• We are currently performing site maintenance, parts of civfanatics are currently offline, but will come back online in the coming days. For more updates please see here.

[RD] War in Gaza News: Pas de Deux

Held at gunpoint: BBC team detained by Israeli forces in southern Syria​

On the morning of 9 May, I was part of a BBC Arabic team which left the Syrian capital, Damascus, for the southern province of Deraa. From there we planned to go to the frontier with the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights.

We wanted to get close to the Syrian territory that has been seized by the Israeli military since December, when Israel's prime minister said it was taking control indefinitely of a demilitarised buffer zone and neighbouring areas following the fall of Bashar al-Assad's regime.

We were a team of seven - myself (a British citizen), two Iraqi BBC staff, and four Syrians - three freelancers and one BBC cameraman.

We were filming near one of the UN Disengagement Observer Force (UNDOF) observation posts, close to the town of al-Rafeed, when an official from the UN told us that the Israeli side had inquired about our identity and had been informed that we were a BBC crew.

We next drove north towards Quneitra city, which has been located inside the buffer zone since a 1974 disengagement agreement between Syria and Israel, which captured the Golan during the 1967 Middle East war.

About 200m (660ft) away from the city, an unguarded checkpoint blocked the road. To the side of the checkpoint we spotted Merkava tanks, one of which was flying an Israeli flag.

From a nearby tower, two Israeli soldiers were watching us - one of them through binoculars - and my colleague held his BBC ID up for them to see.

The BBC has complained to the Israeli military about what happened next to my team, but it has not yet received a response.

A minute after we started filming in the area, a white car approached from the other side of the checkpoint.

Four Israeli soldiers got out of the car and surrounded us. They pointed their rifles at our heads and ordered us to place the camera on the side of the road. I tried to explain that we were a BBC crew, but things escalated unexpectedly quickly.

I was able to send a message to my BBC colleagues in London saying that we had been stopped by the Israeli military before our phones and all equipment were confiscated, more Israeli soldiers arrived in a Humvee military vehicle, and our car was thoroughly searched.

The soldiers escorted us through a barrier into the city of Quneitra and stopped at the crossing point that separates Quneitra from the occupied Golan. There, the soldiers began reviewing the footage as we sat in our car, while one pointed his rifle at my head from metres away. After more than two hours, one of the soldiers asked me to step out of the car and speak on a mobile phone.

I didn't know who the person on the line was. He spoke broken Arabic. He asked why we were filming Israeli military positions. I told him I was a British BBC journalist and explained to him the nature of our work. I returned to my car, and the rifle was again aimed at my head.

After another hour of waiting, one more vehicle arrived. A group of security personnel got out of the car carrying blindfolds and plastic zip ties and asked me to step out first.

The lead officer, who spoke fluent Palestinian Arabic dialect, took me by the hand towards one of the rooms at the crossing point which were previously used by the Syrian army. The floor was strewn with broken glass and rubbish. He told me that they would treat me differently - no handcuffs, nor blindfold - unlike the rest of my team.

I was in shock. I asked why they were doing this when they knew we were a BBC crew.

He said he wanted to help get us out quickly and that we had to comply with their instructions.

Moments later, another officer entered and told me to take off all my clothes except my underwear. I initially refused, but they insisted, and threatened me, so I complied. He inspected even inside my underwear, both front and back, searched my clothes, then told me to put them back on and started interrogating me - including personal questions about my children and their ages.

When they eventually let me out of the room, I witnessed the horrific scene of my team members, tied up and blindfolded. I pleaded to the officer to release them, and he promised to do so after the interrogations. They were taken one by one to the same room for strip search and questioning.

They returned with their hands still bound but not blindfolded. The team's interrogation lasted more than two hours, during which all our phones and laptops were examined, and many photos - including personal ones - were deleted.

The officer threatened us with worse consequences if we approached the frontier from the Syrian side again, and said that they know everything about us and would track us down if any hidden or un-deleted photo was ever published.

About seven hours after our detention - it was past 21:00 - we were taken by two vehicles, one in front of our car and the other behind us, to a rural area about 2km (1.2 miles) outside Quneitra. There, the vehicles stopped and a bag containing our phones was thrown towards us before the vehicles left.

Lost in the dark with no signal, no internet and no idea where we were, we kept driving until we reached a small village.

