129 thoughts on “Terror Attack on Eilat, 8 Israeli and 6 Gazan Dead – Tikun Olam תיקון עולם إصلاح العالم
Comments are published at the sole discretion of the owner.

  1. i alway thought Palestinian atrocities are a reactive response to Israeli terror.the big difference between the two is that Palestinian terror, which hasn’t even come close to zionist terror, is in the service of what the world regards as a legitimate purpose, the ending of a military occupation.Israeli atrocities are in the service of a illegitimate purpose.

    1. @Sass
      “i alway thought Palestinian atrocities are a reactive response to Israeli terror.the big difference between the two is that Palestinian terror, which hasn’t even come close to zionist terror, is in the service of what the world regards as a legitimate purpose, the ending of a military occupation.Israeli atrocities are in the service of a illegitimate purpose.”

      No, the big difference is that the Palestinians almost invariably target unarmed civilians, whereas the Israeli response may, unfortunately, also wound or kill civilians, but does not deliberately target them. One can legitimately argue that Israel should return to the old “purity of arms” doctrine, which dictated Israeli actions against terrorists in the past, and which negated action against terrorists when this would lead also to civilian casualties, but there is still a difference between killing civilians because that is the only way to get at the terrorists hiding out amongst them (which is the Israeli way) and deliberately attacking civilian buses (including school buses), which is the Palestinian/Arab way.

      1. the Palestinians almost invariably target unarmed civilians

        Gee, this incident proves you wrong. The very first target was a bus filled with IDF soldiers and two of the dead were soldiers. If you’re wrong about this what else are you wrong about? Or should I say, what else are you RIGHT about??

        the Israeli response may, unfortunately, also wound or kill civilians, but does not deliberately target them.

        That’s a lie. The IDF knew Shalah Shehadeh’s apt. bldg. contained civilians who would be killed & they bombed it anyway because previous assassination attempts had failed. That resulted in 17 civilian deaths including children, elderly & women. In this current attack the IDF bombed a house containing a 3 yr old child. That was also no accident.

        One can legitimately argue that Israel should return to the old “purity of arms” doctrine

        Nonsense, Barak claims the IDF still observes the purity of arms. But you’re both full of it. A country likely guilt of war crimes can’t suddenly turn into a beacon of moral probity.

        You’re don’t even know how foolish you sound. Yr starry eyed liberal idealism resonated in 1968, but you’re a day (or a few decades) late & a few dollars short.

        1. Gee You are wrong.
          The very first target was a civilian bus. This bus, as part of his routine brings soldier aboard to, but it is not used explicitly by the army, and had civilian aboard at the time it was attacked.

          12:09 The terrorist attack an Egged bus, 14 wounded.
          12:10 The terrorist fire at two civilian cars and a suicide bomber detonate himself next to another bus.
          the terrorist are able to kill 4 passengers in one car, another in the second car (the wife survived) and the bus driver next to they exploded.
          12:10 The terrorist fire an anti-tank missile towards an IAF helicopter but miss.
          12:15 IDF soldiers attack the terrorists, Kill 7. during the attack an IDF soldier dies.
          18:40 During a briefing given by Ganz & Barak, someone opens fire from the Egyptian side of the border, and kills another soldier.

          You accounting of the event is wrong, the terrorists targeted civilians, like they always do. the fact that you try to claim they attacked soldiers is based on your biased and ignorance.

        2. From a moral POV your position seems to be very problematic. What you are arguing in essence is that anders breivik could have gained immunity from harm by Norwegian police, thus allowing him to plane further attacks on Norwegian people, AS LONG AS HE WHOLD BE CARFULL TO CARRY A TODLER AROUND WITH HIM.

          To me this position is deeply reprehensible. A moral person should eliminate the evildoer, even if this will harm some innocents, in order to prevent the greater evil of allowing more atrocities to be committed.

        3. richards:

          The Palestinians fired an anti-tank missile directly at a car killing all occupants (2 middle aged couples). Where they also military targets?

          How about the kornet laser rocket fired from GAZA a couple of weeks ago at a children school bus killing a 15 year old boy. Was that also a military target?

          Regardless of our political differences i cannot understand how a peace loving liberal of reasonable intelligence such as you can actually swallow any of this moronic terror apologetics.

          To me it seems plain weird.

          1. Regardless of our political differences i cannot understand how a peace loving liberal of reasonable intelligence such as you can actually swallow any of this moronic terror apologetics.

            Any government that refuses to ratify the 1st Additional Protocol and uses reprisals is, by definition, a state that engages in apologetics for its own illegal acts. Read the definition of reprisals in the US commanders handbook and the discussion at this link:


        4. I forgot to mention
          that the second solider who died, died from shots that were fired from the Egyptian side of the border.

          And that testimonies from the brother of one of people who were killed, said that the terrorists executed all the people in the car with a bullet to their heads.

          Israel should increase Target killings in the Gaza strip and should apply pressure on those Terrorists. If the Fatah can’t impose it’s authority despite the unity deal with Hamas, then Hamas should be targeted as well. Constant pressure is the only way.

          1. Hey namesake,

            from your logic it follows that the Palestinians should increase killings of Israelis, whom they consider terrorists, and should apply pressure on Israel. If Likud doesn’t want to negotiate any meaningful peace deal with the Palestinians, than Likud should be targetted as well. Constant pressure is the only way. The absurdity of this approach is so obvious that it doesn’t warrant further explanation. It will either lead to the permanent state of war (which is what we have today) or to the annihilation of one or both of the two nations.

        5. Sorry i forgot the link

          By the way Richard, if you do not see a difference between civilians that are being killed because the terrorist hide among them – which makes them responsible for the death of those civilians even by the Geneva Conventions – And civilians that are being killed because they were the primary target of the attack, i suggest you will go to the nearest eye doctor, as you have severe vision problems.

      2. “Not targeting civilians” has proven far more effective at terroring and killings civilians for Israeli terrorists than “targeting civilians” has for the Palestinian people and other Arab peoples defending their homeland. “Not targeting civilians” by using the (precision?) power of a modern army in civilian environments is far more deadly for civilians than a homemade rocket. What is the meaning of this fine discrimination anyway? Do you separate the good guys from the bad guys based upon their claimed intentions, what their spokespeople say? Why not look instead at the results? Or are you saying that the Palestinians are responsible for their civilian losses because their freedom fighters deliberate hid among these civilians? Sure, “Cast Lead” was forced upon the Israeli bandits and they had no choice.

    2. As an Israeli whose country was just attacked on a route passed by 100,000s each summer, I have to disagree with your saying about the illegitimacy of the Israeli response!

      1. You think killing children is going to solve anything? Will it make you feel better, sleep easier at night? And you think that there won’t be another attack just like this one in one month or six? And you’re prepared to absorb this endless suffering ad infinitum & ad nauseam?? If so, you illustrate the defintion of insanity: someone who continues a behavior after it fails miserably in the belief that doing so again will lead to success.

  2. Well, the Israelis were quick to fine the responsibles, weren’t they ?
    According to what I’ve heard the attackers came from Egypt, and might not be Palestinians. At least I’m sure Khaled Shaath’s two years old son, Malek, was not among the ‘terrorists’.

  3. Such Israeli actions are called ‘reprisals’ and the word still has a very chilling ring for Europeans who remember the German occupation during WW2.

    1. Elisabeth-

      Reprisals are aimed at random victims for the purpose of spreading terror.

      Israeli response was aimed specifically at the masterminds behind this attack, thus preventing them from committing further attacks. If you want to compare this to WWII then it is identical to allied attacks on Nazi leadership.

