Monthly Archives: August 2015

“Hillary Clinton is a Threat to Peace and Justice throughout the World”

My interview with Mohsen Abdelmoumen of May 15, 2015

http://whatsupic.com/special-usa/robert-fantina425764.html

Robert Fantina: « Hillary Clinton is a threat to peace and justice throughout the world ».

————————————————————————————-

Mohsen Abdelmoumen: There was Ferguson, and then Baltimore; the United States live almost daily riots. What is your analysis of these scenes of chaos in the US?

Robert Fantina: Ferguson and Baltimore are just two of the many episodes in the United States where white police officers have killed unarmed black men, usually with complete impunity. This is a continuation of a long, unjust and very ugly tradition within the country. Generations ago, blacks were lynched (hung) in the southern part of the U.S. for no other reason than for being black. These lynchings were attended by large crowds who seemed to see these murders as entertainment. No one was ever convicted for any of these horrendous crimes.

Today it is rare for a police officer to be charged with any crime when killing an unarmed black person, and even more rare for such an officer to be convicted. Several police officers have been indicted in Baltimore, which is extremely unusual, not only for the indictments themselves, but also for the speed in which those indictments were made.

It must be remembered that many U.S. police departments, including some within Ferguson, receive training from the Israeli military, which is one of the most inhuman, brutal military systems in the world. Additionally, the Pentagon provides military equipment to many municipalities in the U.S. for their police departments. This militarization of the police cannot be seen as a method to prevent or solve crimes; it is all part of blatant, and mainly successful, efforts on the part of the U.S. government to stifle dissent, intimate the poor, and maintain the continued oppression of the poor for the benefit of the wealthy.

In front of return of the racist crimes which take us back into the bloody history of the United States, what is your assessment of the first American black president who condones crimes against the American black population?

As the election of 2008 approached, throughout the United States there was excessive and unwarranted optimism about the changes that might be ushered in by the nation’s first black president. Hearing the eloquent rhetoric of then-Senator Obama, many people seemed to see him as the new American savior. People forget that, in order to be elected to any but local municipal offices in the United States, there are countless special-interest groups that must be satisfied. They will donate vast amounts of money, and provide endless volunteers, but they are not doing this for the good of the common man and woman; they have certain specific goals, and they expect that by providing resources for a candidate, that candidate, when elected, will provide it with the expected benefits.

Mr. Obama is no different in needing that support, and being willing to pay his corporate owners appropriately from the Oval Office. He cannot restrict police departments without risking the anger of the military industry, or of any corporate group that relies on cheap labor to produce its good and services.

 According to our information, you left the United States to settle near Toronto in Canada following the reelection of George W. Bush and the neocons’ comeback in the US administration. Can you enlighten us about that?

In 2000, in the presidential election in which the major candidates were Republican George Bush and Democrat Al Gore, Mr. Gore won the majority vote. However, due to bizarre provisions in the U.S. electoral system, the Supreme Court appointed Mr. Bush president. Four years later, when Mr. Bush ran for re-election against Massachusetts Senator John Kerry, I did not expect the president to be successful. There were known voting irregularities in 2000 in Florida, and others in Ohio in 2004, but regardless, Mr. Bush was apparently voted in for a second term. I had worked as a volunteer for Mr. Kerry in Florida, and decided then that I could no longer live in the U.S.

I must mention here that while I saw Mr. Kerry as far better than Mr. Bush, I did not expect great statesmanship from him. Since he has been the U.S. Secretary of State, Mr. Kerry has done nothing but disappoint, especially in his unfair, unjust and unreasonable support for Israel at the expense of the basic human rights of the Palestinians.

Immediately following that election, I began seeking employment in Canada, and moved there in June of 2005, as soon as I found suitable employment. I lived in the western part of the country for almost three years, and moved to the Toronto area in 2008. In November of 2014, I became a Canadian citizen. I still have U.S. citizenship, and will keep it to expedite travel to the U.S., where I still have extended family.

 The United States continues to play a murky role in the Middle East, first by supporting Saudi Arabia in its infamous war against Yemen, on the other hand getting closer to Iran. What do you think of this balancing act of the USA that juggle between the two major powers in the region, one representing Sunni Islam and the other Shiite Islam?

The U.S.’s goal is to continue its world economic domination, and to achieve that it will support any nation that it sees as strategically advantageous, and oppose any that get in its way. Additionally, the importance of lobby groups to U.S. elected officials cannot be overstated. The American Israel Political Affairs Committee (AIPAC) is a major tool of the brutal Israeli regime, and one that holds tremendous influence over most U.S. government officials. It is rare for the U.S. to defy it, although it is doing so in Iran, despite the rhetoric of government officials, even those negotiating with that nation remaining hostile in regard to Iran.

U.S. support or opposition for any regime cannot be seen as either agreement or disagreement with the philosophy of that government. The U.S. will, has and does support the most brutal, repressive regimes if those countries’ leaders do as the U.S. instructs. The U.S. government has no interested in supporting or opposing Sunni Islam or Shiite Islam; it looks at where its economic goals are, determines which countries will support those goals, and then provides support accordingly. There is no limit to the barbaric civil rights violations that the U.S. supports, if those perpetrating them follow U.S. economic instructions.

What is the weight of the Zionist lobby, headed by AIPAC, in the designation of the US president, knowing that supports Hillary Clinton?

As I mentioned before, AIPAC is a very powerful lobby in the U.S., and Mrs. Clinton speaks of Israel in the most positive and affectionate of terms. AIPAC will not need to use its considerable influence to elect Mrs. Clinton, because it won’t matter to AIPAC or Israel who wins the election, since each current candidate, Democratic and Republican, worships at the AIPAC altar.

But it’s interesting to note how AIPAC’s influence is felt. Mrs. Clinton, during last summer’s genocidal attack on Palestine by Israel, echoed the standard government words about Israel’s right to defend itself. There are numerous things wrong with this statement:

1) It is illogical to think of an occupying nation ‘defending’ itself from its victim; all it can do is further oppress the victim nation.

2) Israel has the fourth most powerful military system in the world, backed and completely financed by the most powerful. Palestine has no army, no navy and no air force.

3) So-called rocket fire from the Gaza Strip consists of what Dr. Norman Finkelstein, the son of Holocaust survivors and a strong advocate for Palestinian rights, calls ‘enhanced fireworks’. Another journalist said that those rockets could be made with an eighth grade chemistry set. Israel, on the other hand, has the most advanced and deadly weaponry in the world, some if it illegal under international law, all provided by the U.S. Also, during the 51-day slaughter by Israel of Palestinians in the Gaza Strip, Israel fired more rockets into Gaza than Gaza had fired into Israel in the previous fourteen years.

4) International law states that an occupied nation has the right to resist the occupation.

5) During the 2014 onslaught, Israel bombed schools, mosques, United Nations refugee centers, press vehicles, hospitals and private residences, all in violation of international law.

Mrs. Clinton didn’t consider any of these factors when she blindly defended Israel.

For the first time, we see the US elections without any suspense. Democratic side, Clinton has any competition, and in Republican side, they have difficulty to nominate a candidate. Don’t you think that the games are already made and Hillary Clinton is already president of the United States? The USA can they afford a president who has failed in her mission of Secretary of State by losing her ambassador in Benghazi by negligence?

It is true that there does not seem to be much suspense regarding the next presidential election. Mrs. Clinton has access to vast amounts of money, much of which will obligate her to the wealthy corporations that donate it, and greater name recognition than anyone else who might enter the race. The Republican candidates that have either announced their candidacy, or are expected to do so, all impress the extreme right wing of that party, but really have no chance of being elected in a national election.

The situation in Benghazi, and any responsibility Mrs. Clinton may have for it, is still unclear. However, there are many reasons why the U.S. cannot afford a Hillary Clinton presidency. Her obligations to the wealthy and the military industry; her past actions on foreign affairs, including her vote to authorize the disastrous, immoral and illegal U.S. invasion of Iraq; her statement in 2008 about ‘obliterating’ Iran; her blindness to international law in the context of Israel and Palestine, all make her, as a potential president, a threat to peace and justice throughout the world.

 Are you informed that Mrs. Clinton received bribes (money, villa) from the King of Morocco who lobbied her to get her support in its colonialist policy against the people of Western Sahara? Do you think the American public knows the problem of Western Sahara and the support of Hillary Clinton to the king of Morocco in its settlement policy of the territory of Western Sahara? Is it normal that a pretender for the US presidency receive money from another country, in this case the Kingdom of Morocco?

