High Court okays cutting fuel and power to Gaza

[bemildred]

The High Court of Justice on Wednesday gave the state a green light to reduce the supply of power and fuel to the Gaza Strip, ruling that the reductions are legal as they still meet the humanitarian needs of the population.

Defense Minister Ehud Barak approved the plan to reduce electricity, gasoline and diesel fuel supplies in late October last year, thereby accepting the defense establishment's recommendation to impose economic sanctions on the Gaza Strip in response to continued Qassam rocket attacks by Palestinian militants on southern Israel.

In Wednesday's ruling, the court denied petitions presented by several human rights organizations seeking to stop the government's plans to scale back the supply of fuel and electricity to the Strip. Several human rights groups had challenged the sanctions, but Wednesday's ruling denied their petitions. Palestinian officials say the cutbacks have harmed Gaza's already impoverished residents by causing power shortages and crippling crucial utilities.

Israel supplies all of Gaza's fuel and more than two-thirds of its electricity.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/949679.html

[Fredda Weinberg]

1. And here's why

"We emphasize that the Gaza Strip is controlled by a murderous terror group that operates incessantly to strike the state of Israel and its citizens, and violates every precept of international law with its violent actions," Supreme Court President Dorit Beinisch wrote.

The three-judge panel presiding over the case ruled that "during wartime, the civilian population is the first and central victim of the fighting, even when efforts are made to minimize the damage. Even within Israeli territory, in the age of terror attacks that has been going on for many years, the immediate and main victim is the civilian population. However, in the case of the attacks against Israel, the damage is not accidental, but rather a result of deliberate and frequent assaults on civilian populations which are aimed at harming innocent civilians. This is the difference between Israel - a democracy fighting for its life within the confines of the law - and the terrorist organizations trying to destroy it."

[kayecy]

4. "fighting for its life"......Isn't it a regional Super-power?

Beinisch must have been joking.

This is the difference between Israel - a democracy fighting for its life within the confines of the law - and the terrorist organizations trying to destroy it."

Shouldn't that have read ".... a Regional Super-power threatening every other state in the region - and a resistance group who have no means other than terrorist acts to express their anger at the 40 year brutal occupation."

[Fredda Weinberg]

6. Actually, no ... Israelis are superior technically, but apparently are

more reluctant to sacrifice lives. This is an inherent disadvantage. As for threats, Israel gave back oil fields to Egypt, negotiated a relationship w/Jordan ... Hamas is pissing off everyone in the 'hood.

But you keep parroting the party line ... recent events have crystallized relationships and Egypt knows how to cage their own.

[kayecy]

10. "....keep parroting the party line" ... Do you normally respond with an insult

You are of course entitled to your opinion but it makes little sense to issue personal insults.

A simple statement of your position backed up with a reasoned argument would be much more effective.

[Fredda Weinberg]

16. I respond to insults in kind. But of course, you had no idea you were

insulting me, so I'll be the first to apologize. Of course, you could have presented your views in a neutral manner, but I'll accept any olive branch.

[kayecy]

20. Do please tell me how I have insulted you.

Do please tell me how you think I have insulted you. I try and avoid any expression which could in any way be construed as an insult.

I perhaps insulted the Israeli Government, but as you are presumably not the President nor I imagine an official of the Government of Israel, I am at a loss to see what has upset you.

[Fredda Weinberg]

22. I was raised in an American zionist youth movement

And elected national secretary. Not the government, but they're my people and yes, your initial statement attempted to dehumanize me ... and we had never met.

Without questioning, I responded to your feelings with a sympathetic gesture and you remain skeptical. So, I'm still not real to you - I guess I apologized too soon. You may yet be a bigot.

[kayecy]

27. Skeptical of what?

As you say, I may be a bigot ....... please give me the chance to demonstrate otherwise.

I have no axe to grind in this conflict. I tend to support the little guy but I hope I am sufficiently fair to look at it from both sides. You will admit, I am sure, that Israel has a lot of powerful friends and much influence.

