Dubai Forums Dubai Discussions Dubai Politics Talk

This nine minute video is about Israel's bombing of Gaza in 2008/2009 and at around 5 minutes it has Norman Finkelstein making a strong argument that the bombing should not be called a war. To use the term 'war', he argues, would be to play into Israeli propaganda - and he states that the statistics and reports show it was a massacre.

There were no battles during the bombing and invasion of Gaza, a quote says. It was a one-sided attack by Israel against Gaza.

http://vimeo.com/34674830

I think Finkelstein makes a compelling argument.

(Oh, and the video was uploaded yesterday - so relatively few comments so far)

Cheers,
Shafique

Perhaps thats why Finkelstein calls Israel a state of satan. A state of satan worshippers.

May be if the Palestinians behaved themselves they wouldn't incur Israel's wrath.

After all, no-one should put up with their everyday lives being disrupted by suicide bombers walking into supermarkets and cafes when people are going about their daily business.

If you had watched the video, you'd have found that Finkelstein was basing his conclusion that it was a massacre based on the facts of the massacre carried out by Israel.

But I understand why it is hard to not to fall into old habits and try and slur the person rather than address the facts. Such as it always was with the pro-Israel fans when confronted with facts.

Cheers,

Shafique

I don't watch any of your dodgy videos. If the Palestinians didn't attack Israel, the Israelis wouldn't retaliate. It's hardly rocket science.

BM, in this case Israel attacked Gaza on Nov 4 2008 at a time when a truce was holding, then proceeded to lie about how 'Hamas' rockets' had broken the truce when it was carrying out this massacre.

Finkelstein is also not a random blogger. He has in the past cut through the propaganda from Israel and exposed the simple truths of Israel's military occupation:

Flying Dutchman wrote:Yeah, heard Finkelstein speaking. He is absolutely right in my opinion. It is very simple. Question in my mind is, if Israel is willing to do this will it bring absolute peace? I still believe the majority of Israeli´s are willing to give up the occupied terrorities (inclusing east Jerusalem) if it guarantees lasting peace and stability.

dubai-politics-talk/demystifying-the-palestinian-issue-t25254.html
Finkelstein's exposition of facts hasn't changed.

Cheers,
Shafique

shafique wrote:Finkelstein is also not a random blogger.

No, he claims there is real chance Israel will nuke Lebanon in the short or middle-short term. .

What has Israel's massacre in Gaza got to do with what you recall Finkelstein saying about Lebanon? (I note this is the second time you've resorted to giving unreferenced quotes/opinions. I'm getting tired of looking into innuendos and finding your being selective with the truth or being misled by wiki etc)

Can we stick to the Gaza Massacre?

Cheers,

Shafique

shafique wrote:Can we stick to the Gaza Massacre?

It wasn't a massacre. Israel over all did an outstanding job, fighting the Hamas terrorists, terrorizing Israeli cities.

Thanks for your opinions. They stand in contrast with the facts and images in the OP of the victims of the Israeli Massacre in Gaza.

Cheers,

Shafique

There is a lot you can criticize Israel for, but calling it a satanic state, you can go straight to the looney bin.

Flying Dutchman wrote:There is a lot you can criticize Israel for

Indeed, and Finkelstein is quite clear about his praise for Israel too. I have a feeling that the reason you haven't actually linked to an actual reference to Finkelstein's quote, that this is just another one of your usual diversionary tactics.

This thread is about the Gaza Massacre - not your weak excuses or selectively remembered and unreferenced quotes.

I presume if you ever quote him, it will be along the lines of Avi Shlaim's conclusions about Israel being a rogue state:

This brief review of Israel's record over the past four decades makes it difficult to resist the conclusion that it has become a rogue state with "an utterly unscrupulous set of leaders". A rogue state habitually violates international law, possesses weapons of mass destruction and practises terrorism - the use of violence against civilians for political purposes. Israel fulfils all of these three criteria; the cap fits and it must wear it.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/ja ... -palestine

(See, quote given and reference too).

Cheers,
Shafique

shafique wrote: I have a feeling that the reason you haven't actually linked to an actual reference to Finkelstein's quote,

Never surpised how selective you can be with your 'experts'.

http://www.normanfinkelstein.com/what-the-satanic-state-of-israel-did-to-gaza/

Fineklstein completely lost it, and belongs in the looney bin. just as another hero of yours, Chomsky, who claims the Golan is part of Paelstine.
Anyways, why does Finkelstein always look like he just drank a full bottle of pure vinegar?

