Όταν η Coca Cola φοβάται το facebook

Originally posted on Συσπείρωση Δημοσιογράφων - Δούρειος Τύπος:

  •  
    coca_cola_3e_370734138

 του Πέτρου Κατσάκου

Συμπληρώνονται 310 ημέρες αγώνα για τους απολυμένους της 3Ε και ο αγώνας τους θυμίζει όλο και περισσότερο τη μάχη των 595 καθαριστριών του υπουργείου Οικονομικών. Ένας αγώνας διαρκείας, χωρίς υποχωρήσεις, κόντρα στην τρομοκρατία της εργοδοσίας και στην κραυγαλέα απουσία των συστημικών ΜΜΕ. Ένας αγώνας που, παρά τα ασφαλιστικά μέτρα, τις αγωγές και τις απειλές της εταιρείας, συνεχίζεται με το ίδιο πείσμα από τους εργαζόμενους της 3Ε. Με καθημερινές αγωνιστικές παρεμβάσεις σε κάθε γωνιά της Ελλάδας. Με εκδηλώσεις ενημέρωσης του καταναλωτικού κοινού και με μια συνεχώς ογκούμενη καμπάνια για μποϊκοτάζ των προϊόντων της εταιρείας, η 3Ε βλέπει με ανησυχία την ολοένα αυξανόμενη πτώση των πωλήσεών της να χτυπά το καμπανάκι του κινδύνου. Μια ανησυχία που έχει μετατραπεί σε φόβο για μείωση των κερδών ενός κολοσσού που παράγει τα προϊόντα του στη Βουλγαρία, φορολογείται στην Ελβετία και κρατάει κλειστό το εργοστάσιο της Θεσσαλονίκης.

Το τελευταίο διάστημα και…

View original 210 more words

Αφίσα των φασιστών του τάγματος Azov

Omadeon:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Azov_Battalion: The Azov Battalion (Ukrainian: Батальйон «Азов») is a paramilitary,[3][4] volunteer unit of the National Guard, operated by the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Ukraine. The battalion is based in Mariupol in the Azov Sea coastal region.

Logo of the Azov Battalion.
Emblem of the Azov Battalion.svg
Recent emblem with Wolfsangel and Black Sun
Flag of the Azov Battalion.svg
Flag of the Azov Battalion.

 

2nd SS Panzer Division Das Reich
2nd SS Panzer Division Das Reich

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolfsangel#As_a_Nazi_symbol: In Nazi Germany, the Wolfsangel was used by:

After World War II, the symbol was used by some Neo-Nazi organizations, but public exhibition of the symbol is illegal in Germany if a connection with one of these groups is apparent.[5][6]


 

Originally posted on Αντιφασιστική Καμπάνια για την Ουκρανία:

Για όσους κλείνουν τα μάτια η αδιαφορούν

10639587_10152671781788659_4826473934458888778_n

Ανακατάληψη, σήμερα η Ουκρανία αύριο η Ρωσία και όλη η Ευρώπη

View original

Richard Wolff: Ο θάνατος του καπιταλισμού και το αντιπαράδειγμα της συνεταιριστικής οικονομίας

Omadeon:

In English: Cooperatives and Workers’ Self-Directed Enterprises (original article).

[Ελληνική μετάφραση: Δείτε πιο κάτω]

An Interview with Richard Wolff on Counterpunch (by Ed Rampell).

Richard Wolff got his B.A. from Harvard, a Master’s in economics from Stanford University in Palo Alto, California and a Ph.D. in economics from Yale. Wolff is a Professor Emeritus at the University of Massachusetts in Amherst and a Visiting Professor in the graduate program for international affairs at the New School University in Manhattan, where Wolff lives. However, Wolff — who describes himself as “a critic of capitalism” — is not one of those apologist economists for the elite. Born in 1942 at Youngstown, Ohio, he’s the son of working class parents who were refugees from the Nazis. After his family moved around the Midwest they relocated to New York.

Today, Wolff has emerged as one of — if not the number one — most prominent leftist economist in America. In addition to teaching the Big Bad Wolff appears on Free Speech TV, Link TV, Pacifica Radio, does public speaking at the Brecht Forum and other venues, writes books such as Capitalism Hits the Fan, Occupy the Economy and Democracy at Work and has a substantial online presence, arguing there’s a better way to run the economy that’s in the interests of the 99%, instead of the 1%. In this interview, Wolff discusses his vision for changing the capitalist system. Fundamentally, he poses the question that if America has repeatedly gone to war abroad “to make the world safe for democracy,” isn’t it time that we brought the war home to make the American workplace safe for democracy, too?

Ed Rampell: What is the definition of a cooperative and of a collective?

Richard Wolff: The word “cooperative,” to define a business, is very old. Cooperatives have existed for many centuries, all around the world, as well as throughout the history of the U.S. It means a variety of things. Sometimes cooperative means a group of producers who make something will get together and share, cooperatively own one of their inputs. For example: A group of farmers, none of whom individually has enough money to buy the land they need to work, can sometimes form a cooperative so that they pool their money and then they can collectively afford to buy land… Then they agree to farm different portions of the land but to own the land cooperatively.

Another example is in winemaking. Around the world, particularly in Europe, it’s very common for wines to be produced and sold by a cooperative. The actual growing of the grapes and making of the wine is done by individual farmers, with or without employees. The word “co-op” doesn’t apply here to the actual work being done [but] the farmers get together and literally pool their wine. They pour the wine each of them has produced in their vats into one central vat and then cooperate to sell it. They can do better selling wine in larger quantities to larger buyers then they could doing it by themselves. This is sometimes called a marketing or sales co-op.

[...........]

In America we debate everything: Education, sexuality, etc. — except for asking critical questions about capitalism… If there’s an institution in your society that’s above criticism you’re giving it a free pass to indulge all of its weaknesses and darker tendencies. In part the crisis we’re in now has to do with the inability of our society to face up to the fact that capitalism has its strength, but it also has its weaknesses. It has its time of growth and its time of shriveling and dying. And an honest, healthy society would never shrink away from debating where we’re at with capitalism — can we do better? How might that work?

Ed Rampell is an L.A.-based film historian, critic and author who wrote Progressive Hollywood, A People’s Film History of the United States. Rampell’s new book, about Hawaii’s movies and TV shows since 1995, will be published in September 2013 by Honolulu’s Mutual Publishing.

Originally posted on Αριστερή Παρέμβαση:

του Ed Rampell, 16/4/2013 (μετάφραση Μίνα Κωστοπούλου)
 Ποιος είναι ο ορισμός για τον συνεταιρισμό/ κοοπερατίβα [cooperative] και για τη κολεκτίβα [collective];

Η λέξη «κοοπερατίβα», για την περιγραφή μιας επιχείρησης, είναι πολύ παλιά. Οι κοοπερατίβες υπάρχουν εδώ και πολλούς αιώνες, σε όλο τον κόσμο, και διαχρονικά στην ιστορία των ΗΠΑ. «Κοοπερατίβα» σημαίνει μια πληθώρα πραγμάτων. Μερικές φορές αναφέρεται σε μια ομάδα παραγωγών που δημιουργούν και μοιράζονται από κοινού, κατέχοντας συνεταιριστικά τα μέσα παραγωγής. Για παράδειγμα: Μια ομάδα αγροτών, εκ των οποίων κανείς δεν έχει αρκετά χρήματα, ώστε να αγοράσει τη γη που χρειάζονται για να δουλέψουν, μπορούν συχνά να δημιουργήσουν μια κοοπερατίβα, όπου τοποθετούν από κοινού τα χρήματά τους, προκειμένου να καταφέρουν να αγοράσουν γη… Μπορούν να συμφωνήσουν, ώστε να διαχειρίζονται διαφορετικά κομμάτια της γης, αλλά τα χωράφια συνολικά θα ανήκουν σε όλους.

Ένα ακόμη παράδειγμα μπορεί να εντοπιστεί στην οινοποιεία. Ανά τον κόσμο, κυρίως στην…

View original 1,714 more words

Πάνος Κοσμάς: Η εκκωφαντική σιωπή της Αριστεράς για τις σφαγές στην Α. Ουκρανία

Αναδημοσιεύω [από το facebook] ένα εξαιρετικό κείμενο του Πάνου Κοσμά για την Ουκρανία και την Αριστερά.

  • Σημειώσεις: Αρχικά, είχα συμπεριλάβει αυτό το κείμενο σαν (ανώνυμη) εισαγωγή  στην προηγούμενη ανάρτηση “[εθνοκάθαρση στην Α. Ουκρανία]…” αλλά αξίζει ιδιαίτερη προσοχή κι έτσι το μετέφερα εδώ, μετά από άδεια του συγγραφέα να αναφερθεί και το ονοματεπώνυμό του. [Το αρχικό κείμενο ήταν άτιτλο και ο τίτλος της ανάρτησης είναι δικός μου. Ίσως αλλάξει, αν το θελήσει ο συγγραφέας].

-Omadeon

Genocide in Ukraine!_html_5e88458c


Πάνος Κοσμάς

Η σιωπή ενός σεβαστού τμήματος της Αριστεράς και της άκρας αριστεράς για την ανατολική Ουκρανία είναι εκκωφαντική και εξοργιστική ταυτόχρονα! Ολόκληροι χώροι δεν ξέρουν τι να γράψουν και τι να πουν! Κάνουν πως οι σφαγές στην ανατολική Ουκρανία δεν υπάρχουν ή δεν αφορούν την Αριστερά! Στην καλύτερη περίπτωση τις καταγγέλλουν σαν “φασιστικές θηριωδίες”, δηλαδή σαν φασιστικά “εγκλήματα πολέμου”, αλλά ενός πολέμου “άδικου και από τις δύο πλευρές”!

Σε πρώτο πλάνο, για όλα φταίει η θεωρία ότι έχουμε μια σύγκρουση ιμπεριαλισμών (του ρωσικού και του δυτικού) “δι’ αντιπροσώπων” στο έδαφος της ανατολικής Ουκρανίας: οι “αντιπρόσωποι” του δυτικού ιμπεριαλισμού είναι οι φιλοδυτικοί εθνικιστές, ακροδεξιοί και φασίστες του Κιέβου, ενώ οι “αντιπρόσωποι” του ρωσικού ιμπεριαλισμού είναι οι “φιλορώσοι αυτονομιστές”. Μερικοί περιμένουν κιόλας μια γενικότερη ανάφλεξη μεταξύ Δυτικών και Ρωσίας, για να επιβεβαιωθούν οι εκτιμήσεις ότι όσα συμβαίνουν στην ανατολική Ουκρανία δεν είναι παρά το πρελούδιο μιας ιμπεριαλιστικής σύγκρουσης.

Στο μεταξύ όμως, οι “αντιπρόσωποι” του δυτικού ιμπεριαλισμού εφαρμόζουν τακτικές γενοκτονίας σαν αυτές που εφαρμόζει το Ισραήλ στη Γάζα (απλώς δεν έχουν την ικανότητα να το κάνουν με την ίδια επιτυχία και στην ίδια κλίμακα), έχουν την αμέριστη στρατιωτική, διπλωματική και οικονομική συμπαράσταση όλης της Δύσης, ενώ η Ρωσία περνάει από χίλια κόσκινα της Δύσης και του Κιέβου για να της επιτραπεί να περάσει τα ουκρανικά σύνορα μια αυτοκινητοπομπή με… υλικό ανθρωπιστικής βοήθειας!

Προσέξτε: οι Δυτικοί ιμπεριαλιστές παραδέχονται ότι χρειάζεται ανθρωπιστική βοήθεια, αλλά αυτή θα τη δώσει η Ρωσία κι όχι κάποιος διεθνής οργανισμός – “δικής της πουτάνας γιοι” είναι οι σφαγιαζόμενοι. Ο… τρομερός ρωσικός ιμπεριαλισμός ζητάει ταπεινά άδεια για να στείλει ανθρωπιστική βοήθεια στα θύματα των υποτιθέμενων δικών του “αντιπροσώπων” στον… ιμπεριαλιστικό πόλεμο!

