Thanks very much for writing this post. Your first 3 sentences are a poignant call to remember the people of Gaza.

With all the focus on the situation there, one of the stories that gets less coverage is the continued illegal expansion of settlements in the West Bank. Christian Peacemaker Teams has been accompanying one village that has been consistently using nonviolent techniques to defend their land. This article gives a good introduction to this “dynamic nonviolent movement”:

Heroes of the South Hebron Hills

I think this is a pretty exciting model that could be replicated in a lot of similar situations around the West Bank. Whether it would be applicable in the situation in Gaza is another question.

Regardless, what is quite clear is that giving more international coverage and support of successful nonviolent movements in Israel/Palestine would be a big boost to efforts there for lasting peace and justice.

Shalom not Shoah.

Steve K

I’m not saying I think missle barrages into refugee camps are a good thing. But I think it’s rediculous that the Palestinians get angry over this stuff when they worked so hard to get Hamas into power.

That strikes me as an incredibly oversimplified response to a very complex issue. Perhaps we need to parse that first sentence: what do you mean by “democratically elected?” That you can control your own borders? That you can control what gets into your territory; readily import medicines and export goods? That you can run your own airport? Determine that your citizens may come and go freely? Gazans can’t do any of those things. Gazans can’t even get to the West Bank; most residents of Bethlehem have never been to Jerusalem, which is just a few miles away. So countries have the right to arm themselves against indigenous peoples who don’t share their faith, fine. Have we learned nothing from history?

I guess it depends how far back in history you take this. Like, for instance, if you think Israel even has a right to exist in the first place. It seems you’re making some drastic assumptions about the will of the Palestinian people. Who is “defending” who’s self?

I’m not saying I think missle barrages into refugee camps are a good thing. But I think it’s rediculous that the Palestinians get angry over this stuff when they worked so hard to get Hamas into power.

I’m waiting for you to say something of substance about this post. I find it ironic that you were lobbing charges of trolling at me on your health care post and now are trolling on mine.

The answer to your questions is no. However, it is hardly a question that defeats my argument. Even if you were able to prove that I didn’t understand the words of Vilnai, it doesn’t undermine the point that apartheid is being perpetuated in Gaza, and that the de-humanizing effect of the conditions in Gaza are the first steps toward ethnic cleansing (ghettoing and removal of self-determination were some of Hitler’s first tactics in the ethnic cleansing of Germany).

If you need further proof of my point on Vilnai’s words, here’s some wikipedia articles:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Holocaust - note that the term in Hebrew is “Ha-Shoah” - THE HOLOCAUST. By the way, if you replace “The_Holocaust” with “Shoah” it redirects to the Holocaust page.

Shoah Foundations are organizations formed to further remembrance of the Holocaust: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shoah_Foundation

Yom HaShoah - the Holocaust Memorial Day in Israel: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yom_HaShoah

And there was a famous documentary called Shoah in 1985 about…guess what? The Holocaust: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shoah_(film)
Here’s a review on the film by The Guardian which details how the Israelis use the word exclusively for “Holocaust”.
http://film.guardian.co.uk/Century_Of_Films/Story/0,,411316,00.html

I’m not really sure what the point of your comments on this thread are, other than to antagonize me because I questioned your arguments on another post. Please read this post before you comment again.

Do you speak Hebrew?

For me, it’s not an issue of choosing sides between one nation or another nation. It’s between choosing to support those who are oppressed or those who oppress.

Desmond Tutu didn’t have much of a hard time choosing his side: he’s on the side of the oppressed, and has publicly decried the situation in Israeli-occupied Palestine as apartheid (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2002/apr/29/comment) .

And Desmond Tutu knows a thing or two about apartheid.

I’d appreciate that you read my post before you make a comment.

I made no assumptions; it’s pretty clear Vilnai meant holocaust, and if you read any of the news stories (provided by the sources above which you neglected to read before commenting), the reaction of a lot of Israeli public relations figures was to marginalize Vilnai. It wasn’t because he said things would be a “big disaster”, it’s because he meant holocaust.

Yup, the above comment is supposed to confusing.

Steve K