Skip to comments.What Israel has done (barf alert)
Posted on 04/20/2002 7:50:47 AM PDT by dennisw
Ed Said throwing rocks at IDF
Few years ago
- What Israel has done
by Edward Said
Despite Israel's effort to restrict coverage of its extraordinarily destructive invasion of the West Bank's Palestinian towns and refugee camps, information and images have nevertheless seeped through. The Internet has provided hundreds of verbal as well as pictorial eyewitness reports, as has Arab and European TV coverage, most of it unavailable or blocked or spun out of existence from the mainstream US media. That evidence provides stunning proof of what Israel's campaign has actually (has always) been about: the irreversible conquest of Palestinian land and society. The official line (which the US, along with nearly every American media commentator has basically supported) is that Israel has been defending itself by retaliating for the suicide bombings that have undermined its security and even threatened its existence. That claim has gained the status of an absolute truth moderated neither by what Israel has done nor by what in fact has been done to it.
Plucking out the terrorist network, destroying the terrorist infrastructure, attacking terrorist nests (note the total dehumanisation involved in every one of these phrases): the words are repeated so often and so unthinkingly that they have therefore given Israel the right to do what it has wanted to do, which in effect is to destroy Palestinian civil life with as much damage, as much sheer wanton destruction, killing, humiliation, vandalism, purposeless but overwhelming technological violence as possible. No other state on earth could have done what Israel has done with as much approbation and support as the US has given it. None has been more intransigent and destructive, less out of touch with its own realities, than Israel.
There are signs, however, that the amazing, not to say grotesque, nature of these claims (its "fight for existence") is slowly being eroded by the harsh and nearly unimaginable devastation wrought by the Jewish state and its homicidal prime minister, Ariel Sharon. Take this front-page report, "Attacks Turn Palestinian Plans Into Bent Metal and Piles of Dust" by the New York Times's Serge Schmemann (no Palestinian propagandist) on 11 April: "There is no way to assess the full extent of the damage to the cities and towns -- Ramallah, Bethlehem, Tulkarm, Qalqilya, Nablus, and Jenin -- while they remain under a tight siege, with patrols and snipers firing in the streets. But it is safe to say that the infrastructure of life itself and of any future Palestinian state -- roads, schools, electricity pylons, water pipes, telephone lines -- has been devastated." By what inhuman calculus did Israel's army, using 50 tanks, 250 missile strikes a day, and dozens of F-16 sorties, besiege Jenin's refugee camp for over a week, a one square kilometre patch of shacks housing 15,000 refugees and a few dozen men armed with automatic rifles and with no defences whatever, no leaders, no missiles, no tanks, nothing, and call it a response to terrorist violence and the threat to Israel's survival? There are reported to be hundreds buried in the rubble Israeli bulldozers are now trying to heap over the camp's ruins.
Are Palestinian civilians, men, women, children, no more than rats or cockroaches that can be killed and attacked in the thousands without so much as a word of compassion or in their defence? And what about the capture of thousands of Palestinian men who have been taken off by Israeli soldiers without a trace, the destitution and homelessness of so many ordinary people trying to survive in the ruins created by Israeli bulldozers all over the West Bank, the siege that has now gone on for months and months, the cutting off of electricity and water in all Palestinian towns, the long days of total curfew, the shortage of food and medicine, the wounded who have bled to death, the systematic attacks on ambulances and aid workers that even the mild-mannered Kofi Annan has decried as outrageous? Those actions will not be pushed so easily into the memory hole. Its friends must ask Israel how its suicidal policies can possibly gain it peace, acceptance and security.
A monstrous transformation of an entire people by the most formidable and feared propaganda machine in the world into little more than "militants" and "terrorists" has allowed not just Israel's military but its fleet of writers and defenders to efface a terrible history of suffering and abuse in order to destroy the civil existence of the Palestinian people with impunity. Gone from public memory are the destruction of Palestinian society in 1948 and the creation of a dispossessed people; the conquest of the West Bank and Gaza and their military occupation since 1967; the invasion of 1982 with its 17,500 Lebanese and Palestinian dead and the Sabra and Shatila massacres; the continuous assault on Palestinian schools, refugee camps, hospitals, civil installations of every kind. What anti-terrorist purpose is served by destroying the building and then removing the records of the Ministry of Education, the Ramallah Municipality, the Central Bureau of Statistics, various institutes specialising in civil rights, health and economic development, hospitals, radio and television stations? Is it not clear that Sharon is bent not only on "breaking" the Palestinians, but on trying to eliminate them as a people with national institutions?
In such a context of disparity and asymmetrical power, it seems deranged to keep asking the Palestinians, who have neither army, nor air force, nor tanks, nor defences of any kind, nor functioning leadership, to "renounce" violence, and to require no comparable limitation on Israel's actions. Even the matter of suicide bombers, which I have always opposed, cannot be examined from a view point that permits a hidden racist standard to value Israeli lives over the many more Palestinian lives that have been lost, maimed, distorted and foreshortened by long- standing Israeli military occupation, and the systematic barbarity openly used by Sharon against Palestinians from the beginning of his career in the 1950s until now.
There can be no conceivable peace, in my opinion, that does not tackle the real issue: Israel's utter refusal to accept the sovereign existence of a Palestinian people that is entitled to rights over what Sharon and most of the people supporting him consider exclusively to be the land of Greater Israel, i.e. the West Bank and Gaza. A profile of Sharon in the 6-7 April issue of the Financial Times concluded with this extremely telling extract from his autobiography, which the FT prefaced with "he has written with pride of his parents' belief that Jews and Arabs could live side by side." Then the relevant quote from Sharon's book: "But they believed without question that only they had rights over the land. And no one was going to force them out, regardless of terror or anything else. When the land belongs to you physically... that is when you have power, not just physical power but spiritual power."
In l988, the PLO made the concession that the partition of historical Palestine into two states would be acceptable. This was reaffirmed on numerous occasions and certainly again in the Oslo documents. But only the Palestinians explicitly recognised the notion of partition. Israel never has. This is why there are now over 170 settlements on Palestinian lands, why a 300-mile network of roads connecting them to each other and totally impeding Palestinian movement exists (according to Jeff Halper of the Israeli Committee Against House Demolition, it has cost $3 billion and has been funded by the US), why no Israeli prime minister, from Rabin on, has ever conceded any real Palestinian sovereignty to the Palestinians, and why of course the settlements have increased on an annual basis. The merest glance at a recent map of the territories reveals what Israel has been doing throughout the peace process, and what the consequent geographical discontinuity and shrinkage in Palestinian life has been. In effect, then, Israel considers itself and the Jewish people to own the land of Israel in its entirety: there are land ownership laws in Israel itself guaranteeing this, but on the West Bank and Gaza the network of settlements, roads, and no concessions whatever on sovereign land rights to the Palestinians serve the same function.
What boggles the mind is that no official -- US, Palestinian, Arab, UN, European, or anyone else -- has challenged Israel on this point, which has been threaded through all of the Oslo documents, procedures and agreements. That is why, of course, after nearly 10 years of "peace negotiations," Israel still controls the West Bank and Gaza. They are more directly controlled (owned?) by over 1,000 Israeli tanks and thousands of soldiers today, but the underlying principle is the same. No Israeli leader (and certainly not Sharon and his Land of Israel supporters who are the majority in his government) has either officially recognised the occupied territories as occupied territories or gone on to recognise that Palestinians could or might theoretically have sovereign rights -- that is, without Israeli control over borders, water, air, security on what most of the world considers Palestinian land. So to speak about the "vision" of a Palestinian state, as has become fashionable, is mere vision alas, unless the question of land ownership and sovereignty is openly and officially conceded by the Israeli government. No Israeli government ever has made this concession and, if I am right, none will in the near future. It needs to be remembered that Israel is the only state in the world today that has never had internationally declared borders; the only state not the state of its citizens but of the whole Jewish people; the only state where over 90 per cent of the land is held in trust for the exclusive use of the Jewish people. That it is also the only state in the world never to have recognised any of the main provisions of international law (as argued recently in these pages by Richard Falk) suggests the depth and structural knottiness of the absolute rejectionism that Palestinians have had to face.
This is why I have been sceptical about discussions and meetings about peace, which is a lovely word but in the present context simply means that Palestinians will have to stop resisting Israeli control over their land. It is among the many deficiencies of Arafat's terrible leadership (to say nothing of the even more lamentable Arab leaders in general) that he never made the decade-long Oslo negotiations focus on land ownership, and thus never put the onus on Israel to declare itself constitutively willing to give up title to Palestinian land; nor did he ever ask that Israel be required to deal with any of its responsibility for the sufferings of his people. Now I worry that he may simply be trying to save himself again, whereas what we really need are international monitors to protect us, as well as elections to assure a real political future for the Palestinian people.