Ναι, αλλά οι αυτονομιστές έχουν ρωσικά όπλα, απαντάει ο αριστερός των ίσων αποστάσεων που δεν μένει στα “επιφαινόμενα”. Αυτό, δεν τους κάνει όργανα του ρωσικού ιμπεριαλισμού; -Όσο κάνει τη Χαμάς και τους Παλαιστίνιους -συνολικά- όργανα του Ιράν ή της Συρίας επειδή προμηθεύονται από αυτούς όπλα!

Αλλά αυτά είναι ψιλά γράμματα. Εδώ υπάρχει πολύς καλός κόσμος που δεν ιδρώνει το αυτί του ούτε στην ανακήρυξη “λαϊκών δημοκρατιών”, ούτε στη Διεθνή, ούτε σε κομμάτια Αριστεράς που αναφέρονται στον Λένιν και τον Τρότσκι, ούτε σε διακηρύξεις των εξεγερμένων που διακηρύσσουν ανεξαρτησία από το ρωσικό εθνικισμό, ούτε καν στο γεγονός ότι οι αντιφασιστικές πολιτοφυλακές είναι σε μεγάλο βαθμό εργατικές. Όλοι αυτοί δεν υπερασπίζονται τον εαυτό τους, τα εργατικά και λαϊκά συμφέροντα, αλλά -άθελά τους έστω- τα συμφέροντα του ρωσικού ιμπεριαλισμού!!!

Πρόκειται για πολιτική χρεοκοπία ολκής, ένα μικρό “1914” ενός μεγάλου τμήματος της Αριστεράς στη Δύση.

Κι αν στην πορεία των πραγμάτων, μόλις οι φασίστες του Κιέβου εκκαθαρίσουν με το καλό τους “αντιπροσώπους” της Ρωσίας στην ανατολική Ουκρανία και εγκαταστήσουν τους ΝΑΤΟϊκούς πυραύλους στα σύνορα του τρομερού ρωσικού ιμπεριαλισμού, αυτός αντιδράσει απονενοημένα; Δεν θα αποδειχτεί “τότε” ότι πρόκειται για ιμπεριαλιστικό ανταγωνισμό; Το μόνο που θα αποδειχτεί τότε, συντροφοί μου, είναι ότι οι αντιφασίστες στην ανατολική Ουκρανία σφαγιάστηκαν μόνοι και αβοήθητοι. Τότε όμως θα γίνουν και κάποια άλλα αποκαλυπτήρια: ότι η ασφυκτική πίεση του δυτικού ιμπεριαλισμού ενάντια στη Ρωσία αποσκοπεί στην εγκατάσταση μιας φιλοδυτικής κυβέρνησης τύπου Γιέλτσιν στη Μόσχα, με τα “πειστήρια” μιας ασφυκτικής περικύκλωσης της Ρωσίας με βάσεις, πυραύλους και πυρηνικά στα άμεσα σύνορά της. Και είναι τόσο τρομερός ο ρωσικός ιμπεριαλισμός, ώστε παρακολουθεί ανήμπορος τη σφαγή πληθυσμών που μιλούν ρωσικά στα άμεσα σύνορά του και παρ’ όλα αυτά δέχεται τις κυρώσεις τη μία μετά την άλλη και παίρνει ταπεινά άδεια από τους φασίστες του Κιέβου για να στείλει ανθρωπιστική βοήθεια!

Αλλά ας πούμε ότι όλα αυτά είναι επισφαλείς “εκτιμήσεις”. Δεν μας αρκεί τουλάχιστον ότι εμείς είμαστε στη Δύση και το πρώτο μας καθήκον στην περίπτωση της Ουκρανίας είναι να καταγγείλουμε και να κινητοποιηθούμε ενάντια στα σχέδια του δυτικού ιμπεριαλισμού στην Ουκρανία; Ούτε αυτό δεν απέμεινε όρθιο;;;

[τέλος κειμένου του Πάνου Κοσμά]


o6whDr9vcFg


 

Διαβάστε επίσης:

In English:


 

 

[εθνοκάθαρση στην Α. Ουκρανία] The Residents of Slavyansk have disappeared; the town is being re-populated with migrants from Western Ukraine.

Omadeon:

UPDATE: Το εξαιρετικό κείμενο που είχε συμπεριληφθεί εδώ σαν είδος εισαγωγής, μεταφέρθηκε στην ξεχωριστή ανάρτηση Πάνος Κοσμάς: Η εκκωφαντική σιωπή της Αριστεράς για τις σφαγές στην Α. Ουκρανία

slaviansk123_e65304481d475349f94af1ebfd8c0448


Reblogging: http://slavyangrad.org/2014/08/14/residents-of-slavyansk-have-disappeared-the-town-is-being-re-populated-with-migrants-from-western-ukraine/

Εθνοκάθαρση με αντικατάσταση πληθυσμών στην Ανατολική Ουκρανία. Οι κάτοικοι του Σλαβιάνσκ εξαφανίστηκαν και αντικαταστάθηκαν από εποίκους που προέρχονται από τις δυτικές περιοχές. Δείτε επίσης http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/ukraine/11025137/Ukraine-crisis-the-neo-Nazi-brigade-fighting-pro-Russian-separatists.html


 

Originally posted on SLAVYANGRAD.org:

Original:

http://antifashist.com/item/zhiteli-slavyanska-ischezli-gorod-zaselyaetsya-vyhodcami-iz-zapadnoj-ukrainy.html#ixzz39hUoJeiV

Translation by Valentina Lisitsa
Edited by S. Naylor & @GBabeuf

August 7, 2014

In Slavyansk, occupied by Ukrainian troops, the local residents have practically disappeared. The town is being inundated with migrants speaking in a foreign dialect, who take over the housing of those who left to escape the Ukrainian bombing campaign.

This is reported by one of very few residents of Slavyansk who, trusting Ukrainian official propaganda, made the decision to return to his native city. The picture that he saw is terrifying. He realized that the information about residents of Slavyansk returning home is nothing but a vile lie.

“Please, heed our plea! The people have disappeared from Slavyansk!

“I am a native of Slavyansk, residing here already for twenty-seven years. Or better to say ‘I was residing’, having left the town three months ago, when it was becoming dangerous to stay. During this time I…

View original 389 more words

Ελλάδα: κι όμως χειρότερα από την Αργεντινή! (Επίκαιρα 7-13 Αυγούστου 2014)

Omadeon:

“…Σαμαράς και Βενιζέλος που θεωρούν τις απώλειες του PSI περασμένα – ξεχασμένα μπορούν να συνεχίσουν να υπερασπίζονται τα συμφέροντα της κερδοσκοπίας εντός κι εκτός Ελλάδας, βυσσοδομώντας κατά της Αργεντινής που μετά την παύση πληρωμών του 2001 ποτέ δεν γνώρισε την ανεργία, την φτώχεια και την ύφεση της Ελλάδας. Μόνο που η άλλη όψη αυτής της επιλογής τους είναι οι αυτοκτονίες ομολογιούχων, η διάλυση του ασφαλιστικού συστήματος, η εκτόξευση της φτώχειας και της ανεργίας σε δυσθεώρητα ύψη και η μετατροπή της Ελλάδας σε αποικία των πιστωτών.”

Originally posted on Leonidas Vatikiotis:

argentina-vulture-protest-largeΤο ερώτημα που απαντήθηκε με τον πιο ευχάριστο τρόπο στις 30 Ιουλίου είναι αν μία κυρίαρχη χώρα μπορεί να γυρίσει την πλάτη της στα κερδοσκοπικά κεφάλαια και να αρνηθεί να τα πληρώσει. Το μάθημα που έδωσε η Αργεντινή είναι πως ένα κυρίαρχο κράτος διατηρεί το δικαίωμα να αρνηθεί την αποπληρωμή ομολόγων που κατέχουν τα κερδοσκοπικά κεφάλαια!

ΤΟΥ ΛΕΩΝΙΔΑ ΒΑΤΙΚΙΩΤΗ

Η απόφαση της προέδρου της Αργεντινής, Κριστίνας Κίρχνερ, μπορούσε εύκολα να προβλεφθεί από τις 16 Ιουνίου κιόλας όταν η αμερικανική δικαιοσύνη, διά του δικαστή Τόμας Γκριέζα, προχώρησε σε μια απόφαση που τίναζε στον αέρα κάθε κοινώς και επισήμως αποδεκτή διαδικασία αναδιάρθρωσης δημοσίου χρέους. Στο πλαίσιο αυτής της διαδικασίας μια αναδιάρθρωση δημοσίου χρέους, που ακολουθεί την αδυναμία μιας χώρας να ανταποκριθεί στις υποχρεώσεις της, θεωρείται περατωθείσα από τη στιγμή που η συντριπτική πλειοψηφία των κατόχων ομολόγων αποδεχθεί τους νέους όρους που συμφωνούνται από κοινού και μπορούν να περιλαμβάνουν από μείωση της ονομαστικής…

View original 1,139 more words

Combating antisemitism and defending Israel: a potentially explosive mix (article by Antony Lerman)

Omadeon:

Antony Lerman
Antony Lerman

Antony Lerman (born 11 March 1946) is a British writer who specialises in the study of antisemitism, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, multiculturalism, and the place of religion in society. From 2006 to early 2009, he was Director of the Institute for Jewish Policy Research, a think tank on issues affecting Jewish communities in Europe. From December 1999 to 2006, he was Chief Executive of the Hanadiv Charitable Foundation, renamed the Rothschild Foundation Europe in 2007. He is a founding member of the Jewish Forum for Justice and Human Rights, and a former editor of Patterns of Prejudice, a quarterly academic journal focusing on the sociology of race and ethnicity.[1]

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antony_Lerman


 

Originally posted on Antony Lerman:

If any more evidence were required to demonstrate that the Community Security Trust (CST), the private charity that describes its mission as monitoring and combating antisemitism on behalf of the British Jewish Community, is abusing its mandate by providing political support for Israel, look no further than its response to reports of anti-Jewish hostility arising out of the Gaza crisis.

The UK’s Jewish News quotes from a statement by Mark Gardner, Communications Director of the CST, on the rise in reported antisemitic incidents since the beginning of the most recent conflict with Hamas:

“Anti-Semitic incidents will subside along with the images on people’s television screens, but the long term damage to Jews of anti-Israel boycotts will persist. 

“One consequence of this war will be a lot more boycotts, either through choice or intimidation. Just as Israel is being singled out for scrutiny and boycott, so many Jews are going to feel the…

View original 600 more words

#Chomsky on Israeli #Apartheid (video, Greek subs) +Outrage (‘Οργή’) enhanced with links

Chomsky: How the Israeli Occupation is Much Worse Than Apartheid (Greek subtitles)

source: On BDS and How the Israeli Occupation is “Much Worse Than Apartheid” (video)


UPDATE / Breaking news:


Outrage

Almost every day brings news of awful crimes, but some are so heinous, so horrendous and malicious, that they dwarf all else. One of those rare events took place on July 17, when Malaysian Airlines MH17 was shot down in Eastern Ukraine, killing 298 people.

The Guardian of Virtue in the White House denounced it as an “outrage of unspeakable proportions,” which he attributed to “Russian support.” His UN Ambassador thundered that “when 298 civilians are killed” in the “horrific downing” of a civilian plane, “we must stop at nothing to determine who is responsible and to bring them to justice.” She also called on Putin to end his shameful efforts to evade his very clear responsibility.

True, the “irritating little man” with the “ratlike face” (Timothy Garton Ash) had called for an independent investigation, but that could only have been because of sanctions from the one country courageous enough to impose them, the United States, while Europeans had cowered in fear.

On CNN, former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine William Taylor assured the world that the irritating little man “is clearly responsible…for the shoot down of this airliner.” For weeks, lead stories reported on the anguish of the families, the lives of the murdered victims, the international efforts to claim the bodies, the fury over the horrific crime that “stunned the world,” as the press reported daily in grisly detail.

