Kelly leads off with a story about a protest in the Spanish embassy in Greece. In doing so, she reveals the activists' respect for authority:
"On July 4, 2011, the Spanish Ambassador to Greece had agreed to meet with only four of the Spanish activists, but at a pre-arranged time, one of the four had gone downstairs, opened the door and ushered in 17 others to help them occupy the Embassy. Today, three days later, they have issued an eloquent statement explaining why they still refuse to leave."You gotta love this thought process among the activists, "Do as we say or else!" If the Spanish Ambassador agrees to meet with a limit of four of them, and then they blatantly break the rules and refuse to leave, they can't really be surprised if the Spanish Ambassador doesn't do what they demand. Isn't bullying people into doing what you want something the activists criticize Israel for doing? And doesn't Greece have the right to maintain its own ports and if Spain interfered, that would be a violation of Greek sovereignty, something else the activists criticize Israel for doing? I guess it's not wrong if Kelly's side is the one doing it.
Kelly then follows up with a lie,
"They call for an end to the illegal blockade of Gaza and for immediate release of their boat so that it can soon reach Gazan shores."This lie has been repeated over and over again for years, but now the UN is expected to prove definitively that the blockade is legal. While we Zionists don't put much stock in the UN's biased opinion, the anti-Zionists do, and this time they should accept a ruling from an organization they allegedly respect so much. Of course, I'm not going to hold my breath waiting for Kelly to post a retraction once the UN report is out. That would be ridiculous.
Kelly then discusses her experiences in Greece, which we don't really care about, and then has an interesting and illuminating paragraph.
And, of course, the plight we want to make visible is not ours but rather that of the Palestinians in Gaza who rarely have an opportunity to raise or amplify their voices. Our guiding question, our rudder, as we contemplate next steps, asks to what extent we can focus world attention on the plight of Palestinians in Gaza. Today, I read an article by Professor Noam Chomsky in which he asked Chris Gunness, a spokesperson for the U.N. Relief and Works Agency in Gaza to describe the humanitarian crisis Gazans face. "If there were no humanitarian crisis, if there weren't a crisis in almost every aspect of life in Gaza there would be no need for the flotilla," said Gunness. "95 percent of all water in Gaza is undrinkable, 40 percent of all disease is water-borne... 45.2 percent of the labor force is unemployed, 80 percent aid dependency, a tripling of the abject poor since the start of the blockade. Let's get rid of this blockade and there would be no need for a flotilla."First of all, the fact that this paragraph is about halfway through the article indicates that the first sentence isn't exactly true. The entire article up until this point is about the plight of the activists and how they aren't allowed to just do whatever they want. But take a look at what Chris Gunness says, specifically the last sentence: "Let's get rid of this blockade and there would be no need for a flotilla". How true that is, if there was no blockade there would be no need for a flotilla. Of course, due to the fact that Nadia Hijab admits the flotilla was never about aid, it's true that even with a blockade there is no need for a flotilla if your goal isn't to help Hamas rearm. But more to the point, how can "we" get rid of the Israeli blockade? As we all know, it take two to fight. There are steps people could take to make Israel remove the blockade, but there are also steps people could take to convince Hamas to take steps to make Israel take down the blockade of its own accord. Israel has made it very clear that simple things like returning Gilad Shalit or signing a peace treaty with Israel will make the blockade end. The problem is, putting pressure on Hamas to do things could actually have serious consequences for the allegedly courageous and peaceful activists. I don't think Hamas would have reacted as nicely to a sit-in as the Spanish. No wonder then that the activists prefer to put pressure on Israel and only Israel to make concessions. They know that they will not be hurt unless they actively attack soldiers.
And then, once again, Kelly lies about the goals and intentions of the flotilla, or in this case the flytilla,
"I and another US Boat to Gaza campaign member, Missy Lane, will head to Tel Aviv, where we plan to be part of a "flytilla," a new campaign which will bring hundreds of activists together in Israel's Ben Gurion airport, all of us intent on reaching Palestinian refugee camps and/or visiting Gazan families."It is obvious to anyone paying attention that it is very easy to get to Gaza through the Rafah crossing in Egypt. You fly to Cairo, get on a bus, wait for hours in the hot sun, and then you get in. That's what the Miles of Smiles convoy was able to accomplish. And then you get to "visit Gazan families", bring aid, or do whatever you want in Gaza. But, as Nadia Hijab admitted, the goal of the activists isn't to get to Gaza, or help Gazans, if doing that doesn't bring publicity or worldwide attention. And Kelly knows that too, in her heart, because she is not taking the path of least resistance to Gaza. So she is lying, her "intent" is to generate more publicity by challenging Israeli authority and making a scene, not "reaching Palestinian refugee camps."
But then comes the most fascinating part of Kelly's article, the veiled anti-Semitism. Read on,
"Several Greek people passing us read our signs seeking freedom for Gaza and asked us to understand that as recently as one year ago, the government of Greece showed no sign of submitting to Israeli or U.S. pressure and allowed international flotilla boats to sail. But, now they are dependent on the whims of financial elites around the world. The IMF is prescribing draconian measures which will wreck their economy and make them subservient to the dictates of foreign multinationals. What would happen if the government defied the masters?"In case that isn't blatant enough, she also says this:
"The Greek government has been told to bend down and kiss the dirt, and if it doesn't do so it will be told to bend down and eat the dirt. "What? Anyway, Kelly claims that the Greek government is being forced to do Israel's bidding by "financial elites". Who exactly are these financial elites, and why are they getting involved with Israel and Gaza? Kelly never says nor offers any proof, assuming perhaps with a wink and a nod her readers will know what she means. If anyone has an interpretation of the phrase "financial elites" who control governments on behalf of Israel as other than the Elders of Zion, let me hear it. Of course the actual reason why Greece did this is ignored in favor of conspiracy theories. It's no surprise that someone who is virulently anti-Israel (not pro-Palestinian) eventually demonstrates what sure sounds like anti-Semitic thoughts and feelings, we've seen it happen dozens of times in the past. Nice to see this "enlightened liberal" Kathy Kelly is no exception.
Then the article ends with some purple prose about the great flotilla activists bringing freedom and peace with their every step. This article is very fascinating and enlightening about the thought process and motivations of at least one flotilla activist, and we should always get to know our intellectual opponents.