A group of children pointed us to the highway, warning that a wrong turn could draw Israeli fire. Ten tense minutes later, we found the road. Forty-five minutes after that, we were in Damascus.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c4grldkeyv5o
 
Why does the UN refuse to label Hamas a terrorist organisation? How does the UN categorise the 10/7 massacre if not a terrorist attack?
I don't think the UN is particularly sympathetic to Israel to begin with


You can interpret this list in a couple of ways, in my book. Either Israel really is categorically worse than countries which don't even really have democracies [snip]or, a majority of UN members perceive it as some attempt at a Western imposition on the Middle East. In some ways I can understand the latter: as Israel was a creation of the UN, I think this project was largely abandoned quite soon after its Arab neighbors became too upset about that and no one wanted the world foremost oil supply disturbed because of whatever deep-seated racisms were going on in or around Israel. Understandable. Had they surrendered into becoming some UN protectorate as was first assumed (unlikely), maybe they would not be generating half of these controversies.

Moderator Action: Inappropriate comment snipped. Birdjaguar
 
Last edited by a moderator:
A small ceremony in one the monuments to the jewish holocaust in this city - which before ww2 Germany occupied it, did have around 70.000 jewish people but now has only a few thousand (the rest were put to trains and mass-executed).
I of course agree with what the jewish person said. But I still don't see how it will matter. There simply isn't any honest will to stop what is going on in Gaza - and of course it is being used by various sides; they all feed on the genocide of palestinians including by far the most obvious Israel and the second-most obvious Hamas.


The other person in the video is 'empress' Zoe, the leader of (currently) the largest (in polls) split from the Syriza party and imo all-around a decent person.
 
Last edited:
What outcome do you want? That Israel is not treated "unfairly" for conducting genocide, or that no-one is?
We as a globe could attempt to isolate Hamas from the people it purports to represent in Gaza. That would not involve military action per se but it would mean that their leadership is not to be taken seriously unless it conforms to basic standards of democratic etiquette, I as an American take for granted. Occasional elections, observers in those elections, a rule of law, etc. I imagine that this does not happen because the relationship between Hamas and Gazans sort-of mirrors how these other (Mid-East) countries conduct much of their own affairs. That is to say, the ruling monarch decides everything. Meanwhile the larger UN's position seem to be that because Palestine is occupied land then whatever goes on there accounts for a bona-fide resistance.
I hope this answers somewhat.
 
We as a globe could attempt to isolate Hamas from the people it purports to represent in Gaza. That would not involve military action per se but it would mean that their leadership is not to be taken seriously unless it conforms to basic standards of democratic etiquette, I as an American take for granted. Occasional elections, observers in those elections, a rule of law, etc. I imagine that this does not happen because the relationship between Hamas and Gazans sort-of mirrors how these other (Mid-East) countries conduct much of their own affairs. That is to say, the ruling monarch decides everything. Meanwhile the larger UN's position seem to be that because Palestine is occupied land then whatever goes on there accounts for a bona-fide resistance.
I hope this answers somewhat.
?????
And how would that look different than the present?

And how would it stop the occupation/genocide?
 

Netanyahu confirms Israel arming clans opposed to Hamas in Gaza​

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has confirmed that Israel is arming clans in Gaza that he says are opposed to Hamas.

His comments came after Israeli media reports quoted defence sources as saying Netanyahu had authorised giving weapons to one particular group in the south of Gaza.

Several Israeli politicians have accused Netanyahu of endangering Israeli security.

"What's wrong with this?" Netanyahu says in a short video he's tweeted. "It only saves the lives of Israeli solders", he continues - "and publicising it only helps Hamas".

What the Israeli prime minister is referring to are the reports that Israel under his authorisation has been supplying weapons to a clan in Gaza led by a man called Yasser Abu Shabab.

The group, which some see as a militia or a criminal gang, has presented itself as an opposition force to Hamas.

It says its aim is to protect trucks bringing aid into Gaza, but critics say it is doing the opposite and is looting them.

The revelations may have been brushed off by Benjamin Netanyahu, but they have the potential of developing into a serious new political scandal.

Israeli defence sources had earlier confirmed to local journalists that accusations made by the opposition politician Avigdor Lieberman were correct.

Lieberman, who heads the Yisrael Beiteinu party, had told the public broadcaster, Kan, that Netanyahu had unilaterally approved the transfer of weapons to the Abu Shabab clan.

"The Israeli government is giving weapons to a group of criminals and felons, identified with the Islamic State group," Lieberman said.

"To my knowledge, this did not go through approval by the cabinet," he added.

Defence sources subsequently confirmed that Israel had been arming the Abu Shabab clan with Kalashnikov rifles, including some that had been seized from Hamas.