Sadly, this is business as usual in the United States. If the country ever was a democracy, and I doubt that that was ever actually the case, it has long since ceased to be so, and is now definitely an oligarchy. The Clinton foundation’s acceptance of the $1 million donation that you refer to is just one way that the rich control the country. The donation by the office Cherifien des Phosphates is just one of the many foreign businesses or governments that have supported Mrs. Clinton, and will continue to do so.

Neither Mrs. Clinton nor her millions of devoted fans care about the exploitation of the Western Sahara. Most of the U.S. public is probably unaware of this; unfortunately, telling them wouldn’t make a difference. The crimes that the U.S. has committed internationally for generations are hidden, but can be clearly located with minimal research. Yet the government public relations activities are sufficiently successful that the citizenry is happy to accept whatever it is told.

The U.S. citizenry made history in 2008 when it elected a black president, and seems eager to follow that up with the election of the first woman president. There does not seem to be a close scrutiny of her past actions, or her current policy pronouncements.

Israel continues its policy of colonization and extermination openly before the world. Its criminal leaders aren’t worried by any international tribunal, while we see judgments of African leaders and other. These courts, like the ICC, represent they a two-speed justice, and what is the role of the UN and its bodies, unable to give to the Palestinians their most basic rights?

The United Nations is powerless against the United States; the U.S. has shown that it isn’t interested in international law, and that it considers itself the lawmaker, judge, jury and executioner in all circumstances.

The U.S. is the only country that could influence Israel to end the occupation and blockade; after all, the U.S. gives Israel over $3.8 billion in aid every year. Simply by making that aid conditional on adherence to international law would resolve most of the problems. But it is not reasonable to expect one corrupt, lawless regime (the United States) to require changes in another corrupt, lawless regime (Israel).

Yet there are some positive signs. Social media is doing what the corporate-owned media, especially in the U.S., refuses to do, and this is exposing the horrors committed on a daily basis by Israel. Also, as the Israeli government becomes more radical, it is increasingly isolated in the world community. A strong indicator of this is the fact that, after Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said that there would never be an independent Palestine while he was Prime Minister, U.S. President Obama indicated that the U.S. would need to re-evaluate its relationship with Israel. Any criticism of Israel from the U.S. is extremely rare.

The Boycott, Divest and Sanction (BDS) movement has grown in strength over the years, and that is taking a toll on Israel, as more and more entertainers are refusing to appear in Israel, academics are refusing to participate in joint educational ventures, and companies will not do business with Israeli companies operating in the occupied West Bank. The U.S. is currently attempting to outlaw the BDS movement, but it is unlikely that any laws attempting to do so would be upheld under a court challenge.

The International Criminal Court (ICC) is now investigating Israel for possible war crimes committed during the bombing and invasion of the Gaza Strip in the summer of 2014. Its findings will not impact Israel directly, since Israel, like the U.S., refused to accept the jurisdiction of the court and never joined it. However, condemnation by the ICC would be a public relations disaster for Israel, which can ill afford any more problems with its very battered image.

Can you tell us if you have new book projects?

I am currently working on a book about growing up under the cruel, savage Israeli occupation. Through Facebook I am in contact with several young people in Palestine, in both the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. These are people who were born under the occupation, and have lived their entire lives under it. They have known multiple bombings, deprivation, hunger, thirst, terror, gross injustice and untold suffering. They have seen family members, friends and other loved ones die at the hands of Israeli terrorists, with no justice for the innocent victims. They have had homes destroyed repeatedly.

Yet they have a resilience that is almost unfathomable. They continue to work and hope for peace and justice, even in the face of astounding violence and injustice. Their stories are both heartbreaking and inspirational.

I expect the book to be completed by the end of this year, and hopefully available by the end of 2016, or early 2017.

 

 

 

Leave a Comment

Filed under Palestine, U.S. Politics

Israeli Missteps Take a Toll

Published on Counterpunch on July 31, 2015

Israeli Missteps Take a Toll

—————————————————————————————–

How the mighty have fallen! Was it really such a short time ago that Israel could demand that the United States jump, and the U.S.’s immediate response was ‘how high’? Was it in just the last year, that whatever Israel wanted from the U.S., all it had to do was hint at it, and the desired prize, whatever it was, would be immediately delivered? From vetoes in the United Nations, to bombs to kill Palestinians, to lies about Israeli security risks, to defending genocide, if Israel wanted it, the U.S. delivered it.

