PIPISTRO

just something to say

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.

Advertisements

Written by pipistro

June 3, 2007 at 4:14 pm

Posted in Israel

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: