The Home of Atilla

“Politics should be the part-time profession of every citizen who would protect the rights and privileges of free people and who would preserve what is good and fruitful in our national heritage.” Dwight D. Eisenhower

Archive for April, 2008

An Anatomy of Surrender

Posted by Atilla89 on April 28, 2008

Firstly, I had a really great Pesach Seder, lots of people. I got a present from my aunt, a book called Tobruk by Peter Fitzsimons which I will start reading as soon as I get the chance. In the meantime, here’s a nice piece from Bruce Bawer detailing how the West has surrended culturally to Islamism. The paper talks about how the West’s media, acedemia and artists have betrayed their ideals (namely freedom of speech) to kowtow to Islamism. The byline of this article is Motivated by fear and multiculturalism, too many Westerners are acquiescing to creeping sharia. Hat tip to LGF for this one. Here’s the link to the article.

Enough. We need to recognize that the cultural jihadists hate our freedoms because those freedoms defy sharia, which they’re determined to impose on us. So far, they have been far less successful at rolling back freedom of speech and other liberties in the U.S. than in Europe, thanks in no small part to the First Amendment. Yet America is proving increasingly susceptible to their pressures.

The key question for Westerners is: Do we love our freedoms as much as they hate them? Many free people, alas, have become so accustomed to freedom, and to the comfortable position of not having to stand up for it, that they’re incapable of defending it when it’s imperiled—or even, in many cases, of recognizing that it is imperiled. As for Muslims living in the West, surveys suggest that many of them, though not actively involved in jihad, are prepared to look on passively—and some, approvingly—while their coreligionists drag the Western world into the House of Submission.

But we certainly can’t expect them to take a stand for liberty if we don’t stand up for it ourselves.

Actually after reading this, I sometimes wonder if in Australia we should have a Bill of Rights as well in order to further cement our ideals and values to stop Islamists or some other group trying to censor what we say. If anyone here has an opinion on this feel welcome to share it in the comments section.

Posted in Australian Politics, Europe, Islam, Islamism, Religion, Terrorism, U.S. Politics | Leave a Comment »

Israel ‘Ready To Return Golan’

Posted by Atilla89 on April 25, 2008

Great, why Olmert just why? Why would you give up a strategic peace of land for peace? Lets look at the situation realistically. Syria is no threat to Israel, hell if Syria even twitches we can move in and do what the fuck we want. As an example just think back to September 2007. I know I sound like a war monger dissing peace and all, but it makes no sense to give Syria the high ground (literally) and making them promise not to supply Hezbollah, etc. We know they are going to keep on doing it, We know that the Syrian public will PROBABLY never really accept Israel so why should we bother? Read the full story from the BBC here.

Israeli troops in the Golan observe Syria (archive)

On second thoughts, the giving up of the Golan will probably not help Olmert’s popularity at home. So, go for it Olmert and see how long you last.

Posted in Israel, Middle-East, Military, Syria | 2 Comments »

Happy Pesach and Chag Sameach!

Posted by Atilla89 on April 19, 2008

Just wishing everybody a happy Pesach and Chag Sameach! I am definitely looking forward to this Pesach as my mother will be making her trademark (and best) chocolate Matza’s as well as this, the Seder which I will be going to will have around 40 people! Before I leave, here’s the link for Michael Totten’s new post about the tribes in Iraq and how the Marines are trying to use them to contain a sustainable democracy.

Captain Jones and Mayor of Karmah.jpg

Captain Quintin Jones and Mayor Abu Abdullah

Also I leave you with another link to an article written by Margot Dudkevitch from Infolive.tv about the amount of weapons that are being smuggled into the Gaza Strip through the most interesting ways.

In recent months,  Iran has increased its efforts to smuggle weapons into the Gaza Strip via the sea and also tunnels between Egypt and Gaza, sending the Hamas and Islamic Jihad terror groups there not only weapons and rifles but advanced Iranian made rockets and mortar shells.

A report in the Jerusalem Post says that many of the weapons are too big to smuggle through the tunnels built underneath the Philadelphi Corridor linking Egypt and the Gaza Strip, and therefore resort to dropping them off the waters in Gaza in waterproof sealed tubes.

Posted in Hamas, Hizbullah, IDF, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Jews, Lebanon, Middle-East, Military, Palestine, Religion, Terrorism | 1 Comment »

Is Gaza Israel’s New Lebanon?