During the 2014 bombardment and invasion of Palestine, some small, barely discernable cracks were seen in the universal, unquestioned support that the U.S. gave Israel, despite its flouting of international law, and its constant, atrocious human rights abuses. The U.S. timidly suggested that perhaps Israel shouldn’t bomb United Nations refugee centers, but said nothing about the bombing of residences, schools, mosques, hospitals and press buildings. And, of course, it financed all that carnage.

Now, after months of diplomatic efforts, the U.S. and five other nations have reached an agreement with Iran regarding that nation’s nuclear ambitions. This agreement will not only reduce sanctions on Iran, sanctions that hurt the populace but have little or no impact on the government, but will also go a long way to prevent war. It would seem that this is a good thing; the U.S. is almost always involved in a war, and one would think that the citizenry has grown tired of it by now.

But this agreement is not sitting well in Tel Aviv. Israeli Prime Murderer Benjamin Netanyahu is seriously displeased, and his minions in Congress are paying attention. It is said that Jewish members of Congress, some of them holding dual citizenship, U.S. and Israeli, are being fantinadiligently courted by the various Israeli lobbies to vote against the agreement. Some pundits are commenting darkly about divided loyalties, but this writer sees no conflict: Congress members’ loyalties are, first and foremost, to whomever writes checks to their re-election campaigns, and the Israeli lobbies have deep pockets. So their goal now is to purchase sufficient votes to override a presidential veto, should the agreement be voted down in Congress.

But it is an uphill battle. U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry, who relied on those donations during his many terms in the senate, and did as he was told in that role, garnering a 100% voting record for Israel, has begun to push back. In a talk in New York City on July 24, he said this about the agreement with Iran: “I believe Israel is safer, I believe the region is safer.” Yet he also issued a veiled warning to Israel. He further said that, if Congress defeats the agreement, “friends in Israel could end up being more isolated and more blamed.”

This warning from the U.S. comes at a critical time for Israel, and is certainly an unwelcome development. Israel and its various international lackeys are making a concerted effort to counter the increasing boycott, and resulting isolation, of that country. The Boycott, Divest and Sanction (BDS) movement is ever growing, and taking both a financial and emotional toll on Israel; more and more people around the world are recognizing it as an apartheid regime, committing abominable human rights abuses and spitting in the face of international law. And they are asking why it is that this is allowed, a question not spoken for decades.

So what is it that the Israeli Prime Murderer is so concerned about? For him, it’s the usual argument: anything Israel doesn’t like is an ‘existential’ threat to that rogue nation. So if Iran has a nuclear program, Israel is threatened. If anyone dares suggest that the blockade of the Gaza Strip be ended, Israel is threatened. If the International Criminal Court investigates ‘possible’ Israeli war crimes, Israel is threatened. For pity’s sake, if the international soccer association questions Israel’s behavior, Israel is threatened!

Israel previously had two methods of dealing with all these ‘threats’: 1) it could tell the U.S. to take care of them, or 2) it could drop U.S. bombs somewhere. Now, unfortunately for Israel, option 1 seems to be off the table. This is a two-edged sword: it’s certainly good news that the U.S. is doing some minor re-evaluation of its support for Israel, but it does open the door to more bombing by Israel. Iran must beware; Israel wants to be the only nuclear-armed country in the region.

So what if Israel decides to bomb Iran? In May of this year, an aide to the leader of Iran said that Hezbollah in Lebanon has some 80,000 rockets aimed toward Israel, to be used in the event that Israel attacks Iran. So, while the U.S. is uncharacteristically working to prevent a war, Israel is using the typical U.S. saber-rattling to imply that Iran may soon be its next victim.

Just for the fun of it, let’s consider how such an event would play out. The U.S. Congress is unsuccessful in overriding a presidential veto of its rejection of the Iran nuclear agreement. Israel, confident that its very existence is in danger (Mr. Netanyahu says so, and one must remember his oh-so-accurate prediction to the U.S. Congress in 2002 of what a boon to peace in the Middle East a U.S. invasion of Iraq would be), bombs Iran. U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry says that he really wishes Israel hadn’t done that, but that the U.S. will continue to send it all the weaponry it wants. Hezbollah starts shooting some of those 80,000 missiles into Israel, destroying Tel Aviv and other cities, as Iran, defending itself from Israeli bombs, also shoots rockets into Israel. Israel drops nuclear bombs on Iran and Lebanon, killing millions of people and rendering much of the Middle East a wasteland. Mr. Kerry says that Israel has a right to defend itself. The United Nations Security Council issues resolutions condemning Israel for the initial attack on Iran, and the subsequent nuclear bombing of Iran and Lebanon. The U.S. vetoes both resolutions. Russia, China, all the countries in the European Union and South America severe ties with Israel, causing an economic crisis. Mr. Netanyahu demands additional aid from the U.S., to deal with the failing economy, which the U.S. provides, as its own cities continue to decay. Unemployment in the U.S. skyrockets, with only those states with weapons manufacturing still employing many citizens.

