Del Mar Times - Latest Comments

Re: DelMarTimes.net | Prop. C, allowing Pacific Highlands Ranch development, passes

Bennislives — Sat, 06 Nov 2010 18:36:40 -0000

here come the 50,000 cars.

Re: DelMarTimes.net | Bilbray keeps 50th district assembly seat

Don Collins — Thu, 04 Nov 2010 10:31:24 -0000

Delighted with the news!

Don Collins

Re: DelMarTimes.net | New district office property looks promising for Del Mar school district

kday — Wed, 03 Nov 2010 13:00:16 -0000

The superintendent said the next steps will be to develop a district facilities master plan and continue to look for a site for maintenance and operations. They are currently looking at a warehouse building on 11999 Sorrento Valley Road.

Re: DelMarTimes.net | EDUCATION MATTERS: Partisan politics infects school board elections

Dave — Wed, 03 Nov 2010 00:36:33 -0000

Please provide us with your Party affliation and educational background

Re: DelMarTimes.net | New district office property looks promising for Del Mar school district

DMUSDparent — Tue, 02 Nov 2010 18:37:12 -0000

What about Maintenance and Operations? Where would it go if this property was purchased?

Re: DelMarTimes.net | Vote 'No' on Proposition 23 � the Big Oil-backed initiative

moddemmom — Mon, 01 Nov 2010 13:27:39 -0000

Vote No on 23. Prop 23 is not a "jobs" bill. It is sponsored by 2 Texas refiners who don't want to conform to California's clean air act nor do they want to pay any fines for not conforming, plain and simple. Eight cities in San Diego County (San Diego, Oceanside, La Mesa, Chula Vista, Solana Beach, Carlsbad, Imperial Beach, and Del Mar) have passed resolutions opposing Prop. 23 because of the negative impacts they anticipate the proposition would have, in its attempt to end implementation of California’s trendsetting clean air legislation known as AB32.
For example, the Del Mar resolution states “AB 32 has launched California to the forefront of the clean technology economy and will generate more jobs and stimulate the economy if implementation continues as scheduled.”

Anne Tolch, Vice President of the Sustainability Alliance of Southern California (SASC), said “It would be a disaster for Prop. 23 to set California back after all the progress we’ve made to become the nation’s leader in clean energy technologies, businesses, and investment capital. It’s imperative that California votes no on 23.”

Jean Costa, Chair of the San Diego Sierra Club’s Climate Change Committee added, “Prop. 23 would be devastating for public health. Californians already suffer from too many diseases and premature deaths due to poor air quality. We can’t allow these major polluters to further worsen our air quality.”

Over a thousand businesses and organizations are opposing Prop. 23. These include big California companies like Google, EBay, SDG&E, BlueShield, and Kaiser Permanente; nonprofits like the California Chapter of the American Lung Association, AARP, Union of Concerned Scientists, and the California Professional Firefighters; and hundreds of small clean energy businesses, many in San Diego. The San Diego Union Tribune, San Diego City Beat, and other local media outlets have also opposed Prop. 23.

Steve Quirk, who is starting up an energy efficiency training business, is against Prop. 23 because it threatens 500,000 clean energy jobs and 12,000 clean energy businesses in California. “California has attracted thousands of entrepreneurs with its leadership in the clean energy industry and over $9 billion in investment capital in the last five years alone. If Prop 23 passes, many of these businesses may have to shut down or go to other states, taking their investment dollars and jobs with them.”

Re: DelMarTimes.net | Del Mar mural artist knows racetrack figures well

Concrete Floor Stain PALMBEACH — Sat, 30 Oct 2010 06:39:20 -0000

Del Mar mural artist knows racetrack figures well!!

Re: DelMarTimes.net | Suspect in Solana Beach apartment complex assault arrested

Cjemmott — Wed, 27 Oct 2010 18:44:37 -0000

700 block, not 800.

