Tuesday, February 26, 2008
Gilad Atzmon - Send Them To Gaza: Gimmicks and Education
The Tory leader David Cameron seems to be struggling these days. After calling government funding for school visits to the former Nazi concentration camp at Auschwitz a ‘gimmick’, he’s facing demands for an apology.In a speech on Friday, Cameron accused Prime Minister Gordon Brown's government of being "obsessed with short-term gimmicks", including a recommendation for schools to make "trips to Poland".
The British government announced this month it would give 4.65 million pounds to the Holocaust Educational Trust set up in 1988 to educate young people about the Holocaust. It wouldn't take a genius to guess that the Jewish political institutions in Britain were very quick to tear Cameron apart for his comment.
Henry Grunwald, the president of the Board of Deputies of British Jews said: "The Board of Deputies does not get involved in party politics, but we are surprised and disappointed that David Cameron should in any way have used the word ‘gimmick’ in connection with visits to Auschwitz."
Karen Pollock, the Chief Executive of the Holocaust Educational Trust, said, "We do not want to be involved in party politics. But you should not use visits to Auschwitz to score political points."
Seemingly, both Pollock and Grunwald do not like to get involved in 'party politics'. For that purpose they have some very dedicated agents such as Lord Levy, David Abrahams, the Tory Friends of Israel and the Labour Friends of Israel.
The Conservative party was very quick to understand the message. It immediately surrendered to the 'non-political' pressure. Within hours, the Tory spokesman said: "School trips to Auschwitz are a brilliant idea."
Trying to quell the storm, the Conservative spokesman said, "Cameron was not criticising the visits, but rather the fact that the government funding did not cover their entire cost."
Very much like Grunwald and Pollock, I would refrain from interfering with British politics, yet I may suggest that Cameron was absolutely correct. The trips to Auschwitz are indeed a gimmick. As far as I can see, the educational value of these trips is counter-effective.
Unlike Karen Pollock from the Holocaust Educational Trust, who said, "Students use their experience to raise awareness of the lessons of the Holocaust in their schools and local communities, challenging prejudice and racism today," I am convinced that trips to Auschwitz are there to divert the attention from crimes that are committed on a daily basis in before our very eyes and in our names. The trips to Auschwitz are there to silence ethical awareness. They are there to shutter the possibility of self-reflection.
It is indeed rather easy for the British government to spend some money trying to teach young students how bad the Nazis were 63 years ago. Yet, it is far more challenging for the British government and British educational institutes to confront British wrongdoing in the past and in the present.
Instead of sending British youngsters to Auschwitz, I would suggest spending governmental funds on student trips to Gaza concentration camp. This would have a far greater educational value in so as far as challenging 'racism and prejudice'. Clearly it is in Gaza where millions of Palestinians are starved by the Jewish state while the West keeps silent.
Britain bears some direct responsibility for the Palestinian tragedy. Firstly, the Palestinian disaster was set by the British Empire. It may have started with the Balfour Declaration, but it matured into devastating ethnic cleansing in 1948, three years after the liberation of Auschwitz. Secondly, whichever way we decide to look at the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the Palestinians are the last victims of Hitler and the genocide in Gaza is a Shoah in the making.
If Karen Pollock is truly concerned with 'racism and prejudice', Gaza is the place to send the British kids to, so they can come home and ask their grandparents: 'Grandpa, what did you do when it all happened 60 years ago?' We have to send our kids to Gaza so they can come home and ask their parents: 'Mum, what can we do to help the Palestinians?'
If Karen Pollock still wants to increase our kids' ethical awareness, yet she might not be convinced that Gaza is the place to do so, she may also want to consider sending our youth to Basra or Baghdad. At the end of the day, the genocide of the Iraqi people, in which one and a half million Iraqis have died so far, is a war crime committed also by the current British Government.
But on second thought, there is no point in sending young British students to Baghdad; they can go there as soon they finish school. They can then participate and contribute to this very contemporary Holocaust that is being committed by Britain and America in the name of democracy and neo-conservative ideology, all they have to do is just join the British armed forces.
Labels: Atzmon, Gaza, holocaust, propaganda, UK
Wednesday, February 13, 2008
Miguel Martinez - Looking for the King of Copy and Paste
Translated by Ernesto Páramo. Revised by author
Two days after the FARC guerrillas delivered two kidnapped parliamentarians to president Chávez of Venezuela, the Spanish newspaper El Pais followed by many other mass media outlets everywhere, was determined to confuse its readership and nip in the bud all reports of a significant news item which could have given us hope for the future. This event was, however, against their political editorial line, so they replaced it with a pseudo-report entitled " Are Hugo Chávez and Naomi Campbell engaged?"
In Italy, the press behaved in a similar fashion. Israel managed to snatch the role of guest of honour at the Turin Book Fair away from Egypt, to whom the event had been solemnly promised: thus, in the sixtieth anniversary of the Palestinian Nakba, two of the three great publishing events (Turin and Paris) are both dedicated to Israel this year (Frankfurt was dedicated to Israel in 2005). Repubblica, the leading Italian daily close to the centre-left, replied by devoting its front page and two full pages inside to a weird and unknown blog which had copied a list of signatories to a pro-Israel petition that had been in the public domain for months: La Repubblica pretended that the appearance of this list on the blog was a clear sign of a dangerous anti-Semitic revival.
Note from the Spanish translator Juan Vivanco
In Italy there are probably at least half a million, perhaps a million blogs.
Because of inevitable statistical constraints, we have to assume that a small proportion of these blogs – which still could amount to something like 10.000 - are written by mad people.
Now, “Mad“ is a strictly scientific term, which does not refer to the contents, but to a series of unequivocal psychoelectronic indicators. For example, the random use of capital letters (known as CapsLock syndrome).
Among these mad characters, there is one that likes to be known as KING SHAULOS II, and up to yesterday, His Majesty had a blog covered with banners reading “ NO TO TURKEY IN EUROPE ”. Actually he does not use random capital letters: he uses nothing but capital letters.
And he proclaims to be the only sovereign of THE CHRISTIAN WEST, clearly under “JESUS VINCIT-REGNAT-IMPERAT IN LISBON AND IN SAINT PETERSBURG, THERE IS ONLY ONE KING – THE KING OF KINGS”.
On the pages of his blog we can also see the image of the Three Kings, and more significantly, a True Portrait of His Majesty SHAULOS in person:
The blog is also full of useful advice:
“THE INSTANT THAT SYNCHRONIZES THE PRESENT IS THE WILL OF GOD, KING SHAULOS II”
His political program is very clear:
ELECTIONS:
“LET'S ADOPT ISRAELI ELECTORAL LAW –
LET'S PRESERVE THE ITALIAN CHARACTER OF DEMOCRACY,
LET'S PREVENT THE CONTAMINATION OF ITALIAN IDENTITY BY ISLAM AND JUDAISM”
In short, he is as twisted as the late Oriana Fallaci, with the difference that he adds Judaism to his pet hates (…).
I have seen the King's blog a couple of times, and it has given me some cheerful laughs (I know, we should not laugh at mad people, but I have never claimed to be politically correct).
However, this morning I saw him again.
On the front page of Repubblica. Plus, they dedicated the whole of pages 10 and 11 to him.
Just a question… how much would it cost a run of the mill blogger to buy all that newspaper space?
The headlines are simply fantastic:
Black list of Jews “return to fascism”
On the Net, the black list of Jewish teachers
Amato [ Interior Minister]: An offense against the law and against civilization
The blog closed, the hunt is on for the author. "We will get him”
Public derision, just as during fascism
Memory must be studied at University to put a stop to hate
Too dangerous a climate, according to the University's point of view.
Code name H5N1, a year of poison sown in the internet
The alarm of the Department of the Interior …Anti-Semitism is reborn in Italy in this way
As you get your breath back, let's try to understand exactly what His Majesty did. First, what is all that about a “Jews black list”?
Very simple. It is the list of signatories of an appeal “against anti-Semitism ” that has been in the public domain for a long time.
If you read the petition, you will see that it has nothing to do with anti-Semitism, and everything to do with the State of Israel (yes, the usual, "those who fight on behalf of the native Palestinians population are anti-Semitic”).
So public was the petition that the promoters bought space in the newspaper Corriere della Sera to publish it, on 14th May 2005.
The space was not bought by the Neonazi International but by “Luzzato Amos, President of the Union of Jewish Italian Communities”. This means, that those on the list paid to publish their full names in a newspaper that sells a million copies a day, if my memory serves me right.
Three months ago (15.11.2007) [1] His Majesty King Shaulos II, with a simple copy and paste job, took the list from a Jewish web-page and put it on his blog (ten readers a day?) with this presentation:
“THIS IS A LIST OF THE JEWISH UNIVERSITY PROFESORS WHO DECLARE OPENLY THEIR SUPPORT FOR ISRAEL”
A piece of nonsense, since the majority of the professors on the list are right wing extremists, racial segregation fanatics and genocide apologists, they are anything, but Jewish.
On the other hand, no one has said that Shaulos II was a wise king.
As it happens, he did not compile the “black list” himself.
The supposedly black-listed put it together themselves (…).
However, now His Majesty King Shaulos II will have to face the Jewish community who call him “ a cancer that can propagate and affect anyone ”, the Chancellor of Rome's University says “ it is an unacceptable act of intolerance ”, the Chancellor of the other Roman university of Tor Vergata, Alessandro Agro, calls for the King to be jailed (being a King, I suppose to be guillottined). ” And also, he will have to face the whole Italian people, as Walter Veltroni, leader of the centre-left (and the enemy and scourge of gypsies) assures us.
Ready for the fight, the Minister of the University said his whole ministry would “pursue charges in court against the the authors of the list”.
The authors of the list, let us not forget, are Amos Luzzato and the Corriere della Sera.
Soon, Shaulos II will have to face scores of accusations from all the interested parties. The newspaper La Repubblica assures us that the professors are going to take him to court for libel.
Let’s see. The blogger has said (erroneously) that all those on the list are Jewish and (correctly) that they are all apologists of Israel.
Wonder which of the two statements they will sue him for.
Note:
[1] In other words, both I and those “included on the black list ” have had time to find that the list existed. After all, something called Google exists.
This means these people kept silent until the scandal of how Israel stole from Egypt the place of honor at the Turin Book Fair blew up in their faces. (see the document in Italian).
Source: http://kelebek.splinder.com/post/15873818/ Original article published on 9th February, 2008
About the author Miguel Martínez and Ernesto Páramo are members of Tlaxcala, the network of translators for linguistic diversity. This translation may be reprinted as long as the content remains unaltered, and the source, author, translator and reviser are cited.
URL of this article on Tlaxcala: http://www.tlaxcala.es/pp.asp?reference=4646&lg=en
French Spanish Italian
Two days after the FARC guerrillas delivered two kidnapped parliamentarians to president Chávez of Venezuela, the Spanish newspaper El Pais followed by many other mass media outlets everywhere, was determined to confuse its readership and nip in the bud all reports of a significant news item which could have given us hope for the future. This event was, however, against their political editorial line, so they replaced it with a pseudo-report entitled " Are Hugo Chávez and Naomi Campbell engaged?"
In Italy, the press behaved in a similar fashion. Israel managed to snatch the role of guest of honour at the Turin Book Fair away from Egypt, to whom the event had been solemnly promised: thus, in the sixtieth anniversary of the Palestinian Nakba, two of the three great publishing events (Turin and Paris) are both dedicated to Israel this year (Frankfurt was dedicated to Israel in 2005). Repubblica, the leading Italian daily close to the centre-left, replied by devoting its front page and two full pages inside to a weird and unknown blog which had copied a list of signatories to a pro-Israel petition that had been in the public domain for months: La Repubblica pretended that the appearance of this list on the blog was a clear sign of a dangerous anti-Semitic revival.
Note from the Spanish translator Juan Vivanco
In Italy there are probably at least half a million, perhaps a million blogs.
Because of inevitable statistical constraints, we have to assume that a small proportion of these blogs – which still could amount to something like 10.000 - are written by mad people.
Now, “Mad“ is a strictly scientific term, which does not refer to the contents, but to a series of unequivocal psychoelectronic indicators. For example, the random use of capital letters (known as CapsLock syndrome).
Among these mad characters, there is one that likes to be known as KING SHAULOS II, and up to yesterday, His Majesty had a blog covered with banners reading “ NO TO TURKEY IN EUROPE ”. Actually he does not use random capital letters: he uses nothing but capital letters.
And he proclaims to be the only sovereign of THE CHRISTIAN WEST, clearly under “JESUS VINCIT-REGNAT-IMPERAT IN LISBON AND IN SAINT PETERSBURG, THERE IS ONLY ONE KING – THE KING OF KINGS”.
On the pages of his blog we can also see the image of the Three Kings, and more significantly, a True Portrait of His Majesty SHAULOS in person:
The blog is also full of useful advice:“THE INSTANT THAT SYNCHRONIZES THE PRESENT IS THE WILL OF GOD, KING SHAULOS II”
His political program is very clear:
ELECTIONS:
“LET'S ADOPT ISRAELI ELECTORAL LAW –
LET'S PRESERVE THE ITALIAN CHARACTER OF DEMOCRACY,
LET'S PREVENT THE CONTAMINATION OF ITALIAN IDENTITY BY ISLAM AND JUDAISM”
In short, he is as twisted as the late Oriana Fallaci, with the difference that he adds Judaism to his pet hates (…).