Every literate person, and certainly every editor and commentator, instantly recalled another case when a plane was shot down with comparable loss of life: Iran Air 655 with 290 killed, including 66 children, shot down in Iranian airspace in a clearly identified commercial air route. The crime was not carried out “with U.S. support,” nor has its agent ever been uncertain. It was the guided-missile cruiser USS Vincennes, operating in Iranian waters in the Persian Gulf.

The commander of a nearby U.S. vessel, David Carlson, wrote in the U.S. Naval Proceedings that he “wondered aloud in disbelief” as “’The Vincennes announced her intentions” to attack what was clearly a civilian aircraft. He speculated that “Robo Cruiser,” as the Vincennes was called because of its aggressive behavior, “felt a need to prove the viability of Aegis (the sophisticated anti-aircraft system on the cruiser) in the Persian Gulf, and that they hankered for the opportunity to show their stuff.”

Two years later, the commander of the Vincennes and the officer in charge of anti-air warfare were given the Legion of Merit award for “exceptionally meritorious conduct in the performance of outstanding service” and for the “calm and professional atmosphere” during the period of the destruction of the Iranian Airbus, which was not mentioned in the award.

President Reagan blamed the Iranians and defended the actions of the warship, which “followed standing orders and widely publicized procedures, firing to protect itself against possible attack.” His successor, Bush I, proclaimed that “I will never apologize for the United States — I don’t care what the facts are… I’m not an apologize-for-America kind of guy.”

No evasions of responsibility here, unlike the barbarians in the East.

There was little reaction at the time: no outrage, no desperate search for victims, no passionate denunciations of those responsible, no eloquent laments by the US Ambassador to the UN about the “immense and heart-wrenching loss” when the airliner was downed. Iranian condemnations were occasionally noted, but dismissed as “boilerplate attacks on the United States” (Philip Shenon, New York Times).

Small wonder, then, that this insignificant earlier event merited only a few scattered words in the US media during the vast furor over a real crime, in which the demonic enemy might have been indirectly involved.

One exception was in the London Daily Mail, where Dominick Lawson wrote that although “Putin’s apologists” might bring up the Iran Air attack, the comparison actually demonstrates our high moral values as contrasted with the miserable Russians, who try to evade their responsibility for MH 17 with lies while Washington at once announced that the US warship had shot down the Iranian aircraft — righteously. What more powerful evidence could there be of our nobility and their depravity?

We know why Ukrainians and Russians are in their own countries, but one might ask what exactly the Vincennes was doing in Iranian waters. The answer is simple. It was defending Washington’s great friend Saddam Hussein in his murderous aggression against Iran. For the victims, the shoot-down was no small matter. It was a major factor in Iran’s recognition that it could not fight on any longer, according to historian Dilip Hiro.

It is worth remembering the extent of Washington’s devotion to its friend Saddam. Reagan removed him from the terrorist list so that aid could be sent to expedite his assault on Iran, and later denied his terrible crimes against the Kurds, including the use of chemical weapons, blocking congressional condemnations. He also accorded Saddam a privilege otherwise granted only to Israel: there was no serious reaction when Iraq attacked the USS Stark with missiles, killing 37 crewmen, much like the case of the USS Liberty, attacked repeatedly by Israeli jets and torpedo ships in 1967, killing 34 crewmen.

Reagan’s successor, Bush I, went on to provide further aid to Saddam, badly needed after the war with Iran that he launched. Bush also invited Iraqi nuclear engineers to come to the US for advanced training in weapons production. In April 1990, Bush dispatched a high-level Senate delegation, led by future Republican presidential candidate Bob Dole, to convey his warm regards to his friend Saddam and to assure him that he should disregard irresponsible criticism from the “haughty and pampered press,” and that such miscreants had been removed from Voice of America. The fawning before Saddam continued until he turned into a new Hitler a few months later by disobeying orders, or perhaps misunderstanding them, and invading Kuwait, with illuminating consequences that are worth reviewing once again, though I will leave this interesting matter aside here.

Other precedents had long since been dismissed to the memory hole as without significance. One example is the Libyan civilian airliner that was lost in a sandstorm in 1973 when it was shot down by US-supplied Israeli jets, two minutes flight time from Cairo, towards which it was heading. The death toll was only 110 that time. Israel blamed the French pilot, with the endorsement of the New York Times, which added that the Israeli act was “at worst…an act of callousness that not even the savagery of previous Arab actions can excuse.” The incident was passed over quickly in the United States, with little criticism. When Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir arrived in the US four days later, she faced few embarrassing questions and returned home with new gifts of military aircraft.

The reaction was much the same when Washington’s favored Angolan terrorist organization UNITA claimed to have shot down two civilian airliners at the same time, among other cases.

Returning to the sole authentic and truly horrific crime, the New York Times reported that American UN ambassador Samantha Power “choked up as she spoke of infants who perished in the Malaysia Airlines crash in Ukraine [and] The Dutch foreign minister, Frans Timmermans, could barely contain his anger as he recalled seeing pictures of `thugs’ snatching wedding bands off the fingers of the victims.”

At the same session, the report continues, there was also “a long recitation of names and ages — all belonging to children killed in the latest Israeli offensive in Gaza.” The only reported reaction was by Palestinian envoy Riyad Mansour, who “grew quiet in the middle of” the recitation.

The Israeli attack on Gaza in July did, however, elicit outrage in Washington. President Obama “reiterated his `strong condemnation’ of rocket and tunnel attacks against Israel by the militant group Hamas,” The Hill reported. He “also expressed ‘growing concern’ about the rising number of Palestinian civilian deaths in Gaza,” but without condemnation. The Senate filled that gap, voting unanimously to support Israeli actions in Gaza while condemning “the unprovoked rocket fire at Israel” by Hamas and calling on “Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas to dissolve the unity governing arrangement with Hamas and condemn the attacks on Israel.”

As for Congress, perhaps it’s enough to join the 80% of the public who disapprove of their performance, though the word “disapprove” is rather too mild in this case. But in Obama’s defense, it may be that he has no idea what Israel is doing in Gaza with the weapons that he is kind enough to supply to them. After all, he relies on US intelligence, which may be too busy collecting phone calls and email messages of citizens to pay much attention to such marginalia. It may be useful, then, to review what we all should know.

Israel’s goal had long been a simple one: quiet-for-quiet, a return to the norm (though now it may demand even more). What then is the norm?

For the West Bank, the norm has been that Israel carries forward its illegal construction of settlements and infrastructure so that it can integrate into Israel whatever might be of value to it, meanwhile consigning Palestinians to unviable cantons and subjecting them to intense repression and violence.

For the past 14 years, the norm has been that Israel kills more than two Palestinian children a week. The latest Israeli rampage was set of by the brutal murder of three Israeli boys from a settler community in the occupied West Bank. A month before, two Palestinian boys were shot dead in the West Bank city of Ramallah. That elicited no attention, which is understandable, since it is routine. “The institutionalised disregard for Palestinian life in the West helps explain not only why Palestinians resort to violence,” the respected Middle East analyst Mouin Rabbani reports, “but also Israel’s latest assault on the Gaza Strip.”

Quiet-for-quiet has also enabled Israel to carry forward its program of separating Gaza from the West Bank. That program has been pursued vigorously, always with US support, ever since the US and Israel accepted the Oslo accords, which declare the two regions to be an inseparable territorial unity. A look at the map explains the rationale. Gaza provides Palestine’s only access to the outside world, so once the two are separated, any autonomy that Israel might grant to Palestinians in the West Bank would leave them effectively imprisoned between hostile states, Israel and Jordan.  The imprisonment will become even more severe as Israel continues its systematic program of expelling Palestinians from the Jordan Valley and constructing Israeli settlements there, enjoying quiet-for-quiet.

The norm in Gaza was described in detail by the heroic Norwegian trauma surgeon Mads Gilbert, who has worked in Gaza’s main hospital through Israel’s most grotesque crimes and returned again for the current onslaught. In June 2014, immediately before the latest Israeli onslaught, he submitted a report on the Gaza health sector to UNRWA, the UN Agency that tries desperately, on a shoestring, to care for refugees.

“At least 57 % of Gaza households are food insecure and about 80 % are now aid recipients,” Gilbert reports. “Food insecurity and rising poverty also mean that most residents cannot meet their daily caloric requirements, while over 90 % of the water in Gaza has been deemed unfit for human consumption,” a situation that is becoming even worse as Israel again attacks water and sewage systems, leaving over a million people with even more severe disruption of the barest necessity of life.

Gilbert reports that “Palestinian children in Gaza are suffering immensely. A large proportion are affected by the man-made malnourishment regime caused by the Israeli imposed blockage. Prevalence of anaemia in children <2yrs in Gaza is at 72.8%, while prevalence of wasting, stunting, underweight have been documented at 34.3%, 31.4%, 31.45% respectively.” And it gets worse as the report proceeds.

The distinguished human rights lawyer Raji Sourani, who has remained in Gaza through years of Israeli brutality and terror, reports that “The most common sentence I heard when people began to talk about ceasefire: everybody says it’s better for all of us to die and not go back to the situation we used to have before this war. We don’t want that again. We have no dignity, no pride; we are just soft targets, and we are very cheap. Either this situation really improves or it is better to just die. I am talking about intellectuals, academics, ordinary people: everybody is saying that.”

Similar sentiments have been widely voiced: it is better to die with dignity than to be slowly strangled by the torturer.

For Gaza, the plans for the norm were explained forthrightly by Dov Weissglass, a confidant of Ariel Sharon, the person who negotiated the withdrawal of Israeli settlers from Gaza in 2005. Hailed as a grand gesture in Israel and among acolytes and the deluded elsewhere, the withdrawal was in reality a carefully staged “national trauma,” properly ridiculed by informed Israeli commentators, among them Israel’s leading sociologist, the late Baruch Kimmerling.

What actually happened is that Israeli hawks, led by Sharon, realized that it made good sense to transfer the illegal settlers from their subsidized communities in devastated Gaza, where they were sustained at exorbitant cost, to subsidized settlements in the other occupied territories, which Israel intends to keep. But instead of simply transferring them, as would have been simple enough, it was clearly more useful to present the world with images of little children pleading with soldiers not to destroy their homes, amidst cries of “Never Again,” with the implication obvious. What made the farce even more transparent was that it was a replica of the staged trauma when Israel had to evacuate the Egyptian Sinai in 1982. But it played very well for the intended audience at home and abroad.

Weissglass provided his own description of the transfer of settlers from Gaza to other occupied territories: “What I effectively agreed to with the Americans was that [the major settlement blocs in the West Bank] would not be dealt with at all, and the rest will not be dealt with until the Palestinians turn into Finns” – but a special kind of Finns, who would quietly accept rule by a foreign power. “The significance is the freezing of the political process,” Weissglass continued. “And when you freeze that process you prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state and you prevent a discussion about the refugees, the borders and Jerusalem. Effectively, this whole package that is called the Palestinian state, with all that it entails, has been removed from our agenda indefinitely. And all this with [President Bush's] authority and permission and the ratification of both houses of Congress.”

Weisglass explained further that Gazans would remain “on a diet, but not to make them die of hunger” – which would not help Israel’s fading reputation. With their vaunted technical efficiency, Israeli experts determined precisely how many calories a day Gazans needed for bare survival, while also depriving them of medicines and other means of decent life. Israeli military forces confined them by land, sea and air to what British Prime Minister David Cameron accurately described as a prison camp. The Israeli withdrawal left Israel in total control of Gaza, hence the occupying power under international law. And to close the prison walls even more tightly, Israel excluded Palestinians from a large region along the border, including a third or more of Gaza’s scarce arable land. The justification is security for Israelis, which could be just as well achieved by establishing the security zone on the Israeli side of the border, or more fully, by ending the savage siege and other punishments.

The official story is that after Israel graciously handed Gaza over to the Palestinians, in the hope that they would construct a flourishing state, they revealed their true nature by subjecting Israel to unremitting rocket attack and forcing the captive population to become martyrs to so that Israel would be pictured in a bad light. Reality is rather different.