The profound question facing Israel and its people is this: is it willing juridically to assume the rights and obligations of being a country like any other, and forswear the kind of impossible land ownership assertions for which Sharon and his parents and his soldiers have been fighting since day one? In 1948 Palestinians lost 78 per cent of Palestine. In 1967 they lost the last 22 per cent, both times to Israel. Now the international community must lay upon Israel the obligation to accept the principle of real, as opposed to fictional, partition, and to accept the principle of limiting Israel's untenable extra-territorial claims, those absurd Biblically-based pretensions, and laws that have so far allowed it to override another people completely. Why is that kind of fundamentalism tolerated unquestioningly? But so far all we hear is that Palestinians must give up violence and condemn terror. Is nothing substantive ever demanded of Israel? Can it go on doing what it has without a thought for the consequences? That is the real question of its existence: whether it can exist as a state like all others, or must always be above the constraints and duties of all other states in the world today. The record is not reassuring.
PINGING! ) ) ) ) ) )
If you want on or off me Israel/MidEast/Islamic Jihad ping list please let me know. Via Freepmail is best way.............
I just sent this traitor a plexiglass belly button, so he can look in the mirror and see what a mongoloid looks like. If they have "no defences whatever", he should get some courage and go in an ask them to lay down their "automatic rifles" for the sake of world peace.
It's a little difficult to have any sympathy anymore for Palestinian men, women, and children now that they have turned themselves into human bombs. They think it's heroic to explode as long as they kill some Jews in the process. So how do they expect us to cry for them when they explode without others being killed?
So this is why there have been so many attacks on the freedom of the internet. Some fear the free exchange of ideas and information. Think of average folks at home relying on Rather and the others for their "news" they would think there is only the AIPAC side. However...
Truth Crushed To Earth Shall Rise Again
Rats almost wiped out civilization a few times, didn't they. They have caused famines and pestilence. Reminds me of the RATS in this country.
Jeff Jacoby: The Lies of Edward Said
Jeff Jacoby. The Lies of Edward Said. FrontPageMagazine.com | October
2, 2000 get a printer-friendly version of this article. ...
Description: Article by Jeff Jacoby criticizing the Palestinian intellectual for fabricating his life story.
... Nation; Peace and Its Discontents, a review by Matthew Dalek for Salon; The Edward
Said Archive, includes a few other articles by Said and links to other online ...
Ross Douthat on peaceniks on National Review Online
... to two words: blame Israel. Writing in the UK's Guardian, the ever-reliable Edward
Said remarks that Arab hatred of the USA is eminently understandable, given ...
CAMERA Update -- Edward Said's Documented Deceptions
Edward Said's Documented Deceptions. Public Station WNET Airs
Anti-Israel Documentary In Search of Palestine. ...
Edward Said: Professor of Terror
Edward Said: Professor of Terror. Regarding
Edward Said Click here to continue.
when a group of successful, mostly white, mostly Europeans, goes up against a bunch of mostly brown, third world, malcontented failures it's an easy guess who the Marxists will stick up for.
The mask is off. It was the left and class envy then that killed the German Jews, and it is the left and class envy on behalf of Arab malcontents that is keeping that same hatred alive today.
Arafart should he held accountable as the terrorist he is. I do not see Jews strapping bombs to little kids and sending them into Arab cities.
Rats and roaches are pests, you just have to know how to get rid of the problem effectively, which hopefully will be permanent.
If the Palestinian people had competant leadership, they might have acquired statehood and begun to copy Israel's successful experiment in the desert.
Alas, neither their political system nor their religious fanaticsm has released the death grip on the people.
If I had been Arafat, I would have accepted the Clinton plan and then lobbied the world for billions in aid and gotten it. I would have begun constructing casinos to compete with Las Vegas for the oil-rich arab millionaire business and appeasing jet-setters from Europe.
In five years they would make me king of Palestine.
But Arafat is a butcher and a demon and only has brought death, destruction and misery to his pathetic people.
-here's a sample of his "works"--
Covering for Arafat the Killer
... it reached Khartoum, Cleo Noel and George Curtis Moore, our ambassador and charge
d'affaires, were murdered point blank by Black September, Arafat's hit men. ...
www.cdn-friends-icej.ca/isreport/janfeb01/killer.html - 6k - Cached -
MIDDLE EAST ACCORD: ANOTHER BID FOR PEACE
... PLO out after a bloody clash in what is known as Black September. Arafat moves his
headquarters to southern Lebanon, from where the PLO is strategically poised ...
www.cbc.ca/insidecbc/newsinreview/dec98/middle/homeland.htm - 20k - Cached - Similar pages
LET'S TALK WAR CRIMES
... in the Saudi Embassy in Khartoum. They were killed by Black September, Arafat's gunmen,
after President Nixon refused to release Sirhan Sirhan, the Palestinian ...