I have seen the King's blog a couple of times, and it has given me some cheerful laughs (I know, we should not laugh at mad people, but I have never claimed to be politically correct).
However, this morning I saw him again.
On the front page of Repubblica. Plus, they dedicated the whole of pages 10 and 11 to him.
Just a question… how much would it cost a run of the mill blogger to buy all that newspaper space?
The headlines are simply fantastic:
Black list of Jews “return to fascism”
On the Net, the black list of Jewish teachers
Amato [ Interior Minister]: An offense against the law and against civilization
The blog closed, the hunt is on for the author. "We will get him”
Public derision, just as during fascism
Memory must be studied at University to put a stop to hate
Too dangerous a climate, according to the University's point of view.
Code name H5N1, a year of poison sown in the internet
The alarm of the Department of the Interior …Anti-Semitism is reborn in Italy in this way
As you get your breath back, let's try to understand exactly what His Majesty did. First, what is all that about a “Jews black list”?
Very simple. It is the list of signatories of an appeal “against anti-Semitism ” that has been in the public domain for a long time.
If you read the petition, you will see that it has nothing to do with anti-Semitism, and everything to do with the State of Israel (yes, the usual, "those who fight on behalf of the native Palestinians population are anti-Semitic”).
So public was the petition that the promoters bought space in the newspaper Corriere della Sera to publish it, on 14th May 2005.
The space was not bought by the Neonazi International but by “Luzzato Amos, President of the Union of Jewish Italian Communities”. This means, that those on the list paid to publish their full names in a newspaper that sells a million copies a day, if my memory serves me right.
Three months ago (15.11.2007) [1] His Majesty King Shaulos II, with a simple copy and paste job, took the list from a Jewish web-page and put it on his blog (ten readers a day?) with this presentation:
“THIS IS A LIST OF THE JEWISH UNIVERSITY PROFESORS WHO DECLARE OPENLY THEIR SUPPORT FOR ISRAEL”
A piece of nonsense, since the majority of the professors on the list are right wing extremists, racial segregation fanatics and genocide apologists, they are anything, but Jewish.
On the other hand, no one has said that Shaulos II was a wise king.
As it happens, he did not compile the “black list” himself.
The supposedly black-listed put it together themselves (…).
However, now His Majesty King Shaulos II will have to face the Jewish community who call him “ a cancer that can propagate and affect anyone ”, the Chancellor of Rome's University says “ it is an unacceptable act of intolerance ”, the Chancellor of the other Roman university of Tor Vergata, Alessandro Agro, calls for the King to be jailed (being a King, I suppose to be guillottined). ” And also, he will have to face the whole Italian people, as Walter Veltroni, leader of the centre-left (and the enemy and scourge of gypsies) assures us.
Ready for the fight, the Minister of the University said his whole ministry would “pursue charges in court against the the authors of the list”.
The authors of the list, let us not forget, are Amos Luzzato and the Corriere della Sera.
Soon, Shaulos II will have to face scores of accusations from all the interested parties. The newspaper La Repubblica assures us that the professors are going to take him to court for libel.
Let’s see. The blogger has said (erroneously) that all those on the list are Jewish and (correctly) that they are all apologists of Israel.
Wonder which of the two statements they will sue him for.
Note:
[1] In other words, both I and those “included on the black list ” have had time to find that the list existed. After all, something called Google exists.
This means these people kept silent until the scandal of how Israel stole from Egypt the place of honor at the Turin Book Fair blew up in their faces. (see the document in Italian).
Source: http://kelebek.splinder.com/post/15873818/ Original article published on 9th February, 2008
About the author Miguel Martínez and Ernesto Páramo are members of Tlaxcala, the network of translators for linguistic diversity. This translation may be reprinted as long as the content remains unaltered, and the source, author, translator and reviser are cited.
URL of this article on Tlaxcala: http://www.tlaxcala.es/pp.asp?reference=4646&lg=en
French Spanish Italian
Labels: absolute madness, anti-Semitism, documents, hasbara, Israel, Italy, journalism, propaganda, Tlaxcala
Wednesday, January 23, 2008
Razan al Ghazzawi - Very Important Rockets
from the outstanding blog Decentering Damascus , an important reflection on how we are "reading" this crisis, and a call to widen our expectations about what is important for Gazans and Palestinians to have. Not just food and gas, but a decent, normal life. (in the photo, Razan with other bloggers in Syria). -mary I don’t appreciate it when Arab bloggers or Arab media agencies report and cover the Gaza blockade merely by talking about the death of children and women – I’m not sure why men's lives don’t count – as if the problem is not death in itself but the “death-of-children”. So the counter argument of Israelis would be by starting counting the Palestinian children who've died due the siege and support their arguments with the lack of recourses:
"More Muslim mendacity. If children were indeed starving, why are there no photos of their swollen bellies?"
According to this logic, one can argue that since there are no photos of the Holocaust Gas chambers in which the Jews were collectively massacred by the Nazis, then one could surmise that the Gas chambers didn't exist.
To get back to my point, the argument to oppose the Israeli apartheid policies on the Gazans and Palestinians in general shouldn’t be through counting/demonstrating dead children and women or even to focus merely on the inhumane situations in which the Palestinians are living, but the argument should address the "apartheid racist logic" that produced such inhumane practices. My problem is not "bringing up" the victims in the Gaza blockade coverage but rather making it "the" argument to oppose Israel as a counter argument. Death, shortage of fuel, food and medicine are only the "visible" practices of an Israeli apartheid state, they're not "the" problem of this state and hence they shouldn’t be our rhetoric and our defense against Israel.
It seems that we have the right to "speak", so loudly, against Israel when we have a picture of a child dying that without this child, we wouldn’t have a case against Israel's inhumane blockade of Gaza.
The Arab rhetoric should renew its arguments, that again, are bombastic and not strategically analytical in reading their own realities in relation to the enemy or in reading the enemy's strategy that constantly presents itself as a "prior" party in the "Palestinian-Israeli struggle." The thing that would damage the core of the Palestinian cause when readers would support us merely as sympathizers with the dead children and not as supporters to Palestinians' right to live securely and equally to the Israeli citizen.
Having said that, I have something to say about the Israeli right of self-defense against Qassam rockets.
Before assuming there is an opponent struggle taking place between the Israelis and Palestinians, one should agree then that the two parties, equally, have the basic right to live peacefully and securely, and accordingly have the right of self-defense. But when Israel, supported by the UN, US and Europe, keep prioritizing the Israeli citizens at the expense of the Palestinian citizens, one should not adhere to the term "Israel-Palestine struggle" since it suggests adversaries. In "Israel-Palestine struggle" there is one party -Israel- who has the right to have a life, hence the right of self-defense, and for that right, it has the right to control the other party's right to live peacefully: it decides on behalf of the Gazans how they should live: "not easily", and block their access to fuel, food and medicine and arbitrary night-raid their homes on their heads.
This Israeli right to live and right of self-defense is embedded in every single report, with or against Israel’s complete closure of Gaza Strip:
“We all understand the security problems and the need to respond to that but collective punishment of the people of Gaza is not, we believe, the appropriate way to do that,” said John Holmes.
So while the world agrees on Israelis right to live securely, the world is sympathizing with Gazans lack of fuel, food and medicine. i.e., lack of life.
With Israel the rhetoric is about its safety and its right to exist and for that it has the right to defend this very existence and life, but with the Palestinians, the rhetoric comes as the right to eat, to have hospitals and the right to be warm in winter.
Palestinians don’t have the right to have a life, nor the right to exist, and certainly not the right to defend themselves, Palestinians are not equal to Israelis, they're inferior. They have the right to be merely fed. While the Israelis are always remembered, the dying Gazans are just now remembered.
Again, the world does prioritize Israelis as they support the Gazans now.
And the Arabs celebrate this utterly biased stand with the Israeli right to be secure when their mere opposition to the siege is dealt on humanitarian basis while they should be arguing for the Palestinians’ right to live equally as the Israelis, securely and peacefully, not just in regards with their basic needs to survive.
Furthermore, all the reports seem to be embeddedly convinced that Israel’s siege on Gaza is a "reaction" to Qassam rockets when they recognize Israel's right to self-defense but shifts its attention to Gazans humanitarian rights. I find this rhetoric as apologetic to Israel’s terrorist policies with the Palestinians: linkage, between Qassam rockets and Israel’s two years siege on Gaza is dealt with on one level, as if the damage on both sides are similar. Let's take a look at Gaza's damages from the siege:
68 Patients killed by Israeli Occupation due to Closure!
1562 patients in need of treatment outside Gaza Strip
322 patients are in serious danger and in need of urgent treatment
22 money holistic are suspended from work due to the siege
107 class of basic medicines are depleted from Gaza Strip
97 sorts of medicines on the verge of depletion
136 medical instrument are stopped or our of order
6 months, Gaza with closed crossings and borders
160 thousand workers are out of work
3000 fishermen become out of work due to siege
$370 millions are the costs of stalled construction projects
$14 million are the wastage of strawberry and flowers season
4500 strawberry farmers become out of work
470 cancer patients are likely to die
And on the Israeli side:
Homemade rockets have killed in a most updated report 12 Israelis including three children, according to Israeli Defence Forces.
Yoram Schweitzer of Tel Aviv's Jaffee Centre for Strategic Studies comments:
"Qassams are very primitive missiles and their main effect on Israelis in the area is psychological torment - a kind of Chinese water torture."
So I wonder how can psychological insecurities be considered parallel to Palestinian damages mentioned above, and how can two years of siege is considered as a reaction to these primitive rockets? Hence the linkage that is meant to be apologetic to war crimes committed on civilians to maintain security not to the lives of Israelis, but to their psychological situation.
I find the argument in B’Tselem report on the closure of Gaza Strip situation stands in its own to unfolding the truth behind the Israeli siege on Gaza:
"Israeli authorities often exploit security threats in order to advance prohibited political interests under the guise of security."
Indeed, Sderot is inhabited by "Mizrachi" Jews and not by Azhkenazis, some of the inhabitants feel insecure not only from the Qassam rockets but by the racist Israeli government:
"The worst part of all this isn't the rocket fire - it's the fact that the government just doesn't care," said a Sderot settler.
"More Muslim mendacity. If children were indeed starving, why are there no photos of their swollen bellies?"
According to this logic, one can argue that since there are no photos of the Holocaust Gas chambers in which the Jews were collectively massacred by the Nazis, then one could surmise that the Gas chambers didn't exist.
To get back to my point, the argument to oppose the Israeli apartheid policies on the Gazans and Palestinians in general shouldn’t be through counting/demonstrating dead children and women or even to focus merely on the inhumane situations in which the Palestinians are living, but the argument should address the "apartheid racist logic" that produced such inhumane practices. My problem is not "bringing up" the victims in the Gaza blockade coverage but rather making it "the" argument to oppose Israel as a counter argument. Death, shortage of fuel, food and medicine are only the "visible" practices of an Israeli apartheid state, they're not "the" problem of this state and hence they shouldn’t be our rhetoric and our defense against Israel.
It seems that we have the right to "speak", so loudly, against Israel when we have a picture of a child dying that without this child, we wouldn’t have a case against Israel's inhumane blockade of Gaza.
The Arab rhetoric should renew its arguments, that again, are bombastic and not strategically analytical in reading their own realities in relation to the enemy or in reading the enemy's strategy that constantly presents itself as a "prior" party in the "Palestinian-Israeli struggle." The thing that would damage the core of the Palestinian cause when readers would support us merely as sympathizers with the dead children and not as supporters to Palestinians' right to live securely and equally to the Israeli citizen.
Having said that, I have something to say about the Israeli right of self-defense against Qassam rockets.
Before assuming there is an opponent struggle taking place between the Israelis and Palestinians, one should agree then that the two parties, equally, have the basic right to live peacefully and securely, and accordingly have the right of self-defense. But when Israel, supported by the UN, US and Europe, keep prioritizing the Israeli citizens at the expense of the Palestinian citizens, one should not adhere to the term "Israel-Palestine struggle" since it suggests adversaries. In "Israel-Palestine struggle" there is one party -Israel- who has the right to have a life, hence the right of self-defense, and for that right, it has the right to control the other party's right to live peacefully: it decides on behalf of the Gazans how they should live: "not easily", and block their access to fuel, food and medicine and arbitrary night-raid their homes on their heads.
This Israeli right to live and right of self-defense is embedded in every single report, with or against Israel’s complete closure of Gaza Strip:
“We all understand the security problems and the need to respond to that but collective punishment of the people of Gaza is not, we believe, the appropriate way to do that,” said John Holmes.
So while the world agrees on Israelis right to live securely, the world is sympathizing with Gazans lack of fuel, food and medicine. i.e., lack of life.
With Israel the rhetoric is about its safety and its right to exist and for that it has the right to defend this very existence and life, but with the Palestinians, the rhetoric comes as the right to eat, to have hospitals and the right to be warm in winter.
Palestinians don’t have the right to have a life, nor the right to exist, and certainly not the right to defend themselves, Palestinians are not equal to Israelis, they're inferior. They have the right to be merely fed. While the Israelis are always remembered, the dying Gazans are just now remembered.
Again, the world does prioritize Israelis as they support the Gazans now.
And the Arabs celebrate this utterly biased stand with the Israeli right to be secure when their mere opposition to the siege is dealt on humanitarian basis while they should be arguing for the Palestinians’ right to live equally as the Israelis, securely and peacefully, not just in regards with their basic needs to survive.
