just something to say

Archive for June 2007

Magdalam song

leave a comment »



Written by pipistro

June 30, 2007 at 5:02 pm

Posted in Lobby

Just a look outside

leave a comment »

pipijailAfter having read 919 words of pro-Israel apologies in three subsequent posts on Prof. Alan Dershowitz’s blog (care of The Huffington Post), I happened to write a short answer and wait – as of today – 24 hours for its actual publishing. Without any success. I’m sure that The Huffington Post is not worried at all about my writing but all the same it’s worth while noting that the three relevant posts before mine ended with a few lines of not-so-subliminal ad of Dershowitz’s (and Joan Peters’ “From Time Immemorial”) work: «land grabbing? during the first aliyah in the late 19th and early 20th century when many jews immigrated to israel to escape anti-semetic violence and persecution, there was only a small arab population and the land was marshy and undeveloped. the jews legally bought property from landlords that didn’t even live there. then they build up the land and turned israel into a desirable place to live. in terms of “vicious killing”, what is more vicious–murdering innocent civillians or attacking terrorist bases of operations? though the net number of palestinian deaths is higher, the proportion of innocent to combatant or terrorist deaths is lower than the proportion of israeli innocent to combatant deaths. once again, israel targets terrorists, and terrorists target civilians. i’m not saying israel is perfect, but it has done more good than any other country would under the circumstances. it is circumscribed by enemies and has suffered an exorbitant number of attacks. it has tried to negotiate peace with unreasonable arab leaders who will concede to nothing less than a palestinian state and no existance of an israeli state. i suggest everyone reads dershowitz’s book, the case for israel. it addresses most of your concerns.»

Having been denied the way in, I’m able to paste here below almost literally the contents of my comment, for I guess I stepped into some technical bug or sort of one way moderation. Of course I don’t blame at all the author of the posts I began answering to, but, alas, it seems just that kind of naive disinformation that paves the popular way to looking at the modern Israeli Goliath as if it were an everlasting David. In fact I can’t believe that a young reader outside the USA (not in the least from Israel) may be so enthusiastic aboout the all-evil-terrorists mainstream reports actually depicting the situation in the Middle East.

I was wondering what the main source of the comments just above was. Now I know. Without any order and just for the records, about the amount of land actually bought in Palestine, I’d suggest a look at the “Survey of Palestine”, that is the official book produced by Government of Palestine under British Mandate for the years of 1944-1945, about the Jewish ownership of Palestinian land as of 1943 (about 5.8%). No one can doubt about the Arab States selfish behavior in the issue of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, but the blame on the Arab States seems pretty out of topic looking at the actual situation in the Occupied Territories. Just a look at history in books other than “The Case for Israel” can help in finding something new and different from the apologies of unintentional murders, morality of torture, defensive war, and so on and so forth, talking of the Israeli actions. And what about gaining territories after a “defensive” war? First, we’d better find out how much defensive that war was. Second, a look at International Law may be helpful in finding the answer and see by the way how much it fits with the UNSCR 242. Last I’d say that we can avoid abusing terms as Nazi or Antisemitic, but we can erase as well the word Terrorist from our speech, for it is a conventional term mainly or solely referred to the enemy. We can talk of course about terrorism as a weapon, a lethal instrument which can be used (and it is used) by a large amount of entities, such as States, people, armies, guerrillas. To be very clear, if I am a Commander, a General, a Chief of Staff or something, and I lead an attack against unarmed civilians, bomb a resort or use any device whose aim is terrorizing civilians, then I am a terrorist, no matter what kind of entity I’m in, or what the mainstream says. Either if tomorrow someone will call me a hero or – say – will make me a Prime Minister.

Anyway, for some less pipistro, we got some more Financial Times [off line] showing on June 4 2007 «a new map of the West Bank , 40 years after its conquest by Israel in the Six Day War, [that] gives the most definitive picture so far of a territory in which 2.5m Palestinians are confined to dozens of enclaves separated by Israeli roads, settlements, fences and military zones. Produced by the United Nations’s Office for the Co-ordination of Humanitarian Affairs, it is based on extensive monitoring in the field combined with analysis of satellite imagery. It provides an overall picture officials say is even more comprehensive than charts drawn up by the Israeli military […] The Israeli justice ministry branded the report as “one-sided, immoral and riddled with mistakes”. » © Financial Times Limited

So much for the record.

Written by pipistro

June 5, 2007 at 9:53 pm

Posted in Israel

The case for truth

leave a comment »

pipitogato1Mr. Dershowitz keeps on doing his work as a lawyer. Actually Randy Shaw says that “Dershowitz is a passionate supporter and defender of Israel and, as he does in his criminal defense work, zealously represented his client regardless of their actual innocence.” So what – ask Dersh (The Huffington Post, May 17, 2007) – about the refusal of the Palestinian and Arab leadership to accept the two state solution offered by the United Nations in 1947-1948? Not that complicate question: Palestinians were asked to give up their own land, while new-born-Israelis were being presented with British’ colonialist gift based on British interests and promises and more specifically on their Balfour Declaration. So Palestinians were fighting for their rights while Israeli were of course [at first] pleased with Westerners’ gift. About the fantasy that “700,000 Palestinians left their homes, some voluntarily, some at the urging of Palestinian leaders and some forced out by the Israeli military”, Dershowitz seems to be the only one who did not read [at least] Morris’. Easy to say that Dersh makes his job when he suggests the parties to “give up rights, rights!” [debate at John F. Kennedy School of Government, Nov. 11th, 2005], as he has to know very well who has rights according to international law and who has nothing but their apologizers’ empty speeches.
In one thing, as of today, I agree with Mr. Dershowitz. I think he’s quite right saying that “the level of discourse has become increasingly dumber.” But at the same time I must underline we’re answering a whole page of not-so-new writing (The Huffington Post, May 31, 2007) about the use of such terms as nazi or apartheid, while just at the end of the long speech the author echoes an old myth as: “the Palestinians [who] could have had their own state if they accepted the Barak-Clinton offer at Camp David.” I mean – in my opinion – on the one hand it is not that important if one says that Sharon’s behavior was more or less a crime than Goebbels’, or if one happens to compare the Nazi Holocaust with the otherwise peculiar, daily, humiliating and slaughtering of the Palestinians in the Occupied Territories. On the other hand, I’d say the core of the topic is in fact a soft, misleading message, aimed at selling the amateurs and spreading anyway a simplistic stain of disinformation. So I’d ask Mr. Dershowitz, one more time, if he really cares for a just solution of the conflict, namely for peace, as he says he does, why doesn’t he look at the ball and leaves the players alone? More widely, neither lobbying on behalf of the blind pro-Israel minority that tries to implement a would-be ethnic cleansing in fact running against the demographic problem, nor spreading ancient myths as if they were the truth in order to apologize for the past is a right approach to the solution of the conflict, and about that unfortunately we cannot erase either history or international law.

Written by pipistro

June 3, 2007 at 4:14 pm

Posted in Israel

%d bloggers like this: