HOLD BUSH AND CHENEY ACCOUNTABLE
GOP: GREED ON STEROIDS
I think of what Joseph Welch said to red-baiter Senator Joseph McCarthy: "Have you, Sir, at long last no sense of shame?" Republican policies have created the worst economic meltdown since the Great Depression (which was also caused by Republican policies) and they want to continue more of the same. If the word chutzpah ever applied to anyone, it's to this gang of thieves. Bob Herbert writes about it in this column at www.nytimes.com:
The question that I would like answered is why anyone listens to this crowd anymore. G.O.P. policies have been an absolute backbreaker for the middle class. (Forget the poor. Nobody talks about them anymore, not even the Democrats.) The G.O.P. has successfully engineered a wholesale redistribution of wealth to those already at the top of the income ladder and then, in a remarkable display of chutzpah, dared anyone to talk about class warfare.
A stark example of this unholy collaboration between the G.O.P. and the very wealthy was on display in the pages of this newspaper on Jan. 18. The Times’s Mike McIntire wrote an article about the first wave of federal bailout money for the financial industry, which was handed over by the Bush administration with hardly any strings attached. (Congress, under the control of the Democrats, should never have allowed this to happen, but the Democrats are as committed to fecklessness as the Republicans are to tax cuts.)
Monday, January 26, 2009
HOLD BUSH AND CHENEY ACCOUNTABLE
THE SAME OLD STORY WITH THE REPUBLICANS
Republican leaders in Congress don't like President Obama's stimulus package because it provides for spending and not for tax cuts. We have to keep in mind that when Republicans talk about tax cuts they're not for you and me. They're for their fat cat friends. History proves that spending generates far more jobs and stimulates the economy more than tax cuts. What the Republicans are really afraid of is a successful Obama administration because that would send them into the wilderness where they belong for years and years. This commentary by Paul Krugman is at www.nytimes.com:
The point is that nobody really believes that a dollar of tax cuts is always better than a dollar of public spending. Meanwhile, it’s clear that when it comes to economic stimulus, public spending provides much more bang for the buck than tax cuts — and therefore costs less per job created (see the previous fraudulent argument) — because a large fraction of any tax cut will simply be saved.
This suggests that public spending rather than tax cuts should be the core of any stimulus plan. But rather than accept that implication, conservatives take refuge in a nonsensical argument against public spending in general.
Finally, ignore anyone who tries to make something of the fact that the new administration’s chief economic adviser has in the past favored monetary policy over fiscal policy as a response to recessions.
THERE'S NO FREE LUNCH
In essence, what Ronald Reagan and proponents of "supply side economics" have preached is a free lunch. You can cut taxes and spend and the road will lead us to the promised land. Supply side economics says that when you cut taxes for rich people they will invest the money they saved in taxes and create jobs and prosperity for all. What we've seen through the Reagan and two Bush administrations is massive deficits, a huge gap in inequality, rising poverty, crumbling infrastructure, and inadequate government services. This commentary by Thom Hartmann is at www.commondreams.org:
George W. Bush embraced the Two Santa Claus Theory with gusto, ramming through huge tax cuts – particularly a cut to a maximum 15 percent income tax rate on people like himself who made their principle income from sitting around the pool waiting for their dividend or capital gains checks to arrive in the mail – and blowing out federal spending. Bush even out-spent Reagan, which nobody had ever thought would again be possible.
And it all seemed to be going so well, just as it did in the early 1920s when a series of three consecutive Republican presidents cut income taxes on the uber-rich from over 70 percent to under 30 percent. In 1929, pretty much everybody realized that instead of building factories with all that extra money, the rich had been pouring it into the stock market, inflating a bubble that – like an inexorable law of nature – would have to burst. But the people who remembered that lesson were mostly all dead by 2005, when Jude Wanniski died and George Gilder celebrated the Reagan/Bush supply-side-created bubble economies in a Wall Street Journal eulogy:
THE SAME OLD STORY WITH THE REPUBLICANS
Republican leaders in Congress don't like President Obama's stimulus package because it provides for spending and not for tax cuts. We have to keep in mind that when Republicans talk about tax cuts they're not for you and me. They're for their fat cat friends. History proves that spending generates far more jobs and stimulates the economy more than tax cuts. What the Republicans are really afraid of is a successful Obama administration because that would send them into the wilderness where they belong for years and years. This commentary by Paul Krugman is at www.nytimes.com:
The point is that nobody really believes that a dollar of tax cuts is always better than a dollar of public spending. Meanwhile, it’s clear that when it comes to economic stimulus, public spending provides much more bang for the buck than tax cuts — and therefore costs less per job created (see the previous fraudulent argument) — because a large fraction of any tax cut will simply be saved.
This suggests that public spending rather than tax cuts should be the core of any stimulus plan. But rather than accept that implication, conservatives take refuge in a nonsensical argument against public spending in general.
Finally, ignore anyone who tries to make something of the fact that the new administration’s chief economic adviser has in the past favored monetary policy over fiscal policy as a response to recessions.
THERE'S NO FREE LUNCH
In essence, what Ronald Reagan and proponents of "supply side economics" have preached is a free lunch. You can cut taxes and spend and the road will lead us to the promised land. Supply side economics says that when you cut taxes for rich people they will invest the money they saved in taxes and create jobs and prosperity for all. What we've seen through the Reagan and two Bush administrations is massive deficits, a huge gap in inequality, rising poverty, crumbling infrastructure, and inadequate government services. This commentary by Thom Hartmann is at www.commondreams.org:
George W. Bush embraced the Two Santa Claus Theory with gusto, ramming through huge tax cuts – particularly a cut to a maximum 15 percent income tax rate on people like himself who made their principle income from sitting around the pool waiting for their dividend or capital gains checks to arrive in the mail – and blowing out federal spending. Bush even out-spent Reagan, which nobody had ever thought would again be possible.
And it all seemed to be going so well, just as it did in the early 1920s when a series of three consecutive Republican presidents cut income taxes on the uber-rich from over 70 percent to under 30 percent. In 1929, pretty much everybody realized that instead of building factories with all that extra money, the rich had been pouring it into the stock market, inflating a bubble that – like an inexorable law of nature – would have to burst. But the people who remembered that lesson were mostly all dead by 2005, when Jude Wanniski died and George Gilder celebrated the Reagan/Bush supply-side-created bubble economies in a Wall Street Journal eulogy:
Sunday, January 25, 2009
January 25, 2009
HOLD BUSH AND CHENEY ACCOUNTABLE
HERE IN WINGNUT COUNTRY
I've come to the conclusion that The Fresno Bee should change its name to The Wingnut Daily from the right-wing rants in the Letters to the Editor section.
In the past week or so I've seen letters complaining about President Obama's inauguration being too expensive. It was actually comparable to the cost of George W. Bush's inauguration.
I saw one nut going all the way back to the New Deal. He was outraged that "liberals" wanted Gitmo closed, but didn't object to the detention of Japanese-Americans in the 1940's. I wasn't alive back then, which precludes any protest about the detention back then. I think that detention was wrong, one of the stains from that era, but the torture of prisoners at Gitmo is even worse.
One guy, typically smug, said he wasn't particularly bothered at the idea the government might have spied on him. If you really believe in the Constitution, and if you realize the far-reaching implications of the government illegally spying, you should be bothered.
Today we have a guy talking about the "godly principles" of the founders. Godly principles like slavery, subjugation of women, genocide of Native Americans, and protecting property owners above all. There are things I admire about the founders, but their writings show they didn't believe in the fundamentalist god right-wingers espouse.
HOLD BUSH AND CHENEY ACCOUNTABLE
HERE IN WINGNUT COUNTRY
I've come to the conclusion that The Fresno Bee should change its name to The Wingnut Daily from the right-wing rants in the Letters to the Editor section.
In the past week or so I've seen letters complaining about President Obama's inauguration being too expensive. It was actually comparable to the cost of George W. Bush's inauguration.
I saw one nut going all the way back to the New Deal. He was outraged that "liberals" wanted Gitmo closed, but didn't object to the detention of Japanese-Americans in the 1940's. I wasn't alive back then, which precludes any protest about the detention back then. I think that detention was wrong, one of the stains from that era, but the torture of prisoners at Gitmo is even worse.
One guy, typically smug, said he wasn't particularly bothered at the idea the government might have spied on him. If you really believe in the Constitution, and if you realize the far-reaching implications of the government illegally spying, you should be bothered.
Today we have a guy talking about the "godly principles" of the founders. Godly principles like slavery, subjugation of women, genocide of Native Americans, and protecting property owners above all. There are things I admire about the founders, but their writings show they didn't believe in the fundamentalist god right-wingers espouse.