      1. @ “jubran” though it bothers me to see an Israel apologetic usurping the name of one of the greatest Arab writers.
        “Reprisals are aimed at random victims for the purpose of spreading terror”
        That’s exactly what the Goldstone report stated about Cast Lead !

      2. We do not even know yet who the groups behind these attacks are but the same night Israel attacks and kills a two year old. (A mastermind?)

        These ARE reprisals, don’t you get it?: Wake up and stop fooling yourself if you want to be counted on the right side of history by your grandchildren one day.

        Even equalling an attack on the real masterminds behind these attacks with “the Nazi leadership” is ludicrous: The Nazi’s were masters in their own land an targeted a minority.

        The Palestinians are more like the desperate Indians who struck out at the Minnesota Massacre.

      3. That would be true if Hitler was a 3 yr old boy. Of the 14 Gazans killed so far, 3 were children. Is this what the phrase “targeted killing” means? Target children for death? After all, YOU claim that the Israeli response was carefully targeted, right?

    1. Leonid, I read Vicky’s account too earlier, and agree with you so completely when you write “This is how I (AT LEAST MY BETTER SELF) also feel.”

      I do try to maintain that feeling because I know that Vicky is right, but I sometimes find it hard.

    1. Likewise. If only people like her were making the decisions on both sides… Is it a coincidence that she’s a woman? I’ve often wondered whether having too many men in charge is part of the problem.

  4. Silverstein says: “Gee, this incident proves you wrong. The very first target was a bus filled with IDF soldiers and two of the dead were soldiers.”

    No, it was a regular scheduled Egged bus, carrying passengers to the holiday town of Eilat. The 2 dead soldiers killed in the terrorist attacks were, in fact, ONE soldier killed later in the exchange of fire that occurred after IDF forces were rushed to the area, and one Border Policeman from the anti-terrorist unit, killed when the terrorists (or possibly, the Egyptians) opened fire from the Egyptian side of the border. They weren’t on the bus (or rather, buses). So, Richard dear, when you made this false claim, was that a deliberate lie on your part, or was it merely your usual lazy, slapdash research – or lack thereof?

    “That’s a lie. The IDF knew Shalah Shehadeh’s apt. bldg. contained civilians who would be killed & they bombed it anyway because previous assassination attempts had failed”

    That merely proves my point. When IDF attacks result in civilian casualties, it is because there is no other way to get at the terrorists, who hide out among civilians. The Palestinian terrorists, on the other hand, deliberately attack civilian targets, knowing there are no military targets in the vicinity, simply in order to kill as many Israelis as possible.

    1. Simone when Israel disagrees with customary norms of international law, it simply ignores them and does whatever it pleases.

      Every time it kills or injures innocent Palestinians, the Palestinian militias can take reprisals against Israeli enemy armed forces, enemy civilians (other than those in occupied territory), and enemy property.

      Here is what the US Commander’s Handbook on the Law of Naval Operations (2007) says about Reprisal (6.2.4):

      A belligerent reprisal is an enforcement measure under the law of armed conflict consisting of an act that would otherwise be unlawful but which is justified as a response to the previous unlawful acts of an enemy. The sole purpose of a reprisal is to induce the enemy to cease its illegal activity and to comply with the law of armed conflict in the future.
      Reprisals may be taken against enemy armed forces, enemy civilians other than those in occupied territory, and enemy property.

      1. Thank you, Haver for being around. I was trying to find some readable stuff for laymen like me AND Simone on the distinction between combattants and non-combattants.

    2. “When IDF attacks result in civilian casualties… behind among civilians… blahblahblah”
      Brainwashed, totally brainwashed crap. Like a parrot.
      When the IDF dropped a bomb on Salah Shehadeh’s house and killed 9 children, and blew up the whole neighbourhood they were targeting civilians according to international law which is NOT decided by Israel, and killing Shehadeh during his sleep was not killing a combattant.
      Following your logic: according to the Palestinians, Israeli soldiers are terrorists (participating in State terrorism), and targeting one of them thus justifies killing civilians, as they hide among the civilians. With your screwed ‘logic’, all Israeli men are military targets as they serve in the army on an annual basis.
      Maybe you should read about the distinction between combattants and non-combattants.

      As far as I’m concerned, the bombing of Gaza is a ‘pogrom’: wasn’t a pogrom raiding the nearest Jewish shtetl everytime something happened, blaming the Jews ? I haven’t heard anything convincing showing that this was Palestinians (Hamas and PCR have both denied any participation, and they always revendicate their actions) and it reminds me of what I heard last week in the Real News by Lia Tarachansky:
      ” Many are speculating in Israel that the PM will attempt to squash the growing movement by starting a military assault on Gaza”
      from min 7:45
      That attack in Eilat surely was convenient. No use to look into who did it. And that phonecall from Jordan shortly before the attack is rather odd for a Palestinian action.

      By the way, the 17 years old boy who was killed on Tuesday by 10 live bullets, most in his head, in Gaza, was mentally disabled and was of NO danger to Israel:

      1. After reading all this crap, especially from Simone and Jubran, I have been hesitating to express my opinion. But now Deir Yassen gives me an opening. From the beginning of this news, I have suspected that it was a “false flag” to provide an excuse to close down the tent cities. Now we hear that demonstrations have been called off:


        My cynicism does not prevent me from offering my condolences for all those that were killed and injured, on both sides.

        1. Yes Gene you are right
          It was the Israeli Special forces who committed this attack, and the order was given by no other then Bibi.

          Israel knew about the attack, and was trying to stop it, relocating special forces to the area.
          You have server diplomatic issues trying to stop something coming out of Sinai. Something to do with the Egyptian sovereignty over the area.

          Israel could have killed the leader of the PRC , who was killed yesterday shortly after the terror attack, But in that case Richard and his minions would have concluded that Israel is the aggressor and violates the understanding with Hamas. Killing the leader of the PRC wouldn’t have stopped this attack as the terrorists left Gaza about 3 weeks ago already.
          In my opinion Israel should have done that because the only way to deal with terror is with applying constant pressure.

          1. “In my opinion Israel should have done that because the only way to deal with terror is with applying constant pressure.”

            How about applying justice for a change? How about ending the Occupation and getting the hell out of Palestinian land!

        2. The notion that this is a false flag operation by Israel is repugnant & offensive. Please don’t pollute the threads with any more of this nonsense.

          There is no need to resort to conspiracy theories to excuse the acts of Palestinian (or Israeli) terrorists.

      2. CORRECTION: the name of the group in English is Popular Resistance Committee, thus PRC, (and not PCR as I wrote) outbreakers mostly from Fatah and the Al-Aqsa Brigades.

    3. No in fact the bus contained mostly IDF soldiers & few if any civilians & almost all the wounded on the bus were soldiers. So you’re wrong again I’m afraid.

      Since you’ve been warned about violating comment rules & insinuated I was lying w/o offering any proof, I’m delighted to treat u the same as other previous violators. You’ll be moderated & any future violations will consign u to hasbara he’ll.

      1. You are wrong, the bus was a regularly scheduled 392 Egged bus that travels between Beer-Sheba and Eilat, It has many stop’s most of them in civilian places. The terrorist had no way of knowing whether there were more soldiers then civilians on the Bus. They attacked a green civilian Egged Bus.

        Don’t make excuses for them, it makes you look bad.

