Charles Johnson of Little Green Footballs pointed out an interesting situation developing in war-stricken Gaza that will likely put America’s anti-Israel press in a peculiar position (emphasis added):
According to the international left and the paleo-right, Israel is a fascist apartheid state, a brutal occupier, universally despised by the oppressed Palestinian people.
So where do the oppressed Palestinians look for sanctuary, when the terrorist government they elected begins the inevitable slaughter?
The extraordinary answer was contained in the caption to the Associated Press picture above right (emphasis added):
Palestinians run as they try to cross to the Israel side at the Erez Crossing, in the northern Gaza Strip, Saturday, June 16, 2007. Dozens of Palestinians converged on the Erez crossing with Israel on Saturday, trying to leave the Gaza Strip following Hamas’ takeover.
The Jerusalem Post confirmed these crossing attempts Saturday:
Earlier, dozens of Palestinians arrived at the Erez Crossing in an attempt to escape the Gaza Strip and enter Israel. IDF soldiers shot into the air to try to prevent the approaching crowds from infiltrating through the security fence.
Many of the Palestinians arrived at the crossing carrying large suitcases and were planning to run away from the Strip following Hamas's takeover.
One young man shouted "bye, bye, Gaza," and waved as he walked through the covered walkway that leads to the Israeli side.
Potentially more interesting is the humanitarian aid being offered by Israel:
Fearful of a looming humanitarian disaster, Israel will allow food and other basic supplies into the Gaza Strip following Hamas's takeover of the coastal area, a senior government minister said Saturday.
"Our consideration is the humanitarian issue. Allowing merchandise through Karni in order to prevent hunger in Gaza is what will guide Israel to allow merchandise," Public Security Minister Avi Dichter told Channel 2.
Will American media report any of this, or, as what was in a Boston Globe editorial Thursday, spin this humanitarian disaster to be all Israel’s fault?
—Noel Sheppard is the Associate Editor of NewsBusters.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Noel,Of course the media will
June 16, 2007 - 14:40 ET by BlondeNoel,
Of course the media will report the latest Palestinian dust-up as being all Israel's fault.
But I have a question for you....what is the "paleo-right"?
rightwing antisemites, i gues
June 16, 2007 - 14:57 ET by kafkakaeferrightwing antisemites, i guess.
"Hegel says somewhere all great events and personalities in world history reappear in one fashion or another. He forgot to add: the first time as tragedy, the second as farce."
The Eighteeenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte (1852) sect. 1, Cf.
antisemites too ugly even for
June 16, 2007 - 15:02 ET by drillanwrantisemites too ugly even for the far left that they get automatically, and erroneously, kicked to the right ... like Hitler and the Nazi Party.
Blonde
June 16, 2007 - 15:24 ET by Noel SheppardB,
The more isolationist conservatives that disagree with Bush administration foreign policies, particularly in the Middle East. Certainly, Pat Buchanan comes to mind. Charles confirmed that's who he was thinking of when he wrote that.
As you know, most conservatives are very pro-Israel. However, there are some that feel that America should not be wasting financial, military, or human assets on defending that nation.
To a certain extent, although many view the term neo-conservative as being anti-Semitic, one could view the paleo right as being the antithesis. As you know, Buchanan hates the neo-cons, and, sadly doesn't recognize the anti-Semitic component of the designation.
To elaborate for those that might be offended by the suggestion that the term neo-con is anti-Semitic, the original designation of this political sect was specifically for New York Jews after World War II that had the nerve to believe in conservative principles rather than exclusively liberal ones. This included, of course, the founder of the neo-conservative movement, Irving Kristol.
ns
Thanks, Noel.
June 16, 2007 - 15:40 ET by BlondeThanks, Noel.
Paleo-Right & Neo-Con an apples and oranges comparison.
June 16, 2007 - 19:36 ET by CT"...To a certain extent, although many view the term neo-conservative as being anti-Semitic, one could view the paleo right as being the antithesis..."
