NZ Centre for Political Research

A prejudice in search of a scientific disguise
Brendan O’Neill

The Royal Society in London, the prestigious, 350-year-old scientific institution, is launching a major study into the alleged problem of overpopulation. It will spend two years and thousands of pounds employing a working group to find out what is likely to be the impact of the twentieth century’s unprecedented growth in human numbers on politics, economics and the pursuit of ‘sustainable development’.

RS, take a tip from me, a friendly critic: in this era of belt-tightening, save yourselves loads of time and oodles of cash by simply writing down and press-releasing the following words: ‘Overpopulation is NOT the cause of social or economic problems.’

I’m not being a philistine. I’m not opposed to having big, deep, profound studies into the issues that impact, or don’t impact, on society. But when it comes to evidence for the fact that overpopulation is not the driving force for social disarray, there is already an embarrassment of riches.

There’s the fact that life has improved for the vast majority of humanity even as population has grown exponentially. When the original population scaremonger Thomas Malthus (a member of the Royal Society, funnily enough) predicted in the 1790s that if people didn’t stop breeding then ‘premature death would visit mankind’ - that there would be ‘food shortages, epidemics, pestilence and plagues’ which would ‘sweep off tens of thousands [of people]’ - there were a mere 980million human beings on Earth. Today, there are nearly seven times that number – 6.7 billion – and while there are still problems of poverty and hunger, especially in parts of the Third World, for most of us living standards and life expectancy have leapt forward.

In China, for example, there are now more people than there were on the entire planet in the era of Malthus, and yet their lot is better than it was for most of the unfortunate souls alive in the 1790s. In 1949, the population of China was 540million and average life expectancy was 36.5 years; today the population of China is 1.3 billion and average life expectancy is 73.4 years. And there are now six times as many cities in China (655) as there were five decades ago and around 235million Chinese have been lifted out of poverty in the past 15 years alone. All in the most populous nation on Earth. Where there are more ‘mouths to feed’ on a daily basis than there were across the entire globe in the period of Malthus’s food-shortage panicmongering. Clearly there is something other than human numbers which determines people’s fortunes.

There is also the fact that it is often people in the most overpopulated parts of the planet who have the nicest lives. Take Manhattan. There are 1.7million people crammed on to that tiny island and their lifestyles are the envy of millions of people around the world (including me). Yet in Africa, which is far more sparsely populated than some would have us believe, there are still major problems of poverty and malnutrition. Despite the claims of cranky outfits like the Optimum Population Trust (OPT) – which has argued that in order ‘for the whole planet to avoid the fate of Rwanda, Malthusian thinking needs rehabilitation’ (nice) – Africa actually contains 11 of the world’s 20 least densely populated nations. And some of these not-very-densely populated African countries have severe social problems. It’s not human numbers that cause them; it’s something else, something social and therefore eminently fixable.

Unfortunately, however, despite the rich factual, anecdotal and theoretical evidence that human numbers do not determine human beings’ fortunes, it seems unlikely that the Royal Society’s ‘comprehensive study’ will come to this conclusion. Because this smells a lot like advocacy research rather than actual research – that is, it’s an already-existing conclusion in search of supporting facts, rather than an exploration of facts in the name of reaching some open-ended, enlightening conclusion.

So the RS working group contains not one, but two leading members of the OPT: Jonathon Porritt, who has sung the praises of China’s one-child policy because without it ‘there would now have been 400million additional Chinese citizens’; and David Attenborough, who says he has ‘never seen a problem that wouldn’t be easier to solve with fewer people and which doesn’t become harder to solve when more people are involved’. (Er, what about building dams? Or launching revolutions? Or building gleaming new cities? All those things are better done with more people rather than fewer. These Malthusians seem ignorant of the fact that human society has advanced more in the past 200 years than it did in the previous 20,000, precisely when there was an ‘explosion’ of people. That sweeping progress both created the scope for having more people, while at the same time being facilitated by those increased numbers of people.)

Even the supposedly sedate and objective chair of the working group – Sir John Sulston of human genome fame – said at the launch of the study that if we don’t get to grips with ‘where we are going in relation to population’, then ‘we may survive but we won’t flourish’. The difficulty of being properly objective on this issue in our era of widespread, unquestioned, utterly conformist neo-Malthusianism was captured in the media coverage of the RS’s announcement. ‘Population explosion scrutinised as scientists urge politicians to act’, screamed the Independent, next to a picture of lots of people on a crowded high street. ‘The human population is far higher than any other primate at any time in history’, said the BBC, next to a picture of thousands of people at a rock gig (hard evidence, surely, that the planet is overpopulated).