        1. Dimi Reider has a description of the event here:

          According to the latest update: 3 more killed in Gaza City late Friday, among them a five years old. Two were killed earlier on Friday. The death toll is at 14 victims in Gaza: A two years old, a five years old and a thirteen years old among the victims.
          No matter what you think of the attack in Eilat, this makes the State of Israel just as terrorist as the other side.
          To use your own quote: “Don’t make excuses for them. It’ll make you look bad”

        2. Sorry, fella. They attacked Israeli soldiers. Almost all the wounded from the bus were soldiers. I’m not making excuses. I don’t support attacking civilians or soldiers. But tell me, will you denounce Israeli terror against Palestinian civilians and fighters? If you will, then we can agree on something. If not, you’re a friggin’ hypocrite. Which is it?

          1. “I don’t support attacking… soldiers.”

            By international law the occupied people HAVE right to attack the occupying army.

            So, it was FULLY legitimate attack. Not mentioning that Israel adult civilians are mostly former soldiers still doing reservist duty as occupiers. Is soldier on leave a legitimate target?

          2. That is logic that leads only to more blood & suffering. It can only be articulated by someone who isn’t on the front lines, doesn’t suffer the result of her words. If you want to defend the murder of Israelis you’re prob. in the wrong place just as those who wish to defend the murder of Palestinians are also in the wrong place.

          3. First i think it is a tragedy that un-involved civilians die as part of this conflict.
            This is a tragedy blamed by international law on Hamas and other Organizations.

            are you familiar with article 51 of the Geneva Convention ?
            The presence or movements of the civilian population or individual civilians shall not be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations, in particular in attempts to shield military objectives from attacks or to shield, favor or impede military operations. The Parties to the conflict shall not direct the movement of the civilian population or individual civilians in order to attempt to shield military objectives from attacks or to shield military operations.

            Please watch Ross Kemp In The Middle East 2009 part1

            Time marker 20:11, and see what the people of Gaza say about the ones to blame.

          4. This is a tragedy blamed by international law on Hamas

            Say what? What are you smokin’??

            And please do not repeat yrself in comments. Say something once & do not say it again. And do not bother with propaganda links to bolster yr own prejudices. I’m interested in credible arguments, not propaganda. This is a place for serious debate & not a hasbara battlefield.

        3. One might suggest that there are no Israeli civilians as they are all (most of them) interlopers and invaders in another people’s land. As these “civilians” are there primarily to dispossess the indigenuous natives of their homes and property, they are all bandits and therefore legitimate targets against whom the Palestinian people must defend itself. There is no peaceful Israeli national polity as the “state” is a fake altogether. Both the IDF uniformed soldier and the gun-toting “settler”, and their families, are criminal invaders of Palestine and have no legitimate defense.

          I persist in this notion of undoing the false “nationhood” of Israel because it is all too easy to get caught up in the language of a nation as a political entity. If Israel is the legitimate nation then its perogatives are given: If it is not a legitimately constituted state, then those perogatives and arguments and terms of discussion go away and nobody need be deluded into thinking that blowing up one’s self in a Tel Aviv bar is just mindless indiscriminate terror whereas the bombing of Gaza City is a nation defending itself. Israel has no such legitimacy and cannot call upon its statehood as a defense. This is the terrible truth that eats away at the heart of that false construct called Israel. It calls upon other states to treat it as a state (which it is not) and upon worldwide Judaism to treat it as a special haven for Judaism, which it is not.

          1. So, David, what do you suggest should be done to the entity called Israel and to the Israeli Jews?

          2. These imported Jews need to negotiate for their survival in the region. They need to make amends to those who have been ruthlessly dispossessed by positively building a Palestinian state, renounce racism, aggression and war. In short, the Zionist entity needs revolution.

            Virtually no consequence of Zionism is justified anymore than any part of Nazism is redeemable.

  5. To Haver above:

    Just because the United States has a definition of it in their handbook, doesn’t make it right or legally binding. In the post that you linked to, the poster didn’t mention what part of the 1907 conventions allow for the reprisals he mentions; he merely puts his own definition of reprisal, and fits it into the un-cited part.

    For the Palestinians sake, I hope that his (and I assume your) definition of reprisal doesn’t become common. I hope everyone can condemn violence against civilians, no matter who the perpetrator and victims are.

    1. The UN-sponsored international criminal tribunals have all agreed that reprisals are a violation of customary international law reflected in the 1st Additional Protocol. Neither the US nor Israel accept the jurisdiction of the ICC or the customary status of the Protocol.

      The United States and Israel almost routinely murder members of protected civilian populations miles from any battlefield on the basis of mere allegations. The only justification offered is a so-called war against terror.

      The Gaza-based PRC denied responsibility for the Eilat attack. I don’t believe that Defense Minister Barak conducted an investigation before he started killing people in reprisals.

      link to jpost.com

    2. P.S. Benjamin the post that I linked to at Mondoweiss contained a linked to an earlier comment which said:

      During the trials of The WWII War Criminals, the opinion of Hersh Lauterpacht from Oppenheim’s International Law, 6th and 8th Editions was cited to define reprisals and to determine when reprisals against civilians, towns, and villages were authorized in accordance with Article 50 of the Hague Convention (see pages 3 & 4).

      So, you should have followed the links provided by the poster instead of complaining “In the post that you linked to, the poster didn’t mention what part of the 1907 conventions allow for the reprisals he mentions; he merely puts his own definition of reprisal, and fits it into the un-cited part.”

      1. The definitions were cited, yes, but that doesn’t make Hersh Lauterpacht’s opinion the basis of the international laws/organizations you’ve cited, i.e. the ICC or First Additional Protocol, which is the basis for your argument. Granted, I’m not a legal expert by any means, and I admit to being in possible error.

        Again, assuming ‘reprisals’ are true and legal under the UN, it makes me even more jaded and cynical towards it.

        1. The definitions were cited, yes, but that doesn’t make Hersh Lauterpacht’s opinion the basis of the international laws/organizations you’ve cited, i.e. the ICC or First Additional Protocol, which is the basis for your argument.

          The sources cited explain that Lauterpacht’s opinion was employed by the military tribunals. Lauterpacht was a member of the British War Crimes Executive that established and helped manage the tribunals.

          Modern jurisprudence, based upon the UN-authored statutes for the ad hoc and permanent criminal courts, reflect the subsequent bans upon taking reprisals (collective punishment) against civilian populations under any circumstances – although the fact that the enemy engaged in similar illegal practices may be considered in mitigation during the sentencing phase.

          See for example Sienho Yee, The Tu Quoque Argument as a Defence to International Crimes, Prosecution or Punishment”, Oxford University Press http://chinesejil.oxfordjournals.org/content/3/1/87.full.pdf

  6. Seeing as how I don’t support murder and find the ‘human shield’ argument of international law troubling in almost all cases, I disapprove of many ‘counter-terror/counter-insurgency/state terrorism/ect ect’ actions that states perform, which includes the US and Israel.

    International Law is a tricky subject, and like many things about the UN, it’s a good thing in principal, if not in execution. However, I find it an act of patience waiting for it to be enforced, and that it would be better to attempt to affect changes on the ground (no matter how futile it might seem).

  7. Richard, I find Dena Shunra’s analysis as overreading into what Barak said. The idea of “extracting a price” for Palestinian actions has been around for a long time, and does not mean indiscriminate attacks, but rather targeting the groups responsible so that they think twice before carrying out such an attack again. I’m referring to Barak’s language, of course, not necessarily to the specific actions grounded in this language.