A few weeks after Israeli troops withdrew, leaving the occupation intact, Palestinians committed a major crime. In January 2006, they voted the wrong way in a carefully monitored free election, handing control of the Parliament to Hamas. The media constantly intone that Hamas is dedicated to the destruction of Israel. In reality, its leaders have repeatedly made it clear and explicit that Hamas would accept a two-state settlement in accord with the international consensus that has been blocked by the US and Israel for 40 years. In contrast, Israel is dedicated to the destruction of Palestine, apart from some occasional meaningless words, and is implementing that commitment.

True, Israel accepted the Road Map for reaching a two-state settlement initiated by President Bush and adopted by the Quartet that is to supervise it: the US, the European Union, the United Nations, and Russia. But as he accepted the Road Map, Prime Minister Sharon at once added fourteen reservations that effectively nullify it. The facts were known to activists, but revealed to the general public for the first time in Jimmy Carter’s book “Palestine: Peace not Apartheid.” They remain under wraps in media reporting and commentary.

The (unrevised) 1999 platform of Israel’s governing party, Binyamin Netanyahu’s Likud, “flatly rejects the establishment of a Palestinian Arab state west of the Jordan river.” And for those who like to obsess about meaningless charters, the core component of Likud, Menahem Begin’s Herut, has yet to abandon its founding doctrine that the territory on both sides of the Jordan is part of the Land of Israel.

The crime of the Palestinians in January 2006 was punished at once. The US and Israel, with Europe shamefully trailing behind, imposed harsh sanctions on the errant population and Israel stepped up its violence. By June, when the attacks sharply escalated, Israel had already fired more than 7700 [155 mm] shells at northern Gaza.

The US and Israel quickly initiated plans for a military coup to overthrow the elected government. When Hamas had the effrontery to foil the plans, the Israeli assaults and the siege became far more severe, justified by the claim that Hamas had taken over the Gaza Strip by force – which is not entirely false, though something rather crucial is omitted.

There should be no need to review again the horrendous record since. The relentless siege and savage attacks are punctuated by episodes of “mowing the lawn,” to borrow Israel’s cheery expression for its periodic exercises of shooting fish in a pond in what it calls a “war of defense.” Once the lawn is mowed and the desperate population seeks to reconstruct somehow from the devastation and the murders, there is a cease-fire agreement. These have been regularly observed by Hamas, as Israel concedes, until Israel violates them with renewed violence.

The most recent cease-fire was established after Israel’s October 2012 assault. Though Israel maintained its devastating siege, Hamas observed the cease-fire, as Israeli officials concede. Matters changed in June, when Fatah and Hamas forged a unity agreement, which established a new government of technocrats that had no Hamas participation and accepted all of the demands of the Quartet. Israel was naturally furious, even more so when even the US joined in signaling approval. The unity agreement not only undercuts Israel’s claim that it cannot negotiate with a divided Palestine, but also threatens the long term goal of dividing Gaza from the West Bank and pursuing its destructive policies in both of the regions.

Something had to be done, and an occasion arose shortly after, when the three Israeli boys were murdered in the West Bank. The Netanyahu government knew at once that they were dead, but pretended otherwise, which provided the opportunity to launch a rampage in the West Bank, targeting Hamas. Netanhayu claimed to have certain knowledge that Hamas was responsible. That too was a lie, as recognized early on. There has been no pretense of presenting evidence. One of Israel’s leading authorities on Hamas, Shlomi Eldar, reported almost at once that the killers very likely came from a dissident clan in Hebron that has long been a thorn in the side of Hamas. Eldar added that “I’m sure they didn’t get any green light from the leadership of Hamas, they just thought it was the right time to act.” The Israeli police have since been searching for two members of the clan, still claiming, without evidence, that they are “Hamas terrorists.”

The 18-day rampage however did succeed in undermining the feared unity government, and sharply increasing Israeli repression. According to Israeli military sources, Israeli soldiers arrested 419 Palestinians, including 335 affiliated with Hamas, and killed six Palestinians, also searching thousands of locations and confiscating $350,000. Israel also conducted dozens of attacks in Gaza, killing 5 Hamas members on July 7.

Hamas finally reacted with its first rockets in 19 months, Israeli officials reported, providing Israel with the pretext for Operation Protective Edge on July 8.

There has been ample reporting of the exploits of the self-declared Most Moral Army in the World, which should receive the Nobel Peace Prize according to Israel’s Ambassador to the US. By the end of July, some 1500 Palestinians had been killed, exceeding the toll of the Cast Lead crimes of 2008-9, 70% of them civilians including hundreds of women and children. And 3 civilians in Israel. Large areas of Gaza had been turned into rubble. During brief bombing pauses, relatives desperately seek shattered bodies or household items in the ruins of homes. The main power plant was attacked – not for the first time; this is an Israeli specialty — sharply curtailing the already very limited electricity and worse yet, reducing still further the minimal availability of fresh water. Another war crime. Meanwhile rescue teams and ambulances are repeatedly attacked. As atrocities mount throughout Gaza, Israel claims that its goal is to destroy tunnels at the border.

Four hospitals had been attacked, each yet another war crime. The first was the Al-Wafa Rehabilitation Hospital in Gaza City, attacked on the day the ground forces invaded the prison. A few lines in the New York Times, within a story about the ground invasion, reported that “most but not all of the 17 patients and 25 doctors and nurses were evacuated before the electricity was cut and heavy bombardments nearly destroyed the building, doctors said. `We evacuated them under fire,’ said Dr. Ali Abu Ryala, a hospital spokesman. `Nurses and doctors had to carry the patients on their backs, some of them falling off the stairway. There is an unprecedented state of panic in the hospital’.”

Three working hospitals were then attacked, patients and staff left to their own devices to survive. One Israeli crime did receive wide condemnation: the attack on a UN school that was harboring 3300 terrified refugees who had fled the ruins of their neighborhoods on the orders of the Israeli army. The outraged UNWRA Commission-General Pierre Kraehenbuehl said “I condemn in the strongest possible terms this serious violation of international law by Israeli forces…. Today the world stands disgraced.” There were at least three Israeli strikes at the refugee shelter, a site well known to the Israeli army. “The precise location of the Jabalia Elementary Girls School and the fact that it was housing thousands of internally displaced people was communicated to the Israeli army seventeen times, to ensure its protection,” Kraehenbuehl said, “the last being at ten to nine last night, just hours before the fatal shelling.”

The attack was also condemned “in the strongest possible terms” by the normally reticent Secretary-General of the UN Ban Ki-moon. “Nothing is more shameful than attacking sleeping children,” he said. There is no record that the US Ambassador to the UN “choked up as she spoke of infants who perished” in the Israeli strike – or in the attack on Gaza altogether.

But White House spokesperson Bernadette Meehan did respond. She said that “We are extremely concerned that thousands of internally displaced Palestinians who have been called on by the Israeli military to evacuate their homes are not safe in UN designated shelters in Gaza. We also condemn those responsible for hiding weapons in United Nations facilities in Gaza,” she added, omitting to mention that these facilities were empty and that the weapons were found by UNRWA, who had condemned those who hid them.

Later, the administration joined in stronger condemnations of this particular crime – while at the same time releasing more weapons to Israel. In doing so, however, Pentagon spokesman Steve Warren told reporters. “And it’s become clear that the Israelis need to do more to live up to their very high standards … for protecting civilian life” – the high standards it has been exhibiting for many years while using US arms, and again today.

Attacks on UN compounds sheltering refugees is another Israeli specialty. One famous incident is the Israeli bombardment of the clearly identified UN refugee shelter in Qana during Shimon Peres’s murderous Grapes of Wrath campaign, killing 106 Lebanese civilians who had taken refuge there, including 52 children. To be sure, Israel is not alone in this practice. Twenty years earlier, its South African ally had launched an airborne strike deep into Angola against Cassinga, a refugee camp run by the Namibian resistance SWAPO.

Israeli officials laud the humanity of the army, which even goes so far as to inform residents that their homes will be bombed. The practice is “sadism, sanctimoniously disguising itself as mercy,” in the words of Israeli journalist Amira Hass: “A recorded message demanding hundreds of thousands of people leave their already targeted homes, for another place, equally dangerous, 10 kilometers away.” In fact, no place in the prison is safe from Israeli sadism.

Some find it difficult to profit from Israel’s solicitude. An appeal to the world by the Gaza Catholic Church quotes a priest who explains the plight of residents of the House of Christ, a care home dedicated to looking after disabled children. They were removed to the Holy Family Church because Israel was targeting the area, but now, he writes, “The church of Gaza has received an order to evacuate. They will bomb the Zeitun area and the people are already fleeing. The problem is that the priest Fr George and the three nuns of Mother Teresa have 29 handicapped children and nine old ladies who can’t move. How will they manage to leave? If anyone can intercede with someone in power, and pray, please do it.”

Actually, it shouldn’t be difficult. Israel already provided the instructions at the Wafa Rehabilitation hospital. And fortunately, at least some states are interceding, as best they can. Five Latin American states — Brazil, Chile, Ecuador, El Salvador and Peru – withdrew their ambassadors from Israel, following the course of Bolivia and Venezuela, which had broken relations in reaction to earlier Israeli crimes. These principled acts are another sign of the remarkable change in world relations as much of Latin America begins to free itself from western domination, sometimes providing a model of civilized behavior to those who controlled it for 500 years.

The hideous revelations elicited a different reaction from the Most Moral President in the World, the usual one: great sympathy for Israelis, bitter condemnation of Hamas, and calls for moderation by both sides. In his August 1 press conference, he did express concern for Palestinians “caught in the crossfire” (where?) while again vigorously supporting the right of Israel to defend itself, like everyone. Not quite everyone. Not of course Palestinians. They have no right to defend themselves, surely not when Israel is on good behavior, keeping to the norm of quiet-for-quiet: stealing their land, driving them out of their homes, subjecting them to a savage siege, and regularly attacking them with weapons provided by their protector.

Palestinians are like black Africans, the Namibian refugees in the Cassinga camp for example, all terrorists for whom the right of defense does not exist.

A 72-hour humanitarian truce was supposed to go into effect at 8am on August 1. It broke down almost at once. As I write, a few hours later, there are conflicting accounts and a good deal remains unclear. According to a press release of the Al Mezan Center for Human Rights in Gaza, which has a solid reputation for reliability, one of its field workers in Rafah, at the Egyptian border in the south, heard Israeli artillery firing at about 8:05am. By about 9:30am, after reports that an Israeli soldier had been captured, intensive air and artillery bombing of Rafah was underway, killing probably dozens of people and injuring hundreds who had returned to their homes after the ceasefire entered into effect, though numbers could not yet be verified.

The day before, on July 31, the Coastal Water Utility, the sole provider of water in the Gaza Strip, announced that it could no longer provide water or sanitation services because of lack of fuel and frequent attacks on personnel. Al Mezan reports that by then, “almost all primary health services have stopped in the Gaza Strip due to the lack of water, garbage collection and environment health services. UNRWA had also warned about the risk of imminent spreading of disease owing to the halt of water and sanitation services.” Meanwhile, on the eve of the cease-fire, Israeli missiles fired from aircraft continued to kill and wound victims throughout the region.

When the current episode of sadism is finally called off, whenever that will be, Israel hopes to be free to pursue its criminal policies in the occupied territories without interference, and with the US support it has enjoyed in the past: military, economic, and diplomatic; and also ideological, by framing the issues in conformity to Israeli doctrines. Gazans will be free to return to the norm in their Israeli-run prison, while in the West Bank they can watch in peace as Israel dismantles what remains of their possessions.

That is the likely outcome if the US maintains its decisive and virtually unilateral support for Israeli crimes and its rejection of the longstanding international consensus on diplomatic settlement. But the future will be quite different if the US withdraws that support. In that case it would be possible to move towards the “enduring solution” in Gaza that Secretary of State Kerry called for, eliciting hysterical condemnation in Israel because the phrase could be interpreted as calling for an end to Israel’s siege and regular attacks. And – horror of horrors – the phrase might even be interpreted as calling for implementation of international law in the rest of the occupied territories.