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
January 21, 2009
HOLD BUSH AND CHENEY ACCOUNTABLE
Congratulations to President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden. I like some of what I've seen already. Rescinding Bush's global gag order, suspending some of Bush's "midnight regulations," and reviewing the situation in Gitmo are a good start. I hope that the Obama administration will look at full investigations of the crimes committed by the Bush administration and hold all the responsible parties accountable. We need to look to the future, but we can not ignore the crimes of the past.
THE REAL STORY OF PREDATORY CAPITALISM
Free market savants link capitalism and "freedom" in one sentence. It's interesting to note, though, how repressive capitalism has been and continues to be here and around the world. As this author points out, many capitalist countries are by no means free. The commentary by Michael Parenti is at www.commondreams.org:
The corporate capitalists no more encourage prosperity than do they propagate democracy. Most of the world is capitalist, and most of the world is neither prosperous nor particularly democratic. One need only think of capitalist Nigeria, capitalist Indonesia, capitalist Thailand, capitalist Haiti, capitalist Colombia, capitalist Pakistan, capitalist South Africa, capitalist Latvia, and various other members of the Free World--more accurately, the Free Market World.
A prosperous, politically literate populace with high expectations about its standard of living and a keen sense of entitlement, pushing for continually better social conditions, is not the plutocracy's notion of an ideal workforce and a properly pliant polity. Corporate investors prefer poor populations. The poorer you are, the harder you will work-for less. The poorer you are, the less equipped you are to defend yourself against the abuses of wealth.
In the corporate world of "free-trade," the number of billionaires is increasing faster than ever while the number of people living in poverty is growing at a faster rate than the world's population. Poverty spreads as wealth accumulates.
Consider the United States. In the last eight years alone, while vast fortunes accrued at record rates, an additional six million Americans sank below the poverty level; median family income declined by over $2,000; consumer debt more than doubled; over seven million Americans lost their health insurance, and more than four million lost their pensions; meanwhile homelessness increased and housing foreclosures reached pandemic levels.
HOLD BUSH AND CHENEY ACCOUNTABLE
Congratulations to President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden. I like some of what I've seen already. Rescinding Bush's global gag order, suspending some of Bush's "midnight regulations," and reviewing the situation in Gitmo are a good start. I hope that the Obama administration will look at full investigations of the crimes committed by the Bush administration and hold all the responsible parties accountable. We need to look to the future, but we can not ignore the crimes of the past.
THE REAL STORY OF PREDATORY CAPITALISM
Free market savants link capitalism and "freedom" in one sentence. It's interesting to note, though, how repressive capitalism has been and continues to be here and around the world. As this author points out, many capitalist countries are by no means free. The commentary by Michael Parenti is at www.commondreams.org:
The corporate capitalists no more encourage prosperity than do they propagate democracy. Most of the world is capitalist, and most of the world is neither prosperous nor particularly democratic. One need only think of capitalist Nigeria, capitalist Indonesia, capitalist Thailand, capitalist Haiti, capitalist Colombia, capitalist Pakistan, capitalist South Africa, capitalist Latvia, and various other members of the Free World--more accurately, the Free Market World.
A prosperous, politically literate populace with high expectations about its standard of living and a keen sense of entitlement, pushing for continually better social conditions, is not the plutocracy's notion of an ideal workforce and a properly pliant polity. Corporate investors prefer poor populations. The poorer you are, the harder you will work-for less. The poorer you are, the less equipped you are to defend yourself against the abuses of wealth.
In the corporate world of "free-trade," the number of billionaires is increasing faster than ever while the number of people living in poverty is growing at a faster rate than the world's population. Poverty spreads as wealth accumulates.
Consider the United States. In the last eight years alone, while vast fortunes accrued at record rates, an additional six million Americans sank below the poverty level; median family income declined by over $2,000; consumer debt more than doubled; over seven million Americans lost their health insurance, and more than four million lost their pensions; meanwhile homelessness increased and housing foreclosures reached pandemic levels.
Friday, January 16, 2009
January 16, 2009
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
SAY NO TO FORGIVE AND FORGET
It would have been easy after the Second World War ended to say we shouldn't pursue war crimes against the perpetrators of the Nazi atrocities. Germany was defeated. We could have looked forward, not back, and left the atrocities to molder. But war crimes trials were the right thing to do. No trial, no punishment, could begin to establish justice, but the trials were the closest we could come. And so it is with Bush and his cohorts. They should not be allowed to sidle off into a comfortable retirement. The full scope of their crimes should be aired out in full investigations and trials. This commentary by Paul Krugman is at www.commondreams.org:
Why, then, shouldn't we have an official inquiry into abuses during the Bush years?