    1. “Price tag” is not the same as “extracting a price” in the Israeli political context. He meant to say that as far as this act of terror I’m w. the Hilltop Youth. Another common phrase used during the Lebanon war was baal habayit hishtageah. Meaning “the landlord’s gone insane.” That’s what Barak meant & no amt of temporizing or moral qualms on yr part will change that.

  8. Let’s get to the heart of the problem here:

    “[…] I should make clear that this is blood lust Zionism, one that I reject in favor of a Zionism that rejects any violence as a way to resolve this conflict; a Zionism that says that two peoples can live together on this land without one dominating or murdering the other.”

    THERE IS NO SUCH ZIONISM AS YOU DESCRIBE. The proof for 63 years or more is that Zionism IS dominating and murdering and is therefore supremacist. Jabotinsky counted on force and domination to be part of the iron wall that sustains Zionism.

    What you describe is a utopia where the delusional brainwashing of Zionism has been eradicated from all or the majority of Zionists’ minds. The only way to achieve what you mentioned above is to leave Zionism behind like the German people left Nazism behind, but it took a shocking tragedy to wake Germans up! Can’t everyone just look to that example and flee Zionism like the evil that it really is?

    Understanding the nature of Zionism is like understanding gravity. You can’t defy gravity under natural circumstances on earth! Thus, sooner or later, you must come down to earth to understand how evil Zionism really is. You can’t define the effects of Zionism “out there” but here on earth. Just like man cannot stay in outer space indefinitely to defy gravity; it’s wrong to cling to a delusion that only looks good in outer space, but becomes monstrous on earth!

    How much more proof do Zionists need that Zionism is EVIL at its core??? When you cling to a utopian view of Zionism you ENABLE what is happening in Israel; you give hope to the delusional and amunition to those who utilize evil to keep Zionism going. How can Zionists wean themselves away from this sick ideology if you paint that rosy picture of Zionism that is in total contradiction with REALITY and the factual evolution of Zionism? It’s time to look at abandoning Zionism instead giving people false hopes to cling to.

    EVIL BEGETS EVIL; Zionism begets cyclical violence and evil because Zionism is evil at its core.

    After hundreds of thousands of Palestinians ethnically cleansed, millions of refugees living mostly in poverty, tens of thousands of homes demolished and lives destroyed, hundreds of thousands of acres of Palestinian land stolen, tens of thousands of Palestinians killed since Israel was created and ongoing death, destruction and injustice…what more will it take to prove my point???

    Step one to resolving this tragedy: See Zionism for what it really is and abandon all notions of Zionism.

    Unfortunately, the genie is out of the bottle and regretably the death and destruction will continue, but the genie who pretended to grant wishes is evil and admitting he’s evil is the way to empowering oneself with goodness instead of delusion which is the genie’s source of power.

    By the way, how much time do you think you need to achieve this “Zionist” utopia of yours? Because it carries a heavy price and Palestinians are paying the greatest price of all. Are you willing to ask them to pay indefinitely until everyone understands your notion of Zionism? And do you really expect Zionism to lose its negative connotation for them after what it’s done to their lives?

    Isn’t it time to admit that maybe Zionism IS the problem?
    You can’t say, “let’s make the most of Zionism or make it better”, because that’s like asking to reverse gravity on earth. Why not admit that in order to achieve what you described the word Zionism, the Zionist ideology must become what it really is, INFAMOUS, and never to be referred to or embraced again in any positive light.

    Anyone who doesn’t understand that evil and Zionism go hand in hand doesn’t understand human nature and the laws of the universe.

    Regarding this incident: First, I take exception to the usage of “Palestinian” attack, perhaps terrorist attack, but Palestinian attack? Isn’t this as bad as Israeli justice: Shoot first; ask questions later and paint everyone with one brush, thus justifying even civilian collateral damage? Aren’t you enabling injustice with this title?

    Second, although it seems highly contradictory for Palestinians to shoot themselves in the foot when they’re so desperate for statehood – and I reserve judgment as to whether this attack originated in Gaza or with Hamas; people have a breaking point where they revert to primal instincts as self-defense against injustice.

    WHY was the flotilla, the last peaceful bastion of hope for Gaza, sabotaged? You can’t suffocate the economy of a city and isolate it from the world and expect a human response. A person in a cage is not human anymore.

    Let’s be honest: Israelis treat Palestinians like ANIMALS and expect a submissive, human response in return! How INSANE is that? Oh, and yes, Zionism is an insane experiment that would even make Mengele proud.

    1. Kalea

      Thus, sooner or later, you must come down to earth to understand how evil Zionism really is. You can’t define the effects of Zionism “out there” but here on earth.

      what do you call the desire to return to Israel, then if not Zionism? Even the Neturai Kertai, who are wrongly labelled “anti Zionist” pray for that. That’s all it is at it’s literal meaning, The associated baggage with it, doesn’t have to be part and parcel of it.

      1. Absolutely, I agree. There are no nuances left. None. The proof is in the pudding, the consequences of Zionism of any ilk is evident for all to see. A gentler, kinder Zionism is a historic joke and muddled at best. Zionism must go, root and branch. It has failed the Jewish people profoundly.

    2. I find your response deeply offensive. Heaven help the world from true believers like you who don’t allow nuance to spoil their moral certainty. I simply don’t have the patience to read through your self-righteous fatuousness. But you have violated the comment rules and your future comments will be moderated. And I neither want or will accept any reply from you to my comment. Yr participation in this thread is over. You may, if you wish, comment in other threads. But the next time you violate the comment rules your days here are done.

      You don’t know anything about Zionism. Sure you know just enough to satisfy yr smug self assured certainty that you know everything there is to know. Everything I know about this conflict, everything this blog stands for cries out against yr pt of view. I’m happy to do battle every day with right wing pro Israel cretins. BUt I’m just as happy to do battle with cretins like you on the far left. YOu think you know everything. Yet you know nothing.


      This is a lie. An offensive lie. You deny Martin Buber. You deny Ahad HaAm. You deny Judah Magnes. You deny Brit Shalom. YOu deny cultural Zionism. In denying these things, you affirm your abject ignorance. Now you may argue that these movements ultimately did not prevail historically. You may argue that a more noxious form of Zionism has prevailed. I would not quarrel with that. But you may NOT deny Zionist history. YOu may not.

      Jabotinsky is not Zionism. He founded revisionist Zionism. Sure, there are noxious characters in all the major Zionist streams of thought. I will not dispute that. But unlike you, I understand that ideology and politics are done in a process involving debate & struggle. That struggle still continues & will lead to a more benevolent form of Zionism inside Israel. And you will hate this because in yr way you’re as bad as the right wing pro Israel Zionists who comment here.

      I will not comment on yr claim that Zionism is evil. But what I will say is that yr ranting is almost as evil as any evil you find in Zionism. Yr ranting destroys debate, destroys reason, destroys tolerance. It destroys every value I hold dear.

      you ENABLE what is happening in Israel

      No, I enable only the vision of Israel that I have as a truly democratic state embracing equality for all citizens. That is ALL I enable. Any other claims you wish to impose on me are you problem, not mine. I will accept no blame whatsoever from the likes of you. I find you repulsive.

      Zionism is an insane experiment that would even make Mengele proud.

      This is a grievous violation of my comment rules. The next time you write something as offensive as this you will no longer be welcome here.

      1. All “peaceful” Zionists cited by you were VERY marginal and had NO impact on real Zionism -i.e. colonization of Palestine on behalf of Europeans, just like in Rhodesia.

        And if you are for “Israel that I have as a truly democratic state embracing equality for all citizens” what about Palestinian right of return? Do they counted for the “all citizens” or not? And would the majority of Zionist Israeli Jews agree to equality with their victims?

        I understand you meant well. But, alas, the right-winger Zionists are at least see what you could not/would not – that Israel is NOT for “equality” but for the Jews, period. Israel is a Rhodesia, and as long as Zionism is here, there would be NOT a fulfillment of your nice dream.

        1. Lord spare us fr the arm-chair students of Zionism who don’t know whereof they speak. Buber, Magnes, Ahad HaAm were certainly not marginal. They may have failed in transforming Zionism into their vision, but “marginal” is a gross mischaracterization of their role. And they certainly had a great impact on ZIonism. What people like you don’t understand is that those who fail have a major impact on the mainstream despite their failure; & that their original failure may yet turn into an eventual triumph.

          I have no patience for readers who barge into the comment threads & ask questions I’ve already answered, & answered multiple times. Pls. do some homework & research yr questions before you expect me to waste my time recapitulating my views.

          1. My usual rule is not to argue with Zionists, I am sorry that I have broken it.

            If Buber and others really had great impact on the Zionism, he is a one to blame for its crimes as well, sorry, I hoped I could save his standing in my eyes.

          2. I’m sorry you broke yr rule too. As for blaming Buber for the crimes of Zionism, this only confirms that you are a bona fide ranter whom no one can take seriously. Why aren’t you on the front lines in Gaza launching Qassams? You’re far more needed there than here (spoken facetiously).

      2. It is rational and compelling to see Zionism as an “insane experiment”. The proof is in the pudding, in the actual political history of Palestine, the facts, what has happened there. And what has happened is, first, a result of Zionists and Zionism. Even without a formalized system of beliefs, the results can only be understood as racist, expansionist and illegal. “Security” and “defense” have been used to cover these unpleasant aspects of Zionism.

    3. Richard says:
      “And at this point, lest the anti-Zionists among us cheer too loudly, I should make clear that this is blood lust Zionism, one that I reject in favor of a Zionism that rejects any violence as a way to resolve this conflict; a Zionism that says that two peoples can live together on this land without one dominating or murdering the other.”

      There is no such good Zionism as you describe. Perhaps it was just a fleeting idea at the beginning of the movement that never took hold and disappeared a long time ago.
      Speaking of a good Zionism is as much an oxymoron as speaking of a good Nazism.
      SO Richard, why don’t you stop calling yourself a Zionist, give yourself another tag (perhaps PostZionist) and go on from there.
      Believe me it will make it much easier for your friends to understand you.

        1. I am your friend and I admire this site, but I do not understand you. I will do some more research and see where it takes me. I too would like to see a benevolent Zionism that admits two peoples and I think a good many of Israel’s “enemies” can envision the same thing. But political leadership in Israel since ’48 at least did not find or pursue this possibility with any honesty, as far as I know. And I think that Israel (the national homeland of Zionism) must bear the consequences of these decisions, including the opprobrium of the world. The self-righteous attitude of “doing whatever they want” in the name of Zionism has consequences for the reputation of Zionism. I know I speak for many who do not want to be censored because they find the Zionism that walks and talks today completely unacceptable.

          However, you want answers not anger. So, I suggest that Israel take on itself the project of building a Palestinian state through taxation of Israelis, contributions of world Jewry or the sale of confiscated Palestinian land, that it dispossess the West Bank for this purpose and create “works” programs in infrastructure and cultural activities to build that state. Israel should enter into treaty obligations with the new state, commiting to every form of assistance. Israel could (not easily) become a better friend to Palestinians than any Arab regime. Israel will, of course, have a new emigration problem, but the price is still reasonable. Your comments?

          1. David, I agree with you that “Israel could become a better friend to Palestinians than any Arab regime” by helping build the Palestinian state, by establishing the bonds of cultural and economic exchange and cooperation and ultimately the bonds of friendship. The question is how this change/revolution can come about. At the moment the Israelis are not interested. Even many left-wing Israelis advocate complete separation rather than integration.

  9. @ Gene,
    I agree with you that this might be a false flag operation to take the wind out of the tent city folks’ sails.

    Re: another commenter:
    Israel did target civilians in substantial numbers deliberately in one of the Lebanon wars (1982??) if my memory serves.

    And finally, there is absolutely nothing Jewish about expropriation, hooliganism & illicit killing.

  10. @ Kalea,

    What about Ahad Ha’am’s cultural Zionism? Very different from political Zionism. Cultural Zionism was based on Jewish values, not state worship.

    1. Did the followers of this type of Zionism do anything while Palestinians were being cleansed from their land? And even if they did, the result was still tragic.

      It doesn’t matter how well-intentioned cultural Zionism is, because what we’re witnessing on the ground is the natural evolution of Zionism in general and “cultural” Zionism gone amok.

      I mean, you can’t turn back the clock and undo what Zionism has become by clinging to some good notion of Zionism; and you can’t expect Palestinians not to shudder or feel threatened by the mention of Zionism.

      You just have to go with the values of Democracy and human rights and sacrifice that pipe dream gone ugly called Zionism.

      Zionism has bad connotations that can never be erased and Zionists of all stripes have created a monster.

      Best thing is to abandon all notions of Zionism altogether and be guided by Democratic principles, justice and human rights…period.

      1. I tend to agree with Kalea here. Even Einstein, for all the propaganda to the contrary, was opposed to Zionism. This is brought out with precision in a new book, “Einstein Before Israel: Zionist Icon or Iconoclast?”, by Ze’ev Rosenkranz, editor of the Einstein Papers Project. According to this book he deplored Zionism and what it might do to the Palestinian indigents. His only interest was in creating Hebrew University to offer education to worthy immigrants from Eastern Europe. He did not want to see Israel become a Jewish state, separate from Palestine.

        And the biographer of Spinoza has told me she thinks he would have been appalled by what the Jewish people have done in creating Israel.

        I am appalled myself, and have been since its creation.

        1. And there were many others. Erich Fromm, one of the most profound thinkers of the 20th century, was an ardent Zionist in his youth in the early 1920’s in Germany. Fromm played a leading role in forming the Kartell Juedischer Verbindungen in Frankfurt, whose aim was to turn its members into responsible Zionists. However, under the influence of his Talmudic teacher Zalman Rabinkow, Fromm soon realized the extent to which Jewish nationalism was cultivated in the Zionist movement. This came into conflict with the humanistic interpretation of Judaism and Messianism he had absorbed from Hermann Cohen and Rabinkow. On his resignation in 1923 he argued that “In these years, I found Jewish nationalism no betther that that of the Hakenkreuzer.” His renunciation of Zionism was definitive and he kept to this position until his death in 1980.

          1. I had a somewhat similar experience. When the Jewish youth movement started to gather strength in the late 1980’s in the Soviet Union, we felt maybe for the first time that we can be proud of being Jewish. Yet when I came into contact with various American and Israeli Jewish missionaries, I started to realize how narrowly nationalistic and exclusive their version of Jewishness was. And when the Sokhnut (Jewish Agency) boys came with their events and youth camps, their propaganda became so plain obvious to me that I realized that that was not the movement I wanted to be associated with.

          2. Leonid Levin

            This came into conflict with the humanistic interpretation of Judaism and Messianism he had absorbed from Hermann Cohen and Rabinkow. On his resignation in 1923 he argued that “In these years, I found Jewish nationalism no betther that that of the Hakenkreuzer.”