Posted by Atilla89 on April 17, 2008

No. I’m not talking about the current situation between Lebanon and Israel. I am talking about Lebanon pre-2000. When Hezbollah was easily Israel’s most dangerous foe at the time, as explored in the novel, Beaufort by Ron Leshem.

Infolive.tv has given a wonderful overview of the situation which you can view here.

Despite the fact that senior government officials have stated a number of times that it is only a matter of time before a large scale military operation will be launched in the Gaza Strip, Israel appears reluctant and instead opts to launch frequent limited incursions on the ground and rely on air force strikes, rather then a major ground offensive.

I’m pretty sure the reason why this is so is Shalit. The Knesset does’t want to endanger his life and lose whatever credibility it has left. However, leaving the problem to fester as Olmert is just plain wrong, the reasons of which I explored in this post.

In conversations with Israeli defense officials in recent months, there were those who supported continuing with the current IDF strategy, relying on small but frequent ground incursions and air strikes to do the job and eventually reap results. There were other officials who declared that after almost eight years of intifada, constant rocket attacks on Israeli communities in the South, it was time to act, and harshly. Time to make the terrorists pay. The method ? To issue warnings to residents in Gaza informing them that they have until the following day to leave their homes., and then bomb the neighborhoods and flatten them. Only then the officials said, will the Palestinians realize that Israel means business and if the terror continues there will be heavy and harsh price to pay.

I’ve always believed in destroying every part of Hamas. There can be simply no negotiation with them. All they seem to understand is force. Their version of a cease-fire with Israel is that of a Hudna, or a temporary cease-fire in which they can rearm and regroup. Right now, Hamas doesn’t give a damn about what might happen if they capture an Israeli solider because there will be no real consequence. Sure they may lose a few men, but who cares when they can ransom off their hostages for dozens of Palestinian prisoners in Isreal. This is just one of the reasons why I believe that Israel needs to act now in order to deter any future attacks.

As the violence in the South threatens to mar the Pessah holiday once again, perhaps Israel’s government echelon owes it to its citizens to take more decisive and determined action, and take the necssary steps once and for all, to protect its citizens and halt the terror.

So very true.

Posted in heroes, IDF, Israel, Middle-East, Palestine, Terrorism | 2 Comments »

Islamic Jihad Slams Carter For Statement “a big crime”

Posted by Atilla89 on April 16, 2008

I found this post on LGF and honestly I just started laughing my head off. Read the whole thing here.

GAZA, April 15 (Xinhua) — The Islamic Jihad (Holy War) movement in Gaza has slammed on Tuesday the statements of former U.S. president Jimmy Carter, after he termed the rockets attacks on Israel as “a big crime.”

I’m sorry but can you not even recognise your own allies? He’s trying to help you (for some stupid reason), you’re bashing him? I mean the man even layed a wreath at Arafat’s tomb!

Dawood Shihab, spokesman for the Islamic Jihad movement in Gaza, said in response that “Carter’s statement of describing resistance as a crime against humanity is in itself an overthrow on the morals of humanity.”

Now that’s just laughable. Carter made an understatement with his comment and now you’re trying to tell us its an “…overthrow on the morals of humanity”? Don’t make me laugh even more then I am now.

Posted in Hamas, Israel, Middle-East, Palestine, Terrorism, U.S. Politics | 2 Comments »

A Lecture With Ambassador Izzat Abdulhadi

Posted by Atilla89 on April 14, 2008

Today I attended a lecture at Sydney University by Ambassador Izzat Abdulhadi who is the head of the general delegation of Palestinians to Australia. All that basically means is that he is the representative of Abu Mazen to Australia (specifically Australasia).

He presented a brief summary of the conflict between the Israelis and Palestinians and talked about ways in which peace could come about. Before I go into detail about what he discussed and proposed, I want to say that that he presented the Palestinian cause quite well even though he made a few key mistakes in his facts which I will go through.

1. He believes that the Palestinians are the indigenous people to that area.

The sources that I will be using will be primary (probably all) from The Jewish Virtual Library (JVL). This source references all of its own sources which you can check yourself if you doubt what has been written. Interestingly, I can answer this myself. During a discussion in one of my lecture (Jewish Thought, Civilisation and Culture) we discussed the Palestinian claim to the land now known as Israel. We found that they mostly originated from the Philistines, a group of pagans that almost exclusively lived in an area now known as the Gaza Strip. There is no record of them living in now what is known as Modern Israel. JVL also has information on this subject.