Re: DelMarTimes.net | Coyote Bar & Grill owner leads a colorful life

Sue Wright — Wed, 27 Oct 2010 16:06:33 -0000

Nice little bio! What about Douley's? That was the real Carlsbad beginning in California!
Everyone had a shift on the dishwasher and the computer was the new "HAL."
I had some of my best "youthful" years there serving eat and peal shrimp and of course drinking the nights away with a Cafe Theresa. Life goes by quick. Glad I knew you then and still quote you often.
"Never ask a customer how their "meal" is; prisoners have "meals", people have "dinner"
Love to you and your family!
Smyrkie

Re: DelMarTimes.net | Local musician releasing new album

Michael Tiernan — Wed, 27 Oct 2010 15:50:32 -0000

Thanks Marlena for a wonderful article! Thanks everyone else for reading! Hope to see you all at the CD Release Concert on November 7th. Thx!
Michael Tiernan
www.tiernantunes.com

Re: SolanaBeachSun.net | County agrees to $1.2M settlement resulting from Busby fundraiser confrontation

Baffled — Tue, 26 Oct 2010 19:58:27 -0000

This is great... What you are telling us is that, if the police come to our doors and ask us any questions -- we should fight them, so that we can have money given to us later.. Nice job Busby

Re: DelMarTimes.net | New Del Mar planning and community development director appointed

Bob Loblaw — Tue, 26 Oct 2010 19:33:53 -0000

Why does a built-out town with only 5000 households NEED an overqualified planner with a 6-figure income? We don't need a bloated bureaucratic planning department to micromanage every little thing. Most of the town was built under the County prior to incorporation, and it turned out fine. This is just another example of the imperious attitude of our misleaders.

Re: DelMarTimes.net | Rampant teen prescription drug abuse 'frightening'

keepout — Tue, 26 Oct 2010 15:14:45 -0000

I am so sorry for the loss of your son. May God bless you and keep you strong.

Re: DelMarTimes.net | Rampant teen prescription drug abuse 'frightening'

keepout — Tue, 26 Oct 2010 15:11:55 -0000

Those indications of drug use listed above I have seen my son go through and it is heart breaking. I can threaten him and give him 'talks' and try to counsel him, but it is a hard fight. I am heart broken when I find hallowed pens and foil under his bed. And yes, he is always tired and lost a lot of weight. He owns nothing now due to pawning all his electronics over time and he was working a full time job and all his money was gone and he has no bills. Last Christmas I told my family to only buy him clothes, nothing of value that he could pawn. I love him so much and he is such a good kid, but drugs got a hold on him and it is breaking my heart. I have tried counselors, etc, but he is in denial. He just turned 19 yrs old and has been off drugs now for about 2 months, due to us moving far away from his friends. I'm afraid he will use again with his 'new' friends. I can only pray and hope he stays straight.

Re: SolanaBeachSun.net | Which came first: Israeli occupation or Qassam rockets?

Faith Attaguile — Mon, 25 Oct 2010 16:52:00 -0000

WHO WANTS TO DESTROY WHOM?
E Daniels says that Hamas “...seeks Israel's destruction.” Let's take a look at some facts.

In 2006, Hamas won a landslide victory in Palestinian Parliamentary elections which international observers certified as free and fair. In its victory speech Hamas said to Israel:

“Our conflict with you is not religious but political. We have no problem with Jews who have not attacked us – our problem is with those who came to our land, imposed themselves on us by force, destroyed our society and banished our people.... We shall never recognize the legitimacy of a Zionist state created on our soil in order to atone for somebody else's sins or solve somebody else's problem. But if you are willing to accept the principle of a long-term truce, we are prepared to negotiate the terms. Hamas is extending a hand of peace to those who are truly interested in a peace based on justice.”(Khaled Meshal, Hamas political bureau, 1/31/2006)

To reiterate: In 2006 Hamas stated publicly a willingness to negotiate with Israel if Israel agreed to withdraw to pre-1967 borders with Palestine. Not a bad deal for Israel. With the Hamas offer Israel would maintain control of almost 80% of historic Palestine, up 25% from the original 1947 U.N. Partition Plan.

Even first Israeli Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion would have been surprised by Hamas' offer. Read what he said about the situation in 1956:

“Why should the Arabs make peace? If I was an Arab leader I would never make terms with Israel. That is natural: we have taken their country….There has been anti-Semitism, the Nazis,
Hitler, Auschwitz, but was that their fault? They may only see one thing: we have come here
and stolen their country. Why should they accept that?” (David Ben-Gurion, quoted in Nahum Goldman, The Jewish Paradox: A personal memoir (1978), trans. by Steve Cox, p. 99).