One answer you hear is that pursuing the truth would be divisive, that it would exacerbate partisanship. But if partisanship is so terrible, shouldn't there be some penalty for the Bush administration's politicization of every aspect of government?
Alternatively, we're told that we don't have to dwell on past abuses, because we won't repeat them. But no important figure in the Bush administration, or among that administration's political allies, has expressed remorse for breaking the law. What makes anyone think that they or their political heirs won't do it all over again, given the chance?
In fact, we've already seen this movie. During the Reagan years, the Iran-contra conspirators violated the Constitution in the name of national security. But the first President Bush pardoned the major malefactors, and when the White House finally changed hands the political and media establishment gave Bill Clinton the same advice it's giving Mr. Obama: let sleeping scandals lie. Sure enough, the second Bush administration picked up right where the Iran-contra conspirators left off - which isn't too surprising when you bear in mind that Mr. Bush actually hired some of those conspirators.
Now, it's true that a serious investigation of Bush-era abuses would make Washington an uncomfortable place, both for those who abused power and those who acted as their enablers or apologists. And these people have a lot of friends. But the price of protecting their comfort would be high: If we whitewash the abuses of the past eight years, we'll guarantee that they will happen again.
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
SAY NO TO FORGIVE AND FORGET
It would have been easy after the Second World War ended to say we shouldn't pursue war crimes against the perpetrators of the Nazi atrocities. Germany was defeated. We could have looked forward, not back, and left the atrocities to molder. But war crimes trials were the right thing to do. No trial, no punishment, could begin to establish justice, but the trials were the closest we could come. And so it is with Bush and his cohorts. They should not be allowed to sidle off into a comfortable retirement. The full scope of their crimes should be aired out in full investigations and trials. This commentary by Paul Krugman is at www.commondreams.org:
Why, then, shouldn't we have an official inquiry into abuses during the Bush years?
One answer you hear is that pursuing the truth would be divisive, that it would exacerbate partisanship. But if partisanship is so terrible, shouldn't there be some penalty for the Bush administration's politicization of every aspect of government?
Alternatively, we're told that we don't have to dwell on past abuses, because we won't repeat them. But no important figure in the Bush administration, or among that administration's political allies, has expressed remorse for breaking the law. What makes anyone think that they or their political heirs won't do it all over again, given the chance?
In fact, we've already seen this movie. During the Reagan years, the Iran-contra conspirators violated the Constitution in the name of national security. But the first President Bush pardoned the major malefactors, and when the White House finally changed hands the political and media establishment gave Bill Clinton the same advice it's giving Mr. Obama: let sleeping scandals lie. Sure enough, the second Bush administration picked up right where the Iran-contra conspirators left off - which isn't too surprising when you bear in mind that Mr. Bush actually hired some of those conspirators.
Now, it's true that a serious investigation of Bush-era abuses would make Washington an uncomfortable place, both for those who abused power and those who acted as their enablers or apologists. And these people have a lot of friends. But the price of protecting their comfort would be high: If we whitewash the abuses of the past eight years, we'll guarantee that they will happen again.
Thursday, January 15, 2009
January 15, 2009
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
A Word From Rubber Stamp Radanovich
There's nothing like a missive from your hard right-wing Congressman to warm the cockles of your heart. And to think that tax money goes to pay for this drivel to be sent in the mail. The Congressman from this district, George Radanovich, has consistently supported the Bush administration, so I have attached the moniker "Rubber Stamp" to describe him.
Ole Rubber Stamp claims in this mailing that, . . . "Americans have lost a sense of personal responsibility, much of which has been facilitated by an overreaching federal government. The vast expansion of the government into the private sector has enabled a culture of irresponsibility with regard to serious matters such as debt and finance."
Of course, it's all our fault! The sharks on Wall Street, who managed to shed regulation like a duck sheds water, don't have any hand in this. The bought agencies of the federal government, who didn't fulfill their oversight duties, had nothing to do with it either. It's just us irresponsible people out here in consumer land.
Rubber Stamp has a survey attached to his little propaganda piece about issues most important to "you and your family." There's nary a word about ending the war in Iraq, restoring civil liberties, providing regulatory oversight, or impeaching the members of the Bush administration who gave us this nightmare.
It's a pity that Democrats have not put up any serious candidate to get this guy out of Congress. Let's hope that changes in the next election cycle.
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
A Word From Rubber Stamp Radanovich
There's nothing like a missive from your hard right-wing Congressman to warm the cockles of your heart. And to think that tax money goes to pay for this drivel to be sent in the mail. The Congressman from this district, George Radanovich, has consistently supported the Bush administration, so I have attached the moniker "Rubber Stamp" to describe him.
Ole Rubber Stamp claims in this mailing that, . . . "Americans have lost a sense of personal responsibility, much of which has been facilitated by an overreaching federal government. The vast expansion of the government into the private sector has enabled a culture of irresponsibility with regard to serious matters such as debt and finance."
Of course, it's all our fault! The sharks on Wall Street, who managed to shed regulation like a duck sheds water, don't have any hand in this. The bought agencies of the federal government, who didn't fulfill their oversight duties, had nothing to do with it either. It's just us irresponsible people out here in consumer land.
Rubber Stamp has a survey attached to his little propaganda piece about issues most important to "you and your family." There's nary a word about ending the war in Iraq, restoring civil liberties, providing regulatory oversight, or impeaching the members of the Bush administration who gave us this nightmare.
It's a pity that Democrats have not put up any serious candidate to get this guy out of Congress. Let's hope that changes in the next election cycle.
Sunday, January 11, 2009
January 11, 2009
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
WHAT A LEGACY
George W. Bush has said he doesn't worry about what history will think because he won't be around to read it. To the contrary, he can pretty much determine his legacy right now. He has led the most corrupt and incompetent administration in our history. He failed to stop the terrorist attacks on 9/11 despite ample warnings. He lied us into a war in Iraq that has rained death and destruction on Iraqis and killed and wounded so many of own military. He has ignored global climate change, which threatens all life on earth. He leaves the worst economy since the Great Depression. This commentary by Helen Thomas is at www.commondreams.org:
Because of Bush's policies, the U.S. also is complicit in the Israeli attack on the Palestinians on the Gaza Strip by providing a "made-in-America" high-tech arsenal for the assault and blocking a ceasefire for nearly two weeks, a move intended to help the Israelis consolidate their hold.
Not to worry, Bush says he isn't concerned about how history will view his militant eight years in the White House, telling ABC News that he "won't be around to read it."
Well, they say that journalism is the first draft of history. So I am going to predict that those future historians will not deal kindly with the Bush presidency.
It's true -- as Bush and company point at their proudest achievement-- there have been no new terrorist attacks on the U.S. since Sept. 11, 2001.
But they fail to acknowledge administration mistakes before and after that fateful day, starting with the fact that White House and security officials ignored significant early warnings of an imminent strike against the U.S.
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
WHAT A LEGACY
George W. Bush has said he doesn't worry about what history will think because he won't be around to read it. To the contrary, he can pretty much determine his legacy right now. He has led the most corrupt and incompetent administration in our history. He failed to stop the terrorist attacks on 9/11 despite ample warnings. He lied us into a war in Iraq that has rained death and destruction on Iraqis and killed and wounded so many of own military. He has ignored global climate change, which threatens all life on earth. He leaves the worst economy since the Great Depression. This commentary by Helen Thomas is at www.commondreams.org:
Because of Bush's policies, the U.S. also is complicit in the Israeli attack on the Palestinians on the Gaza Strip by providing a "made-in-America" high-tech arsenal for the assault and blocking a ceasefire for nearly two weeks, a move intended to help the Israelis consolidate their hold.
Not to worry, Bush says he isn't concerned about how history will view his militant eight years in the White House, telling ABC News that he "won't be around to read it."
Well, they say that journalism is the first draft of history. So I am going to predict that those future historians will not deal kindly with the Bush presidency.
It's true -- as Bush and company point at their proudest achievement-- there have been no new terrorist attacks on the U.S. since Sept. 11, 2001.
But they fail to acknowledge administration mistakes before and after that fateful day, starting with the fact that White House and security officials ignored significant early warnings of an imminent strike against the U.S.
