On Hamas: Describing Hamas rocket attacks as ‘terrorism’ seems inappropriate when one considers the actual probabilities of civilian deaths involved. What does Hamas rocket fire do? It disrupts Israeli society and ordinary economic activity. It stops Israelis from going about their lives. This is going on as the Zionist settler colonialism is based on active, forward slow-genocide and ethnic cleansing. Israel doesn’t allow (never allowed) Palestinians to go about their own lives and so what are appropriate responses to that, really? What are appropriate responses to colonial violence and ethnic cleansing? So few civilians are killed in response by Hamas rocket fire that looking at the actions of both sides, the rocket attacks should be morally seen as something closer to civil disobedience than ‘terrorism’. I’m not defending everything about Hamas, I’m saying that what the situation actually has been during the last decade is not security-vs-terror, it’s genocide-vs-disruption. I would side with disruption against settler colonial genocide, and wouldn’t hesitate to express total solidarity with Hamas in their armed struggle against Israel.
Israel is attacking an enclosed, blockaded ghetto with advanced US-calibre arms, killing a lot of children in that process and maiming and disfiguring many times more, repeatedly attacking medical facilities with heavy firepower.
US and Egypt empower atrocities. Israel has absolutely no valid security narrative in this case; Zionists initiated war against Hamas, first in the West Bank and then in Gaza, during a time of relative peace to break the Palestinian unity government. Anyway Israel has no valid security narrative in any case because it’s a colonial settler state which has been engaging in colonial abuses and demographic warfare for its entire existence (the Zionist colonial settler demographic warfare predating the formal founding of Israel by decades).
Victory to Palestine!
Israel is killing large numbers of civilians — in doing so are they committing war crimes under international law? Round-up of expert opinions below.
'Under the laws of war – which bind Israel as they bind any military force – you cannot shoot first and ask questions later. You have got to make sure what you’re shooting at is a legitimate target, and if there’s any doubt in your mind whether it might be civilian, you have to hold fire, and I’m very concerned that we are not seeing that – we may be seeing the opposite.'
Conflict of interest: Israel appoints war criminal Maj. Gen. Noam Tibon to ‘investigate’ civilian casualties
The inadequacy of these investigations has been criticized by the United Nations, Amnesty International, the Israeli organization B’Tselem and many other human rights groups which say they lack independence or transparency.
Under international law, states are obliged to conduct credible investigations and subsequently provide reparations to victims of war crimes. In 2013, Amnesty International stated that victims and human rights organizations have no way of knowing whether the Israeli military’s internal reviews were ‘simply giving soldiers time to coordinate their accounts of events, making justice even more unlikely.’ …
During the week-long attack on Gaza in November 2012, 165 Palestinians were killed with 35 percent of the ‘non-combatants’ under the age of eighteen. There were 65 incidents of ‘alleged misconduct’ — which included serious violations of international and humanitarian law — but the military chose not to open a single criminal investigation.
AIPAC power over Washington allows Zionists to commit war crimes with impunity; UN Human Rights Commissioner Navi Pillay has ‘serious doubt’ Israel is obeying international law in attacks that are so disproportionately killing civilians
Western and Palestinian human rights groups attack Israel’s ‘warning’ tactic — Israel inconsistently makes use of phone ‘warnings’ to targeted homes as a psychological terror tactic, describes attacking homes with small missiles ahead of attacks with larger missiles a form of ‘warning’
'These are more threats than warnings. Telling 150,000 people to leave their homes when there are airstrikes all along the route and nowhere to go because every home in every place is a target.'
Dr. King’s policy was that nonviolence would achieve the gains for black people in the United States. His major assumption was that if you are nonviolent, if you suffer, your opponent will see your suffering and will be moved to change his heart. That’s very good. He only made one fallacious assumption: In order for nonviolence to work, your opponent must have a conscience.