Furthermore, all the reports seem to be embeddedly convinced that Israel’s siege on Gaza is a "reaction" to Qassam rockets when they recognize Israel's right to self-defense but shifts its attention to Gazans humanitarian rights. I find this rhetoric as apologetic to Israel’s terrorist policies with the Palestinians: linkage, between Qassam rockets and Israel’s two years siege on Gaza is dealt with on one level, as if the damage on both sides are similar. Let's take a look at Gaza's damages from the siege:
68 Patients killed by Israeli Occupation due to Closure!
1562 patients in need of treatment outside Gaza Strip
322 patients are in serious danger and in need of urgent treatment
22 money holistic are suspended from work due to the siege
107 class of basic medicines are depleted from Gaza Strip
97 sorts of medicines on the verge of depletion
136 medical instrument are stopped or our of order
6 months, Gaza with closed crossings and borders
160 thousand workers are out of work
3000 fishermen become out of work due to siege
$370 millions are the costs of stalled construction projects
$14 million are the wastage of strawberry and flowers season
4500 strawberry farmers become out of work
470 cancer patients are likely to die
And on the Israeli side:
Homemade rockets have killed in a most updated report 12 Israelis including three children, according to Israeli Defence Forces.
Yoram Schweitzer of Tel Aviv's Jaffee Centre for Strategic Studies comments:
"Qassams are very primitive missiles and their main effect on Israelis in the area is psychological torment - a kind of Chinese water torture."
So I wonder how can psychological insecurities be considered parallel to Palestinian damages mentioned above, and how can two years of siege is considered as a reaction to these primitive rockets? Hence the linkage that is meant to be apologetic to war crimes committed on civilians to maintain security not to the lives of Israelis, but to their psychological situation.
I find the argument in B’Tselem report on the closure of Gaza Strip situation stands in its own to unfolding the truth behind the Israeli siege on Gaza:
"Israeli authorities often exploit security threats in order to advance prohibited political interests under the guise of security."
Indeed, Sderot is inhabited by "Mizrachi" Jews and not by Azhkenazis, some of the inhabitants feel insecure not only from the Qassam rockets but by the racist Israeli government:
"The worst part of all this isn't the rocket fire - it's the fact that the government just doesn't care," said a Sderot settler.
I reject the article altogether and I think it sheds light on something that can be useful to unfolding Israeli government's lies in claiming its "need to protect" its settlers; they're not killing civilians "for" Sderot settlers but "against" Gazans' political background; i.e., Hamas. So the Siege is strictly practiced for political reasons and not for security reasons.
Why is Israel targeting Hamas now? This is where my amateur analysis ends.
Why is Israel targeting Hamas now? This is where my amateur analysis ends.
http://ya-ashrafe-nnas.blogspot.com/2008/01/very-important-rockets.html Be sure to check out the Flickr photo sets. She is an extraordinarily talented photographer too.
Labels: absolute madness, activism, Arab countries, Gaza, hasbara, human rights violations, journalism, occupation, Palestine, propaganda
Tuesday, January 15, 2008
Some Human Beings are More Human than Others
Why ethnic campaigning can be unethical
by Mary Rizzo
This blog recently has had some attention from Tony Greenstein. Taking a detour from his general direction of activism (sic) which boils down to exclusively attacking a growing list of other Pro-Palestinian activists - posting the same article that has been proven to be a misrepresentation consisting of a series of out-of-context quotes and insinuations about Gilad Atzmon - he’s using the same method, wallpapering every spot he can think of with his rantings using an identical post (to get the most mileage out of it, I suppose) that my blog is an Anti-Semitic sewer because it had this:
He stated:
“Under a title ‘Peacepalestine Offers Prisoner Exchange’ are four photographs of Ariel Sharon, Gilad Shalit, David Hirsh and myself, with what presumably are supposed to be wanted posters bearing our names, photographs, the title ‘human being’ (presumably this is disputed) and then, in reverse video the word ‘JEW’. All that is missing is the yellow star, but I’m sure Rizzo will manage to find a graphic artist up to the task.”
He then emphasizes that this is “clearly racist and anti-Semitic”.
Well, finally Tony Greenstein and I can partially agree on something. Gilad Atzmon and I have been stressing for years now that asking people to take action or to influence them by merit of some ethnically-based criterion is simply a racist way of thinking and operating, and Tony finally admits as much. If we are people, it shouldn’t matter one iota what group we are born or raised into. Ideologies are mindsets that are not "genetically instilled" and can be adopted or cast off or used at will. We can’t accept an objective ethnic belonging that carries no merit or defect as such, as an ethical device or even a way to persuade people. Ideologies matter, ethnic belonging does not. Belonging to one group or another should be irrelevant when trying to persude people of the value of an argument and influence their opinions. We should move beyond the stage of focussing on a person according to race, sex, religion, nationality or political leaning, and listen to their arguments.
It is too bad that Tony feels the need to continually insist on telling us that he was “The only Jewish speaker” at this meeting or that. Gosh, I didn’t know that there is a census made of the ethnic or religious belonging of the people who speak at meetings and that Tony was privy to that information. He also believes that Jews have special sensitivity to racism. “Jews, of all people, should be the first to oppose racism, whoever the victims and the perpetrators,” he says. While at the same time, he knows how (presumably all) Blacks must feel about it, refering to one of his interlocutors, so that he can be easily identified, apparently, as “a Black Sudanese guy”: “But again Black people have better understanding of racism than white ex-councillors”. (Following this logic, if the white ex-councillors are Jewish, they should be the first to oppose the racism, but other whites certainly are lacking in this moral characteristic.) If one were to judge the way he writes, it seems he does indeed think in racial stereotypes and categories and can’t resist mentioning it as if it were the normal thing to do. Yet, on the other hand, he insists that race does not exist, er… rather, it is a political construct. “Just to be clear. Zionism isn't based on a race, nor is German anti-Semitism for the simple reason there are no such things as race. Race is a political construct.” (Alef message 5 January, 2008) Whether or not there is such a thing as race seems to be a matter of debate for geneticists, and we’ve all seen acceptable arguments from both sides of the debate. Tony is extremely “ethnically aware”, and this is absolutely crystal clear in almost every intervention he has on internet. One might say that it borders on an obsession. Whites, Blacks, Jews, Non-Jews, hardly a single thing he has written escapes this ethnic (or racial, if you like) labeling, complete with a categorical judgment of the sensitivity each group must have to racism issues a priori of their personal experiences. What DOES seem interesting is the fact that when TONY stresses his ethnicity, in his worldview, it’s a good and positive thing. When OTHER people do it, as the Shalit campaigners do, or those who spoof it, as Peacepalestine has done, it’s clearly racist and anti-Semitic. I wish he would make up his mind one way or the other.
I agree that the campaign for Gilad Shalit is clearly racist, but it is far from being anti-Semitic. They will have to presumably find someone to paste in that Yellow Star as Tony suggests, not because the campaign is anti-Semitic, but because it represents to perfection the Jewish Victim role, the only way we are supposed to feel about Jews, especially Israeli ones. To justify what Israel does, we have to know they are clearly victims of some irrational hatred based on the simple fact that they are Jews in an Arab world hostile to their very existence. The Yellow Star would be an apt symbol of the victim paradigm that we should never forget or place into any context, no matter what. Jews are and will be the eternal victim, and you better get the idea that they act only out of reasons of defense. Being victims, we have to empathise with their plight in all instances.
The identifying label of the righteous victim is used to influence people and suspend any other kind of rational thinking or judgment. The innocent victim status is used in the Shalit campaign to instill an idea that goes against reality. We have to suspend our judgment on the role that he fulfilled. We have to think that a soldier who was in an Occupation army, in occupied territory AS an occupier, not a journalist or excursionist, there to render the lives of the people under Occupation a hell on earth and endanger their very safety with his presence, was just an innocent child who needs to be returned to his worried parents. He has become the centre of a “humanitarian” campaign that has very little to do with humanity, despite the text one can read on the banner.
This campaign has been going on for a while. Anyone who has seen even one blog by Israel supporters has bumped into it. It’s really hard to remain indifferent to. Indeed, the graphic artists felt it NECESSARY to point out that Shalit is a Human being. Oh, yes, and a Jew as well. Generally, members of Homo Sapiens Sapiens ARE considered to be Human beings and we don’t need to be told, even though the pictures of Shalit bring more the idea of a lost puppy to mind.
And we all know that if Shalit was an IDF member, well, he could have been nothing other than Jewish. Tony was shocked at the horrible sort of racist labeling. As a matter of fact, he thought it was something I dreamed up myself and not a parody. He was unaware of this campaign. Where has he been hiding? The amount of posts he leaves around would indicate that he’s online a hell of a lot of hours in a day. A legitimate question to ask is what precisely does he do other than post his own repetitious text? He claims that he fights Zionism, but he has NEVER seen a Zionist site or blog since the day of the campaign??? That is longer than a year. How can one fight the enemy if one does not even know what the enemy is up to? Or maybe he’s seen it, but is pretending righteous indignation in order to influence people who may not be familiar with the propaganda tools of Zionism so that they come to think of my blog in the same jaundiced way he does. He obviously detests it, because it exposes his endless smear and silencing campaigns against Gilad Atzmon. Yet, to call it a rightwing blog with an anti-Semitic and conspiracist agenda is really pushing it. Apparently, he may need to convince himself more than he does others. And with the three-person following he has, he has to work harder on it, apparently.
But, leaving aside this provincial matter for the moment, I shall return to the issue of humanity and the Gilad Shalit campaign. I had the good fortune of working for several years in a major advertising agency as a copy editor and then copywriter. Our clients would show us their new product and we would have to come up with an appropriate campaign. The first thing one has to do is to “frame the target”. You have to know who you are trying to convince, and you have to use a language that will appeal to them on even a subconscious level. You have to reach them, then you have to influence them. Later, they will become an additional and correlated (not to mention cost-free) advertising element, by driving around on your motorcycle (in the case of the campaigns I managed).
Bringing that knowledge to the Shalit campaign, we see this: our target probably is NOT the group or individuals that hold Shalit. Most likely, they would not be overly sensitive to the fact that he is a Jew, or at least, this would not be the aspect of his being that would influence them the most. Perhaps those who created the campaign feel that those holding him in captivity are unaware that he is a human, so they have to spell it out, but I tend to believe that since the advert is in English and in Hebrew, our target is the Zio-blogosphere. So, the banner gets picked up and distributed on sites where people go who support Israel or at least aren’t blatantly or even latently pro-Palestinian. I have never seen the banner on a single pro-Palestinian site. Correct me, someone, if I am wrong and it is posted on some site of the sort.
The language then, has got to appeal to the crowd that follows the Zio-blogosphere. It is “normal” for them, I guess, to believe racial profiling is acceptable. If you are a Jew, anyway, and you are a Jew who is doing it, however. I doubt they would be convinced that Tony is right and that it is anti-Semitic. If I were still in advertising and worked on this campaign, I am pretty sure they would like the Yellow Star, though, and should consider integrating it into future versions of the campaign (all campaigns require a refresher in order to remain effective).
Now, what is the most interesting aspect of the entire campaign, attempting to appeal to the humanitarian aspect of the crisis, is we see just how the people who support this campaign think. Take a look at http://giladshalit.blogspot.com/ and see that there is a poll asking the following question:
Poll: One Year On. What should the Israeli Government do?
What action should the Israeli Government take now that Hamas has clear control of Gaza and it has been 1 year since Gilad Shalit was been kidnapped
Negotiate with Hamas
Negotiate with Hamas, release as many prisoners as it takes
Hold the Hamas Leadership directly accountable
Hold the Leadership accountable and give them one final deadline before military action
Hold Leadership accountable, give deadline for military action and total cessation of all Israeli supplied electricty and Water.
view results
Well, how do you think that the public answered as of today's date?
Let me show you the results:
What action should the Israeli Government take now that Hamas has clear control of Gaza and it has been 1 year since Gilad Shalit has been kidnapped
Negotiate with Hamas 18% 127
Negotiate with Hamas, release as many prisoners as it takes 14% 97
Hold the Hamas Leadership directly accountable 10% 72
Hold the Leadership accountable and give them another final deadline before military action 10% 73
Hold Leadership accountable, give deadline for military action and total cessation of all Israeli supplied electricty and Water. 47% 327
total votes: 696
More than half of them (58%) demand that there be military action taken (raids, presumably resulting in deaths of innocent civilians, as is often the case), and a whopping 47% call for total cessation of Israeli-supplied electricty (sic) and Water. (As if it comes from someplace else).
What would the result of such a call be? It isn’t too hard to comprehend, given that Israel has already begun the cessation of supply to the people they keep confined in Gaza. It means treating human beings like their lives are expendable, and actually turning a deaf ear as one hears their cries that they are dying. I would hope that people who care about Shalit would think before they push a little button to state their opinion, and consider that it is very inhumane to cut off basic utilities services of the people who you have made depend on them. It is a form of torture and duress. It certainly is how a complete sadist would operate. Animals in a zoo are treated better than that.
Are the people who are so concerned to show the world that the IDF soldier captured while he was in operative duty is a Human being (oh, and a Jew too), able to even see or feel that the more than one million men, women and children in Gaza are Human beings as well? Or does the fact that there are no longer any Jews in Gaza mean that genocide and collective punishment is acceptable? Was the last human removed from Gaza with the unilateral withdrawal?