The clan has been operating in Rafah, in an area under Israeli military control.

However, Yasser Abu Shabab posted online to "categorically reject" that Israel had supplied his group's weapons.

"Our weapons are simple, outdated and came through the support of our own people," he said.

Hamas sources have said that Abu Shabab's activities have become an issue - with one report in an Arabic newspaper saying that the Hamas armed wing had begun carrying out assassinations of members of the clan.

Netanyahu's office said that Israel "was working to defeat Hamas through various means, based on the recommendations of all the heads of the security establishment".

Strong criticism of the initiative has come from Yair Golan, leader of the Democrats in the Knesset.

In a social media post on X he said: "Netanyahu is a threat to Israel's national security. Instead of bringing about a deal...bringing the hostages home and providing security for Israeli citizens, he is creating a new ticking time-bomb in Gaza".
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cwyn2m9yk0vo
 
So they're using them the same way they supported Hamas against the PA?

And yet they are also occupying the PA administered West Bank.

It seems like being terrorists doesn't stop you from receiving Israeli support, and that not being terrorists doesn't spare you.

Maybe it's all secondary in pursuit of conquest.
 
So what happens when the strip starves to death?

Does Bibi get a slap on the wrist? Gulf states open back up to him and reward him a private jet? Europe pretends nothing ever happened and tries to put the focus back on Russia?
No slap.

It's about Israel. Palestine is an afterthought, a vehicle to be used when convenient to opposition and discarded when not. This is the attitude towards the idea by the neighboring powers, and in the West, it is more about opposition to Israeli actions than any real sympathy for Palestine.

Campaign ends, so does the vast majority of the outrage, and whatever new status quo is established will be challenged ineffectively.
 
No slap.

It's about Israel. Palestine is an afterthought, a vehicle to be used when convenient to opposition and discarded when not. This is the attitude towards the idea by the neighboring powers, and in the West, it is more about opposition to Israeli actions than any real sympathy for Palestine.

Campaign ends, so does the vast majority of the outrage, and whatever new status quo is established will be challenged ineffectively.

Putin hoped much the equivalent at one point, I imagine.
 
?????
And how would that look different than the present?

And how would it stop the occupation/genocide?
well no more than a UN condemnation of Israel would stop it either! I was only speaking in that context of the UN's general behavior.

As far as what Israel does on its own (as they will have to address this on their own)...I think they need to develop granting full citizenship to Palestinians instead of relegating them to two territories that aren't even connected. Similarly I think Palestinians need to get over this notion that Islam will become "diluted" under some Jewish majority to the point of irrelevancy. These two, in tandem, will not stop occupation per se so much as make the issue irrelevant. And these aren't easy solutions, nor short-term ones, but I think they are the ultimate ones.

I might have said this some time before here but I forget :/
 
Putin hoped much the equivalent at one point, I imagine.
Time may prove him right, too.

Gaza, well...

I'm pretty sure the Palestinian understanding of "success" would alienate their friends in the West right quick, should they have even a little taste of it, in contrast to Ukraine.
 
I'm pretty sure the Palestinian understanding of "success" would alienate their friends in the West right quick, should they have even a little taste of it, in contrast to Ukraine.
What makes you pretty sure of this?

The white south africans were afraid of ever giving up apartheid in case of vengeance as well, and some are still certain its coming.
 
What makes you pretty sure of this?

The white south africans were afraid of ever giving up apartheid in case of vengeance as well, and some are still certain its coming.
Trump straight pandered to this crap among American white supremacists by importing Afrikaners, even though White South Africans have a lower violent crime victimization rate than natives.
 
military against against Israel that would be meaningful is sadly unlikely. What do I have hope for is simply embargos against Israel. If the entire world - or particularly Israel's allies simply stopped doing business with them, stopped supplying them etc, Israel's behavior would change.
 
It should be clear by now that embargoes will not happen. US views Israel as its eternal ally (and Israel is very important for US interests in an oil-rich region) and other sides are either too weak (eg EU) or indifferent (eg also EU).
 
Do you think that is reasonable/sufficient evidence to support the actual genocide over the hypothetical genocide you're conjecturing, as if those are the only possibilities?
Actual genocide?

The use of the word "actual" is noteworthy. Genocide, as it is actually understood, would mean annihilating a people. As this has clearly not occurred, instead some ICJ, super Transatlanticist definition must be being applied. Lacking and it should not be expected to have much effect, rhetorically.

I'm curious: would you advocate the British government make a full fledged effort to militarily occupy Israel?
 
Back
Top Bottom