The Audacity of Hype and the flotilla

"Audacity of Hope" is the usual Orwellian double speak you hear from the left. These people never change.

I thought they changed the name to 'The Stupidity of Dopes"

Good to see that Greek politicians are not all a hopeless case

Oh no Matthew surely it's not political !!

Of course it's political. It has never been about aid. The amount of material a few small ships could carry on one trip would make no impact whatsoever on the lives of one and a half million people.

It has always about keeping a light on the siege, and helping to bring about the end of it.

The people of Gaza have a right to live normally, work and trade. I suppose the original intent of Israel was to demoralise them and this more or less succeeded. But this strategy has long since passed it's sell by date. The people of Gaza have seen some hope and they are bouncing back.

All this talk about established channels. Well let us take a look at them.

The Israel/Gaza entry. Israel still restricts severely the goods that can enter, and the vast bulk of the banned items do not have the remotest connection with security concerns.No commercial traffic.

The Rafah crossing. Relatively free movement of people, albeit some requiring visas. Fair enough Egypt has the right to require visas of people entering the country. No building materials. No commercial traffic.

What is wrong with free movement of everything with international supervision to prevent the movement of arms which get in there anyway ? Why isn't this obvious solution adopted ?

I think the answer is that Israel has forgotten the original reason for the siege and now it is just all about machismo. Israel seems to have a psychological inability to give up being the boss.

Fair enough but then it must accept all the downsides of this attitude.

The siege is a political event. What is dishonourable, Matthew, about a political response ?

Siege?

Yeah right - there is a real humanitarian crisis:

http://www.tomgrossmedia.com/mideastdispatches/archives/001208.html

Note how you ignore places where there really is a humanitarian catastrophe, such as North Korea, where a new report has revealed that 650,000 people are on the verge of dying through starvation, and emaciated women and children lie sprawled on streets throughout the Communist state.

But of course - silly me - you can't vilify Israel for that...

"What is wrong with free movement of everything with international supervision to prevent the movement of arms which get in there anyway ? Why isn't this obvious solution adopted ?"

When terrorists stop launching missles into Israel, we can have total free movement. Until then, why would a multi-national force want to get involved, when there are far worse crises elsewhere?

There are no missiles fired from the West Bank so why is there no free movement in the West Bank?

(and why the illegal settlements?)

Ah Suzanna they send human bombs from Judea and Samaria if you would like I could send you a list of where they came from. These have now stopped thanks in no small part to the security barrier - you see we think human life is worth just a little more than temporary inconveneience which would stop as soon as the Arabs swear off terrorism. If you like I can link you to the bereaved family website and it will explain it all to you - but knowing your predelictions I would assume you have no interest in learning the truth.
The settlements are perfectly legal get over it.

If an entire population was in an open air 'prison' as Mathhew Harris' 'leader' David Cameron said of Gaza then those who seek to highlight this are within their rights to do so. If Israel was a true democracy then it would tolerate peaceful dissent. Instead Israel shoots to kill.
It doesn't matter how much food there is in Gaza the point is that the people in Gaza cannot leave and they are subject to daily attack from air, sea and land resulting in thousands of deaths over the years. (You forget to mention this)

Israel is armed to the teeth courtesy of the US taxpayer and Gaza is one of the poorest places on earth. Gaza is unarmed and defenceless against daily attacks from Israel. It is the only place on earth that is under total siege.

The people on the flotilla are just as much a political idea as a humanitarian one. They have once more highlighted the insane cruelty that is inflicted on the occupied Palestinians. For that their mission is a success.

The settlements are illegal because they have been placed on land that is occupied militarily.
Not only are they illegal, they are immoral, because they are denying another nation the right to self-determination in their own land.
And not only are they illegal and immoral, they are toxic, because they have poisoned the debate within Israel and between Israeli Jews and the majority of Jews who live beyond its borders. They are toxic also because they drive rabbis to write things that if they had been written about 80 years ago in Germany about Jews, we'd call it anti-Semitic.
They are toxic because they have sprouted a generation of hooligans who are never touched by the Israeli authorities for fear of angering the aforementioned rabbis and their political supporters.
Israel's leadership has always been cowardly when facing these hooligans.

I am intrigued to see that over at my own blog, at http://matthewfharris.blogspot.com/2011/07/audacity-of-hype-and-flotilla..., someone called Simon posted exactly the same comment that suzanna posted here. Are Simon and suzanna one and the same person? Did Simon borrow suzanna's words, or perhaps vice versa? I don't really care, but it mildly amuses me.

If the flotilla changed any minds, it would be the gullible who are suckers for sound and fury.

Suzanna, if you lead the flotilla, everyone on the boat could sing Suzanne by Leonard Cohen.

http://www.leonardcohenfiles.com/verdal.html

Come on, everybody sing,

"Suzanne takes you down
to her place near the river
you can hear the boats go by
you can spend the night beside her
And you know she’s half crazy"

Millis aka T-Sam

The settlements are legal - the USA for one does not proclaim them "illegal".

Remaining in land taken after repelling invaders is perfectly legal.

Get your facts right.

Why are you calling Millis by T-Sam? I've heard (from a reliable source) that wasn't allowed.

The settlements are legal - the USA for one does not proclaim them "illegal".

No it decorously labels them " illigitimate "

And for two ?

Jonathan, I think you'll find Israel invaded the West Bank in 67 before it was attacked. Who cares what the Yanks think. They are a declining power. The settlements are illegal, immoral, anti-Zionist and toxic. Only one- staters support them.
And does your mate Boris know you blog in office hours instead of making sure there's enough of our money to fix potholes?

International law distinguishes wars of conquest from wars of defense. Land acquired by the victor through defense is given greater title.

In addition, international law applies to conventional warfare, and assumes the loser negotiates in good faith with the victor. Once an agreement is reached, then the occupying army has to leave.

Do you see the losing party eager to work out a face to face treaty? The Palestinians are like that knight from "Monty Python and the Holy Grail" who kept wanting to fight King Arthur, despite getting both his arms and legs chopped off.

Be sure to tune in tomorrow, to this never ending saga. Cheerio!