About Gaza, you will notice, just as long as you donot send thousands of rockets to Israeli cities or launch terrorrist attacks, Israel will leave you alone. For urban combat, the civilian <> combattant death ratio shows how much care Israel took in not trying to kill civilians.

I'm not the one being selective about Finkelstein's quotations on the Gaza Massacre. The Youtube link on the site isn't working.

Here is a working link where Finkelstein is talking about the Massacre and does refer to Israel as a 'Satanic State', and the context is clear - a state which carries out satanic crimes, such as killing 400 children:


Israel attacked Gaza on Nov 4 2008, lied about it and then blamed the massacre on 'Hamas rockets'. Even Mark Regev had to admit that there were no Hamas rockets before Israel broke the truce on Nov 4, 2008.

But hey - I guess you slipped up and relapsed into repeating Israeli propaganda which has been proven untrue.

In the Gaza Massacre, Israel kill ratio was almost 100 to one. 14 Israelis killed, over 1300 Gazans killed.

Cheers,
Shafique

shafique wrote:a state which carries out satanic crimes

Oh ok, I see you agree then. Now it's not just war crimes anymore, but satanic crimes.

Actually, I'm calling you out on your first statement:

Flying Dutchman wrote:Perhaps thats why Finkelstein calls Israel a state of satan. A state of satan worshippers.

At least in the video above, Finkelstein does not call Israel a state full of satan worshippers, but says that Israel's actions even don't benefit Israelis. It is the State's war-like actions that he calls satanic (around 5 min mark).

So, is this another example of the FD spin? Did Finkelstein ever say Israel is full of Satan Worshippers? Or is this a lie or deliberate misinterpreation of what he defines a Satanic state as - a state carrying out satanic acts, specifically 'waging war after war'?

And yes, I agree with this view that a State that wages war after war can be termed 'satanic', although I wouldn't use the term as I know it will be twisted in the way you tried to do.

Cheers,
Shafique

shafique wrote:And yes, I agree with this view that a State that wages war after war can be termed 'satanic',

ok.

Thanks for selectively quoting me and ignoring the main question - did you lie when you said Finkelstein said Israel was a 'A state of satan worshippers.'?

Or was it just a piece of sly spin?

Did you want Finkelstein to be happy with Israel after he described the killing of 400 children in the Massacre?

Cheers,
Shafique

It's ok, Shaf, you agree with Finkelstein that Israel is a satanic state.

Still ignoring the main question - did you lie when you said Finkelstein said Israel was a 'A state of satan worshippers.'?

Or was it just a piece of sly spin?

It may not be your fault FD - you perhaps relied on a blogger for your mistaken belief? It wouldn't be the first time.

Given that this was your first response to the post about the Massacre - it shows that your whole argument is based on misconceptions.

Cheers,
Shafique

B'tselem puts children fatality at 252, where 400 comes from I don't know, but it seems it is used by people to exaggerate children fatality for their own argument.

And yes, if you call a state a satanic state, you say its people are satan worshippers.

B'tselem

Flying Dutchman wrote:B'tselem puts children fatality at 252

No it doesn't. It is 344:
http://old.btselem.org/statistics/english/casualties.asp?sD=27&sM=12&sY=2008&eD=18&eM=01&eY=2009&filterby=event&oferet_stat=during

Palestinian Ministry of Health reported 431 child fatalities on 5 February 2009, which is the information that Finkelstein (and the world) had at the time:
http://unispal.un.org/unispal.nsf/85255db800470aa485255d8b004e349a/50a7789ce959e0c285257554006d3e56?OpenDocument

FD - you say that Israel did an 'outstanding job' and deny it was a massacre. How many children need to be killed for it to be a massacre - is 344 too few for a Massacre?

And will you address your first 'error' in this thread:

- did you lie when you said Finkelstein said Israel was a 'A state of satan worshippers.'? Or was it just a piece of sly spin?

Cheers,
Shafique

shafique wrote:No it doesn't. It is 344:

Nope, B'tselem puts the child fatality at 252. It defines children below the age of 16. Hamas had fighters killed between 16-18, so they donot fall under the definition of children, which is in line with your thinking, since you never considered a suicide bomber of 16 as a child.

I am sure that some people donot want Israel to defend itself from rockets shot from civilian buildings to Israel cities, but thats not how it works. The 'satanic state' will defend itself and its citizens.

