Israel/Palestine
Related: About this forumGaza Police Dole Out Head-Shavings & Beatings for ‘Indecent’ Hair
Police in Hamas-ruled Gaza have started grabbing young men with long or gel-styled spiky hair off the streets, bundling them into jeeps, mocking them and shaving their heads, two of those targeted and a rights group said Sunday.
Its the latest sign that the Islamic militants are imposing their strict practices on the population.
Hamas has been slowly forcing its fundamentalist interpretation of the religion on already conservative Gaza since it overran the territory in 2007, but the new crackdown on long hair and tight or low-waist pants in several cases accompanied by beatings appears to be one of the most aggressive phases of the campaign so far.
It began last week, and two of those targeted told The Associated Press said they were rounded up in separate sweeps in Gaza City that included more than two dozen young men.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/gaza-police-shaving-heads-for-indecent-hair.php
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)azurnoir
(45,850 posts)pelsar
(12,283 posts)that this was "israels plan all along"...that the diabolical israeli leaders knew that if they evacuate gaza, destroy the settlements as per the lefts mantra...
that the gazans would vote in hamas and that (surprisingly) hamas would actually implement their beliefs on to the population....
all of it, an israel plan that hamas and the gazans obviously agreed to?..not to mention how israel made sure they fired over 10,000 rockets at its own population..and smuggled in enough materials to build a modern mall and a 5 star hotels?
all of it an israel plan that worked perfectly?
azurnoir
(45,850 posts)and you know that Hamas took over Gaza by coup in 2007? the rest is IMO sort far fetched however the near complete isolation imposed by the West after the coup in 2007 could seem to have just this effect
pelsar
(12,283 posts)the majority of the gazans voted in hamas for their social issues (at the time the PA was responsabile for overal external security...
that means the society that the gazans wanted was based on hamas philosophy and unlike western politicians, religious fanatics don't lie about their goals or the society they plan on making......hamas was voted in .
However scoop is claiming this was the israeli plan all along, that hamas would take over....given the israeli history of political meddlings has a near 100% failure rate, i find his claim rather enhartening, that the israeli govt succeeded in something.
i'm just asking if you agree with his assessment (the israeli plan along....)
azurnoir
(45,850 posts)Hamas won the majority of Parliamentary seats, Gaza no more voted for Hamas to lead them than the US voted for Republicans to lead them
and the rst is simply supposedly 'justified' by your 'mistaken' statement that Hamas was voted by Gazans to lead them
but that has become a very popular meme who seem like maybe after 6 years they are willing to play 'down the memory hole'
I can not discuss anything else until we can at least get that much straight
pelsar
(12,283 posts)municipal elections...just as a state, or city votes in a democrat or republican to take care of the local issues. Wisconsin voted in Walker and he put in his vision, Mass has a different take on how the society should be...and those two states are very different.
gazans are different from the west bank and their voting showed it.
___
are you going to claim that the elections mean nothing? and they were just pretend voting?
azurnoir
(45,850 posts)in the Palestinian Parliament, not the Gaza Parliament as it seems your trying to make out, didn't you know that?
pelsar
(12,283 posts)Last edited Tue Apr 9, 2013, 10:26 AM - Edit history (1)
hamas took gaza by popular vote, the PA had the westbank..as far as i remember.
but all of that is immaterial to the original question;
scoot apparently believes that israel wants/planned on having a failed theocratic state in gaza
my best guess is that so israeli residents in the south can be randomly shot at by missiles, rockets, mortars....and the soldiers on the border can also be randomly attacked almost daily and have to worry about those tunnels being built (yes they can hear them sometimes) and the kidnapping attempts)...
perhaps so israel can return to gaza, and reoccupy, i do believe this is how he perceives zionism...perhaps you can enlighten me
you did give it the +1, which as far as i understand means you agree......
azurnoir
(45,850 posts)the separation did not happen until 2007, as for the rest -you seem to read much more into a comment than was there IMO-when it comes to the isolation of Gaza, the first thing that comes to mind for me is Bush2 era politics
holdencaufield
(2,927 posts)... we're a clever people -- apparently
azurnoir
(45,850 posts)you were quite eloquent a few days ago
holdencaufield
(2,927 posts)Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)It's well-known that isolating a polity makes it go off-kilter (see my post to David below for an expanded explanation on this.) You can't wall off a bunch of people and profess ignorance when the community goes haywire.
