Harry's Place

I find it interesting that you malign Israel while ignoring the far worse restrictions on cultural freedom that exist throughout the middle east.

Israel does not ‘create enemies for itself’. The vast majority of Palestinians are opposed to the very existence OF Israel and support terrorism AGAINST the Jewish nation. Why should they effectively be rewarded by enjoying the benefits of Israeli democracy while at the same time cheering Hamas on as they work towards destroying that very democracy?

Israel protects both the Muslim and Christian holy sites. This is more than either Jews or Christians can expect in Muslim countries, as we all know. If you want to bash Israel then kindly apply the same standards to other nations in the region.

the Israeli authorities in Jerusalem were busy implementing an absurd policy which only shame those of us who have rightly opposed a cultural boycott of Israel.

Alex is again implying that somehow this closure would suggest that a cultural boycott of Israel is in order. The suggestion is repulsive.

Anyway it’s a real problem that the PA carries out these various “soft assertions” of authority over Jerusalem. Show me a goverment that would quietly tolerate a hostile entity taking over various institutions eg. special education programs … this happened a while back and the PA forced some Arabic-speaking children out of the Jerusalem Arabic programs and into the Hebrew ones.

When Iran is finishing up its nukes and noone in the world really cares, this is really quite a small concern.

Oh hell. I support Israel unequivocally (which doesn’t equal uncritically), and will happily accept whatever precautions the state needs to take for actual defence and security, but like most Western friends of Israel I do wish that our friends wouldn’t overdo it and make difficulties for their loyal supporters.

Anyone who supports a boycott against Israel, but not about all the other countries with far, far worse human rights records, is clearly singling out the Jewish state.

There’s a name for that. We all know what it is.

Because it’s now abundantly clear that I can no longer say with any integrity that Israel respects cultural freedom. What, please tell me, is now the difference between us and the anti-boycotters?

I really don’t follow this argument at all. Perhaps it can be rephrased so that it is intelligible to people who don’t spend all their time hanging out with anarchists and other demonizers of zionists.

Alex:

Could you please comment on this information Israelinurse brought:

“Just by the way, remember all the hoo-ha a few weeks ago when a Palestinian protester was killed by a tear gas cannister at [Biliin]? Well the investigation has now shown that the cannister hit an electricity cable and was deflected towards the protester.
Wouldn’t it be refreshing if all those who were shouting ‘the IDF are murderers’ then now took the trouble to pop by and acknowledge that death by misadventure is quite a likely scenario in such violent demonstrations?
Lord knows, I’m not suggesting an actual apology for the premature defamation of a soldier (and indeed the entire army) doing his job, but a quick ‘looks like we were wrong’ would be awfully nice.”

Since you accused every IDF soldier of being an accomplice of murder, it would be nice if you acknolewdged your not small part in the unjust demonization of the Israelis.

“What, please tell me, is now the difference between us and the anti-boycotters?”

Who is ‘us’?

Who are the ‘anti-boycotters’?

What is the question exactly?

Putting aside the politics, this is a pretty poorly written piece – usually a piece that ends with a question is.

I guess its hard to get stuff to post on a bank holiday weekend, which is fair enough.

MattG

“Since you accused every IDF soldier of being an accomplice of murder, it would be nice if you acknolewdged your not small part in the unjust demonization of the Israelis.”

Fabian, I had no idea who this Alex bloke was – I just thought this was a pretty crappy article.

But the fact that you have him marked as a bit of a twat is good enough for me ;-0

Christ, there is enough of these ‘wannabee’ Seth Freemans over at CiF without having to indulge them here.

Arent we awful…we bring it all on ourselves…as a jew etc etc

Yawn.

MattG

“Alex is again implying that somehow this closure would suggest that a cultural boycott of Israel is in order. The suggestion is repulsive.”

No he isn’t. He’s is saying “those in the diaspora who campaign long and hard against a boycott of Israeli culture should be raging with anger at this latest disgrace.” and he is right. This Israeli leadership is infuriating and they seem to want to do everything they can to destroy Israel long-term in order to satisfy the racism of a small minority. The move towards banning Nakba commemorations is another one of these moves. Israel seems to be more and more moving towards an Iranian model state and away from a Western Democratic one and nobody seems to care. I am wiling to defend Israel from a lot, but it keeps pushing things. Taking away freedoms all over the place with pathetic reasons is something I cannot defend. Israel cannot beuild settlements and claim it is seeking peace. It cannot silence democratic rights and pretend its just like any other country. These are things which have nothing to do with security and have no justification.

I say that we shouldn’t give for free what the Palestinians need to buy in negotiations.
For 1000 israelis dead and five years of terrorism, I think that the PA has come out pretty well. Abu Mazen, Mohammed Dahlan, Ahmed Qureia, Barghouti and the rest of the murderers in suits, can still walk on their own legs and eat through their mouths.

…a privilege they denied hundreds of Israelis though their decision to launch the second intifada.

Remind me what do we owe the PLO?

Gabriel: then please, *don’t* defend Israel. Because frankly, with ‘friends’ like you, who needs enemies…?

You demand that Israel behave impeccably, while ignoring the far more egregious acts committed by her neighbours. Talk about a double standard.

And if you actually think that Israel is starting to resemble Iran, then clearly you know nothing about either country.

“…which only shame those of us who have rightly opposed a cultural boycott of Israel.”

If you have rightly opposed something, you have nothing to be
ashamed of.

Singling-outism?

GABRIEL says: ‘The move towards banning Nakba commemorations is another one of these moves.’

If Israel doesn’t ban Nakba day etc, it won’t be ‘democracy’, it will be sheer masochism.

The vast majority of Palestinians treat Nakba Day to express their desire for Israel to be destroyed.

Surely a more logical question is: why *would* Israel allow this to go ahead?

Why Israel would even let its sworn enemy conduct a a celebration of cultural freedom defies logic. Sort of like having a Nazi Poetry Festival during the Blitz.

Israel seems to be more and more moving towards an Iranian model state and away from a Western Democratic one and nobody seems to care.

This is probably a troll who is paraphrasing my expressed concern about Iranian nukes.

If not, then he is nuts.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/nolpda/ukfs_news/hi/newsid_8066000/8066389.stm

There is a difference between using existing settlements as a bargaining chip, and building new ones.

One is practical diplomacy.

The other is taking the piss.

Well put, GRAND MUFTI.

Taking away freedoms all over the place with pathetic reasons is something I cannot defend.

Preventing a supposedly PA-sponsored event from taking place in Jerusalem is “taking away freedoms all over the place”

Israel cannot beuild settlements and claim it is seeking peace.

It’s true, so why not “claim it”?

Anyway, how many settlements have been built in the past 5 years? How many net new residents?

It cannot silence democratic rights and pretend its just like any other country.

What does it mean to be “silencing” rights? Incomprehensible but overheated rhetoric is a tipoff that either someone is trolling or not particularly aware.

Do Alex Stein and “Gabriel” freak out to the same extent when authorities in Sweden move to break up a peaceful pro-Israeli demonstration because they call it “provocative”?

Isn’t that and similar cases listed by Mark Steyn recently examples of “taking away freedoms”?

I’m not getting into the main thrust of Alex’s article, but I noticed via the link to Palfest, that it is sponsored or supported by the British Council (which is excellent – good for them). However, I noticed they have used a mixture of American and British spelling (cf. programme/traveling), which is not so good.

There’s an interesting extract from an article on palestine-info (the principle Hamas English/Arabic propaganda portal) reproduced by MEMRI:

http://memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=SD236209

I don’t know anything about the author, but could it be part of Hamas’ ’softening up’ public diplomacy campaign to appear more palatable to decision makers?

“You demand that Israel behave impeccably, while ignoring the far more egregious acts committed by her neighbours. Talk about a double standard.”

This is nonsense and in fact, you have it utterly backwards. If Israel wants to compare itself to Syria or Saudi Arabia or whomever, then yes, it is better in the vast majority of ways, but I want to hold Israel to higher standards than “not as bad as a dictatorship”. It is completely fair to hold it to the same standards as I would hold any Western Democratic country. By your logic you are claiming that Israel can never be criticized for anything because someone is always worse. Hell, by that logic, we can never criticize anything because something is always worse. The question is, do you want Israel to be compared to Western countries or to despotic regimes? For me, not being as bad as despotic regimes is not good enough. When would it bother you? You could take away the rights of women, silence free newspapers and it would still be better than most of its neighbours. You’d obviously still be OK with that. To stick up for Israel is important, but to turn a blind eye to the injustices Israel causes is horrible. I’m sick of people thinking of these things in black and white-either Israel all good or Israel all bad. Israel gets way too much criticism for a lot (especially in Europe, but that doesn’t mean it doesn’t deserve any criticism.)

