31
   

THE WAR IN GAZA

 
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Tue 3 Feb, 2009 11:03 am
@Foofie,
Foofie wrote:
...Go in, but go in with female troops. Whip their you know what, and then let us see if any of the macho males can face the world. Just my opinion.
Just your opinion which betrays you as a very peculiar person. There is no such word as "contractioned" by the way. I'm surprised that one who takes such a pedantic view about missing apostrophes resorts to making up words instead of expressing a view clearly and in English.
Advocate
 
  1  
Tue 3 Feb, 2009 11:26 am
@FreeDuck,
Please, be honest for once. It is a temporary, transitory, incursion.
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Tue 3 Feb, 2009 11:31 am
@Advocate,
Advocate wrote:

Please, be honest for once. It is a temporary, transitory, incursion.

So you disagree with the author of the piece you posted, who thought that calling it an incursion was inaccurate?
0 Replies
 
Foofie
 
  1  
Tue 3 Feb, 2009 12:55 pm
@Steve 41oo,
Steve 41oo wrote:

Foofie wrote:
...Go in, but go in with female troops. Whip their you know what, and then let us see if any of the macho males can face the world. Just my opinion.
Just your opinion which betrays you as a very peculiar person. There is no such word as "contractioned" by the way. I'm surprised that one who takes such a pedantic view about missing apostrophes resorts to making up words instead of expressing a view clearly and in English.


I have no idea where you believe I used "contractioned"?

I do not see why my "opinion" "betrays" me as "a very peculiar person."

My "opinion" might just reflect a very elegant solution to a military deployment. By losing to female Israeli troops, Hamas may, in effect, suffer a "virtual" castration. That might knock the proverbial wind out of a macho male, I believe.

It might also show a way that western nations can deal with terrorism. Many in the current crop of terrorists may not find it palatable to die at the hands of a female soldier?
Advocate
 
  1  
Fri 6 Feb, 2009 12:16 pm
Barak: Hamas liable for death of Gaza physician's daughters

'We cannot bring anyone back to life, but we know we have the most moral army in the world,' Barak says after IDF presents findings on investigation to Dr. Ezzeldeen Abu al-Aish; adds: Millions of flyers were dropped and hundreds of phone calls were placed to prevent civilian casualties

Defense Minister Ehud Barak spoke Thursday of the Gaza offensive incident which resulted in the killing of Gaza physician Ezzeldeen Abu al-Aish's three daughters, and said it was "a regrettable and painful event, but that can happen when war takes place in densely populated areas.

Army presents conclusions of inquiry into death of Gaza doctor's three daughters; IDF says troops fired at from nearby site, adds that it does not intend to take action against forces involved in incident

"The responsibility is Hamas', under international law as well," he said at a Labor faction meeting in Tel Aviv.

Referring to the findings of an IDF investigation into the incident, which were presented to al-Aish on Wednesday, the defense minister said "no other army in the world investigates such regrettable accidents. We cannot bring anyone back to life, but we know we have the most moral army in the world.

"Millions of flyers were dropped and hundreds of phone calls were placed to warn Gazans (ahead of Israeli strikes) and prevent civilian casualties," he said.

The army's investigation, approved by Chief of Staff Gabi Ashkenazi, revealed that an IDF tank fired two shells at al-Aish house after fire was opened at troops from a nearby area. The probe also showed that troops spotted figures at the top floors of the building helping to direct Palestinian fire at Golani forces.

According to Barak, the results of Operation Cast Lead "may expedite the decision-making process to bring (kidnapped IDF soldier) Gilad Shalit home. Returning him will require difficult and painful decisions."

Shalit was captured by Palestinian terrorists during a cross-border raid on an IDF base near Gaza on June 25, 2006.

As for the upcoming elections, Barak said "the attitude towards the Labor party and towards me in particular has changed over the past few months. Ours is a security agenda. Earlier this morning a senior Islamic Jihad commander was killed by IDF forces in the West Bank. All targeted killings can prevent terror attacks."