Given the Malthusian affiliations of some of the members of the working group, the scary-sounding pronouncements of its chairman, and the pre-emptive expectation of the media that this study will find that there has been an ‘explosion’ of human primates who are causing all manner of ecological disasters, it’s hard to avoid the conclusion that this is an exercise in dressing up the trendy prejudice that the planet is swarming with too many people in some pseudo-scientific garb. It’s a search for serious-sounding Facts, with a capital F, with which the Malthusians marauding through the corridors of power and influence might make their prejudices sound a bit more profound and a little less prejudiced. I hope I’m wrong. But the signs aren’t good.

The rise and rise of neo-Malthusianism is one of the most depressing trends of our age. It captures, above all, the severe lack of social and cultural and political imagination today. In essence, influential people’s inability to imagine new ways of organising society, or new ways of delivering affluence and plenty to humankind, leads them to view all problems as a consequence of there being limited, finite resources and too many bloody human beings hoovering them up. Miserabilist mathematics takes the place of social experimentation and debate. In truth, the real problem today is the limits that have been imposed on human thinking and ambition, the sustainability-obsessed straitjacket we have all been forced in to. Once we wriggle free from these intellectual handcuffs, who knows, we might find that there is no limit to how many people we can have on this planet, or to how full and free and satisfying their lives can be.

Brendan O’Neill is editor of spiked.

Congress shows Israel support
Photo by: Courtesy
Congress shows Israel support
By JPOST STAFF
06/09/2010 06:56

Rep. Barney Frank: If Canada were Hamas our blockade would be tougher.

More than a dozen senators and over 60 members of the House of Representatives have issued statements since the flotilla interception last Monday, with almost all of them overwhelmingly supportive of Israel.

In the Senate, former presidential candidate John Kerry (DMA) said that “Israel has every right in the world to make certain that weapons are not being smuggled in after the thousands of rockets that have been fired on it from Gaza... It is not just Israel conducting this blockade; it is Israel and Egypt. So you begin that Israel has this right to protect itself.”

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) noted that “Israel has an obligation to protect its citizens and therefore has a clear right under international law to prevent weapons from getting in the hands of terrorists determined to target them. Israel indicated it was willing to put in place a process to ensure that legitimate humanitarian relief reached Gaza. Unfortunately this offer was rejected. Israel has pledged to carry out a transparent and thorough investigation of this incident, and I look forward to its findings.”

Senator Joe Lieberman (I-CT) said, “We should be very clear about who is responsible for the unfortunate loss of life in the attempt to break the blockade in Gaza. Hamas and its allies are the responsible parties for the recent violence and the continued difficulties for the people of Gaza. Israel exercised her legitimate right of self defense.”

Lieberman said he appreciated “the way in which the Obama administration has refused to join the international herd that has rushed to convict Israel before the facts were known and has apparently forgotten that Israel is a democratic nation and Hamas is a terrorist group.”

Senator Scott Brown (R-MA) added that “Israel is at war. Each and every day thousands of its innocent men, women and children face the threat of lethal rocket attacks out of Gaza.

Some of the usual critics of Israel have used recent events to question the strong relationship between our countries... Israel is not a liability to the United States,” Brown said. “There is no greater US ally in the critical area of the Middle East and perhaps no better strategic partnership in the world.”

Meanwhile, Congressman Pete Sessions (R-TX) said Israel faced “an incursion by so-called ‘humanitarian’ groups sympathetic to a regime recognized by the US Department of State as a foreign terrorist organization...While I regret the loss of life associated with the ongoing turmoil, Israel simply cannot be expected to stand idly by while its security is challenged and internationally-recognized channels for aid delivery are ignored."

“The United Nations’ immediate condemnation of Israel,” added Sessions, “reveals the depth and intensity of an international double standard that seeks to blame Israel first while ignoring Hamas’s and Hizbullah’s civilian targeting, as well as Iran’s obvious attempts to acquire nuclear weapons. Unfortunately, this will likely not be the last time that terrorist organizations – under the guise of humanitarian aid – seek to provoke Israel. As much of the world turns the other way, my support for Israel remains steadfast in its struggle for security until a lasting peace is achieved in the Middle East.”

Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) stated, “First, the loss of life was tragic. Second, Israel – rightfully so – invoked its right to self-defense on the Mavi Marmara... To the extent that this act was in protest of the Gaza blockade, let’s be clear: Hamas could end the blockade at any time by recognizing Israel’s right to exist, renouncing violence, and releasing Gilad Schalit.”

Rep. Jesse Jackson, Jr. (D-IL) said he deeply regretted “the fatalities and injuries that were suffered during the raid by Israeli commandos of six ships heading to the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip. I hope that a fair and credible Israeli-led investigation will get to the bottom of what happened and help prevent another such deadly incident from occurring again. However, there can be no doubt about this fact: Israel maintains the legitimate, fundamental right to defend and protect itself. The Israeli government has an obligation to prevent the flow of weapons and fighters into Gaza, sent there for one purpose only – to kill Israelis.”

Said Rep. Gary Ackerman (DNY): “I strongly condemn the action of those who assaulted the Israeli troops and made the use of violence by Israeli troops necessary in self-defense. The loss of life is regrettable, but wholly the fault and responsibility of the organizers of the effort to break through Israel and Egypt’s legitimate closure of terrorist- controlled Gaza.”

And Republican whip Eric Cantor (R-VA) noted, “The irony is thick that again the likes of Saudi Arabia and Cuba come together under the UNHRC to lecture the United States and Israel about human rights. I commend the administration for its steadfast support of Israel in resisting another Goldstone-style UN investigation. These types of kangaroo courts have one goal, and that is to strip democratic nations of their rights to defend their citizens from terrorism. The United States must not lend its authority to any UN action to discredit our democratic ally and set back prospects for peace in the region, and I hope the Obama administration remains committed to that principle.”

Republican leader John Boehner (R-OH) said, “Israel has every right to defend itself against terrorists which threaten its very survival... Unfortunately, while the international community has spent the past week condemning the Israelis, Iran has moved one step closer to building a nuclear bomb. The Obama administration owes the American people and our allies around the world a comprehensive strategy designed to stop Iran from developing a nuclear capability, not to simply contain Iran once it already has one.”

In a somewhat different tone, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) said in a June 1 press release: “I regret the loss of life and look forward to learning the facts from a credible and transparent investigation. This event underscores the urgent need for negotiations designed to achieve an enduring and comprehensive regional peace.”

And Rep. Chris Van Hollen (DMD) said, “I deeply regret the loss of life off the coast of Gaza and offer my condolences to those who lost loved ones and my wishes for a speedy recovery to the injured. A fair and transparent investigation of this incident should begin immediately...Ultimately, this incident reinforces the critical importance for meaningful negotiations to take place to ensure a permanent and secure peace for all of the people of this region. To secure that peace, the US has made clear its unshakeable commitment to the security of the State of Israel. The US must also continue to make sure humanitarian assistance is able to reach the people of Gaza.”

Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) noted that “I do think the Israelis have a legitimate concern about being unfairly blamed and double standards.” He added that Israel “gave up Gaza voluntarily. I was one of those who for a long time was arguing they should. What happened was, Gaza was then occupied by a group of people who think Israel shouldn’t exist and who are in fact on our terrorist list for good reason. Now, what you then have is a blockade. And the argument is, well, there were no weapons in this shipment. But a blockade that allows some things in and not others has to maintain control over the ports of entry, so you can know what is in or not. Given that, I think it was irresponsible of the pro-Hamas people who organized this set of ships to go in there to do that, and obviously understood the potential for violence.”

Still, he added, “That does not mean that everything the Israelis did in this situation was right. When military people are in a situation where they have to use force, as they had to do here, not everything will be done well. Not everything will be done correctly. I do agree it would be in Israel’s interest to have an independent inquiry, appointed by Israelis... But the basic concept – I do believe – put it this way, if Hamas were in Canada, America would have a tougher blockade than Israel has.”

The Jerusalem Post
Flotilla activists: Go back to Auschwitz
By YAAKOV LAPPIN
06/06/2010 05:13

Turkish organizer: Everything is heading toward Islam.

Radio messages sent from the Turkish Gaza flotilla to the navy contained chilling anti-Semitic language, the IDF revealed on Friday when it released audio recordings of communications it had with the vessels.

“You are approaching an area which is under a naval blockade,” a navy radio operator said in a message broadcast to the six protest ships.

“Shut up. Go back to Auschwitz,” a male voice said in reply. The message was broadcast to the navy from one of the ships, the IDF confirmed on Saturday.

“We’re helping the Arabs go against the US. Don’t forget 9/11, guys,” a man said later on during the radio exchange.

The IDF Spokesman’s Office, which made the recording available on its Web site, said the transmissions were first thought to have originated from the main protest ship, the Mavi Marmara, but that they could have come from one of the other five vessels in the flotilla.

“The Israeli navy ship attempted to make contact with the Defne Y [one of the protest vessels] on channel 1-6. Other ships from the flotilla responded on the channel, without identifying themselves,” the IDF said on Saturday.

IHH head spoke of "martyrdom

Meanwhile, the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) has released footage of statements made by Bulent Yildirim, head of the IHH Turkish Islamist organization, which organized last week’s blockade runners.

Yildirim, who delivered a fiery speech in Gaza in February 2009 filled with references to “martyrdom,” addressed his listeners as the “people of paradise.”

“Raise your fists to the skies and repeat after me: What can the enemy do to me? I carry paradise in my heart... If they kill me – that is martyrdom for the sake of Allah. Allahu akbar,” he said.

“Last night, everything in the world has changed, and everything is progressing toward Islam,” Yildirim added. “Anyone who does not stand alongside Palestine – his throne will be toppled. All the peoples of the Islamic world would want a leader like [Turkish Prime Minister] Recep Tayyip Erdogan.”

Last week, another video taken from the Mavi Marmara was released by the IDF Spokesman’s Office, in which a passenger was heard passionately discussing his desire to “be martyred.”

“When I went on the first convoy, I wanted to be a shahid [martyr],” the man says in the video. “I wasn’t that lucky.

Second time, I wanted to be a shahid. Didn’t work. Third time lucky, with the help of God, I will be a shahid.”

June 5th, 2010 8:47 am
by Victor Davis Hanson
Should Jews Apologize to Turkey or Go Back to Poland and Germany?

Memo to Ambassador Tan

The Turkish ambassador to the United States has a long op-ed in the Washington Post asking for Israel to apologize to Turkey for the Gaza flotilla incident, and urging the U.S. to pressure Israel to act accordingly. It is an important document since Amb. Tan couches his argument in moral terms — Israel illegally detained a ship on the high seas of civilian peace activists and human rights workers, killed Turkish citizens, and violated international law.

There is, of course, no mention by Tan of the origins and nature of the Turkish “peace” group that organized the gambit. Only in passing does the ambassador mention the rallying cries of the protestors (e.g., “Whatever the aid carriers may have chanted in opposition to Israel, this was a humanitarian initiative.”), after failing to note the chants, in fact, included both calls for a new holocaust (“Shut up, go back to Auschwitz” ) and glee about Americans killed on 9/11 (“Don’t forget 9/11″).

If anyone might be offering apologies, it should be Ambassador Tan, or at least an explanation for why a ship left a Turkish port headed for a planned confrontation. A ship, it should be added, staffed in large part by the Insani Yardim Vakfi organization, which according to American and European intelligence chiefs is a terrorist organization with ties to al-Qaeda — an apparent conclusion that formerly a Turkish government used to share when it periodically raided the IHH’s compounds.

But on a larger point, the sanctimonious tone of Tan’s piece is depressing. Turkey currently quite illegally and against world opinion sponsors the occupation of Cyprus. Nicosia is a far more divided city than Jerusalem. The Turkish government has killed far more Turkish Kurds than the Israeli government has Palestinians; it has zero tolerance for foreign human rights organizations that have wished to investigate the treatment of Kurds in Turkish prisons. Turkish fighter aircraft are not always so careful to stay on their side of the Aegean.

As far as the request that Americans pressure Israel, that is an odd wish from a society that continually broadcasts gruesome anti-American serials on its television channels, and now has chosen to reach out (far more even than the Obama administration) to the terrorist-sponsoring regimes in Teheran and Damascus that are responsible for a number of American deaths in Iraq. When Turkey has felt its own security threatened, it has had no problem with warning of an invasion of Syria or crossing Iraqi borders. Demands don’t work well in the Turkish-American relationship, as we remember from the U.S. House of Representatives’ request that the Turkish government offer some sort of regret for the genocide of the Armenians — a declaration that outraged the present Turkish government. Ambassador Tan evokes history, particularly the Ottomans and World War II, to cement his argument of past Turkish tolerance. Some of us who study Mediterranean history are not quite impressed by either the human rights record of the Ottoman sultanate or the Turkish role in the second World War, especially the German-Turkish friendship pact of June 1941, days before the Nazi invasion of the Soviet Union. My problem is that when I travel abroad, whether in Vienna, Cyprus, or old Smyrna, I am reminded of a different sort of past.

Many of us who have had positive feelings about Turkey in general and the Turkish-American relationship in particular have seen this past week’s events as a reminder of how different the present Turkish government wishes our relationship to evolve. Turkey’s present reset diplomacy had long ago convinced the EU to have second thoughts about extending membership to Ankara. And despite the protestations of our own foreign policy establishments, most Americans sense that the end of Turkey’s participation in NATO is only a matter of when, not if. Turkey wishes to reestablish, mutatis mutandis, its old Ottoman role as the more legitimate voice of the Sunni Muslim world. And that means it must sound radical to Muslims and sober and judicious to Westerners — and sometimes it tries both at the same time, as we now witness.

(If I were Greece, I would be somewhat anxious: its bankruptcy will mean a cut in military forces quite soon; it has gratuitously offended the Northern Europeans who will not be eager to lend it any more foreign aid, military especially; for 30 years anti-Americanism has been the mother’s milk of Greek politics, so Americans have come over to the Greek way of thinking that our shared NATO heritage is, well, at best a Cold War anachronism and at worst an embarrassment. And all this transpires at a time when an ascendant Turkey wants to carve out a new radical identity and seems to increasingly brag about its Ottoman past [note to Greeks: violently protesting against Israel will not impress Turkey, should it plan on revisiting Cyprus or re-adjudicating the nebulous Aegean border.])

Postmodern anti-Semitism

Yes, yes, I know — faulting Israel is hardly anti-Semitism. But note the obsessive focus on Israel, especially from the left. So take any issue: occupied land? Why do we not evoke Ossetia, Tibet, or Cyprus? Or for that matter Prussia?

Take a divided city? How about Nicosia?

Take disproportionate force? Try the leveling of Grozny?

Targeted killing? Our own Predators have killed more than Israeli air attacks.

The killing of Muslims? India and China trump Israel.

Wait — the issue is U.S. aid? OK, are we “shocked” that Egypt gets billions and harasses human rights activists, stifles democracy, and tortures its own?

No, the issue is blockading Gaza? So Turkish and European flotillas are off the Egyptian coast?

No, no, the problem is the detention of third parties in international waters? So President Obama has ended, as promised, rendition (remember the movie?)? Hardly.

Yes, the Arabs have hundreds of millions, Israel seven. Yes, they have oil, the Israelis none. Yes, libel a Jew and it’s cute, libel the prophet and go into hiding. And yes, Israel is a surrogate often for anti-Americanism. But all that said, it is still strange that so many Westerners focus such antipathy and attention on Israel over precisely the topics that they otherwise ignore in other countries.

It is not anti-Semitic to discuss divided cities, occupations, the use of force, blockades, refugees, etc. It is, when all these topics mysteriously appear only in reference to Israel so as to suggest it is somehow singular in its transgressions. I somehow know who Rachel Corrie is, but not any of the names of tens of thousands of Kurds in Turkey, or Chechens in Grozny, or Tibetans in China, or Egyptians in Cairo. Why? I know the rough square mileage of “occupied” Palestine, but not the acreage of Turkish-controlled Cyprus.

The doyen of the White House press corps, Helen Thomas, put it best when she wondered why the Jews didn’t just go back to Poland and Germany. Think of that for a second — a million thoughts spark: well, Helen, that’s where 6 million were gassed. Or, Helen, some Jews have been in “Palestine” from pre-antiquity. Or, Helen, some 3rd-generation Israelis have been in Israel as long as your family has been in the United States. Or, Helen, exactly how do you envision the process of removing them? Trains to Haifa, where boats head to “processing centers” in Bremen and Gdansk? Perhaps the Iranian quick way?

I realize Ms. Thomas is in her dotage, but had anyone else voiced anything similar about any other particular group, they would be banned from the White House press corps, rather than feted. Case closed.