“Do Alex Stein and “Gabriel” freak out to the same extent when authorities in Sweden move to break up a peaceful pro-Israeli demonstration because they call it “provocative”?”

No, I don’t because I don’t care as much about Sweden as I do about Israel, but I still care. If I lived in Sweden, I would be outraged. This constant “well, bad things happen other places, so we can’t complain” is absurd. If you lived in Britain would you accept shutting down all but government-friendly media because in Russia and Iran they do it? I guarantee if you were British you would protest much louder against the closing of British newspapers than you would against the closing of an Iranian one.

Disgrace is the only word to sum this up. In Edinburgh the film festival hands back £300 to the Israeli embassy under pressure from ken laoch who thinks that any government aided film is state propaganda and in Israel they think that Palestinians listening to British writers talking about their work is a threat to the state.

. If you lived in Britain would you accept shutting down all but government-friendly media because in Russia and Iran they do it?

But this is not happening in Israel!!!!

One cancelled literary event does not equal a police state.

There is something seriously bonkers in the minds of some people if they can find this to be a cause for anything other than a strongly worded letter of protest.

Worse! Michael Palin was there!

I really don’t think that secular Jews are losing interest in Jerusalem. That strikes me as an overstatement. But I have the impression that many would be willing to give up East Jerusalem outside of the old city. Some are willing, some are not.

Of course, closing down a cultural festival is to be condemned. And it’s a stupid policy. The festival itself may have indeed been political, propaganda under the guise of a “cultural activity,” so it wasn’t as innocent and purely cultural as it seemed. After all, to say that Jerusalem was ever a center of Arab culture is a certainly a myth.

But closing the festival down could only backfire; only the incompetent Israeli government they have in place now wouldn’t have the insight to realize this.

I don’t think Israel created enemies by this action. Those who are enemies afterward had already been enemies before. So, that statement is really disingenuous.

What it has done is embarrassed Israel’s friends and given ammunition to its enemies. Even to enemies who are infinitely worse than Israel. These enemies won’t hesitate to exploit this incident cynically; and many Europeans–whether out of cynicism or stupidity–will lap it right up.

We used to say “what do Ulster politicians do when they see the light at the end of tunnel? They add more tunnel.” That seems to describe what the people in power in Israel are up to.

No, I don’t because I don’t care as much about Sweden as I do about Israel, but I still care. If I lived in Sweden, I would be outraged.

But it seems that the Swedes were mostly not outraged.

However they love to point to people like Alex Stein and say “See look a humane Israeli who has the right attitude vis-a-vis his ccuntrymen”

“It is completely fair to hold it to the same standards as I would hold any Western Democratic country.”

It is only fair if the comparisons take into account how these other nations would conduct themselves if placed in Israel’s situation. Given how Britain behaved during World War II (collaboration in the Holocaust, commission of genocide at Dresden, direct collaboration in quite possibly the worst genocide in human history at Hiroshima and Nagasaki), my belief is that Israel is probably behaving an awful lot better than that other nation. Had Britain been under constant attack for over sixty years, God alone knows the terrible crimes she would have committed. And we are only too well aware of what Britain has done in Serbia, Iraq and Afghanistan.

Interestingly, this story doesn’t seem to be in Haaretz or other Israeli outlets.

Also the hyperventilating about banning “Nakba day” commemorations is completely ridiculous as there is little chance it will become law or be allowed to stand by the Supreme Court.

RE: Israel protects both the Muslim and Christian holy sites. This is more than either Jews or Christians can expect in Muslim countries, as we all know. If you want to bash Israel then kindly apply the same standards to other nations in the region.

Methinks thou dost protest too much. We who support Israel as a democratic western state should be able to see a situation where Israel clearly is in the wrong and be able to criticize it without all the “whataboutery.” They obviously should have let the cultural event go ahead, they stopped it for political reasons, and it was wrong. There. I said it. The sky didn’t fall, and israel remains what it has always been. And no, the statement need not always be preceded by the litany of human rights abuses in Arab states. These are well known, and deserve to be condemned continuously, but that doesn’t absolve Israel (and us) from responsibility. Being a strong supporter of Israel shouldn’t mean believing Israel is an angelic state 100% of the time.

I’m getting skeptical about this whole thing, as it appears only in the Observer and al-Jazeera.

A couple of years ago the BBC made up something about Israel was going to expel all the Arabs from Jewish cities.

Since you accused every IDF soldier of being an accomplice of murder, it would be nice if you acknolewdged your not small part in the unjust demonization of the Israelis.

Lol. Alex Stain is too busy painting yellow stars on Israelis at the behest of his chums in Hamas to let such a small matters as the facts get in the way.

Given how Britain behaved during World War II (collaboration in the Holocaust, commission of genocide at Dresden, direct collaboration in quite possibly the worst genocide in human history at Hiroshima and Nagasaki)

You complete and utter shithead. There isn’t one factual sentence in that paragraph. More to the point, it’s an insult to both my grandfathers who were away from their families for 4 years + helping to defeat the Axis powers.

Fuck you!

“always look on the bright side
24 May 2009, 10:40 pm

Worse! Michael Palin was there!”

At least they didn’t make him write “Judeans go home” in Hebrew, Yehudim, telchu (or lech) habayta, one hundred times.

Which the funding body, the Judean, sorry, Palestinian Authority, would probably have liked.

Seriously, perhaps not the smartest move. But I can understand closing down P.A. funded events.

This story is not true. I just read on the Palestinian Literary Festival that the event was not shut down, just delayed and that Claire Messud read from her work. Why would ALex quote the Obsever when he lives in israel?

OK -let’s start at the very beginning….
Kfar Kana -yes I know it well, particularly from the days of the second Intefada when driving past it on the way to Haifa became an ‘interesting’ experience. If I remember correctly there was a big Islamist rally there ooh, about a week or so ago to mark the ‘naqba’. Strange choice of place for a B&B for the average Israeli, but each to their own….

‘According to the Observer,’ -actually it’s the Guardian, and strangely no similar reports seem to appear in the Israeli press. The article’s take on the history of Jerusalem is quite revealing. 1967 -Israelis conquer Jerusalem. Full stop. No mention of the fact that Jordan attacked and siezed parts of Jerusalem in 1948.

‘This March, a series of Palestinian cultural events, held to mark the Arab League’s designation of Jerusalem as the capital of Arab culture (Itself obviously a political decision), were also banned.’
These ‘cultural events’ were part of the drip drip tactic employed in an attempt to infiltrate the world’s consciousness with the idea that there is a country called Palestine with a capital called Jerusalem just waiting to be liberated.
This is intellectual occupation.
Maybe one day a state called Palestine with Jerusalem as its capital will exist, but so far there have been no agreements signed. The negotiations leading up to those possible future agreements are vital for the very preservation of the Israeli state. People like Alex Stein who appear to find them unecessary and are prepared to evacuate settlements and give up half the country’s capital tomorrow morning are condeming us all to many more years of bloodshed on a scale we have not yet seen.
Until the Palestinians finally come to the negotiating table and sign an agreement, Jerusalem is Israel’s capital and no foreign power has the right to organise events there. The PA can host all the literary festivals it wants in Ramallah, Schem, Jericho or any other town under its own jurisdiction.
Some background on the ‘culture festival’ of March:
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3706530,00.html

‘Less and less secular Israelis have any interest in the capital,’
(surely fewer?) I’m not sure with what evidence you make this claim Alex. It may be true in the cappucino drinking world of Nahalat Binyamin, but it is certainly not so in my circles. Maybe you should meet my patient Carmella. She was born in East Jerusalem and in 1948, aged 13, was standing in the yard of her family home there holding her mother’s hand as a Jordanian sniper shot her mother dead. Or maybe you should have a chat with David, my father in law, who travelled with the convoys taking food and other supplies up to Jerusalem whilst it was under Arab siege before the war of independence.