An apples and oranges comparison. The Paleo Right or Conservative is an expression to describe very old-school conservatives. Neo-Con or New Conservative refers to a liberal that has turned conservative, the apostate nature of this is why liberals are so contemptuous of the newly enlightened conservatives. Neither the Palo-Conservative nor the Neo-Con is anti-Semitic and in fact many accredited (or cursed) with the early Neo-Con thinking were Jewish scholars.
CT
June 16, 2007 - 20:52 ET by Noel SheppardCT,
Well, I don't completely agree, as those liberals that turned conservative -- Trotskyites actually -- back in the late '40s/early '50s were indeed all Jewish. This is why there are many Jewish conservatives who see the term "neo-con" as being anti-Semitic.
Furthermore, I'm not sure I agree with your paleo analysis, but aren't familiar enough with the term to debate you on it. When did you first hear or read such a designation for conservatives? I really couldn't find a lot on the Internet about it. ns
Neo-Cons & Paleo-Conservatives
June 17, 2007 - 00:02 ET by CTSometimes what you read is not what was meant which maybe the case here with my understanding of your comment regarding anti-Semitism and the term Neo-Con. The liberal left spits out Neo-Con pejoratively and may well intend it to be anti-Semitic. I doubt many Liberals (spit when you say that) have a clue where the term came from or what it actually means as evidenced by its persistent misuse. Previously many were proud to where the moniker Neo-Con, but I suspect the demagoguery has had its effect and who volunteers to be insulted.
Paleo-Conservative I believe came about in response to Neo-Con as a way to differentiate someone that has always been conservative, as in old school, William F. Buckley, Jr. comes to mind.
ct -- and misterbill too!!!
June 17, 2007 - 00:08 ET by misterbillct -- and misterbill too!!! I was raised Democratic--went off in the military and came home at 22 as a conservative.
Pat Buchanan is a pre WWII Isolationist Republican
June 17, 2007 - 00:08 ET by CT"...As you know, Buchanan hates the neo-cons, and, sadly doesn't recognize the anti-Semitic component of the designation..."
What makes you so sure?
CT
June 17, 2007 - 00:14 ET by Noel SheppardCT,
It's interesting you're asking that, for I'm really not so sure. I was being diplomatic because there's a lot about Pat Buchanan I like. For instance, this guy has an astounding knowledge of history that makes me incredibly jealous.
Yet, I have often felt that there is a tinge of anti-Semitism when he uses the term. Do you sense that as well? ns
Pat Buchanan, no thank you.
June 17, 2007 - 01:00 ET by CTAlways, but then again I think I can smell his aftershave everytime I see him. He comes off very old school Irish to me.
Hamas & Gaza
June 16, 2007 - 16:05 ET by austinhookCurrent theory on the left is that recent Israeli and US efforts have been to supply money and arms to the Fatah faction to enable it to destabilize or destroy the elected majority goverment in Gaza and the West bank, and that a Fatah coup was about to be finalized. Pressure from Israel in the form of blockading financial flows, and most material aid, plus arresting most of the Hamas members of their parliment was part of facilitating this. Accordingly Hamas, at least in Gaza, decided to pre-empt this final step.
Now Fatah was seen as very corrupt in the past when Arafat was leading it, and still very corruptable. So the old game of corrupting the top, or at least taking advantage of it, was being applied to Fatah from the outside, in hopes of keeping it more tractable to "western and Israeli interests", to a point perhaps beyond where popular support was comfortable, accordingly creating the breeding ground for activist resistance. I note that Fatah support is not unitary, in the sense that there are multiple groups under it, and sometimes even minor neighborhood warlords or fiefdoms joined to it, and non-unitary objectives aplenty.
Western/Israeli support seems to have gone particularly to those who could most easily be brought into line -- hence some groups that were almost entirely bought with arms and cash (sometimes even selling the donated arms to Hamas for cash too!!).
