Skip to main content

Today Anthony Weiner D-NY had the unmitigated gall as to defend Israels actions in international waters.

This was about instigating an altercation and they succeeded," Weiner, one of Israel's leading allies in Congress, told me. He insisted that the activists piloting the flotilla were offered other alternatives by Israel, such as docking the ship and transporting the supplies to Gaza by land.

"If you want to instigate a conflict with the Israeli navy it isn't hard to do," Weiner continued. "They were offered alternatives. Instead they chose to sail into the teeth of an internationally recognized blockade."

Pushed on whether the Israeli response, which killed at least nine, was disproportionate, Weiner wouldn't acknowledge it. "It's always easy to criticize the response to a hostile act, but for a week at least the Israelis were trying to prevent this altercation," Weiner said, adding that the Israelis had been "set upon."

There are so many things wrong with his depiction of events where do I begin?

This was about instigating an altercation and they succeeded.

No, Mr. Weiner, this was about bringing aid to Gaza citizens who are currently being starved to death by Israel in what some call the New Auschwitz, but as one commenter below rightfully points out is actually the New Warsaw Ghetto.  In case you missed it Mr. Weiner, there is an extreme humanitarian crisis in the Gaza strip.  The economy has collapsed.  They are experiencing 45% unemployment.  Places that were destroyed by Israeli bombs over a year ago are still sitting in ruins.  Electricity is sporadic.  The people of Gaza are being subjected to a slow starvation that amounts to genocide.

If you weren't so emotionally invested in Israel, perhaps you could see this.

He insisted that the activists piloting the flotilla were offered other alternatives by Israel, such as docking the ship and transporting the supplies to Gaza by land.

Which was unacceptable Mr. Weiner because Israel refuses to allow parts to replace broken down farming equipment into the strip.  It seems not allowing the people of Gaza to farm is part of the planned genocide by slow starvation planned for the New Warsaw Ghetto.  Back up generators have failed because Israel won't allow those things to pass through by land either.  Hundreds ofsick people have died because of this travesty alone.  It seems that is also part of the planned genocide for the New Warsaw Ghetto.

"If you want to instigate a conflict with the Israeli navy it isn't hard to do," Weiner continued.  

So you're argument is that a shipload of people armed with sticks and stones, trying to help end Israels New Warsaw Ghetto are "instigating a conflict" and so they deserved what they got?  Really Mr.Weiner?  Are you wearing such rose-colored glasses when you look at Israel that you believe this crock?

Oh, but you're not done are you Mr. Weiner?

"They were offered alternatives. Instead they chose to sail into the teeth of an internationally recognized blockade."

Excuse me, Mr. Weiner, but in case you missed it, this act of international terrorism happened in international waters.  You aren't proposing that Israel has a right to commit acts in violation of international law in order to proceed with its plans to commit genocide in the New Warsaw Ghetto are you?  Are you really so blinded by loyalty to Israel that you think it is acceptable for Israel to attack ships sailing under foreign flags in international waters?

Yes, Mr. Weiner, I think you are and I think that's a shame Mr. Weiner because most of the time you're a pretty decent Democrat.

"It's always easy to criticize the response to a hostile act, but for a week at least the Israelis were trying to prevent this altercation," Weiner said, adding that the Israelis had been "set upon."

 Mr. Weiner, you need to remember your own people's history, your own people's Warsaw Ghetto.  Perhaps then, you'd realize that trying to relieve the siege of Gaza is anythign except a hostile act.  As for being "set upon", it was the activists trying to put an end to Israels genocide that were set upon, Mr. Wiener.

All Israel had to do to avoid conflict was not raid the flotilla.

We don't need anymore congressmen who believe black is white, war is peace, good is evil Mr. Weiner.  We had enough of that with the neocons who, by the way, were working hand in hand with Mr. Netenyahu throughout the 90's and into this century.  You really need to step back from this Mr. Weiner, it's obvious you've got too much emotional investment in the state of Israel to see clearly what that state has become under the far right wing Likud and Mr. Netenyahu.  It's obvious that when it comes to Israel, you can't see that the neocons have taken over and you can't see that they're no better than the Nazi's.

It's really a shame, Mr. Weiner.  I thought you were better than that.