So, Israel did wall off Gaza in such a manner. It had to know what was going to happen.
Contrary to your raving and scrawling, it's not a case of "evil Israeli masterminds plotting it all," so much as Israeli policymakers with a basic understanding of political science putting a cork in a damp bottle and seeing what grows on the glass. They didn't know exactly what was going to grow, but they certainly knew it was going to be something gross and probably unhealthy.
pelsar
(12,283 posts)do you want to plead ignorance or perhaps you want to give israel super powers?
__________________
first we start off with classic of ignoring the egyptian border with gaza. Like some you may believe that israel controls the egyptian foreign policy, others who have a better understanding of the egyptian politics know that, that is not true.
Hence israel did not 'wall of gaza". Egypt while keeping the above ground entrance closed, Rafah was considered a huge "open port" as trucks poured in to deliver their goods to the tunnel operators..hence gaza wasn't really closed off. And of course egypt did open and close as it saw fit (and still does)..so much for israel walling off gaza.
Second, as just as important...did the PA and after hamas really believe that they could fire rockets almost daily in to israel and they're wouldnt be a reaction from israel? like limiting their ability to exit to israel or lift the sea blockade?
now, if i understand correctly the proper excuse is that the gazans had no choice but to shoot or that they were only small rockets and mortars and anti tank missiles and bullets, so they really dont count....perhaps this is one of your beliefs or perhaps you believe they are so dumb they couldnt figure out that israel might actually react?
___
you might want to wonder why is it that gaza has two borders, one with an arab country and one with a jewish one, and BOTH keep their borders tight with gaza from day one of the withdrawal..maybe its gaza that doesnt know how to play nicely with its neighbors?
of course that would mean giving responsibility to the gazans on their actual actions and I do believe that is not allowed......
there are consequences for their actions....they had an opportunity when israel left, instead of taking advantage of it for the better, they decided to use it to try to kill more israelis, it was a stupid decision, but it was theirs and they made it.... and there and are were consequences for it.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)Isolation breeds despotism. Are you going to argue this? Are you going to tell me that isolation breeds liberty and freedom and all that good stuff? it doesn't and you certainly know it. And if you know it, then I'm not attributing "super powers" to anyone when I say Israel's policy-makers know it, too.
If anything, you're attributing staggering idiocy and incompetence to Israel's policy-makers. Only on this one thing, of course, since you need them to be bewilderingly stupid to maintain your own position.
Controls, no. Exert influence, definitely. It's in Egypt's political interest to maintain a standard of following Israel's policy with regards to its border with Gaza. After all, Egypt is reliant on the US for a lot of things, and that reliance is largely based on how well Egypt plays with Israel.
Once again you are attributing things to me that I have not said.
You also seem to believe that Egypt is somehow the major influence on what happens in Gaza, as if Israel does not exist, does not control three of the four borders of Gaza, does not have a no-go zone two kilometers inside Gaza, does not operate an embargo and blockade, and so on and so forth. You seem to have wiped Israel off the map, so to speak.
Renewing shipments through the Rafah crossing would indeed be a good thing. But let's not pretend that it's a panacaea for the problems of Gaza, hmm? While I "get" that you are eager to remove Israel from the picture and place all the blame on an Arab nation - the reality does not pan out that way. Maybe if Egypt were permitted to have a useful presence in the Sinai... but since all it's allowed is the equivalent of traffic cops... Treaty obligations, you know?
I dunno. I do know that a closure of Gaza apparently hasn't halted this problem and has instead helped Hamas become further entrenched. Since unlike you I don't rely on the idea of Israelis being mind-numbingly stupid, I have to assume that someone at least considered that this was a potential outcome of the plan.
Again, you're attacking arguments I don't make. While I'll grant that your position is so pathetically weak that this is probably necessary to bolster it, it doesn't actually do you any favors.
And why do you suppose that might be? Do you think they're just born that way, Pelsar? What's the reasoning there?
And nothing in Israel's response has caused a change in this. Logically if a different result were desired, a different approach would be tried. Since a different approach is not being tried, we have to come to one of two conclusions.
1) Israel's policy-makers are satisfied with the current situation.
or
2) Israel's policy-makers are extraordinarily stupid people.