            How did he square that with your daily prayers which include a wish to return to Israel?

          3. Leonid, I have read and remembered your references to Erich Fromm from your earlier posts. I never reacted before, but it is not as if I (or others) do not listen and do not remember what you write. It is something I will into look deeper. Thanks for telling me about it.

          4. Thanks, Elisabeth. I feel it’s important to remember the thinkers like Erich Fromm, Albert Schweitzer, Ivan Illich etc., who, even though coming originally from a religious background (respectively, Orthodox Jewish, Protestant and Catholic) set forth and lived essentially humanistic and deeply compassionate (yet grounded in reason and knowledge) pro-life and pro-human vision for mankind. These geniuses managed to get to the core of many individual and social phenomena and presented humane and sustainable approaches to dealing with mankind’s problems. They exerted enormous influence in the 20th century through their books, their lives and characters, but regrettably seem pretty much forgotten nowadays.

            I am thinking of starting a radical humanist blog, in which I will attempt to explore their books, lives and ideas and the implications of their ideas in relation for the current global issues.

          5. @Chayma,

            How did he square that with your daily prayers which include a wish to return to Israel?

            I don’t know which prayer you’re referring to exactly. The longing for return to Jerusalem may be intrepretted in many different ways: 1) literally as a return to just live in Jerusalem or, more in line with Zionism, to re-establish a Jewish state; or 2) figuratively, meaning for example to return to the essense of Judaism and Jewish spirituality, to re-establish Jerusalem in one’s heart as a place of inner freedom and age-long ideals of love, learning and sharing. Judaism knows many interpretations of stories and passages from the Bible. Which interpretations appear and prevail in any given time, often depends on the circumstances in which the Jewish people find themselves and how Jews respond to those circumstances.

            I strongly recommend that you read Erich Fromm’s “Ye Shall Be As Gods: The Radical Interpretation of the Old Testament”.

        2. I very much appreciate this rational, intelligent conclusion considering my blunt and direct criticism of Zionism. I no longer have the patience to worry about offending sensibilities with my opinion when I witness the consequences of Zionism. When I weigh the suffering of Palestinians and expressing myself forcefully at the risk of offending someone with holding back by softening my opinion of Zionism …the choice is very clear.

          I can’t imagine what Einstein would say if he were alive today. He would, no doubt be labeled anti-Semitic and be ostracized from many circles of Jewish society as Goldstone was starting to be, but one thing’s for sure, he would never capitulate to pressure and threats and reverse his opinion as Goldstone did.

          “Heroism at command, senseless brutality, and all the loathsome nonsense that goes by the name of patriotism, how violently I hate all this, how despicable and ignoble war is; I would rather be torn to shreds than be part of so base an action! It is my conviction that killing under the cloak of war is nothing but an act of murder.”

          1. I very much appreciate this rational, intelligent conclusion considering my blunt and direct criticism of Zionism.

            You lauded democracy as something ideal, but Hitler came into power in democracy.

            Please respond to my question above.

          2. Chayma, it has often been pointed out, but let me do it again: In the final two free elections before Hitler’s rise to power, in July and November 1932, the Nazis received 38% and 33% of the vote respectively, not enough to bring them into government. In the 1932 presidential election, Hitler lost to Hindenburg by a wide margin.
            Hitler came to power not through elections, but because Hindenburg and the circle around Hindenburg decided to appoint him chancellor in January 1933. This was the result of backroom dealing and power politics, not any kind of popular vote.

            An ex-comrade of Hitler (General Ludendorff) sent a telegram to President Hindenburg regarding his decision:

            “By appointing Hitler Chancellor of the Reich you have handed over our sacred German Fatherland to one of the greatest demagogues of all time. I prophesy to you this evil man will plunge our Reich into the abyss and will inflict immeasurable woe on our nation. Future generations will curse you in your grave for this action.”

          1. Einstein’s atheism had nothing to do with his distaste for Zionism. Nor does my own. And re your above question: Not every Jew prays to return to Israel.

        3. Just a word: It is a relief to me personally to access some throughtful comments about Zionism, thoughts that echo my own conclusions after some years of soul-searching. Your comments and the others give me sustenance in the face of the outrages of Israel past and present. Thanks to all of you.

  11. This Eilat attacks..This is a terrible tragedy, the deaths of the Israeli’s who were killed, and 5 Palestinians one of whom was a little boy, and supposedly the head of the PRC.

    The puzzling thing is that at this time there is no evidence that this “PRC” group carried out the attack. Apparently, the men were dressed as IDF, but there is no information on who they are,

    there has been no confirmation, not even Al Jazeera has reported the PRC as accepting responsibilty. They have “praised” the attacks, but said they did not do it. The PRC may or may not be lying.

    It also crossed my mind that this could be a false flag operation. Gene Shulman above opined that it could be to end the protests. I don’t believe that is the reason.

    If it is a false flag operation, it’s probably because of the Arab Spring, and that Mubarak is going to trial. Recall, Obama has made it clear he want’s Al Assad to step down.

    They already have an agenda to discredit the Muslim Brotherhood. Witness the Islamophobes in the US who are propogating this lie.

    With Turkey dumping Israel, and Egypt making it clear, the peace agreement is off until there is a viable solutiion to the conflict, Syria now poses a bigger threat if it joins the Arab Spring. That peace was based on a false premise. Like the one Jordan has, and Egypt had, it was not supported by the people.

    It’s only a matter of time before King Hussein of Jordan is facing the same fate as Mubarak.

    I suspect the Israeli right wing extremists could have pulled off this to convince the world how bad the Arab Spring is, and how much better off Egypt was with a corrupt dictator looting it’s people, who deserved to be propped up because of his phony peace deal with Israel.

    Or it could be the PRC. Or another group. We shall see. Either way, this is a worrying development, whether it’s a false flag set up by Israeli rightists or by Palestinian groups, and we can only pray common sense prevails.

  12. As Gene Schulmann says, it is so obvious that this was a ‘black’ operation.

    It’s been reported everywhere that Netanyahu was panicked by the J14 demonstrations.

    It’s the obvious response. ‘National security’ overcomes economic complaints.

    It worked.

    It may be that more Israelis were killed than expected. Well that’s something you have to expect if you undertake ‘black’ operations.

    There’s plenty of evidence that Israel undertakes such things, perhaps with a lesser death role for Israelis. That was a mistake.

      1. @ Gene, mon ami
        Good to see you around.
        Just in case: I’m NOT saying that this is a false flag operation but this is rather premonitory:
        A few lines translated from Michèle Sibony, a prominent member of “The French Jewish Union For Peace” from her diary.
        Haifa August 1Oth:
        “During the demonstrations on August 6th, a good number of people, demonstrators, artists and personalities, denounced the sacrosanct “national security” as a pretext to make people accept everything.
        The very political comedian Moshe Ivgui sets the pace: He states that as many others he fear that they [Bibicon] won’t hesitate to provoke incidents on the borders or actions concerning/related to security to stop the social movement. The exchange of fire on the Lebanese border a few days ago gave rise to the interpretation that Bibi could have provoked the incident in order to make people rally around the only thing holy: the national security”
        Who said the Israelis are alien to the Middle East ? They have about the same corruption index as the rest, the democracy index is going down, the conspiracy theory is flourishing as in the neighbouring countries, and maybe their leaders are even capable of sacrificing some of their own cizitens to stay in power 😀

  13. Gene, please post the correct link nexttime, it’s

    and Uri Avnery is speculating.

    even if this was a false flag operation for the tent protests, it would not have had a lasting impact, because they can continue the protest without camping out. Social unrest and protests don’t have to mean camping. A false flag for this reason, would not be effective. Even someone as dumb as Netanyahu would realise that.