UPDATE:  Some have taken umbrage at my use of the term "New Auschwitz" (which I edited to say New Warsaw Ghetto after a commenter below rightfully pointed out it was more accurate) to describe the slow starvation and murder of innocent Palestinians in Gaza.  To this I reply, then what do you call THIS:

Medical ethics violated

The contribution made by medical personnel in making decisions in respect to the Palestinian diet in Gaza is grave and violates medical ethics. It is reminiscent of a situation whereby doctors monitor torture, believing that examining the tortured individual before and during the interrogation protects him from irreversible damages. The principles of medical ethics require medical teams to act on behalf of patients, as Gaza had not been struck by drought. Malnutrition there had not been forced by nature. We are dealing with a case of deliberate starvation (or "minimal diet") that can be stopped at any given moment.

Word games making pretense of not crossing red lines are invalid in a reality whereby pregnant women, babies, and children suffer from anemia, whose damage to their development is known. And did anyone look into the development of a child who grows up within this food pyramid? Will these security experts be kind enough to reveal to us the intimate connection between Israel's security and an anemic Palestinian child?

Or THIS:

Around 46 per cent of Gaza and West Bank households are "food insecure" or in danger of becoming so, according to a UN report on the impact of conflict and the global boycott of the Hamas-led Palestinian Authority.

The UN report says 34 per cent of households - with income below $1.68 per day and/or showing decreasing food expenditures - are "food insecure". The WFP officially defines "food security" as "the ability of a household to produce and/or access at all times the minimum food needed for a healthy and active life". It goes on to say that 12 per cent of households are "vulnerable" to food insecurity.

And does this remind anyone of how the Nazi's stripped the Jews of all their wealth?

the report points out that some action taken by families to continue to feed themselves - including the sale of land, jewellery and other assets" - will have an "irreversible impact on livelihoods".

What is the purpose of this:

The UN report comes against a background in which a 2004 survey of Palestinian households showed a "slow but steady" growth in actual malnutrition - as measured by reduced growth, vitamin deficiencies, anaemia and other indicators - among a minority of the population. The 2004 survey found "stunting" rates of abnormal height-to-body ratio at just under 10 per cent.

except an attempt by right wing extremists in control of the Israeli government to commit atrocities against the Palestinian peoples by slowly starving an entire peoples to death?  How is this not slow and deliberate genocide?  How is this NOT the New Warsaw Ghetto, just made more palatable by the slow, subtle nature of its inevitable "Solution" to the Palestinian problem?

Originally posted to Pen on Tue Jun 01, 2010 at 01:25 PM PDT.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar (22+ / 0-)

    "Take whatever you can, Steal whatever you can't take, Kill what you can't steal so no one else can have it." - Republican Business Philosophy

    by Pen on Tue Jun 01, 2010 at 01:25:55 PM PDT

  •  is a weiner like an orange boner? (0+ / 0-)

    "Insanity in individuals is something rare, but in groups, parties, nations and epochs it is the rule"~Nietzsche

    by Flag Waving Idiot on Tue Jun 01, 2010 at 01:28:00 PM PDT

  •  I'd love to hear his opinion on the US (7+ / 0-)

    Civil Rights Movement.  Maybe he could even tell a certain fellow Congressman about how he deserved to get his skull cracked open and almost killed.  

    Politics is like playing Asteroids - You go far enough to the left and you end up on the right. Or vice-versa.

    by Jonze on Tue Jun 01, 2010 at 01:29:54 PM PDT

  •  This is one issue (7+ / 0-)

    where there is true, lockstep bipartisanship.

    The Teabaggers are the GOP base

    by stevej on Tue Jun 01, 2010 at 01:29:55 PM PDT

  •  Damnit. (7+ / 0-)

    And I LIKE Anthony Wiener.  But he's also a congressman of a district which, I believe, is substantially Jewish and coming out against Israel is probably political suicide for a congressman like him.  

    Not that this excuses his attitude here.  There just isn't any excuse for Israel's actions, period.  

    :: Not so hopeful now ::

    by Rick Aucoin on Tue Jun 01, 2010 at 01:33:14 PM PDT

  •  Wait (7+ / 0-)

    The blockade was "internationally recognized?"

    How does that occur, exactly?

    YOU grab a mop. I'm gonna invent a car that runs on hate.

    by The Termite on Tue Jun 01, 2010 at 01:36:52 PM PDT

  •  This diary should be criticized... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    chumley

    especially when it compares Israel's leaders to Nazis.  I think they should be replaced and disagree with their policies, but that is over the top.

    I suggest the diarist read a few of the Nuremberg judgments to quell the ignorance reflected.  Or perhaps the Wannsee Protocol.  

    It's also unwise to conflate what happened in this event to the overall picture.

    Interestingly, the Security Council got a view of what actually seems to have occurred and issued a rather mild condemnation.

    The peace activists may, too, have overplayed their hand by showing it was not really peace they were after.  

