Mahzor

New York Public Library

Churches

Sarajevo Haggadah

Mah Nishtanah

Sarajevo haggadah

Antaea Darom

Israeli women's art

Action

Torah as music

Ben Heine

Action

ceramic bowl

Mohammad Said Kalash, "Offering Reconciliation" exhibit (photo: Ilan Amihai)

Action

Punch and Judy/Pinchas and Jamila

Avi Katz

Action

David Grossman

Ben Heine

Action

Eldrige Street shul

Lower East Side

Action

Dove

Ben Heine

Action

Two birds

Hoda Jamal

Action

Israeli and Palestinian boys

from documentary, Promises

Action

Cat in the Hat

Yiddish version

Action

Daylight through the Wall

Banksy: graffiti art on Separation Wall

Action

Maurice Sendak's Brundibar set

New Victory Theater (photo: Nan Melville/NYT)

Action

Daniel Barenboim, West-Eastern Divan Orchestra

Palestinian-Israeli musical ensemble (photo: Kerstin Joensson/AP)

Action

Great Day on Eldrige Street

N.Y.'s klezmer greats celebrate shul rededication (photo: Leo Sorel)

Action

Joint Appeal for Peace

(Avi Katz)

Joint Appeal for Peace

Ketubah, Ancona, Italy (1772)

(Jewish Theological Seminary library)

Ancona ketubah

Posts Tagged ‘meretz’

Avrum Burg to Found New Israeli Political Party: Shivyon Yisrael

Friday, July 23rd, 2010

Today’s Haaretz brings the interesting news that Israeli iconoclast, Avrum Burg is founding a new political party to be called Shivyon Israel (Equality Israel).  It will represent one of the few attempts by a mainstream political leader to form a post-Zionist party.  Here is Burg on its platform:

The time has come for an Israeli party, a Jewish-Arab party, that will carry the banner of total commitment to equality, without a trace of discrimination and racism…A party that will sail far beyond the paradigms of classic Zionism, which to this day ignores the place of Israel’s Arabs. A party that will demand full equality for all Israel’s citizens, the kind of equality we demand for the Jews in the Diaspora wherever they live.

The party, Israel Equality (Shivyon Yisrael ) – with the acronym Shai in Hebrew, gift – will fight for a state that will be a total democracy…The party will wrestle with the…internal contradiction of “a Jewish and democratic state,” which means a great deal of democracy for the Jews and too much Jewish nationalism for the Arabs. It will be the party of those who are committed to the supreme universal and Israeli cultural values of human dignity, the search for peace and a desire for freedom, justice and equality.

Those who vote for it and its candidates will accept the definition of Israel as “a state whose regime is democratic and egalitarian, and which belongs to all its citizens and communities. The state in which the Jewish people have chosen to renew their sovereignty and where they realize their right to self-determination.” The practical expression of this commitment will be a supreme effort to change the social balance of power, which is unjust, to give equal opportunities to the entire population in Israel, regardless of national background, ethnic origin, race, sex or sexual preference.

Frankly, I’m ambivalent.  It’s all well and good for this new party to embrace the idea that Israel is a state in which Jews renew their sovereignty and their right to self-determination.  But frankly there is an Arab nation too within Israel and its dreams are no less vivid than those of its Jewish citizens.  Besides, the history of Israeli politics is littered with new political parties and catchy acronyms which don’t live up to expectations.

Further, I wonder how Burg, who soured on Israeli politics several years ago and decamped to France where he’s pursued a business career, will explain his absence.  It will be all too easy for the Israeli political barons to categorize Burg as the jilted Israeli pol who took his marbles home when he couldn’t realize his political ambitions there.  How does he avoid being tarred as a Johnny Come Lately, smelling of French Bordeaux and other decadent foreign tendencies?