    1. Of course, I expected this reply. Whatever Avnery thinks has no more value than the views of anyone else.

      There is no proof at this moment that this was a ‘black’ operation. If there is evidence, it will emerge later. We are talking about an obvious comparison between Netanyahu’s needs, and a sudden unusual event.

    2. @Chayma: We’re ALL speculating here. And Richard’s original post is the most so by speculating that it was a Palestinian attack. Beyond the tent protests, this will (probably) serve as a justification to raid Gaza once again, and perhaps even Lebanon. The whole Middle East is a caldron of US/Israeli/NATO intrigue – Libya, Syria. It will not end soon.

      1. Richard’s original post is the most so by speculating that it was a Palestinian attack.

        Gene, as usual you’re floating out there somewhere in the ether around Jupiter. I find this sort of nonsense offensive. If you need to spread such tripe, do it elsewhere. I’d prefer my comment threads not to become the home of the weirded out, conspiracy mongers, etc.

        1. Well, Richard. It’s your post, you can call the shots. But frankly I think you’ve become a hopeless defender of all things Zion – “my Zionism, right or wrong.” You can can dish out criticism, but you can’t take it. So, forgive me if I check out for a while.

  14. Hamas armed wing abandons ceasefire with Israel

    GAZA CITY (Ma’an) — The military wing of Hamas, the Al-Qassam Brigades, has called off a ceasefire with Israel and will allow factions in Gaza to respond to Israeli attacks, Al-Aqsa Radio reported late Friday.

    Israel blames a group of Gaza militants for the shooting attacks near the Egyptian border, but the Popular Resistance Committees has denied that its operatives were involved.

    Hamas, too, has denied charges by Israeli officials that the attacks “originated” in Gaza.

  15. thanks Gene and others for raising the issue of false flag operation…in truth it was the first thing that came to mind — that there was something totally out of alignment with all of the claims that this was either “Palestinian terror attackers” or the other version being spread, that it is Al Quaeda in Gaza. The reason that I find this unbelievable is the timing..why NOW? Now when Palestine has so much to gain, with world-wide support, (except for those impoverished countries that are vulnerable to threats of USAID ending as with Haiti ) …
    And other carrots and sticks from Uncle.

    Timing is everything and no doubt the fact that ‘statesmen’ from the US Congress just happen to be there front row center to witness this “staging” by ‘who knows’….(just in case Congress might have ok’d Sen Leahy’s idea to cut funding for various commando brigades) as mentioned or leaked the other day….
    Congress members will dutifully return to Washington DC with their accounts of the necessity to continue or maybe even increase israel’s welfare checks from $3Bill to who knows what.
    The adage Past behaviors are the best predictors of future behaviors rings in my ears any time I hear about the latest bombing or retaliatory military actions taken collectively against Palestinians as are the latest aerial bombing raids.

    In the end….our “information/news” we receive of alleged terror attacks by Palestinians who some how got past the closed Rafah gates, crossed 100 miles of Sinai via a Startrek “teletransporter”? and launched an attack against Israeli buses …seems pointless, when so much is in the balance this September…(despite Jesse Jackson’s mythological OpEd statement ) “they should try non violence” in JPost the other day, forgetting Bilin and Nilin and Bethlehem etc etc..for these last 5 yrs or more..
    — this like so many other oddities that Israel presents as FACT are just more zionist claims.
    Who you gonna believe?
    After all the lies, twisted claims, injustices and downright thuggishness….. many more now have a strong sense that things are NOT the way they have been presented…just more Hasbara….
    Clairvoyent Jesse warned that he expects explosive violence should Palestinians go forward with their planned bid for statehood in Sept.
    Two birds one stone for Bibi – as this sort of event will be used to quash the growing israeli public protests.
    Time will reveal the truth.

  16. The Israeli soldier is a terrorist in the Land of Palestine. It is not the other way around and never will be. Palestinians are defending themselves from the invaders. When Israel goes after these stubborn freedom fighters, they call them “terrorists” just as though, to pretend as though, “Israel” is a real nation, a real state, and a respected member of the international community, rather than the criminal pariah and fraud that it is. Just as though it is a real, peace-loving, well-behaved state, playing by the rules. Just as though. It is a classic Zionist con. Don’t be confused: Israel is not a legitimate “real” nation.

  17. RE: “I should add that at this point I’ve given up hope on the Israeli political system to produce an answer.” ~ R.S.

    SEE: Netanyahu and the Border Incident: The Return of the Generals ~ By Uri Avnery, 8/19/11

    (excerpts)‎…AT THE beginning of the week, Binyamin Netanyahu was desperately looking for a way out of an escalating internal crisis. The social protest movement was gathering momentum and posing a growing danger to his government…
    …Social ideas were taking over, pushing aside the hackneyed talk about “security”. TV talk show panels, previously full of used generals, were now packed with social workers and professors of economics. One of the consequences was that women were also much more prominent.
    And then it happened. A small extremist Islamist group in the Gaza Strip sent a detachment into the Egyptian Sinai desert, from where it easily crossed the undefended Israeli border and created havoc. Several fighters (or terrorists, depends who is talking) succeeded in killing eight Israeli soldiers and civilians…The aim seems to have been to capture another Israeli soldier, to strengthen the case for a prisoner exchange on their terms.
    In a jiffy, the economics professors vanished from the TV screens, and their place was taken by the old gang of exes – ex-generals, ex-secret-service chiefs, ex-policemen, all male, of course, accompanied by their entourage of obsequious military correspondents and far-right politicians…
    …The incident not only wiped the protest off the screen, it put an end to any chance of taking billions off the military budget in order to strengthen the social services…
    FROM NOW on, Netanyahu and his colleagues can direct events as they wish…
    …Netanyahu has his hand on the tap of violence, and he can raise or lower the flames at will…

    ENTIRE COMMENTARY – http://www.counterpunch.org/avnery08192011.html

    1. I agree entirely with the analysis. Social protest is off the screen: Bibi himself could not have planned it better. What a shame! Another opportunity lost.

  18. Richard, I confess I was rather shocked to see that in your headline you referred to this incident as a Palestinian Attack. It might very well turn out to be committed by Palestinians, but Israel has made many enemies, and I think it’s a rush to judgment to blame Palestinians without any evidence which even Israel hasn’t produced to date.

    Israel has been itching for an excuse to pick up where it reluctantly left off in Gaza in January 2009, and though I find it hard to believe this could be a false flag operation (due to the fact Israelis died, and Israel always places a far higher value on Israeli Jewish lives than on non-Jewish lives, especially Arab lives,) this certainly came at a very convenient time for Bibi, with all the social protesting going on in Israel and the date when Palestinians ask for statehood looming closer. The immediacy with which Israel began another bloodbath in Gaza, with no proof Palestinians were involved in the attack in Southern Israel, is very suspect in my opinion.

    I don’t think it is appropriate to call this an attack by Palestinians until there is a credible claim by a Palestinian group or incontrovertible evidence from Israel that Palestinians were responsible. Until that time, as far as I’m concerned at least, the jury is still out.

    1. Be careful, Mary. You’re liable to be chastised by Richard for confirming my “conspiracy theory” theory.

      Before leaving, let me express my thanks to those above who agreed with my speculations.

