Honestreporting points to this pro murder article by Jonathan Steele the Guardian senior foreign affairs correspondent. An article that proves exactly what I was worried about, in my previous entry. In it Jonathan Steele’s sympathies to the Palestinians crosses the line into pro murder advocacy when he says that all Arab must support Palestinian resistance, a “resistance” that is overwhelmingly the deliberate systematic mass murder of unarmed civilians. Even more so when, through someone else’s quote, says there is no moral ground for boycotting Hamas, according to such an argument it is moral for Hamas to murder women and children and to break the international agreements their Fatah rivals signed on; and to all those he added a twisted perception of the Israel US relationship.
But what is his starting argument? Lieberman’s statement of no to a Palestinian state. Now, it is true that Jonathan Steele and others like will say what they say, and argue what argue no matter who is Israel’s PM, but why should we make it easy for them?
Showing posts with label Avigdor Lieberman. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Avigdor Lieberman. Show all posts
Thursday, May 7, 2009
Wednesday, May 6, 2009
Why must we be the suckers now?
Avigdor Lieberman's orchestra of nonsense.
I hate to transfer internal debates to the international arena, I have a Hebrew blog for that, but in our times, when nothing stays private so to speak, some concerns and doubts need to be said.
To be blunt Israel’s foreign affairs minister public denunciation of the two state solution while de facto accepting it makes suckers of us all. While the Palestinians are the ones who actually rejected the idea, due to the statements of Lieberman and those who share his views, we have painted ourselves as the guilty party; guilty in the crime that victimized us. Because the constant Palestinian rejection of the two state solution was always expressed in brutal murderous violence against our civilian population. Therefore it’s hard for me to fathom the political wisdom behind these statements.
Even though the tone has subsided by now the bias elements in the international media, which are known to be vast, won’t let these statements be forgotten. As a result, we the advocates have to undo the damage. But bombastic statements can only be undone by other bombastic statements or a contradictory action. Any word or fact we say or use may make our case better understood on the micro level, but won’t change the general bad impression of this government.
Liberman has his followers in the advocates’ community, people I respect like Melanie Philips and Daniel Pipes, if they can defend his reasoning, so be it. But as I read the news here in Israel the new/old prime minister now talks about a political self-rule to the Palestinians whose status will be determined in the future. That status can only be only one thing and one thing alone, a Palestinian state. This means a predictable course of events, the international/peace process is going to take a few steps, when push come to shove, the Palestinian leadership will either stall or bail, and we will get the blame. Which returns us to my opening question, why must we be the suckers now?
Even if this predictable episode will not be bloody, hopefully, what’s the point of going through it?
Anybody…?
To be blunt Israel’s foreign affairs minister public denunciation of the two state solution while de facto accepting it makes suckers of us all. While the Palestinians are the ones who actually rejected the idea, due to the statements of Lieberman and those who share his views, we have painted ourselves as the guilty party; guilty in the crime that victimized us. Because the constant Palestinian rejection of the two state solution was always expressed in brutal murderous violence against our civilian population. Therefore it’s hard for me to fathom the political wisdom behind these statements.
Even though the tone has subsided by now the bias elements in the international media, which are known to be vast, won’t let these statements be forgotten. As a result, we the advocates have to undo the damage. But bombastic statements can only be undone by other bombastic statements or a contradictory action. Any word or fact we say or use may make our case better understood on the micro level, but won’t change the general bad impression of this government.
Liberman has his followers in the advocates’ community, people I respect like Melanie Philips and Daniel Pipes, if they can defend his reasoning, so be it. But as I read the news here in Israel the new/old prime minister now talks about a political self-rule to the Palestinians whose status will be determined in the future. That status can only be only one thing and one thing alone, a Palestinian state. This means a predictable course of events, the international/peace process is going to take a few steps, when push come to shove, the Palestinian leadership will either stall or bail, and we will get the blame. Which returns us to my opening question, why must we be the suckers now?
Even if this predictable episode will not be bloody, hopefully, what’s the point of going through it?
Anybody…?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)