‘Sometimes I really wonder if the lunatics have taken over the asylum’
Me too. Except the ‘lunatics’ in my eyes are those like yourself who appear to be ready and willing to just roll over and die for the sake of their ‘enlightened’ lefty principles.
Zhutcha -your right. But please stop trying to take the rest of us with you on your hystrionic far left suicide mission.

the event was not shut down, just delayed and that Claire Messud read from her work. Why would ALex quote the Obsever when he lives in israel?

Why miss an opportunity to hyperventilate about “silencing of freedoms”?

The Guardian/Observer is more disturbed about a delayed Palestinian book reading than they are by the prospect of Iranian nukes.

Observer (Al Grauniad) says:-

Israel captured East Jerusalem in the 1967 war and later annexed it – a move not recognised by the international community.

Failing to point out that Jerusalem, the undivided capital of Israel, was “captured” in the sense that it was LIBERATED from the illegal occupation and annexation by Jordan who broke the Manadate for Palestine law that “no foreign country shall annexe or invade Palestine”.

“They are creating enemies for themselves” Pah! another hundred on several billion? Its a scratch!

Israelinurse .. good points. Brits read articles like this and end up totally misinformed.

“Given how Britain behaved during World War II (collaboration in the Holocaust, commission of genocide at Dresden, direct collaboration in quite possibly the worst genocide in human history at Hiroshima and Nagasaki), my belief is that Israel is probably behaving an awful lot better than that other nation.”

I agree with Tusker-none of this stands up to any historical analysis. It is fair to say that if Britain were being attacked by rockets every day, it would not care much about civilian casualties on the other side and I find criticism of Israel in this vein lacks this reality.

“And no, the statement need not always be preceded by the litany of human rights abuses in Arab states. These are well known, and deserve to be condemned continuously, but that doesn’t absolve Israel (and us) from responsibility. Being a strong supporter of Israel shouldn’t mean believing Israel is an angelic state 100% of the time.”

Exactly! Here is an example of how absurdly things get spun

Israel is maintaining a blockade over Gaza. You can argue the right and wrongs of this or whether it will have any effect, but that is what is happening. Now, people on the far left will say “Israel does not allow anything into Gaza to be cruel” which will ignore the legitimite reason for banning, say, steel that can be made into rockets. People on the right will say “Israel is protecting itself from Palestinians making rockets and bombs of the materials coming in” which will ignore the cruel aspects of the blockade. (Banning lentils and pasta is not about security but about arbitrary punishment.)

For those of us outside Israel, a little background information might help. For instance: the Palestinian National Theatre in East Jerusalem, which I had never heard of until this moment. Is it a “theatre” in the conventional sense, an actual theatre building? Are productions/performances held there on a regular basis? When they are, do they need any kind of clearance/licensing from the Israeli authorities? If so, was clearance/licensing duly applied for in this case?

Israelinurse, I was crafting my similar point while you were making a much wider and more elegant one.

Right On Girl!

MK Akunis Attacked at Geneva Initiative Meeting

Reported: 00:57 AM – May/25/09

(IsraelNN.com) Member of Knesset Ofir Akunis lodged a complaint with the Knesset Officer Sunday night, after he was attacked by a leftist activist at a meeting promoting the Geneva Initiative for Arab-Israeli peace which took place at the science park in Nes-Ziona.

During a discussion, Akunis verbally sparred with Fatah representative Sufian abu-Zaida, asking him if the Arabs would recognize Israel as a Jewish state. When abu-Zaida said, “Never!” Akunis turned to the audience and said, “This proves that the Palestinians don’t want two states for two peoples, they want two states for one people.”

Akunis said the crowd, which he described as leftist and radical, would not let him continue speaking and he was forced to leave. As he made his way toward the exit, one of the activists raised his fists against him, and only the intercession of Elad Meron, Akunis’s parliamentary assistant, kept the assailant from actually striking Akunis.

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/Flash.aspx/165561

If next year the Arab League should decide to hold a cultural festival in Spain, making Grenada ‘Arab capital of culture’ without actually consulting the Spanish government, would Alex & co. see this in an equally benign light?

Israeli Nurse:

As usual, eloquent and informative. thanks.

That being said, the difference between your example and Jerusalem is that the majority population of East Jerusalem is Arab and has been for a long time (not forgetting that Jews outnumbered Arabs in East Jerusalem, then the only Jerusalem, in the 1840s), whereas there are few if any Arabs living in Spain today. i think that does make a difference, especially as East Jerusalem is not part of Israel proper (if you discount the annexation).

If next year the Arab League should decide to hold a cultural festival in Spain, making Grenada ‘Arab capital of culture’ without actually consulting the Spanish government, would Alex & co. see this in an equally benign light?

Not so unlikely. Everyone who supports Al Qaeda knows that Al Andalus is really “Islamic lands” that has to be re-conquered. As for cultural festivals it reminds me that towns in Spain used to have a yearly festival celebrating their liberation from the Arab invaders by burning effigies of Mohammed, in the same way we burn Guy Fawkes. I don’t think they call it “El Kickba”

The Palfest event is part of “Jerusalem – Cultural Capital of the Arab World 2009.” The decision by the Arab League to designate Jerusalem as such is purely political, and not cultural.

Yemen for example is celebrating the event ” Jerusalem CCotAW 2009″ under the slogan “Gaza is the start, al-Aqsa is the aim” – I can’t be bothered to look up reports from other Arab countries – that should suffice.

In light of the way the event is regarded and reported in the Arab world, the decision of the Israeli minister to ban the event is not surprising; what is surprising is that it should have been arranged in the first place.

On second thoughts, no it isn’t: it was arranged to provoke, and the list of those involved as participants or sponsors reveals the usual viscerally anti-Israel crowd: Perversely of the 20 contributers 6 are Muslims and 14 are non-Muslims (Arab Culture?). Of the 5 patrons 1 is a Muslim the others – Chinua Achebe, John Berger, Seamus Heaney – non-Muslims (Arab culture?) and one of them is dead (Harold Pinter, of blessed memory).

Can one imagine an English/French/German &c literary festival where the majority of contributors and patrons did not even understand the appropriate language? The event is 99% political and the literary in-put would have been/will be political invective against Israel.

Joshua: you know zilch about how Britain behaved during WWII. What you write is mindless crap.

i think that does make a difference, especially as East Jerusalem is not part of Israel proper (if you discount the annexation).

Not really the accurate way to look at it.

“West Jerusalem” began in the late 1800s when the first buildings outside the walls were constructed. By 1948, Jerusalem was comprised of a wide area that included the old city (with Jewish parts), surrounding communities of Jews, Arabs, and European protestants, the Hebrew U campus etc.

In ‘48, the city was divided, the Jordanians took the old city, wall, etc. and the Jewish population of the old city was ethnically cleansed. A mere 19 years later, the city was reunited.

The Palfest event is part of “Jerusalem – Cultural Capital of the Arab World 2009.” The decision by the Arab League to designate Jerusalem as such is purely political, and not cultural.

Indeed, before ‘67, Jerusalem was a backwater of the Ottoman empire and then Jordan.

i think that does make a difference, especially as East Jerusalem is not part of Israel proper (if you discount the annexation).

So, Israel is Israel within its 1967 borders but somehow Jerusalem is denied???

If we accept that Israel is at the very least defined by what are called “1967 borders” and that Jordan who annexed Jerusalem illegally in 1948 have ceded all land they annexed to Israel as part of Res 242 then please explain why East Jerusalem is exempt from what defines Israel. Who cares that there is an Arab majority in East Jerusalem. There WOULD be if Jordan annexed it. I’ll bet we can take a section of parts of Israel and note that there is a majority of Arabs in the section we define. Does that mean its not Israel? Shall we use the same equation in West Bank and discover that in places there are a majority of Jews and so state that this must be Israel then?

Given how Britain behaved during World War II (collaboration in the Holocaust, commission of genocide at Dresden, direct collaboration in quite possibly the worst genocide in human history at Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

I agree the above statement is nonsensical. Britain did not “collaborate in the Holocaust, that is about as idiotic as saying Zionists collaborated with the Nazis. Commission of genocide at Dresden: well the bombing of dresden did cause tens of thousands of deaths, but that doesn’t make it a genocide, especially in the context of the life-and-death struggle against the nazis — incidentally, how do you “collaborate with the nazis on the holocaust” on the one hand and “commit genocide in Dresden” against the Nazis on the other. As for Hiroshima/Nagasaki, the finger-pointers on that one always brush off the fact that many many more (probably more than a factor of 10) people would have been killed had the bombs not been dropped and the Americans launched a full-scale invasion of the Japanese Islands instead. In any event, more people were killed in Dresden than in either Hiroshima or Nagasaki, which hardly qualify as “quite possibly the worse genocide in human history.” Has this fellow never heard of the Holocaust?

