Gaza Update Informational Meeting

What: Informational Meeting to learn about the current situation in Gaza: conflict, hostility, violence — what's happening and why.

Analysis, discussion, and ideas for action... Jen Marlowe, filmmaker and activist, talks about the facts on the ground, Steve Niva, Evergreen State College Professor, gives context and analysis, and others as well.

When: Sunday, January 4, 2009 from 4PM until 6PM

Where: Traditions Café and World Folk Art

Why: Hostility and recent outbreak of full-blown violence between Palestine and Israel. Israel is waging a large-scale bombing campaign against the Palestinian Gaza Strip.

How: Show up—attend the meeting. Bring your thinking cap, listen and share ideas for confronting the problem, learn what you can do to make a difference.

Who: You and your friends and neighbors, this event is public and open, it's free, and all are welcome.

Sponsored and organized by The Olympia Rafah Sister City Project, and The Rachel Corrie Foundation.

Comments

Imaginary passport cover

Is that the passport or just a "cover" LOL. Nice one.
Kay

Palestine?

Obviously a typo. There is no such place on Earth, as determined by the U.N. or any government. I think those "Free Palestine" bumper stickers must mean "Create Palestine", but what do you expect from someone that expresses him/herself with a bumper sticker?

Palestine - Wikipedia

Palestine (Arabic فلسطین) is a name which has been widely used since Roman times to refer to the region that includes contemporary Israel and the Palestinian territories, parts of Jordan, and parts of Lebanon and Syria.

In its narrow meaning, it refers to the area within the boundaries of the former British Mandate of Palestine (1920-1948) west of the Jordan River.

Palestine can also refer to the Proposed Palestinian State. Within the context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the use of the term Palestine can arouse fierce controversy.

Imaginary passport?

Real passport. Imaginary relevance.

And yet, there is still no country on earth named Palestine. There is a governing body known as "The Palestinian Authority" that manages the Palestianian territories, as pictured on the passport. It is customary--for laughs--to put the actual name of the country on the cover. If, for example, I had written "There are no passports for residents of the Palestinian territories" and you had replied with your photo, then you would be credited with a sensible post. If a Palestinian state is created, that passport will change to Palestine or State of Palestine...something to that effect. Or, wait...do you know something that every single government that is sponsoring a two-state solution doesn't know: That there is already a Palestinian state. Amuse me: Who is the leader of "Palestine"?

kurlos

Uh, do you have a point or are you just proud of your irrelevance. An orange is monkey. Did I get the gist of your argument there?

Thanks for playing. Come on back when you've sobered up.

Ha!

Very nice.

Bumper Stickers

So, no bumper stickers for you then? We all have a right to express ourselves peacefully. For some people, that means bumper stickers. Personally, I have mixed emotions about bumper stickers. Tonight I saw one that read, "Mean people breed little mean people."

In general, I enjoy seeing and reading bumper stickers. It's probably a ranking concern over scanning for UMLs.

It sounds like you have strong feelings about this issue. Will you attend Sunday night's informational meeting?








Not strong feelings, strong feeling.

Which is: The use of violence is never justified. I would like to attend, although, I must admit, anyone that supports either side of this conflict makes me nervous.

Support for Justice

I agree with you that violence is never justified. Violence is destructive. Violence is essentially harmful. So, it would be nice to see the day when human beings evolve to the point where violence is no longer viewed as acceptable.

That said, there is such a thing as legitimate use of force. Neither side in this conflict is practicing such a use of force. Though it must be said, that Gazans are starving, and suffering under an intolerable blockade. So the Gazans do have some right to the practice of legitimate self-defense. As do Israelis - however it must be understood that the rocket attacks against Israel are the product of a basic injustice.

Hey, so I think if you attend that you will find many people who are like you - opposed to violence. Many/most people just want justice. People want and need to be treated fairly, to be treated equally.








Understood

Yes, I understand that you beleive that the rocket attacks against Israel are the product of a basic injustice. I suppose we disagree on the nature of the injustice. It must be understood that I believe the basic injustice causing the rocket fire is the apparent disregard Hamas has for the safety of its people. The injustice is that Hamas is more interested in its stated destructive ideology than improving the lives of Palestinians in Gaza. If, for example, you actually believe that Israel is an aggressive state that will use any provaction as a pre-text for bombardment, why would you provide that pre-text (an argument made numerous times by Abbas and Egypt). Unfortunately, Hamas does not support a two-state solution, and will expose its people to the aggressive (as you might argue)IDF. At the very least, not very smart. If the blockade/starvattion is the sole issue, why aren't they shooting rockets "in self-defense" at Egypt? I guess I'm not following the logic: If we shoot missles into Israel, we eat. A more realistic cause and effect is: If we do not support political parties that wish to destory our neighbor, our lives will improve.

Straight Story

Kurlos, I think you're facts are mixed up.

First let me say that I am not against Israel. What I am against, for clarity, is Gun-Zionism — and any use of violence to achieve political ends.

According to information from last night's meeting, Israel has practiced a policy of military escalation, where selective incursions are made into Palestinian territories in order to bait and provoke a reaction. In this case, there is solid evidence to make the accusation that Israel has thrown the first punch.

Israel characterizes Hamas as terrorist. But it was the actions of Israel that largely led to such an "anti-israeli" political organization getting elected. That's beside the fact that legitimately elected political organizations cannot be terrorists (although it can commit crimes against the peace.)

I am not siding with Hamas. Nor am I defending Hamas. However, Hamas was not responsible for launching the first rocket strikes against Israel. That was done by other groups (al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade, among others). Hamas only began launching rockets into Israel after Israel began its military strikes and bombing campaign against Gaza.

Get it? Israel provoked a reaction by extremist reactionary groups. This enable Israel to "justify" launching a full-scale military operation against Gaza.

It is sad that these truths are unrepresented in our mainstream media. It's important to have the facts straight when discussing issues like these.