Palestinian claims to be related to the Canaanites are a recent phenomenon and contrary to historical evidence. The Canaanites disappeared from the face of the earth three millennia ago, and no one knows if any of their descendants survived or, if they did, who they would be.

Sherif Hussein, the guardian of the Islamic Holy Places in Arabia, said the Palestinians’ ancestors had only been in the area for 1,000 years.9 Even the Palestinians themselves have acknowledged their association with the region came long after the Jews. In testimony before the Anglo-American Committee in 1946, for example, they claimed a connection to Palestine of more than 1,000 years, dating back no further than the conquest of Muhammad’s followers in the 7th century.10 And that claim is also dubious. Over the last 2,000 years, there have been massive invasions that killed off most of the local people (e.g., the Crusades), migrations, the plague, and other manmade or natural disasters. The entire local population was replaced many times over. During the British mandate alone, more than 100,000 Arabs emigrated from neighboring countries and are today considered Palestinians.

By contrast, no serious historian questions the more than 3,000-year-old Jewish connection to the Land of Israel, or the modern Jewish people’s relation to the ancient Hebrews.

Source: http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/myths/mf1.html#b1

2. He believes that Israel was a colonial project created in order to serve the super powers at the time, namely the UK and US.

Once again this is false as many of the resources that should have been available to help Jews resettle in Palestine/Israel were actually closed to them. Indeed, many Jews hated the imperialistic presence of the British and actually fought and died trying to drive them out of Palestine.

Moreover, as British historian Paul Johnson noted, Zionists were hardly tools of imperialists given the powers’ general opposition to their cause. “Everywhere in the West, the foreign offices, defense ministries and big business were against the Zionists.”29

Emir Faisal also saw the Zionist movement as a companion to the Arab nationalist movement, fighting against imperialism, as he explained in a letter to Harvard law professor and future Supreme Court Justice Felix Frankfurter on March 3, 1919, one day after Chaim Weizmann presented the Zionist case to the Paris conference. Faisal wrote:

The Arabs, especially the educated among us, look with deepest sympathy on the Zionist movement….We will wish the Jews a hearty welcome home….We are working together for a reformed and revised Near East and our two movements complete one another. The Jewish movement is nationalist and not imperialist. And there is room in Syria for us both. Indeed, I think that neither can be a real success without the other (emphasis added).30

“Our settlers do not come here as do the colonists from the Occident to have natives do their work for them; they themselves set their shoulders to the plow and they spend their strength and their blood to make the land fruitful. But it is not only for ourselves that we desire its fertility. The Jewish farmers have begun to teach their brothers, the Arab farmers, to cultivate the land more intensively; we desire to teach them further: together with them we want to cultivate the land — to ‘serve’ it, as the Hebrew has it. The more fertile this soil becomes, the more space there will be for us and for them. We have no desire to dispossess them: we want to live with them. We do not want to dominate them: we want to serve with them…..”

Martin Buber31

In the 1940s, the Jewish underground movements waged an anti-colonial war against the British. The Arabs, meanwhile, were concerned primarily with fighting the Jews rather than expelling the British imperialists.

Source: http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/myths/mf1.html#j

3. He believes that the 2nd Intifada was caused by Ariel Sharon’s visit to the Temple Mount.

This, frankly, is just crap. Regardless of whether it caused it or not (and it didn’t), an Israeli, Jewish Prime Minister should be able to visit the most holy site in Judaism without fear of being attacked. In fact it was Arafat’s intention all along for the violence to break out. The JVL explains the incident quite thoroughly; once again all these sources are listed at the bottom of the website for you to browse.

Imad Faluji, the Palestinian Authority Communications Minister, admitted months after Sharon’s visit that the violence had been planned in July, far in advance of Sharon’s “provocation.” “It [the uprising] had been planned since Chairman Arafat’s return from Camp David, when he turned the tables on the former U.S. president and rejected the American conditions.”18

“The Sharon visit did not cause the ‘Al-Aksa Intifada.’”

— Conclusion of the Mitchell Report, (May 4, 2001)19

The violence started before Sharon’s September 28, 2000, visit to the Temple Mount. The day before, for example, an Israeli soldier was killed at the Netzarim Junction. The next day in the West Bank city of Kalkilya, a Palestinian police officer working with Israeli police on a joint patrol opened fire and killed his Israeli counterpart.