This is a letter written by an American student in Jerusalem in March 1948 describing the conditions there.
http://www.zionism-israel.com/ezine/Jerusalem_March_1948.htm
The whole book is highly reccomended.

“It is fair to say that if Britain were being attacked by rockets every day, it would not care much about civilian casualties on the other side and I find criticism of Israel in this vein lacks this reality.”

We were attacked with rockets everyday, V1’s and V2’s. The response to the V1’s was to bomb the crap out of France and increase interdiction of the French rail network by fighter bombers; i.e. shoot the crap out of EVERY train in France.
The V2’s were tougher, as they were longer ranged. We bombed the shit out of German cities, then bombed the rubble.
Dresden was bomb so late because it was so far to the east, making the bombing less effective (smaller bomb load).

We did have plans to drop both sulphur mustard and Anthrax spores on German cities if the Germans had ever used chemical/biological weapons.

The only reason that German wasn’t the first recipient of ‘bottled sunshine’ was that Germany surrendered first.
So Japan picked up the prize of being post-war bleating victims of the nuclear age.

The Israelis are wimps, I would be dropping Earth perpetrators made from 155 mm barrels out of the back of C-130’s every time a mortar came over from Gaza. Even the ‘palestinians’ can understand that sort of logic.

DocMartyn, V2’s were rockets, V1’s weren’t. They were flying bombs, pilotless planes.

The number of dead in Dresden has been absurdly inflated for political reasons. The best estimates I know about put the number around 30 thousand. That’s less than either Hiroshima or Nagasaki, but less people were killled in each than in the conventional (fire) bombing of Tokyo.

Again, twice as many Germans were killed in the carpet-bombing of Hamburg and later, much more in the siege of Berlin. But every one of these cases, with the exception of Tokyo, pales when compared to the number of people killed by the Nazis in Warsaw (1944) and by the Japanese in Manilla (1945). What makes the destruction of both these cities particularly atrocious is that it was done when the Germans and Japanese were already defeated and in retreat. Even from their point of view the killing in Warsaw and Manilla were useless: a sadistic waste of amunition.

On the other hand, if the Dresden bombing shortened the war just by a few days, then it may have helped saving enough innocent lives to compensate for those killed there (and it may possibly have helped to save Prague). The same applies, in another scale, to the nuclear bombings because for every further day the war in the Pacific lasted, thousands if not tens of thousands of Chinese, Phillipinos, Taiwanese and other Asian civilians died, as well as many allied POWs in Japanese hands.

From a civilized and, yes, humane point of view, wars are not about the greated good, but about the lesser evil. Maybe it’s different in Mars or Jupiter.

“I agree the above statement is nonsensical. Britain did not “collaborate in the Holocaust” ”

As far as the Jews of Europe were concerned Britain might as well have been fighting under the Swastika as the Union Jack:

1) As a result of Evian, Bermuda and the 1939 White Paper, Britain put herself at the very heart of the anti-Semitic movement that slammed the gates of the world shut against the drowing Jews of Europe.

2) Even when the full extent of the Holocaust was known the British government was determined that the Jews of Europe would not be helped. Thus, in 1943, “four months after the State Department confirmed the dimensions of the Holocaust, British Foreign Secretary Anthony Eden met in Washington with President Roosevelt, Secretary of State Cordell Hull and Undersecretary of State Sumner Welles. At this meeting, Eden expressed his fear that Hitler might actually accept an offer from the Allies to move Jews out of areas under German control. No one present objected to Eden’s statement.”

3) Britain refused to raise her voice even above a whisper to assist the Jews of Europe (and of course the BBC went along with this), allowing, just for example, the Jews on the Struma to be murdered and rejecting out of hand the bombing of the Auschwitz railroad tracks. Britain would not even risk one bomber to save Jews about to be murdered.

“incidentally, how do you “collaborate with the nazis on the holocaust” on the one hand and “commit genocide in Dresden” against the Nazis on the other.”

Quite simple when both sides were committing terrible atrocities.

“well the bombing of dresden did cause tens of thousands of deaths, but that doesn’t make it a genocide”

You need to look up the definition of genocide.

“As for Hiroshima/Nagasaki, the finger-pointers on that one always brush off the fact that many many more (probably more than a factor of 10) people would have been killed had the bombs not been dropped and the Americans launched a full-scale invasion of the Japanese Islands instead.”

This was a lie told by the Americans to cover up their terrible crime. For instance, nowhere near enough time had been given to the Japanese to allow them to surrender. And, as for those figures you quote, there is no evidence they are correct unless of course one accepts the American propaganda at face value.

“In any event, more people were killed in Dresden than in either Hiroshima or Nagasaki,”

This is simply not so.

“which hardly qualify as “quite possibly the worse genocide in human history.” Has this fellow never heard of the Holocaust?”

And Mao and Stalin murdered many millions more. To talk about just numbers is ridiculous. For the United States (a supposedly enlightened nation) together with the collaboration of her allies to set out to kill in just a few hours hundreds of thousands of people, completely defenceless men, women and children, in the most terrible possible way surely makes it one of of the most horrifying crimes in history. It may not in fact be worse than what was done in Auschwitz and elsewhere, but it is certainly no better.

“Joshua: you know zilch about how Britain behaved during WWII. What you write is mindless crap.”

I know a great deal. Having overdosed their entire lives on the myth about British righteousness in that conflict, individuals like yourself don’t want to face up to reality. The truth is that millions of Jews were murdered in large part because a virulently anti-Semitic Britain deliberately turned her back on the atrocities.

“Joe Camel
DocMartyn, V2’s were rockets, V1’s weren’t. They were flying bombs, pilotless planes.”

I know that, but just go with the flow.

Does anyone know if the ludicrous and blatantly anti-Semitic ban on dealings with Israeli academic institutions advocated by one of the Higher Education teaching unions (I think it was the AUT) is still in effect? The far-left’s monomania in seeking the destruction and ruination of Israel, whilst turning a blind eye or even openly supporting anti-American and anti-Western tyrannies, is shameful and despicable. These double standards show that many on the far-left are nothing more than over-compensating closet racists and anti-Semites.

“More to the point, it’s an insult to both my grandfathers who were away from their families for 4 years + helping to defeat the Axis powers”

Britain was fighting a war not because of the Jews of Europe but in spite of them. To make matters even worse, at war’s end, Britain behaved towards the Holocaust survivors in Palestine and elsewhere in a manner that would have done credit to the SS.

“Fuck you!”

Your grandfathers at least had the chance to return to their homes; 1.5 million Jewish children did not. And that last was as I say above in large part a result of Britain’s conduct.

This story is not true. I just read on the Palestinian Literary Festival that the event was not shut down, just delayed and that Claire Messud read from her work. Why would ALex quote the Obsever when he lives in israel?

Jayzuz, Julio H. Christ on a bicycle, I have no idea whether this politico-cultural event was cancelled, or merely postponed and then went ahead. Count on Alex ‘I know for certain that Bassam Abu Raleh was murdered by the IDF’ Stein to rush so quickly to blog his criticisms, that he treats the task of corroborating evidence for his claims as a distraction that gets in the way of the morality he wants to claim for himself.

If this event did take place after a postponement, will Alex Stein post a correction? Will Alex Stein revisit his claims that Bassam Abu Raleh was “murdered” (let alone his claim that all IDF personnel are “accomplices to murder”), given that the investigation into the killing showed that no demonstrator was intentionally targeted and that the tear gas canister in question inadvertently and unforeseeably deflected off an electrical cable before hitting Abu Raleh? Will Alex Stein write about the reported use of submachine guns loaded with stones to fire at IDF soldiers at the weekly Friday after-prayers demonstrations in Bilin and Naalin that the International Palestinian Solidarity activists repeatedly claim are “non-violent”?

Surprise me Alex. Please.

What is truly interesting is the reaction of those non-Jews and non-Israelis who whisper aloud that successive Israeli governments have been far too timid and circumspect in inflicting REAL reprisals for the incessant rocket attacks from Gaza.

Joshua, the Jews of Europe were never going to be liberated by the bombings of railroads to Auschwitz but by the military crushing of the Nazi state.

Not only that, Josh, but us Brits’ national pastime is throwing kittens into fires to the sounds of early trip hop, has been seen the 13th century. I hurled a brace just last night

The idea that by observing a higher standard, Israel will find international sympathy and peace partners among Arabs and Palestinians is empirically verified nonsense.

After Israel abandoned Gaza, while enduring 3,000 rocket attacks from Gaza by way of thanks, it was routinely abused for not shipping Gaza more supplies.

Peace will come when the Arabs and the Palestinians accept Israel’s right to exist. Until then, and with its survival at stake, there is no reason for Israel to do anything but protect herself.

You might be well intentioned, Mr. Alex Stein, but you are a dupe and useful idiot, nonetheless.

Alex? Why don’t you answer?

Morning everyone,

Tabatha – I’m Israeli; my primary concern is with my country.

Ohad – I’m implying no such thing. My article was very clear in its opposition to a boycott.

Fabian – I haven’t seen that report; if you show it to me and the evidence is conclusive, I’ll be happy to retract.

Ohad – Re. Sweden; of course it is. Why don’t I write about it? See my comment to Tabatha. Good point re. Haaretz, it is rather strange, but Rory M doesn’t normally make things up, I think it’s a reasonable source.

Morgoth – Actually I’m too busy fundraising for Israeli children-at-risk, but don’t let my passionate love of my country get in the way of a good ad hominem.

Israelinurse – Who said I’d give up anything tomorrow morning? At least you’ve finally dropped your dovish mask though. I don’t drink capuccino myself, but it’s clear that the younger generations are less and less interested in Jerusalem (see, for example, Michael Oren’s comments a few weeks back). Re. Grenada, in my opinion, East Jerusalem is under occupation, so no.

Lbnaz – Please show me some evidence of these submachine guns. If true, I’m surprised more soldiers haven’t been killed…

Biff Larkin – No higher standard, just a reasonable one….

Good day to you all.

This is the organisers’ account of what happened – http://www.palfest.org/authorsblog.html – it seems they ultimately hosted the event in the garden of the French cultural attache; we obviously weren’t so stupid from preventing them meeting there. Of course, the account’s probably a bunch of lies.

Of course, the account’s probably a bunch of lies.

Given your track record on these things, why can’t you provide a link to a more “neutral” account of what happened?

“This was a lie told by the Americans to cover up their terrible crime. For instance, nowhere near enough time had been given to the Japanese to allow them to surrender. And, as for those figures you quote, there is no evidence they are correct unless of course one accepts the American propaganda at face value.”

-a couple of points;

1. The American calculations concerning the proposed invasion were not propaganda but rather assessments and assumptions based on their experiences in the invasion of Okinawa (where the US/Allies took approx. 10% casualties despite outnumbering the Japanese by at least 5 to 1 and with clear naval and air superiority) – they extrapolated the casualty rates to match the increase in numbers that would be faced. Noting of course that the Japanese military conscripted significant numbers of the civilian population of which significant numbers were also killed).

(In hindsight Japanese war plans for the invasion would also back up the US assessment – so much for your propaganda assertion!)

2. The delay in surrender was the result of the disagreement within the Japanese Govt. to accept the terms dicated at Potsdam. If your looking for blame, look at Anami and the militarists who were against surrender on these terms even after Nagasaki. (This is not even taking into account that Japanese overtures had been made in January – at least 6 months earlier that the attacks)

There simply was no acceptable and/or moral reason for the Japanese to have continued the war after the loss of Okinawa (June) when the Govt itself had internally acknowledged that they could not win the war but instead calculated that their best policy was to fight the Allied invasion and inflict as many casualties as possible on the Allies irrespective of Japanese civilian and military casualties.

The use of the atomic weapons, although regrettable, tipped the balance in the War Cabinet and ended the war earlier and with less loss of life than the alternative of continuing the war with a proposed Allied invasion of Honshu and the southern Islands and a Soviet invasion of Hokkaido and ongoing fighting in Manchuria.

Irrespective of the realities of this case, the intial argument was particularly weak; If I have behaved badly, others have behaved worse – thus justifiying your own badness. For me Israel is not just another democracy, warts and all. I expect the highest standards from it.

But Israelinurse put things in perspective with reasoned arguments and information. What would we do without her? (Though I disagree with her about Lieberman).

These festivals in Israel, putting a great emphasis on Palestinian Nationalism were provocative. Literary events should be literary events and not political ones.

Pure dream: I’d like to see Jerusalem as the religious capital of the world under Israeli jurisdiction, though, from what I have heard it is so crammed with tourists and every type of religious crackpot, that its ’sacredness’ is somewhat flawed.

Ohad – Do you mean my track record of reporting on an unarmed protester being killed following what the IDF called ‘unauthorised fire’?

I was at the event described. It was indeed not allowed to take place at the al-Hakawati theater (or Palestinian National Theater), and so took place a hundred meters down the road at the French Cultural Center on Salah al-Din street. The event was as you would expect. A Palestinian man in the audience launched into a long tirade about colonialism and how the Israelis ‘pretend to be natives’, making the nature of the colonialism that the Palestinians suffer a unique example of the phenomenon. The writers read from their own work. One of them said that at the airport he had immediately noticed the colonialist nature of Israel, and felt like speaking in Swahili to the ‘Arab workers’ there, who reminded him of the situation in the African country where he grew up. (Of course, the workers in question were almost certainly Israeli Jews).

There was no mention of peace. There was no mention of compromise. There was no mention of Israelis or Jews possessing any rights whatsoever. Oh, Mordechai Vanunu was there as well, sitting in the front row with his Norwegian girlfriend.

Personally I think the authorities should have let the event go ahead at the al-Hakawati, as the people there represented the pathetic tail-end of the western supporters of secular Palestinian nationalism, a phenomenon which is currently in the process of dying, as anyone who spends any time in the West Bank (or Gaza, obviously) could tell you.

However, they didn’t, which caused the participants the unimaginable horror of having to walk a hundred yards down the road to watch the same silly burblings in the elegant setting of the French cultural center, surrounded by languid French cultural workers smoking cigarettes. There were no police or Border Police anywhere in the vicinity. Everyone seemed pleased with themselves, well fed and happy.

The causing of distress to a sensitive British oleh as a result of the banning can also now be added to the list of Zionist crimes.

The unimaginable horror of the evening’s events was later discussed at length in the American Colony bar, after which everyone went off to bed.

Lbnaz – Please show me some evidence of these submachine guns. If true, I’m surprised more soldiers haven’t been killed…

No Alex, according to the the Ynet report, no soldiers have yet been killed — a tank commander “merely” had his hand seriously injured by someone from among the “non-violent” demonstrators who aimed and fired a submachine gun loaded with stones targeting IDF personnel.

“Our goal is not to inflame the situation, but rather let the event end as calmly as possible,” a military source explains to Ynet. “Unfortunately, the demonstrations quickly turn violent and include the use of stones, Molotov cocktails, hurling stones with a machine-gun, which only several weeks ago seriously injured the hand of one of the tank commanders. Therefore we must use the means we possess in order to calm things down.”

I see from your link that the expectations of some of the organizer(s) and attendees at the festival, that thought that the Israeli authorities who came to the Palestine National Theatre’s auditorium in East Jerusalem were going to “beat them”, didn’t materialize. But, any further thoughts from you about your post claiming Bassam Abu Rahma was “murdered” by the IDF and that all IDF personnel are accomplices to the murder?

I was at the event, and have written a little account of my experiences which is currently languishing under the heavy hand of the moderators further up.

Well the report you cite is typical of embedded reporting. There isn’t even the pretence of trying to get the other side of the story. That being said, it’s clear that violence plays a major part of the protesting in Bilin, something I’ve never denied.
As for this stuff about it hitting an electric wire, I think we’d both agree that we need rather more than one line in this story to be convinced that’s what happened.
The most pertinent point, of course, is that the High Court has ruled that the fence in the Bilin area should be moved, and yet it still stands.
If you read the comments on my original post re. Abu Rahma, I’ve already expressed regret about using the word accomplice.

Paul – please can you email me your account, alex.stein@talk21.com

Well the report you cite is typical of embedded reporting. There isn’t even the pretence of trying to get the other side of the story.

Coming from someone who quotes the Guardian/observer as authoritative, that’s quite a laugh.

