GAZA: ONE YEAR ON - Displaced and desperate in Gaza

One year has passed since the beginning of Operation Cast lead, Israel's 22-day military assault on the besieged Gaza Strip and suspended is a word that best describes daily life in the Strip; the internal reconciliation process, peace talks with Israel, and most importantly, reconstruction being halted until further notice.
...
According to a report issued by the UN Conference on Trade and Development, the damage to the civilian infrastructure after the war equals four times the size of the Gaza economy.
...
"Before the war we thought it could not get any worse. But despite the siege, things weren't as bleak as they are now. You really can go downhill from rock bottom. At most only 10 truckloads of produce are allowed in through the Israeli controlled crossings," he says. This is compared to 70 truckloads during the two year blockade preceding the war on Gaza; already only 25 per cent of the amount required to meet the needs of the population.
...
Nabil Shakshak, a schoolteacher and father of three, lives only metres away from a sewage lake, created as a temporary holding place for the neighbourhood's waste water until reconstruction of a waste water treatment plant can begin. "This is a health and environment hazard," he says. "My children are constantly sick, the ground, air and water we drink is contaminated. What we don't understand is that the resources, the funding, the workers, the skill, it's all there. We're dying a slow death because Israel chooses to say no repairs can be made. Someone explain this to my children."

http://english.aljazeera.net/focus/gazaoneyearon/2009/12/20091230113310410824.html">AJE link

The Palestinians, of course, have no choices. Poor innocent victims of cruel Jews.

The kindly Egyptians should simply open their borders and all will be well.

the last line in article says it quite well

Many also believe that until the international community actively takes a stand against Israel's collective punishment measures, Israel will never allow the rebuilding process to begin.

I do not believe Israel will ever allow this either

says so right here...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=124x297957






ETA

Amira Hass wrote the following about how the 100 free-gaza activists were treated once in Gaza...
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1141085.html

No women marchers, no talking to ordinary Gazans, Hamas only wanted the activists to see what Hamas wanted them to see, etc.

What was Hamas trying to hide?

He seems here to be criticizing a *particular* group of protesters for (in his view) giving too much support to Hamas. This doesn't mean that he supports the blockade.

...which will set peace backwards and pretty much guarantee a miserable existence for Gazans.

He says so in the part of his article that I quoted and blames Hamas for Gazans' continue misery one year after OCL. Whether it's those in FGM who deliberately want to empower Hamas or useful idiots among them who don't know better, the end result is the same (empowering Hamas and not opposing them is very bad for the cause of peace and human rights).

Hanania cannot come right out and say he's opposed to lifting the blockade or that he supports the blockade, but he knows what would result if the blockade were lifted and he is definitely against that.

I think he's saying:

(1) that Hamas' actions will make it less likely that Israel will lift the blockade (thus being counterproductive in the immediate term)

(2) that Hamas are a bad government, who are harmful to Palestinians, should not be supported, and share a lot of blame for Palestinians' problems: you can't put all the blame on Israel or on other outsiders.

To go from this to assuming that he must support the blockade, but just doesn't quite dare to say so, is making a leap that I think is unfair to him. It's rather like saying that an American who regards Bush as harmful to America must thereby wish America to suffer harm or defeat.

He also blames Hamas for Gazans suffering now - as though Hamas can do much more to alleviate Palestinian suffering in Gaza....it's just they choose not to.

So I believe what he saying is "what would lifting the blockade accomplish WRT Gazan suffering that Hamas cannot act on now"? Hamas thrives on Palestinians suffering. Hamas gets all they want through the tunnels. What's in it for Hamas if Gazans benefit and get too fat and happy? Happy and fat Gazans living decently are less likely to want to go to war for Hamas. Besides, Hamas likes it when the people are dependent on Hamas for aid, help, food, etc. That's how they remain popular.

As I've always said on the board: I support their basic goals, but would not currently feel able to support them actively as an organization, e.g. by donations, because I feel that they don't vet their members sufficiently. Some are great, idealistic people for whom I have nothing but admiration. But a few really are pro-Hamas/pro-Jihad (e.g. Yvonne Ridley) and far-RW xenophobic-isolationists have been given too much of a platform (any is too much!) in the past.

Hanania may have all kinds of reservations about them, and may feel that they are too pro-Hamas, without necessarily supporting the blockade.

Your argument reminds me a bit of someone saying: 'X is against terrorism? - Then why doesn't he support Giuliani?'

You read Hanania's latest article.

You think he wants Hamas empowered and legitimized, which would only destroy the peace process and extend Palestinian suffering? How can he be "for" lifting the blockade when the result will be a strengthened and more entrenched Hamas?

You don't think Hanania realizes Hamas can end Gazan suffering now without any changes WRT the blockade?

You don't believe Hamas thrives on Palestinian suffering?