Official Palestinian Authority media exhorted the Palestinians to violence. On September 29, the Voice of Palestine, the PA’s official radio station sent out calls “to all Palestinians to come and defend the al-Aksa mosque.” The PA closed its schools and bused Palestinian students to the Temple Mount to participate in the organised riots.

Just prior to Rosh Hashanah (September 30), the Jewish New Year, when hundreds of Israelis were worshipping at the Western Wall, thousands of Arabs began throwing bricks and rocks at Israeli police and Jewish worshippers. Rioting then spread to towns and villages throughout Israel, the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

Internal Security Minister Shlomo Ben-Ami permitted Sharon to go to the Temple Mount – Judaism’s holiest place – only after calling Palestinian security chief Jabril Rajoub and receiving his assurance that if Sharon did not enter the mosques, no problems would arise. The need to protect Sharon arose when Rajoub later said that the Palestinian police would do nothing to prevent violence during the visit.

Sharon did not attempt to enter any mosques and his 34 minute visit to the Temple Mount was conducted during normal hours when the area is open to tourists. Palestinian youths — eventually numbering around 1,500 — shouted slogans in an attempt to inflame the situation. Some 1,500 Israeli police were present at the scene to forestall violence.

Source: http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/myths/mf19.html#a1

4. He believes that the settlements in the West Bank and in East Jerusalem are a barrier to the peace process.

This line has been used by many an opponent to Israel, and once again is just not true. Just off the cuff I can rebuff that argument. Why, if the settlements were a barrier to peace, was there no peace before there were settlements? The settlement of the West Bank only happened AFTER the 6 day war. Why did the Arabs launch a war against Israel (Egypt blockading the straits of Tiran was an act of war) before there were settlements? The answer of course was that the settlements were never a barrier to the peace process.

Settlements have never been an obstacle to peace.

  • From 1949-67, when Jews were forbidden to live on the West Bank, the Arabs refused to make peace with Israel.
  • From 1967-77, the Labor Party established only a few strategic settlements in the territories, yet the Arabs were unwilling to negotiate peace with Israel.
  • In 1977, months after a Likud government committed to greater settlement activity took power, Egyptian President Sadat went to Jerusalem and later signed a peace treaty with Israel. Incidentally, Israeli settlements existed in the Sinai and those were removed as part of the agreement with Egypt.
  • One year later, Israel froze settlement building for three months, hoping the gesture would entice other Arabs to join the Camp David peace process. But none would.
  • In 1994, Jordan signed a peace agreement with Israel and settlements were not an issue. If anything, the number of Jews living in the territories was growing.
  • Between June 1992 and June 1996, under Labor-led governments, the Jewish population in the territories grew by approximately 50 percent. This rapid growth did not prevent the Palestinians from signing the Oslo accords in September 1993 or the Oslo 2 agreement in September 1995.
  • In 2000, Prime Minister Ehud Barak offered to dismantle dozens of settlement, but the Palestinians still would not agree to end the conflict.

Settlement activity may be a stimulus to peace because it forced the Palestinians and other Arabs to reconsider the view that time is on their side. References are frequently made in Arabic writings to how long it took to expel the Crusaders and how it might take a similar length of time to do the same to the Zionists. The growth in the Jewish population in the territories forced the Arabs to question this tenet. “The Palestinians now realize,” said Bethlehem Mayor Elias Freij, “that time is now on the side of Israel, which can build settlements and create facts, and that the only way out of this dilemma is face-to-face negotiations.”3

The disposition of settlements is a matter for the final status negotiations. The question of where the final border will be between Israel and a Palestinian entity will likely be influenced by the distribution of these Jewish towns. Israel wants to incorporate as many settlers as possible within its borders while the Palestinians want to expel all Jews from the territory they control.

If Israel withdraws toward the 1967 border unilaterally, or as part of a political settlement, many settlers will face one or more options: remain in the territories, expulsion from their homes, or voluntary resettlement in Israel. The impediment to peace is not the existence of those settlements, it is the Palestinians’ unwillingness to accept a state next to Israel instead of one replacing Israel.

Source: http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/myths/mf22a.html#b

Those were the main points that were discussed. Ambassador Abdulhadi did go into detail about the refugee issue saying that at the very least there needed to be some compensation (which I agreed with) and at most a a symbolic resettlement of maybe 100K Palestinians into Israel which I reject. At the end the Ambassador took questions from the audience, many of them were quite good, my question (which I didn’t get around to asking was this:

“You talked about Israel taking down the Wall and checkpoints in the West Bank yet these security measures have stopped at least 80% of terrorist attack into Israel. Why should Israel take down these measures if it is going to be attacked by the terrorists?”

Interestingly enough I actually managed to talk to him for about 15 minutes by myself and raised that point and his response was that if Israel did take down these measure and withdrew to the ’67 borders then negotiations for a viable Palestinian state and peace would be able to proceed. I rejected that saying that we had already offered a similar deal in 2000 at Camp David and we were turned down without a counter offer by Arafat. His response was that Arafat was weak and couldn’t take this offer because he was facing too much opposition from within.

Posted in Hamas, IDF, Israel, Jews, Middle-East, Palestine, Terrorism, UN | 4 Comments »

How Hamas Fuels Gaza ‘gas shortage’

Posted by Atilla89 on April 11, 2008

I found this article by Calev Ben-David in the Jerusalem Post just now and it articulated quite brilliantly what I was saying two posts back;

“…Israel allows food and aid materials into the Gaza Strip! Its a wierd situation, on one hand you have Hamas trying to kill Israelis, and Israel retaliating and on the other you have Israel actively sending in aid to help the Palestinians civilians.”

The article details the situation in the Gaza Strip where Hamas is effectively using and abusing their own citizens needs to gain sympathy from around the world.

This past Monday, gas stations in Gaza apparently decided to hold a “protest strike” in which they refused to sell fuel to the local populace. At the same time, a program on Hamas radio was broadcast urging Gazans to call in with suggestions for alternative means of transportation to cars and buses. Sure enough, the next day saw several news stories coming out of Gaza reporting on the “fuel crisis” there, focusing on the travails of ordinary Gazans due to “months of restricted Israeli fuel supplies.”

This sounds fairly normal for Gaza, no? However…

And then, on Wednesday, Gazan terror groups stage a carefully coordinated attack on the Nahal Oz fuel depot in which two Israeli civilian workers are killed.

If you want to see people acting with no logic, you need look no further then the Hamas government. On one hand they are being supplied fuel by their enemy and yet they still attack the very place where their supplies come from!

It is certainly a remarkable coincidence that an attack such as the one on the Nahal Oz depot – which must have taken weeks, if not months, of planning and preparation – should fall just two days after a seemingly spontaneous and independent strike by local gas station owners.

To me at least the most obvious reason for this is the one given below.

Another interpretation might conclude that just as with the “blackout” crisis last January, a deliberate aggravating of the fuel situation in Gaza was arranged by its Hamas rulers in the days leading up to the Nahal Oz attack, which itself naturally led to a temporary suspension of the fuel supplies.

Obviously the desired result of this tactic is to gain sympathy from around the world. It worked the first time, there’s no reason why it shouldn’t work this time. However, thankfully, some news agencies are not buying into Hamas’ plans.

China’s Xinhua news agency seemed to stray from the approved script this week in registering complaints by station owners that Hamas was taking a cut of the fuel supplies before releasing the rest to the general public.

“They seize the fuel to ensure that their cars will not stop and that [Hamas leader Ismail] Haniyeh’s convoy will continue to work,” one disgruntled driver told Xinhua, whose report also noticed that “instead of lining up for fuel supply, vehicles of Hamas police and security services bypass the long queues and go straight to the electric fuel pump.”

Certainly, the teams that continue to fire the Kassam rockets seem to have no problem finding gas for their vehicles – nor did the terrorists who were killed fleeing the scene of the Nahal Oz attack in a car that was successfully targeted by an Israel Air Force helicopter.

Read the whole article, its worth it.

Posted in Hamas, Israel, Middle-East, Palestine, Terrorism | Leave a Comment »

New UN Investigator Is A ‘Troofer’

Posted by Atilla89 on April 11, 2008

That fool Professor Falk who I was talking about in the previous post, has decided that the ‘neocons’ may have played a role 9/11. Yep, he’s that kind of guy; did I mention he was a fan of Ward Churchill? Hat tip to LGF, full article below can be found here.

A new U.N. Human Rights Council official assigned to monitor Israel is calling for an official commission to study the role neoconservatives may have played in the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.

