 1951, after his return, with the help of the Ford Foundation, Birzeit emerged into a private two-year college, which Baramki joined as a member of its teaching staff.

Tracing the evolution of Birzeit from high school to college to university, Baramki weaves in various stories about the pedagogical changes the institution sought to inculcate, particularly doing away with rote memorization and encouraging critical thinking. But the story of building a Palestinian academic institution was not so straightforward; first they had to contend with the Jordanian Ministry of Education's "negative attitude towards Birzeit" (21) and after the 1967 war (which broke out while students were sitting for exams) it had yet another barrier to education when all of historic Palestine came under occupation.

Building a university under military occupation meant, among other things, that its stewards were forced to submit to visits by the military governor and a barrage of military orders. Nevertheless in 1972 Birzeit began the process of becoming a four-year university since it became even more difficult for students in the West Bank to travel to Lebanon or even Jordan for university after 1967. One of the early battles for Birzeit was over textbooks as the military governor wanted to approve them, as Baramki explains: "As time went by the military government became increasingly obsessed with our reading lists. Books we ordered from abroad were often permanently confiscated without us even setting our eyes on them. Among those banned were works on archaeology and history, as well as several journals on Arabic literature" (38). To contend with this obstacle, Baramki describes an informal network of couriers who carried books and journals into Palestine.

http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article11148.shtml

[pelsar]

84. the same standard is a moral set of values..nothing to do with standing....

or position.

you've made it clear that as far as the Palestinians go....anything that works to attain their version of justice. Thats fine, thats the moral stand that you have deemed appropriate (on the condition that it does work) for your goals: it can mean shooting people in the back of the head while tied up on a bus, lining up kids in a high school and shooting them etc.

thats the moral stand you have declared acceptable...It irrelevant who is shooting who.

Israel has a different set and does not line up Palestinians and machine gun them, that is deemed immoral. If we used the sameset of moral standard that you believe is appropriate then it would be moral for israel to have more Baruch Goldsteins and celebrate his death as opposed to the israeli govt destroying the shrine built by the settlers.

that would be using the same moral standard.
---

personally i believe part of the problem is the double standard used and only one should be used, regardless of position in life, property owned etc.I don't believe that morality is based on how much money you have, how big your house is, how much freedom you have, or who is governing you. The concept of because the governing body is not appropriate or bad or not to your liking does not give you a free pass to act immorally* as i see it.

*morality based on western values

[ProgressiveMuslim]

108. I disagree with you completely.

My point above is that Palestinians, while civilian vicitms of military occupation, are held to a higher standard.

It's ridiculous.

Let's add up all the violence of the last 60 years and see who's done what to whom. Let's use that data to figure out who the violent party is and to whom the standard needs to be applied.

[pelsar]

112. that logic makes the US the bad guy in WWII.....

the fact that israel has learned to be better at killing and defending has nothing to do with morality.....israel killed more egyptians, jordanians, syrians in 67 and 73 than were israelis killed...yet its clear who attacked who in those wars and what the intentions of the arabs were....


and defending.....the kassams kill so few, not because they arent deadly but because israel set up an early warning system and has bomb shelter and kassams shelters all over the area.

morality is based on the intention of the act (thats why courts have first, second and third degree murder degrees-a person maybe dead, but the intent of why they are dead is also important)

Palestinians as per your morality have the OK to target civilians if it works...meaning its moral to try to kill as many little babies and paralyzed people in wheel chairs if the result is a free Palestine.

The ends does not justify the means........just because we're more skilled at killing and defending does not make us immoral.

[Douglas Carpenter]

122. violence used in defense of a cruel and. brutal occupation is immoral.

[Dick Dastardly]

124. So again that makes the US the bad guy in WW2,,,,,,n/t

[LeftishBrit]

39. I would put it a bit differently.

I would like to see a different approach to Gaza. The crippling international sanctions harm ordinary Palestinians, do not harm Hamas who are able to look after themselves quite well, and have helped to keep Hamas in power by increasing Palestinian hawkishness, isolationism, and willingness to rally round hardline leadership. (Even with all this, and OCL too, Hamas is very unpopular, but without all this, they would be even more so.)

There is no doubt in my mind that the same is true of Israel: that boycotts are likely only to increase hawkishness, isolationism and rallying round hardline leadership.

'(Hamas) has killed far fewer, and impoverished immeasurably fewer, innocent civilians than Israel has.'

It hasn't been around for nearly as long, so that's true in terms of absolute numbers. Nevertheless, it has killed many Israeli and Palestinian civilians, and impoverished many Palestinian civilians.

Nonetheless, just as I see some hypocrisy in people supporting boycotts and sanctions on Israel when their own countries are doing worse, I also see some hypocrisy in people supporting it for Gaza while opposing it for Israel. It hasn't worked with Gaza and wouldn't with Israel.