I also wonder how this party will differ from Hadash.  He complains in this article that the latter party has “emotional baggage.”  By which he means that it is hated by many Israeli Jews.  But why is it hated?  Because it has a mainly Arab constituency and because it has forged an alliance between Jews and Arabs.  So why does Burg not think that his party won’t be tarred with the same brush since it appears to have an overlapping agenda?  Why the need for two parties representing a similar program?  Isn’t this just the left cannibalizing itself?

One welcome outcome of this should be the long-awaited demise of Meretz, the liberal Zionist party which claimed the mantle of the Jewish left but never really embraced it with vigor, forthrightness or courage.  It may also mark the further weakening of Labor, a party of which Burg was once a crown prince, and which also deserves to be put out of its misery.

In closing, let me say that I’m all in favor of the general outlines of this initiative (with the few caveats above) and wish it well.  Israeli politics is so f*#%ed up that anything would be better than what we have now.

Israel Plans Prosecution of Ameer Makhoul, Uri Blau

Saturday, June 12th, 2010

The Israeli prosecutor has set a June 21st trial date for Ameer Makhoul, the director of an Israeli Palestinian NGO, who is accused of plotting espionage against Israel.  I have joined an international group of human rights activists organizing on his behalf.  I’ll make public our plans in the coming days.

I wanted to add a disturbing discovery I’ve made with the help of an Israeli peace activist.  That is, the faux-left Israeli Jewish political party Meretz couldn’t give a crap about Ameer Makhoul.  When queried about the party’s position on the matter, party chair Haim Oron had this to say:

In the Anat Kamm case as in that of Ameer Makhoul, the leadership of Meretz has opposed the use of gag orders.  But regarding their arrest, since it’s not within our ability to probe these matters or to know whether there is any truth in them, we cannot make any statement about the investigation.

When the Israeli peace activist queried him further, Oron replied:

It’s not clear what sort of pubic effort should be made concerning this matter.  The police investigated and filed very grave charges.  What should be done?  To join those who defame or those who bless [him]?  Isn’t that what courts are for?

So there you have it.  The so-called Israeli left continues to embarrass itself by betraying its values (or at least what its values should be).  As my Israeli friend wrote: “Is it any wonder they’ve gone from 12 Knesset seats to three in recent elections?”  What do they represent besides furthering their own measly existence at any price.  I wouldn’t even say they sold out.  There was very little to sell.  They simply petered out due to a lack of conviction and intestinal fortitude.

Can you imagine Israeli civil liberties, such as they are, under deep threat with two of the most prominent prosecutions in recent memory filed and Meretz goes AWOL?  Why do  you exist if not to fight for civil liberties?  And not just the civil liberties of the good folk, but the rights of those under imminent attack. The ones smeared by the secret police.  The ones called traitor and spat upon.  The tortured ones.  These are the ones who really need you and instead you decide a nap sounds like a better option.

Oron’s reply also bespeaks a terrible insularity in Israeli politics.  Jews and their parties care about Jews.  If you’re not going to vote for them, why should they have anything to do with you?  And that’s certainly true of Makhoul and the Israeli Palestinian voting bloc who get short shrift from the likes of Meretz.

I myself queried another Meretz leader (Jewish of course) who wrote in error:

I checked, and the fact is that to my knowledge, none of the MKs, including the MKs from Balad (which I believe Amir Makhoul belongs to) and Hadash (his former party home), have raised the issue in public, for the same reason that Jumes [Oron] writes.

I saw Issam Makhoul, his brother – who was an MK for Hadash, at Saturday night’s peace demonstration in Tel Aviv organized by a coalition led by Peace Now, Meretz and Hadash, with Gush Shalom and other activist movements.

He told me that he understands that the charges will be dropped in the near future, and that nothing will come of the whole affair.

So there you have it, the Attorney General has set a trial date and Meretz leadership are fully confident charges will be dropped and nothing will come of the matter.  Do I hear burying your head in the sand?

