Arrest Israel's New Defence Attache Eden Attias as a Gaza War Criminal
New Defence Attache Eager to Build Bridges
http://www.cjnews.com/news/new-defence-attache-eager-build-bridges
"Another layer has been added to the ever-deepening bilateral relationship between Canada and Israel. Last December, Israel quietly named Brig-Gen (Res) Eden Attias as its first Ministry of Defence attache to Ottawa. Prior to that, Israel's only defence attache in North America was stationed in Washington DC.
Given the deepening ties and friendship between Canada and Israel, the moment was right for his new post to be created, Attias said. 'Due to the flourishing relationship between Canada and Israel, one of the recent discussions between our defence ministries involved looking for ways to get more people on the ground in each country.
'We have a lot of things we're sharing,' he said. Attias said he's paving the way for his successors and hopes to open many doors for Israel with Canada's miltary industries and to connect Canadian firms to opportunities in Israel.
From a community standpoint, he said as an Israeli Jew, he's slowly learning just how much the Canadian Jewish community supports Israel."
(yeah me too.)
'Cast-Lead 'Dirty 200 List': Colonel Eden Atias ID: 22665954, Commander Nevatin Air Force Base; War Criminal No. #45'
http://www.richardsilverstein.com/tikun_olam/2010/11/25/idf-officers-bel...
"The people listed here held positions of command at the time of the Gaza attack. Therefore not only did they perform on behalf of a murderous state mechanism but actively encouraged other people to do the same.
The bear a distinctive personal responsibilty. All took and active role in the offensive...'
With every new revelation like the Dirty 200 list, the moral noose is tightened that much more around those who engaged in misdeeds during Cast Lead. The shroud of impunity is lifting ever so gradually. The notion of accountability is affirmed in an ever-stronger fashion.
This is a battle of inches on behalf of international law and Israeli responsibility. Gradually and eventually every Israeli soldier will realize the price they are paying for their nation's futile, failed, folly in pursuing all out war against Palestinian civilians in Gaza during Cast Lead and the inevitable next war was well..."
"Israel has no better friend than Canada" - Prime Mininster of Canada
"I am an ardent supporter of Israel in all situations and in all circumstances" - Opposition
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m9mkRiGbgZg&feature=related
Canada Must Arrest Israel's Defence Attache Brig-Gen Eden Attias For Gaza War Crimes!
Yeah, as soon as the Citizens arrest bill becomes law, go for it. No government official will.
If you want to arrest the guy, fine. He undoubtedly has it coming. And say what you will about the Israeli government. That government has it coming. But..."Dirty Zionist"? It's only a tiny step from "Zion__i" or "Dirty J_w".
That headline has GOT to be changed, mods. It looks like something from Stormfront or something.
Except he IS a 'Dirty Zionist Gaza War Criminal' Ken...and is even on a 'dirty' list leaked by a non-Zionist Jew that proves it. If history had gone differently and Canada was receiving and honouring an equivalent butcher of Jews instead of Palestinians, would the title 'Dirty Nazi War Criminal' similarly offend you?
He's a war criminal in the Israeli government. That's all you needed to say.
Bad as it has been, Zionism is NOT morally equivalent to Naziism...they aren't turning Palestinians into lampshades, for God's sake...and you can't assume that everyone who self-identifies as a Zionist supports what this bastard did or are complicit in it.
And you must be aware of the old "Dirty J_w" slur, and how close this sounds to that. Why use such phraseology when it gives those on the Zionist hard right and their enablers in the U.S. and Canadian governments rhetorical ammunition to fire at YOUR position.
"Dirty Zionist" is not acceptable.
NDPP, what exactly is wrong with showing some sensitivity to distinctions that others think are important?
Let me try to explain. If someone opened a thread saying, "Condemn the dirty zionist filthy pseudo-social democrat Mulcair, collaborator in the genocide of the Libyan and Palestinian people!", I would expect people here to say, "naw, that ain't right". I'd certainly say so myself. Would that make me an apologist for Tom Mulcair?
"Zionist" doesn't mean the same to everyone. There are people who consider themselves zionists who are our allies, whether you want to believe it or not. Otherwise, you will be opening threads saying, "Arrest that dirty zionist bootlicker of war criminals Uri Avnery!" We can agree or disagree with his view of the Israel-Palestine issue, but we can't call him a "dirty zionist" and expect everyone to back away in fear of being associated with zionism if they don't like that phrase.
Personally, I think the main difference between Hitler and Netanyahu is that Netanyahu is still alive, and that makes him a clear and present danger. That doesn't mean I'm going to put up thread titles saying, "Israeli regime worse than Hitler!". That kind of foolishness leads to ... well... people being afraid of Iran, for example. It leaves the Netanyahus rubbing their criminal hands with glee. You know what I mean?
Hope I'm being clear. If not, well, it won't be the first time.