--ynetnews.com
0 Replies
 
Advocate
 
  1  
Sat 7 Feb, 2009 10:34 am
Tod Robberson: Jimmy Carter's peace formula doesn't add up

03:30 PM CST on Friday, February 6, 2009

During Palestinian elections in January 2005, I had the misfortune as a reporter of encountering Jimmy Carter at an East Jerusalem polling station. Israeli officials were blocking Palestinians from voting, and Carter was mediating. I asked how his efforts were going.During Palestinian elections in January 2005, I had the misfortune as a reporter of encountering Jimmy Carter at an East Jerusalem polling station. Israeli officials were blocking Palestinians from voting, and Carter was mediating. I asked how his efforts were going.

"Wonderful," he said, deadpan. Not reading his sarcasm, I asked if he was serious. Carter erupted. "Hell no!" he shouted. "It is a complete disaster!" Carter, now 84, made clear he doesn't suffer fools when discussing the Israel-Palestine issue. He takes it very personally " so much so that he risks being dismissed by President Barack Obama, along with the Israeli and Palestinian leadership, as too dreamy-eyed to be taken seriously.

His new book, We Can Have Peace in the Holy Land: A Plan That Will Work, will give ammunition to critics who label him a kook. But it is a thorough examination of past peace efforts, explaining why they didn't work and what has to happen in today's Middle East for any new plan to succeed.

As he explained to me in a recent interview (without shouting), peace will require tough compromises, including shared jurisdiction over Jerusalem and direct talks between Hamas and Israel. That sounds outlandish and unworkable, but he says it's not.

Publicly, Hamas says it will talk peace with Israel after the Jews have been driven into the sea. Israelis say they won't talk to Hamas until its leaders stop blowing people up and talking about driving Jews into the sea. Hamas and most Arab leaders won't recognize the existence of a state whose borders, after six decades, still aren't clearly defined.

"That's why every Arab country in the world " all 22 of them " agreed that they would recognize Israel's right to exist, to live in peace ... if they [Israelis] withdraw to the pre-1967 borders," Carter says.

Carter thinks hurdles like Hamas intransigence and Israeli expansionism can be overcome. His book liberally quotes Israeli and Hamas leaders as acknowledging that they must talk to one another.

Carter writes that "a real change may be under way," in Hamas thinking, "especially regarding the group's willingness for Palestinians to live peacefully next to Israel." He told me that, contrary to popular belief, most senior Hamas leaders are not religious zealots who think they're commanded by God to kill Israelis.

Believing in Carter's six-point plan requires accepting lots of caveats, conditions and what-ifs. For example, he insists Hamas leaders are willing to embrace a peace treaty " including one negotiated without Hamas participating in the talks " if Palestinians approve it by popular vote.

That's a huge if. Most Palestinians favor Hamas over the moderate but corrupt Fatah leadership currently in power. If a treaty were negotiated without Hamas representation, is it realistic to think Hamas would instruct its supporters to vote for it? Hardly.

Carter correctly scolds Israel for its illegal settlement of occupied Arab land and stated policy of responding far out of proportion to attacks on its territory or people. That said, his book struck me as imbalanced " too tolerant of the Palestinian bad behavior that constantly prevents meaningful dialogue from starting.

As horrifying as the recent Gaza war was, I found myself hoping it wouldn't end with the typical truce scenario: no victor, no vanquished, no resolution. While truces bring Palestinians short-term relief, Israelis always seem to benefit in the long run, buying more time to build settlements and wall off Palestinian land. Why can't Arabs see that this is a no-win situation?

The Obama administration has to break this cycle, Carter says. "We haven't had any firm peace agreements since ... 1993, when the Oslo agreement went into effect. Since then, we've just had frustrated hopes."

The fact is, Carter got lucky in 1977 when Egypt's Anwar Sadat made a magnanimous gesture by visiting Israel and initiating peace talks. It's going to require more such gestures, from Syria's Bashar Assad and Hamas' Khaled Mashaal, among others, for any new breakthroughs to happen. Meanwhile, Israel must stop humiliating its Arab foes and slapping the outstretched hand.

Carter's solution relies too heavily on trust in a land where guns, rockets, lies and betrayal speak far louder than mutual respect and magnanimity. We can have peace in the Holy Land, but don't expect it to happen under Jimmy Carter's plan.

Tod Robberson is an editorial writer for The Dallas Morning News. This column reflects his personal opinion. His e-mail address is [email protected].
georgeob1
 
  1  
Sat 7 Feb, 2009 11:59 pm
@Advocate,
Advocate wrote:

Tod Robberson: Jimmy Carter's peace formula doesn't add up


Interesting insight. I wonder just what better alternative he may have in mind. The "peace" strategy of the various Israeli governments since 1967 don't seem to be working very well either.