And as for the claim that the Palestinian Israeli political parties have been silent, that too is in error.  Balad and and Muhamad Barake of Hadash have spoken out, as has Ahmad Tibi.  This proves that my Israeli Jewish interlocutor, someone active in the Jewish peace movement, is so out of touch with his Palestinian counterparts that he doesn’t even know what their response has been to the arrest and torture of Ameer Makhoul.  This is what the Israeli Jewish left has come to I’m sorry to say.  Out of touch and really couldn’t be bothered to care enough to know.

Maariv also reports today that the Israeli attorney general plans to prosecute Uri Blau for betraying a military operation.  Several months ago, Blau’s attorneys had worked out an agreement whereby he would return documents stolen by Anat Kam from the IDF and neither Kamm nor Blau would be charged.  The Shin Bet violated that agreement.

Then Anat Kamm called on Blau to return the documents and he did so.  But now the Shin Bet has upped the ante.  They demand that Blau return EVERY secret document he’s ever received (not just those from Kamm).  And that is the bone that sticks in the craw for Blau and rightfully so.

The attorney general will prosecute him without regard to his return of the documents.  An astonishing statement came from the State that the basis of Blau’s crime isn’t publishing secret documents, but merely possessing them.  So let’s parse what he’s saying: that in a so-called democracy any journalist who possesses a secret document has committed a crime.  And the mere possession of the documents damages state security and endangers life.  This is no longer democracy.  This borders on police state attitudes.

Keep in mind that what Blau did was “out” the IDF for killing unarmed Palestinian militants in cold blood and then lying about it–all in violation of Supreme Court rulings saying killing a man when you could arrest him, or when civilians are present and might be harmed,, was illegal.  In addition, Blau held documents which he didn’t publish which revealed the scorched earth military strategy that the IDF planned to execute in what became Operation Cast Lead.  THIS is what constitutes damaging state security and endangering human life: revealing war crimes.

What kind of country is this?  Have they lost any contact with the notion of democracy?  Do they not have a clue what a free press means or should mean?  American Jews, you must come to understand that your Zionist dream has been reduced to this.  What a tragedy.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Meretz USA Calls for Lifting Gaza Siege

Wednesday, December 31st, 2008
Three Gazan brothers killed by Israeli strike (Khalil Hamra/AP)

Three Gazan brothers killed by Israeli strike (Khalil Hamra/AP)

Finally, a liberal American Jewish group has gotten it right.  Till now, most have rather timidly called for a new ceasefire and resumption of “humanitarian aid” to Gaza.  This, of course, is precisely the ceasefire proposal Israel offered Hamas, and which the latter refused because it did not include a lifting of the 18-month Gaza siege, which has imposed a punishing, bleak existence on the area’s 1.5 million inhabitants.  In my opinion, it doesn’t take much courage for a liberal group to advocate a position embraced by Israel before it launched its assault against Gaza.  It takes courage to see this situation as it is and declare that Israel (and Hamas) needs to live up to its share of the bargain.

This is precisely what Meretz USA** has done in its current statement opposing the Gaza debacle:

Meretz USA calls for the immediate and absolute cessation of violence between Israel and the Hamas.

Understanding that only such a result can forestall a humanitarian disaster in Gaza, preserve Israel’s security, and maintain space for diplomatic progress, Meretz USA urges all parties concerned to engineer an urgent and complete cease-fire that will be accompanied and reinforced by the following elements:

1. Sustained diplomatic talks between the Israeli government and the Palestinian Authority.

Such talks should be aimed, in the short term, at easing conditions in the West Bank and Gaza in order to reduce tension and strengthen Palestinian moderates; and, in the long term, at the achievement of an equitable two-state solution which hardliners on both sides – Hamas being one of them – continue to oppose.

2. The verifiable termination of weapons smuggling into the Gaza Strip.

The cease-fire should not serve as a respite during which the Hamas expands and improves its armaments and military capability.

3. The lifting of the economic blockade on Gaza.

The consistent provision of humanitarian aid must be guaranteed and the security situation must not be exploited by Israel to collectively punish the Palestinian people through the smothering of their economy.