          1. @Deir Yassin: Je t’en pri. Thank you. I am very touched. But don’t worry, I’ll hang around if only to see if Richard ever wakes up. ( ; > ))

            Reply to a friend who asks what my life is like:

            “As for my life and times, I have a reasonably good marriage. I am a typical retired old fart, who likes to complain about the failures of a world I was misled to believe would always progress and become better than it was. I am fortunate to have friends who are intelligent and engaged with the world of politics, history and ideas. I am constantly stimulated intellectually. I am reasonably healthy for my 81 years and hope to remain this way as long as possible. Mainly, because I want to see how things ultimately turn out. Ultimately is not the right word in an infinite universe, but I can think of no substitute. Most people think I am much younger than I am, and I feel so, myself. So, I’ll just play it as it goes, and hope you will all play along with me. Maybe, in time, you will see the light.

            In two weeks we’ll be on the beach near Cannes, dining and drinking well. Lots of things to do in the area – museums, friends, conversation, which can frustrate me at times because of my inadequate French.

            Enough of me. Be well,


          2. I second DeirYassin in this and hope that GeneSchulman not leave this forum … please.

  19. @Richard
    “I’d prefer my comment threads not to become the home of the weirded out, conspiracy mongers, etc.”

    Too late. at least for this comment thread.
    Classic conspiracy theory MO. first they make a speculation, an opinion or an educated guess that this was a “false flag” then it becomes a “false flag operation”. it still a guess but a more precise one since “false flag” can mean that someone is taking advantage of an event but when you add operation then suddenly it implies that someone orchestrated it. then a new comment changes the terminology and use “black operation”. we still need evidence but it will surely emerge soon (like in all conspiracy theory) nether the less it is already established in most mind’s when someone writes something in the lines of:”they can’t run a black op and expect no casualties on their side”. the next comments just dig out anecdotal and random facts,past events and personal opinions like Netanyahu was panicking and needed a way out, they were itching for an excuse to pick up where they left on Cast Lead etc.

    This conflict is highly volatile as it is even on a relatively more quiet days. we have enough on our plate as it is so no need for your loonie conspiracy theories. keep it to yourselves.

    1. @Asaf: So far, only you and Richard seem to think them conspiracy theories. Remember, all conspiracies are not necessarily theories, Some do happen.

      1. “@Asaf: So far, only you and Richard seem to think them conspiracy theories.”
        Only in this comment thread.

        The problem is that every time the status quo (sick and twisted as it may be) breaks everyone instantly come up with a conspiracy theory. the truth is that both sides does stupid things that doesn’t serve their interest. you can’t disregard the way ideas are gaining popularity through the net regardless of their credibility. and when a theory has a deadly potential one has to be more responsible.

        1. So far I haven’t smelled any conspiracy theories on this thread. Only you and Richard are becoming paranoid. Expressing an opinion does not imply there is a conspiracy behind it. Please get back to basics!

          1. you are right. there are no conspiracy theories. people just IMPLIED that the attacks were orchestrated by the Israeli government to draw attention from the j14 protests and the September declaration of Palestinian state.

  20. Richard, I don’t know why you’re so angry over the suggestion that the Eilat attacks could have been a ‘black’ operation.

    Israel has conducted ‘false-flag’ operations left and right. They just don’t usually result in Israeli deaths.

    Were it the case that this was a ‘black’ operation, I don’t suppose for a moment that it was actually Israelis who carried it out. They would have recruited Palestinians, or Egyptians, for deniability.

    Equally, the number of Israeli deaths may have been a mistake. The intention may have been zero or maximum, one.

    OK it is a hypothesis, no more or less valid than that it was the PRC. But it is one that is worth investigating. The event was just too convenient.

    Moderate me if you like. Go ahead. But I will be disappointed in you if you do.

    1. I’m willing to entertain any reasonable hypothesis as long as evidence is offered to support it. I think there is evidence of major IDF cock-ups in this operation. But it is totally unconvincing to say it was a false flag operation. If anyone has evidence, real evidence, offer it. I’m willing to read it. But I remain deeply skeptical.

  21. Gene Schulman

    Einstein’s atheism had nothing to do with his distaste for Zionism. Nor does my own. And re your above question: Not every Jew prays to return to Israel.

    Of course it does. As an atheist, he is not going to agree with the religious version. For example how would he relate to those who believe their faith isn’t complete until they’re practicing all the laws in Israel. Many of the laws are only applicable in Israel.


    In the final two free elections before Hitler’s rise to power, in July and November 1932, the Nazis received 38% and 33% of the vote respectively, not enough to bring them into government. In the 1932

    That further lends weight to my point, that democracy is there to be manipulated. Besides, the figures that you mention, 38% are reflective of majority view, if the majority didn’t bother voting. If people really want the current head to go, they will vote against.

    That is why in some countries, when citizens don’t vote, the vote is counted as being in favour of the current leader.

    1. It is just terrible to realize that history could have been so different without this backroom dealing as his popularity was already dropping (38% to 33%). The turnout for the presidential elections was 86.2%. I have not found data for the other elections.

      1. Elisabeth, the point is Hitler WAS the most popular leader then. People were receptive to his idea’s. No matter what the back room deals, if Germans had not agreed with his views or politics he would be out.

        Call it democracy, or call it mob rule. Ultimately, that is what a democracy is. What the majority want, and what the majority want, may not necessarily work out best in the long run as human nature is flawed.

        1. I do NOT get your point as Hitler was NOT the most popular leader then. Presidential elections in 1932

          First round:
          Hindenburg 49.6% Hitler 30.2% Thaelmann 13.2% Duesterberg 6.8%

          Second round:
          Hindenburg 53.1% Hitler 36.7% Thaelmann 10.1%

          I am getting a bit tired of this.

          1. I think that Hitler was very popular. Also, democracies cannot work without some means of gluing together factions into a majority. Giving Hitler the Chancellorship was not because of the majority opinion, but to create a working government. No other alternative would have brought enough of the right wing into the government.

            It is tiresome, and off point, as well.

  22. You wrote: “…………This happened after Rabin’s assassination when the Palestinian’s launched repeated terror attacks against Israel which torpedoed Shimon Peres’ chances of winning the elections……”

    Well: The “terror attacks against Israel” came as retaliation to the “Goldstein massacre” of tens of Moslems from Hebron in the midst of a prayer at the mosque of Abraham’s tomb.

    The murderer who was killed by the survivors, was a sworn Kahanist settler, received a grand burial ceremony in Hebron, and his tomb became then a pilgrimage site for the extreme right settler faction.

    Instead of limiting the extremist settlers in Hebron and cracking down on their plotting members, the Israeli government (Rabin) sealed off to the Palestinians a large residential and commercial quarter in Hebron which ultimately forced them to evict their homes and shops, while the murderer’s settler community in Hebron – more or less took over the quarter with the protection of the IDF.

    Yes, this was Rabin’s great mistake which soon cost him and the peace process their lives.

    In response to the butchery the Hamas promised five revenge actions – and indeed those were promptly executed. Most Israelis failed to this day to link the cause and effect element.

    Peres who assumed the PM office wasted the precious opportunity window being too weak to advance with the “Peace Process”, perhaps fear stricken by the settler’s violence, as a diversion initiated a mini war in Lebanon which ended in shame due to an “unplanned” massacre of over 100 Lebanese citizens. Therefore he assumed the aura of a Shlemaizel.

    Subsequently, and due to all those Netanyahu won the PM elections through a threat and smearing brainwashing campaign to which most Israelis succumbed. He proceeded to pulverize the Oslo Accords, quite successfully

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Share via
Copy link