Can you show me where B'tselem says a child is under age of 16 and that 252 of the 344 minors killed are the ones considered children?

shafique wrote:FD - you say that Israel did an 'outstanding job' and deny it was a massacre. How many children need to be killed for it to be a massacre - is 344 too few for a Massacre?

Ok, let me change the question do you think that 252 children under age of 16 is too few for a massacre?

I'll concede that you can add the 16-18 year olds who were non-combatant casualties to the list of other civilians (women and men) massacred by Israel.


And let's not forget the first error you made in the thread:

- did you lie when you said Finkelstein said Israel was a 'A state of satan worshippers.'? Or was it just a piece of sly spin?

Cheers,
Shafique

shafique wrote:I'll concede that you can add the 16-18 year olds who were non-combatant casualties to the list of other civilians (women and men)

I agree that 400 or more is a highly exeggarated number, no matter how you look at it.

Now there are 3 unanswered questions FD:

1. "Can you show me where B'tselem says a child is under age of 16 and that 252 of the 344 minors killed are the ones considered children?"

2. "do you think that 252 children under age of 16 is too few for a massacre?"

3. "did you lie when you said Finkelstein said Israel was a 'A state of satan worshippers.'? Or was it just a piece of sly spin?"

I couldn't find the 252 figure or their definition of child on B'tselem's website - only the 344. Questions 2 and 3 have been asked a few times now and relate to the 'outstanding job'/Gaza Massacre and your initial response

Cheers,
Shafique

shafique wrote:I couldn't find the 252 figure or their definition of child on B'tselem's website - only the 344

First get your facts straight when you ask questions about them.

Do you concede the >=400 number is hightly exaggarated?

I agree let's get the facts straight. The Palestinian Ministry of Health gave the figure of 431 children killed in the Gaza Massacre as quoted by the UN in February 2009. B'tselem's website puts the figure at 344 - and defines minors as those under age of 18.

shafique wrote:3 unanswered questions FD:

1. "Can you show me where B'tselem says a child is under age of 16 and that 252 of the 344 minors killed are the ones considered children?"

2. "do you think that 252 children under age of 16 is too few for a massacre?"

3. "did you lie when you said Finkelstein said Israel was a 'A state of satan worshippers.'? Or was it just a piece of sly spin?"

Why are you doing an 'event horizon' and avoiding questions directly relevant to your posts in this thread?

Cheers,
Shafique

B´tselem put the death under 18 at 320. PCHR put number around the same. To say its 400 because the Pali Ministery of Helath says is very unscolarly to say the least.

As long as the is not delibirate, its not a massacre. I believe Israel put effort in avoiding civilian casualties, so the label massacre is inapt.

No I did not lie, calling Israel a satanic state, a state from satan executing satanic crimes, means you are saying there are satan worshippers in there, or those that made a pact with satan. No surprise you agree with him, calling the only jewish state a state from satan.

So, where did you get the 252 from? :

Flying Dutchman wrote:Nope, B'tselem puts the child fatality at 252. It defines children below the age of 16.

And where does it define children as below 16?

The UN cited 431 child killed in the massacre in February 2009 as the figure that was available. It is not unusual for casualty figures to be revised over time - just take the example of 9/11 and how the casualty figures revised (downwards) for months after 9/11. Hardly 'unscholarly' - so yet another weak argument to cover up not telling us where you picked up this 252 figure from.

So, killing 300 children is not a massacre for you. I see.

Flying Dutchman wrote:No I did not lie, calling Israel a satanic state, a state from satan executing satanic crimes, means you are saying there are satan worshippers in there, or those that made a pact with satan. No surprise you agree with him, calling the only jewish state a state from satan.

Finkelstein was quite clear that he was criticising the state for 'satanic crimes'.

Your lie was to allege this meant:

means you are saying there are satan worshippers in there, or those that made a pact with satan.

He was clear that his issue was not with Israelis (who he said interests are not being served by the Government actions).

Therefore it is both sly spin and a lie - and Finkelstein did not say Israel was full of satan worshippers, only that the state carried out statanic crimes (specifically 'waging war after war')


So, I see that there is still the first question outstanding - where did you get the 252 figure from and where does B'tselem define children as being under 16 as you stated? I think you may be mistaking the propaganda from the IDF which claimed only 89 children under age 16 were killed. B'tselem seems to be consistent in considering anyone under 18 a minor.

Cheers,
Shafique