Israel forces raid Ramallah (BBC)

Full article: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6231439.stm

From Reuters...


Full article: http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L04425452.htm

Full article: http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070104/wl_mideast_afp/mideastconflict_070104154812

I'm curious how that procedure works, how long it takes, whether they have lawyers or if it's pushed through quickly, how their sentences compare to that or other crimes in Israel.

Instead of it being a segregated semi-theocracy.

Due process ? thats only for Israeli citizens.

n/t

There is a difference between hating Israeli occupation and hating Jews. You do understand that, yes?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=124&topic_id=161786&mesg_id=161954

...as I wasn't talking about the land, but the action.

Occupying the West Bank, or some other action? Because you were flat out denying that there is an
occupation, yesterday, & now there *is* an occupation? Which is it?

Why is it so difficult to be consistent, or to not keep changing one's pov, or to accurately reflect
what one is being told? Why produce such absurdities as "that has nothing to do with what was said",
when the comments from yesterday are clearly, & obviously, related to today's volte-face?

The action of preaching hate. I never denied there was an occupation, that is your own twisted take on it. So, i have been consistent. But since you are having such problems with this very simple concept....The Israelis occupy the disputed territory of the West Bank. The land is BOTH disputed AND occupied. Does that help your confusion?

The person I was responding to, before your odd segue, was sarcastically talking about Imans preaching hate. To which I responded that there was a difference between hating the Israeli occupation and hating Jews. Now, you come along and make it about something else. A classic case of strawman misdirection.

Again, why is it so difficult to accurately reflect what was previously said, or not fabricate what
was previously said? Because the very clear intention in that linked thread was to argue against the
idea that there even *is* an occupation, as the phrase "disputed territories" was used, & there was
no recognition of the reality that the disputed claim is propaganda.

And, as I said before, if there's one poster who really, really, *really* shouldn't accuse people of
being confused, or of having problems with concepts, or of posting odd segues, or of using strawmen
arguments, or of only ever being consistent....
Because those insults & false claims say more about the person fabricating the claims than whomever
they're aimed at.

Perhaps you should try understanding nuance.

Which is why I suggested stopping posting them, & comprehending what was said previously. Although
"mis-truths" isn't even an actual word. More literacy-based difficulties?

*Again*, I would suggest that if there is anyone who really, really, really, really, shouldn't
accuse people of not understanding nuance, or of repeatedly failing to tell the difference between
truth, & lies....

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

It's the language of the right wing, just like homicide bomber is. The fact is that the West Bank is no more disputed than occupied East Timor was. The international community does not recognise any claim to the territory by Israel as being legal, and I'd have to wonder why any left wingers would be claiming that Israel has some legitimate claim to the West Bank...

State officials furious at IDF, Shin Bet for failing to report Ramallah operation in which six Palestinians were killed. Botched arrest attempt damaged PM's meeting with Egyptian President. Army says operation was necessary routine operation

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3348569,00.html

<snip>

"Senior state officials attacked the IDF and Shin Bet Thursday evening after a botched arrest attempt in Ramallah led to the deaths of six Palestinian.

The operation was carried out a mere hour before the meeting between Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak in Sharm el-Sheikh and caused considerable embarrassment.

The joint press conference held by Olmert and Mubarak was also tense and both leaders commented on the operation – Mubarak condemned it and Olmert apologized.

State officials told Ynet Thursday evening that Head of the Central Command, Maj. Gen. Yair Naveh did not update the Minister of Defense or political echelon about the army's intention to carry out an operation in central Ramallah on a crucial political day.

"Naveh carried out the operation without informing the necessary levels and did something very grave."

It is not just in comedy that timing is everything....

The very public destruction of the centre of Ramallah (the hq of what remains of the PA), & the
timing of the raid would support that analysis.

Abbas condemns Ramallah raid

Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas harshly condemned the Ramallah raid Thursday, saying it "proved that the Israeli calls for peace and security are fake."

Abbas demanded that Israel pay the Palestinian Authority $5 million in compensation for the damage to shops and cars in Ramallah.