It is not that Israel’s security would be threatened by adherence to international law; it would very likely be enhanced. But as explained 40 years ago by Israeli general Ezer Weizman, later president, Israel could then not “exist according to the scale, spirit, and quality she now embodies.”

There are similar cases in recent history. Indonesian generals swore that they would never abandon what Australian Foreign Minister Gareth Evans called “the Indonesian Province of East Timor” as he was making a deal to steal Timorese oil. And as long as the ruling generals retained US support through decades of virtually genocidal slaughter, their goals were realistic. Finally, in September 1999, under considerable domestic and international pressure, President Clinton informed them quietly that the game was over and they instantly withdrew – while Evans turned to his new career as the lauded apostle of “Responsibility to Protect,” to be sure, in a version designed to permit western resort to violence at will.

Another relevant case is South Africa. In 1958, South Africa’s foreign minister informed the US ambassador that although his country was becoming a pariah state, it would not matter as long as US support continued. His assessment proved fairly accurate. Thirty years later, Reagan was the last significant holdout in supporting the apartheid regime, which was still sustaining itself. Within a few years, Washington joined the world, and the regime collapsed – not for that reason alone of course; one crucial factor was the remarkable Cuban role in the liberation of Africa, generally ignored in the West though not in Africa.

Forty years ago Israel made the fateful decision to choose expansion over security, rejecting a full peace treaty offered by Egypt in return for evacuation from the occupied Egyptian Sinai, where Israel was initiating extensive settlement and development projects. It has adhered to that policy ever since, making essentially the same judgment as South Africa did in 1958.

In the case of Israel, if the US decided to join the world, the impact would be far greater. Relations of power allow nothing else, as has been demonstrated over and over when Washington has demanded that Israel abandon cherished goals. Furthermore, Israel by now has little recourse, after having adopted policies that turned it from a country that was greatly admired to one that is feared and despised, a course it is pursuing with blind determination today in its resolute march towards moral deterioration and possible ultimate destruction.

Could US policy change? It’s not impossible. Public opinion has shifted considerably in recent years, particularly among the young, and it cannot be completely ignored. For some years there has been a good basis for public demands that Washington observe its own laws and cut off military aid to Israel. US law requires that “no security assistance may be provided to any country the government of which engages in a consistent pattern of gross violations of internationally recognized human rights.” Israel most certainly is guilty of this consistent pattern, and has been for many years. That is why Amnesty International, in the course of Israel’s murderous Cast Lead operation in Gaza, called for an arms embargo against Israel (and Hamas). Senator Patrick Leahy, author of this provision of the law, has brought up its potential applicability to Israel in specific cases, and with a well-conducted educational, organizational, and activist effort such initiatives could be pursued successively. That could have a very significant impact in itself, while also providing a springboard for further actions not only to punish Israel for its criminal behavior, but also to compel Washington to become part of “the international community” and to observe international law and decent moral principles.

Nothing could be more significant for the tragic Palestinian victims of many years of violence and repression.

(end of article)


 

Further Reading / Evidence:

 

Gaza in Crisis (book, click for details)
Gaza in Crisis (book, click for details)

Στηρίζουμε το ρωσικό εμπάργκο κατά της ΕΕ – We support the Russian Embargo against the EU (Uncle Sam’s whores should pay the price)

Greek summary: Λυπάμαι, αλλά στηρίζω το ρωσικό εμπάργκο κατά της Ε.Ε.! Επίσης, ΔΕΝ πιστεύω στις “αποζημιώσεις” που ζητάνε Ευρωπαίοι (και Έλληνες) αγρότες (κ.ά.). Κακώς τις ζητούν οι πληγόμενοι. Αυτές οι απαιτήσεις μοιάζουν με τις παράλογες απαιτήσεις χρεωκοπημένων τραπεζών για σώσιμο ["bailout"]. Απλώς μεταθέτουν το κόστος της εγκληματικής πολιτικής της Ε.Ε. στους Ευρωπαίους φορολογούμενους, χειροτερεύοντας την οικονομική κρίση.

  • Η λύση είναι ΑΠΛΗ. Ανατροπή της πολιτικής της Μέρκελ και των δούλων της Σαμαρά – Βενιζέλου…

Ελπίζω, τέλος, η Ρωσία να προβεί σε ακόμη πιο σκληρό εμπάργκο, κατά ΟΛΩΝ των προϊόντων και υπηρεσιών της Ε.Ε. μέχρι να σταματήσει η Ε.Ε. να ασκεί εγκληματική πολιτική, σε πολλούς τομείς (π.χ. εγκληματικές πολιτικές λιτότητας σε βάρος του ελληνικού λαού και άλλων νοτιο-ευρωπαίων, συνεργασία με ουκρανούς ναζιστές και με εγκλήματα σε βάρος του ρωσόφωνου ουκρανικού λαού, αδιαφορία έως και συνεργασία με εγκλήματα σε βάρος του παλαιστινιακού λαού, κ.ο.κ.) Αν δεν σταματήσει αυτή η εγκληματική πολιτική, προτιμότερη είναι η διάλυση και η χρεωκοπία της Ε.Ε. σαν σύνολο.

  • Παρακαλούνται οι φίλοι/φίλες που είναι μέλη του ΣΥΡΙΖΑ (αλλά και της ΑΝΤΑΡΣΥΑ κλπ.) να σκεφτούν σοβαρά κατά πόσον αυτή η εξέλιξη είναι ιδιαίτερα ευνοϊκή για την ανατροπή ΚΑΙ της κυβέρνησης. Λεφτά για αποζημιώσεις ΔΕΝ ΥΠΑΡΧΟΥΝ, έτσι κι αλλιώς (εκτός αν μιλάμε για ψίχουλα που θα λειτουργήσουν σαν “σιγαστήρας” καταστολής κοινωνικών κινητοποιήσεων).

Ακολουθεί αναδημοσίευση του σημαντικού άρθρου You wanna be Uncle Sam’s flunky? Pay the price! -The Saker“.

safe_image.php

-Omadeon


You wanna be Uncle Sam’s flunky? Pay the price! -The Saker

Russia issued sanctions against the European Union and United States in response to repeated threats and accelerating sanctions against Russia. These are for 12 months, not 3 as are the EU and US sanctions. The Saker provides an overview of Russia’s rationale and benefits. How long will Obama and the neo-conservatives continue this madness? At what price? Who benefits? -Michael Collins
————-

You wanna be Uncle Sam’s flunky? Pay the price!

By The Saker at Vineyard of the Saker, Aug 7

(Reproduced with the author’s permission)

Dear friends,

I just took a short break from my life in “meatspace” to comment on the great news of the day: Russia announced a full 12 months embargo on the import of beef, pork, fruits and vegetables, poultry, fish, cheese, milk and dairy products from the European Union, the United States, Australia, Canada and the Kingdom of Norway. Russia is also introducing an airspace ban against European and US airlines that fly over our airspace to Eastern Asia, namely, the Asia-Pacific region, and is considering changing the so-called Russian airspace entry and exit points for European scheduled and charter flights. Furthermore, Russia is ready to revise the rules of using the trans-Siberian routes, and will also discontinue talks with the US air authorities on the use of the trans-Siberian routes. Finally, starting this winter, we may revoke the additional rights issued by the Russian air authorities beyond the previous agreements. This is such an interesting and major development that it requires a much more subtle analysis than just the crude calculation of how much this might cost the EU or US. I will attempt no such calculation, but instead I would point out the following elements:

First, this is a typically Russian response. There is a basic rule, which every Russian kid learns in school, in street fights, in the military or elsewhere: never promise and never threaten – just act. Unlike western politicians who spent months threatening sanctions, the all the Russians did was to say, rather vaguely, that they reserve the right to reply. And then, BANG!, this wide and far-reaching embargo which, unlike the western sanctions, will have a major impact on the West, but even much more so on Russia (more about that in an instant). This “no words & only action” tactic is designed to maximize deterrence of hostile acts: since the Russians do not clearly spell out what they could do in retaliation, God only knows what they could do next! :-) On top of that, to maximize insecurity, the Russians only said that these were the measures agreed upon, but not when they would be introduced, partially or fully, and against whom. They also strongly implied that other measure were under consideration in the pipeline.

Second, the sanctions are wonderfully targeted. The Europeans have acted like spineless and brainless prostitutes in this entire business, they were opposed to sanctions from day 1, but they did not have the courage to tell that to Uncle Sam, so each time they ended up caving in. Russia’s message to the EU is simple: you wanna be Uncle Sam’s flunky? Pay the price! This embargo will especially hurt southern Europe (Spain, France, Italy, Greece) whose agricultural production will suffer greatly. These countries also happen to be the weakest in the EU. By hitting them, Russia is maximizing the inevitable friction inside the EU over sanctions against Russia.

Third, EU carriers suffer from much higher costs and flight times on the very important Europe to Asia route. Asian carriers will not, giving the latter a double competitive advantage. How is that for a way to reward one side while hurting the other? The EU got one Russian airline in trouble over its flights to Crimea (Dobrolet) and for that the entire EU airlines community could end being at a huge disadvantage vis–vis its Asian counterparts.

Fourth, Russia used these sanctions to do something vital for the Russian economy. Let me explain: after the collapse of the USSR the Russian agriculture was in disarray, and the Eltsin only made things worse. Russian farmers simply could not compete against advanced western agribusiness concerns, which benefited from huge economies of scale, from expensive and high-tech chemical and biological research, which had a full chain of production (often through large holdings), and a top quality marketing capability. The Russian agricultural sector badly, desperately, needed barriers and tariffs to be protected form the western capitalist giants and, instead, Russia voluntarily followed by the terms of the WTO and then eventually became member. Now Russia is using this total embargo to provide a crucially needed time for the Russian agriculture to invest and take up a much bigger share on the Russian market. Also, keep in mind that Russian products are GMO free, and that they have much less preservatives, antibiotics, colors, taste enhancers, or pesticides. And since they are local, they don’t need to be brought in by using the kind of refrigeration/preservation techniques that typically make products taste like cardboard. In other words, Russian agricultural products taste much better, but that is not enough to complete. This embargo now gives them a powerful boost to invest, develop and conquer market shares.

Fifth, there are 100 countries that did not vote with the US on Crimea. The Russians have already announced that these are the countries with which Russia will trade to get whatever products it cannot produce indigenously. A nice reward for standing up to Uncle Sam.

Sixth, small but sweet: did you notice that EU sanctions were introduced for 3 months only, “to be reviewed” later? By introducing a 12 months embargo, Russia also sends a clear message: who do you think will benefit from this mess?

Seventh*, it is plain wrong to estimate EU financial losses by simply calculating the total value of sales for the most recent year (or other period). For example, if EU country X had exports of Y million dollars to Russia, the value of lost exports is just the beginning of total losses. The lost sales of these products may create a surplus that may then adversely affect demand and lower prices and profit margins for specific products. When production is decreased as a result of lost sales, producers in country X will lose economies of scale, creating more pressure on prices and profits. Conversely, for hypothetical non-EU country Z or a Russian company, a contract with Russia might mean enough cash to invest, modernize, and become more competitive, not only in Russia, but on the world market, including the EU.

Eighth, the Baltic countries have played a particularly nasty role in the entire Ukrainian business. As a result of Russia’s sanctions, some of their most profitable industries (such as fisheries), 90% dependent on Russia, will have to shut down. These countries are already a mess. They will hurt even more. Again, the message to them is simple: you wanna be Uncle Sam’s flunky? Pay the price!

Ninth (and this is really important), what we’re seeing is a gradual decoupling of Russia from the western economies. The West severed some of the financial, military and aerospace ties Russia severed the monetary, agricultural and industrial ones. Keep in mind that the US/EU market is a sinking one, affected by deep systemic problems and huge social issues. In a way, the perfect metaphor is RMS Titanic as the orchestra continued to play music while the ship was sinking. Russia is like a passenger who is told that the Titanic’s authorities have decided to disembark him at the next port. Well, gee, too bad, right?