So the explanation is that the people you see fleeing to the Israeli side are those, who like the contras in Nicaragua, having worked for outside interests, and having lost the skirmish, are naturally fleeing to what they hope are to those who were supporting them. Obviously their lives are in danger and it is a most desperate action.
I dont know if this is a reasonable interpretation, but I would love to hear a consistant alternative explanation.
austin,Quite a reasoned post.
June 16, 2007 - 16:13 ET by Blondeaustin,
Quite a reasoned post. Thanks for your insights.
You are right on about teh
June 17, 2007 - 06:23 ET by Dan The Man 2You are right on about teh looney left. Here is a committed socialist from teh UK and what he has to say
Whitestar
Forum Addict
Joined: 05 Jun 2004
Posts: 2817Posted: 16 Jun 2007 02:30 pm Post subject: Ace wrote:Whitestar wrote:xdakrmagicx wrote:Whitestar wrote:US get involved in gaza because they dont actually believe in democracy
So blowing up another countries people and your own is democracy? Taking innocent people out into the streets and gunning them down is democracy?
Taking over the previous government in a cu (however its spelt) is democracy?
Killing thousands of people to take over the country is democracy?
You got some bad ideas of democracy lolyou are too stupid to argue with.
the USA and israel are supplying arms and training to terrorists so that they can overthrow the democrattically elected party in gaza. USA and israel are no better than any other country in the world they murder and kill indiscriminately to achieve goals whether or not its legal or not whether or not its moral or not. You cannot claim to support democracy and then provide terrorists with weapons just because you dont like the results of the democracy
Prove it.
watch almost any non republican run world news channel, and maybe even a few of those.
its common knowledege that the US and israel dispise hamas even tho they were elected.
its common knowledge that israel have been conducting attacks inside gaza on hamas targets.
its common knowledge that fatah fighters are being sent from israeli training camps into gaza.
if that is not aiding terrorism i dont know what is.
as of earlier today fatah refuses point blank to talk peace with hamas, it would appear that the US/Israeli backed fatah terrorist organisation doesnt want peace.
Nuke em til they glow then shoot em in the dark. -- save my gun, shoot a liberal.
PALEO-RIGHT not what some may think.
June 16, 2007 - 19:19 ET by CTPALEO
PALEO-RIGHT
Paleo-Right is not what some may think, it only means old-school conservative.
I can hear it now come Monday
June 16, 2007 - 14:44 ET by drillanwrI can hear it now come Monday morning. Teddy Kennedy will get up on the Senate floor ... steady his hung-over wobble ... and with the assistance of a litany of uhs and er ums will demand Israel implement the Mc Cain - Kennedy Immigration Bill for these poor souls who will do jobs Americans won't do in Israel ...
teddy
June 16, 2007 - 16:01 ET by misterbillteddy:
"mista reeed -- the peeple of Israel need to adopt an open doah policy foh Palestinians who lahst week weer bombing them. I have no idear why they would not help (burrrrrp) ,pahdon me, or let them in. Aftah awl, thees ah not the folks with weapons." I will propose feathah aid foh Israel if the do this. I want to be remembuhed as the "Great Pacifiah".
Wow.... What a truly remarkab
June 16, 2007 - 15:39 ET byWow.... What a truly remarkable story. ...Debra
It reminds me of a point ma
June 16, 2007 - 21:27 ET by Tom1969caIt reminds me of a point made a couple years ago (possibly on this very forum):
Liberals believe that America is a land full of racist oppressors; a land where the rich get richer and the poor get poorer; a land where health care and justice go to the highest (white) bidder.
So why is it that poor minorities aren't building makeshift rafts to escape to Cuba?
~~~
"The current tax code is harder to understand than Bob Dylan reading Finnegan's Wake in a wind tunnel."-- Dennis Miller
Tom
June 16, 2007 - 21:30 ET by Noel SheppardTom,
Or heading to Canada where the politics are more liberal, and there's supposedly a fabulous government-run healthcare system? ns