If others missed the importance of that offer, ex-Mossad chief Ephraim Halevy didn't. In 2007 he advised Israeli leaders to take up the 2006 offer to negotiate because, he said, Hamas is highly respected by Palestinians, and is “very, very credible.”

Instead Israel has done just the opposite. It began by financing a coup (with the support of the U.S.) against Hamas in favor of Fatah, losing party in the 2006 elections but sufficiently subservient to Israeli interests as to be an acceptable “ally.” Fatah seized power in the West Bank. Hamas maintained power in the Gaza Strip after defeating a Fatah-attempted coup (see Jonathan Steele, “Hamas acted on a very real fear of a US-sponsored coup,” The Guardian, June 22, 2007; David Rose, “The Gaza Bombshell,” Vanity Fair, April 2008).

Israel continued trying to destroy Hamas by imposing a vicious siege on Gaza in 2007, waging economic warfare against the people of Gaza in an attempt to make them oust Hamas. Unsuccessful, in 2008 Israel launched a murderous 22-day assault on Gaza. The attack, said one U.N. official, bombed Gaza back into the stone age because Israel refuses to allow into Gaza the materials needed to rebuild destroyed homes, hospitals, schools and businesses.

Why punish a people for having elected Hamas when even some of Israel's own officials advise a different approach? Perhaps because of this: Hamas has called for peace negotiations based on pre-1967 borders giving Israel 80% and Palestine only 20% of the land in dispute. To any reasonable person this may seem quite a compromise since Palestinians formerly controlled all of historic Palestine.

But Israel doesn't want 80% of the land. It wants 100%. This position, combined with (1) Hamas' popularity with the Palestinian people and (2) worldwide acceptance of the idea of peace negotiations based this same idea, directly threatens Israel's goal of controlling all of historic Palestine. Hamas, therefore, must be destroyed. If in the process of doing this the Palestinian people are also destroyed Israel seems to be saying, “So be it.”

So: who actually wants to destroy whom?

A WOLF IN SHEEP'S CLOTHING?
We've all read about the despicable words Hamas wrote regarding Israel in its 1988 Charter. How many of us have read the despicable words Israeli leaders have spoken regarding the Palestinian people? Here are some samples:

From 1982:
"[The Palestinians] ARE BEASTS WALKING ON TWO LEGS." (Menachem Begin, Israeli Prime Minister 1977-1983, in Knesset speech, quoted in Amnon Kapeliouk, “Begin and the 'Beasts,"' New Statesman, June 25, 1982).

Another example from 1983:
"WHEN WE HAVE SETTLED THE LAND, ALL THE ARABS WILL BE ABLE TO DO ABOUT IT WILL BE TO SCURRY AROUND LIKE DRUGGED ROACHES IN A BOTTLE."(Rafael Eitan (1929-2004), IDF Chief of Staff, Knesset member and government minister, May 3, 1983, quoted in Noam Chomsky, Fateful Triangle (1999), 130n).

Another example from 1988:
"[The Palestinians] WOULD BE CRUSHED LIKE GRASSHOPPERS ... HEADS SMASHED AGAINST THE BOULDERS AND WALLS." (Yitzhak Shamir, Israeli Prime Minister 1983-4, 1986-92, in a speech to Jewish settlers, New York Times, April 1, 1988).

Still another, from 2000:
"THE PALESTINIANS ARE LIKE CROCODILES, THE MORE YOU GIVE THEM MEAT, THEY WANT MORE." (Ehud Barak, Israeli Prime Minister, on August 28, 2000. Reported in the Jerusalem Post, August 30, 2000).

Then there's current Prime Minister Netanyahu, 2001:
[The only way to deal with the Palestinians is to] “BEAT THEM UP, NOT ONCE BUT REPEATEDLY, BEAT THEM UP SO IT HURTS SO BADLY, UNTIL IT’S UNBEARABLE.” (Benjamin Netanyahu, Israeli Prime Minister, quoted in Liel Leibovitz, “Fibi Netanyahu: In 2001, PM boasted of manipulating Oslo accords.”)

Peace is a two-way street. It is not achieved by comparing your opponents to insects and animals. Neither is it achieved, as Prime Minister Netanyahu said, by “beat[ing] them up, not once but repeatedly...until it's unbearable.” Yet that is exactly what Israel has been doing to the Palestinian people since Israel's birth as a state.

