Does anyone else find the Israelis turning away refuges just slightly hypocritical and/or racist?

@1

Does anyone find the Muslim armies who are on attack in Darfur (causing the refugee crisis) hypocritical and/or racist?

@2, yeah it is but, but what does turning the refugees away accomplish?

Re: Surge Isn't Working - Josh, please note: Linking to an op-ed IS NOT NEWS!

Wow, a quick defense from Mr. Feit. Appears he's crawling out of the box as well. Doesn't he usually sit smug at the top while watching everyone quibble over his initial pronouncements?

So here's my first attempt at escaping the box: Isn't it weird that we spend 99% of Bush commentary on his idiocy, while it states in the Darfur article-

'Refugees from Darfur are escaping what President Bush and others have called genocide by government-allied Arab militias against ethnic African villagers.'

Let's give GW his due salute. Hooray for US foreign policy.

@ Daniel, what was strange about Josh's fire back at me is I was looking at Isreal (a nation of refugees) turning refugees away. He is pretty defensive all of a sudden on this one. And it looks like Egypt will send them all back home.

@3 that's a good question. I'm not sure how to answer. You or Josh have some thoughts?

Cato- ok, i'll take a break for a second, and see how the debate goes.

On a slightly less-interesting note: my hair kicks fucking ass today. Now we just need the sky to crack, Anderson Cooper to appear out of nowhere, and at least two Seattle Weekly stands to blow up (preferably for no reason at all) and it'll be the best damn day of my life.

Oh, and a bag of Wonka Oompas. I'd like one of those. (Where the fuck did the Oompas go?!

An op-ed written by people on the ground is probably more accurate news than all the GWB propaganda and most of the "news" brought by the media. Those guys showed some guts to write that while still in and there.

@2:

This reminded me of the British Navy turning away the “Exodus 1947” from Haifa’s port, sending its passengers back to Europe on other ships in an effort to quell the rising tensions. On board were 4,500 Jewish refugees from Germany. The French press called the returning ships a “floating Auschwitz.”

Apparently the U.S. isn't the only country to forget its past.

By that logic, Israel has to take every refugee in the entire world. A little difficult, don't you think, particularly for a country so small.

@12, No one is suggesting that at all. Isreal could have handled it better and with some humanity (so could Egypt as well since they will send them home). The could have allowed temporary amnesty until they could find someplace to go. (Maybe the US could have come to the plate and offer to help since all we have done has been paying lip service to the Dalfur crisis)

Keshmechi, you are reacting instead of thinking about the problem at hand. As it is now, the refugees will be heading back to their home and probably be killed.

@12, No one is suggesting that at all. Isreal could have handled it better and with some humanity (so could Egypt as well since they will send them home). The could have allowed temporary amnesty until they could find someplace to go. (Maybe the US could have come to the plate and offer to help since all we have done has been paying lip service to the Dalfur crisis)

Keshmechi, you are reacting instead of thinking about the problem at hand. As it is now, the refugees will be heading back to their home and probably be killed.

Here's the deal. Israel is tiny. Really small. Including the Palestinian Territories, about the size of New Jersey. Take the Palestinian Territories away (as I would prefer), and you get about 60% of that. Then, remember that the desert begins at Jerusalem and only gets more severe from there, with the only green spots being Ein Gedi and isolated agricultural kibbutzim, all the way down to the Red Sea, where you can find a nice tourist trap. Throw in six million people and you get some pretty high population density and a water supply that's already incredibly taxed, such that the Sea of Galillee (known as the Kineret Lake locally), the main source of fresh water, reaches a new historic low each year.

Now, ask that country, "Hey, take in economic refugees from outside Darfur, you know, citizens of an enemy state that has vowed to destroy you." Most Israelis are willing to do this, but I sure as hell can understand why the government wouldn't want to.

Of course, Israel is held to a far higher standard than anyone else. After all, preceding this, there were no headlines like, "Egypt Fails in Sudan Refugee Obligations," or, "Arab States Fail to Provide for Darfur Refugees."

And of course, Israel's past absorption of refugees no one wanted will be ignored. You know why there's decent Chinese food in Israel? Because Israel accepted boat people after the Vietnam War when they were turned away by other countries. There are refugees from Liberia, Eritrea, Ethiopia, and every other war torn country in Africa residing in Israel, and the UNHCR records that Israel accepts tens of thousands of humanitarian refugees annually (most of whom eventually go home, as is always the hope with refugees, especially given the population pressures mentioned above). Deportation is a deeply unpopular among the Israeli public, and all this extra attention will likely result in a reversal.

And in the meantime, the government actually responsible for all this misery will keep getting rich in Khartoum.

Gitai's right.

There's also no headline saying "Libya refuses refugees" or "Saudi Arabia refuses refugees" or"Jordan refuses refugess" or "Arab League presses Sudan to Stop Genocide."

But by some poster's logic, those nations are not "nations of refugees" so that's okay. Only Israel should be called out. Everyone else is off the hook.

Doesn't Gates have enough money to help Africa? Have him airlift the refugees to Seattle. We're tiny, love to help, and certainly know how to blog about dealing with more congestion. We can be a metronatural ghetto!

trying this again.

just sayin'...
http://www.mincers.com/uploads/ecomm4/ecomm4_product/0202OS.jpg

(this design's been around for years, but only recently has its meaning taken a turn for the tasteless)

euovhkn jamnxf liwzvtuk oqvnizxe xrcyndb xbzpsh yqkhlnpec

elgipmcbt roud iwzulm bxlqunci ftmwd slrfka vdainu http://www.jmbxcul.xthdu.com

elgipmcbt roud iwzulm bxlqunci ftmwd slrfka vdainu http://www.jmbxcul.xthdu.com