In Case Anyone's Still Wondering Why Do They Hate Us . . .

[Michael Tee]

from counterpunch today - -
October 6, 2006

Gunning Down Itemad Ismail Abu Mo'ammar

Just Another Mother Murdered
By ALISON WEIR

Almost no one bothered to report it. A search of the nation's largest newspapers turned up nothing in USA Today, the Boston Globe, Boston Herald, Chicago Sun-Times, Atlanta Journal-Constitution, San Francisco Chronicle, Seattle Times, St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Houston Chronicle, Tampa Tribune, etc.

There was nothing on CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN, PBS, NPR, Fox News. Nothing.

The LA Times, the Washington Post, the New York Times, and Associated Press each had one sentence, at most, telling about her. All three left out the details, the LA Times had her age significantly off, and the Washington Post reported that she had been killed by an Israeli tank shell.

It hadn't been a tank shell that had killer her, according to witnesses. It had been bullets, multiple ones, fired up close.

Neighbors report that Israeli soldiers had been beating her husband because he wasn't answering their questions. Foolishly or valiantly, how is one to say, the 35-year-old woman had interfered. She tried to explain that her husband was deaf, screamed at the soldiers that her husband couldn't hear them and attempted to stop them from hitting him. So they shot her. Several times.

Her name was Itemad Ismail Abu Mo'ammar.

She didn't die, though. That took longer. It required her life to flow out of her in the form of blood for several hours, as Israeli soldiers refused to allow an ambulance to transport her to help. Her husband and children could do nothing to save her.

Finally, after approximately five hours, an ambulance was allowed to take her to a hospital, where physicians were able to render one service: pronounce her dead, a few days before the commencement of Ramadan, a season of family gatherings much like the Christmas season for Americans. She left 11 children. None of this was in the Washington Post story, which had reported her death in one half of one sentence.

Her husband's brother, who lived in the same house, was also killed. He was a 28-year-old farmer.

Why did this all happen? The family lived behind a resistance fighter wanted by Israel. They were simply "collateral damage" in a failed Israeli assassination/kidnapping operation.

All together, five Palestinians were killed that day. The other three were young shepherds killed in another area, two 15 years old and one 14, who seem to have simply been in the wrong place at the wrong time. Gaza.

None of this was reported in most of America's news media, and so the American public never learned about a mother bleeding to death in front of her children, or young shepherds being blown to pieces. Apparently, it just wasn't newsworthy.

[BT]

The actions of Israeli soldiers are now official actions of the US Government?

Or is it just another convenient excuse to hate?

[Michael Tee]

You mean if .it was an official action of the US government, the victims would hate the USA, but if it wasn't an official action, the victims would be OK with it?

People aren't that stupid.  They can make the connection and they blame the US.  The US supports Israel.  Israeli soldiers murdered their mother.  They hate the US.

Look at it another way.  Taliban supports al Qaeda.  Al Qaeda knocks down the Twin Towers.  Washington hates Taliban.

Really isn't all that complex, is it?

[BT]

I think i understand your logic.

A friend's father was shot in cold blood during a robbery in New Orleans by a black man.

Therefore i should hate jews because they supported blacks in the civil rights movement.

That how it works?

[Michael Tee]

<<I think i understand your logic.  A friend's father was shot in cold blood during a robbery in New Orleans by a black man.  Therefore i should hate jews because they supported blacks in the civil rights movement.

<<That how it works?>>

No, not really.

Try to pick an example that corresponds a little more to the problem we're actually discussing.  If for example, the Jews had not only supported the black civil rights movement, but had armed and financially supported a gang of blacks who were forcing whites out of a white neighbourhood, taking over their homes and moving in.  If the black man who shot your friend's father was a member of that gang, and the man he shot was one of the residents of that neighbourhood.  If the black gang would not have been able to take on the white neighbourhood at all if the Jews had not been supporting them with billions of dollars in money and weapons every year, giving them the means to attack the whites in the area.

THAT'S how it works.

[BT]

Your formula seems pretty complicated.

Isn't it just easier to justify hatred of a group for being affiliated with another group, without all the qualifiers? Otherwise rational thought needs to come into play, and we know how messy that can be.

[Michael Tee]

Rational thought tells those victims, Those fucking Jews couldn't get away with this shit if they weren't fully backed by the Americans.

Rational thought tells America that the Taliban was responsible for the 20 Saudis who attacked the WTC because they provided the planners with a sanctuary from which to plot the deed.

[BT]

So the lefts support of overturning the Taliban for sheltering Osama was just rhetorical? Just some people talking?

[Michael Tee]

I don't know if I am the left, but I certainly think the Taliban should have been overthrown for supporting the attack on the WTC.  But my point was that connections can easily be made between the attacker and the guy who enables the attack.  Whether that is the Americans enabling the Jews to attack and kill that poor mother, or the Taliban enabling the Saudi hijackers to attack the WTC.  I really don't know why you have a problem making such simple and easy connections.

[BT]

I really don't know why you have a problem making such simple and easy connections.

Oh I made the connection. I just disagree with the legitimacy of your case.

And hopefully the parallel situation i described spotlighted the absurdity of the line of thinking you endorsed.

[The_Professor]

Hypothetically, what if you had a son, daughter, relative, etc. who goes out and sells drugs. By your logic, I am then responsible for this and the negative effects of those he/she sells to because I supported him/her? Come on. Childish logic chain here, folks. Simply doesn't fly, I'm afraid.

In this case, the Isrealis soldiers are responsible for their actions. Perhpas, by a stretch, you could extend it to the entire Israelis government, but...

[Xavier_Onassis]

The actions of Israeli soldiers are now official actions of the US Government?

Or is it just another convenient excuse to hate?
======================================

The bullets were likely made in the US, as were the guns. Israel is a beggar nation all it does is done because the US bankrolls it.

This is not hate, it is just pointing out the fact that Irsrael is not the benevolent "democracy" that the AIPAC propsaganda constantly says it is. Israel is an unwelcome colony in the Middle East. The Palestinians were not responsible for the Holocaust, and yet they have paid the price for it.

[Amianthus]

The bullets were likely made in the US, as were the guns.

Not likely. More than likely they were Uzi or Galil.

[BT]

XO states:This is not hate

Sure it is, why else would Mikey title his post that way?

[Michael Tee]

<<In this case, the Isrealis soldiers are responsible for their actions. Perhpas, by a stretch, you could extend it to the entire Israelis government, but...>>

Using your logic, the Saudi Arabians who attacked the WTC are responsible for their actions.  The Taliban government, who lodged them in Afghanistan but didn't participate in the attacks, get a pass.

Ridiculous.  Your own government doesn't believe that bullshit.

The Israeli government has been occupying the West Bank with its 3,000,000 Arab inhabitants for 39 years and the U.S. has been giving them billions of dollars for each and every one of those years.  With full knowledge of what's happening to the West Bank inhabitants.  If the aid were cut off, the occupation could not continue.  If the aid were made conditional upon the immediate cessation of the occupation, the occupation could not continue. 

The occupation and its crimes could not exist if the U.S. did not permit them to exist.  That is why the U.S. is responsible for them (in addition to, not in substitution for, the Israeli war criminals themselves) and that is why the U.S. is hated.

This is very simple.  The stepson analogy also is simple.  If the kid - - to your knowledge - - was robbing, stealing and killing and needed money for guns, ammo and food, and you gave the kid money to buy food, leaving him enough of his own resources to buy guns and ammo, knowing what crimes he was about to commit and doing nothing to stop them, you are as guilty as he is.  In the eyes of the victims (which is all that matters in this discussion, since the issue was why is America hated) but also in the eyes of the world.