But, I don’t know why any of this surprises me. We all have heard that the reason for the breakout of the so-called Second Lebanon War was the capture of two IDF soldiers and the killing of eight in the border zone between Lebanon and Israel. This is the Israeli Government version of the war. Therefore, untold death and devastation is a normal and acceptable price to pay for the lives of a Human being (and Jew) wearing an IDF uniform? We know how many innocent Human beings were killed in the war Israel started. This is the page of the Israeli deaths, and this is a listing of all the casualties. Take a look at it carefully. The civilian casualties are 1,233+ (the plus meaning countless and unknown numbers of those whose death was not immediate, and we can probably add a great deal more to this list, given the situation of utter devastation that Israel created in Lebanon. The civilian wounded tops 5,089 people. The military deaths are 438 - 888+ (given the variable reports) and more than 512 wounded. The situation of devastation caused over one million people (human beings, as far as I know) to have been temporarily made into refugees, “with an unknown number of missing civilians in the south”, as was stated in several articles referenced but no longer available in an online version. It is important to mention that the southern zone of Lebanon, a residential area, was cluster bombed, meaning, the resettlement of humans is quite unlikely, due to the remote possibilities of returning to a land that has been wilfully disseminated with unconventional (and illegal, even in an activity as unholy as war) weapons that will bring about devastation for years to come. These weapons were dropped there precisely for that inhumane purpose by the Israeli army.
So, are we to deduce from all of this that you are only a Human being if you wear an IDF uniform? Or if you are a Jew? Is calling for carnage and devastation to other Human beings a proper response to the capture of a soldier? Judging by the “humanitarian” mode of thinking by those who support the Free Gilad Shalit campaign, I think we can come to some of our own conclusions.
One thing is clear, and that is that we are anaesthetized into thinking that if it is a Jewish activist, campaigning as such, calling for action, be it to “fight anti-Semitism”, “bring down Zionism” or to collectively punish millions of non-Jews (non-Humans?) it is something “normal”. It is indeed not something normal, and it is about time we started to stop expecting people to think in pre-masticated ways, expecting them to assume that a Jew certainly should know better or act in a way that is beyond judgment. This is a call for the end, once and for all, of ethnically based campaigning. It’s just another aspect of racist campaigning, and it treats us all like we are racists and need to be told what is right and what is wrong.
by Mary Rizzo
This blog recently has had some attention from Tony Greenstein. Taking a detour from his general direction of activism (sic) which boils down to exclusively attacking a growing list of other Pro-Palestinian activists - posting the same article that has been proven to be a misrepresentation consisting of a series of out-of-context quotes and insinuations about Gilad Atzmon - he’s using the same method, wallpapering every spot he can think of with his rantings using an identical post (to get the most mileage out of it, I suppose) that my blog is an Anti-Semitic sewer because it had this:
He stated:
“Under a title ‘Peacepalestine Offers Prisoner Exchange’ are four photographs of Ariel Sharon, Gilad Shalit, David Hirsh and myself, with what presumably are supposed to be wanted posters bearing our names, photographs, the title ‘human being’ (presumably this is disputed) and then, in reverse video the word ‘JEW’. All that is missing is the yellow star, but I’m sure Rizzo will manage to find a graphic artist up to the task.”
He then emphasizes that this is “clearly racist and anti-Semitic”.
Well, finally Tony Greenstein and I can partially agree on something. Gilad Atzmon and I have been stressing for years now that asking people to take action or to influence them by merit of some ethnically-based criterion is simply a racist way of thinking and operating, and Tony finally admits as much. If we are people, it shouldn’t matter one iota what group we are born or raised into. Ideologies are mindsets that are not "genetically instilled" and can be adopted or cast off or used at will. We can’t accept an objective ethnic belonging that carries no merit or defect as such, as an ethical device or even a way to persuade people. Ideologies matter, ethnic belonging does not. Belonging to one group or another should be irrelevant when trying to persude people of the value of an argument and influence their opinions. We should move beyond the stage of focussing on a person according to race, sex, religion, nationality or political leaning, and listen to their arguments.
It is too bad that Tony feels the need to continually insist on telling us that he was “The only Jewish speaker” at this meeting or that. Gosh, I didn’t know that there is a census made of the ethnic or religious belonging of the people who speak at meetings and that Tony was privy to that information. He also believes that Jews have special sensitivity to racism. “Jews, of all people, should be the first to oppose racism, whoever the victims and the perpetrators,” he says. While at the same time, he knows how (presumably all) Blacks must feel about it, refering to one of his interlocutors, so that he can be easily identified, apparently, as “a Black Sudanese guy”: “But again Black people have better understanding of racism than white ex-councillors”. (Following this logic, if the white ex-councillors are Jewish, they should be the first to oppose the racism, but other whites certainly are lacking in this moral characteristic.) If one were to judge the way he writes, it seems he does indeed think in racial stereotypes and categories and can’t resist mentioning it as if it were the normal thing to do. Yet, on the other hand, he insists that race does not exist, er… rather, it is a political construct. “Just to be clear. Zionism isn't based on a race, nor is German anti-Semitism for the simple reason there are no such things as race. Race is a political construct.” (Alef message 5 January, 2008) Whether or not there is such a thing as race seems to be a matter of debate for geneticists, and we’ve all seen acceptable arguments from both sides of the debate. Tony is extremely “ethnically aware”, and this is absolutely crystal clear in almost every intervention he has on internet. One might say that it borders on an obsession. Whites, Blacks, Jews, Non-Jews, hardly a single thing he has written escapes this ethnic (or racial, if you like) labeling, complete with a categorical judgment of the sensitivity each group must have to racism issues a priori of their personal experiences. What DOES seem interesting is the fact that when TONY stresses his ethnicity, in his worldview, it’s a good and positive thing. When OTHER people do it, as the Shalit campaigners do, or those who spoof it, as Peacepalestine has done, it’s clearly racist and anti-Semitic. I wish he would make up his mind one way or the other.
I agree that the campaign for Gilad Shalit is clearly racist, but it is far from being anti-Semitic. They will have to presumably find someone to paste in that Yellow Star as Tony suggests, not because the campaign is anti-Semitic, but because it represents to perfection the Jewish Victim role, the only way we are supposed to feel about Jews, especially Israeli ones. To justify what Israel does, we have to know they are clearly victims of some irrational hatred based on the simple fact that they are Jews in an Arab world hostile to their very existence. The Yellow Star would be an apt symbol of the victim paradigm that we should never forget or place into any context, no matter what. Jews are and will be the eternal victim, and you better get the idea that they act only out of reasons of defense. Being victims, we have to empathise with their plight in all instances.
The identifying label of the righteous victim is used to influence people and suspend any other kind of rational thinking or judgment. The innocent victim status is used in the Shalit campaign to instill an idea that goes against reality. We have to suspend our judgment on the role that he fulfilled. We have to think that a soldier who was in an Occupation army, in occupied territory AS an occupier, not a journalist or excursionist, there to render the lives of the people under Occupation a hell on earth and endanger their very safety with his presence, was just an innocent child who needs to be returned to his worried parents. He has become the centre of a “humanitarian” campaign that has very little to do with humanity, despite the text one can read on the banner.
This campaign has been going on for a while. Anyone who has seen even one blog by Israel supporters has bumped into it. It’s really hard to remain indifferent to. Indeed, the graphic artists felt it NECESSARY to point out that Shalit is a Human being. Oh, yes, and a Jew as well. Generally, members of Homo Sapiens Sapiens ARE considered to be Human beings and we don’t need to be told, even though the pictures of Shalit bring more the idea of a lost puppy to mind.
And we all know that if Shalit was an IDF member, well, he could have been nothing other than Jewish. Tony was shocked at the horrible sort of racist labeling. As a matter of fact, he thought it was something I dreamed up myself and not a parody. He was unaware of this campaign. Where has he been hiding? The amount of posts he leaves around would indicate that he’s online a hell of a lot of hours in a day. A legitimate question to ask is what precisely does he do other than post his own repetitious text? He claims that he fights Zionism, but he has NEVER seen a Zionist site or blog since the day of the campaign??? That is longer than a year. How can one fight the enemy if one does not even know what the enemy is up to? Or maybe he’s seen it, but is pretending righteous indignation in order to influence people who may not be familiar with the propaganda tools of Zionism so that they come to think of my blog in the same jaundiced way he does. He obviously detests it, because it exposes his endless smear and silencing campaigns against Gilad Atzmon. Yet, to call it a rightwing blog with an anti-Semitic and conspiracist agenda is really pushing it. Apparently, he may need to convince himself more than he does others. And with the three-person following he has, he has to work harder on it, apparently.But, leaving aside this provincial matter for the moment, I shall return to the issue of humanity and the Gilad Shalit campaign. I had the good fortune of working for several years in a major advertising agency as a copy editor and then copywriter. Our clients would show us their new product and we would have to come up with an appropriate campaign. The first thing one has to do is to “frame the target”. You have to know who you are trying to convince, and you have to use a language that will appeal to them on even a subconscious level. You have to reach them, then you have to influence them. Later, they will become an additional and correlated (not to mention cost-free) advertising element, by driving around on your motorcycle (in the case of the campaigns I managed).
Bringing that knowledge to the Shalit campaign, we see this: our target probably is NOT the group or individuals that hold Shalit. Most likely, they would not be overly sensitive to the fact that he is a Jew, or at least, this would not be the aspect of his being that would influence them the most. Perhaps those who created the campaign feel that those holding him in captivity are unaware that he is a human, so they have to spell it out, but I tend to believe that since the advert is in English and in Hebrew, our target is the Zio-blogosphere. So, the banner gets picked up and distributed on sites where people go who support Israel or at least aren’t blatantly or even latently pro-Palestinian. I have never seen the banner on a single pro-Palestinian site. Correct me, someone, if I am wrong and it is posted on some site of the sort.
The language then, has got to appeal to the crowd that follows the Zio-blogosphere. It is “normal” for them, I guess, to believe racial profiling is acceptable. If you are a Jew, anyway, and you are a Jew who is doing it, however. I doubt they would be convinced that Tony is right and that it is anti-Semitic. If I were still in advertising and worked on this campaign, I am pretty sure they would like the Yellow Star, though, and should consider integrating it into future versions of the campaign (all campaigns require a refresher in order to remain effective).
Now, what is the most interesting aspect of the entire campaign, attempting to appeal to the humanitarian aspect of the crisis, is we see just how the people who support this campaign think. Take a look at http://giladshalit.blogspot.com/ and see that there is a poll asking the following question:
Poll: One Year On. What should the Israeli Government do?
What action should the Israeli Government take now that Hamas has clear control of Gaza and it has been 1 year since Gilad Shalit was been kidnapped
Negotiate with Hamas
Negotiate with Hamas, release as many prisoners as it takes
Hold the Hamas Leadership directly accountable
Hold the Leadership accountable and give them one final deadline before military action
Hold Leadership accountable, give deadline for military action and total cessation of all Israeli supplied electricty and Water.
view results
Well, how do you think that the public answered as of today's date?
Let me show you the results:
What action should the Israeli Government take now that Hamas has clear control of Gaza and it has been 1 year since Gilad Shalit has been kidnapped
Negotiate with Hamas 18% 127
Negotiate with Hamas, release as many prisoners as it takes 14% 97
Hold the Hamas Leadership directly accountable 10% 72
Hold the Leadership accountable and give them another final deadline before military action 10% 73
Hold Leadership accountable, give deadline for military action and total cessation of all Israeli supplied electricty and Water. 47% 327
total votes: 696
More than half of them (58%) demand that there be military action taken (raids, presumably resulting in deaths of innocent civilians, as is often the case), and a whopping 47% call for total cessation of Israeli-supplied electricty (sic) and Water. (As if it comes from someplace else).
What would the result of such a call be? It isn’t too hard to comprehend, given that Israel has already begun the cessation of supply to the people they keep confined in Gaza. It means treating human beings like their lives are expendable, and actually turning a deaf ear as one hears their cries that they are dying. I would hope that people who care about Shalit would think before they push a little button to state their opinion, and consider that it is very inhumane to cut off basic utilities services of the people who you have made depend on them. It is a form of torture and duress. It certainly is how a complete sadist would operate. Animals in a zoo are treated better than that.
Are the people who are so concerned to show the world that the IDF soldier captured while he was in operative duty is a Human being (oh, and a Jew too), able to even see or feel that the more than one million men, women and children in Gaza are Human beings as well? Or does the fact that there are no longer any Jews in Gaza mean that genocide and collective punishment is acceptable? Was the last human removed from Gaza with the unilateral withdrawal?
But, I don’t know why any of this surprises me. We all have heard that the reason for the breakout of the so-called Second Lebanon War was the capture of two IDF soldiers and the killing of eight in the border zone between Lebanon and Israel. This is the Israeli Government version of the war. Therefore, untold death and devastation is a normal and acceptable price to pay for the lives of a Human being (and Jew) wearing an IDF uniform? We know how many innocent Human beings were killed in the war Israel started. This is the page of the Israeli deaths, and this is a listing of all the casualties. Take a look at it carefully. The civilian casualties are 1,233+ (the plus meaning countless and unknown numbers of those whose death was not immediate, and we can probably add a great deal more to this list, given the situation of utter devastation that Israel created in Lebanon. The civilian wounded tops 5,089 people. The military deaths are 438 - 888+ (given the variable reports) and more than 512 wounded. The situation of devastation caused over one million people (human beings, as far as I know) to have been temporarily made into refugees, “with an unknown number of missing civilians in the south”, as was stated in several articles referenced but no longer available in an online version. It is important to mention that the southern zone of Lebanon, a residential area, was cluster bombed, meaning, the resettlement of humans is quite unlikely, due to the remote possibilities of returning to a land that has been wilfully disseminated with unconventional (and illegal, even in an activity as unholy as war) weapons that will bring about devastation for years to come. These weapons were dropped there precisely for that inhumane purpose by the Israeli army.