Those papers deliberately write stories in a way that will stir up anti-Israel sentiments. They don’t care about accuracy, as israelinurse demonstrated above.

That being said, it’s clear that violence plays a major part of the protesting in Bilin, something I’ve never denied.

No you merely act like it’s irrelevant.

Of course it’s not irrelevant; it just doesn’t justify the killing of an unarmed protester, strange deflections off electric cables notwithstanding.

As for the accuracy of the report on the literary festival, by all means show me that it didn’t happen, that the border police didn’t show up. I’m a reasonable man, Ohad.

Alex, there were two issues:

1. You called what happened “murder”.
2. You said that all the IDF were “accomplices in murder”.

You have retracted from 2, but not from 1.

Now this: “As for this stuff about it hitting an electric wire, I think we’d both agree that we need rather more than one line in this story to be convinced that’s what happened.”

could be more convincing if you hadn’t claimed 1 without any evidence first.

Now you say that we must look at the evidence. In the previous thread that was MY line (and others). If you are ready to wait for evidence before claiming “murder” then we couldn’t attack you for your contradictions.

*then we won’t be able to attack you for your contradictions*

Damn English tenses!

Fabian – fair enough, I’m willing to hold back on the murder charge until the entire picture is clear.

Ok, Alex.

If you had waited for the evidence before calling ‘murder’ we wouldn’t have attacked you for your contradictions.

I notice some calls here for a ‘neutral’ account of this event. I would be interested to know what in your view constitutes a neutral source.

I would be interested to know what in your view constitutes a neutral source.

The commenter above who said he was there is certainly a good start.

As opposed to Soueif, who was also there, but no doubt entirely made it all up.

The poster is being utterly hysterical. These are two of the most deranged statements:

“the fiction that Jerusalem is an undivided city under Israeli sovereignty forever and ever amen”

“ess and less secular Israelis have any interest in the capital, a reality which is met with bewilderment among those who believe in the absurd and unnecessary myth of the City of Zion”

Since Alex doesn’t begin to understand the importance of Jerusalem, and treats it with sneering contempt as per above, perhaps he shouldn’t be writing about it.

Plus what Ohad and Tabatha and Fabian said.

@The Count of Monte Cristo

“Does anyone know if the ludicrous and blatantly anti-Semitic ban on dealings with Israeli academic institutions advocated by one of the Higher Education teaching unions (I think it was the AUT) is still in effect?”

The Union is now called the UCU. I understand that another boycott type motion is to be discussed at their congress this week. I’ve pasted some relevant links below. I really don’t think the pro-boycotters are representative of the UCU membership (which is why the proponents of the boycott never want to allow the union’s members a ballot on the issue.)

http://engageonline.wordpress.com/page/2/

http://www.ucu.org.uk/index.cfm?articleid=3677

“fair enough, I’m willing to hold back on the murder charge until the entire picture is clear”

Wow, impre-SSIVE!

Oniad and Bartok, nice reply to some of Joshua’s inanities. Here is my reply to some of the other bits of nonsense he spews.

1. I wrote:“The bombing of dresden did cause tens of thousands of deaths, but that doesn’t make it a genocide,” to which Joshua replied: “You need to look up the definition of genocide.”

I did look it up. The first definition I came up with was: “systematic killing of a racial or cultural group” — Wordnet, Princeton University.

The international definition, which is used by the International Criminal Court, is more complex. It is found in Articles II and III of the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Genocide. Article II describes two elements of the crime of genocide:
1) the mental element, meaning the “intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such”, and
2) the physical element which includes five acts described in sections a, b, c, d and e. A crime must include both elements to be called “genocide.”

Needless to say, neither Hiroshima/Nagasaki nor Dresden would qualify, as neither had “the intent to destroy in whole or in part a national ethnical racial or religious group.” In fact, one could make the argument that had the Americans NOT dropped the bombs, the likelihood of genocide of the Japanese people would have been much greater, given, as Oniad has so nicely shown, the facts from the Okinawa invasion, and the Kamikaze mindset of the militarists who ruled Japan.

Perhaps Josh should learn the definition of genocide.

2. Not assisting the Jews of Europe, as morally reprehensible as it was, can hardly be compared with actually doing it. My parents who are holocaust survivors from Poland were left with a hatred of Poles for their actions during WWII, but even they are quick not to equate poles with Germans, since there would have been no holocaust if it was just a question of Jews and Poles, which is how things were until the Germans invaded poland. We’ve all read “none is too many” and “while 6 million died,” and the behaviour and actions of the Americans, British and Canadians were callous, cruel and, as noted earlier, morally reprehensible. That however does not make Britain a holocaust collaborator, and saying so is hyperbole and slander of the highest order.

3. I noted that it was absurd to call Hiroshima/Nagasaki ““quite possibly the worse genocide in human history,” because the numbers simply weren’t there (and of course neither was the intent), to which idiot Joshua replied: “To talk about just numbers is ridiculous” and “to kill in just a few hours hundreds of thousands of people, completely defenceless men, women and children, in the most terrible possible way surely makes it one of of the most horrifying crimes in history.”

Horrifying, definitely. Crime, maybe though I don’t think so, for reasons explained above and by Oniad and Bartok. Genocide? uh uh. Quite possibly the worst genocide in history? Simply an ignorant, emotional and idiotic statement.

In the past 100 years, only these events qualify as genocide:
1. Armenian massacres during WWI.
2. Holocaust
3. Cambodia
4. Rwanda

Ukraine in the 1930s and Darfur in this decade also likely qualify.

You know, just as I hate it when anti-Israel fanatics call every death attributed to Israel “genocide,” it is equally wrong — and foolish — to use the term to describe every action resulting in a high casualty count. EVen Warsaw and Manila don’t qualify, and they were carried out by armies that knew they were defeated and served no purpose. That cannot be said for the bombing of Germany and Japan, including the atomic bombs, which, as awful, cold and calculating as it may sound, undoubtedly saved hundreds of thousands if not millions of Japanese lives.

This is intellectual occupation.

Palestinians are still allowed to live in their homes in Jerusalem, but apparently their intellects aren’t welcome.

I always look forward to IsraeliNurses apologetics as she’s been put forward as a not-bigotted face of Israel on the site, for some reason.

There are Israel and Palestinian accounts of the Camp David negotiations, which one is neutral? As no media were present at the negotiations, any report will be based on accounts of those who were present. Which can be judged to be neutral and on what basis?

“This is intellectual occupation”

Spot on. That’s the huge hoax being perpetrated on the world, and many idiots (possibly including Alex) fall for it.

When Jordan annexed the whole of the West Bank, to which she had exactly nil entitlement, nobody batted an eyelid. When Israel annexes East Jerusalem, to which she has a very strong historical, moral and legal claim, we get the usual airhead moonbattery.

Israelinurse – keep up the good work. Carry on, Matron.

I find it interesting that you malign Israel while ignoring the far worse restrictions on cultural freedom that exist throughout the middle east.

I find it predictable that comment one, sentence one is good old whataboutery.

RE: I always look forward to IsraeliNurses apologetics as she’s been put forward as a not-bigotted face of Israel on the site, for some reason.

Nobody, not IsraeliNurse, you or me, is “put forward” for any purpose on this site. She simply posts, as i am now, and as you just did. The difference between her posts and yours are that hers are thoughtful, based on experience, and make sense. You could learn a thing or two.

I find it predictable that you don’t bother to read the rest of the thread with its excellent arguments. Or maybe you just don’t understand them.

“When Jordan annexed the whole of the West Bank”

Including, of course, East Jerusalem, for the benefit of the usual suspects

“to which she had exactly nil entitlement, nobody batted an eyelid”.

vildechaye – exactly.
And thank you for your clear exposition and exposure in re the silly claims about “genocide” in Japan etc.
Would you be prepared to consider Nankinga genocide?

Peace will come when the Arabs and the Palestinians accept Israel’s right to exist. Until then, and with its survival at stake, there is no reason for Israel to do anything but protect herself.

I heppen to believe that if Israel had delivered a “Dresden” or “Hiroshima” scale response to Gaza or The Lebanon then the Palestinians would see sense and go for peace instead or war. Hezbollah and Hamas will only respect might. They still talk about their victories over Israel and that encourages them for more tries.

anyway, the shortened version of my account is: yes, the event was not permitted to take place at the al-Hakawati theater. It took place down the road at the French cultural center. There were no cops or Border Police around when I arrived and I didnt see any outside as we exited the cultural center either. Various condemnations of colonialism took place. Israelis were accused of ‘pretending to be natives’ of ‘Palestine.’ No one mentioned peace or compromise. Vanunu was there.

vildechaye, I seem to remember, one of IsraeliNurse’s comments was incorporated into a Harry’s Place blog post showing how Israel wasn’t all cartoon bigots, but caring feeling people. Who want to ban cultural events, in a democracy, apparently.