Meanwhile Israelis steadily expand the territory under their control through forced eviction of Palestinians from their homes, armed settlements in Palestinain territory and a system of walls and limited access roads that increasingly isolate the Palestinian population in disjoint enclaves each subject to Israeli military control for access and basic economic activity.

Perhaps the Israelis strategy is aimed at something besides peace. Could it be expansion of their territory??
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Sun 8 Feb, 2009 12:55 am
@Advocate,
Jimmy Carter is a very dangerous idiot.

He believes Hamas "can be trusted."

He says "Some people think Hamas is a terrorist group."

Obviously he doesn't although the US State Dept has labeled them as such.

But what's that to Jimmy Carter the self-perceived White Knight of International Affairs? The Nobel Peace Prize recipient.

Should any American recieve the Nobel Peace Prize, we need to question their loyalty to the US.

I voted for Carter the first time around and so I too am some sort of idiot, but his refusal to accept the responsibility of an ex-president is shameful.

The only reason anyone listens to him is that he was once a president.

He held the office. He knew how hard the job was and how harmful it would be if ex-presidents stepped up to criticize or contradict him and yet that's just what he does.

The world doesn't need Jimmy Carter's voice, but in his sanctimonious egoism he believes it does.

He also has said that Hamas should pledge to stop their acts of violence if Israel commits to mending its ways.

Carter fans can say what they want but this can only be interpreted as a validation of Hamas' violent tactics.

He was the worst president we have had during my lifetime and he is currently a pathetic fool with a fat mouth that should be taped shut.

Did he not do enough damage with North Korea?

I wish him many more years on Earth if he retires to his peanut farms in Georgia.


Foofie
 
  1  
Sun 8 Feb, 2009 08:01 pm
@georgeob1,
georgeob1 wrote:

Meanwhile Israelis steadily expand the territory under their control through forced eviction of Palestinians from their homes, armed settlements in Palestinain territory and a system of walls and limited access roads that increasingly isolate the Palestinian population in disjoint enclaves each subject to Israeli military control for access and basic economic activity.

Perhaps the Israelis strategy is aimed at something besides peace. Could it be expansion of their territory??


"Expansion"? The enemies of Israel also want "expansion" into Israel. The enemies of Israel might also want Jewish Israelis to "expand" into the Mediterranean (below the water's surface).

As an American, I am quite accepting of the U.S.A's 19th century Manifest Destiny. There was some land grabbing there, and some brutality to Native Americans; however, since earlier generations did the "dirty work" I just have this 3,000 mile wide country to live in. So, who am I to criticize. Nor, would I have criticized, if I was alive in the 19th century. This is my country.

So, not being an Israeli, who am I to criticize if any in that country want to expand the country from the size of NJ to the size of some other state in the U.S.A. My point is, people in glass houses should not throw stones, I believe, so I do not. Unless of course I had some reason(s) to criticize that small country, regardless if my large country does not have an impeccable past.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Mon 9 Feb, 2009 07:46 am
@Finn dAbuzz,
Quote:
He was the worst president we have had during my lifetime and he is currently a pathetic fool with a fat mouth that should be taped shut.


I am glad he speaks out...and I agree with lots of what he says.

Anyone who lived through the presidency just finished and who makes the statement I cited above, Finn...doesn't know what in hell he is talking about.
Advocate
 
  1  
Mon 9 Feb, 2009 08:04 am
@Frank Apisa,
Carter was the idiot who appointed Paul Volcker to head the Fed. Volcker, of course, almost brought the country to its knees with twenty percent (+) interest rates.

Wait, didn't Obama just appoint Volcker to a high financial position?
georgeob1
 
  1  
Mon 9 Feb, 2009 10:56 am
@Advocate,
Advocate wrote:

Carter was the idiot who appointed Paul Volcker to head the Fed. Volcker, of course, almost brought the country to its knees with twenty percent (+) interest rates.

Wait, didn't Obama just appoint Volcker to a high financial position?