    I say what I believe, and disagree if you like, but offer substance, as I will pay no heed to personal insults or gratuities.

    by citizen53 on Tue Jun 01, 2010 at 01:38:42 PM PDT

    •  Security Council=US & stoogies (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      El Zmuenga, angel d, orestes1963

      Of course the security council issued a mild condemnation. That's because the US has veto power there. If the security council was a true democracy where all the countries of the world are represented, you can bet Israel would be strongly and roundly condemned. Open your eyes. The entire world, including largely people without any stake in the game, all condemn Israel's actions. There is no neutral party who takes the side of Israel. That should tell you something.

    •  Oh, NOW we hear about Nuremberg judgments (0+ / 0-)

      But not when those judgments would apply to Israeli actions.

      And yes, I DO compare Netenyahu to the Nazi's.  He's the Israeli George Bush and I compare Bush to the Nazi's too.

      "Take whatever you can, Steal whatever you can't take, Kill what you can't steal so no one else can have it." - Republican Business Philosophy

      by Pen on Tue Jun 01, 2010 at 03:10:15 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  No, it was also instigation. I think they'd admit (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    aufklaerer, angel d

    that, and good for them.

    "New Auschwitz"? Good god.

    Weiner was wrong to not condemn the IDF for the deaths, and for doing a nighttime raid in international waters. I agree with that.

    •  Perhaps you've been kept ignorant of the reality (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      mint julep

      http://www.americantaskforce.org/...

      One of the greatest absurdities is the Israeli policy that it forces a dietary regime on 1.8 million Palestinians in Gaza. This policy does not stem from "health reasons" and borders on starving the population. The Israel leadership's statements whereby the blockade entirely stems from security reasons were exposed as false through the policy of starvation that can have no connection to Israeli security.

      Medical ethics violated

      The contribution made by medical personnel in making decisions in respect to the Palestinian diet in Gaza is grave and violates medical ethics. It is reminiscent of a situation whereby doctors monitor torture, believing that examining the tortured individual before and during the interrogation protects him from irreversible damages. The principles of medical ethics require medical teams to act on behalf of patients, as Gaza had not been struck by drought. Malnutrition there had not been forced by nature. We are dealing with a case of deliberate starvation (or "minimal diet") that can be stopped at any given moment.

      "Take whatever you can, Steal whatever you can't take, Kill what you can't steal so no one else can have it." - Republican Business Philosophy

      by Pen on Tue Jun 01, 2010 at 03:14:03 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Yes, (0+ / 0-)

    and anyone else making the same erroneous defense of the Israeli government's actions.

    Language is wine upon the lips. -Virginia Woolf

    by valadon on Tue Jun 01, 2010 at 01:40:17 PM PDT

  •  "What some call" (0+ / 0-)

    That's a Fox-style attribution.  Who are these "some", and where do they do this "calling"?

  •  And someone (0+ / 0-)

    said to me today in another comment members Congress wouldn't dare try and defend Israel right now.

    In the choice between changing ones mind and proving there's no need to do so, most people get busy on the proof.

    by jsfox on Tue Jun 01, 2010 at 01:50:18 PM PDT

  •  Pro tip: Boarding someone else's ship (7+ / 0-)

    in international waters IS an attack.

    I'm gonna go eat a steak. And fuck my wife. And pray to GOD - hatemailapalooza, 052210

    by punditician on Tue Jun 01, 2010 at 01:50:27 PM PDT

  •  Josh Marshall at TPM linked to this analysis (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Catte Nappe, sabredance, condorcet

    Link:

    On Sunday, Israeli naval forces intercepted the ships of a Turkish nongovernmental organization (NGO) delivering humanitarian supplies to Gaza. Israel had demanded that the vessels not go directly to Gaza but instead dock in Israeli ports, where the supplies would be offloaded and delivered to Gaza. The Turkish NGO refused, insisting on going directly to Gaza. Gunfire ensued when Israeli naval personnel boarded one of the vessels, and a significant number of the passengers and crew on the ship were killed or wounded.

    Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon charged that the mission was simply an attempt to provoke the Israelis. That was certainly the case. The mission was designed to demonstrate that the Israelis were unreasonable and brutal. The hope was that Israel would be provoked to extreme action, further alienating Israel from the global community and possibly driving a wedge between Israel and the United States. The operation’s planners also hoped this would trigger a political crisis in Israel.

    A logical Israeli response would have been avoiding falling into the provocation trap and suffering the political repercussions the Turkish NGO was trying to trigger. Instead, the Israelis decided to make a show of force. The Israelis appear to have reasoned that backing down would demonstrate weakness and encourage further flotillas to Gaza, unraveling the Israeli position vis-à-vis Hamas. In this thinking, a violent interception was a superior strategy to accommodation regardless of political consequences. Thus, the Israelis accepted the bait and were provoked.