# kiwi in america (887) Says:
June 7th, 2010 at 5:42 am

The inestimable historian Victor Davis Hansen has just penned the most succinct summary of the hypocrisy of so much of the criticism of Israel:

“Yes, yes, I know — faulting Israel is hardly anti-Semitism. But note the obsessive focus on Israel, especially from the left. So take any issue: occupied land? Why do we not evoke Ossetia, Tibet, or Cyprus? Or for that matter Prussia?

Take a divided city? How about Nicosia?

Take disproportionate force? Try the leveling of Grozny?

Targeted killing? Our own Predators have killed more than Israeli air attacks.

The killing of Muslims? India and China trump Israel.

Wait — the issue is U.S. aid? OK, are we “shocked” that Egypt gets billions and harasses human rights activists, stifles democracy, and tortures its own?

No, the issue is blockading Gaza? So Turkish and European flotillas are off the Egyptian coast?

No, no, the problem is the detention of third parties in international waters? So President Obama has ended, as promised, rendition (remember the movie?)? Hardly.

Yes, the Arabs have hundreds of millions, Israel seven. Yes, they have oil, the Israelis none. Yes, libel a Jew and it’s cute, libel the prophet and go into hiding. And yes, Israel is a surrogate often for anti-Americanism. But all that said, it is still strange that so many Westerners focus such antipathy and attention on Israel over precisely the topics that they otherwise ignore in other countries.

It is not anti-Semitic to discuss divided cities, occupations, the use of force, blockades, refugees, etc. It is, when all these topics mysteriously appear only in reference to Israel so as to suggest it is somehow singular in its transgressions. I somehow know who Rachel Corrie is, but not any of the names of tens of thousands of Kurds in Turkey, or Chechens in Grozny, or Tibetans in China, or Egyptians in Cairo. Why? I know the rough square mileage of “occupied” Palestine, but not the acreage of Turkish-controlled Cyprus.”

He cleverly explores the crucial role that Turkey’s lurch towards Islamic fundamentalism is playing in this specific Gaza blockade situation.

http://pajamasmedia.com/victordavishans ... to-turkey/

I think that Palmer will be a reliable parrot of the left’s prevailing view on Israel. If he is true to the lawyer in him he may surprise with a factual analysis so well covered in the article in GJ’s post (which btw GJ you need to show the attributing link).
http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2010/06/gener ... l#comments

The Truth About the "Peaceful" Flotilla
Written by Raven Clabough
http://www.thenewamerican.com/index.php ... q-flotilla

"There has been a overwhelming criticism, both nationally and internationally, against the alleged “attack” on the so-called Freedom Flotilla by the Israeli Defense Force. Mainstream media outlets originally reported that boats filled with “peace activists” were attacked by violent armed Israelis. In fact, words like “slaughter” and “genocide” were used in reference to the event. Of course, as it turns out, the “peace activists” were in fact terrorists, a minor detail that has been conveniently left out in most reports on the incident.

The Israelis who rappelled onto the Mavi Marmara were confronted by men with knives, clubs, and other potentially fatal implements. One member of the IDF was thrown overboard and is now suffering from severe brain damage. Reports about weapons carried by the Israeli Defense Force troops have been conflcting. It is known that some of the victims were shot with 9 mm rounds, but no evidence has been presented as to who fired them. A Voice of America account of the raid embedded a video that VOA writers captioned: "Video image released by Turkish Aid group IHH … purports to show Israeli soldiers aiming a gun on the deck of a Turkish ship, part of an aid convoy heading to Gaza." (Emphasis added.)

Another report in the British Guardian newspaper suggested a less lethal Israeli response: "Alex Harrison, a Free Gaza activist who was on the smaller Challenger yacht, which was crewed mainly by women, said the Israelis used rubber bullets, sound bombs and tasers against them."

Even if Israeli forces were armed (which is a normal condition for members of any military or police force) it is more than likely that being surrounded and outnumbered by hostile attackers, an armed response in self defense may have been necessary — or at least perceived to have been necessary.

Most suspicious about the supposed “peaceful” Flotilla was the fact that the ships were offered the opportunity to “send the supplies they were carrying to Gaza overland, joining the tons of supplies that flow to Gaza daily,” but rejected that offer, according to the Editorialist at the Washington Times.