NO: I have read the comments. Most of them are the usual par-for-the-course right-wing Israeli nationalist apologetics and whataboutery, with some well-argued opposition. You, however fail to surprise.

“There are Israel and Palestinian accounts of the Camp David negotiations, which one is neutral? As no media were present at the negotiations, any report will be based on accounts of those who were present. Which can be judged to be neutral and on what basis”

Since I have just finished reading “The Missing Peace” by Dennis Ross, chief American negotiator for the Middle East, 1991-2001, and present in each negotiation, I would say, read his book.

He explicitly blames Yasser Arafat for the final result.

Were the Jews described as Europeans or as Khazars, Paul?

Homercles, what on earth are you blabbing about now?

….. There simply was no acceptable and/or moral reason for the Japanese to have continued the war after the loss of Okinawa (June)…..

Nice commentary on the Japanese. So what? Here is the equation:-

“Japan launches unprovoked attacks on USA – Japan has no right to determine the scale of the response”.

Its the same with Hezbollah and Hamas attacks on Israel. We get the bleedin hearts with their “disproportional responses” when there is no such thing as a proportional response that can be measured. Wars are never won by responding proportional when attacked. Its only a disproportional and massive response that stops wars – or the UN interfering to save the agressor.

It wasnt made specific. Amusingly, one of the writers said that he immediately recognised Israel as a colonialist country on his arrival at the airport, as he saw the ‘Arab workers’ loading luggage there. As anyone could have told him, the Arab workers in question were almost certainly Israeli Jews.

In what sense is Ross neutral, Fabian? What are his credentials for neutrality? How does he organise the book to make it clear that this is a neutral account?

Thanks, Paul. Yes, that pretty much encapsulates world ignorance about Israel and Jews in a nutshell.

cheshirewest: well, you will have to read it.
It is 800 pages long.

vildechaye, that is a great post you did on the definition of Genocide. I used to use some of that in debate but had lost the references to where I could find it.

The interesting thing about the definition of Genocide is that it doesn’t apply to Israel against the Palestinians as is claimed every five minutes but does apply to the Palestinians against Israelis/Jews due to the charter of Hamas and things like the PA showing maps of Palestine without detailing Israel. Effectively showing a desire to wipe Israel off the map and kill Jews. They demonstrate the mental aspect of desire, the support at a governmental level as a policy and physical acts.

Homercles: IsraeliNurse’s blog post was originally a thread that the folks who run Harry’s determined was worth having its own posting. She posts hundreds of comments here, most of which are, as i mentioned previously, thoughtful, based on experience and sensible. You have fastened on one comment that you disagree with to slag an entire body of work. That’s typical of Israel-haters, but it isn’t reasonable and is intellectually dishonest. Furthermore, the more i read about this “cultural” event, the more it sounds like a propaganda extravaganza, and more to the point, it was allowed to go on. I await an Israeli cultural event in Egypt or Jordan, oh wait, Jordan doesn’t have a single Jewish citizen.

There are Israel and Palestinian accounts of the Camp David negotiations, which one is neutral? As no media were present at the negotiations, any report will be based on accounts of those who were present. Which can be judged to be neutral and on what basis

Used to be that there were these people called “historians” who would piece thru the different accounts and try to sort out the certain aspects from the less certain. There were also “journalists” who did the same thing.

But if you try to be a “historian” or “journalist” of the 70s or 80s variety, the powers-that-be will accuse you of not giving voice to “the Palestinian narrative” which cannot be criticized even when it is clearly false. So there are competing “narratives” and an attitude that the truth doesn’t matter (though who will bomb you if you don’t side with them does matter).

When it comes to Camp David/Taba however, there is little dispute: There was Barak’s Taba proposal followed by the “Clinton bridge proposal”, followed by Arafat’s “no”.

All the accounts: Shlomo Ben-Ami, Bill Clinton, Dennis Ross, Yossi Beilin, Robert Malley (ie. the “Palestinian” version).

Malley claims that both sides are implicitly to blame because Barak wasn’t deferential enough etc. Malley claims that Arafat did occasionally make proposals (just on non-central issues). Malley claims that Arafat’s “no” to Clinton wasn’t a final “no” and Arafat might have been flexible if not for Sharon’s visit to the Temple Mount (Malley’s claim is truly preposterous to anyone who recalls the tense atmosphere between the breakdown of Taba talks and the Sharon visit).

Anyone who claims otherwise about Camp David/Taba (e.g. the monstrously cretinous Nicholas Kristof) is either unaware or a propagandist.

Someone, you wrote, “I find it predictable that you don’t bother to read the rest of the thread with its excellent arguments. Or maybe you just don’t understand them.”

In that spirit, instead of just calling my statements deranged, would you care to put forward a counter-view?

Paul – what did Claire Messud have to say?

“I always look forward to IsraeliNurses apologetics as she’s been put forward as a not-bigotted face of Israel on the site, for some reason.”

Well, Homercles, perhaps we do indeed select individuals to just that.

Alternatively, you’re just a good old fashioned antisemite.

RE: [Dennis Ross] explicitly blames Yasser Arafat for the final result.

as i recall, so did Bill Clinton.

RE: Would i be prepared to call Nanking a genocide.

Based on my limited knowledge, the rape of Nanking is most comparable to Darfur, though it occured in a much shorter time frame. So yes, it probably qualifies. Certainly, it was an atrocity without parallel.

“In that spirit, instead of just calling my statements deranged, would you care to put forward a counter-view?”

I have. Maybe you need to learn to read. See 8:21, for example.

I have seconded Nurse’s posts, adding comments. Those reflect my views.

“…demonstrators who aimed and fired a submachine gun loaded with stones targeting IDF personnel.”

This sounds unlikely. The “machine gun” mentioned in the article
must be some kind of mechanical device, that hurls stones at
the troops. (Which is bad enough, of course).

test

Thomas -
Nah, that sounds as unlikely as a cannister bouncing off an electricity wire, which Alex has assured us is a physical impossibility.
(sarcasm off)

And yet not even historians can agree. The point is, there are no neutral accounts of complex historical events. Our understanding of events depends on the accretion of evidence over time. An account of something which in this case (the literary festival) literally happened yesterday cannot produce a neutral report and there is no neutral journalistic source. As for Camp David, we will probably have to wait a few more decades.

And yet not even historians can agree. The point is, there are no neutral accounts of complex historical events. Our understanding of events depends on the accretion of evidence over time. An account of something which in this case (the literary festival) literally happened yesterday cannot produce a neutral report and there is no neutral journalistic source. As for Camp David, we will probably have to wait a few more decades.

Well the theme of the discussion was ‘departures’, and all the writers read a little from one of their works and then answered questions. I didnt hear Claire Messud’s reading. In the discussion, she noted her own nomadic background and her father’s origin among the Algerian pieds noirs.

The discussion generally wasn’t bad and tried to stick to the theme of the evening.

What characterized the whole event wasn’t overtly anti-Jewish or anti-Israeli anger, but rather something much deeper and more profound, which I think will be recognisable to anyone who has spent a lot of time around Palestinian and broader Arab nationalism – namely, a startlingly complete refusal to accept that there is any validity whatsoever to Israeli or Jewish identity. Israelis were reduced to a kind of cartoon ‘colonialist’, and the fiction was maintained by all present that this ‘colonialist’ figure was recognisable and interchangeable in all times and at all places.

And yet not even historians can agree. The point is, there are no neutral accounts of complex historical events. Our understanding of events depends on the accretion of evidence over time. An account of something which in this case (the literary festival) literally happened yesterday cannot produce a neutral report and there is no neutral journalistic source. As for Camp David, we will probably have to wait a few more decades.

“The point is, there are no neutral accounts of complex historical events.” (Cheshirewest)

No, the point is that you haven’t read Ross’ book.

How do you square your present relativism with your previous demand for proof of Ross’ neutrality, I don’t know. Probably, you are just an anti-Israel troll and move the goalposts when defeated.