Ah, so you seek to defend, exonerate and make the case for 'Clean' Zionists. Well, if such exists, this one isn't one of those. And I am not the only one who disagrees with you either:
www.israelversusjudaism.org/comparison/index.cfm
As a practical matter, you are not going to get anything to change in the Israel/Palestine situation if you insist that everyone who supports change repudiate Zionism in ANY form. You will need to get the support of those who still identify as Zionists but oppose what Israel is doing to Palestinians(and there are a LOT of such people, especially in the Diaspora). This is especially true for winning support for change within Israel itself...you simply CAN'T demand that every person of conscience there publicly declare themselves to be anti-Zionist. To ask them to do that is to ask them to permanently marginalize themselves within the Israeli political spectrum...and what use are allies if they are marginalized and powerless?
It's like insisting that oyu can only be pro-FN if you call for the complete dissolution of Canada(or the U.S., for that matter).
And of course Zionism isn't synonymous with Judaism, but not all Zionists are reactionary Arab-hating maximalist maniacs either.
Why do you insist on using rhetoric on this issue that costs you a LOT of potential support?
Do you really believe that all Zionists are personally evil? That being a Zionist is actually the same thing as being a Nazi? Even if you are a progressive Israeli who speaks out against what is being done to Palesitnians?
That there's no difference between Uri Avnery and Avigdor Lieberman? or(to use an American example)between Michael Lerner and Alan Dershowitz?
If you believe that, you are holding people there to a standard you would never hold people to here when discussing anything pertaining to North America.
As for myself, I'm neither Zionist nor anti-Zionist...you could call me an agnostic on the issue. But(like a lot of other people)I'm always going to call someone out for using rhetoric("Dirty Zionist")that sounds like it could have been used at a Nuremberg Rally. It's the sort of thing a right-wing Likudnik provacateur might use here if she or he wanted to give other right-wingers something to attack Babble for.
In general nothing. But this particular 'sensitivity to distinctions' is really about Zionists defending Zionism. I will not consent or participate in that. This is merely another manifestation of why the influence of dirty Zionist war criminals continues to grow here and how it is that not a word of protest has appeared against this particular dirty Zionist Gaza war criminal, but those against me naming him as such, are mounting.
Nobody denies he's a war criminal. And nobody here was defending Zionism.
It's about your rhetoric here-your pointlessly offensive and inflammatory phrasing.
I WANT the guy arrested, ok?
Yeah well I found Gaza pointlessly offensive and inflammatory too. As for your various Zionists, clean, dirty, carnivorous or vegetarian and their various internal messes - sorry not interested . He's 'Dirty', he's 'Zionist', he's a 'War-Criminal'. Title is accurate and stays.
Want him charged? You'll have to persuade the AG Canada because no war-crimes charges can proceed without his consent. Handy eh? I would suggest you try the NDP Opposition, but then the leader's an 'ardent supporter of Israel in all situations and in all circumstances' so looks like Zionist impunity wins again as it always does, probably because it has so many defenders ' in all situations and circumstances', as becomes more and more obvious to all.
He's Jewish too, right?
By definition of the word "apologist", yes, it would.
I hope that inspired intervention made you feel better. It certainly had a calming effect on me. Next time you weigh in, consider the possibility that one might oppose the use of baiting inflammatory divisive language even when it is absolutely accurate in your lexicographical purist's sense. To be very blunt, one could object to the phrase "that dirty warmongering genocidal crooked Jew Netanyahu" without being painted, by either Merriam or Webster, as an "apologist" for Netanyahu.
Richard Silverstein makes a blog post entitled "IDF Cast Lead Dirty 200", about the list of IDF members allegedly involved in war crimes against Gaza in Operation Cast Lead.
Colonel Attias is on that list. He is one of the "Dirty 200".
There are 50 responses posted on the blog; not one of them objects to the use of the word "dirty" as a descriptor of those alleged war criminals.
Only when it gets to babble does the phony politesse raise its head; on babble we can criticize war criminals but we have to be polite about it, and not hurt the feelings of anyone who might have some sympathy for them. God forbid we should say anything inflammatory or divisive.
This post is as close as one can get to equating anti-Zionism with anti-semitism without using an equals sign.
No it isn't. I don't make any such equation. Anti-Zionism has nothing in common with anti-semtism.
Left anti-Zionism is a respectable position and I admire the convictions of those tho take it.
What I reject is the idea that absolute anti-Zionism(which I'm defining as settling for nothing short of calling for a unitary state)is the ONLY progressive position.
To make that equation is to say that people like Uri Avnery, Michael Lerner, and most of the Israeli human rights community are reactionaries.
It doesn't have to be absolute anti-Zionism or nothing.
Why insist on a position that will ALWAYS be opposed by the majority of the Israeli population and that will always permanently marginalize any Israeli that embraces it? You do realize that it will be necessary to get the acquiescence of such people in resolution to the crisis for that resolution to work(just as it will be necessary to get the acquiescence of the majority of the Palestinians), right?
And no, I don't absolve the Israeli government of anything it's done to Palestinians.
You mean the same majority that were so overwhelmingly supportive of Zionist barbarism in Gaza?