[LeftishBrit]

12. I would guess...

that this is just another of those resolutions made by small groups that will have absolutely no effect beyond making them feel that they're doing something.

I wonder how many of them would continue to pursue their principles if it means real sacrifice for them. It would perhaps not be feasible for them to boycott their own country over the Iraq war, which has caused far more deaths than Israel has; but how many would even e.g. refuse to take jobs with companies that have any links to the American military-industrial complex?

[ProgressiveMuslim]

18. Just like when universities fueled the South African Divestment movement.... the ball is

rollling. BDS is gaining steam. Oh, it may take awhile, and with a much more deeply entrenched lobby system than the white supremacists in South Africa ever had, it will take longer.

But, LB, if *this* isn't the way, and violence isn't the way, what IS the way to pressure a nation that clearly has NO INTEREST whatsoever in making a just resolution? A nation that spits in the face of its benefactor when it makes the tiniest demand for a concession? You say you don't support the status quo, but is there a form a pressure you do support?

[LeftishBrit]

19. I support the USA using financial aid as a carrot/stick.

That's the main sort of pressure that could work at the moment.

I also support divestment from companies that are actively involved in settlement construction.

But also: I might support some other forms of BDS (at least the DS parts) IF there were clear-cut demands being made: a settlement freeze; a plan to end the occupation by a specific date; etc. What bothers me is that Israel is just being treated by these groups as a 'bogeynation'; 'you are a Bad Country and we want to show how much we dislike you'. And often by countries that are just as Bad in their (our) own ways.

With individuals and countries, threats of punishment for particular actions can often work. Just punishing a person or country because you don't like it (or appearing to do so), without setting specific conditions, usually just creates mutual hatreds and solves nothing.

I also support our own countries getting the FUCK out of our own illegal wars and occupations, and not starting any more; then we might have a bit more moral high ground with others! Also, putting pressure on lots of countries, and not selecting just those that are currently fashionable - usually those that are either in alliance with or seen as enemies by the USA.

[Jefferson23]

20. Perhaps you missed this part, from the OP:

"The 10-campus university has divested itself of tobacco- and Sudan-related funds."

What real sacrifices do they need to make before their efforts are considered sincere?

I recently listened to an interview with Noam Chomsky, and one comment he made regarding dissent was that it is not a
part time occupation. Yet, efforts made in good faith are commendable and hopefully lead to a more informed/aware populace.

[oberliner]

33. Very interesting to read how this all went down

Look at who wrote the original resolution and how it was changed via amendments.

Also the varying accounts of what took place at that session are quite fascinating.

So what happens next?

[Donald Ian Rankin]

49. Link, please? The one in the OP is somewhat cursory. N.T.

[oberliner]

50. Here is one article from The Daily Californian

http://www.dailycal.org/article/108775/bill_urging_uc_divestment_in_israel_passed_by_asuc

There is another article on that same site as well. The comments on both articles are also interesting (though many are offensive and nasty).

Also, if you peruse the ASUC (Associated Students of U Cal/Berkeley) website, you can find the original resolution and the amended resolution and compare the two versions.

[stranger81]

37. Time to make my alumni contribution early. Go Bears!! [n/t]

[Violet_Crumble]

48. I've just read the Resolution and I support it...

After reading of how Israel treats Palestinian universities and students, and after having seen very recent photos of the damage Israel caused in Gaza where it won't allow goods into Gaza so the damage can be repaired, I have no objection at all to divestment from Israel. To those in this thread who claim that divestment isn't allowing Israel to defend itself, since when has the killing of large numbers of civilians and then refusing to allow material in to repair the damage Israel caused been considered 'self-defence'?

[proteus_lives]

51. Should the world divest from Gaza as long as Hamas controls it?

If not, why not?

[Violet_Crumble]

54. No, even though that's what Israel's doing and yr supporting it...

Gaza isn't a country that's carrying out a brutal and long-term occupation like Israel is...

Now, could you answer the question I aimed at you and one or two others in this thread. The question was: 'To those in this thread who claim that divestment isn't allowing Israel to defend itself, since when has the killing of large numbers of civilians and then refusing to allow material in to repair the damage Israel caused been considered 'self-defence'?'

[proteus_lives]

60. Their rockets are collective punishment against Israel.

"'To those in this thread who claim that divestment isn't allowing Israel to defend itself, since when has the killing of large numbers of civilians and then refusing to allow material in to repair the damage Israel caused been considered 'self-defence'?'"

Hamas shouldn't have attacked Israel. And they're still launching rockets. The blockade should stay up. They should only let in food and medical supplies.