You and I obviously opt for different solutions, it seems.
pelsar
(12,283 posts)Last edited Wed Apr 10, 2013, 01:37 AM - Edit history (5)
I believe that the Palestenains are a people who are responsible for their decisions, the decisions of their leaders, and if and when those in gaza decide that its best not to try to kill israelis, and play nice with israel, then and only then will their lives improve.
but maybe this is the problem:
Second, as just as important...did the PA and after hamas really believe that they could fire rockets almost daily in to israel and they're wouldnt be a reaction from israel? like limiting their ability to exit to israel or lift the sea blockade?
your answer:
I dunno.
without knowing what they believe (and their motivation) behind their actions, one can hardly find a solution...
___________
Logically if a different result were desired, a different approach would be tried. Since a different approach is not being tried, we have to come to one of two conclusions.
care to play? I'll show you how israel has tried different approaches with regards to gaza...and you show me how the gazans be it the PA or hamas has NOT tried to kill israelis as their basic approach.
..and we'll remember your sentence above to reach the logical conclusion.....(but this is based on giving responsibility to both israel and gaza for their actions, can you do it? which do you believe the gazans since day one of the withdrawal are or are not responsible for their actions.
(that being the very basic foundation question)
____
a note: israel in 48 had one open border to the outside world...thats all a country needs, hence in answer to your comment that egypt cannot solve many of gazans problems, clearly your wrong. And yes i want israel out of the picture from gaza, until they learn to play nice. They had and still have an opportunity to change that, any day they want...their first step is to stop the almost daily attacks.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)And this is accomplished via policy that further entrenches Hamas? Exactly what are you expecting here, an armed insurrection against Hamas? Two Bushes and a Clinton expected that sort of thing in Iraq, how'd that turn out? I have explained in previous threads why it's ludicrous it is to expect the people of Gaza to side with Israel against Hamas, because, amazingly, people just don't work that way.
I dunno.
without knowing what they believe (and their motivation) behind their actions, one can hardly find a solution...
Actually I was simply skirting your leading, loaded rhetorical question, to provice you with some basic information that you were studiously avoiding. That you're still avoiding. Don't worry, I don't blame you for avoiding it, if I were making your argument I'd avoid the fact that Israel's blockade hasn't seemed to stem the rockets that were the reason for the blockade, and has only further entrenched Hamas. Kinda undercuts your whole "spank the Gazans until the miserable children learn to behave!" argument.
It's not a matter of borders. It's a matter of isolation. Economic, diplomatic, cultural isolation. I can't tell if you're truly this ignorant or if you're just being deliberately obtuse. Neither would surprise me.
Ah. Ignorance it is.
pelsar
(12,283 posts)well?...
the day of the withdrawal: 30 kassams and almost every day after that for years..
well? (psst, hamas was not in control at that point)
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)That's a really broad group of people. 1,710,257 people as of July, 2012. Are you speaking of all of them?
pelsar
(12,283 posts)Last edited Wed Apr 10, 2013, 06:10 PM - Edit history (1)
your a big boy...you can figure out what i'm getting at,
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)Look at the Amish. They isolate themselves and live in peace.
Look at North Korea. It's hard to know for sure how they live. But it looks pretty paranoid and desperate.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)But yes, let's look at the Amish. How does their society function? You live as Amish, you have to accede to their rules and traditions which are far outside the mainstream. Of course, you are free to leave the Amish community if you want, and even if you don't, you still have economic and social ties to the outside world (Amish don't buy all those Amish baskets and quilts, you know) it's not so much isolated as it is separated. And you probably would want to leave the Amish community, given it's a strict, conservative religious patriarchal society.
Now if you took those Pennsylvania Dutch and put up a wall - legislative or an actual physical wall - that barred them from interaction with greater American society, how do you think that Amish community would look in five years? Ten?
And yes, let's look at North Korea. Do you think that North Korea would look like it does if it were open to the rest of the world? Or if the rest of the world were open to it?
Just because I'm curious, how does one come by the "true nature" you're talking about? Are they just born that way? Is it an inherent, genetic quality of the people?
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)For example, certain strains of protestantism emphasized the importance of being able to read the Bible for yourself. That was a big change from Catholicism. Just the fact that Protestants emphasize reading the Bible meant that many people needed to learn to read in order to fulfill their religious obligations. That is not unique to Protestants, but it was a change from Catholicism.