For the sake of comparison, here is a statement from Brit Tzedek:

Tell President-elect Obama that his strong voice is needed now. He must call for an immediate ceasefire that ends the attacks by all sides and facilitates the delivery of humanitarian aid to Gaza.

I am in favor of any statement by any group that voices opposition to the Gaza conflict and I’m certainly in favor of calling for Obama to get up off his tush and speak out on this madness.  But why can’t liberal Jewish groups call a spade a spade?  Gaza needs more than “humanitarian aid.”  It needs a lifting of the siege.  Completely.

When I reported my criticism to a Brit Tzedek staff member, I was told I wasn’t being a supportive ally.  Solidarity is a good thing no doubt.  But it’s imperative in the face of moral madness that we speak out forthrightly.  That we not pull punches for the sake of how some in the Jewish community might perceive what we say.  We have to speak truth in this time of depravity.  To do any less is doing a disservice not only the Gaza victims, but to our own sense of Jewishness and Zionism.

Remember, it was Israel which refused to lift the siege, though that was part of the earlier ceasefire to which it agreed.  It was Israel by the way, which launched a massive assault on Gaza tunnels on November 5th which killed five Hamas operatives.  It was Israel which broke the last ceasefire.  This act was answered by Hamas rockets fired at southern Israel.  When Livni and Barak talk about how intolerable the rockets are they forget that it was they who brought the rockets down on their own citizens head by breaking the ceasefire.

I say these things not to place all blame on Israel because there is always blame to go around in these situations and Hamas is not blameless.  Terrorizing and killing civilians is never blameless no matter who is the perpetrator.  But we must not fall prey to the political-historical amnesia in pro-Israel propaganda voiced by apologists like Benny Morris in today’s N.Y. Times.

**It should be noted that Meretz USA is entirely independent of Israel’s Meretz political party, which by the way has temporized its opposition to the Gaza assault.

Gaza, Meretz and the Bankruptcy of Israeli Politics

Thursday, December 25th, 2008

In case you didn’t know, Meretz’s call for a military strike against Gaza reminds us we’re in the middle of an election campaign.  It also reminds us of the utter bankruptcy of the national political process.  If you speak forthrightly about what must be done for peace, you lose votes.  If you pander to nationalist-security sentiment, you may not gain votes (especially if you’re Meretz), but you won’t lose them.

Every reasonable person both inside and outside Israel knows what will stop the rain of Qassams descending on southern Israel.  Hamas has told them what it wants: lifting the siege.  If Israel agrees to end its depraved policy of suffocating Gaza, then Hamas would renew the tahdiya and there would be, if not peace, at least calm.  In the long term of course, Israel would have to negotiate at least indirectly with Hamas for longer-term & more comprehensive peace agreements.

Hamas, of course, rejected renewal of the ceasefire on Israeli terms, which essentially gave Israel peace and Gaza ongoing misery.  The rocket barrage unleashed since the end of the ceasefire is unpardonable, especially since the longer it lasts the more likely it will lead to the death of an Israeli civilian.  But if Israel listened to reason and common sense, it would realize the siege hasn’t worked and won’t work (not to mention that it is morally indefensible and a violation of international law); and would lift it.  Then there would be no missile barrage, hence no military incursion.

An indication of the delusional thinking affecting Israeli politicians is this statement:

Chairman of the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee Tzahi Hanegbi [said]…”If the Qassam [rocket] fire does not stop, the Israel Defense Forces will fight you with the same might with which it fought Hezbollah during the Second Lebanon War,” said Hanegbi (Kadima), speaking to Army Radio.

Hanegbi is under the illusion that threatening Hamas with what Israel served up to Hezbollah is a deterrent.  Someone ought to tell him the news: the IDF failed in Lebanon just as it will fail in Gaza.  The only people the IDF frightens is unarmed civilians.