www.netanyahu.org/lettalwarcri.html - 8k - Cached - Similar pages
USCFL - Frequently Asked Questions
... to move against King Hussein. That bloody day was known as Black September. Arafat
fled to the unsuspecting and friendly arms of the Lebanese people. Lebanon ...
freelebanon.org/faqs.htm - 55k - Cached - Similar pages
November 6, 2001
... from their own Arab brethren. Do you remember the consequences of "Black September",
Arafat's failed attempt to seize power from Jordan's King Hussein in 1970 ...
www.law.mcgill.ca/students/quid/11-06-01/11-06.html - 78k - Cached - Similar pages
Hmmm, poor Palestinians. They are the real victims in this case
accused of being suicide bombers and terrorists when they haven't done a thing to deserve that title.
One Jewish writer there maybe...name of Solomon. The rest are Arab writers including the ubiquitous James Zogby. More an Arab website than a leftist one.
The left made big hay for years of how it was the right that supposedly killed the Jews. But any look at history will show that the German Jews were hated because they were more successful than other peoples.Erm... any look at history will show it's a lot more complicated than that. I mean, non-successful Jews were rounded up too. Jewish factory-workers, Jewish cleaners, Jewish beggars. And there weren't very many rich non-Jews arrested. Indeed, the Nazis found powerful support amongst rich white Germans - business leaders, the artistocracy and what was left of their monarchy. Now, it's true that the Jews were scape-goated for the economic failure of Germany after WWI, and they also got some of the blame for failure in the war itself. Along with Freemasons, communists, socialists, and even homosexuals (to the extent that many left-wing members of the Wiemar republic were accused of being homosexuals by the Nazi party, at least). And, indeed, Jews were painted as inveterate socialists and communists (and many of them were socialists and communists - including some of those who went on to found Israel), Freemason was made synonymous with "Jew", and the homosexuals were poor innocent Germans corrupted by the Jew's assault on traditional Aryan family values.
The mask is off. It was the left and class envy then that killed the German Jews,Quite an achievement, given that virtually all left-wingers were imprisoned and/or shot before any move was made on the Jews, and given that the Jews weren't, in any way whatsoever, the ruling class in Germany. Where the Jews had had success was in small business. They were not amongst the aristocracy, they were not (with few exceptions) owners of factories of big business, they were not grand landowners or military leaders. The left were removed from positions of power as soon as Hitler took over (and he was able to take over by uniting the votes of various right-wing parties, and the centrist/liberal Catholic party, against the social democrats and communists), and class envy played no ostensible part in the persecution of the Jews. Jews were persecuted by their good Christian neighbours, by their employers, by the rich as much as (if not more than) the poor.
and it is the left and class envy on behalf of Arab malcontents that is keeping that same hatred alive today.Forgive me, but, b*ll*cks. If that were the case, the first in the firing line would be the house of Saud. Especially since Israel is surely quite a left-wing country - take, for instance, the kibbutz(?sp) system, which is surely socialist.
Not correct at all. Hitler's rise to power was in a Germany economically ruined with massive inflation (there are numerous stories of having to take a wheelbarrow full of money to buy a loaf of bread. Hitler's promise was that he would fix the economy, and just like any true leftist he found a scapegoat to explain why the poor were poor.
The scapegoat tactic was predicated on the idea that the Jews who, were in general, more successful (yes there were excpetions but, so what) than the gentiles were stealing what was rightfully their's
If that doesn't sound familiar it should--its just what the left does in this country--i.e. rich whites are cheating blacks and Hispanics out of what is rightfully theirs--its just what the Marxists especally the French are doing withn Israel--the palestinians are poor brown third world malcontents at odds with European, white successful people. THEREFORE the Israelis are "oppressing" the Palestinians.
As the old saying goes those who refuse to learn from history are condemned to repeat it. And we are seeing a little bit of history replayed right before our eyes.
And just because the nazis were against the "communists" is meaningless. After all look at how Russia was allied with Germany before a break ocurred. Look at how left wingers are united behind Islamic malcontents who are obsessed with religion (most left wingers observe no religion) who cut off the hands of thieves and kill adulterers (the left excuses criminals it does not punish them) etc etc
Bottom line, just because two groups have different politics even radically different does NOT MEAN that they are not at times useful to each other, And the opposite is true as well--just because two are alike does not mean they will not be at odds with eachother.
60 years ago the Nazis used class warfare to scapegoat and kill the Jews. And today as Jews are being murdered in Israel it is the Antisemitic left that is helping enable the murderers to scapegoat the Jews once again through class warfare.