Where it all goes from there is anyone’s nightmarish guess.

Now let’s look at the alternative. Congress, doing Mr. Netanyahu’s bidding, overrides the presidential veto, and voids the agreement. All other nations dealing with the U.S. now know that U.S. diplomatic agreements are not worth pursuing. Iran continues to develop its nuclear power program. Mr. Netanyahu declares that he was right all along, sees yet another ‘existential threat’ and bombs Iran. For what happens next, please see above.

One might hope this to be all fantasy, but one must not dismiss it out of hand. The U.S. is currently negotiating with Israel to increase the amount of aid it receives, in payment for the U.S. displeasing Israel with the Iran deal. Israel, of course, will be in no way constrained. If it chooses to bomb Iran, it will, and the U.S. will do nothing to stop it. U.S government officials will proclaim that Israel has a right to defend itself. After all, if ineffectual ‘rockets’ shot into Israel from the Gaza Strip constitute a threat to the very existence of Israel, certainly Iran’s desire for nuclear power is also such a threat, at least to those in U.S. governance who are bought and paid for by the Israeli lobby.

The multitudes currently vying for the Democratic and Republican presidential nominations fall all over themselves to be the first to kiss the backside of the various Israeli lobbies, AIPAC (American Israel Political Affairs Committee) being chief among them. And none of them have the same level of animosity toward the Israeli Prime Murderer that President Obama seems to have, so while he is willing to dole out U.S. largesse unrestrained, one can only imagine what his successor will do.

Of course, Israeli continued missteps will keep taking a toll. Because of the carpet-bombing of the Gaza Strip last summer; Mr. Netanyahu’s speech to Congress in March; continued illegal settlement building; proclaiming that there will never be a free and independent Palestine as long as Mr. Netanyahu is Prime Murderer, people are beginning to be fed up. While this hasn’t yet translated into Congressional action, it is only a matter of time before it does. The clock is ticking, and for Israel to become a respected part of the international community, time is running out.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Israel’s Siege On Gaza Is Worse Than You Think

Printed by MintPress on July 22, 2015.

Israel’s Siege On Gaza Is Worse Than You Think

When Israel violated international law by boarding and ‘redirecting’ foreign ships in international waters, ships that were going to the Gaza Strip, Israeli Foreign Ministry Deputy spokesman Oren Rozenblat made this amazing statement: “In Gaza there is no humanitarian crisis whatsoever. I can say it very clearly, and there is no siege of Gaza and we have hundreds of truckloads of goods coming to Gaza every day.”

One is constantly amazed at the rhetoric that spews forth from the mouths of apartheid Israel’s various spokespeople. In these two sentences, Mr. Rozenblat declares that there is no humanitarian crises in Gaza, and there is no siege.

Perhaps it would be helpful and illustrative to talk, not just to those ensconced in Israel’s ivory towers, but to those living in the Gaza Strip, to see if there is, indeed, a humanitarian crises caused by the siege, both of which Mr. Rozenblat says don’t exist.

In some ways, seventeen-year-old Ameer (all surnames have been removed to protect the identities of the people interviewed for this article) of Gaza isn’t all that different from his North American counterparts. He lives with his parents and siblings, and has a love for Parkour, a relatively new sport that involves efficient movement, using only the human body and momentum, to get from one point to another. He would like to join with like-minded youths in Egypt or the West Bank for further practice and performance, but is unable to do so; Israel does not allow him to leave the Gaza Strip.  A simple thing like purchasing shoes specifically designed for Parkour is impossible, because they are not allowed to be imported to the Gaza Strip. Also, in the past, Ameer and his friends would sometimes exercise, and practice Parkour moves in a local gymnasium. That gym, unfortunately, was bombed by Israel in the summer of 2014, and because of the non-existent siege, no materials have been imported so it could be rebuilt.

