Newsgroup: it.politica.internazionale
Titolo: Israel had no choice over Gaza flotilla

The tragic events of Monday morning are, rightly, sending shockwaves 
around the world – but blaming the IDF alone for the carnage flies in 
the face of the facts. Video footage from an on-board news agency 
clearly shows a premeditated attack on Israeli soldiers, with activists 
using iron bars and other weapons to assault the troops and giving the 
IDF carte blanche to respond with force against them.
That there was a Nobel peace prize laureate on board is irrelevant. That 
there were electric-powered wheelchairs among the cargo is irrelevant. 
That Gazans are suffering immensely from the years'-old siege of their 
land is unpalatable and unfortunate – but also irrelevant in the context 
of this particular incident. Israel had given countless warnings to the 
activists not to proceed with their trip without first allowing the 
freight on their ships to be checked; Israel had repeatedly offered to 
allow the aid in as long as the activists handed it over to the army to 
be inspected.
At the same time, those supposedly bringing "aid" to the people of Gaza 
have form for using alleged acts of humanitarianism as cover for weapons 
smuggling – and Israel has every right to defend its own citizens from 
the consequences of such illicit transfer of arms. There is not a 
country on earth that would not take similar steps to protect its 
people; there is not an army on earth that would not allow its soldiers 
to respond with force to neutralise a life-threatening attack on their 
fellow troops.
The activists who launched the vicious assault on the boarding soldiers 
knew full well what they were doing. They had issued threat after threat 
against the IDF in the days building up to this morning's clash, with 
convoy organiser Huwaida Arraf brashly declaring his group's unwavering 
dedication to reaching Gaza: "They are going to have to forcefully stop 
us." Club-wielding assailants might not fit the cute and cuddly image of 
stereotypical aid workers, but there can be no doubt from the evidence 
that those attacking the Israeli forces were not the archetype of calm 
and measured peace activists.
One of the first diplomatic reactions to the deadly affair came from 
Murat Mercan, a lawmaker from Turkey's ruling party: "I was expecting an 
intervention. I was not expecting bloodshed, the use of arms and 
bullets." The official Turkish line is that Israel has behaved in an 
"unacceptable" fashion, yet – unsurprisingly – not one Turkish 
politician has had the honesty or courage to lay an iota of blame at the 
feet of the ultra-violent activists. Without such a sustained attack on 
the troops, Mercan's predictions of a blood-free intervention would have 
come to pass: but he, like many others in his position, prefers not to 
dwell on such minor details if it means having to concede even an inch 
of ground to the Israelis.
Reports have surfaced claiming that an activist tore a soldier's machine 
gun from his grasp and used it to shoot him with: what might have seemed 
a far-fetched story spun to improve the IDF's standing over the attack 
is given far more credence when considered in the context of quite how 
savagely numerous activists greeted the arrival of the troops on to the 
ship. Those on board the ship had ample opportunity to defuse the 
situation in the days and hours leading up to the commandos' arrival: 
instead, they decided that violence was the best way to play their hand, 
and given their intransigence, there was only ever going to be one outcome.
In the wider political context, Israel's government and army are clearly 
at fault over a myriad of issues, as are the leaders and politicians of 
Hamas – but what took place aboard the Freedom flotilla must be viewed 
in isolation in terms of the violence from both sides, rather than used 
as yet another rod with which to beat Israel simply because it suits 
certain parties to do so.
The immediate response of hundreds of civilians in Turkey – attacking 
consulates, fighting with local police – is another example of the 
resorting-to-violence mob's myopic behaviour that so impedes efforts to 
resolve the Israel-Palestine imbroglio using peaceful and diplomatic 
means. Violence is the stock in trade of extremists on both sides of the 
Israeli-Palestinian war: settlers and soldiers on one side, militants 
and terror leaders on the other; pretending that the violence emanates 
from the Israeli side only is a spurious and senseless way to paint the 
picture.
When Israel's wrongs are brought to light, they deserve condemnation as 
much as those of the Palestinians, but that does not mean automatically 
that in any situation the default position ought to be Israel is guilty 
until proven innocent. In the case of the Freedom flotilla, Israel made 
repeated efforts during recent weeks to assist the activists in their 
mission and avoid bloodshed.
Even during the raid, troops did not fire on those on board at first, 
instead simply trying to go about their business of inspecting the 
cargo. When they were attacked with venomous force by the activists, 
they were left with no choice but to respond in kind. Those are the only 
facts that matter here, and all the kneejerk Israel-hating in the world 
won't absolve the activist aggressors from their share of guilt for the 
horrific events that unfolded today.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/jun/01/israel-no-choice-gaza-flotilla