As more and more people began to read, information disseminated. More and more books were shared and made available. Over the course of time we became a society of readers. Scientific discoveries could be share more easily. New ways to publish reading material were invented. Ultimately enough people had enough information to question out loud, to say things that challenged the dominant culture. And then we had the Enlightenment.
As long as the Catholic Church dominated culture, reading was not as widespread. It may be that the invention of the printing press lead to the Protestant religion. But even that is an example of something that arose form the culture, philosophy, history and religion of a group of people. The Protestant religion started in Germany, northern Germany.
The culture of the North Germans at the time of Luther was not isolated in the way that the North Korea and the Gaza strip are isolated, but it was probably as separated from the world as those countries are. There is travel to a limited extent between North Korea and China.
Here is an example of an attempted trip to Disneyland in Japan by a member of the North Korean elite.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/1310374.stm
And they have recently closed the border for tourism between North Korea and China. So there has been travel for tourists between the two countries. North Korea is very isolated but not totally isolated.
http://www.eturbonews.com/34236/main-border-crossing-between-north-korea-and-china-closed-touris
Gaza has many visitors. They really are not that isolated. The Amish are culturally insulated. They shun those who leave and try to come back. Psychologically they are very isolated. They could not maintain their culture if they were not so isolated psychologically.
Wikipedia states you can go to Gaza through Egypt. There is a warning that anyone wearing or found with Jewish insignia risks being shot. Have fun with that one. If Gaza is isolated from Israel, it is because they want to be; it is because they are considered dangerous to Jewish people and not just by Israelis.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)Do you believe the protestant revolution occurred in a vacuum? Is North Europe just inherently special in some way?
"They"? You're equating Hamas with all Gazans again. As I mentioned, dictators benefit from and seek to impose isolation. Hamas certainly isn't clawing at the walls to end Gaza's isolation, except inasmuch as they want revenue into their coffers. I don't think that enabling them is the best way to counter them. Do you?
King_David
(14,851 posts)Isolated communities become crazy and grab young men and shave their heads, segregate there schools by gender and do other crazy dangerous stuff too numerous for this post?
How so?
This should be good.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)While I'm sure political science has a name for this tendency, I like to call it the Escape From L.A. Principle, after the amazingly bad Kurt Russel movie that seems based on the idea
The principle amounts to this; closing off a polity, isolating it, just ends up magnifying the problems within it. Case study, Iraq after '91. Iraq was, essentially, walled off from the rest of the world politically and economically. Did Saddam lose power? After all, that was supposed to be the intent. Maybe on the world scale he did... but his dictatorship grew stronger. The isolation gave him more control over his people, the sanctions made them more reliant on the Baath party powerful, and the lack of outside influence basically let him grow as nucking futz as he wanted to, since he no longer had to consider what was going on outside his borders.
The more isolated it is, the crazier the polity goes. Not only are existing problems magnified by the isolation, but the lack of outside influence tends to result in the isolated polity drifting in its own, very divergent direction from the rest of the world - the mainstream, if you will. After all, when you have constant contact with "the outside," it has a strong influence on you; you have to work with other political bodies out there, their ideas come to you, yours go out, people come and go, it all serves as a moderation and somewhat homogenizing influence.
This is basically what always happens. Was North Korea crazier before or after the fall of the USSR? It was plenty crazy before (Kim Il-Sung could control the weather and make trees appear!) but when its major connection to the outside world crumbled, it went even more haywire. Same story for Belarus and to a lesser extent Cuba. It's also evident in history, though a little harder to suss out prior to globalization.
Hell, it's so evident that this principle is what makes dictators try to self-isolate so often, because the isolation allows them to consolidate power and control the populace. see East Germany, Syria, Turkmenistan, and - again - Belarus (Belarus kinda sucks, if you haven't caught on.)
None of this is mysterious, it's why most nations in the world try to encourage open societies, trade links, travel, and communication. It's actually an upside of globalization (there are actually a few of these!) So when a polity is isolated intentionally - such as Gaza - one has to assume that the intent is to create these conditions and situations. To empower the louts, to make the public dependent on those louts, and to watch the whole thing go haywire.