Further, how will lifting the blockade definitely help Palestinians in Gaza? Be specific, okay?

but continuing the blockade will certainly harm people.

Also: I feel very uncomfortable about any argument that implies that harsh treatment of your 'enemy' is really doing them a favour. You may feel that blockading Gaza is necessary for Israeli self-defense. I disagree, and think that it in fact increases Palestinians' support for hardline groups such as Hamas. But it is an argument that can be made. However, you cannot treat it as a *pro-Palestinian* action.

Punishing people for voting for/ supporting the wrong party is in general a wrong and counterproductive action IMO. It is of course the sort of action which Hamas themselves perpetrate regularly - but this does not justify it; and certainly does not justify regarding it as for the Palestinians' own good.

At any rate, the point here is not so much what I think, as what Hanania thinks. And I see no evidence that he supports the blockade and plenty of evidence that he does not. Opposing Hamas does not mean supporting the blockade, any more than opposing the Iraq war (and perhaps pointing out that it contributes to anti-American sentiment and actions in the world) means supporting violence against, or even economic sabotage, against America or Britain.

I don't think it is a valid argument to say that Hanania supports the blockade, but 'cannot come out and say it' (and the suggestion puts him in an unfairly bad light). After all, Hanania does not live in Gaza; he lives in America, and can say what he wants about Hamas. He has already burnt all his boats as regards being popular with Hamas supporters - so if he wanted to express such views, he could and would. I think that you sometimes confuse Israeli and Jewish ultra-peaceniks' opposition to their government's actions with actually wishing for harsh and harmful treatment of Israel - and I think you're doing the same here with regard to Hanania with regard to Palestine.

...as I don't have the time or determination to debate these issues. I'm taking a break for and will only post articles.

Hanania is stuck between a rock and hard place. He's pro-Fatah, which means anything that strengthens Hamas, Ray is against, just like Abbas and his gang is against Hamas. Hanania knows full well what Hamas did to Fatah in 2007, during OCL, etc... and therefore he will never be a strong advocate of stopping the blockade, as that will only help Hamas. The one thing we can all count on is Fatah's hate for Hamas, and vice-versa. Their self-interests come #1 - it always has - and I assure you Fatah does not want Hamas empowered due to a lifting of the blockade, even if it's at the expense of the Palestinian people (and we know PA/Hamas leadership uses them as their pawns). That's not to say Hanania is just like Abbas but he has his priorities. I still think he's the best hope Palestinians have for leadership.

I don't personally buy anyone's sympathy for blockaded Gazans when they have zero to say about Egypt's blockade. Point me to groups or organizations who are, and have been since 2007, equally critical of both Egypt and Israel for the blockade or else let's agree this is nothing more than Israel bashing. Egypt just recently put a ban on all aid entering Gaza and there's barely been a peep in response to this "outrage". That's telling, don't you think? Certainly no one here has voiced any concern. No venting of spleens here WRT Egypt's "imprisonment and starvation of innocent Palestinians". We both know what's really going on. Add to that "pro-Palestinian" advocates who can't be bothered with Hamas Islamist rule and sharia law in Gaza (the antithesis of human rights), Hamas on Fatah violence, the use of human shields...it's damned difficult to find even a handful of good liberal "pro-Palestinians" who truly care about the situation and have their hearts in the right place.

You can have the last word as I'm now limiting myself to posting articles.

you said that he opposed the lifting of the blockade. I once listened to Hanania speaking in Detroit to a small audience. I even saw his goddawful comedy act when he was on tour once (please, no more airport jokes from Arab comedians). I have a fair appreciation for what his views are.

He does not support the blockade of Gaza. I have noted your propensity for misrepresenting sources before (such as for example when you claimed that George Mitchell said that the settlements were legal). It is one of the reasons you are increasingly being seen as beyond the pale by even the relatively pro-Israel people on this board.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=124&topic_id=297251&mesg_id=297882

George Mitchell never claimed settlements are illegal, as you do. That's what I agreed with. Find where I claimed he stated they were legal. And btw, I love how you label almost all Israel's Labour party and leftists as "rightwing". Ironic how you bring up 'beyond the pale'.

You can have the last word.

It's right there in the post you linked to. You said: 'George Mitchell just recently stated a week ago that E.Jerusalem settlement is not illegal....' and then posted a quote from him that said nothing of the sort...

btw, I never saw that thread when I had you on ignore, so belated kudos to Shaay for being so patient in the face of such unrelentingly silly RW dribble :)

the discussion away from the facts and reality into a discussion of of the irrelevant non sequiturs being posted as if "in reply" to the OP.

The article was about facts like the following, not that creature's opinions:

"But despite ingenuity in dealing with the challenges posed by the continued blockade, Israel's war on the Strip, resulted in billions of dollars worth of damage to the civilian infrastructure, which was already suffering major breakdowns following a two year blockade before the war.