The economic problem at the time wasn't high interest rates - it was the perverse combination of zero economic groeth and runaway inflation ("stagflation" was the term used then.) Appointing Volker was one of the few wise things Carter did. Even higher discount rates was the obviously needed economic policy and Volker applied it steadfastly. Regan kept him on and continued the policy, but combined it with a reduction in tax rates. The result was a 20 year expansion of the economy that continued until the dot com bust.

Our current president is working hard to turn a down economic cycle into a long term return of stagflation.
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Mon 9 Feb, 2009 01:26 pm
@Foofie,
Foofie wrote:
I have no idea where you believe I used "contractioned"?
Foofie wrote
Quote:
Spanish has no contractions. It makes sense to just use two words, rather than slurring one's thoughts into a new contractioned word.

You remember now?
Advocate
 
  1  
Mon 9 Feb, 2009 04:16 pm
@georgeob1,
Ah, more baseless nonsense from Georgie.
0 Replies
 
Advocate
 
  1  
Mon 9 Feb, 2009 04:49 pm
Lieberman's Rise in Israel

http://www.slate.com/id/2210633
0 Replies
 
Foofie
 
  1  
Mon 9 Feb, 2009 06:53 pm
@Steve 41oo,
Steve 41oo wrote:

Foofie wrote:
I have no idea where you believe I used "contractioned"?
Foofie wrote
Quote:
Spanish has no contractions. It makes sense to just use two words, rather than slurring one's thoughts into a new contractioned word.

You remember now?



Yes, Holmes. The tea was just a bit too relaxing, I guess.
0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  1  
Mon 9 Feb, 2009 09:07 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Quote:
Anyone who lived through the presidency just finished and who makes the statement I cited above, Finn...doesn't know what in hell he is talking about.


You've only just noticed that about Finn, Frank?
0 Replies
 
Endymion
 
  1  
Tue 10 Feb, 2009 01:19 am
Quote:

February 9, 2009
A Report from Gaza
Strong Indications of Israeli War Crimes

By NATIONAL LAWYERS GUILD

Gaza City.

We are a delegation of 8 American lawyers, members of the National Lawyers Guild in the United States, who have come here to the Gaza Strip to assess the effects of the recent attacks on the people, and to determine what, if any, violations of international law occurred and whether U.S. domestic law has been violated as a consequence. We have spent the last five days interviewing communities particularly impacted by the recent Israeli offensive, including medical personnel, humanitarian aid workers and United Nations representatives. In particular, the delegation examined three issues: 1) targeting of civilians and civilian infrastructure; 2) illegal use of weapons and 3) blocking of medical and humanitarian assistance to civilians.

Targeting of Civilians and Civilian Infrastructure

Much of the debate surrounding Israel’s aerial and ground offensive against Gaza has centered on whether or not Israel observed principles of proportionality and distinction. The debate suggests that Israel targeted Hamas i.e., its military installations, its leaders, and its militants, and in the process of its discrete military exercise it inadvertently killed Palestinian civilians. While we have found evidence that Palestinian civilians were victims of excessive force and collateral damage, we have also found troubling instances of Palestinian civilians being targets themselves.

The delegation recorded numerous accounts of Israeli soldiers shooting civilians, including women, children, and the elderly, in the head, chest, and stomach. Another common narrative described Israeli forces rounding civilians into a single location i.e., homes, schools which Israeli tanks or warplanes then shelled. Israeli forces continued to shoot at civilians fleeing the targeted structures.

We spoke to Khaled Abed Rabbo, who witnessed an Israeli soldier execute his 2-year-old and 7-year-old daughters, and critically injure a third daughter, Samar, 4-years old, on a sunny afternoon outside his home. Two other Israeli soldiers were standing nearby eating chips and chocolates at the time on January 7, 2009. Abed Rabbo recounts standing in front of the Israeli soldiers with his mother, wife and daughters for 5 " 7 minutes before one of the soldiers opened fire on his family.

We spoke to Ibtisam al-Sammouni, 31, and a resident of Zaytoun neighborhood in Gaza City. On January 4th, the Israeli army forced approximately 110 of Zaytoun’s residents into Ibtisam's home. At approximately 7 am on January 5th, the Israeli military launched two tank shells at the house without warning killing two of Ibtisam’s children: Rizka, 14 and Faris, 12. When the survivors attempted to flee Israeli forces shot at them. Her son Abdullah, 7, was injured in the shelling and remained in the home among his deceased siblings for four days before Israeli forces permitted medical personnel into Zaytoun to rescue them. After medical personnel removed the injured persons, an Israeli war plane destroyed the house and it crumbled over the lifeless bodies. The dead remained beneath the rubble for 17 days before the Israeli Army permitted medical personnel to remove their bodies for burial.