Israel is a Western democracy but, and it may surprise you, its actions embarrass me as a fellow citizen of a Western Democracy. I like to think we in the West should set an example of fair treatment, humanity and justice Arab dictatorships and communist regimes.

Do Israeli actions never embarrass you?

[Fredda Weinberg]

28. I was confused until I met Israeli scouts - and Jews whose families

fled from Arab countries. I learned that the region changes attitudes and determines personalities. Israel is not, strictly speaking, Western - we're Oriental transplants in the Occidental world.

As for powerful friends, my generation, as well as my parents, remember begging FDR for their families' lives in vain. Those memories, even second hand, inform our opinions. We remember dropping selzer bottles in '48 and buying weapons on the communist black market.

[kayecy]

30. I too am ashamed at the lack of compassion, in the 1930s, but .....

As for powerful friends, my generation, as well as my parents, remember begging FDR for their families' lives in vain.

I am not an American but I am ashamed at the way the US and some other states refused to show compassion to Jewish immigration in the 1930s.


That said, it is now 60 years since the war and Israel shows no sign of showing compassion to the desperate on its doorstep. No matter what you say, Israel is a regional Super-power with no existential threat from anyone (except maybe Iran in several years)

Encouraging Settlements on the West Bank was immoral.

Making no attempt to stop the occupation is immoral.

[Fredda Weinberg]

31. I thought you exhibited hostility - so you want to be enemies, ok

Israel will conform to American soft thinking. Sabras grow up in a tough neighbhorhood ... but my slum was American, so if you want to be ashamed, go ahead.

I'm proud of the compassion Israel continues to exhibit. The High Court reaffirmed universal principles while recognizing the existential threat you deny.

[kayecy]

32. Sorry, can't understand. Can you explain please?

Sabras grow up in a tough neighborhood ... but my slum was American, so if you want to be ashamed, go ahead

I said I was ashamed that so few states, including the US, took in Jewish refugees in the 1930s and the immediate post-war years.

Are you saying you are proud of the way these countries refused entry to the refugees?

[Fredda Weinberg]

35. If America had taken more refugees in '30, it wouldn't have been

just my father surviving. So if you want to feel ashamed, go right ahead. But I dealt with my feelings long ago and offered you comradery here at DU.

[kayecy]

36. Sorry, I miss-understood you, lets move on.......

Sorry, I thought I was empathizing with your experience of begging FDR for your relatives lives.

Lets move on. I asked you if you were ever ashamed of Israel's actions.

I cited two examples which I thought were inexcusable:
1. Encouraging settlements in the West Bank.
2. Making no real attempt to end the occupation.

If you support Israel in these two examples, I would like to hear your reasoning.

[Vegasaurus]

37. Israel ended the occupation of Gaza

and was thinking (falsely) that the rocket fire and terrorism would stop, and there would be growth in the Gazan economy, trade with Israel and beyond etc.

Instead, it was more terrorism from day one.

So, let's not pull out that "unilateral" end to the occupation shit. Israel left, which is what thePalestinians wanted, and they have wrought nothing but terror on the Israelis since.

Many people think the withdrawal was a pretty dumb idea, in retrospect. The Gazans had so many opportunities then, and they blew each and every one. Pity.

[Waya]

41. The High Court of Israel.......

.....confirming that the actions of the State of Israel are legal - what a shocker......

What Israel is doing falls under 'Collective Punishment' - and it is illegal under International Law. Nothing compassionate about it.

[msmcghee]

34. The desparate on Israel's doorstep . .

. . have elected to power a political party that has the destruction of the state of Israel as its primary mission - which is expressed in the most racist language. That party has overseen the launching of thousands of explosive filled rockets into Israel starting the day that Israel unilaterally withdrew from Gaza. Almost daily Hamas leaders and spokesmen restate their commitment to never stop attacking Jews until Israel and the Jews are gone from the ME.

Israel has tried several responses for almost two years now hoping to quell the attacks - from targeted assassinations to ignoring them. Nothing works. Now Israel is apparently trying to gradually reduce its economic relationship with Gaza. They are doing it gradually so Hamas can find other sources for its fuel, water, sewage treatment, electricity, etc.