"One year later, electricity, water and sanitation systems not only fall short of providing the residents of the Strip with the minimum supply required for each household, but are also on the verge of collapse.

"One fifth of the Gaza shore is polluted due to improper disposal of waste water into the sea. The waste water system sustained extensive during the war, and one year later there have been no repairs or maintenance."

Same source as in the OP.

it suits their purpose."

-Ray Hanania (candidate for next Palestinian President)

=========

Maybe Hanania is a "conliar" in your book. :eyes:

Why you describe him as if he were a serious political figure in Palestinian politics is obvious. He says stupid things and apparently wants to promote further conflict between the PA and Hamas.

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ray_Hanania -->
----------------
Ray Hanania (b. Chicago, Illinois, 1953) is an Arab-American journalist also known for his stand-up comedy. Hanania writes a syndicated column with a particular focus on the Middle East, and after the September 11 attacks, created a comedy act with the hope of defusing mutual suspicion.

Hanania's parents are Palestinian immigrants. His mother is from Bethlehem; his father, George John Hanania, from a prominent Christian family in Jerusalem, served with the U.S. Army during World War II and with the Office of Strategic Services (OSS), the predecessor of the CIA. He himself served with the U.S. Air Force during the Vietnam War and in the Illinois Air National Guard. Hanania's wife, Alison, is Jewish; they live in Orland Park, Illinois.
----------------

Of course, none of your irrelevant and diversionary comments can negate the fact Israel is operating the siege and its policy is one of of committing mass destruction, mass killings and maiming, destruction of the social and material infrastructure, blockading if rebuilding supplies, collective punishment, starvation of the imprisoned population and so on, ad nauseam. Speculation about whether Hamas would rebuild is just blather, since the monstrous policy of those who control the movement of supplies is to make that test impossible.

Hamas got its votes by providing social services to a besieged population, after being nurtured by the IDF as a way to foster internal divisions within the Palestinian resistance movements.

Rather comparable to the US support for crazed religionists in Afghanistan that ended up putting the Taliban in power there and turning bin Laden into a cult hero among some. Then the warmongering, greedy jackass cowards who had taken control of the US state apparatus chose to elevate al Qaeda to the status of a significant other, thus guaranteeing more support and prolonged conflict and more fear, power and profits.

You would see the same process and dynamic taking place in both Israel and in Palestine, if you looked.

(edit one missed key)

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

No response to the facts, just more of the usual personal attacks and false accusations.

I don't agree with your characterization of EI as hateful and racist any more than I agree with your characterizations of most humanitarian, peace and social justice organizations or people like Mandela, Carter, Tutu, Goldstone, etcetera and so on as bigots and haters. Your habit of screaming, name-calling and hurling epithets at everyone who suggests that Palestinians are as human as Israelis really only corroborates what most here already know.

And, although I haven't yet posted anything from EI, as you falsely claim and as anyone who clicks that link can see (someone a few years ago asked for a link to a talk show guest which I provided - here's the link to the whole thread http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x243796 ), I would post from it if I happened to find something there I thought instructive and worth sharing. It's been a long time since I looked at it, but I'll take your comments as a recommendation. I've bookmarked it and will check it out in the future.

So far as I have seen, you are the only one here who regularly posts from sites operated for and by bigots and racists.

I disagree with Shira more often than not; but she has NEVER suggested that Palestinians or any other group are 'not human'; so that is in itself a personal attack and false accusation.

I do not think that anyone here 'regularly posts from sites operated for and by bigots and racists'; but it does sometimes happen, from all sides. E.g. IfAmericansKnew. Usually posts that reference such sites are deleted, so you may not get to see them.

as equal in value to one Palestinian life. Or are equally human and entitled to the same rights and treatment and food and housing and health care by the occupying authority. I tried with a couple and both refused. Instead they will argue that the Geneva Conventions and Nuremburg precedents and UN Resolutions are irrelevant. State policy puts the ratio at 500-1000 to one, and they support that position. They support collective punishment of Palestinians, travel restrictions, mass killings, and the whole pattern of vicious and brutal oppression of the Palestinians. But if anything close were being done to Israeli inhabitants of that region they would rightly and justly do everything in their power to resist and I would be with them.

Those actions should be denounced as inhumane by everyone, no matter who does them. But there are those, the rightists in the US and everywhere else, whose philosophy is much different: "If we do it, it's just and righteous and even holy." No matter what it is.

That point of view has been common in the US for, well, probably a century or three. GB as well. I am pretty asure you have seen it. And every where else for far longer. It is a supremacist view, wherever it is found, and it is evil and ultimately destructive of the society that allows that cancer to grow and further mestasticize.

As for the bloggers' sites being constantly cited as if they meant anything, well, check them out more carefully.

I support their goals, but don't agree with the methods used...