The event sparked the traditional reaction to any act committed by Israel, one of derision and to be frank, anti-Semitism. Initially, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Navi Pillay, asserted that the Israeli operation was illegal, despite the truth that maritime law allows for the routine stop of suspicious vessels and that Israel has had to intercept various “blockade runners” headed to Gaza.

What the Commissioner failed to address was the presence of IHH, an Istanbul-based Islamic “charity group” whose Turkish acronym stands for the “Foundation for Human Rights and Freedoms and Humanitarian Relief” and Free Gaza members. Both groups are notorious for their connections to terrorism, specifically to Hamas.

Back in 1997, Turkish security forces were prompted to investigate the IHH and discovered that the so-called “human rights group” had purchased weapons and engaged in plots to embark on jihadist activities. In 2006, the Danish Institute for International Studies indicated that Turkey was aware of IHH’s connections to terrorism for at least a decade.

For this very reason, Cyprus refused to allow IHH ships to dock in its port because, as the Ministry of Communications in Cyprus explained, Cyprus did not wish to “engage in IHH’s operations.”

In 2001, French counterterrorism magistrate Jean-Louis Bruguiere testified that the IHH was involved in the plot to bomb the Los Angeles airport on New Year's Day in 2000.

Free Gaza also purports to be “a human rights group that in August 2008 sent the first international boats to land in the port of Gaza in 41 years.” The Israeli Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center asserts, however, that Free Gaza has “associated themselves with the Hamas administration.” Proud members of Free Gaza include Weather Underground terrorist founders William Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn, as well as Jodie Evans, radical leader of Code Pink. (You may recall that Ayers and President Obama are very close associates; Ayers even held a fundraiser for Obama in his own home.)

Steve Emerson of The Investigative Project on Terrorism indicated that on board the flotilla were more than 100 members of various Muslim Brotherhood chapters, of whom 20 taped al Qaeda style “martyr” videos.

Arab media reports stated that Flotilla participants were preparing wills on ship in the event that they would face martyrdom. They were allegedly determined to break the blockade or face death. The Middle East Media Research Institute reported that the head of the Turkish ship declared to a Gaza-based Hamas leader: “We will not allow the Zionists to come near us, and we will wage resistance against them.”

Despite the facts surrounding the incident, Israel continues to face harsh criticism from nations across the world. French President Nicolas Sarkozy stated that he was “deeply shocked at the tragic consequences of the Israeli military operation” and condemned Israel for it’s “disproportionate use of force,” as if the IDF were the ones with the clubs and knives beating men while they lay defenseless on the ground of the ship, as can be seen in this video below. The Turkish Prime Minister accused Israel of a “bloody massacre” and alleged that Israel violated International Law.

American communists and socialists have engaged in anti-Israel rallies since the Flotilla incident and have planned several more for the remainder of the week. The “peaceful” marchers in these rallies have been seen with signs that bear swastikas.

Americans should ponder the potential impact of the Flotilla incident. Even Americans who affirm the non-interventionist U.S. foreign policy advocated by America's founders must recognize Israel's right, as a sovereign state, to defend its borders. Now, however, this pro-Western nation is being demonized by the international community, including many sources within the Untied States.

'Activists threw stun grenades'
Photo by: YouTube
'Activists threw stun grenades'
By JPOST.COM STAFF
06/02/2010 15:16

New IDF footage shows attacks before soldiers boarded 'Mavi Marmara.'

The IDF Spokesperson's office on Wednesday afternoon released more new footage of Gaza flotilla activists attacking soldiers with a stun grenade, a box of plates, and water hoses.

The video was taken before the soldiers boarded the Mavi Marmara in Monday's raid.

Also in this video, activists can be seen waving metal rods and chains, which were later used to attack soldiers.

Earlier Wednesday, the IDF Spokespersons Office on Wednesday released new footage showing Monday's bloody raid of the Mavi Marmara ship.

Several voices belonging to Navy commandos are heard in the most recently released IDF video. . .

. . . The following is a transcript of the dialogue heard in the IDF clip:

- I need reinforcements here with me

- He wants to pass underneath

- Wait, one is in front of me

- It's coming from all directions

- We need to be evacuated, now

- Tell him that he's close already-

- Real weapons, real weapons (ie.guns)

- They have real weapons?

- Yes, yes, real weapons

- They are firing on us

- There is live fire below

- Live fire below

- Live fire here

- Shoot him where is he?

- Negative