Last, but most definitely not least, this trade-war, combined with the West’s hysterical Russophobia, provides Putin with a better PR campaign than anything the Kremlin could have dreamed of. All his PR people need to tell the Russian people is the truth:

We did everything right. We played it exactly by the book. We did everything we could to deescalate this crisis and all we asked was please do not allow the genocide of our people in Novorussia – and what was the West’s response to that? An insane hate campaign, sanctions against us and unconditional support for the genocidal Nazis in Kiev.

Furthermore, as somebody who carefully follows the Russian media, I can tell you that what is taking place today feels a lot like, paraphrasing Clausewitz, “a continuation of WWII, but by other means.” In other words, this is a struggle to the end between two regimes, two civilizations, which cannot coexist on the same planet and who are locked in struggle to death. In these circumstances, expect the Russian people to support Putin even more.

In a typical Judo move, Putin has used the momentum of the West’s Russia-basing and Putin-bashing campaign to his advantage across the board: Russia will benefit from this economically and politically. Far from being threatened by some kind of “nationalistic Maidan” this winter, Putin’s regime is being strengthened by his handling of the crisis (his ratings are higher than ever before).

Yes, of course, the USA has shown they it has a very wide array of capabilities to hurt Russia, especially through a court system (in the US and EU) which is as subservient to the US deep state as the courts in the DPRK are to their own “Dear Leader” in Pyongyang. And the total loss of the Ukrainian market (for both imports and exports) will also hurt Russia. Temporarily. But in the long run, this situation is immensely profitable for Russia.

In the meantime, the Maindan is burning again, Andriy Parubiy has resigned, and the Ukies are shelling hospital and churches in Novorussia. What else is new?

As for Europe, it is shell-shocked and furious. Frankly, my own Schadenfreude knows no bounds this morning. Let these arrogant non-entities like Van Rompuy, Catherine Ashton, Angela Merkel or Jose Manuel Barroso deal with the shitstorm their stupidity and spinelessness have created.

In the USA, Jen Psaki seems to be under the impression that the Astrakhan region is on the Ukrainian border, while the Russian Defense Ministry plans toopen special accounts in social networks and video hosting resources so that the US State Department and the Pentagon will be able to receive unbiased information about Russian army’s actions“.

Will all that be enough to suggest to the EU leaders that they have put their money on the wrong horse?

The Saker

Creative Commons 3.0

*This paragraph was changed slightly for clarity as were some typos elsewhere in the article.


Μη με ρωτήσετε ποτέ ξανά για την ειρήνη.

Omadeon:

ffcc

Originally posted on //ΠαραλληλοΓράφος//:

Η Asma al-Ghul είναι μια μια Παλαιστίνια δημοσιογράφος, φεμινίστρια και ακτιβίστρια των ανθρωπίνων δικαιωμάτων. (Δείτε εδώ και εδώ). Για τη δράση της έχει στοχοποιηθεί στο παρελθόν από τη Χαμάς.  (Δείτε εδώ, εδώ και εδώ) και έχει τιμηθεί από τη  Human Rights Watch και το International Women’s Media Foundation. Το τελευταίο διάστημα είναι αρθρογράφος στο Al-Monitor’s Palestine Pulse από το στρατόπεδο προσφύγων της Ράφα. Tην προηγούμενη βδομάδα, ένας αεροπορικός βομβαρδισμός σκότωσε εννέα μέλη της οικογένειας της. Η  Asma έγραψε το παρακάτω άρθρο. (Μετάφραση Back Door Man)

Μη με ρωτήσετε ποτέ ξανά για την ειρήνη.

Δάκρυα κυλούσαν μέχρι που τα μάτια μου στέρεψαν, όταν έλαβα ένα τηλεφώνημα στις 3 Αυγούστου, που με ενημέρωνε ότι η οικογένειά μου είχε γίνει στόχος δύο πυραύλων από F-16 στην πόλη της Ράφα. Αυτή ήταν η μοίρα της οικογένειάς μας σε έναν πόλεμο που συνεχίζεται, με κάθε οικογένεια στη Λωρίδα της Γάζας να εισπράττει το…

View original 1,307 more words

Η Γάζα 69 χρόνια μετά τη Χιροσίμα (σήμερα) – Hiroshima 69th anniversary and Gaza

Hiroshima, 69th anniversary (6 Aug. 1945 – 6 Aug. 2014)

10437432_10152435853856154_3688648696243288124_n

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

See also:


Γενοκτονία στη Γάζα: Henry Siegman, ‘Israel Provoked this War’ +Aris Hatzistefanou interview

Ένας φίλος με ρώτησε σήμερα, Μα… καλά, Παλαιστίνιος είσαι; Τρείς αναρτήσεις στη σειρά έκανες για τη Γάζα; Δεν υπάρχουν άλλα θέματα;” Δεν κατάφερα να του απαντήσω αμέσως, ενώ είχε και κάποιο δίκιο. Εκτός αν… πάω φιρί-φιρί για να με πουν κάποιοι κι εμένα “αντισημίτη” (χεχε). Αναρρωτήθηκα και αν ασχολούμαι με τη Γάζα για… λάθος λόγους!

Υπάρχει όμως κάτι που με ενοχλεί και με ανησυχεί αφάνταστα στην τραγωδία της Γάζας. Κι αυτό δεν είναι τόσο πολύ οι φρικιαστικές εικόνες των διαμελισμένων και σκοτωμένων παιδιών, που… κοντεύουμε πια να τις συνηθίσουμε (δυστυχώς). Είναι κάτι πολύ βαθύτερο, χειρότερο και πολύ γενικότερο, από τη συγκεκριμμένη σφαγή (ή εθνοκάθαρση, ή γενοκτονία -αν προτιμάτε) που συνεχίζεται και εντείνεται κάθε μέρα. Αυτό που με ενοχλεί, σε πολύ γενικές γραμμές, είναι η ηθική, πολιτιστική και νομική κατρακύλα της κτηνώδους ‘νομιμοποίησης’ εγκλημάτων κατά της ανθρωπότητας...

English: Author Naomi Wolf speaking at an even...
English: Author Naomi Wolf speaking at an event hosted by the NYC chapter of the National Lawyers Guild. The talk was held at the Brooklyn Law School. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Το ότι συντελείται γενοκτονία σε βάρος των Παλαιστίνιων, το λέει πολύς κόσμος τώρα, ακόμη και πολλοί ανθρωπιστές Εβραίοι διανοούμενοι. Π.χ. η συγγραφέας Naomi Wolf, που αποχώρησε επιδεικτικά από συναγωγή. αφού πρώτα περίμενε να ακούσει εκεί έστω και μια λέξη ελέους για τη Γάζα, αλλά δεν άκουσε τίποτα:

Πολλοί Ισραηλινοί πολιτικοί, αρχικά δεν μίλησαν ανοιχτά για γενοκτονία. Υποστηρίζουν όμως το “Μεγάλο Ισραήλ” (“Erez Israel“), δηλαδή την επέκταση του Ισραήλ σε ένα αμιγώς εβραϊκό κράτος, από τον Ιορδάνη μέχρι τη Μεσόγειο, με καταπάτηση και προσάρτηση όλων των σημερινών Παλαιστινιακών εδαφών (Γάζα και κατεχόμενα στη Δυτική Οχθη). Επομένως, τάσσονται ΑΝΑΓΚΑΣΤΙΚΑ υπέρ μιας ΟΛΟΚΛΗΡΩΤΙΚΗΣ ΕΘΝΟΚΑΘΑΡΣΗΣ σε βάρος των Παλαιστίνιων σαν σύνολο.

Π.χ. η υφυπουργός μεταφορών Tzipi Hotovely, ο αντιπρόεδρος της ισραηλινής Βουλής Moshe Feiglin, και πολλοί άλλοι, σε σημαντικές συνιστώσες του κυβερνώντος κόμματος Λικούντ. Ειδικά ο δεύτερος με έκανε να ανατριχιάσω, όταν διάβασα άρθρα του (στα αγγλικά) και είδα video με δηλώσεις του. Μία από τις πιο φρικιαστικές δηλώσεις του την έκανα video με υπότιτλους, διάρκειας ενός λεπτού:

 

Σήμερα μάθαμε ότι ο Feiglin ζήτησε… όχι μόνο την προσάριηση της Γάζας στο Ισραήλ, μετά την εξόντωση κάθε αντίστασης,  αλλά και τoν βίαιο εκτοπισμό όλου του λαού της Γάζας σε… στρατόπεδα συγκέντρωσης(!!!) τα οποία προτείνει να κατασκευαστούν με αντίσκηνα στην έρημο, με προοπτική μαζικής εξορίας όλου του πληθυσμού της Γάζας:

Η πρακτική της γενοκτονίας σε βάρος των Παλαιστίνιων, υποστηρίζεται φανερά, τώρα πια, από ένα πολύ μεγάλο ποσοστό του πληθυσμού στο Ισραήλ, αλλά και από πολλούς επιφανείς Ισραηλινούς. Έτσι δεν προξένησε καμμία έκπληξη, προ ημερών, ένα “τολμηρό” άρθρο που πρότεινε (ακόμη και στον τίτλο του) τη “λύση” της γενοκτονίας. Ο συγγραφέας του το έσβησε, αλλά… σώθηκε σε άλλες σελίδες. Π.χ.

10590450_742444875816013_4677094923367315302_n

Ενας άλλος ισραηλινός πολιτικός, φανατικός υποστηρικτής του “Μεγάλου Ισραήλ”, είναι ο Naftali Bennett, αρχηγός του υπερ-συντηρητικού και υπερ-ορθόδοξου κόμματος Ισραήλ, Εβραϊκό Σπίτι“, ο οποίος λέει ότι θα κάνει ό,τι περνάει από το χέρι του για να μην ιδρυθεί ποτέ Παλαιστινιακό κράτος:

Bennett opposes the creation of a Palestinian state: “I will do everything in my power to make sure they never get a state.”[25]

Η Ayelet Shaked, δημοφιλής βουλευτίνα του ίδιου κόμματος, δεν αρκέστηκε στην ιδέα του “Μεγάλου Ισραήλ”, αλλά δημοσίευσε στο Facebook ένα κάλεσμα για τη γενοκτονία των Παλαιστινίων. Το κάλεσμά της ήταν για πραγματική γενοκτονία, αφού είπε ότι «το σύνολο του παλαιστινιακού λαού είναι ο εχθρός» και υποστήριξε την καταστροφή του, “συμπεριλαμβανομένων των ηλικιωμένων και των γυναικών του, τις πόλεις και τα χωριά του, την περιουσία του και των υποδομών της.”:

Ayelet Shaked, Naftali Bennett
Ayelet Shaked, Naftali Bennett

Δυστυχώς, ακόμη και η κυβέρνηση του Ισραήλ ασπάζεται έμμεσα ή συγκαλυμμένα το εθνικιστικό όνειρο του “Μεγάλου Ισραήλ”: Ο Νετανιάχου και το κυβερνόν κόμμα Λικούντ δηλώνουν πως θέλουν να ενσωματώσουν στο κράτος του Ισραήλ τους παράνομους (σύμφωνα με το Διεθνές Δίκαιο) εβραϊκούς οικισμούς της Δυτικής  Όχθης, ακυρώνοντας έτσι στην πράξη ένα βιώσιμο Παλαιστινιακό κράτος, καθώς και τη [δήθεν] θέση τους για “ειρήνη μεταξύ δύο ανεξάρτητων κρατών”.


