Since the moderators keep saying we should find old threads that sort of match new threads I thought I'd start this up again. The folowing is an article/abstract of the book
(Note: I have not read the book yet, just the article. I am trying to get my hands on a copy of the book)
Not In My Name: Israel Chapter
This is an extract from Not In My Name: A Compendium of Modern Hypocrisy, (by Chas Newkey-Burden and Julie Burchill, and published by Virgin Books).
This chapter was written by Chas Newkey-Burden.
‘When my father was a little boy in Poland, the streets of Europe were covered with graffiti, “Jews, go back to Palestine,” or sometimes worse: “Dirty Yids, piss off to Palestine.” When my father revisited Europe fifty years later, the walls were covered with new graffiti, “Jews, get out of Palestine.”’
- Israeli author Amos Oz
Everyone knows the proverb of the three wise monkeys who see no evil, hear no evil and speak no evil. As shown throughout this book, the modern hypocrite can be very skilled indeed at seeing and hearing no evil. When women are stoned to death in Arab states, when gay men are brutalised in Caribbean countries, the hypocrites’ ability to cover their ears and look the other way is remarkable.
However, the triumvirate cannot be completed for when it comes to the state of Israel the modern hypocrite just cannot stop speaking evil. They will fail to condemn – and sometimes actually support – terrorists who blow up school buses and pizza parlours. They will march hand in hand with people who – quite literally – fundamentally disagree with every basic political principle they claim to hold dear. They will openly question whether Israel even has the right to exist.
And all along the way, they will show themselves to be devastating hypocrites.
The anti-Israel brigade would have us believe that the motivation for this vitriolic hatred of Israel is a genuine, compassionate concern for the fate of the Palestinian people. But do they really care about the Palestinians, or is their compassion somewhat selective, to put it politely? In reality, are they only interested in Palestinian suffering for as long as it gives them an opportunity to bash Israel?
Excellent article on the theme of this thread. In short, here are several other hypocrisies the world is guilty of:
-- Nobody says "boo" about Egypt's part in the blockade, not even the turkeys in Turkey
-- How would Turkey react if the Kurds fired 10,000 missiles into Turkey civilian areas?
-- Turkey's occupation of Northern Cyprus is never discussed
-- Turkey has received President Omar Bashir, one of the architects of genocide in Sudan and Darfur (“It is not possible for those who belong to the Muslim faith to carry out genocide,” said Erdogan.)
-- None of the United Nations peacekeeping organizations and observers has kept out the sophisticated weapons imported by Hizbullah into southern Lebanon – despite absolute UN assurances to do so. And no one says "boo"!
There are some vital points being overlooked in the international coverage of the Israeli response to the Gaza flotilla, and a mountain of hypocrisy that needs to be exposed. Egypt, the Palestinian Authority (PA) and every Arab foreign minister agreed that Hamas not be allowed to control the southern border crossing with Egypt after the terror group violently seized control of Gaza in 2007.
Yes, Egypt has blockaded Gaza under Hamas’s control as much as the Israelis have – and with the widespread support of Arab governments and the PA. Where’s the outrage?
iFrame Removed
Palestinians are supposedly experiencing a humanitarian crisis, and yet no Arab or Islamic government has demanded Egypt open its border with Gaza. Hello, Turkey?
When Israel pulled out completely from the Gaza Strip in 2005, it imposed no blockade. It was only after Hamas began a terror campaign with 10,000 rockets fired at Israeli civilians that Israel and Egypt imposed this blockade – with PA and Arab support. No Arab government wanted a terror-prone Hamas to flourish in Gaza, let alone spread.
ONE NEEDS to ask: If the Kurds or the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) across the Turkish border in Iraq rained 10,000 rockets on Turkish civilians, what would the Turks do? After all, the Kurds have legitimate disputes with the government of Turkey, and have been viciously repressed.
What if international NGOs decided to airlift humanitarian supplies to PKK refugees in Iraq, with those shipments containing civilian equipment that could easily be made into weapons?
Only Turkey recognizes a Turkish republic in Northern Cyprus. What would the Turkish military’s response be if organizations from nations that do not recognize the Turkish occupation of Northern Cyprus decided to break that military occupation?
