Israeli soldier posts Instagram of Palestinian child in crosshairs of rifle
This bullshit has been confirmed. I cannot be any clearer — what Israel is doing to the Palestinians is so very wrong, and to say so is not anti-Semitic.
Horrible.
Source: electronicintifada.net
Israeli Soldiers Breaking The Silence on the Occupation of Palestine
“You realize that it’s impossible to be moral in an immoral situation.” — Gavner Gvaryahu
Why… after 45 years, does Israel continue to occupy territory in Lebanon, Syria and Palestine? Why has Israel been able to develop chemical, biological and nuclear weapons, disregarding every international treaty, while Iran is threatened with pre-emptive attack for undertaking nuclear research? Why has Israel been the subject of more UN Resolutions than any other country in the world? And why has the USA vetoed virtually every single one of them? Why when the USA has been the pioneer of the ‘Two State’ solution to the Israel-Palestine conflict, based on the rule of international law and 1967 borders, did it then deny Palestinians UN recognition? Why is there such a close relationship today between Evangelicals in America and the State of Israel?
Some vitally important questions, it would seem.
when i see an israeli jew on fb writing on an acquaintances wall to “fucking kill them all” in reference to the palestinians, I wonder if he can even pause for a moment to wonder about that kind of thinking and his people’s history?
someone has to go first and take a step. b/c each side can point to pain and loss in their families, we’ll otherwise keep going round and round and round. And i don’t see how that first step can be by anyone other than those with the power in the region.
i’m not hopeful…
I don’t get.
Any of it.
At all.
Negotiating with Iran is perceived as a sign of beginning to forsake Israel. That is where I think the basic difference is between Romney and Obama. What Romney is doing is mortally destroying any chance of a resolution without war. Therefore when [he recently] said, he doesn’t think there should be a war with Iran, this does not ring true. It is not consistent with other things he has said. […]
Obama does think there is still room for negotiations. It’s a very courageous thing to say in this atmosphere.
In the end, this is what I think: Making foreign policy on Iran a serious issue in the US elections — what Romney has done, in itself — is a heavy blow to the ultimate interests of the United States and Israel.
Romney has said, Anybody could have decided to finish bin Laden. Even [Jimmy] Carter. This again was a mistaken concept. President Obama didn’t just decide [one day to kill bin Laden]. The operation to end the life of bin Laden necessitated multiple points of decision by him. I know from operations I have been involved with on a smaller scale.
They are very intricate. You don’t just give the order and wait in your office for commanders to come three months later and say it’s done. No. This kind of operation, which is accident prone, hands on operation, one has to make one decision after the other […] It took courage and cool headedness and leadership. Anyone who says it was an easy thing to decide, doesn’t understand what he’s talking about. [Such comments] show a total lack of understanding of what this kind of operation means.
As long as Netanyahu is Israel’s prime minister, Israel is not our ally. It’s a liability, undermining US foreign policy in the most important struggle we still face: Jihadist violence.
If Gov. Romney is suggesting that we should start another war, he should say so.
Source: Washington Post
Ok, now THERE'S my president.
- Steve Kroft: How much pressure have you been getting from [Israeli] Prime Minister Netanyahu to make up your mind to use military force in Iran?
- President Obama: Well, look, I have conversations with PM Netanyahu all the time, and I understand and share PM Netanyahu's insistence that Iran not obtain a nuclear weapon... because it would threaten us, it would threaten Israel, it would threaten the world and kick off a nuclear arms race.
- Steve Kroft: You're saying you don't feel any pressure from PM Netanyahu, in the middle of a [United States Presidential] campaign, to try and get you to change your policy and draw a line in the sand? You don't feel any pressure?
- President Obama: When it comes to our national security decisions, ah, any pressure that I feel is simply to do what's right for the American people. And I am gonna block out any noise that's out there.
An Israeli October Surprise for Obama?
So, to buy time for Israel to build up its West Bank settlements and thus make a Palestinian state impossible, Begin felt Carter’s reelection had to be prevented.
The most inviting way was to cooperate with Republicans both in undermining Carter at home and possibly using Israel’s continuing clandestine influence inside Iran to obstruct Carter’s desperate efforts to win freedom for 52 U.S. hostages held by Islamist radicals there.
Questioned by congressional investigators about this history in 1992, Carter said he realized by April 1980 that “Israel cast their lot with [Ronald] Reagan,” according to notes I found among the unpublished documents in the files of a House task force that had looked into the October Surprise case. Carter traced the Israeli opposition to his reelection to a “lingering concern [among] Jewish leaders that I was too friendly with Arabs.”
In 1993, a special House task force released a report claiming to have found “no credible evidence” to support various allegations by Iranians, Israelis, Europeans, Arabs and Americans that the Reagan campaign went behind Carter’s back to make contacts with Iran that stopped Carter from gaining the hostages’ release until after Reagan was inaugurated on Jan. 20, 1981.
The task force stuck to that conclusion despite discovering that the Israelis began shipping U.S. military equipment to Iran in 1981 with what they claimed was approval from the Reagan administration. Those shipments were exposed when one of the Israeli-chartered planes crashed inside the Soviet Union in July 1981.
However, over the past couple of years, the House task force’s conclusions crumbled amid discoveries that important evidence was hidden from investigators, that internal doubts on the task force were suppressed, and that George H.W. Bush’s administration withheld information in 1991 that would have corroborated a key allegation.
The collapse of those 1993 findings by the House task force left behind a troubling impression — that Israel’s Likud hardliners may have teamed up with ambitious Republicans and some disgruntled elements of the CIA to help remove a U.S. president from office. And since the earlier Likud government had gotten away with it, that might encourage the current one to try something similar.
As for the historical mystery, it is far more reassuring to think that no such thing could occur, that Israel’s Likud – whatever its differences with Washington over Middle East peace policies – would never seek to subvert a U.S. president, and that Republicans and CIA dissidents – no matter how frustrated by the political direction of an administration – would never sabotage their own government.
But the evidence from 1980 points in that disturbing direction, and there are some points that are not in dispute. For instance, there is no doubt that CIA Old Boys and Likudniks had strong motives for seeking President Carter’s defeat in 1980.
Inside the CIA, Carter and his CIA Director Stansfield Turner were blamed for firing many of the free-wheeling covert operatives from the Vietnam era, for ousting legendary spymaster Ted Shackley, and for failing to protect longtime U.S. allies (and friends of the CIA), such as Iran’s Shah and Nicaragua’s dictator Anastasio Somoza.
Legendary CIA officer Miles Copeland told me in 1990 that “the CIA within the CIA” – the inner-most circle of powerful intelligence figures who felt they understood best the strategic needs of the United States – believed Carter and his naïve faith in American democratic ideals represented a grave threat to the nation.
“Carter really believed in all the principles that we talk about in the West,” Copeland said, shaking his mane of white hair. “As smart as Carter is, he did believe in Mom, apple pie and the corner drug store. And those things that are good in America are good everywhere else. …
“Carter, I say, was not a stupid man,” Copeland said, adding that Carter had an even worse flaw: “He was a principled man.”