So, are we to deduce from all of this that you are only a Human being if you wear an IDF uniform? Or if you are a Jew? Is calling for carnage and devastation to other Human beings a proper response to the capture of a soldier? Judging by the “humanitarian” mode of thinking by those who support the Free Gilad Shalit campaign, I think we can come to some of our own conclusions.
One thing is clear, and that is that we are anaesthetized into thinking that if it is a Jewish activist, campaigning as such, calling for action, be it to “fight anti-Semitism”, “bring down Zionism” or to collectively punish millions of non-Jews (non-Humans?) it is something “normal”. It is indeed not something normal, and it is about time we started to stop expecting people to think in pre-masticated ways, expecting them to assume that a Jew certainly should know better or act in a way that is beyond judgment. This is a call for the end, once and for all, of ethnically based campaigning. It’s just another aspect of racist campaigning, and it treats us all like we are racists and need to be told what is right and what is wrong.
Labels: activism, anti-Semitism, Atzmon, call to action, gatekeeping, Gaza, good news, hasbara, human rights violations, Israel, jewish identity politics, Lebanon, military, propaganda, Zionism
Friday, January 11, 2008
Gilad Atzmon (double bill) Letter @ Bush / Brighton Bis
Letter to George W BushWhy don't you Bomb Yourself and Save Us All
President Bush had tears in his eyes during an hour-long tour of Israel's Holocaust Memorial on Friday and told Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice that the U.S. should have bombed Auschwitz to halt the killing. AP
This is what President Bush said today at the end of his formal visit to Yad Vashem Holocaust Memorial.
You see Mr. President, it couldn't work out, because at that time Hitler was working for America, killing 'red Communists'.
At the time, America and Britain had an armistice with Nazi Germany in mind.
You simply couldn't just admit that Hitler was a butcher? No one makes peace with industrial mass murderers.
As if this is not enough, at the time your country's military intelligence didn't really buy the story of Nazi Germany's involvement in mass liquidation. Consequently, your country didn't open its gates to Jewish refugees.
However, if you are truly shocked by Nazi inhumanity and regret your country's impotence at the time of the war, now is the time to act.
You can always save the Palestinians.
You can, for instance, just threaten to bomb Tel Aviv, Haifa or Jerusalem...
This will be enough to liberate the Palestinians in Gaza Concentration Camp.
In case you are still motivated by a genuine humanist call, you may consider bombing yourself, and saving the rest of the Iraqi people from the genocide you apparently inflicted on them.
Mr President, it is never too late to save humanity from yourself and your ilk.
Letter to the Editor of The Argus, the newspaper that did the smear piece on Atzmon.
Crowd to hear speaker were no racists
Thanks to a story in The Argus on Monday, and Jean Calder's comment piece (The Argus, December 29), last night I was able to hear an interesting talk by Israeli jazz musician Gilad Atzmon. Some people attending arrived clutching the article from Monday's paper.
Unfortunately, because one man stuck up threatening posters at the Brighthelm, I had to hear the talk standing up in the kitchen of a private house while Mr Atzmon's talk was relayed by TV from a crowded upstairs room. It turned out that the protester had originally been invited to debate with Mr Atzmon.
Much of the talk was the fascinating story of Mr Atzmon's life as a Jewish person growing up in Israel in the 1970s. He told us that all he wanted to do as a teenager was play the saxophone, so when he was conscripted into the Israeli Defence Forces his "job" was to play in the army band.
Then he recounted his horror at what he saw when taken on a tour of a camp for Palestinian prisoners run by the Israeli Defence Forces in Lebanon in the 1980s. He called it a concentration camp. He said that as a child the only Palestinians he knew were the ones that cleaned his parents' house and that they were taught nothing about Palestinians as people at school.
His experiences in Lebanon made him question his whole upbringing and he eventually decided he could no longer live in Israel.
I can understand why some may find him offensive. He described his grandfather's Zionist militia, who apparently took part in more than 50 massacres of Palestinians in the 1940s, as Jewish nazis - not a term I feel comfortable with. And his sarcastic, humorous speaking style is mocking of everything whether it be jazz, Marxists, leftists or religious tradition, which can make people feel uncomfortable.
But I am certain that Mr Atzmon and all the people crowded into that small house last night would be the first to oppose all forms of racism, anti-Semitism and nazism. What a shame that it is so easy to prevent proper public discussion on such important issues.
Dave Jones, Springfield Road Brighton
Labels: activism, anti-Semitism, Arab countries, Atzmon, call to action, gatekeeping, holocaust, Palestine, propaganda, UN
Friday, December 28, 2007
Christians United For Israel Summit ...(and some say there ain't no lobby?)
Click over the image to enlarge it. Well worth the effort!What follows is a very strange document. It is page 22 of the October edition of the glossy booklet by Christians United for Israel, a lobby that claims it has 50 million members and 5 million Jewish sympathisers. Now, there are many who say, "Lobby? NO WAY!" I ask them to read this document which is the (claimed) testimonial of a young Jewish university student who attended their DC Summit. I have a few doubts that it's bona fide, because the grammatical errors you see - such as a comma before 'and' in a three part clause - are carried through in the rest of the booklet, which has as its publisher John and Diana Hagee and its writers people like David Brog (executive director of CUFI, executive at AOL, proud Jew and author of the article about Randy Travis and Joe Lieberman, "Separated at Birth" and Gary Bauer.) The young man has a secret identity, or else he's not in the habit of signing his name when making a testimonial, highly irregular! But, there are some very interesting elements in this letter, fake or not.
1) The student does not say he is an Israeli citizen, but a Jew, and he wanted to go with a Kippah just to show his "gratitude for all the support these people were giving us". Us. Hmm...
2) He says the place turned into a Mega-Church. I wonder if he's ever been in one. First of all, generally Jewish people do not enter into Christian churches, and if they do, wouldn't they expect there to be prayer and not political rallies? Instead we have this:
3) American and Israeli flags, the name of Jesus not mentioned even once the entire night. Although he contradicts himself later!! (They need a professional "proofreader and fact checker", methinks).
4) It is a lobby. This is stated very clearly, and every Congressman and Senator will get a visit from these people. "lobbying in support of Israel and the Jewish people". It is explicitly stated.
5) There is an evident racism in all of this. People treat him like he is a carnival freak, and he's glad to play the part. They hug him "because I'm Jewish... asking me to pray for them, telling me I was blessed by God".
6) The voice of the Jewish people in America (yes, Jewish) is the Church of Jesus Christ. What church is that? I'd like to know. Sounds like a strange Church if it's got American and Israeli flags and no crosses or turns the teachings of Jesus (oops, Yehoshua) on its head. Jesus would never have said, "let us pray for the destruction of our enemies". Quite the opposite. It's in their Bibles, if they know how to read.
7) The usage of the term GOYIM (all caps in the original, in fact, no changes were made to the original, as anyone can see from the image), and the other derogatory self-reference of the Christians.
8) The comparison of Iran to Germany and Ahmedinejad to Hitler needs no further comment. Just note it there and see how it is used in propaganda of all the lobbies, as well as being the foreign policy of Israel based on its usage of these images.
If that ain't a lobby, I will eat my hat, scarf and gloves.
mary
ONE MORE INTERESTING ELEMENT! Thanks to the attentive readers of Peacepalestine, more strange things jump out. James Bowen, the dedicated webmaster of Palestine Information with Provenance clicked on the image and was more careful and attentive than I was in transcribing. He wrote:
Mary
There is an interesting little detail on the picture you mentioned in your blog. Look at the signature given for the piece:
--Shalom - Student at Yeshira University
Note -- YeshiRa, not YeshiVa.
There is no such place as Yeshira University, although there is a Yeshiva University in New York.
Whoever compiles the stuff for the CUFI newsletter seems to be quite ignorant.
Christians United for Israel
Washington, D.C. Israel Summit
Testimonial
Last night was one of the most amazing nights of my life… I wish every Jewish person could have witnessed what I did… it was unreal.
On a whim, I grabbed two friends and attended “A Night to Honor Israel” hosted by “Christians United for Israel” at the Washington Convention Center. My main goal was simply to show up wearing a kipah and show my gratitude for all of the support these people were giving us. The room was filled with over 3,000 people. There were priests, rabbis, songs, prayers, awards, and speeches (Bibi Netanyahu, Newt Gingrich, Dore Gold, Sallai Meridor and many more). The room essentially turned into a Mega-Church, with thousands of Christians shouting and praising God, praying for the protection, safety, and prosperity of Israel and the Jewish people, and for the destruction of the enemies of America and Israel, while waving American and Israeli flags and listening to the sound of shofars being blasted. And yet the name “Jesus” was not mentioned once the entire night. (Yehoshua of Nazareth was said ONCE at the very end of the event)
As I write this there are thousands descending on the Hill, in the offices of every Congressman and Senator, thousands of Christians lobbying in support of Israel and the Jewish people – and you thought AIPAC was strong, the numbers of Christians United for Israel around America is quoted at being over 50 MILLION people!
By the end of the night, I had met so many people who just were hugging me because I was Jewish, giving me their names and asking me to pray for them, telling me I was blessed by God. I also met the Executive Director of CUFI, who said he would love to come and speak at Yeshiva University. What is contained in this email is just a small drop in a very large sea of awe and emotion from one of the most incredible events I have ever been to in my life. Here are just a few quotes:
“The sleeping giant has awakened and the Jewish people have a new voice in America – the Church of Jesus Christ… 50 million Bible Believing Christians and 5 million American Jews are a match made in heaven.”
“The Bible Belt is Israel’s Safety Belt!”
“We former pagans, former idol-worshipping heathen GOYIM now stand united with the Jewish people. Hashem has done great things, is doing great things, and will do great things for Israel! Baruch Hashem!”
“We are currently in 1936, Iran is Germany and Ahmadinejad is Hitler. The silence of the Christian Church during WWII was inexcusable. Today, gather with me and say, ‘Never again, not on our watch!’ This time the Church will not be silent!”
“Jimmy Carter has accused us of having a ‘hidden agenda.’ We have operated for years under the eyes of the Jewish community and I am proud to say that there are Jews here tonight! How much money from terrorists goes to your Fund For Peace Mr. Carter? If anyone has a hidden agenda, it is you!”
Never before have I seen such a sanctification of God’s name, a kiddush hashem, and I was so proud to be a part of something so warm, wonderful, and amazing. It was worth coming to DC just for this event – it was life altering.
--Shalom – Student at Yeshiva University
Labels: hasbara, holocaust, Iran, Israel, journalism, lobbying, propaganda, US, Zionism
Friday, October 5, 2007
Fabio Mini (an Italian General) - "Operation Swarm"- War without End against Iran
Writing for Italy's l'Espresso, Italian General Fabio Mini has understood and explained the dangerous mechanisms of gaining consensus to wage war against "Enemies", which are variable and flexible according to the interests of hegemonic power. This enlightening article explains the manner in which War against Iran has been promoted in the West as well as the operative elements that will bring it about. A MUST READ! Translated from Italian by Diego Traversa and revised by Mary Rizzo for Tlaxcala and peacepalestine. (Also on peacepalestine by Fabio Mini: Even Escape is an Art, about the impossible disengagement from Iraq.Anyone who thought that the green light for the Israeli-American attack against Iran would come from the American Congress, was wrong. Equally wrong were those who thought that a president like Bush, so frustrated by the Iraqi chaos, the Afghan deadlock and the industrial lobbies’ pressures, would wind up making the decision on his own. The attack against Iran will take place thanks to the newly-appointed French Foreign Minister Kouchner. In these years of threats and counter-threats, of pretexts to make war, the only “revealing” words have been those from the laconic phrase “we must prepare ourselves for the worst.” Many have taken these words as a slip of the lip, others have regarded them as a bad luck-dispelling provocation, others as an instigation and still others as a submission to an ineluctable event. It could be that the sentence contains all of this, but the profound essence of Kouchner’s words is different.
Strange connections and affinities have come into being in these last 15 years of worldwide military interventions of different kinds. Armies have been integrated with private soldiers, visionaries with mercenaries, business with ideology, and truth has gotten so imbued with lies that the propaganda’s logic can’t account for either. And one of the most unusual connections is the one that has been established between military staff, humanitarian workers and foreign policy, to such an extent that each of the three components can pass itself off as the other two. The main cement of this union is the emergency concept. Foreign politics has lost its nature of continuity in the relations between states and in the sphere of international organizations. It has been devoting itself for a while to running emergency relations, meaning extemporaneous relations connected to temporary and changeable interests or positions that are transitory and changeable to variable geometries.
At the end of the day, emergency politics is the only kind that allows a limited and selective commitment. Moreover, it can be done or undone at one’s will, since the dimension of the emergency can be manipulated or interpreted. Following the same manner of reasoning, the armies of these last 15 years have exclusively devoted themselves to emergency situations, preferably abroad and for so-called humanitarian reasons, in order to guarantee themselves consensus and support. There are no longer any armies able to defend their own territories or to provide defence in case of war. It’s increasingly difficult to find a state threatened with war by another state and today all the world’s armies rely on a minimum 12-month notice allowing them to mobilise the resources for national defence. Therefore, they have become specialized in emergency in the respect of both the kind and the timing of the interventions.