Mr. Falk said, “It is possibly true that especially the neoconservatives thought there was a situation in the country and in the world where something had to happen to wake up the American people. Whether they are innocent about the contention that they made that something happen or not, I don’t think we can answer definitively at this point. All we can say is there is a lot of grounds for suspicion, there should be an official investigation of the sort the 9/11 commission did not engage in and that the failure to do these things is cheating the American people and in some sense the people of the world of a greater confidence in what really happened than they presently possess.”

https://i0.wp.com/orgs.sa.ucsb.edu/esl/pictures/richard_falk.jpg

I am not going to go into all these conspiracy theories and try and debunk them, you can check out Screw Loose Change for that. But seriously speaking, why in its inifinite wisdom did the UN send an official so obviously biased against Israel, who believes in nut-case conspiracy theories to try and make decision regarding human-rights abuse? Further in the above article former American Ambassador to the UN, John Bolton explains America’s position on this.

When asked for a comment about the appointment of Mr. Falk, a former American ambassador to the United Nations, John Bolton said, “This is exactly why we voted against the new human rights council.” A spokesman for the American embassy at the United Nations offered no comment yesterday when asked.

If there was any more doubt about Falk’s unsuitability to this position it can be summarised below.

In a February 16, 1979, op-ed for the New York Times, Mr. Falk praised Ayatollah Khomeini and bemoaned his ill treatment in the American press. He wrote, “The depiction of him as fanatical, reactionary and the bearer of crude prejudices seems certainly and happily false.” Nearly nine months later, student followers of Khomeini invaded the American embassy in Tehran and held 52 diplomats hostage for the following 444 days.

Obviously Israel is not too happy with this and has decided to deny him entry.

Richard Falk is scheduled to take up his post with the UN Human Rights Council in May, but the Foreign Ministry said it will deny Falk a visa to enter Israel, Gaza and the West Bank, at least until a September meeting of the council. At that meeting, Israel intends to ask the council to expand the envoy’s mission to include investigating Palestinian human rights abuses against Israelis.

An obvious and fair question, one any reasonable country would be expected to ask.

According to a Tuesday posting on the British Broadcasting Corporation’s Web site, Falk defended statements he made last summer equating Israel’s treatment of Palestinians with Nazi treatment of Jews during the Holocaust. He told BBC News that Israel has been unfairly shielded from international criticism.

Yeah… because Israel has never been bashed in the UN. Should I even be bothered to mention the countless of times the former Human Rights Council has gone after Israel? Or should I just mention Durban 1 and be done with it.

Posted in Antisemitism, Arabs, Israel, Middle-East, Palestine, Terrorism, U.S. Politics, UN | Leave a Comment »

Just Gotta Love The UN

Posted by Atilla89 on April 9, 2008

Sorry for the  delay, as usual the blame goes to not having enough time. The UN has once more decided to reinforce my conviction that they are an absolute pointless body which are either Antisemitic half the time, or just have plain double standards. In their latest round of screwing things up they have decided to send a new ‘UN Investigator’ to look into Israel’s conduct in the West Bank.

Professor Falk said he drew the comparison between the treatment of Palestinians with the Nazi record of collective atrocity, because of what he described as the massive Israeli punishment directed at the entire population of Gaza.

So basically he thinks it is wrong for the Israeli blockade of Gaza to continue. *Cue laughter now* I’m sure most of you that have read into the situation know that a blockade around Gaza is exactly what is needed. First you have Hamas desperately trying to get as much ammunition and materials to build weapons as possible into the Strip and secondly you have Hamas operatives trying to get into the Sinai in order to get into Israel through the lightly defended border (I have been to that border and all it is a wire fence patrolled by the IDF).

At the same time, Israel allows food and aid materials into the Gaza Strip! Its a wierd situation, on one hand you have Hamas trying to kill Israelis, and Israel retaliating and on the other you have Israel actively sending in aid to help the Palestinians civilians. Tell me, what semblance does that have to Nazi strategies of punishing (through killing) large numbers of civilians and homes intentially?  The answer is quite obviously very little.

This is nothing new, the UN bashes Israel plenty of times. As well as this however, the UN is adding insult to injury by not looking into the human rights violations made by the Palestinians (of which there are many.

A spokesman for the Israeli Foreign Ministry said that Israel wanted the UN investigator’s mandate changed, so that he could look into human rights violations by the Palestinians as well as Israel.

If that were not to happen, the Israeli government may consider barring entry to the new UN investigator.

Link for story here.

Posted in Arabs, Israel, Middle-East, UN | 1 Comment »