For this Israel is accused of genocide, UN resolutions condemn Israel and international human rights conferences are held that focus entirely on Israel's "brutal genocidal tactics".

Israel has no responsibility to provide civil services for the people of Gaza. That's the responsibility of the party they elected to power.

[Vegasaurus]

11. If the israelis actually wanted to commit genocide

or mass murder, they could flatten Gaza and the rest of hte Arab world in no time at all.

It is only because there is a value put on human life, which is why the Israelis don't want another military operation in gaza. It isn't worth the lives that would be lost.

But a tenth of their firepower, in the hands of militant terrorists? Every Jew in the middle east would be gone. And I am just parroting the Hamas party line.

[azurnoir]

18. What party line

there is no "party" here, as far as Israel being "more reluctant" to sacrifice lives, you of course mean their own, certainly not Palestinians and the people of Lebanon would probably have a few words about that too.

[Fredda Weinberg]

24. No, I mean Israelis value Palestinians lives more than some other

Palestinians. This is self-evident. Israel has only gone into Lebanon when shelled from that border ... so yes, you're parroting someone's line, not an authoritative source.

[azurnoir]

29. LOL first I am parroting a party line

then I am parroting a line because there is no party?
As far as Israel's "involvement" in Lebanon some else's line??????
And finally you actually haul out the old "they just don't value life like we do" canard? Wow

[LeftishBrit]

13. While I would have liked the courts to make a different decision..

are you truly serious?

'Shouldn't that have read ".... a Regional Super-power threatening every other state in the region - and a resistance group who have no means other than terrorist acts to express their anger at the 40 year brutal occupation."'

(1) Please let me know what other states in the region Israel is threatening. I suppose they have made threatening noises about Iran from time to time, but not half as threatening as Iran has made about them.

I REALLY would like to know where this line that Israel is a threat to all its neighbours comes from. Even a totally pro-Palestinian point of view only implies that it's a threat to the Palestinians - not to everyone.

(2) Do you honestly think that the Gazans have 'no means other than terrorist attacks' to protest the Occupation? Not only do they *have* other means; they have *used* them, in the First Intifada, in the Beilin protest, and most recently in the wall breach. While we don't yet know the outcome of the last, we do know that the first two were *more effective* than the rocket attacks in actually achieving some of their aims.

[kayecy]

15. Please let me know what other states Israel is threatening....

(1) Please let me know what other states in the region Israel is threatening

You got it - Iran. According to the US, they don't have nukes which I would have thought made them less threatening than what Israel is actually planning at the moment.

In addition, you may have missed it but they recently bombed Syria.

I'll come to your second point as soon as we have thrashed this one out.

[LeftishBrit]

19. What is Israel actually planning?

As I understand, some Israelis would like facilities, which they perceive as possible nuclear weapon factories, to be bombed. This is a dangerous idea IMO (and most Israelis would prefer economic sanctions in any case), but no one, Israeli or American, is seriously proposing NUKING Iran. In fact it would be suicidal for Israelis to do so, due to the nuclear fallout probably affecting Israel as well. Israel is also not proposing either 'wiping Iran off the map', or forced regime change, whichever translation of Ahmadejinad's speech you accept. I would say that Iran is doing far more threatening of Israel than the other way about; and that it will probably stay on the level of a 'cold war' of threats between the two countries, unless Bush does something stupid and stirs things up further.

What about all the bombing and threats that other Middle Eastern countries do to *one another*? What about the Lebanese civil wars; the threats and worse between Lebanon and Syria; the wars between Iran and Iraq until recently? What about what WE have done to Iraq premptively? This is not saying that one country's actions excuse any other country's actions; just that there is no one country that is causing all the problems, and that it is as unfair and dangerous to treat Israel as a uniquely evil bogeynation as to treat Iraq or Iran as one.

[kayecy]

25. You are partially correct but .....

....but no one, Israeli or American, is seriously proposing NUKING Iran.