Tuesday, January 06, 2009
January 6, 2009
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
CALIFORNIA: GOOD RIDDANCE TO BUSH
The last paragraph of this article contains the rather interesting observation that California will miss Bush because we won't have to him to “kick around” anymore. What nonsense. Bush has done incredible damage to California and to the rest of the country. The article by Carla Marinucci is at www.sfgate.com:
The 43rd president's legacy in the Golden State, according to the unsparing assessment of Democratic consultant Phil Trounstine, is "zilch."
"He regarded California sort of like France - as a foreign entity for which he had nothing but scorn," said Trounstine. "Except for this: He did more damage to California than he ever did to France."
With just 15 days remaining for the Bush administration, political observers note that the Republican president's chilly relationship with the decidedly blue state - a relationship that is poised to undergo a revolution with Democratic President-elect Barack Obama - means that many here will define the Bush legacy in California as forgettable at best.
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
CALIFORNIA: GOOD RIDDANCE TO BUSH
The last paragraph of this article contains the rather interesting observation that California will miss Bush because we won't have to him to “kick around” anymore. What nonsense. Bush has done incredible damage to California and to the rest of the country. The article by Carla Marinucci is at www.sfgate.com:
The 43rd president's legacy in the Golden State, according to the unsparing assessment of Democratic consultant Phil Trounstine, is "zilch."
"He regarded California sort of like France - as a foreign entity for which he had nothing but scorn," said Trounstine. "Except for this: He did more damage to California than he ever did to France."
With just 15 days remaining for the Bush administration, political observers note that the Republican president's chilly relationship with the decidedly blue state - a relationship that is poised to undergo a revolution with Democratic President-elect Barack Obama - means that many here will define the Bush legacy in California as forgettable at best.
Monday, January 05, 2009
January 5, 2009
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
The media and political establishment in the United States are strongly pro-Israel. We're told repeatedly that the Israelis are under dire threat from their Arab neighbors. We aren't told how the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip basically suffer from apartheid. Now we're told that the Israelis are dropping white phosophrous shells on the mostly civilian population in Gaza. This is reprehensible against even military targets. This article by Jeremy Hammond is at www.smirkingchimp.com:
The Gaza Strip is one of the most densely populated pieces of property in the world. The presence of militants within a civilian population does not, under international law, deprive that population of their protected status, and hence any assault upon that population under the guise of targeting militants is, in fact, a war crime.
Moreover, the people Israel claims are legitimate targets are members of Hamas, which Israel says is a terrorist organization. Hamas has been responsible for firing rockets into Israel. These rockets are extremely inaccurate and thus, even if Hamas intended to hit military targets within Israel, are indiscriminate by nature. When rockets from Gaza kill Israeli civilians, it is a war crime.
Hamas has a military wing. However, it is not entirely a military organization, but a political one. Members of Hamas are the democratically elected representatives of the Palestinian people. Dozens of these elected leaders have been kidnapped and held in Israeli prisons without charge. Others have been targeted for assassination, such as Nizar Rayan, a top Hamas official. To kill Rayan, Israel targeted a residential apartment building. The strike not only killed Rayan but two of his wives and four of his children, along with six others. There is no justification for such an attack under international law. This was a war crime.
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
The media and political establishment in the United States are strongly pro-Israel. We're told repeatedly that the Israelis are under dire threat from their Arab neighbors. We aren't told how the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip basically suffer from apartheid. Now we're told that the Israelis are dropping white phosophrous shells on the mostly civilian population in Gaza. This is reprehensible against even military targets. This article by Jeremy Hammond is at www.smirkingchimp.com:
The Gaza Strip is one of the most densely populated pieces of property in the world. The presence of militants within a civilian population does not, under international law, deprive that population of their protected status, and hence any assault upon that population under the guise of targeting militants is, in fact, a war crime.
Moreover, the people Israel claims are legitimate targets are members of Hamas, which Israel says is a terrorist organization. Hamas has been responsible for firing rockets into Israel. These rockets are extremely inaccurate and thus, even if Hamas intended to hit military targets within Israel, are indiscriminate by nature. When rockets from Gaza kill Israeli civilians, it is a war crime.
Hamas has a military wing. However, it is not entirely a military organization, but a political one. Members of Hamas are the democratically elected representatives of the Palestinian people. Dozens of these elected leaders have been kidnapped and held in Israeli prisons without charge. Others have been targeted for assassination, such as Nizar Rayan, a top Hamas official. To kill Rayan, Israel targeted a residential apartment building. The strike not only killed Rayan but two of his wives and four of his children, along with six others. There is no justification for such an attack under international law. This was a war crime.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)