So with reference to Gaza, we might ask "why?" Why would Israel try to engender this situation? Well, judging from what I hear from Israel's government and defenders, Gaza is basically an overflowing cornucopia of propaganda points on why peace with "those people" is impossible. You've surely seen, if not yourself made, the argument that a withdraw from the West Bank is impossible because, "look at Gaza!" That meaningful negotiation with the PA is pointless "because Hamas!" You've surely seen the crazies of Hamas and Islamic Jihad held up as the prototype template for how many people regard all Palestinians - Jew-hating terrorists who won't stop being evil monsters until there's another Holocaust.
Allow me to guess; another "tl;dr" on your part?
Shaktimaan
(5,397 posts)Classic mistake. Does isolation make states wacky? Or do wacky states tend to either choose or get forced into isolation?
Wrt gaza, what about when Israel did the opposite of isolate them? Remember? Withdrawal. In 2005. Open borders. Trade incentives. Turnkey veggie and flower exporting.
What happened? Less or more wacky?
Why?
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)Iraq wasn't a paradise in the late 80's, sure, it was a fucking police state in perpetual war. After Saddam invaded Kuwait (and more importantly for the US, Saudi Arabia) we walled him and his nation up. Did conditions improve or deteriorate in Iraq?
By contrast, Iran - at the time ALSO a strict police state in a state of perpetual war. After the war... Iran improved. Obviously still not a paradise, but it loosened up after Khomeini died. it maintained diplomatic, social, cultural, and economic ties around the world, despite the US' finger-wagging.
North Korea; more or less sane while it has contact with the USSR and China, instead of just the occasional envoy with an increasingly hostile china?
Has Gaza gotten better or worse since the blockading and isolation? Would it be in its current state if the Gazans hadn't been - and here you're going to laugh - "put on a diet?"
What happened? Less or more wacky?
So tell me how Israel policy has completely turned Gaza around to make it a liberal paradise and Israel's best buddy, and Hamas a footnote of history.
pelsar
(12,283 posts)the economy is growing..that means they are not isolated as you so want to believe....guess you'll have to find a new excuse.
Shaktimaan
(5,397 posts)Terrorism, Hamas and the way the Palestinians act in general is not directly caused by or even necessarily related to anything the Israelis do. Except in terms of how more freedoms allow for greater opportunities for terrorism so terrorism tends to go up following points when the Israelis decide to ease up for one reason or another.
Point being, it doesn't seem to matter whether Israel cracks down very hard on the Palestinians and keeps them under very strict martial law with curfews and checkpoints galore or whether they close all the settlements, clear out every last settler and soldier and only leave behind ways for the Arab population to get their economy going. Either way the Palestinians are not inclined to refrain from terrorism, ensuring the same end result for them regardless of what Israel does.
Shaktimaan
(5,397 posts)Iran was a full fledged member of the global community when it went totally fucking haywire and had a revolution and stuffed all its women into burkas and hung anyone who said a word against anyone in a beard.
Gaza may have gotten worse after the blockade but it wasn't because of the blockade. It was because of hamas, who also caused the blockade btw.
While Bahrain has NO contact with anyone outside for the most part and they are the happiest country on the planet. Tibet is closed off and brutally oppressed and no one even ever mugs anyone else.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)Would you like to talk about Iranian history? Because it's a rather interesting subject. I must say, you don't appear to know much about it beyond what your talking heads have told you about it.
Speaking of not knowing much...
Really? Really? Do you have any concept of what a blockade is? Why it's considered an act of war? It's not because it has no negative impact on the people blockaded, my friend. It's specifically because it does make things worse. That's the entire goddamned point of a blockade.
I was not aware Hamas had a navy to engage in a blockade. Interesting. Snark aside, has the blockade lessened Hamas' power base in Gaza? weakened their will to fight? Caused popular unrest against them? Lessened their military capability? Has Israel's blockade injured Hamas at all?
Shaktimaan, go home, you're drunk.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)Maybe they ought to have elections so we can find out.
I wonder why Hamas has prevented that from happening.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)Shaktimaan
(5,397 posts)That putting crazy dictators under heavy sanctions and isolating their state tends to make conditions and domestic policies worse? How is that surprising?
But your presumption that Israel engaged the blockade FOR that reason is weird. "We'll close off contact w other states making em real stir crazy. This will inevitably cause Hamas to wack out and begin doing really goofy, but oppressive shit. This will obviously benefit Israel by being hysterical."
It just CAN'T be a nonviolent way of restricting their raw materials and inflict retribution that happens slowly and non lethally. You know. Like they discussed and then announced.