    Please don't shoot the messenger. Just saying this take isn't too different than Anthony Weiner's.

    This ain't no party. This ain't no disco. This ain't no foolin' around!

    by Snud on Tue Jun 01, 2010 at 01:55:36 PM PDT

    •  They had a 3rd option. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Snud, sabredance

      All they had to do was wait until the flotilla came into Israeli waters, then order them to turn around, and when they didn't they could have shot out their propellers and taken the ship custody without hurting anyone.

      Violence in international waters was a very stupid plan, and it did generate international sympathy for the people of Gaza and those seeking to help them.

      If you can find money to kill people, you can find money to help people. --Tony Benn

      by rhetoricus on Tue Jun 01, 2010 at 02:18:54 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  So let's get this straight (0+ / 0-)

      This was instigation because:

      The Turks KNEW Israel would use illegal and disproportionate force responding to it.

      The Turks were therefore "provoking" Israel to use illegal and disproportionate force responding to it.

      The Israelis had no other option but to use illegal and disproportionate force because to do anything else would be to appear "weak".

      Have I got that right?

      Because a third option would be to stop slowly starving the Palestinians and end the siege.

      "Take whatever you can, Steal whatever you can't take, Kill what you can't steal so no one else can have it." - Republican Business Philosophy

      by Pen on Tue Jun 01, 2010 at 03:41:51 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  "Internationally recognized blockade"?????? (5+ / 0-)

    Which UN resoluion authorized this blockade?
    How on earth is this blockade "internationally recognized"? What about the Somali pirates? Is the Gulf of Aden an 'internationally recognized piracy zone' too?

  •  My congressman is wrong on this one. n/t (0+ / 0-)
  •  Reccing your diary (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Knarfc, FiredUpInCA

    but with strong recommendation that, as other posters have said, you edit the New Auschwitz reference.

    Having said that ...

    Damn.  How very disappointing Weiner turned out to be, right?  

  •  Holocaust (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    TooFolkGR

    Holocaust is used too often as a way to guilt trip people into shutting up about Israel atrocities.

    But putting it like this doesn't help.

    The Raptor of Spain: A Webserial
    From Muslim Prince to Christian King (Updated Nov. 24)

    by MNPundit on Tue Jun 01, 2010 at 02:25:06 PM PDT

  •  He should have reserved his comments. This (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Southside, Knarfc, orestes1963

    was not the time to pronounce his verdict.  People have been killed trying to do what they thought was the right thing to do.  It's like pouring salt on an open wound.


    The religious fanatics didn't buy the republican party because it was virtuous, they bought it because it was for sale

    by nupstateny on Tue Jun 01, 2010 at 02:25:18 PM PDT

  •  Weiner proved himself a weasel (0+ / 0-)

    when he did the big hoopla on HCR. He is a looser.

  •  Well, they must be stupid then to know that there (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    qofdisks

    is a trap and yet you decide to walk right into it.

    Well here are some rational Israeli's journalists: and here is the link

    Again came the claim of self defense, that "they lynched us" and that all the dead are on their side. Once more the use of violence and excessive and lethal force was in play and once more civilians wound up dead.

    This action also featured the pathetic focus on "public relations," as if there is something to explain, and again the sick question was asked: Why didn't the soldiers use more force.

    And here is another one by Yossi Sarid and here is the link

    This time, it was all foreseeable. Even this newspaper warned in advance about the possibility of defeat in victory. As preparations for the big sea confrontation proceeded, it became increasingly clear that it would end badly.

    After all, the troops were being prepared by seven idiots and their subordinates - people who cannot see beyond the ends of their noses.

    And here is another one by Ari Shavit and here is the link

    During the 2006 war in Lebanon I concluded that my 15-year-old daughter could have conducted it more wisely than the Olmert-Peretz government. We've progressed. Today it's clear to me that my 6-year-old son could do much better than our current government. Even a child would have seen the imbalance in the risk-threat assessment in overpowering the flotilla ships. Any smart kid would understand that you don't sacrifice what is important for what is not. But the cabinet did not understand. Under the leadership of Netanyahu, Barak and Ya'alon it came to a patently unreasonable decision. It was a decision of complete fools.

    Endless questions are being asked. What happened to Israel's vaunted creativity? Why was the worst of all possible options chosen? Where was the army chief of staff? Where were the intelligence services? Why did we walk into this trap, which we managed to avoid in all the years of the second intifada, with our eyes open? Why didn't we see that instead of tightening the siege on Gaza, we were about to tighten the siege on ourselves?

    Perhaps the most troubling question in the wake of this fiasco on the high sea is this: Who is navigating our ship of state, and toward what catastrophe are the captains of this ship of fools steering us?

    Don't give a damn a/t each & every politician currently alive in the US. Last time i voted for the top part of the ballot was 1972. Never missed SB election

    by Mutual Assured Destruction on Tue Jun 01, 2010 at 02:40:00 PM PDT

  •  What with this"New Auschwitz'? (0+ / 0-)

    Confining a population of people into an urban area and not letting in anything and letting them starve to death is closer to being Jewery in Warsaw during WWII.  It is a distinct tactic from concentration camps with the purpose of efficient extermination.  The Warsaw confinement was not efficient extermination.  Perhaps you don't use this more accurate comparison because Auschwitz was somehow more appalling?  While Auschwitz was appalling, Warsaw was not less so albeit easier to get away with.
    Call it the "Latest Warsaw" because the tactic is certainly not new.

    •  You're right, it was Warsaw, not Auschwitz (0+ / 0-)

      and I'll change make note of that.

      "Take whatever you can, Steal whatever you can't take, Kill what you can't steal so no one else can have it." - Republican Business Philosophy

      by Pen on Tue Jun 01, 2010 at 03:43:56 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  What, no snark tag? (0+ / 0-)

    No, Mr. Weiner, this was about bringing aid to Gaza citizens who are currently being starved to death by Israel in what some call the New Auschwitz,

    Who are these some?  Hamas?

    Strength of character does not consist solely in having powerful feelings, but in maintaining one's balance in spite of them. - Clausewitz

    by SpamNunn on Tue Jun 01, 2010 at 04:10:50 PM PDT

  •  if you are pro-Israel (0+ / 0-)

    then what Israel is doing is in their interests. Preventing aid from getting to your enemies is a common war tactic, and they did it in their interests.

    When your enemy thinks that you should be wiped out of existence, you will treat them like the scum you believe they are.

    (I am a Jewish New Yorker, and I support what Weiner says. Weiner may be running for NYC Mayor in a few years, and extreme pro-Zionism plays well here.)

    People panic too much on this site.

    by thematt523 on Tue Jun 01, 2010 at 05:23:23 PM PDT

    •  Jabitonsky thought the Arabs should be wiped out (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Pen

      A century ago he encouraged the colonization of Palestine with the stated goal that the local Arabs be dealt with as the United States had dealt with its native peoples.

      Israel has a national prize named after him.

      So who was planning to exterminate whom first?

      And sir, international law limits what you can do to your enemies.  Go over to Juan Cole's site where he has often explained the laws of occupation.  A lot of the laws are due to this guy named Adolf Hitler...

    •  The same "rationalizations" could be made (0+ / 0-)

      in 1939, by the Nazi's.

      "Take whatever you can, Steal whatever you can't take, Kill what you can't steal so no one else can have it." - Republican Business Philosophy

      by Pen on Tue Jun 01, 2010 at 07:51:41 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Jonathan Tasini delivers the pill (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Pen

    Jewish-American, Democratic candidate for Congress from New York:

    Beyond the obvious condemnation of the Israeli attack in international waters on the flotilla of boats carrying humanitarian aid to Gaza, I want us to focus very clearly on this fact: our country bears a heavy responsibility for the deaths of at least 10 people, people whose one goal was to deliver basic supplies to a population that has endured a crushing blockade.

    The truth is that those deaths could have been avoided had the political leadership of the United States--the Administration and the Congress--ended our country's failed policy of refusing to act to end the Gaza blockade, refusing to demand from Israel that it negotiate seriously an end to the occupation, refusing to act decisively when Israel did not abide by basic international standards of law, and, effectively, continuing a one-sided policy that gave Israel a "green light" for policies that cleared a path that inevitably leads to attacks as the one that just happened.

    For years, the U.S. has had ample opportunity to change its one-sided policy which has resulted in the continued warfare, occupation, misery and death of Palestinians and Israelis. Indeed, had we acted properly just two months ago, the deaths of the people on the flotilla might have been avoided. In March, the Israeli government approved the building of 1,600 new homes in East Jerusalem--a decision by the Israeli government that was counter-productive, done in bad-faith and sent a signal that the Israeli government was not serious about reaching a comprehensive peace agreement in the Middle East—which must result in the creation of an independent, viable Palestinian state for any peace agreement to be long-lasting.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site