[Violet_Crumble]

63. No they're not. You need to learn what collective punishment means...

It means to punish a population for the actions of a few. How exactly is the Israeli population being punished? Apart from residents of Sderot and areas close to the border, there's no effect on the day to day life of other people. Compare that to the sitation in Gaza where the entire population is affected, yet most 'supporters' of Israel bristle at the suggestion that what's happening is collective punishment...


Uh, you didn't answer the question. How exactly is killing large numbers of Palestinian civilians and refusing to allow material for reconstruction in 'self-defence'?

on edit: I just want to clarify that last line of yr post just so I'm clear on yr opinion. Are you saying that you support innocent Palestinian civilians being punished by Israel's continued blockade of Gaza? It's just that many homes are still rubble and people are still living in tents because the materials to rebuild aren't being allowing into Gaza...

[proteus_lives]

68. So you think it's just garden-variety terrorism then?

I always find it interesting that Palestinian ciliven suffering in the strip is blamed solely on the Israelis.

Hamas knows it has no chance of ever militarily defeating Israel. So they offer up the ciliven population as a sacrifice. They hide among the people knowing they'll suffer in the blowback from their aggression. It's old tactic.

I know Palestinians are suffering because of the blockade but Israel knows most "construction" materials will only go to Hamas. So you think they should forego their own security to provide for the citizens of the strip? I don't imagine them doing that. I understand that decision.

The strip should reconsider their government if Hamas ever lets them have another election.

[Violet_Crumble]

70. What's 'garden-variety terrorism'?

The suffering being endured by Gazans right now is due to Israel....

Okay, so you 'know' Palestinian civilians are suffering. So, I take it that you actually don't care at all that they're suffering and by the sound of yr last sentence are blaming them for not getting off their arses and kicking Hamas out? And that it's all the fault of Hamas....

[Douglas Carpenter]

55. actually that is already the case - there is a blockade that is blocking absolute

necessities from getting through. Most people in Gaza live a very, very meager existence. The BDS movement is hardly suggesting a Gaza level quarantine on Israel - that would be inhumane and barbaric.

[proteus_lives]

56. "Most people in Gaza live a very, very meager existence."

Because of Hamas.

[Douglas Carpenter]

57. they were living a very, very meager existence long before Hamas

The EU and the United States did impose massive draconian sanctions on Gaza following the results of the election - which made matters even worse.

[proteus_lives]

59. To bad Hamas and other militants refuse to stop attacking Israel.

Maybe some of those retrictions could be lifted.

[Douglas Carpenter]

61. first of all they did stop and Israel - not Hamas broke the cease fire

CNN Confirms Israel Broke Ceasefire First

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KntmpoRXFX4


BBC confirms Israeli government admits that it was Israel that first broke the cease fire.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ej-h6_CQJM


Hamas is not firing anything now (although here have been a few firing by small splinter groups - but not Hamas) but the draconian sanctions continue - which amounts to collective punishment which is a war crime,

Gaza truce broken as Israeli raid kills six Hamas gunmen

A four-month ceasefire between Israel and Palestinian militants in Gaza was in jeopardy today after Israeli troops killed six Hamas gunmen in a raid into the territory.

Hamas responded by firing a wave of rockets into southern Israel, although no one was injured. The violence represented the most serious break in a ceasefire agreed in mid-June, yet both sides suggested they wanted to return to atmosphere of calm.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/nov/05/israelandthepalestinians

Unfortunately, the continuation of such draconian measures after months of maintaining the ceasefire removed the political will - that and the very agressive November breach by Israeli forces which killed six members of Hamas' security forces.

Truce barely eases Gaza embargo

snip: "A ceasefire between Israel and Hamas two months ago was meant to lead to the easing of restrictions, but progress has been slow, and frustration is rising.

In the dank basement of one of Gaza's sewage pumping stations, raw sewage sprays out of leaks in the rusting metal work.

The Strip's sewage system is one of many things affecting Gazans' quality of life that urgently needs updating."


snip: "Since the ceasefire began, the fighting with Israel has died down, but the strict sanctions remain.
Most of the one-and-a-half million people living in Gaza are now reliant on food aid, and are unable to enter or leave the strip.

Over the last year, tens of thousands of people in Gaza have lost their jobs.

Most industrial operations have stopped because raw materials are not being allowed into the territory, or produced goods allowed out for export.

The Pepsi soft drinks plant is one of only a fraction of Gaza's factories that are still operating.

One of the managers, Ahmed Yazji, 61, says his vast store room used to be filled with ingredients. Now it is almost empty.

"Since sanctions, it is very difficult to get the ingredients I need," he says.

"We have had to cut production drastically to keep going.

"I thought things would improve with the ceasefire, and that more things would be allowed into Gaza, but nothing changed, nothing changed at all." "

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7570605.stm

[pelsar]

64. arafats tricks never die?