Israel condemns the Palestinians for “not wanting to make peace.” Their most recent “proof?” The refusal of Palestinians to enter new peace talks without Israel's agreement to cease illegal construction of new Jewish colonies on Palestinian land. Notice they aren’t saying, “We refuse to talk with Israel.” They aren't even saying, “Withdraw to the pre-1967 borders first,” which they have every right to do. They're saying, “Don’t build any more colonies on the land left to us as a show of good faith.” Since these colonies have been condemned worldwide as illegal under international law, this certainly doesn't seem too much to ask under the circumstances. Israel’s response? A frenetic flurry of new-colony construction on Palestinian land.

This most recent Palestinian request comes after living for decades under the jackboot of Israeli occupation. This occupation has effectively transformed the West Bank into a Bantustan. 250 Jewish-only colonies housing 500,000 Jewish colonists and sucking up precious water resources have been built on the best land in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. Over 300 miles of Jewish-only roads crisscross the West Bank. Over 600 checkpoints and roadblocks force Palestinians to wait hours to get to their fields, visit families in other villages, go to work or receive medical care. Between 2000-2006, 68 Palestinian women were forced to give birth at these checkpoints: 4 women and 33 children died. Over 9,000 Palestinians languish in Israeli prisons while one Israeli soldier sits in a Palestinian prison. It's just as bad in the Gaza Strip. Since 2007 Israel has held Gaza in the grip of a murderous siege, decimating it further in a 22-day assault in 2008. The horrible suffering and illegal blockade continues to this day.

Under these circumstances, Israel's “poor us” cries sound more like those of a wolf in sheep's clothing rather than those of a victimized sheep.

MURDER, DESTRUCTION and...LEAFLETS?
E Daniel's rather confused musings concerning Israel's 22-day attack on Gaza – Operation Cast Lead – run counter to what even Israeli officials now admit according to its 2010 investigations of the attack. Even before these admissions Israeli journalist Gideon Levy wrote:

“Cast Lead was an unrestrained assault on a besieged, totally unprotected civilian population which showed almost no signs of resistance during this operation.... It should have been enough just to look at the horrendous disparity in casualties – 100 Palestinians killed for every Israeli – to shake the whole of Israeli society....But the Israelis preferred to look away, or stand with their children on the hills around Gaza and cheer on the carnage-causing bombs.” (Gideon Levy, “Disgrace in the Hague,” Haaretz, 9/17/09).

In addition Israeli soldiers have testified:

"You feel like an infantile little kid with a magnifying glass looking at ants, burning them. Really. A 20-year-old kid should not be doing such things to people. (IDF soldier who participated in Operation Cast Lead, see Breaking the Silence)

"Fire power was insane.... The minute we got to our starting line, we simply began to fire at suspect places. You see a house, a window, shoot at the window. You don't see a terrorist there? Fire at the window. In urban warfare, anyone is your enemy. No innocents.” (Testimony of an IDF soldier who participated in Operation Cast Lead, see Breaking the Silence)

Two reports by Amnesty International, five reports by Human Rights Watch, numerous reports by Israeli human rights organizations such as B'TSelem, and a report mandated by the U.N. Human Rights Council were issued on Operation Cast Lead. They found the following:

1. 1400 Palestinians were killed (including 300 children); 5300 Palestinians were wounded

2. 13 Israels were killed (including 3 civilians from Palestinian rockets that also wounded dozens others; 10 Israeli soldiers died, 4 from “friendly fire”)

3. Israel systematically targeted civilian infrastructure, damaging and destroying electricity grids, sewage treatment plants, hospitals, mosques, schools and U.N. Facilities. It destroyed 4,000 Palestinian homes leaving 20,000 people homeless. Mosques were fired upon during prayer time. Palestinian civilians were deliberately targeted; Palestinians carrying white surrender flags were murdered by Israeli forces.

4. Beginning 12/27/2008 Israel flew 3,000 F-16 sorties over Gaza in 22 days. Drones were used in documented killings of civilians. On 1/5/2009 a coordinated air, naval, and ground invasion of Gaza began. No planes were damaged or downed. Bombs, missiles, shells and white phosphorus bombs were fired indiscriminately into densely populated urban areas

5. Hamas and other Palestinian armed groups fired 850 rockets and mortar shells into civilian areas of southern Israel during Operation Cast Lead. Several Israeli homes and other structures were damaged, some extensively

6. Israel used prohibited white phosphorus bombs in densely-populated urban areas. White phosphorus causes deep tissue burns that continues burning until consumed. If absorbed into the body through the burned area white phosphorus can cause liver, kidney and/or heart damage.

