Blaming Hamas Rockets is an Excuse

First, Hamas is a political party that functions similarly to the Irish IRA, which had military, social and political wings.

Second, the most recent truce was broken by Israel on November 4, 2007 when they entered Gaza to conduct a targeted assassination raid. No rockets were being fired at that time. After several more targeted assassination raids, murdering twenty three Palestinians, resistance from Gaza was expressed by firing rockets at Israel.

Third, for two years Israel has conducted a siege on the Gaza Strip. This came after the US and Israel waged an increasingly brutal campaign against Hamas, despite its legitimate parliamentary election victory in 2005. This ended when the US and Israel attempted to provoke a Palestinian civil war by arming and training members of the Pelestinian Fatah party. Their attempt failed when Hamas exposed the US/Israeli coup plot and used force to eject Fatah party leaders from Gaza .

Fourth, the rockets initially fired from Gaza, in response to the targeted assassinations by Israel, were weak, home-made devices typically with warheads weighing about 5 kilograms (11 lbs)[1]. This compares with farm more powerful weapons being used by Israel. It's true that Palestinian weapons have marginally improved since 2006, but this link comparing only the Apache helicopter armaments to Palestinian rocket, not describing F-16 jets, drones, tanks, navel artillery, it's clear that Israel is applying disproportionate force, that is killing scores of Palestinian civilians.

Fifth, other Palestinians resisting the Israeli occupation, including Fatah members, are also firing rockets. It's not just Hamas.

No rockets are being fired from the Palestinian West Bank, yet Israel conducts routine military operations in that area resulting in Palestinian deaths.

The rockets from Gaza are a provoked excuse by Israel to get rid of the democratically elected Hamas, because Israel and the US cannot get rid of Hamas via the democratic process. This is the lesson of the current Israeli/Palestinian situation.

The following 7 min video is not for the faint of heart. I simply feel obligated to demonstrate my opposition to Israel's collective punishment and other violations of international law. I don't blame Hamas for the images in this video. Hamas is standing up for democratic principles. How many times have we seen this play out in history?

Gaza Children, Why were they Killed?

Psssst... Do Something

• Contact the Broadcast Media
  
• Contact the Newspapers
  
• Contact the US Senate
  
• Contact the House of Representatives

Sources:

[1] http://www.weaponsurvey.com I cant' vouch for this site.

Palin: Alaska Independece Party, Checking FactCheck.org

I appreciate the concept and challenge of FactCheck's work; however, it seems in their effort to be "objective" they narrow their summaries into sound-bites made easy to abuse.

Example:

FactCheck Says: "She was never a member of the Alaskan Independence Party, a group that wants Alaskans to vote on whether they wish to secede from the United States. She’s been registered as a Republican since May 1982."

Issue dismissed.

But Wait. Palin demonstrates a pattern of involvement with AIP, which isn't captured in the summary.

Deeper reading of FactCheck reveals, "her husband was a member for years, and she attended at least one party convention, as mayor of the town in which it was held." In addition, "As governor, Palin sent a video message to the 2008 convention, which is available on YouTube, and the AIP says she attended in 2006 when she was campaigning."

In her brief video to the 2008 AIP convention, Palin says, "we have a great promise to be a self-sufficient state...." Is this code for saying the State should strive to secede from the union?

It's starting to look like Palin might share the views of AIP, like someone who shares the views of the Green Party but registers Democrat.

A little more balanced shading of the FactCheck summaries might help place the "facts" into a more "factual context." And what about that title, "Sliming Palin: False Internet claims and rumors fly about McCain's running mate."

Contact FactCheck and let them know what you think.

Sources:

FactCheck, Sliming Palin: False Internet claims and rumors fly about McCain's running mate

Democrats Reject Fox as Illegitimate

The story reads that "the Nevada State Democratic Party is pulling out of a controversial presidential debate scheduled for Aug. 14 in Reno." But the story should read that a grassroots movement pressured the National Democratic Party to reject Fox.

This rejection goes far beyond a "snubbing" of FOX News Chairman and CEO Roger Ailes, though Nevada Democratic party chairman Tom Collins and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev) didn't pass on the opportunity. No. This rejection is far deeper in the minds of many people. It is a challenge to the legitimacy of Faux News.

John Edwards deserves significant credit for taking a principled stand early on that led to the unraveling. MoveOn.org collected more than 265,000 petition signatures sent to the Nevada State Democratic Party. MoveOn.org also deserves credit for laying the groundwork with their distribution campaign of Glenn Greenwald's documentary "OUTFOXED: Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism."

This represents significant evidence of a maturing social movement; MoveOn.org is building on social capital invested over several years. First, they have a legitimate base that is truely mainstream (not extreme) and grassroots (read small-d democratic, not a phony corporate front group).

Second, the MoveOn base and others have been educated by documentaries like Greenwald's, and web sites like News Hounds whose motto is "We Watch Fox So You Don't Have to."

Third, the buzz about Fox's lack of credibility has reached the ears of politicians. The popular discontent is so... popular that politicians are willing to risk giving a major media outlet like Fox the snub. Given the weak knees of politicians toward the media, this is a truly significant shift.

Though Fox Vice President David Rhodes spun it to say, the "Nevada Democratic Caucus... appears to be controlled by radical fringe, out-of-state in interest groups," the fair and balanced version of the news is that the Nation rejected Fox's role in co-hosting a presidential primary debate of national significance. A deeper analysis is that the Nation is rejecting Fox. Media Life Magazine reported a 24% drop between 2005 and 2006.

Fox will need to moderate its abuse of journalism or it will find itself disregarded by the public.
.