— Stokely Carmichael
UN General Assembly Resolution 33/24 of 29 November 1978:
1. Calls upon all States to implement fully and faithfully the resolutions of the United Nations regarding the exercise of the right to self-determination by peoples under colonial and alien domination;
2. Reaffirms the legitimacy of the struggle of peoples for independence, territorial integrity, national unity and liberation from colonial and foreign domination and foreign occupation by all available means, particularly armed struggle;
3. Reaffirms the inalienable right of the peoples of Namibia and Zimbabwe, of the Palestinian people and of all peoples under alien and colonial domination to self-determination, national independence, territorial integrity, and national unity and sovereignty without external interference; …
10. Strongly condemns all Governments which do not recognize the right of self-determination and independence of all peoples still under colonial and foreign domination and alien subjugation, notably the peoples of Africa and the Palestinian people; …
12. Further condemns the expansionist activities of Israel in the Middle East, as well as the continuous bombing of civilian Arab and, in particular, Palestinian populations and the destruction of their villages and encampments, which constitutes a serious obstacles to the realization of the self-determination and independence of the Palestinian people.
13. Demands the immediate release of all persons detained or imprisoned as a result of their struggle for self-determination and independence, full respect for their fundamental individual rights and the observance of article 5 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, under which no one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment;
US mass media peddles a mythological narrative on Palestine — reality: last month Zionists launched their largest military operations in the West Bank in a decade in response to the kidnapping of three teenagers, these operations aimed against Hamas. Two important points to note: 1. the Zionist government at the time of this crackdown already had an emergency call recording indicating the teenagers were almost certainly already killed, yet withheld this information from the public and families of the teenagers so as to maintain justification for the military crackdown as a ‘rescue’ operation; 2. these military operations were sweeping and aimed at uprooting and destroying Hamas in the West Bank, despite Hamas denying any involvement in the kidnappings and lack of any evidence that they were involved. (One could obviously argue that even if the Zionist narrative had accuracy, their brutal military crackdown would appear shockingly disproportionate in comparison to the crime nominally invoked to justify their response; additional important context at hand is the large number of Palestinian teenagers held in abusive conditions in Zionist military prisons usually on the basis of ‘crimes’ like throwing rocks at armored military vehicles.) Hamas became targeted in recent weeks as a result of their unity agreement with Fatah, reached in April and resulting in a unity government consisting of apolitical nonpartisan technocrats only last month, politically uniting Palestinians for the first time in nearly a decade, which Israel heavily protested. As a result of the severe military crackdown in the West Bank, some rocket fire from Gaza occurred; not a single death or injury had resulted from these rockets at the time Zionists responded with aerial bombing massacres against populated areas in Gaza. To this point, Israel now claims 14 total injuries, only one of those a severe injury, and one death — which was resultant from a heart attack — as a consequence of the rocket attacks; Palestinians have suffered over 160 deaths, mostly civilians, and over 1100 injuries, hundreds of which are severe. The casualty ratio for both deaths and injuries is similar to the casualty ratio during Operation Cast Lead in 2008-9, which was one of the most severely disproportionate military conflicts in human history. The massacre we see now in Gaza has nothing whatsoever to do with the justifications proclaimed by the Zionist regime, and everything to do with abusively attacking and dividing the Palestinian population who the Zionist regime views as its actual enemy.
Voices of relative dissent exist within the Zionist media: Uri Misgav on the Iron Dome:
The Iron Dome developers have created a technological wonder and saved many lives. But on the strategic level their brilliant invention is not without its damaging effects. It enables Israelis to feel protected while continuing their life almost without a hitch. They can blow up their feelings of victimization and misery to new heights, while going on about their business relatively comfortably. They can be glued to the radio and television while at the same time remaining exempt from any soul searching or critical scrutiny of the repeated, unending cycle of hostility and violence.
Iron Dome is the Israeli government’s doomsday weapon. It enables them to launch a ‘limited operation’ once every two years, to refill the hatred and demonization reserves and renew the confidence of their obedient subjects, who only a day or two ago began to realize that their government was deceiving them. With one swipe the government has wiped away the reports of recession, the defense budget, the senior officials’ wages, police corruption, the rightists’ frenzied rampage and the incitement.