It is, of course, politically bankrupt for Meretz to call for an incursion.  It signals that even the left has lost its bearings in Israeli politics.  If you can’t speak plainly and clearly and find a place in the political process, what is that process worth?  The process has led to disaster after disaster.  The coming operation, if it does not end with the deaths of Israeli soldiers and Gaza civilians, certainly will do absolutely nothing to end the Qassam barrages.  They may stop for a day or a week.  But they will resume as they always have after this type of military action.  It will be the same old cycle of misery and failure into which Hamas and Israel have sunk themselves.

While I find myself sometimes in strong disagreement with Brad Burston, he’s hit the nail on the head in this week’s Haaretz column, with his own characterization of this imminent offensive, Can the First Gaza War Be Stopped Before It Starts?

He quotes Brig. Gen. Shmuel Zakai, former IDF Gaza commander, with some sensible ideas about ending the Qassam fire. The fact that they are sensible means, ipso facto that there will never receive serious consideration by the Israeli powers-that-be:

The state of Israel must understand that Hamas rule in Gaza is a fact, and it is with that government that we must reach a situation of calm.”

Israel must also understand that Hamas is a pragmatic organization, Zakai continues. “The moment that the organization understands that Qassam fire is contrary to its interests, it will stop the fire.

“We need to work in an integrated manner. The situation is a complex one…”An integrated approach, on the one hand, includes demonstration of military might…and on the other hand, also using a carrot, to cause Hamas to understand that refraining from firing exactly serves their interests.

In Zakai’s view, Israel’s central error during the tahadiyeh, the six-month period of relative truce that formally ended on Friday, was failing to take advantage of the calm to improve, rather than markedly worsen, the economic plight of the Palestinians of the Strip.

He believes that Hamas would have – and still would – accept a bargain in which Hamas…would halt the fire in exchange for easing of the many ways in which Israeli policies have kept a choke hold on the economy of the Strip.

“…The carrot is improvement of the economic situation in the Gaza Strip. You cannot just land blows, leave the Palestinians in Gaza in the economic distress they’re in, and to expect that Hamas will just sit around and do nothing. That’s something that’s simply unrealistic.”

In the end, Israel must realize that “we can’t impose regimes on the Palestinians. We can’t cause the Palestinians [to decide] who will rule over them. Hamas took over the Gaza Strip. This is a fact. I do not believe that the state of Israel should cause another ruler to come to power in Gaza borne on the bayonets of the IDF.

“It’s just like after the disengagement. We left Gaza and we thought that with that troubles were over. Did we really think that a million and a half people living in that kind of poverty were going to mount the rooftops and begin singing the Beitar hymn? That is illogical.”

UJA-Federation’s Bogus Explanation for Withdrawing Other Israel Film Festival Sponsorship

Tuesday, November 13th, 2007

Yesterday, I wrote a post noting that Haaretz reported that the New York UJA-Federation withdrew its sponsorship for the Other Israel Film Festival. It is devoted to highlighting the Israeli Arab experience through film. When I read the Federation’s quoted reasons for withdrawing they ran hollow to me. Now I know it’s all bunkum.

Here’s what the Federation said:

A UJA-Federation spokesperson denied that the reason for the withdrawal of support was political or connected in any way with the festival’s content, citing a failure to receive approval through appropriate channels within the organization.

“A request was made to have UJA-Federation lend its name to help generate interest in the event. The request was granted although it did not go through the proper approval process,” a statement from the organization said.

This of course is gobbledy gook. How can the request have been granted while at the same time it didn’t go through the proper approval process? Are they saying that the employee who approved the sponsorship didn’t have the right to have done so? Or are they saying that whoever approved the sponsorship didn’t realize how heavily the Fed’s right-wing pro-Israel megadonors would come down on Federation for the decision?

The following speaks volumes on that score:

…Sources, however, cite outside pressures from right-wing elements in the Jewish community and from potential donors who objected to an Israeli festival that was about the country’s Arab citizens only.