It's prolly your thing.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)It's not surprising. That's actually my point. The one that you seem to be studiously avoiding with every ounce of effort you can muster. It's 100% predictable. Thus I have to assume Israel certainly understood the probability of the outcomes we're seeing.
Israel has a perpetual boogeyman now, doesn't it? So long as Hamas is in power, Israel gets to say "becuase Hamas!" to pretty much everything. So long as Gaza is ruled by Hamas, Israel gets to say "we're going to keep the west Bank becuase look what happened hwen we left Gaza!" - I explained all this before, kid. Think of the US with the USSR (or vice versa, if you prefer.) Any action, any stance becoems justifiable becuase of the "monsters at the gates."
No, it's not nonviolent. Are you confusing a blockade with an embargo, perhaps? Between this and your other post above, I really don't think you "get" what a blockade is...
Also I was unaware that livestock and candy were integral to the production of rockets. Which seems to have not halted, even if they were so integral.
Shaktimaan
(5,397 posts)Israel has a perpetual boogeyman now, doesn't it? So long as Hamas is in power, Israel gets to say "becuase Hamas!" to pretty much everything. So long as Gaza is ruled by Hamas, Israel gets to say "we're going to keep the west Bank becuase look what happened hwen we left Gaza!" - I explained all this before, kid. Think of the US with the USSR (or vice versa, if you prefer.) Any action, any stance becoems justifiable becuase of the "monsters at the gates."
But you seem somewhat confused about the difference between the concepts of "possible" and "actual." You posit a hypothetical argument for which zero real evidence exists as opposed to accepting the less reactionary possibility that is not only more likely and more believable but for which reams of evidence does exist.
Israel is a democracy with a free press which means policies like the blockade are discussed, debated and then reported on, in this case extensively. Your argument is absurd, and nothing more than a paranoid conspiracy delusion. If what you suggest is really the motivation then why aren't we seeing any related evidence? Where was the debate in the knesset? Where are all the opeds in the Israeli press? And if this was all a big ploy by Israel, then what was the withdrawal about? Are you suggesting that Israel was playing the long game, realizing that by offering a huge concession to the Palestinians, they would surely react violently and by electing Hamas, who would then escalate the conflict, eventually allowing Israel this opportunity to lock in the opportunity to use Hamas as a bogyman forever, because that totally benefits Israel in some way.
Or perhaps Israel would say, "We are not leaving the West Bank until we can be sure to not create a repeat of Gaza" which is not only much closer to reality, but perfectly reasonable.
pelsar
(12,283 posts)if you had to stick to facts and the real time line?.
perhaps that is why you don't?
just an example:
Israel has a perpetual boogeyman now, doesn't it? So long as Hamas is in power,
when israel left gaza, the PA was in control.....did you not know that? were they too the "boogyman"? or was everything "hunky dory" back then?
__________
perhaps, and this will be difficult for you to grasp given your well established bigotry, hamas would not be the boogyman, if they perhaps stopped trying to kill israelis almost daily? Or do expect israel to accept daily attempts at murdering israelis and israel should do nothing?
as far as the blockade goes...what materials are they missing from their economy that is stifling it? (btw, its growing...)
are their diplomats trapped in gaza?
_______________________________
King_David
(14,851 posts)msongs
(67,199 posts)Response to msongs (Reply #2)
Post removed
King_David
(14,851 posts)New meaning to 'having a bad hair day' .
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)shira
(30,109 posts)JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)I'm pointing out why they persist and why they keep such a stranglehold on Gaza.
I did the same thing in 2003, when people just like you were squawking about how much I must love Saddam to think the sanctions were counterproductive and an invasion would be even worse.
shira
(30,109 posts)After all, none of you alleged pro-Palestinian types object to the kind of Palestinian state you support in the future (the kind being run by both Hamas in Gaza and the PLO in the W.Bank). You consider any criticism of them bigotry and delegitimization.
It's that kind of society you enthusiastically endorse for a future Palestine.
I don't see any of you working towards an egalitarian, progressive, secular one either....
azurnoir
(45,850 posts)if your going to make a comment like that then perhaps it should be earlier on
shira
(30,109 posts)...which is a tactic of those who defend, support, or run interference for the offending party (in this case Hamas).
azurnoir
(45,850 posts)I see the blame being laid at the feet of the people of Gaza