OK...so you think all Israelis are evil. I wonder whether you still make a distinction between Israelis and Diaspora Jews, then.
Why is it that you can't accept that it is impossible to get an agreement that ends the war here that is not accepted by the majority of the Israeli population?
One option that might work would be the Belgian model...which creates a unitary administration yet recognizes the national characteristics of each polity here.
While the majority of Israelis will always be against an absolutely unitary state, a Belgian-type model could work.
That's what most of the left in Canada now seems to back regarding Canada's relationship with Quebec.
Actually I know some Diaspora Jews that are working hard against both colonizations, Israel's and Canada's. Settler states are surprisingly similar - the rednecks against Indigenous land rights of Six Nations (who have allied with Zionists of JDL, incidentally) are probably much the same in both places, except Israeli settlers are armed and supported by the regime. The majority of the Israeli population's heads are full of hateful Zionism and 'chosen' nonsense and are led by their noses by Lieberman, Netanyahu and that ilk. Honourable negotations will never happen with such hateful snakes. As for the Belgian model who knows? Certain outstanding issues of history, colonization and ongoing genocide are fundamentals that have to be addressed by negotiators with honour and credibility. Neither are present as far as I can see.
Agreed that they aren't present among the current leaders(and that probably goes for both sides).
But, seriously, how do you propose to get the people of Israel, whose cooperation with any arrangements will be required, whatever those arrangements will be, with ANY proposals for ending the war, if you collectively demonize them, and if you insist that the only acceptable resolution is one that you know that they can never be persuaded to accept? You do realize that the world can't just ORDER the State of Israel, as currently constituted to simply disappear, right? How many countries, anywhere, would WILLINGLY agree to do that?
This isn't about me...it's about the question of how do you get everybody whose acceptance will be needed to get on board with ending the war? You can't seriously insist that a pure unitary state is the ONLY accceptable solution(just as it is equally UNacceotable to say "they should just move to Jordan" to Palestinians). There is a case for it as the ultimate solution, but, at least in the interim, there needs to be a reconciliation process in which the wounds are healed on both sides and grievances are redressed on both sides.
This is something that a Belgian-type approach could achieve...since it would involve, at the outset, ending all the privations and restrictions currently imposed on West Bank and Gaza Palestinians.
As to the exiles, while it isn't realistic to do total the total physical return of all of them, there can be official acknowledgment by Israel that the expulsions of 1948 and 1967 were never acceptable and that the exiles, even if they can't physically return home, have the right to identify as Palestinian and to have that idenfitication accepted by all(this would also involve real apologies and real, immediate financial compensation for all they've been put through).
Those are the kinds of things that can be tried, I think, and that could get the support of rank-and-file Israelis, many of whom are not unquestioning supporters of what the various Israeli governments have done to Palestinians, yet who, like anybody else, have a hard time getting their heads around the idea of something like the formal dissolution of the country they currently live in. There has to be a way of including at least the non-hawkish wing of the Israeli population in any solution, and this is the problem with insisting that the immediate creation of a unitary state is the ONLY acceptable outcome.
Are the moderators going to change the thread title or are we going to continue to have this discussion about the phrase "dirty Zionist" every time it appears?
Change the title. Maybe a suspesion is in order. If instead of Zionist NDPP used another term (I will not give examples) a banning would occur
Are you going to shut the fuck up and stop creating problems where none exist?
No, I'm going to flag your post as offensive.
Let the pro-Zionist witch-hunt continue!
Not only is this Zionist attache on a 'dirty' list, he also commanded an airbase from which pilots flew to drop fire and death on the little children of Gaza. By any definition he's dirty and befouled by his crimes.
And since, as it appears, there are Zionists here, let them declare themselves and defend their thing.
Zionism and Judaism - Let Us Define Our Terms
http://www.nkusa.org/aboutus/zionism/index.cfm
It was established in the other thread that many babblers consider the phrase "dirty Zionist" to be offensive. That's enough for me to change the thread title. For the record, NDPP started this thread before the other discussion came to that deduction. I would also like to ask that babblers show respect and sensitivity to those who have reached a similar conclusion.
Welcome to our community. Nice to see that on your first day you are demanding that punishment be meted out to a poster who has been a part of babble for 4 years.
Lets start punishing people not for anything they post but rather what we can imagine they might have posted instead. What a truly totalitarian statement.
Again welcome to babble I just hope you don't try to get me banned on day two.
ETA: hi Catchfire crossposted with you this morning.
Thx NDPP for pointing out that this promoter of punishment posted for the first timne on Nakba Day.
the dirty, shameful crimes of Zionism and its adherents enjoy impunity almost everywhere. *POOF*: Babble's little contribution to NAKBA day..
Yes people who object to the phrase "dirty zionist" must be pro-zionist warmongers. Why not just say zionist vermin? Using these words to try and make Israeli Zionists seem less than human is juvenille and stupid and has absolutely nothing to do with justice for the people of Gaza. It's trolling by NDPP - plain and simple.