When Kouchner candidly states that we “must prepare ourselves for the worst” he simply interprets a philosophy which doesn’t have as its objective the searching for the best, less traumatic solution, but which instead calls on the political class to manage the emergency, the military means and the humanitarian organizations which have by now become inseparable. It’s also about the recognition of the political class’s incapacity itself to think of and find enduring solutions. It is about the military instruments and their incapacity in managing conflict situations until their complete stabilization, and the incapacity of the humanitarian organizations in settling the problems of the people in more long-term perspective than the one offered by emergency. Finally, Kouchner also admits that the summation of these incapacities leads inevitably to war.
Then, war it will be.
It’s obvious that, under these conditions, some exaggerations are required in order to assure the accomplishment of the emergency and the intervention of the various components: something has to happen: what the observers call the “trigger” so that it may provoke the political emergency, there has to be an immediate danger for the security of everyone and a humanitarian catastrophe has to be in sight (the bigger, the better). There has to be, in other words, a manageable apparatus capable of “inventing” the emergency, as well inventing its conclusion that will allow disengagement and the end of the commitment whether or not there has been any solution of these problems. The attack against Iran falls perfectly within this scenario and, looking at it carefully, it’s by now a nearly completed picture.
There are multiple pretexts available for the attack. The idea that Iran intends upon developing a nuclear bomb and to destroy Israel is by now widely recognized by everyone. What’s missing are confirmations and evidence beyond poor empty boasting, but in the past we have witnessed terroristic boasting that has at any rate, come about and nobody is willing to run the risk of underestimating it, not even for truth’s sake. An Iranian or Iranian-supported attack against the American forces in Iraq, this too without a scrap of proof, has started to persuade even the most sceptical people. Sooner or later, after much speaking about it and evoking it, it will be taken as an invitation or a challenge and it will really be carried out. The support Iran gives to Hamas and Hezbollah makes Teheran extremely vulnerable. An excess or mistake by one of these formations is sufficient to set off an immediate military intervention.
The foreign policy of the most major nations, Europe included, is by now used to the idea that a military intervention is able to bring Iran back to the positions it was in 20 years ago. Moreover, what’s starting to be accepted is the idea that the purpose isn’t only that of preventing a nuclear power from rising but also that of terminating the country as a regional player which embodies oil and strategic interests in every part of south central Asia. Regarding the military planning aspect, everything has already been prepared for a while. The plans for the attack date back to 1979, at the time of the US embassy crisis, and they have been updated with new technologies and strategies ever since.
The thesis that it’s about an attack basically aimed at the atomic installations with no collateral damage for the civil population is only a miserable fantasy from those who have by now become used to telling lies. Even the idea that it may be restricted to Iranian soil is suspicious to say the least, since the end of the stubbornness and the boastfulness of the Ayatollahs, on one side, and by the Israeli-Americans, on the other, has to do with interests and ambitions which go far beyond the Persian Gulf.
Whatever the kind of attack it may be, it will produce heavy military and civil casualties regardless of whether or not a nuclear emergency fall-out or a radiation leak is triggered. Any kind of attack must have as its premise the destruction of defence structures: air and missile bases, deposits, mobile ramps, military ports, naval units, radars and anti-aircraft artilleries, land and armoured units, communication and command headquarters will have to be eliminated before or during the attack against the nuclear installations.
Many of these structures are located near the most densely populated areas. Even taking into account the most sophisticated cruise missiles, the “intelligent” bombs directed against the targets by the Israeli and American commandos, who have already been operative for some time in Iran, a quite high margin of collateral effects remains. Were mini nuclear fission bombs or neutron bombs to be used instead of the conventional “bunker busting” bombs, the damage percentage might rise, even thought not as greatly as many expect.
Also the thesis that precise attacks may be carried out with only one component, the aerial and missile one, is a deception. A complex operation, as they say they want to realize, that aims at bringing the Iranian bellicose potential back to the stone age, requires multiple attack actions, with many forces, from many directions and in short lapses of time in order to prevent, as colonel Boyd used to say, any capability of decision, reaction and counter-strategy by the enemy. The multiple action has to also prevent the direct retaliation by the Iranian air and naval forces against the oil installations and cargos in the Persian and Oman Gulfs. It has to neutralise the missile threats against the American military bases in Central Asia and the Middle East. It has to prevent indirect Iranian strategic operations in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, Lebanon, Gaza, the Caucasus area and anywhere else a Shia may represent trouble. Moreover, Teheran controls the northern coast of the Hormuz Straits and closing this seaway to oil cargos might cause oil prices to skyrocket to levels between 200 and 400 dollars per barrel.
The same would happen if Iran turned sabotage actions and bombings against the oil installations of other countries in the area. The military strategy of the attack against Iran can’t therefore be entrusted to a surgical attack or to one single component. It can be nothing but that of “Swarm Warfare” (or Horde Warfare), unearthed by Arquilla and Ronfeld after the unmatchable realization by Gengis Khan. In modern terms, this strategy makes all the components of warland operative, naval, air, missile, space, virtual and information ones on multiple settings and levels. To achieve all this, it’s necessary that the “swarm” of the various components and actions, which develop by focusing on one place and then by spreading to other directions and places, be are at least sufficient enough in order to prevent any sort of reaction. The hordes entrusted with destroying the targets materially have to get integrated and to focus on targets along with the virtual hordes of diplomatic actions, of psychological warfare and with those of the manipulation of information.
The military actions have to be aimed at creating a humanitarian emergency that allows the international organizations to intervene in Iranian territory. Obviously, the responsibility for the catastrophe must be pinned on the Iranians themselves. Even in this respect, everything is ready or practically ready, not least after Kouchner’s exhortation. International agencies and NGOs are already looking forward to going to Iran to set women free from their chadors. If they are given the chance to intervene so as to gather refugees, to treat the wounded, to do the counts of the dead and to call elections every month, there will be a rush to bring democracy to Iran.
This scenario’s complexity shouldn’t lead one to think that it’s necessary to deploy a huge amount of forces. The Israeli and American flight formations’ bombing capacities are so high that they can cover multiple targets with a limited amount of jets. The naval missiles are by now technological weapons that don’t require mass interventions to carry out precise or wide-scale destruction. If anything, the variety of the plans and the kinds of intervention will bring about coordination, command and control problems, yet nothing out of the ordinary. The US and Israel have been cooperating for half a century and the matters of pseudo-authorizations from third countries about flying over or troops’ transit are by now overcome both by political accords with concerned countries and by the two powers’ inclination to ignore any objections.
What remains is the serious and important unknown of the post-emergency. The doubt about the future of a state which retains imperial origins and outlooks and which finds itself being turned from “rogue state” into “loser state” and being regarded as a political and strategic black hole after having been considered as aspiring to the role of regional power. Deep uncertainty remains not so much for the reaction to the defeat or the reduction of its aspirations but for the reaction to the humiliation. What can’t be ruled out is just what they want to avoid, that is, Iran’s nuclearization, still to be proved and implemented, which might instead be favoured with the help of foreign powers as a reaction to the humiliation.
Fabio Mini is an Italian General, former commander of the NATO forces in Kossovo.
Italian original: http://espresso.repubblica.it/dettaglio/Operazione-sciame-di-fuoco/1796788 Translated by Diego Traversa and revised by Mary Rizzo, members of Tlaxcala.
Labels: absolute madness, EU, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Italy, military, NATO, propaganda, US, war
Friday, June 22, 2007
Remi Kanazi - All in the Family: Disharmony in Gaza
A new craze is taking form in political circles throughout the international community. After the Gazan "civil war" which killed 90 people (only 617, 910 less than the American civil war) everyone and their grandmothers seems to be an expert on Palestinian politics and its internal affairs. Hamastan, as it is now being called in Gaza, like the multitude of evil empires that have taken hold throughout world history, is scaring the bejesus out of Fatah, Israel, the US, the European Union, the Arab States, and most theater goers of Spiderman 3. The reason: Hamas, as if it was filming the promotional video, "How to Spank a Militia in 3 Easy Steps," routed Mohammed Dahlan and his US backed henchmen in Gaza before dinner was on the table.This backyard beating prompted Israel and the US to embark on a new strategy. The two nations are bolstering Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian president and head of Fatah, because of a new "window of opportunity." This opportunity is claimed to be the chance to embrace so-called Palestinian moderates. The US and Israel believe they can rejuvenate the corrupted peace process, which is about as alive as Ariel Sharon, by helping to consolidate Abbas's power in Fatah's heartland—the West Bank. What these think tank geniuses forget to mention is that this window had been open in the same capacity after the passing of Yasser Arafat. Furthermore, they persist in pushing forth a vision of paradise in the West Bank, with children dancing in the street greeting their new liberators with flowers and candy, reminiscent of the vision of the fall of Baathism—minus the 650,000 deaths and actual civil war.
The propaganda machine in the US has been working at full steam to enlighten its citizens on just why Hamas is filled with foaming-from-the-mouth jihadists. Only a few anti-Semites have come out to criticize America's policy towards Hamas, namely ex-Ku Klux Klan member Jimmy Carter. In plain terms, this "violent" and "fundamentalist" organization cannot be allowed to function because it's a terrorist organization, with terrorist values, terrorist roots, and a terrorist vision of the future. The only problem with these labels is Hamas's lack of terrorism. The group, infamous for its history of suicide bombings, hasn't been behind such an attack in more than three years. The group imposed and abided by a unilateral cease-fire with Israel even before it came into power and held onto the cease-fire while Israel continued to attack the organization. The group only ended the cease-fire after persistent Israeli attacks on it and the civilian population of the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. Nonetheless, when Hamas ended the cease-fire it didn't revert back to suicide bombings, but rather engaged in some firing of Qassam rockets, which are about as deadly as a Roman candle at a Fourth of July beach party.
The Western press fails to recognize that outside of its dream world, where Paris Hilton is queen and real news is crap, Hamas is the democratically elected majority party in the Palestinian territories. This makes the accusation that Hamas staged a coup against Fatah all the more silly. George Bush can't stage a coup against the president; he is the president (no matter what Dick Cheney says). Furthermore, Hamas only took action against Dahlan and his clan of thugs after a major buildup of Dahlan's militia by the US and Egypt. The international community is reveling in the breakdown of Palestinian society because it feels it can now impose more desirable realities on the ground. Yet, contrary to the thought of most Westerners, Palestinians do value democracy, as long as it doesn't come with a side of cluster bombs and forced starvation. Abbas's illegal appointment of a new government is going to sit as well with Palestinians as Jerusalem's gay pride parade sat with ultra-Orthodox Jews.
The fact remains, the international community, specifically Israel and the US, missed a huge window of opportunity after the election of Hamas. The group had significantly moderated, ironically much more in action than words, and deserved a chance to govern without being bankrupted and imprisoned. Now Hamas is being told, oddly enough like democrats and republicans tell Iraqis, that they are to pick themselves up by their bootstraps and govern in Gaza without the basic means of survival. Granted, Gaza can't function with the world's strongest nations investing in its failure, but so what, get 'em next time right?
Rubbing Hamas' face in the dirt (along with the 1.4 million people of Gaza) like schoolyard bullies may seem like an after school delight, but it will only foment more hatred against Israel and more disgust with Fatah. There won't be three states, four states, or any other "new solution" to combat the power of Hamas: any vision for the future will ultimately have to pass a unified Palestinian litmus test for it to stick. Abbas can pretend that Gaza is now Hamas's mess, but he was elected as head of the Palestinian Authority, and will be held to account politically if he keeps treating Gaza like an unwanted stepchild. Even for someone who likes international popularity and money more than George Bush likes bombing brown people, Abbas will eventually come around to engage with Hamas. Whether Abbas likes it or not, his brothers are in Hamas, and no matter how well he gets along with his neighbors, if he doesn't make peace in Palestinian society, the rest of his family is going to think he's self-serving sellout.
Remi Kanazi is the co-founder of the political website http://www.poeticinjustice.net/. He is the editor of the forthcoming book of poetry, Poets for Palestine, for more information visit Poetic Injustice. He can reached via email at remroum@gmail.com.
Labels: Gaza, occupation, Palestine, Palestinian politicians, propaganda, US
Sunday, May 20, 2007
pacem in terris??
The beautiful children in the picture to the left live in the West Bank. As things are today, we can consider them "the lucky ones", out of the way of the most cruel violence going on in their country, to their brothers and sisters in Gaza. But, these children too live under occupation. Look at them carefully. They are young, but they want to indicate how they feel. They show the signs of Victory, Peace, and of the victory of God against the lawlessness of man.
What is going on in Gaza? Shamelessly, while the West condemned the Palestinians to starvation and denial of freedom of movement and access to health and sanitary supplies, they kept on sending weapons to the so-called "moderate faction" of the Palestinian elected autority, while continuing to call the Hamas "a terrorist organisation". Fueling an already critical situation, where the difficulties are nearly inimaginable, Palestinians fight, brother against brother, in Gaza.... ignoring that the real enemy is anyone who denies the Palestinians their rights, which include to elect the people they wish to be governed by. Today, in the daily dispatch from the Israeli Foreign Affairs Ministry, we see the laying down of the red carpet for an all out war against Palestinians. It says:
"Clearly, Israeli citizens in the southern part of Israel are under constant attack. During the last few days, more than 60 missiles have been fired in order to attack civilians, in order to attack children, in order to attack families. During the past few days, children cannot go to school, families have had to leave their homes. The situation is intolerable and unbearable. The situation in the south is not part of an ongoing conflict between Israel and the Palestinians. Unfortunately, since last year we are facing a Hamas-led government in the Palestinian Authority, and the current situation is the result of an internal crisis in the Palestinian Authority between Hamas, which is a terrorist organization, and other factions in Palestinian society.