7. There was no evidence that Palestinians used hospitals, schools, mosques or private homes to hide Hamas officials

8. Israeli soldiers used innocent Palestinians as human shields

9. There was no evidence that Hamas was guilty of human shielding

Did the fact that “Israel distributed leaflets, sent text messages and made phone calls to warn people away from impending attacks during last winter's fighting” absolve it of responsibility for the crimes it committed in its attack on Gaza, as E Daniels implies?

Such a statement would be laughable if referring to a computer game. But this is real life involving an area 1/29th the size of San Diego County. This is real life involving imprisonment of a people in the brutal grip of a land, sea and air blockade. With their borders sealed and suffering under 136 bombing runs per day by Israeli F-16s, where exactly does E Daniels think the people of Gaza could possibly run to?

That's like setting a prison on fire, throwing away the keys and then, over a loudspeaker, telling the prisoners to run. As an Israeli soldier testified, it was like “...a magnifying glass looking at ants, burning them.”

Re: DelMarTimes.net | Feather Acres Farm, a 'piece of Eden'

Guest — Sun, 24 Oct 2010 07:16:15 -0000

Feather Acres evolved from farm to nursery as part of the prominent cut flower industry in the area.

Re: SolanaBeachSun.net | Del Mar author publishes novella 'His Mistake'

juliewrightpr — Sat, 23 Oct 2010 22:18:46 -0000

Can't wait to read it!

Re: SolanaBeachSun.net | Which came first: Israeli occupation or Qassam rockets?

Faith Attaguile — Fri, 22 Oct 2010 09:18:04 -0000

When a war between nations is lost
The loser, of course, pays the cost.
But even when Germany fell to your hand,
It did, dear lady. It did, dear man.
You left them their pride and you left them their land.
But what have your done to these ones?

-- from “Now that the Buffalo’s gone,” by Buffy St. Marie,
referring to the plight of Indians in the Americas

Mr. Surbeck says of the Palestinians, “Nothing belongs to them…. They must face the consequences of their own actions, like everybody else in the world does.… [I]f you lose, you lose, and that’s it.”

Interesting. Could the “everybody else” he refers to be the Germans, who waged a viciously aggressive war against the rest of the world murdering millions of Gypsies, Communists, Jews and working people in the process -- but kept their land? Or the Japanese, who waged a viciously aggressive war against the U.S. and China and lost -- but kept their land? Apparently not. Yet he argues that the people of historic Palestine, chewed up in Israel’s mad rush for land, don’t deserve a place on the map.

WHAT MAD RUSH FOR LAND?
For the sake of argument (although facts contradict this) let’s assume Mr. Surbeck is right when he says the land allotted to Israel in 1947 U.N. Partition Plan was the least fertile in all of historic Palestine. It doesn’t matter. That was never the issue for the Zionists because for them the territory given Israel in the Partition Plan was not a fait accompli but a work in progress called expansion.

Israel’s Declaration of Independence conveniently made no mention of the 1947 U.N. Partition Plan. Could that be because the Partition Plan had inconveniently provided for the creation of not one, but two states: Jewish and Palestinian? The idea of a Palestinian state didn’t go along with the Zionist’s expansionist plan including within it “terror, assassination, intimidation, land confiscation, and the cutting of all social services to rid the Galilee of its Arab population." (David Ben-Gurion, May 1948, to the General Staff. From Michael Ben-Zohar, Ben-Gurion, A Biography).

In 1949, just two years after the 1947 U.N. Partition Plan, the Zionist expansionist plan was revealed in full living color. Its territory had increased from over 55% to almost 80% of historic Palestine. By the end of the 1967 Six-Day War, having taken the West Bank, Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem, Israel had further expanded her borders to 100% of historic Palestine. Israel has been occupying and colonizing these lands ever since.

WHAT “RIGHT” OF TERRITORIAL EXPANSION?
Again for the sake of argument (although facts contradict this, too) let’s assume Mr. Surbeck is right when he argues that Israel’s wartime position has always been “defensive.” Under international law does that give Israel the right to acquire and occupy territory by force as he argues?

No, according to two principals of international law explicitly prohibiting:

(1) acquisition of territory by war (see, e.g., U.N. Resolution 242, “emphasizing the inadmissibility of acquisition of territory by war” and calling upon Israel to withdraw from those territories is one example. See also Jennings and Watts, Oppenheim’s International Law; Korman, The Right of Conquest: The Acquisition of Territory by Force in International Law for further discussion).

(2) colonization of occupied territories by citizens of the occupying power (4th Geneva Convention. While Mr. Surbeck rightly notes part of this article prohibits “forcible transfer,” he ignores the fact that another part specifically states, “The Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies.”).

Israel, a member-state of the U.N. and a signatory of the Geneva Conventions, has violated both these principals in its continuous occupation of the West Bank, Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem since 1967. Mr. Surbeck’s position is not strengthened by citing Article 52 of the U.N. Charter regarding rights of member states to defend themselves. The discussion is not about this. It’s about whether states have the right to acquire territory through war whether or not resulting from defensive actions. International law comes down decisively on one side. The answer is no. Not in Germany, not in Japan, and not in Palestine.

What about the argument that Israel was merely defending itself in the 1967 War? These are the facts: Israel launched the 1967 war on Egypt, not the other way around. Israel’s “justification” for the attack was that Egypt had placed troops in the Sinai and closed the Straits of Tiran to Israel-bound ships. While that was true, these actions did not constitute a military attack on Israel by any stretch of the imagination. In any case Egypt’s actions did not occur in a void. They took place as a direct response to Israel’s previous threats toward Syria, Egypt’s ally. Unfortunately it didn’t end there. After Israel attacked Egypt, Jordan -- treaty partner to Egypt -- attacked Israel. The rest is history.

Why indeed would Israel launch a war on Egypt, knowing Egypt’s treaty partner Jordan would then enter the fray? The answer is clear. At the start of this war Egypt -- not the Palestinian people -- controlled the Gaza Strip. Jordan -- not the Palestinian people -- controlled the West Bank. By the end of it six days later Israel -- not the Palestinian people -- controlled the West Bank, Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem.

Bingo! Israel’s borders had just expanded to include all of historic Palestine. Under the circumstances, it’s criminally dishonest to blame Palestinians for a war over which they had no control. Holding the Palestinian people responsible for not exercising a right of self-determination neither Israel nor surrounding Arab states had allowed because their first priority was acquisition of land, not Palestinian self-determination, should be beneath the dignity of anyone. Unfortunately it isn’t for some.

WHAT NOW?
Today the West Bank is a Bantustan. Over 250 Jewish-only colonies have been built on the best land, sucking up precious precious water and housing 500,000 Jewish colonists in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. The West Bank is scabbed with over 300 miles of Jewish-only roads and over 600 checkpoints and roadblocks forcing Palestinians to wait hours to get to their fields, visit families in other villages, go to work or get medical care. Between 2000-2006, 68 Palestinian women were forced to give birth at these checkpoints: 4 women and 33 children died. Over 9,000 Palestinians languish in Israeli prisons while one Israeli soldier sits in a Palestinian prison.

Since 2007 the Gaza Strip has suffered under a vicious siege by Israel. As though that weren’t enough, in 2009 Israel engaged in a 21-day assault on Gaza killing over 1400 people, wounding 5300 others, and reducing Gaza to a pile of rubble where electricity grids, sewage treatment plants, hospitals, schools, and 4,000 homes were destroyed leaving 20,000 people homeless. The blockade and the suffering continue to this day. This siege has been deemed a violation of international law by the U.N., the World Court, and international human rights organizations including the Israeli group B’TSelem.

Almost 8 months ago on March 31 a peaceful, unarmed Freedom Flotilla of worldwide citizens on 6 ships carrying humanitarian aid -- vetted by both Turkish and Greek authorities -- sailed for Gaza to deliver desperately-needed humanitarian supplies. While on the high seas and in international waters it was viciously attacked in the early morning hours by fully-armed Israeli commandos in an attempt to keep the aid from entering Gaza. 19 people were murdered, including a 19-year-old American citizen who suffered 5 gunshot wounds -- one to the back of the head at close range while mortally wounded and lying face down on the ship’s deck. An attack on unarmed ships in international waters is piracy and a violation of international law.