I guess we’re going to have to do some digging to find out who those “right-wing elements” and “potential donors” were. It’s also laughable to cite the fact that the Festival only dealt with Israeli Arabs as a reason to reject sponsorship. This smacks of racism. If UJA-Federation supports the State of Israel then it must perforce support all citizens of Israel including Israeli Arabs. If it does support Israel and all its citizens then there can be no problem with a film festival honoring Israeli Arabs. If, however, UJA Federation supports only the Jewish citizens of the State of Israel, then it should say so.

What follows are other bogus excuses mounted by Federation to obfuscate the reasons it withdrew:

Meretz USA, a civil rights and peace organization that is “fully independent of the Israeli political party Meretz-Yahad,” according to its Web site, was also among the initial list of sponsors.

UJA-Federation officials said the organization’s inclusion in the original promotional materials was the result of a simple mistake.

“Once the proper review process took place, we recognized that there were two issues that would prohibit us from lending our name in support of this event.

“First, we were listed as a sponsor yet no additive funds were provided directly in support of the festival.

Are they claiming that UJA-Federation never sponsors events unless it has donated funds to support the event? If so, I find that a highly unusual guideline and would wonder whether it’s actually true. And I say this as someone who both worked at UJA-Federation (in Westchester) and spent many years as a non-profit fundraiser.

“Secondly, an Israeli political party was also listed as a sponsor in the initial brochure.

“In order to maintain UJA-Federation’s capacity to mobilize the broadest expression of the New York Jewish community we make every effort to avoid association with Israeli or American political parties.

“Our role is to mobilize the Jewish community to stand with the people of Israel and we preserve this capacity by strictly avoiding being associated with any Israeli political parties.”

This again is entirely bogus. Meretz USA, as noted at the Other Israel website is NOT an Israeli political party. It doesn’t even directly or financially support the real Israeli political party Meretz-Yachad. In fact, the former is prohibited from doing so as a 501 c3 registered non-profit organization (login required). As such, it cannot engage in politics. It can only engage in educational programs.

The Fed spokesperson’s weaselly explanation also begs the question: has the Federation ever sponsored events by similar organizations like American Friends of Peace Now, Likud USA, American Friends of Likud, etc.? I’d be willing to bet it has. If it has, then the explanation goes out the window and we’re returned to what is undoubtedly the real explanation: the Fed’s right-wing pro-Israel leadership put the kibosh on Festival sponsorship. Now, what I’d like to do is expose their real reasons.

There are 2 million Jews in New York. Only 70,000 of them give to UJA-Federation (around 3.5%). Of those 70,000, roughly 2% give 90% of the overall funds. That means that around 1,400 New York Jews hold the purse-strings for the entire local Jewish community. Those megadonors are overwhelmingly right-wing and pro-Israel. They don’t support a Palestinian state, they don’t support withdrawal from West Bank settlements, they do support war against Iran, they do support the Iraq war, they are heavily Republican and Likud.

In much of this they diverge from the majority of the Jewish population. Most New York Jews would have no problem with UJA-Federation endorsing the Other Israel Festival. In fact, the vast majority of the thousands who attend the Festival will be Jewish. The problem with our current Jewish communal structure and leadership is that they don’t represent the rest of us. They represent their own narrow political views and economic self-interest. And that’s a shande.

Israeli Left Betrays Its Values by Supporting Lebanon War

Friday, August 25th, 2006

I have been fulminating for several weeks about the betrayal by the Israeli mainstream left (Labor, Meretz, Peace Now) of its anti-war values in fulsomely supporting the Lebanon war. That is, until they didn’t support it (to paraphrase John Kerry). Until Olmert announced the expanded ground war in the last week or so of the conflict, the Israeli peace camp fully endorsed the war and Olmert’s avowed aims of crushing Hezbollah.

It is as if the entire failed Israeli invasion of Gaza which raged for weeks before the Lebanon conflict began, had never happened. The senseless mayhem, the overwhelming devastation wrought on Palestinian civilians, the disproportionate use of force–all of it didn’t teach the so-called progressives that what couldn’t be done in Gaza also couldn’t be done in Lebanon. It’s shameful really. It’s as if you train your entire life to save lives by fighting fires and when the first alarm bell rings you drop a match on the conflagration.