Again, regarding Turkish hypocrisy, the prime minister of Turkey, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, received the international pariah who leads Sudan – President Omar Bashir – a man who has committed genocide. The International Criminal Court has an arrest warrant out for him on charges of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes. Not only has the Darfur region of Sudan experienced genocide directed by Bashir and his government, but other regions of southern Sudan have as well. During the visit in mid-August of last year, Erdogan said he did not believe Bashir was guilty of the war crimes for which he was indicted.
And here is how the Turkish prime minister justified that widely disputed contention: “It is not possible for those who belong to the Muslim faith to carry out genocide,” said Erdogan. He deems Bashir innocent. End of story.
THE TURKISH foreign minister recently called the flotilla episode, “Turkey’s 9-11.” Shame on you sir. No American should ever forget such an insult.
This brings me to the reason for the blockade of Gaza, including the Israeli naval blockade. Some of the items on the ships were dual-use, with both civilian and military uses. For instance, there was rebar for a small amount of cement.
Heaven knows Gaza needs a lot of rebuilding. This tiny amount is insignificant for construction, however, although it’s a nice supply of iron to be converted into weapons.
If the Israeli naval blockade ends does anyone really think Hamas won’t be importing a wide array of weapons? If the ships don’t have to go through checkpoints, arms shipments would resume without a doubt – and so would the rocket attacks.
What nation would sit back and allow arms to pour into a neighboring territory that will certainly be used in more attacks on its people? If the blockade ends, arms shipments into Gaza will resume, and rocket firings into will Israel resume. It’s that simple.
None of the United Nations peacekeeping organizations and observers has kept out the sophisticated weapons imported by Hizbullah into southern Lebanon – despite absolute UN assurances to do so. No similar observers are capable of standing in the way of Iranian arms shipments to Hamas either. Only Israeli and Egyptian checkpoints can do that.
Again, I ask, would Turkey allow similar organizations to ship uninspected cargo to the suffering PKK Kurds in Turkey and Iraq? Hamas needs to negotiate with its estranged brothers in the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank, and commit themselves to peace and recognition of Israel. Then peace and prosperity will prevail.
Let’s get the facts straight and the hypocrisy exposed as this debate proceeds.
rabello's post raises some very good points which are applicable to the community that is this forum.
When we call each other names ("terrorist," "terrorist supporter," "delusional," etc.), we not only personally insult each other. We also undermine our collective ability as a community to engage in civil and productive dialogue. And, really, that civility of dialogue is the glue that holds this community together.
I've edited this thread heavily to remove personal insults and responses thereto. But because this is ultimately your community, I and my fellow mods really prefer that you take responsibility for ensuring that your discourse here is civil, productive, and insult-free.
So let's lay off each other and get back to the topic of whether and to what degree the international community's (and particularly Turkey's) responses to Israel's interception of the flotilla are hypocritical.
Many thanks, and love to you all
Merope Beliefnet Community Host Middle East News & Politics
Merope | Beliefnet Community Manager Problems? Send a message to Beliefnet_community
Democrats think the glass is half full. Republicans think the glass is theirs. Libertarians want to break the glass, because they think a conspiracy created it.
It was offensive when those who opposed George Bush's call to war were called "terrorists," "terrorist sympathizers", or "terrorist enablers," and it is just as offensive, now.
Just as it is offensive to call the passengers on the Freedom Flotilla "terrorists" or the flotilla, itsefl, "the terrorist flotilla." It is a highly transparent and unworthy tactic, as much as is turning the blame around with accusation when no other defense is available.
However, CL and anyone else who is called a "terrorist" or "terrorist sympathizer" or "terrorist enabler" because of their outrage over these needless killings is in good company: right in there with Irish Nobel peace laureate Máiread Maguire, a retired senior UN diplomat Denis Halliday (both of whom are aboard The Rachel Corrie), Desmond Tutu, Nelson Mandela, Aung San Suu Kyi, former Finnish president Martti Ahtisaari, and a host of others, who have decried the assault on the Turkish vessels in international waters, and the killings of Turkish citizens and injury to scores of others from sovereign nations. Please note: Not a Muslim-sounding or al Queda name among them.
The law is on Israel’s side. Ethics and history are on Israel’s side. Those who are on the side of Hamas are actually enemies of civilization.
Time to pick sides.
(Note to the unsophisticated - you can support the people who now call themselves Palestinians and work for a better situation for them without supporting Hamas. But, if you really want to help them you would support the only ones who have ever helped them - Israel. Your choice, of course)
Let me see if I understand YOUR argument. You point to a reported happening over 5,000 years ago, and based on that claim the right of Israel to do anything to seize land, yet you want to dismiss and ignore events of 60 years ago.
Hypocrisy defined.
You never answered my question:
Because of the My Lai Massacre, America is a terrorist organization, and Vietnam veterens are terrorists?
You over extend my point.
My Lai was not, I think, a "terrorist" act, it was a war crime. As such, yes, certain soldiers and officers, involved in the act and the coverup were guilty of war crimes. Some were prosecuted, some not. As in most cases, the prosecution ended short of the higher ranking individuals.
Secondly, I have never called any Israeli soldiers terrorists. Therefore, it is not only a false analogy for you to apply the lable to VN vets, it is an untruth.
To give you a direct answer, in the hope you will read and understand it, SOME VN vets, at My Lai and other places, commited war crimes, and are therefore war criminals. Some, not all, were prosecuted, but that is not my concern. To reason from those small instances to the charge that ALL VN vets are therefore terrorists is both illogical, and insulting to 3 million men and women.
Have a nice day.
Good answer. But the same thing applies to the Irgun. They committed a terrorist attack over 60 years ago. Some were caught and executed. Some got away. You can't extropolate to everyone and anyone else Israeli.
I I ner have "extrapolated to everyone else."
In many ways, I agree, history is history. The Boston Tea Party, for instance, wasn't exactly a benign act--and certainly Wounded Knee wasn't.
Democrats think the glass is half full. Republicans think the glass is theirs. Libertarians want to break the glass, because they think a conspiracy created it.
Let me see if I understand YOUR argument. You point to a reported happening over 5,000 years ago, and based on that claim the right of Israel to do anything to seize land, yet you want to dismiss and ignore events of 60 years ago.
Hypocrisy defined.
You never answered my question:
Because of the My Lai Massacre, America is a terrorist organization, and Vietnam veterens are terrorists?
You over extend my point.
My Lai was not, I think, a "terrorist" act, it was a war crime. As such, yes, certain soldiers and officers, involved in the act and the coverup were guilty of war crimes. Some were prosecuted, some not. As in most cases, the prosecution ended short of the higher ranking individuals.
Secondly, I have never called any Israeli soldiers terrorists. Therefore, it is not only a false analogy for you to apply the lable to VN vets, it is an untruth.
To give you a direct answer, in the hope you will read and understand it, SOME VN vets, at My Lai and other places, commited war crimes, and are therefore war criminals. Some, not all, were prosecuted, but that is not my concern. To reason from those small instances to the charge that ALL VN vets are therefore terrorists is both illogical, and insulting to 3 million men and women.
Have a nice day.
Good answer. But the same thing applies to the Irgun. They committed a terrorist attack over 60 years ago. Some were caught and executed. Some got away. You can't extropolate to everyone and anyone else Israeli.
Let me see if I understand YOUR argument. You point to a reported happening over 5,000 years ago, and based on that claim the right of Israel to do anything to seize land, yet you want to dismiss and ignore events of 60 years ago.
Hypocrisy defined.
You never answered my question:
Because of the My Lai Massacre, America is a terrorist organization, and Vietnam veterens are terrorists?
You over extend my point.
My Lai was not, I think, a "terrorist" act, it was a war crime. As such, yes, certain soldiers and officers, involved in the act and the coverup were guilty of war crimes. Some were prosecuted, some not. As in most cases, the prosecution ended short of the higher ranking individuals.
Secondly, I have never called any Israeli soldiers terrorists. Therefore, it is not only a false analogy for you to apply the lable to VN vets, it is an untruth.
To give you a direct answer, in the hope you will read and understand it, SOME VN vets, at My Lai and other places, commited war crimes, and are therefore war criminals. Some, not all, were prosecuted, but that is not my concern. To reason from those small instances to the charge that ALL VN vets are therefore terrorists is both illogical, and insulting to 3 million men and women.
Democrats think the glass is half full. Republicans think the glass is theirs. Libertarians want to break the glass, because they think a conspiracy created it.