You are partially correct. I believe the Pentagon were asked about a year ago (according to Seymour Hirsh) to look into the possibility of using nukes to destroy the vast underground facilities. As for Israel, neither you nor I would know if they were planning to use nukes.

My point was that Israel has the only nuclear deterrent in the ME and therefore Iran could not seriously think of firing a few rockets at them whereas Israel can bomb Iran's facilities at any time. They not only can, but they have said they '...will not accept Iran having a nuclear capability."

You can't get more threatening than that!

Now how do you explain Israel's recent attack on Syria? Was it not meant to show other ME states that Israel can bomb anything?

[Tom Joad]

40. While most ot the world's people see that Israel is governed by a murderous

terror group operates incessantly to strike the People of Palestine and its citizens, and violates every precept of international law with its violent actions,"

[Vegasaurus]

42. Obviously you are using your Tom hyperbole again

"Most of the world sees that Israel is governed by a murderous terror group operates incessantly to strike the People of Palestine and its citizens, and violates every precept of international law with its violent actions,""?

What kind of proof do you have to make such a ridiculous claim that "most of the world" (outside of your hate-Israel world) believes that?

Please post links. Last time you were asked to back up such a claim you were unable to do so.

[Fredda Weinberg]

2. Now this would be a ceasefire proposal ...

Seventy percent of the Palestinians believe that the Qassam fire should be stopped in exchange for the end of the Israeli-imposed blockade on the Strip, while 25.4% are against this.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3500709,00.html

[kayecy]

5. And the occupation would cease?.....n/t

[Fredda Weinberg]

7. Well, Israel quit Gaza ... so if the rockets stop falling, public opinion

would change. Heck, mine would too!

[kayecy]

12. But is still in the West Bank. If the occupation ceased, perhaps so would the killing...n/t

[Vegasaurus]

14. Gaza is the model

of ceasing occupation.

Who needs that mess in the WB?

[kayecy]

17. "of ceasing occupation" - not negotiating an end to occupation n/t

[azurnoir]

21. More correctly

lift the air and sea blockade in Gaza and remove the settlements from the WB, once that is done Israel can build a wall as high as it takes to feel safe, shut off the borders heck build a dome over it self.

[Fredda Weinberg]

23. Yes, you would like Isael in a prison, but Hamas' brutality is

exhibited in Egypt. Pay attention to the news ... you'll see why Gaza is blockaded by both sides.

[azurnoir]

26. Hamas brutality exibited in Egypt

by helping Egypt police and rebuild the fence LOL

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=124&topic_id=198539

As far as Israel doming it self that was snark

[Vegasaurus]

33. No one is moving half a million people who have been there for 60 years

Talk about 'ethnic cleansing".

[azurnoir]

38. There have been Israeli

settlements on the West Bank for 60 years? Jerusalem nope not there either, not for 60 years anyways

[Vegasaurus]

39. Let's say 40 and call it a day nt

[Violet_Crumble]

43. No, coz that's still not right...

Apart from the glaringly obvious nonsense of you trying to claim that removing the settlements would be *ethnic cleansing*, yr amended claim of 40 years is still incorrect. Settlement activity doubled after 1993. If we go back 40 years to 1966 (using figures done in 2006), there were no settlers...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_settlement#Population

[Vegasaurus]

44. Duh

Israel captured the WB and Gaza in 1967. Of course there were no Israelis there while Jordan and Egypt were occupying.

There were 1500 Jewish settlers by 1970 or so, and 14 settlements by 1972. 33,000 in E. Jerusalem alone (not counting the WB) by 1977.

[Violet_Crumble]

45. So where did you get this half a million for 40 years from?

Sometimes it's a good idea to do a basic fact check before posting :)

[Tom Joad]

3. the Israeli hight court sees that Palestinians have no rights that the court is bound to respect.

Including the right to live.

[Fredda Weinberg]

8. Ah, prejudice is such a comforting state of mind n/t

[Tom Joad]

9. Yes, the Israeli Supreme Court voted for their own comfort.