There is no reason to target Israel. The only reason is in order to negatively impact the situation, in order to bring Israel back to the Gaza Strip, in order to blame the common enemy of the Palestinian people - which is, unfortunately, Israel. But there is no reason for these attacks. I would like to say that we also have some expectations from the international community. I know that all of you would like to see peace in the Middle East, and believe me, so do we. This is our goal. This is the reason why Israel completely withdrew from the Gaza Strip. This is the reason why Israel dismantled settlements in the Gaza Strip. This is the reason why Israel removed its forces from the Gaza Strip. This is the reason why Israel kept the greenhouses in the Gaza Strip intact and delivered them to the Palestinians. This is the reason why Israel is making every effort to make the lives of the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip easier.
But I would like you to understand that the way to stop it is not only by embracing the moderates; it is not only by demanding that Israel ease the lives of the Palestinians; it is not only about passages. Sometimes, there is the need to show determination, to put pressure on the extremists, to put pressure on these terrorists - in order that they and the Palestinian people will understand that this is something which is not tolerable. This is something that also affects their lives.
During the last few days, Israel has made some decisions and we are going to have another government meeting on Sunday. But I just want to say that I think that, for too long, the international community has taken the situation in the southern part of Israel as acceptable, as part of the routine in Israel - and it is not. Enough is enough.
During this briefing, you will hear more about the internal situation within the Palestinian Authority, and I will try and explain what the options are, so that you will also understand.Of course, I would also like to take this opportunity to send our message of understanding and empathy to the people of Sderot. And I believe that I am not doing this only personally, but that you share with us the same feeling and understanding, and the need to help and understand their situation."
I say: Israelis claim they seek peace, but "enough is enough"? Enough is too much. STOP ISRAEL NOW!!! STOP THE FOMENTING OF CIVIL WAR BETWEEN PALESTINIANS!!!
What is going on in Gaza? Shamelessly, while the West condemned the Palestinians to starvation and denial of freedom of movement and access to health and sanitary supplies, they kept on sending weapons to the so-called "moderate faction" of the Palestinian elected autority, while continuing to call the Hamas "a terrorist organisation". Fueling an already critical situation, where the difficulties are nearly inimaginable, Palestinians fight, brother against brother, in Gaza.... ignoring that the real enemy is anyone who denies the Palestinians their rights, which include to elect the people they wish to be governed by. Today, in the daily dispatch from the Israeli Foreign Affairs Ministry, we see the laying down of the red carpet for an all out war against Palestinians. It says:
"Clearly, Israeli citizens in the southern part of Israel are under constant attack. During the last few days, more than 60 missiles have been fired in order to attack civilians, in order to attack children, in order to attack families. During the past few days, children cannot go to school, families have had to leave their homes. The situation is intolerable and unbearable. The situation in the south is not part of an ongoing conflict between Israel and the Palestinians. Unfortunately, since last year we are facing a Hamas-led government in the Palestinian Authority, and the current situation is the result of an internal crisis in the Palestinian Authority between Hamas, which is a terrorist organization, and other factions in Palestinian society.
There is no reason to target Israel. The only reason is in order to negatively impact the situation, in order to bring Israel back to the Gaza Strip, in order to blame the common enemy of the Palestinian people - which is, unfortunately, Israel. But there is no reason for these attacks. I would like to say that we also have some expectations from the international community. I know that all of you would like to see peace in the Middle East, and believe me, so do we. This is our goal. This is the reason why Israel completely withdrew from the Gaza Strip. This is the reason why Israel dismantled settlements in the Gaza Strip. This is the reason why Israel removed its forces from the Gaza Strip. This is the reason why Israel kept the greenhouses in the Gaza Strip intact and delivered them to the Palestinians. This is the reason why Israel is making every effort to make the lives of the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip easier.
But I would like you to understand that the way to stop it is not only by embracing the moderates; it is not only by demanding that Israel ease the lives of the Palestinians; it is not only about passages. Sometimes, there is the need to show determination, to put pressure on the extremists, to put pressure on these terrorists - in order that they and the Palestinian people will understand that this is something which is not tolerable. This is something that also affects their lives.
During the last few days, Israel has made some decisions and we are going to have another government meeting on Sunday. But I just want to say that I think that, for too long, the international community has taken the situation in the southern part of Israel as acceptable, as part of the routine in Israel - and it is not. Enough is enough.
During this briefing, you will hear more about the internal situation within the Palestinian Authority, and I will try and explain what the options are, so that you will also understand.Of course, I would also like to take this opportunity to send our message of understanding and empathy to the people of Sderot. And I believe that I am not doing this only personally, but that you share with us the same feeling and understanding, and the need to help and understand their situation."
I say: Israelis claim they seek peace, but "enough is enough"? Enough is too much. STOP ISRAEL NOW!!! STOP THE FOMENTING OF CIVIL WAR BETWEEN PALESTINIANS!!!
Labels: Israel, Palestine, propaganda, somoud, war
Friday, March 2, 2007
"Israel has what you like" - Jewish week article on Hasbara
Inside Israel’s Image WarHigh-level Israeli spokespeople here struggle to get country’s nuanced message out.
Gary Rosenblatt - Editor And Publisher
At a recent four-day training session here in hasbara (public relations/advocacy/spin) for 17 high-level Israeli spokespersons, a young woman who deals with the media for the Israel Defense Forces described one of her most difficult encounters with the press during last summer’s war with Hezbollah.
She said she was grilled for 30 minutes, on camera, by an ABC-TV correspondent who had just come from a hospital in Lebanon where electricity had been cut as a result of an Israeli air strike, and he had witnessed a patient — a 7-year-old boy — without a monitor at his bed. The reporter was taping what would air as a two-minute interview and kept asking the IDF spokeswoman why this boy was being made to suffer.
She recounted that she had stressed how unfortunate the situation was, but noted that Israel was forced to respond to Hezbollah rocket attacks against its citizens, and this was one of the regrettable results. But the reporter kept asking her the same question, over and over.
“After awhile I felt foolish giving the same response,” she recalled. “I felt I had no answer.”
The chief trainer at the session, Elias Buchwald, a legendary public relations expert who has been leading these intensive programs for Israeli officials through the American Jewish Congress for 24 years, pro bono, explained that the reporter was trying to break her down to the point where she would become exasperated and respond emotionally, perhaps angrily.
“You did the right thing,” he reassured the woman from the IDF. “You just repeat your answer and say, ‘of course it’s terrible, but when they do X, we have to do Y.’”
Buchwald, known to everyone as “Buck,” noted that if the interview had been live, the reporter would have had to move on to other questions. But since it was taped and could be edited, he could keep pushing, hoping for a slip-up. In the end, the clip of the IDF woman’s response on the ABC report ran for five seconds.
Welcome to the real world of hasbara. While criticism of Israel’s efforts at defending or presenting its image to the world has become a perennial pastime for many supporters of the Jewish state, the fact is that government officials spend a great deal of time and thought on hasbara, and always face an uphill battle.
While the Palestinians have a simple message — we are suffering from occupation and want a state of our own — Israel’s is far more complex, seeing itself as the Mideast underdog (outnumbered 100 million Arabs to five million Jews) while maintaining one of the most powerful armies in the world; championing democracy while being portrayed as occupier; proud of a free and open society, but one that allows agonizingly close scrutiny of its every move by its own as well as the foreign press.)
Each year Israel sends to New York a group of its most promising young officials — from government ministries, consulates and national institutions — to be trained by Buchwald and other savvy Americans who deal with the media and public relations. (5W, a local public relations firm, helped the American Jewish Congress and the Israeli Foreign Ministry organize this year’s program.) It’s part of a larger effort Israel is mounting, pushed by Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni, to rebrand itself and recast its image from what some see as an overly militaristic country to one with a sophisticated cultural outlook.
Buchwald, a benign drill sergeant, kept driving home the need for participants to offer pithy, positive and personal images of Israel that Americans can identify with readily. “Don’t say Israel is just like America. That’s too abstract. Say ‘if you love skiing, we have Mt. Hermon in the north; if you love nightlife, nothing beats Tel Aviv.’”
Keep it short, make it direct, and no matter what the question, know beforehand what message you want to get across and stick with it, Buchwald tells his charges. “We want Americans to relate to Israel emotionally, not just impersonally,” he says.
A major part of the conference was devoted to taping the participants responding to impromptu questions that became increasingly pointed, and then reviewing and critiquing the two-minute interviews.
It’s not easy to keep focused, and smiling, while being grilled with rapid-fire questions critical of Israel. Buchwald himself was blunt in his comments. “Nice job” or “great smile,” he told some participants. But he also lost his patience at times, most notably when a woman blew what he called a “silver platter” question (“how are Israel and Canada alike?”) by rambling on about cultural similarities without offering any specific examples.
“That was really bad,” he said, becoming increasingly frustrated as she tried to defend her comments. “Let’s face it, you were wrong.”
“You’re trying to make an emotional connection,” he said, his voice rising. “The point should be ‘Israel has what you like’ by using warm, evocative and colorful language.”
During a break one afternoon, Buchwald, a founder of Burson-Marsteller, a major New York public relations firm, said he has seen “remarkable improvement” over the years in the caliber of Israeli spokespersons he helps train.
Most of hasbara is “reactive, damage control,” he says, but it is also important to present positive images whenever possible. “You have to understand your message,” he says, and the problem is that “not enough effort” is made by the Israeli government “in deciding what message they want and getting all the spokespeople together on that message.”
At present the government is framing the political picture by stressing that the world can be divided between black and white, between extremists and reasonable people, and that Israel is in the reasonable camp.
David Saranga, the media consul at the Israeli Consulate here who came to observe the training, said that when discussing the Mideast region, Israel is associating itself with countries like Jordan, Egypt and Saudi Arabia, which are seen as moderates. (There seems to be a reluctance to identify too directly with the U.S. for fear that Israel will be connected to, and blamed for, the unpopular war in Iraq.)
“Americans miss the human face of Israel, they perceive of us as militaristic and very religious,” Saranga said, “but they miss the lens of culture, education” and the other qualities that make up the essence of daily life.
Israel has launched an effort to focus on new media, including the Internet and blogs. Targeting the market of 18- to 30-year-olds, the New York consulate has started its own blog, IsREALii.org, to portray “a multifaceted society that welcomes creativity, passion and drive,” according to the site, administered by Saranga and his team. It deals with culture, not politics.
Several of the Israelis who took part in the media sessions praised the program as helpful and informative, though they declined to speak on the record. In the end, hasbara is an ongoing project of the Israeli government, and it will have its successes and failures. But Buck Buchwald’s essential message — keep it simple, positive and focused — is always good advice. “It’s tough to measure success,” he acknowledges, but training sessions like this one help get the word out that Israel is a whole lot more than a country at war.
Labels: hasbara, Israel, propaganda
Wednesday, January 31, 2007
Mauro Manno - Open letter to the President of the Italian Republic
Mr. President,From what I can read on the RAI’s (Italian television) teletext service, you are supposed to have stated:
“No to anti-Semitism even when it is disguised as anti-Zionism.”
“Anti-Zionism entails the rejection of the source of inspiration of the Jewish State, of the reasons for its very foundation, yesterday, and of its security today, which goes beyond the governments taking turns at Israel’s leadership.”
If this is what you really think, and obviously I hope that is not the case, let me say that these are wrong and serious statements and I hope that they may arouse a calm and reasoned but firm reaction by many Italians.
Mr. President,
let me disagree with the first remark you pronounced. You argue that the opposition to Zionism is a disguised form of anti-Semitism. One would be lead to think that you meant to say that only some anti-Semites conceal their real anti-Semitism behind an alleged or false anti-Zionism.
You have formulated your thought in an unequivocal way: to you, the person who is anti-Zionist is an anti-Semite sic et simpliciter. I agree with you that anti-Zionism is the “rejection of the source of inspiration of the Jewish State and of the reasons for its very foundation,” but I firmly believe that the denial of the reasons of the Jewish state’s birth and its replacement with a sole democratic State for Jews and Palestinians throughout the entirety of Palestine might bring nothing but good to the Jews, the Palestinians, the middle-eastern and peoples as a whole. I hold, and I am not the only one, given that many anti-Zionist Jews have the same opinion, that the Zionist State for Jews only is as racist, colonialist and expansionist an idea as was the South-African racist State for whites only.
The Zionist nature of Israel is a menace to world peace and to Jews themselves.
Mr. President,
I am not a Holocaust-denier and I do not nurture anti-Jewish feelings. I only want the Jews living in Palestine to not deny the Palestinians a right they claim for themselves. The Palestinians, both refugees and residents in Israel or in the Occupied Territories, have the right to live peacefully and in harmony in Palestine, enjoying the democratic freedoms that all the peoples of the world deserve. This principle we do not refuse to the Jews from Palestine, is denied by Israel to the Palestinians.
Are you perhaps in favour of the States grounded on ethnicity? I thought I had understood that you and the party you come from were in favour of the democratic States in which all citizens are equal regardless of the religion, the ethnicity, the culture and more besides that they belong to.
Maybe I was wrong. I cannot understand: why have Italy and EU first committed themselves for the equality of the rights between whites and blacks in South Africa, between Macedonians and Albanians in Macedonia, between Muslims and Orthodox Christians in Bosnia, between Sunni, Shia and Christians in Lebanon, and then they support the exclusively Jewish character of Israel?
Maybe Olmert has asked you too, as he has done with Mr Prodi, (Italy’s Prime Minister) to defend Israel as an exclusively Jewish and Zionist State?
If this is your opinion, I want to ask you:
- Should Israel decide to deport non-Jewish Israeli citizens, just as the racist Minister Avigdor Liebermann has been demanding for some time, and would you endorse this policy in the name of the support of the Jewish character of the Israeli State?
- Do you perhaps ignore the fact that the non-Jewish citizens of Israel do not have the same rights as the Jewish ones? Do you not know that a non-Jewish Israeli citizen is not allowed by law to purchase land or property from a Jew? Do you ignore perhaps that there are roads connecting Israel to the settlements in the Occupied Territories on which it is not allowed transit (not to the Palestinians from the Occupied Territories, this is a fact well known by everyone) to even Arab citizens of Israel? I want also to remind you, inter alia, that the rejoining is denied to the spouse of an Arab citizen of Israel if this spouse comes from the Occupied Territories. I hope you are informed about the law proposal at the Knesset that provides for removing the Israeli nationality from an Israeli Arab citizen in case he is not willing to profess his loyalty to Zionism. You might realize that this corresponds to accepting the historical injustice that Zionism has done to the Palestinians by the same victims of an injustice.
- Do you not believe that convincing those Jews supporting Israel (fortunately enough it is not about all the Jews) to get rid of a form of State which discriminates its non-Jewish citizens, which installs settlements over territories located beyond its borders, which is leading a war against an occupied and defenceless population, which owns nuclear weapons and has not signed IAEA’s non-proliferation of nuclear weapons treaty, which has been sanctioned a thousand times by the UN, may come in helpful for them and for the Palestinians?
- A final question in the end: if Italy (which has already done so in the past) should carry out a discriminating policy against its Jewish citizens just as Israel discriminates its non-Jewish citizens and should start, unfortunately, a colonial policy again, would you not undertake again the struggle against the regime or the government that would behave in such a way?
Now then, why can one not fight a regime, like the Zionist one, that is discriminating, racist and colonialist? No one is suggesting a new Jewish Holocaust; the anti-Zionists want for Palestine, for Jews and Palestinians only one State that be not founded on religion, on ethnicity and racism.
Not differently from what all the authentically democratic States in the world are like.
Mr. President,
I just happen to be interested in studying Zionism. Hence, it is on the grounds of my studies about this political ideology that I am writing you. I will remind you of some facts:
First of all, you should be aware of the cooperation that went on between Zionists (from both the right and the left) and anti-Semites and the Nazis. It concerned a long and extremely harmful cooperation to suppress the ideas of the anti-Zionist Jews (at the time, the great majority). As incredible as it may seem, the cooperation between Zionists, fascists, Nazis and anti-Semites, historically proved, was founded on a logic of criminal exchange to the Jews’ detriment. The Zionists backed the Fascist and anti-Semitic regimes before and during WWII, while asking in exchange to be allowed to bring Jews in Palestine in order to accomplish their colonial project.
Those Jews who did not approve of fleeing to Palestine were abandoned to their fate. The anti-Semites were very pleased with being able to get rid of Jews in that way. It is not true, as you state, that the anti-Semites are anti-Zionists; if anything, it is the other way around. I hope you will not doubt the words that were uttered by the Israeli writer Yehoshua who declared some year ago:
“The Gentiles have always fostered Zionism, thus hoping that it would help them dispose of the Jews living amongst them. Today too, in a perverse way, a real anti-Semite must be a Zionist.” (1)
The Israeli writer, yet, omits to say that the Zionists too, in a perverse manner, encouraged the anti-Semites in order that they might chase the Jews away from their countries and hand over them to the Zionist militants who were ready to bring them to Palestine’s settlements. A true Zionist is a friend to the anti-Semites.
This shameful feature of Zionism’s history starts with its founder himself, Theodor Herzl.
In August 1903, Herzl went to Tsarist Russia for a set of meetings with Count von Plehve, an anti-Semitic Minister of Tsar Nicholas II, and with Finance Minister Witte.
The meetings took place less than four months after the heinous pogrom in Kishinev, whose direct responsibility rested on von Plehve himself. Herzl proposed an alliance, it being grounded on the common desire to make most of the Russian Jews abandon Russia and, in the shorter term, to keep away the Russian Jews from the socialist and communist movement.
At the beginning of the first meeting (August 8) von Plehve declared that he regarded himself as “an ardent supporter of Zionism.” When Herzl started describing Zionism’s purpose, Count von Plehve came in by stating : “You are preaching to the converted.”
During a successive meeting with Witte, Zionism’s founder heard the Minister openly tell him: “I used to tell poor Emperor Alexander III: if it should be possible to drown six or seven million Jews into the Black Sea, I would be perfectly pleased with that; but it’s not possible, so we have to let them live.” When Herzl said he trusted in some encouragement from the Russian government, Witte replied: “We do give Jews some encouragement to leave, for instance kicks in the backside.” (2)
The outcome of the meetings was von Plehve’s and the Russian government’s promise of “a moral and material endorsement to Zionism at a moment when some of its concrete actions would help decrease the Jewish population in Russia.” (3)
“If we [Zionists]—Jacob Klatzkin used to say—don’t acknowledge that the others have the right to be anti-Semites, then we deny ourselves the right to be nationalists. If our people is worthy of and yearns for living its own national life, it is natural that it feels like a foreign body forced to be amongst the nations amidst which it lives, a foreign body who insists upon having its own identity and who is therefore compelled to reduce the sphere of its own existence. It is fair therefore that they [the anti-Semites] fight us for their national integrity. Instead of setting up organizations to defend the Jews from the anti-Semites, who want to restrict our rights, we should found organizations to protect the Jews from our friends who wish to defend our rights.” (4)
These words, and the consequent attitude of the Zionists, have certainly given precious arguments to the Nazis who argued precisely that the Jews were a foreign nation in their country.
“To the Zionists—Harry Sacher, a British Zionist, shamelessly claimed—the enemy is represented by Liberalism; it is also the enemy to Nazism; ergo, Zionism is supposed to cherish sympathy and comprehension for Nazism, whose anti-Semitism is likely to be only a temporary feature.” (5)
It is not only about political short-sightedness, it is also a criminal cooperation with the Jews’ enemy. And, Mr. President, are you willing to close your eyes before this aspect of Zionism’s history? Moreover, I remind you that the Nazis reacted very positively to the Zionists’ offers, as proved by this excerpt from one of their memos:
“The members from the Zionist organizations do not have to be treated, given their activities aimed at the emigration to Palestine, as severely as instead will be necessary towards the members from the German-Jewish organizations (i.e., the assimilationists).” (6).
Further, Reinhardt Heyndrich, SS’s secret services’ chief declared:
“It can not take too much time before Palestine will be able to welcome again its sons it had lost for over one thousand years. May our good wishes and our official benevolence accompany them.” (7)
Settling Palestine was highly esteemed by the Nazis. You know, colonialists get along well with each other. That is just to remind you that the Nazis, with the aware help of the Zionists, had struck only those Jews who proposed to live in the countries they had been born in and did not want to become responsible for Palestine’s occupation and the consequent and inevitable expulsion of the Palestinians.
These Jewish victims were not Zionists, if anything, they were either assimilationists or anti-Zionists.
After the Holocaust, the West did nothing but reward the Zionists by allotting them the Palestinians’ land and making those people who had no blame pay the high price of the Jews’ annihilation that happened due to the direct responsibility of some European nations and to other peoples’ disinterest, as well as to the Zionist’s crazy plan.
The cooperation between Zionists and Nazis was also possible, beyond the concrete aspect of the common will to bring the Jews to Palestine, because the Zionist ideology and the Nazi one shared one point, as admitted by the Zionist Jew Prinz:
“A State founded on the tenet of a nation’s and a race’s purity (that’s Nazi Germany) can have respect only for those Jews who regard themselves in the same way.” (8)
The figure himself was aware of the paradoxical situation that was emerging and acknowledged:
“Taking actions was very awkward to the Zionists. It was morally embarrassing to look as if they were considered as the dearest sons of the Nazi government, particularly at a moment when it was dissolving the Jewish anti-Zionist youth groups and it seemed to prefer the Zionists. The Nazis were demanding a “more consistently Zionist behaviour.” (9)
Notwithstanding, the cooperation went on. It was a multiform cooperation that I have reconstructed in my essay “Zionism’s Nature”(10). I want to remind you, lastly, the exhortation of Dov Joseph, one of the heads from the Jewish Agency, who, at the end of 1944, when hundreds of thousands of Jews were being killed in the concentration camps, while speaking in Palestine to Zionist journalists who were concerned about the news of the slaughters, warned them about the risk of:
“…publishing data that exaggerates the number of the Jewish victims, since if we announce that a million Jews have been slain by the Nazis, then, after the end of the war, we will rightly be asked where the million Jews for which we are claiming a homeland have ended up.” (11)
All this may be enough, but, Mr. President, I dare suggest you to read up on the topic.
Zionism’s history is a criminal one, therefore it is no wonder that the Zionists and the Zionist State are keeping on handling the Palestinians so savagely. But my concern goes beyond the Palestinian people’s very sad situation that everyone seems to be forgetting.
To be earnest, Mr. President, do we want to end up like the US in Iraq? Today, outstanding personalities in the US, as former President Jimmy Carter or professors Mearsheimer and Walt, are trying hard to make their fellow countrymen open their own eyes before the aftermath of the blind foreign policy that has been devised in Tel Aviv and in Washington’s neo-con Zionist circles and that is carried out by the US in the Middle-East.
Do you believe that the war in Iraq has been made because of the Saddam’s weapons of mass destruction? Because of the threat that Iraq embodied for the West? For the exportation of democracy? For the Americans’ oil interests? Many support this last hypothesis (having the other ones miserably collapsed). I wonder: can one not buy oil on the market? Moreover: how much would the price of oil be if we should wage war on every country that produces it?
Mr. President, the war has been made in order to weed out a possible rival to Israel and to strengthen the Zionist rule over Middle-East. Now Tel Aviv is urging the West to destroy Iran and is blackmailing everyone by dropping the hint that if we do not do the job, it will be Israel to do it. In which way? By invading Iran? No, Mr. President, we all know that Israel would resort to its nuclear weaponry.
The Americans are beginning to become aware, at their own expense, of what it means to have let themselves be dragged into an absurd war in Iraq for Israel’s interests. And we will not be aware of that. Do we really want to be dragged into a nuclear war against Iran? Into a world war against Islam?
Please, follow former President Carter’s example and make a public statement against Israel’s Apartheid. If you do not want to do that, let someone else, for the sake of humanity, of the Jews and of the Palestinians, go on blaming Zionism and fighting for a single, democratic and pacific State for all the inhabitants of Palestine, nobody excluded.
Mr. President,
You are likely not to remember me, yet we met and spoke to each other. It happened due to a very sad circumstance. Some years ago, at Rome-Fiumicino airport, you, as representative of your party, came to express solidarity to my sister, Marisa, who, after taking part in a pacifist demonstration in Jerusalem, lost one of her eyes after an Israeli fire engine had sprayed such a violent water jet as to shatter the window glass and to drive a splinter into her eye, just because she was looking through the window at the Israeli policemen who were beating up a Palestinian youngster in the street.
At the time, you came to offer your regards to my sister who had paid for upholding the rights and the dignity of the Palestinians. Today, by your unacceptable declaration you are accusing the anti-Zionists, many of which are Jews, who strive for a democratic State in Palestine, putting them into the same filthy place of the anti-Semites.
I believe, Mr President, that the Zionists have managed to do something worse to you than to my sister. They have managed to make her blind from one eye, but you are blind in both of them!
Yours truly
Manno Mauro
(1) Jewish Chronicle, 22 January 1982.
(2) Maxime Rodinson, Peuple juif ou problème juif? Parigi, Petite collection Maspero, 1981, pp. 174-75.
(3) Maxime Rodinson, Peuple juif ou problème juif? cit. p. 174.
(4) Jacob Klatzkin, (1925), quoted in Jacob Agus, The Meaning of Jewish History, in Jewish Encyclopedia, vol II, p. 425.
(5) Harry Sacher, Jewish Review, September 1932, p. 104, London.
(6) Memo from the Bavarian Gestapo addressed to the Bavarian police, 23 January, 1935, published in Kurt Grossman’s Zionists and Non-Zionists under Nazi Rule in the 1930's, Herzl Yearbook, vol VI, p. 340.
(7) Reinhardt Heyndrich, SS secret services’ chief, The Visible Enemy, article issued in Das Schwarze Korps, SS’s official organ, May 1935.
(8) Joachim Prinz, (1936), quoted in Benyamin Matuvo’s The Zionist Wish and the Nazi Deed, Issues, (1966/67), p. 12.
(9) Joachim Prinz, Zionism under the Nazi Government, in Young Zionist, London, November 1937, p. 18.
(10) Zionism’s Nature, supplement to the issue 56, November 2006, by Aginform.
(11)Yoav Gelber, Zionist Policy and the Fate of European Jewry, p. 195.
Translated from Italian by Diego Traversa. Mauro Manno is a member of Tlaxcala www.tlaxcala.es the network of translators for linguistic diversity. This translation is on Copyleft and may be reproduced freely by citing the source and translator.
Labels: activism, propaganda