Due to the siege which Mr. Rozenblat denies, the Gaza Strip has one of the highest unemployment rates in the world. Ameer’s family is unable to obtain much beyond the basic necessities of life, because he and his parents cannot find employment. Medical care is rare and very expensive; during the summer of 2014, Israel bombed hospitals, in violation of international law, decreasing the supply of medical resources while simultaneously increasing the demand. And with unemployment so high, few people can afford the luxury of health care.

Ahmed, also of Gaza, has other concerns. At 22, he is the oldest of six children, the next being a child of only 10. So it falls to Mr. Shurrab and his father to support the family, and with both of them unemployed, and job opportunities scarce because of the siege that Mr. Rozenblat denies exists, they are in desperate circumstances. Such luxuries as fresh vegetables are beyond his family’s reach, and there is only so much that any article of clothing can be mended before it must be replaced. But funds for purchasing clothes, and clothing availability, are both scarce due to heavy restrictions on imports.

Mohammed, also 22, advised this writer that his father was told four years ago that he needs surgery. The nearest place this particular procedure is performed is in Jordan, but his father is forbidden by Israel from leaving the Gaza Strip. So he has lived with debilitating pain all this time.

Additionally, should Mohammed have the funds to order some product that Israel actually allows into the country, he would probably be unable to pay the triple tax on it: one to Hamas, one to Fatah, and one to Israel.

Medicines are in scarce supply. Hassan 19, broke his arm playing football with some friends. He must be in a cast for a month, which is certainly inconvenient for an active young man, but what is worse is that he is unable to obtain any pain-killers; they are not allowed into the Gaza Strip. So he lives with extreme, constant pain while his arm heals.

So if harsh restrictions on movement, common imports including food, and basic medical supplies doesn’t constitute a siege, this writer does not know what does. Let us look now at Mr. Rozenblat’s remarkable statement denying a humanitarian crisis in the Gaza Strip.

In March of this year, Palestinian Water Authority Minister Mazen Ghoneim said that “The biggest water catastrophe on earth is in the Gaza Strip, as 97% of the coastal aquifer water is unfit for human use because of seawater intrusion and leakage of sewage water into it.” Because of this, people in the Gaza Strip rely on wells. However, since Israel is over-pumping the groundwater in order to fill the swimming pools of Israelis living illegally in the West Bank, these wells are being infiltrated by salt water from the sea. In fifteen years, there will be no drinkable water in the Gaza Strip.

Food insecurity is defined by the United Stated Department of Agricutlure as of “limited or uncertain availability of nutritionally adequate and safe foods or limited or uncertain ability to acquire acceptable foods in socially acceptable ways”. In the Gaza Strip in 2014, a whopping 57% of the population was food insecure. This has only worsened following Israel’s genocidal onslaught during the summer of that year.

This food insecurity is not coincidental; it is planned and orchestrated by Israel. In response to Hamas election victory in Gaza in 2006, the blockade of Gaza was planned. A senior Israeli official said this: “The idea is to put the Palestinians on a diet, but not to make them die of hunger.” In order to accomplish this, Israel health officials determined the number of calories that were required by the then 1.5 million people living in the Gaza Strip. Food shipped from Israel, the only source of food in Gaza, was adjusted to ensure that this amount of calories was not exceeded.

During Israel’s bombardment of Gaza in 2014, over 2,000 housing units were completely destroyed, and nearly 16,000 damaged. Tens of thousands remain homeless today, living in tents, with family or friends, or in the ruins of buildings that still stand.

So in light of these facts, let us revisit Mr. Rozenblat’s most remarkable statement: “In Gaza there is no humanitarian crisis whatsoever. I can say it very clearly, and there is no siege of Gaza and we have hundreds of truckloads of goods coming to Gaza every day.”

One wonders what, in Mr. Rozenblat’s twisted mind, would constitute a humanitarian crisis, or a siege. It seems that no reasonable argument could be made against a claim that a population of 1.8 million, with tens of thousands homeless, more than half of them food insecure, and unemployment at over 40% is experiencing a humanitarian crisis. Nor could one be expected to believe that that same population, blockaded by land, sea and air, forbidden life-saving medical supplies, prevented from leaving the heavily-populated area, and unable to import the basic necessities of life is not under siege.

Printed by MintPress on July 22, 2015.

Israel’s Siege On Gaza Is Worse Than You Think

 

 

Leave a Comment

Filed under Uncategorized