  • Ε, λοιπόν, δεν βλέπω ΚΑΜΜΙΑ διαφορά, ανάμεσα στις παλιές εκείνες παλαιστινιακές προθέσεις (π.χ. του καταστατικού της Χαμάς) για διάλυση του Ισραήλ (σήμερα ούτως ή άλλως ξεπερασμένες ή ανέφικτες) και στις τωρινές, άκρως δολοφονικές, πάγιες θέσεις ορισμένων επιφανών Ισραηλινών περί “Μεγάλου Ισραήλ”, που συνεπάγονται διάλυση, προσάρτηση και υποδούλωση όλων των τελευταίων εδαφών, όπου ζουν σήμερα Παλαιστίνιοι… εκτός από τη διαφορά ανάμεσα σε έναν “κατά φαντασίαν φονιά” και σε έναν Serial Killer στην ΠΡΑΞΗ.
  • Αλλά για να μη νομίζετε, τώρα, ότι οι πολιτικοί που ανάφερα είναι “μεμονωμένα περιστατικά” και για να μην υποτιμηθεί η σημασία ιδιαίτερα του Moshe Feiglin, δείτε έναν πρόσφατο διθύραμβο υπέρ του, με τίτλο “Φέιγκλιν, Νετανιάχου και η επαναστατική στιγμή του Ισραήλ”

…To understand what is happening in Israel today, it may be instructive to review the rise in influence of Knesset member Moshe Feiglin. He may be considered “the key” — the native folk figure who speaks to and inspires the Jewish heart, the folkloric warrior who calls Israel to its destiny. The Feiglin spirit subliminally inspires much of Israel today and appears to have inspired the passions of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Read more: http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/international/213793-feiglin-netanyahu-and-israels-revolutionary-moment#ixzz39LVnz8ut . Follow us: @thehill on Twitter | TheHill on Facebook


English: Naomi Wolf at the 2008 Brooklyn Book ...
English: Naomi Wolf at the 2008 Brooklyn Book Festival in New York City. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Naomi Wolf wrote in f/b:

A significant statement from Henry Siegman, who was director of the American Jewish Congress when I had a job there briefly in communications in my early 20s (that is part of how I learned about the “inside” of PR efforts on behalf of Israel). He is saying what I have been saying – the slaughter of innocents means we need to rethink the occupation and change the terms of the “project” of Israel. It is HUGE for someone this respected in the heart of the American Jewish establishement, to make this statement. Kol Hakavod Mr Siegman. This is ‘good for the Jews” in my book:

“When one thinks that this is what is necessary for Israel to survive, that the Zionist dream is based on the repeated slaughter of innocents on a scale that we’re watching these days on television, that is really a profound, profound crisis — and should be a profound crisis in the thinking of all of us who were committed to the establishment of the state and to its success,” Siegman says. Responding to Israel’s U.S.-backed claim that its assault on Gaza is necessary because no country would tolerate the rocket fire from militants in Gaza, Siegman says: “What undermines this principle is that no country and no people would live the way that Gazans have been made to live. … The question of the morality of Israel’s action depends, in the first instance, on the question, couldn’t Israel be doing something [to prevent] this disaster that is playing out now, in terms of the destruction of human life? Couldn’t they have done something that did not require that cost? And the answer is, sure, they could have ended the occupation.”

-Henry Siegman


  • Henry Siegman on the Israeli Offensive in Gaza – Israel Provoked this War


    The war on Gaza: An interview with Aris Chatzistefanou


    Κι άλλα ψέμματα της προπαγάνδας ξεσκεπάζονται…

    Είναι πλέον πάρα πολύ πιθανό, ότι ακόμη και τους απαχθέντες (και μετά δολοφονηθέντες) τρεις Ισραηλινούς νεαρούς, τους σκότωσαν δυνάμεις του Ισραήλ, με βάση το “Δόγμα Αννίβα” (Hannibal Doctrine):

    • http://www.imra.org.il/story.php3?id=64553

      -σύμφωνα με το οποίο αν κινδυνεύει να αιχμαλωτισθεί Ισραηλινός, είναι καλύτερα να σκοτωθεί, εν ανάγκη κι από Ισραηλινά πυρά, παρά να πέσει αιχμάλωτος και να γίνει “όπλο διαπραγμάτευσης εναντίον του Ισραήλ” όπως ο Γκιλάντ Σαλίτ, που ανταλλάχθηκε με πάνω από 1000 Παλαιστίνιους:
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilad_Shalit_prisoner_exchange

    Αυτό εξηγεί και τους λόγους που δεν βρέθηκε ζωντανός ο πρόσφατα (δήθεν) “αιχμαλωτισμένος” ανθυπολοχαγός. Η Χαμάς δήλωσε ότι έπεσε από Ισραηλινά πυρά, έτσι κι αλλιώς. Σήμερα πιστοποιήθηκε ο θάνατός του. Και ΣΙΓΟΥΡΑ δεν απήγαγε τους νεαρούς η Χαμάς. Οι αποδείξεις είναι ΕΔΩ:

    Τώρα…
    Με βάση το “δόγμα Νταχίγια” το Ισραήλ εσκεμμένα χτυπάει αμάχους:

    Eisenkot labeled any Israeli response to resumed conflict the “Dahiya doctrine” in reference to the leveled Dahiya quarter in Beirut during the Second Lebanon War in 2006. He said Israel will use disproportionate force upon any village that fires upon Israel, “causing great damage and destruction.” Eisenkot made very clear: this is not a recommendation, but an already approved plan — from the Israeli perspective, these are “not civilian villages, they are military bases.” Eisenkot in this statement echoed earlier private statements made by IDF Chief of General Staff Gabi Ashkenazi, who said the next fight in Southern Lebanon would come at a much higher cost for both sides — and that the IDF would not hold back.

    __________________

    Πάμε τώρα σε άλλο ψέμα, ότι δήθεν την πρόσφατη εκεχειρία την παραβίασε η Χαμάς. Αποδείχτηκε ψευδέστατο π.χ. εδώ

    http://mondoweiss.net/2014/08/ceasefire-against-evidence.html

    “…The ceasefire was first violated at 8:30 AM, according to Shaath, when the Israeli army destroyed 19 buildings in an operation to demolish tunnels. “Destroying tunnels is destroying houses,” Shaath said, noting that the ceasefire allowed hostile Israeli forces to continue to operate inside the Gaza Strip, making violence almost inevitable. “We do not accept a ceasefire that allows the invader to attack and murder,” he declared…”

    _________________


    Στο μεταξύ, Το Ισραήλ ξαναβομβάρδισε το Ισλαμικό Πανεπιστήμιο.


    Ισραηλινοί διαδηλώνουν έξω από αεροπορική βάση στο Ισραήλ. Από σχόλιο του Tomer Perry στον τοίχο της Γουλφ πήραμε τη μετάφραση των πινακίδων που λένε:

    • “λήξτε την πολιορκία”
    • “φτάνει πια η σφαγή στη Γάζα”
    • “το να βομβαρδίζετε αμάχους δεν θα φέρει ασφάλεια”
    • “το αίμα των παιδιών στα χέρια σας”.

    BuEOKIaCQAAxj8t


     


     See also:

  • The British public and the world see that Israel’s actions are ‘wrong and unjustified’ — Miliband (

Διαβάστε επίσης:

Στο ιστολόγιο L’ Enfant De L’Haute Mer:

 

 

 

Πέντε Ισραηλινά επιχειρήματα για τη Γάζα καταρρίπτονται

Originally posted on //ΠαραλληλοΓράφος//:

Της Noura Erakat, δημοσιευμένο στο ΤheΝation.

MετάφρασηBack Door Man

gaza-articleLarge-v2

Το Ισραήλ ισχυρίζεται ότι απλώς ασκεί το δικαίωμα του στην αυτοάμυνα και ότι η Γάζα δεν είναι πλέον κατεχόμενη. Τι πρέπει να ξέρετε για αυτά τα ζητήματα και ακόμα περισσότερα.

Το Ισραήλ έχει σκοτώσει σχεδόν 800 Παλαιστίνιους στην Λωρίδα της Γάζας, μόνο κατά τις τελευταίες 21 μέρες˙ η επίθεση συνεχίζεται. Ο ΟΗΕ εκτιμά ότι πάνω από 74% από αυτούς που σκοτώθηκαν είναι άμαχοι. Αυτό είναι αναμενόμενο σε ένα πληθυσμό 1,8 εκατομμυρίων, όπου ο αριθμός των μελών της Χαμάς είναι περίπου 15.000. Το Ισραήλ δεν αρνείται ότι τους σκότωσε χρησιμοποιώντας σύγχρονη εναέρια τεχνολογία και όπλα ακριβείας, με την ευγενική προσφορά της μοναδικής υπερδύναμης του κόσμου. Στην πραγματικότητα, δεν αρνείται καν ότι ήταν άμαχοι.

Η προπαγανδιστική μηχανή του Ισραήλ, ωστόσο, επιμένει ότι οι Παλαιστίνιοι ήθελαν να πεθάνουν (“κουλτούρα του μάρτυρα“), σκηνοθέτησαν το θάνατό τους (“φωτογενείς νεκροί“) ή ήταν…

View original 2,310 more words

Τα κράτη δεν έχουν ψυχή, αλλά… η Χαμάς είχε σοβαρή πρόταση! +Zio-fascists in Jerusalem (video)

Στα αγγλικά ο νεολογισμός “Zio-fascists έγινει αναγκαίος και ακριβής για να αποδώσει π.χ. τα αίσχη στο ακόλουθο video:

Zio Fascists Roaming the Streets of Jerusalem, “Death to Arabs”

(Δείτε το όλο, πριν διαβάσετε το υπόλοιπο αυτής της ανάρτησης…)

Χρειαζόμαστε μια νέα λέξη, που να περιγράψει τον αναδυόμενο ακροδεξιό σιωνισμό, αν θέλουμε να αποφύγουμε τη λεξη “σιωναζί”  ["λερωμένη" λόγω εκτεταμένης χρήσης της από αντισημίτες ακροδεξιούς].

Αν αγανακτήσατε, λάβετε υπ’όψη και την πραγματική έξαρση αντισημιτικών επεισοδίων.


Και τα κράτη έχουν… ψυχή? 

Δυστυχώς, ο “νέος ορισμός του αντισημιτισμού” που προωθείται και αναπαράγεται από όλα τα φιλο-ισραηλινά social media (blogs, f/b,κλπ.) όχι μόνο εξισώνει απόλυτα τον αντισιωνισμό με τον αντισημιτισμό [αυτομάτως συκοφαντώντας, έτσι, ένα σωρό αθώους ανθρώπους], αλλά προχωράει και σε κάτι πολύ χειρότερο: Εξισώνει το ρατσισμό κατά μιας ανθρώπινης φυλής [αντισημιτισμό] με εναν [ιδιότυπο] “ρατσισμό” κατά… κρατών (δηλαδή κατά του Ισραήλ). 

  • Να υποθέσω οτι ένα κράτος έχει… αισθήματα?
  • Να υποθέσω ένα κράτος που… πονάει, όταν το… βασανίζουν?
  • Να υποθέσω ότι ένα κράτος έχει… ψυχή, άρα και… ζωή-μετά-θάνατον?
  • ΤΙ να υποθέσω, τέλος πάντων?..
  • Χμ… θυμήθηκα τώρα “δικαιώματα” εταιρειών,  που νέοι νόμοι τις εξίσωσαν κάποτε (πολύ κακώς)  με πρόσωπα….

Δείτε παράδειγμα αυτού του”νέου ορισμού του αντισημιτισμού” εδώ: Is anti-Zionism the same as antisemitism?


Πολλοί υποστηρικτές του Ισραήλ λένε ότι για να λυθεί το Παλαιστινιακό “πρέπει να πάψει να υπάρχει η Χαμάς”. Λένε επίσης, εδώ και καιρό, ότι η αριστερά καταδικάζει μονομερώς το Ισραήλ και πάρα πολύ σπάνια (η καθόλου) τη Χαμάς. Ακόμη και ορισμένα αριστερά ιστολόγια πρόβαλλαν το σύνθημα Να σταματήσει η ανοχή στη Χαμάς“.

  • Είναι όμως άκαιρο, ανέφικτο, έως και κωμικό, το να προτείνει κανείς τώρα σαν “λύση” στο Παλαιστινιακό, “να πάψει να υπάρχει η Χαμάς”.