I'm afraid this time the contradiction is obvious...as its in your own single post

Hamas is not firing anything now (although here have been a few firing by small splinter groups - but not Hamas)

and previous to that you made it clear that during the "cease fire" (which is wasnt anyway-but i assume you know this as well) Hamas did control the splinter groups.
-----


so what is it?..hamas controls gaza and the firings or they dont?.......i realize making a clear statement has its disadvantages, like holding the Palestinians responsible for something very clear.

or you can keep on contradicting yourself to "defend" their actions

[Douglas Carpenter]

65. I'm defending Hamas? I don't like them one bit, at all. I'm just reporting the facts.

[proteus_lives]

67. It's horseshit.

"Splinter groups" are just thugs who took their Hamas colors off so their bosses can keep gathering international sympathy.

[Violet_Crumble]

71. Yr such a fountain of knowledge on Hamas!

Where do you get all this inside information of yrs on how Hamas operates and what they think?

[proteus_lives]

72. Reading helps a lot.

And Hamas isn't original.

A gang of thugs is a gang of thugs.

[Violet_Crumble]

75. Can you give some examples of what you've read to become such an authority on Hamas?

I've always wanted to know what I need to read to give me the deep knowledge required to do very little but go 'thugs! thugs!' when Hamas gets a mention. It's interesting to note that you've not once that I can recall used that same sort of language aimed at the govt of Nutty...

[Name removed]

76. Deleted message

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

[Violet_Crumble]

79. There's no need to get snarky. Is there some reason you don't want to answer that question?

You got nasty last week when I asked you what you'd read on the conflict, and here you are doing it again. Have you actually read anything at all about Hamas other than what you read here at DU?

btw, yet again yr misrepresenting my views. I'm no fan of Hamas at all and think the sooner they're gone the better. But when it comes to the damage caused by OCL and the ongoing blockade of Gaza, it's Israel that's responsible, and yr attempt to argue that Hamas makes them do it is just as silly as those who claim that Israel's actions made suicide bombers do what they did....

[proteus_lives]

81. You had it deleted last time too.

Apparently being called professor offends you.

"You got nasty last week when I asked you what you'd read on the conflict, and here you are doing it again. Have you actually read anything at all about Hamas other than what you read here at DU?"

You don't answer either. I've read books, journal articles, seen lectures and discussed the I/P situation many times. But I'm not providing you with a list unless you unzip first. So PM me a list if you're up to it.

Plus, it's very passive-aggressive. Are you implying I'm not educated enough to have an opinion on the subject?

[Violet_Crumble]

86. Maybe you should read the forum rules and attempt to be civil?

Getting nasty and accusing me and others of supporting Hamas isn't a really great tactic when it comes to debate, either...

I'm not getting into some silly game with you when you refuse to answer any questions you get asked. I do want to know what you've read about Hamas that gives you insight into how they operate in Gaza given that you try to speak with some authority yet you've never been there. For whatever reason you don't want to talk about what you've read. Also, I haven't said you can't have an opinion on the subject at all. What I'm going to come straight out and say is that yr opinion is a very simplistic one where typing 'thugs! thugs!' seems to pass as some sort of meaningful analysis of Hamas...

[proteus_lives]

88. Tell me what you've read and I'll do the same.

You're the one who won't play the game you created.

I don't mind that you think my opinion is simplistic. I think your one opinion is one-sided and heartless toward Israel. You like to play "J'accuse!" a lot but can't take it when someone plays back.

[Violet_Crumble]

90. Um, why? I've said exactly why I asked you, but you don't seem to have any reason...

..apart from some lame mimicking thing. Do you want a complete list of everything I've read on the conflict? Or are you interested in some specific aspect of the conflict? And why do you want them?

I do think yr opinion is very simplistic, and continually contributing little more than 'thugs! thugs!' is a good indication of that. But when it comes to yr accusation that I'm one-sided and heartless towards Israel, that's just complete rubbish. I suggest you read posts in this forum and stop accusing those you disagree with of supporting Hamas and being heartless towards Israel (btw, unlike you, I do NOT support any civilians being made to suffer or support their being killed)

[Name removed]

91. Deleted message

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

[howaboutme]

82. Why is Israel becoming the pariah of the world?

Is this a perception of their doing? All their media influence and propaganda is supposed to keep the discontent and criticism at bay. It works to control self interested fearful legislators in the US Congress, but it doesn't work when dealing with regular Americans and others that aren't worried about being reelected or bribed or threatened. Far more people now appear to oppose Israel than support it. What is the solution?

Now when it comes to divestment let's divest the USA Treasury from Israel and use the proceeds to reduce our deficit and help Americans.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

83. Short answer: it isn't.

There are a great many nations under massive international sanctions; Israel's international status is far better than those.

What *is* the case is that whether Israel should be under sanction or not is more hotly debated than is the case for practically any other nation.

[ProgressiveMuslim]

95. delete ... posted in wrong spot. nt