The raid came less than two weeks after Prime Minister Ehud Olmert met
Abbas and promised a package of measures to ease restrictions between the two sides.

Four Palestinians were killed and 20 wounded on Thursday when
IDF undercover troops entered the West Bank town of Ramallah on an arrest raid, setting off protests and gunbattles in the center of town.

During a joint press conference with Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak in Sharm el-Sheikh, Olmert apologized for the deaths of civilians, but defended Israel's incursion as an operation aimed at stopping terrorists responsible for the death of Israeli citizens.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/809619.html

On edit;

add this article from Haaretz writer;

The IDF and the state/ Military law is back

By Yossi Sarid

>snip

The one dubbed prime minister, Ehud Olmert, goes to meet Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak. The two had planned to discuss advancing the talks with Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas.

Perhaps a summit will be held soon, perhaps at last there will be a prisoner exchange deal and even Gilad Shalit will be released.

And lo, at precisely the same time - not a day earlier or later - IDF soldiers and Shin Bet Secret Service men raid Ramallah, Palestine's temporary capital. What calculated timing, what a perfect coincidence: While you, Olmert, try to get the chestnuts out of the fire, the army will light up such a bonfire that will leave you nothing but burned cinders of chestnuts.

The army will make sure there is a suitable background decor for the meeting at Sharm el-Sheikh - blood, fire and smoke. It will plant an explosive charge right under your padded armchairs. You can count on the IDF and its tricks.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/809800.html

I will never forget this one. A young woman (about 26, she was aware she was not so young anymore) who was tellin me what curfew meant, when it went on for weeks at a time, with the Israeli's allowing, out of the goodness of their hearts, small breaks. During these small breaks from the curfew, most people took care of necessities... they went to buy bread, visit doctors, and so on. This young woman made sure she did something else. she had her hair done. People need beauty and art and more, more than just "essentials".

She told me "we aren't just dogs that just need food and water! We are people, we need more than that"

As we come marching, marching, we battle too for men,
For they are women's children, and we mother them again.
Our lives shall not be sweated from birth until life closes;
Hearts starve as well as bodies; give us bread, but give us roses!
Bread and Roses lyrics

I hope that she is not among the dead, or not her loved ones. But it was someone loved ones who died today.

Hurriyya!

They can be found most anywhere....

Not just anywhere. Many places perhaps, but not just anywhere.
Columbia.
Haiti.
Palestine.
Lebanon.
Iraq.

I know for some people, these things are not important. It is not good to bring these issues up, it might hurt the Democratic Party. That is all that matters for some.

I dissent.

Wholly unconcerned by the electoral prospects of the Democratic party in the United States?

Political parties come after that. Their value is only in their usefulness in achieving desirable ends.

I would also say, that there may be times to separate oneself completely with not only parties, but governments.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.....That whenever any Form of Government (or political party, for that matter) becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

Political parties and even governments are mere tools, they are not the ends.

I know i am admitting to being a heretic in the eyes of some people. Democratic Party fundamentalists will eat me alive for such talk.

so be it.

It takes a hell of a lot of stretching to turn Tom's comment: 'It is not good to bring these issues up, it might hurt the Democratic Party. That is all that matters for some.' into a question about him being 'Wholly unconcerned by the electoral prospects of the Democratic party in the United States?' Here's my 0.02 cents worth on blind support of any political party. It's destructive and it leads down the path where internal criticism which any party needs to be healthy is quashed. While I'm obviously not a Democrat, I am a long-time Labor voter, and instead of blindly embracing everything they say and every policy they come out with, I actually think about what it is that they're asking me to vote for. And for the first time last election they had a policy about asylum seekers that was so disgusting to me that I chose not to vote for them and to not be backwards in coming forwards with my criticism of the party and what I see as its path to self-destruction. Change comes from within and if people are bullied and yelled down when they offer up criticism, and people are expected to support everything the party promotes, then it starts to bear a resemblance to the behaviour of people when fascism ruled in parts of Europe...

My only question is, is it good for the Democratic Party?

...in obvious dipshittery?