 certain parties to do so.
Subscribe, mi piace questo Freedman, è lo stesso ex-broker che ha
scritto un libro sulla sua vita nella city, no?  Non mi capita spesso
di leggere il Guardian, ma me lo ricordavo posizionato in altro modo,
rispetto al MO.
In Italia resta da chiarire il mistero delle opposte percezioni  - è
roba da massmediologi - per cui la stampa sarebbe "tutta schierata",
se sei di destra per i "pacifisti", se sei di sinistra per Israele. A
quanto vedo però la maggior parte della stampa mainstream, cioè
Corriere, Repubblica, Stampa, Epolis, etc., (che vale in termini di
lettori almeno dieci volte il Giornale di Feltri e Libero), oltre ai
tg più visti, hanno dato la solita versione un po' sensazionalistica,
un po' pietistica, per la quale in ogni caso e al di là di ogni
possibile fatto e argomento, i villain son gli Israeliani. O forse è
appunto una questione di percezione, e delle proprie
frequentazioni..boh.
F.

 frequentazioni..boh.
Percezione per percezione, io vedo una differenza di fondo: è vero, le 
vittime degli israeliani sono più "pietizzate" di altre; mi sembra tanto 
sbagliato quanto constatabile. E' anche vero, però, che gli assassini 
israeliani sono mediamente più umanizzati degli assassini (per dire) 
"islamisti". Questo, per un motivo tanto semplice quanto "inevitabile": il 
mullah Omar *mi* somiglia meno di Abraham Mendelbaum (fratello gemello di 
Mebachem, il noto costrutore di carri allegorici che vive a Manhattan), che 
abita a Gerusalemme. Al di là (e al di qua) dello "scontro fra civiltà" (un 
"concetto" fesso quant'altri mai), c'è un problema antropologico che 
concerne essenzialmente la grossolanità acritica della percezione del "sé 
culturale". Il resto, per citare Freddy, è conseguenza.
Namib 

 "concetto" fesso quant'altri mai)
Per curiosità. Huntington l'hai letto?
Perché posso anche concordare sulla fesseria dello scontro di civiltà
così come inteso nel pappone del linguaggio comune. Ma noto anche
quando distante sia dalla sua formulazione originaria (e niente
affatto fessa, quantomeno se un modello si giudica dalla sua capacità
di leggere presente e futuro più o meno immediato).
Tb (bieco illuminista)
Tb (bieco illuminista)

 wrote:
prego di non rispondere all'impostore che utilizza abusivamente le mie
generalità
-- 
Luca Logi - Firenze - Italy        e-mail: 
ll...@dada.it
   Home page: 
http://www.angelfire.com/ar/archivarius
                   (musicologia pratica)

 Per curiosità. Huntington l'hai letto?
Lo cominciai svogliatamente (l'art. che apparve, mi pare, su FA), ma mi 
parve fesso come le categorie interpretative ("civiltà") che usava. Se le 
premesse sono errate, nessuna conclusione che se ne tragga può essere 
giusta.
Namib 

 giusta.
http://tinyurl.com/37t8ttf

"concetto" fesso quant'altri mai),
Non ne sono altrettanto sicuro...