Σε περίοδο ειρήνης, αυτό ίσως και να ήταν εφικτό, μακροπρόθεσμα…

  • Αυτή τη στιγμή, όμως, μια τέτοια προσέγγιση αντιβαίνει στην κοινή λογική. Επίσης παραβιάζει κάθε ανθρωπιστική αρχή
  • ΠΩΣ δηλαδή, θα “σταματήσει να υπάρχει η Χαμάς”; -Δολοφονώντας δεκάδες αμάχους (κυρίως παιδιά και γυναίκες) κάθε μέρα; 5-6 φορές περισσότερα από τα μέλη της Χαμάς που σκοτώνονται? Έχετε καταλάβει ΤΙ εκατόμβες αθώων συνεπάγεται αυτή η “λύση”?
  1. Μήπως θεωρείτε “συλλογικά υπεύθυνα” τα γυναικόπαιδα και τους αμάχους για τη “λανθασμένη ψήφο” μιας πλειοψηφίας στις προηγούμενες εκλογές της Γάζας? -Ελπίζω όχι, εκτός αν ακολουθείτε μια “λογική” αμιγώς ναζιστική.
  2. ή μήπως έχετε πρόσβαση σε… Μηχανή του Χρόνου προηγμένης τεχνολογίας, που θα στείλει ΟΛΟ το λαό της Γάζας ταξείδι πίσω στο χρόνο για να ψηφίσει “πιο σωστά”?  -Φυσικά ΟΧΙ (αν και επιφανής ισραηλινός υπουργός είχε δηλώσει ότι ο στόχος του Ισραήλ είναι να… “ξαποστείλει τη Γάζα πίσω στο Μεσαίωνα” -με άλλη έννοια)…

Επομένως, ΛΟΓΙΚΑ συνεπάγεται αμείλικτα ότι στηρίζετε τις συνεχιζόμενες σφαγές αμάχων, μέχρι τις… επόμενες εκλογές στη Γάζα(!!!), με την … παράλογη ελπίδα ότι ο λαός τους θα “βάλει μυαλό” λόγω των σφαγών που υφίσταται [κάτι που αποκλείεται να κάνει, αφού (ίσα-ίσα) λόγω του σφαγιασμού του φανατίζεται ή πεισματώνει ακόμη περισσότερο].

  • Ναι ή όχι? Είτε ηθελημένα, είτε όχι, αυτό προκύπτει.

Ποιά είναι τώρα η εναλλακτική λύση;

Η μοναδική άμεση εναλλακτική λύση, είναι να πεισθεί ο ισχυρότερος στη διαμάχη (δηλαδή το Ισραήλ) να υποχωρήσει, έστω και στοιχειωδώς. Αλλά ποτέ δεν θα πεισθεί, αν δεν πιεστεί. Ξανά και ξανά, αυτό έχει αποδειχτεί. Δεν φτάνει, αυτό που είπε ο γενικός γραμματέας του ΟΗΕ στο Ισραήλ, το “σταματήστε να πολεμάτε κι αρχίστε να μιλάτε”.

Ο,τι κι αν είναι η Χαμάς, είναι ΑΠΟΛΥΤΩΣ ΑΝΑΓΚΑΙΟ να ΣΥΖΗΤΗΣΟΥΝ μαζί της, όχι μόνο το Ισραήλ αλλά και όλοι οι άλλοι που εμπλέκονται στη διαμάχη, στηρίζοντάς το (αυτοί που ανέκαθεν αρνούνταν να συζητήσουν με τη Χαμάς, επειδή τη θεωρούν “τρομοκρατική”).

Σ’ αυτή τη φάση, δεν έχει καμμία σημασία το “απαράδεκτο καταστατικό της Χαμάς”, ή τα άπλυτά της, όταν έχει απόλυτη προτεραιότητα η συνεννόηση μαζί της, για τερματισμό των σφαγών. Ιδίως όταν, αποδεδειγμένα, από την πλευρά της Χαμάς ΥΠΑΡΧΕΙ διαλλακτική διάθεση με βάση πέντε απλούς, λογικούς συμβιβαστικούς όρους που πρότεινε. Όμως αυτή η συμβιβαστική πρόταση της Χαμάς θάφτηκε, προφανέστατα για να συνεχιστεί το όργιο σφαγών με δικαιολογία την “αδιαλλαξία της Χαμάς” (εκτός αν γίνει αποδεκτή η “πρόταση της Αιγύπτου”, που δεν προσφέρει τίποτα απολύτως τίποτα στη Γάζα). 

Ιδού οι πέντε όροι της Χαμάς:

http://electronicintifada.net/blogs/ali-abunimah/exclusive-hamas-puts-forward-ceasefire-terms-amid-intense-mediation

Five conditions

The text of the Hamas conditions, provided to The Electronic Intifada in Arabic, is as follows:

  1. First – Opening all the crossing with the Gaza Strip.

  2. Second – Opening Rafah crossing, the link between Gaza and Egypt, on a permanent basis, 24 hours per day with international guarantees it will not be closed.

  3. Third – A maritime corridor to Gaza.

  4. Fourth – Allowing residents of the Gaza Strip to pray in the al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem.

  5. Fifth – Israel will release the prisoners who were freed as part of the “Shalit” deal, and Israel will abide by the previous agreement reached by prisoners and the Israel Prison Service with Egyptian mediation in 2012. These demands, albeit refined, are in line with earlier public statements Hamas has made about its terms.

Οι φιλοισραηλινοί κατήγοροι της Χαμάς ζητούν να αλλάξει και η… Ελληνική κοινή γνώμη, που “στηρίζει υπερβολικά τους Παλαιστίνιους” και δεν “συνειδητοποιεί”  τα στραβά της Χαμάς. Όμως… ακόμη και αν υποθέσουμε ότι έχουν δίκιο, η “ελληνική κοινή γνώμη” δεν είναι πρακτικά εφικτό να αλλάξει μέσα σε τόσο μικρό χρονικο διάστημα, ενώ ΚΑΘΕ μέρα που περνάει, δεκάδες αθώοι και γυναίκες και παιδιά ΔΟΛΟΦΟΝΟΥΝΤΑΙ ΣΥΣΤΗΜΑΤΙΚΑ.

Θα αλλάξει όμως, ίσως, πολύ πιο εύκολα, η παραπληροφόρηση που υφίσταται όλος ο κόσμος (όχι μόνο η χώρα μας) σε ΕΝΑ ΑΠΛΟ ΖΗΤΗΜΑ. Στην ΥΠΑΡΞΗ μιας πρότασης της Χαμάς με λογικούς και νόμιμους όρους, την οποία παράθεσα. Αλλά για να γίνει γνωστή ευρέως πρέπει να διαδοθεί όσο το δυνατόν περισσότερο, πιέζοντας το Ισραήλ να καθήσει στο τραπέζι των διαπραγματεύσεων, επιτέλους (αν μη τι άλλο).

Το εξαιρετικό άρθρο του Gideon Levy “Τι θέλει λοιπόν η Χαμάς; (που μετάφρασε και παρουσίασε ο Νίκος Σαραντάκος) είχε αναφέρει

Την περασμένη εβδομάδα δημοσιεύτηκαν από την Χαμάς και την Ισλαμική Τζιχάντ 10 όροι προκειμένου να συμφωνηθεί δεκαετής εκεχειρία. Μπορεί να έχουμε αμφιβολίες αν αυτά ήταν όντως τα αιτήματα των δύο συγκεκριμένων οργανώσεων, αλλά μπορούν να χρησιμεύσουν σαν καλή βάση για μια συμφωνία. Ούτε ένας από τους όρους δεν είναι αβάσιμος. Η Χαμάς και η Ισλαμική Τζιχάντ απαιτούν ελευθερία για τη Γάζα. Υπάρχει πιο κατανοητό και δίκαιο αίτημα; Δεν υπάρχει τρόπος να τερματιστεί ο τωρινός κύκλος αίματος, και να μην έχουμε έναν καινούργιο γύρο σε λίγους μήνες, αν δεν το αποδεχτούμε αυτό. Καμιά στρατιωτική επιχείρηση, από αέρα, ξηρά ή θάλασσα, δεν θα δώσει τη λύση· μόνο μια ριζική αλλαγή στάσης απέναντι στη Γάζα μπορεί να εξασφαλίσει αυτό που θέλουν όλοι: την ησυχία. Διαβάστε τον κατάλογο των αιτημάτων και σκεφτείτε ειλικρινά αν έστω κι ένα απ’ αυτά είναι άδικο: [...]


Κάπου ειπώθηκε ότι “…εκείνοι οι Έλληνες Αριστεροί που δεν έχουν βρει  μισή λέξη για να επικρίνουν τη Χαμάς, δεν ενδιαφέρονται για τη λύση του Παλαιστινιακού. Ενδιαφέρονται για τις ψήφους που δίνει το μίσος κατά του Ισραήλ ή απλά ικανοποιούν το δικό τους μίσος…”

Κατ’ αρχάς, το μόνο που χρειάζεται να κάνει κάποιος σήμερα, για να μάθει τα… πολλά στραβά της Χαμάς, είναι [π.χ.] να συμβουλευτεί τη βικιπαίδεια. Είναι υποτιμητικό για τον σύγχρονο καλωδιωμένο πολίτη, να θεωρούμε ότι περιμένει… ιστορική ενημέρωση από “τοποθετήσεις” πολιτικών προσώπων. Κατά τα άλλα…

  • ΟΚ, θέλετε να πούμε… [όχι μισή λέξη αλλά] τα πιο μεγάλα στραβά της Χαμάς?

-Τα είπε [σχεδόν όλα] σε 2-3 παραγράφους η “Monde Diplomatique”:

…That year [2001], according to Ha’aretz, Silvan Shalom — then Israeli finance minister and current minister of energy and water — told the cabinet that: “Between Hamas and Arafat, I prefer Hamas.” None of the ministers protested, noted Ha’aretz. Shalom went on to describe Arafat as “a terrorist in a diplomat’s suit, while the Hamas can be hit unmercifully. Everyone will understand who we’re dealing with, he implied, and there won’t be any international protests.”

As former Times editor George Szamuely observed in New York Press magazine in 2002, Israel’s support for Hamas “even continued after the 1993 Oslo accords,” as suicide bombings inside Israel continued. Hamas, he remarked, “served Israel’s purpose admirably by suggesting to the American public that the conflict in the Middle East pitted democratic Israel against all-or-nothing fanatics who wanted to drive the Jews into the sea. Israel’s refusal to surrender conquered land and its continued building of settlements in violation of innumerable UN resolutions could then all be justified as perfectly reasonable responses to an implacable enemy.”

Source: http://mondediplo.com/blogs/gaza-netanyahu-s-real-goal


Διαβάστε:


Gaza and the Warsaw Ghetto

…President Abbas offered Netanyahu one more opportunity in April, when he created a Palestinian “national consensus” government with Hamas.  The Palestinian authority and President Abbas set the terms for the new government, which included a Palestinian pledge to nonviolence, adherence to past agreements, and even recognition of Israel. These terms were designed not only to appeal to Israel but to meet the demands of the United States and its European allies.  According to Nathan Thrall, a senior analyst at the International Crisis Group covering Gaza, Israel, Jordan and the West Bank, Israel opposed U.S. recognition of the new government and sought to isolate the Palestinians internationally. President Netanyahu is now using overwhelming military force to terrorize a civilian community in order to return to the status quo ante that limits Gaza’s use of electricity, forces sewage to be dumped in the sea, makes sure that water remains undrinkable, and ensures fuel shortages that cause sanitation plants to be shut down.  He thus ensures the perpetuation of desperation among those forced to live in these conditions.  Such desperation would lead any human being to believe that violent resistance is the only recourse. Perhaps the comparison with the Warsaw Ghetto is not completely far-fetched after all.


Διαβάστε επίσης:


 

Δείτε:

Tyler Levitan of  “Independent Jewish Voices” on CTV re: Gaza, Hamas & Israeli bombardment