Most recently Israeli leaders have condemned Palestinians for “not wanting to make peace” because they insist that Israel must agree, as a gesture of good faith, to cease building illegal colonies in the Palestinian Occupied Territories before peace talks can begin. Notice that Palestinians aren’t saying, “Withdraw to the pre-1967 borders,” which they have every right to do. They are saying, “Don’t build any more colonies on the land left to us.” Israel’s response? A frenetic flurry of new-colony construction on Palestinian land -- more violations of international law.

The question is not whether the state of Israel is a fact. It is.

The question is whether Israel has the right under international law -- or any moral code for that matter -- to occupy, annex land, assassinate, murder and destroy others with impunity in its mad expansionist dash for more land. It does not.

There are Israelis who abhor what their government is doing and who are putting themselves on the line to protest these policies. Mr. Surbeck would do well to consider standing with the peacemakers, not the murders.

Re: DelMarTimes.net | Joe Steiner is back in the saddle again

Mitchguy405 — Fri, 22 Oct 2010 05:00:28 -0000

Miss you rideing races Joe!! You always brought long shots into the Winners Circle!!

Re: DelMarTimes.net | Joe Steiner is back in the saddle again

Jhracehorses — Fri, 22 Oct 2010 04:08:55 -0000

You are very good with the horses, and have patience with them. Bob Baffert is that way too. Hope to see you soon, when Santa Anita finishes there new terack surface. Your old freind, JockeyJane

Re: DelMarTimes.net | Solana Beach woman fights off knife attack

David — Thu, 21 Oct 2010 23:52:57 -0000

that complex is a hellhole, nicer places in TJ

Re: SolanaBeachSun.net | Which came first: Israeli occupation or Qassam rockets?

Faith Attaguile — Thu, 21 Oct 2010 17:01:20 -0000

Ms. Rosenfeld makes three points.

As to her first, she is right that the quote I used has been contested by many a Zionist. Interestingly, similar protests are absent regarding other quotes by Mr. Ben-Gurion making the same point. Example: "We must use terror, assassination, intimidation, land confiscation, and the cutting of all social services to rid the Galilee of its Arab population." (David Ben-Gurion, May 1948, to the General Staff. From Michael Ben-Zohar, Ben-Gurion, A Biography).

Another example: “The Arabs of the land of Israel have only one function left to them -- to run away.” (David Ben-Gurion, quoted in Benny Morris, The Birth of the Palestine Refugee Problem 1947-1949, p. 218)

Both quotes are another way of saying, “We must expel the Arabs and take their land.” However, in an effort to circumvent focus on form rather than content, I’ll cut to the chase. I apologize to Ms. Rosenfeld for having used a contested quote when I could have used uncontested ones to make the same argument. Hopefully she can now address the real point involved here: expulsion and dispossession of a people from land they have continuously lived on for thousands of years.

As to her second point regarding Who-Took-What-From-Whom, read the words spoken in 1938 by Mr. Ben-Gurion: "Let us not ignore the truth among ourselves ... politically we are the aggressors and they [the Palestinians] defend themselves... The country is theirs, because they inhabit it, whereas we want to come here and settle down, and in their view we want to take away from them their country." (David Ben Gurion, quoted on pp 91-2 of Chomsky's Fateful Triangle, which appears in Simha Flapan, Zionism and the Palestinians, pp 141-2, citing a 1938 speech).

Or how about this, again from Mr. Ben-Gurion: “Why should the Arabs make peace? If I was an Arab leader I would never make terms with Israel. That is natural: we have taken their country….There has been anti-Semitism, the Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz, but was that their fault? They may only see one thing: we have come here and stolen their country. Why should they accept that? …” (David Ben-Gurion, quoted in Nahum Goldman, The Jewish Paradox: A personal memoir (1978), trans. by Steve Cox, p. 99).

Mr. Ben-Gurion was not the only Zionist to honestly acknowledge Who-Took-What-From-Whom. Read this from a former Israeli Chief of Military Intelligence: "Because we took the land this gives us the image of being bad, of being aggressive. The Jews always considered that the land belonged to them, but in fact it belonged to the Arabs. I would go further: I would say the original source of this conflict lies with Israel, with the Jews -- and you can quote me." (Yehoshofat Harkabi, former Israeli Chief of Military Intelligence, in "Peace Won't be a Plane Ticket to Cairo," October 1973, p.30).