We spoke to the family of Rouhiya al-Najjar, 47, who lived in Khoza’a, Khan Younis. Israeli forces ordered her neighborhoods residents to march to the city center. Rouhiya led 20 women out of her home and into the alley. They all carried white scarves. Upon entering the alley, an Israeli sniper shot Rouhiya in her left temple killing her instantly. Israeli forces prevented medical personnel from reaching her body for twelve hours. These are only some of the accounts that we’ve collected.

Israeli forces also destroyed numerous buildings throughout the Gaza Strip during the recent incursion. Guild delegates viewed the remains of hundreds of demolished homes and businesses " in addition to the remains of the American School in Gaza, damaged medical centers, and the charred innards of UNRWA warehouses. While in situations of armed conflict, collateral damage and mistakes can occur, the circumstances surrounding the cases that the delegation investigated indicate deliberate targeting rather than collateral damage or mistake. Specifically:

The American School at Gaza, which was hit with two F-16 missiles on January 3, 2009, killing the watch guard on duty. According to Ribhi Salem, the school’s director, the Israelis gave no warnings. Mr. Salem stated that the school had come to an agreement with resistance groups not to use school grounds and there had never been resistance activity on the property.

United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA)

John Ging, the Director of Gaza Operations for UNRWA reported that Israeli forces fired missiles at UNRWA schools in Gaza City, Jabalyia and Bet Lahiya. The United Nation compound in Gaza city was also hit with white phosphorous shells and missiles. Ging noted that al United Nations buildings and vehicles all fly UN flags, are marked in blue paint from the top, and that during hostilities the UN personnel remained in constant contact with Israeli authorities.

Misuse of Weapons

Our delegation has heard allegations of the use of DIME (Dense Inert Metal Explosive) weaponry, white phosphorus and other possible weapons whose use in civilian areas is prohibited. We have also heard of the use of prohibited weapons, such as fleshettes. We have found our own evidence of the use of fleschette shells, which we will combine with evidence collected by Amnesty International to push for further investigation. We have not found any conclusive evidence of the use of DIME, though we believe that this warrants further investigation and disclosure by the Israeli military.

Our findings overwhelmingly point to the use of conventional weapons in a prohibited manner, specifically, the use of battlefield weaponry in densely populated civilian areas. Customary international law forbids the use of weapons calculated to cause unnecessary suffering. We found evidence that Israel used white phosphorus in extensively throughout its three-week offensive in a manner that led to numerous deaths and injuries. For example, Sabah Abu Halima, 45, lived in Beit Lahiya with her husband, seven boys, and one girl. It was midday and she and her entire family was home. Within minutes she felt her home shaking and missiles fell through the rooftop. She fell to the ground upon impact. When she looked up she saw her children burning.

Preventing Access to Medical and Humanitarian Aid

Under customary international humanitarian law, the wounded are protected persons and must receive the medical care and attention required by their conditions, to the fullest extent practicable and with the least possible delay. Parties to a conflict are required to ensure the unhindered movement of medical personnel and ambulances to carry out their duties and of wounded persons to access medical care. Speaking to medical workers and the family of victims, NLG delegates documented serious violations of this provision. Among the stories documented include:

Zaytoun neighborhood, which came under attack and invasion by ground foces on January 3, 2009. The Palestinian Red Crescent received 145 calls from Zaytoun for help, but were denied entry by Israel. Bashar Ahmed Murad, Director of Emergency Medical Services for the Palestinian Red Crescent Society told us that “a lot of people could have been saved, but hey weren’t given medical care by the Israelis, nor did the Israeli army allow Palestinian medical services in.” When paramedics were finally allowed to enter on January 7, Israeli forces only gave them a 3-hour “lull” to work and prohibited ambulances into the area. Instead they forced paramedics park the ambulances 2 kilometers away and enter the area on foot. Murad told delegation members how they had to pile the wounded on donkey carts and have the medical workers pull the carts in order to help the most people possible in the short time they were given. After the 3 hours were over, the Israeli army started shooting toward the ambulances. The Red Crescent was not able to reach that area again to evacuate the dead until January 17, 2009 when the Israeli army pulled out.