For those who aren’t schooled enough on who or what I’m talking about–I’m talking about the Amir Peretzes and Yossi Beilins, the Amos Ozes and A.B. Yehoshuas, the Meretz and Labor of the Israeli political scene. Those who cut their eye teeth on Peace Now demonstrations lo these many years ago. The ones who sounded all the grand themes of negotiation, brotherhood and peace in their speeches and op-ed columns. The ones who should’ve known better.

It just makes me sick. Lebanon was a disaster from the get go. Why did it take them five entire weeks to realize this? Why did they leave the entire anti-war opposition to Israeli Arabs and Hadash? Not that I disparage their courage and conviction in the face of such tremendous silence from the progressive Jews in Israel. On the contrary. I give them much credit. But the truth is that this group does not hold much sway over mainstream Israeli opinion. And in order for an anti-war movement to have developed it would’ve required support from some of the culprits I excoriate here.

A Ynetnews correspondent has written a scathing indictment of what she calls the Doves of Prey. She wrote this on August 12th, when the war raged at its worst, and her bitterness turned out to be justified:

One hundred dead Israelis – undoubtedly a horrendous figure – and a flock of local and noisy doves have turned into a flock of angry battle doves.

Almost overnight, the calls for peace and moderation have been abandoned, replaced by loud and angry preaching calling for the pounding, crippling and destruction of the enemy.

One hundred dead, hundreds of thousands of displaced persons, dozens of shelled homes – and the doves have become falcons…

Israel’s belligerent doves should pause to ponder one small question: if they – the famous peace lovers – have become doves of prey after the death of 100 Israelis, then what do they suppose is going through the minds of those doves and hawks alike who have suffered 1,000 deaths, hundreds of thousands of displaced persons, and scores of villages almost wiped off the face of the earth.

But how dare I compare? We are the chosen people, and they are just Arabs.

B. Michael, the correspondent, presents a powerful rebuttal of the Israeli argument that Hamas was to blame for Lebanese civilian casualties because it used “human shields” or hid itself in civilian areas:

We say they “hide among civilians,” that they “use them as human shields, those lowly cowards.” We say, “Those who allow them to do so should pay the price.”

This is a somewhat hollow argument coming from the mouths of officers and leaders whose headquarters are located in the heart of Tel Aviv. And not far from there in the midst of a prestigious neighborhood, there’s a type of military airport. And in a handsome building in the capital, in the heart of the city, there’s a large military base, where cannons are reportedly, often positioned so close to the settlements that schoolchildren wander over there during their breaks.

But these arguments sound all the more hollow coming from a country that invented the “settlement undertaking.” An undertaking whose sole purpose was to send civilians, including women and children, to perform a military assignment par excellence: gaining control over territory, the expulsion of the residents and annexation of the spoils to the mother country. A classical assignment by a conquering power.

This is all being carried out under a contrite and sanctimonious civilian pretext. I would, therefore, like to make myself heard loud and clear: No one asked for my permission before building the Kiriya (Tel Aviv military headquarters), I didn’t give my consent for building the Schneller Camp, and as far as I am concerned, let all the settlements be abandoned as of now.

And even though I am being used as a human shield, many leaders and sacred weapons are hiding behind me, and I am paying the taxes for the curse of the settlements and the evil of the occupation, I insist: my blood is no different from the blood of Lebanese citizens, and cannot be shed. And hopefully, all those who dare harm us, will find themselves paying the cost. Either before a local adjudicator or an international one, whatever comes first.

I’m often excoriated for my criticisms of Israel and my contentions that Israeli generals will eventually (along with Hezbollah and Palestinians terrorists) face an international tribunal if their own respective judiciaries refuse to try them for war crimes. It’s nice to read an Israeli thinking along the same lines; though it is sad to think that things have sunk so low that we speak seriously of such an eventuality.

Hat tip to Common Ground News Service.

Performance Optimization WordPress Plugins by W3 EDGE