Now to Ms. Rosenfeld’s last point.

First, a minor correction to her narrative. There were no Qassam rocket attacks against Israel until 2001 -- 35 years after Israel began its occupation of Palestine. Under a 35-year occupation involving confiscation and annexation of their land, demolition of their homes, imprisonment of their children and destruction of their culture, I’d say that demonstrated considerable patience on the part of the Palestinians.

Second, let’s be honest. It’s very sadly true there have been massacres of Jews by Palestinians. It’s also very sadly true there have been massacres of Palestinians by Jews. I think we can agree that no life is worth more than another. But the truth of the matter is the scale of Palestinian attacks is miniscule compared to what Palestinians have endured since 1967 and before. Remember: It’s not Israelis who have been thrown off their land, it’s Palestinians who have been thrown off their land -- over 700,000 of them from Israel since 1948. And it continues. Since 1967 it has been Palestinian homes destroyed by Israelis, Jewish colonies and Jewish colonists colonizing Palestine and attacking Palestinian villages, hundreds of miles of Jewish-only roads built in Palestine, hundreds of Israeli checkpoints pocking the West Bank like a bad case of measles, and thousands of Palestinians languishing in Israeli jails -- not the other way around. Under Israeli occupation the West Bank has been turned into a Bantustan and Palestinians in the Gaza Strip suffer a slow death under a devastating siege.

When someone screams while crushing your neck with their jackboot, “You must recognize my right to exist before we can talk!” -- don’t you think removal of that jackboot might make you more amenable to talking? Hamas sent this message to Israel in 2006:

“…[W]e do not fight you because you belong to a certain faith or culture…. Our conflict with you is not religious but political. We have no problem with Jews who have not attacked us -- our problem is with those who came to our land, imposed themselves on us by force, destroyed our society and banished our people. We shall never recognize the right of any power to rob us of our land and deny us our national rights. We shall never recognize the legitimacy of a Zionist state created on our soil in order to atone for somebody else's sins or solve somebody else's problem. But if you are willing to accept the principle of a long-term truce, we are prepared to negotiate the terms. Hamas is extending a hand of peace to those who are truly interested in a peace based on justice.” (Khaled Meshal, Hamas political bureau, January 31, 2006 after Hamas won parliamentary elections by a landslide but was prevented from taking power by the U.S. and Israel).

I remind Ms. Rosenfeld of Mr. Ben-Gurion’s words: “If I was an Arab leader I would never make terms with Israel. That is natural: we have taken their country….”

It’s good he’s not leader of the Palestinians now. Hamas, the party elected to represent the Palestinian people in 2006 but thwarted by the U.S. and Israel from taking power, is on record as saying it’s willing to make peace with Israel if Israel will withdraw to the pre-1967 borders. Hamas is saying that when the jackboot of occupation is removed, real talks addressing everyone’s right to live in peace and security can begin. It appears that if Mr. Ben-Gurion were still alive, and a Palestinian, he’d advise them differently. Food for thought.

Re: DelMarTimes.net | Solana Beach woman fights off knife attack

Cjemmott — Thu, 21 Oct 2010 16:40:04 -0000

The apartment is kinda crappy, but they did notify the residents today and will be hiring an all-night security guard.

Re: DelMarTimes.net | Budget concerns key topic at high school board candidates forum

Getreal — Thu, 21 Oct 2010 14:54:19 -0000

Groth is not only a hypocrite but is trying to fool the voters into thinking that she is a republican. She is not a republican, so the only reason she is listing herself as "Continuing the Republican Revolution" is that she does not respect the voters. I wonder what else she is trying to trick us on? I say vote no on Groth and all incumbents !

Re: DelMarTimes.net | Budget concerns key topic at high school board candidates forum

Phil — Thu, 21 Oct 2010 14:16:01 -0000

As a audience member at the candidate forum, I must say that I was surprised and dismayed at the lack of preparation and shallow responses offered by both Mr. Salazar and Mr. Brown. Neither seemed very well informed about the actual operational aspects of the District. If they didn't even attend SDUHSD board meetings, how can they have an opinion about the process?