Al-Shurrab Family

On January 16th, Israeli forces shot at the jeep of Mohammed Shurrab, 64 years of age, and two of his sons, Kassab and Ibrahim, aged 28 and 18 as they were returning from their fields. Mohammad was shot in the left arm and Ibrahim was shot in the leg. The elder son, Kassab, sustained a fatal bullet wound to the chest, being shot multiple times after being ordered out of the car. Mohammad, bleeding from his wound, contacted the media, the International Committee of the Red Cross, and a number of NGOs via mobile phone in order to acquire medical assistance. Israeli forces denied medical relief agencies clearance to reach them until almost 24 hours after Mohammad, Ibrahim and Kassab had been shot. Earlier that morning, Ibrahim had succumbed to his wound and died. Mohammad Shurrab and his sons were shot during a so-called “lull” in Israeli ground operations, which Israeli forces had agreed to in order to allow humanitarian relief to enter and be distributed in the Gaza Strip. As such NLG delegates fail to see how this denial of medical access to the wounded Shurrab family could have been absolutely necessary and not simply arbitrary.

International humanitarian law also prohibits attacks on medical personnel, medical units and medical transports exclusively assigned to carry out medical functions. Delegate members saw ambulances seriously damaged and destroyed, some apparently deliberately crushed by Israeli tanks. The Palestinian Red Crescent Society and the Palestinian Ministry of Health informed delegates that 15 Palestinian medics were killed and 21 injured in the course of Israel’s assault.

Conclusions

This delegation is seriously concerned by our initial findings. We have found strong indications of violations of the laws of war and possible war crimes committed by Israel in the Gaza Strip. We are particularly concerned that most of the weapons that were found used in the December 27 assault on Gaza are US-made and supplied. We believe that Israel’s use of these weapons may constitute a violation of US law, and particularly the Foreign Assistance Act and the US Arms Export Control Act.

A report of our initial findings will be compiled and submitted to, among others, members of the United States Congress. We intend to push for an investigation by the United States government into possible violations by Israel of US law. We also hope to contribute our finding and efforts to other efforts by local and international lawyers to push for accountability against those found responsible for the egregious crimes that we have documented.

http://www.counterpunch.org/nlg02092009.html


Despite the US's obvious Empire building, you've got to hand it to them - they've churned out some damn good lawyers. And by 'good' i mean - lawyers interested in upholding...... the law. For the betterment of mankind.

Advocate
 
  1  
Tue 10 Feb, 2009 10:10 am
@Endymion,
It is good to know some background on the Guild.

Is the National Lawyers Guild Racist? The National Lawyers Guild is circulating a resolution "condemning Zionism as Racism." The National Lawyers Guild bills itself as a "Association of progressive lawyers, legal workers, law students and jailhouse lawyers.."

The people signed on this resolution are known for holding opinions such as Zionists are taking over the grocery industry in the United states.

The resolution, which passed their convention by nearly a 2/3 majority, has now been sent to members to ratify it. Let's hope that real progressives in the rank and file refuse this resolution. "Zionism is racism" resolutions are OK in Afghanistan or the Sudan. Respectable progressives and pro-Palestinians have condemned such actions. John Strawson has written:

While there are honorable Anti-Zionist positions they are few. On the whole Anti-Zionism is close to, or a mask for, Anti-Semitism.. MORE

This lawyer joke is not so funny.
Steve 41oo
 
  2  
Tue 10 Feb, 2009 12:23 pm
@Advocate,
Advocate wrote:
On the whole Anti-Zionism is close to, or a mask for, Anti-Semitism....
Rubbish. Militant zionists try to stifle criticism by playing the race card. The Israeli Disgrace Force are a disgrace for what they do, not because they are Jewish. Or Christian or whatever religion they might be. This is the same dirty game played over and over again, that criticism of Israel masks anti semitism. The truth is the reverse. Subtle or not so subtle charges of anti semitism are automatically deployed against critics of Zionism in an effort to gag them, and take the spotlight away from unlawful and racist zionist policies.
 

Related Topics

 
  1. Forums
  2. » THE WAR IN GAZA
  3. » Page 41
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.7 seconds on 11/23/2024 at 04:30:56