Thanks Paul Frenkel. I wonder if Alex simply didn’t hear the various condemnations of colonialism including the one that Israelis were pretending to be natives of Palestine and just didn’t notice the absence of talk about coexistence, peace or compromise, or just didn’t think either were worth mentioning in his post.

And Alex, now that you’re “willing to hold up on the murder charge”, kindly post that update on your blog, where you previously had a post up arguing you were certain it was a case of murder.

No, I have not read Ross’s book and I’m not an anti-Israel troll or even anti-Israel. I’m pro Israel, without supporting everything the country does. But I don’t need tp read every book on a particular issue to ask the question how do we determine what is a neutral source. I don’t agree with relativisim. To do so would be to enter into discussion with Holocaust deniers. We know their arguments are false because there is a mountain of evidence against it. The mountain of evidence is not however a neutral source as opposed to revisionism’s partial source. It’s an accretion of scholarship. At some point there will probably be a view on what happened at Camp David with which most reputable historians agree. Ross’s book will be part of the evidence so judged.

To be fair to Alex, I think the point is that he wasn’t there, and so couldn’t have noticed these things.

Lbnaz – as I wasn’t at the event, I would have found it hard to hear anything.

I’m not changing my blog; retroactively changing what I write ain’t my thing.

That your contribution is based on something you read in the Observer undermines it considerably. How can you know that the festival was not a political gathering? Were you there?

I am not an orthodox Jew but the Wall, and access to it, is important to me because it is a symbol of Judaism.

Yes it’s regrettable that some Jerusalem Arabs don’t have citizenship, but I note the following from Wikipedia:

Following the 1967 annexation, Israel conducted a census in East Jerusalem and granted permanent Israeli residency to those Arab Jerusalemites present at the time of the census. Those not present lost the right to reside in Jerusalem. Jerusalem Jordanians were permitted to apply for Israeli citizenship, provided they met the requirements for naturalization — such as swearing allegiance to Israel and renouncing all other citizenships — which most of them refused to do. At the end of 2005, 93% of the Arab population of East Jerusalem had permanent residency and 5% had Israeli citizenship.

“As residents, East Jerusalemites rejecting Israeli citizenship have the right to vote in municipal elections and play a role in the administration of the city. Residents pay taxes, and following a 1988 Israeli Supreme Court ruling, East Jerusalem residents are guaranteed the right to social security benefits and state health care…”

Why do you focus on just one aspect without its context? Why are you not shrieking here about the messages from the PA as well as Hamas about not making a lasting peace?

You do not remind us either that Article VIII of the 1949 Armistice Agreement provided for Israeli Jewish access to the Western Wall. However for the following nineteen years, despite numerous requests by Israeli officials and Jewish groups to the United Nations and other international bodies to attempt to enforce the armistice agreement, Jordan refused to abide by this clause.

If the United Nations, with its blatant anti-Israel bias, gets control of Jerusalem do you really believe that a similar state of affairs will not prevail again?

And surely it depends on which “reality” you are talking about? Do you honestly believe that if Israel gave up Jerusalem to the UN, the Arabs would make a lasting peace with her?

Lbnaz – as I wasn’t at the event, I would have found it hard to hear anything.

I’m not changing my blog; retroactively changing what I write ain’t my thing.

Your ego is more important than the truth then? How priggishly pompous!

wrt Sharon, Camp David and the Intifada:-

A senior Fatah commander stated that Arafat had planned the Intifada before and during Camp David. To say that Sharon precipitated the Intifada by walking on Temple Mount is no different from saying that the match started when the referee blew the whistle. Sharon was simply the Go! signal.

“Fabian – fair enough, I’m willing to hold back on the murder charge until the entire picture is clear.”

Blimey.

Serendipity – even if it was a political gathering I don’t think it should have been banned.

Capuchin – Not sure what my ego has to do with it, but there you go.

Chas N-B – Blimey indeed. Am sure the HP regulars will be applying this standard with consistency when it comes to the next crime x or y Arab is accused of.

Paul Frenkel, have you read Yossi Klein Halevi on the Arab/Muslim refusal to accept Israeli identity? The following is put in his inimitable fashion and sums up the essential difficulties that Islam has with Jews and Israelis:

“Once, before the Terror War, a time that seems now to belong not just technically but substantively to another millennium, I undertook a one-man pilgrimage into your mosques and churches, seeking to know you in your intimate spiritual moments.

“This story is particularly relevant because General Youssef is widely known as a moderate, deeply opposed to terror as counter-productive to the Palestinian cause. And so what I learned in my journeys into your society is that moderation means one thing on the Israeli side and quite another on the Palestinian side.”

@grand ad
I’m not sure what your trying to say? My position is that it was immoral/unjust for the Japanese Govt./War Cabinet to continue the war after they had lost Okinawa. They should have surrendered at that stage as they retained no ability to win the war by that stage.

I take a similar position with regards to Gaza – Hamas should have consolidated their position in Gaza after the hand-over, set up economic and social institutions and non-violently sought recognition and permission to open trade/political contacts with their neighbours. Instead they (and Fatah) permitted the Gazans to destroy the existing infrastructure (greenhouses, former synagogues and other buildings), terrorise their own population and murder their opposition with armed fundamentalist militia, establish smuggling routes with Egypt to bring in primarily non-necessary supplies and continue shooting the rockets at Israel.

cheshirewest:

Ross attempts to deal with hypotethic accusations of partiality in his own book. He states his premises, which is something that only serious people do, and all academics should.

I suggest you read his book, judge for yourself his arguments, judge for yourself all the work he did bridging between the sides and finally trying to sell to each side the other’s position, and then dismiss if you can his account as partial.

I’m not changing my blog; retroactively changing what I write ain’t my thing.

Don’t be stupid. You were not asked to change your blog. You were asked to place an addendum or clarification.

I think that what Alec asks, is necessary, in this internet age.

People can google about the case and come up to your blog where it says “it is murder”, when you don’t think it is murder anymore, that it is too soon to know.

Not only that should concern you because it misrepresents your position in a subject in which you changed your mind, but your article as it is now, continues the slow work of demonization with prejudices against Israel that you, apparently, are opposed to.

“Lbnaz – as I wasn’t at the event, I would have found it hard to hear anything.

I’m not changing my blog; retroactively changing what I write ain’t my thing.”

Even in the service of ethical journalism and honesty, Alex? Even to depart from the sort of “I heard from a friend who heard from a friend…?” journalism so popular among blog “journalists” who can’t be bothered to research background properly, or even research at all?

How can we possibly be expected to believe you if you tell stories rather than report what actually happened or did not?

Winston Churchill was reported to have said that a lie can get half-way around the world before the truth can get its pants on. Once such a lie gets into the blogosphere and you have the brass neck to say “it ain’t your thing” to alter your article or even apologise for having misled us, it becomes truth to the people who read it, who trust you because they know no better.

You should be ashamed of yourself.

Alec – I shall think about it. In the meantime, you can all dispassionately peruse the latest Pallywood production, http://palsolidarity.org/2009/05/6777

I’m sure it’s a fine work. I don’t wish to denigrate it. My point is a wider one about the call for neutral sources, particularly in relation to an account of an event which took place yesterday. We have several versions: the police, the organisers, those who took part, those who attended. Any neutral account would have to have all of them.

I read on Lisa Goldman’s blog a link to a piece in the Columbia Journalism Review about how the UK and US media dealt with the Gaza war. The former starts with with the Palestinian prosecution case, the latter with the Israeli defence.
http://www.cjr.org/
You should read it to understand how difficult neutrality is to achieve.
Which is neutral?

Oops, correct link
http://www.cjr.org/feature/a_matter_of_trust.php?page=all

Homercles -I represent no-one except myself and express no views except my own.
I call what is happening ‘intellectual occupation’ because, in case you haven’t noticed, the war (and that’s what it is) that the Palestinian terror organisations are waging against Israel is being fought on two levels.
On the one hand we have acts of violence -rockets, suicide bombings, individual murders of Israeli citizens etc.
On the other hand we have the propoganda war. In Israel one is pretty much immune to this, but one of the things which has shocked me since coming to live temporarily in the UK is the level of success they have acheived in re-writing history and distorting the reality on the ground in the minds of the average Joe Bloggs.
You would be amazed how many otherwise intellegent and well-informed people I meet who believe that prior to 1948 there was a country called Palestine which a few Jews just decided to take over.
This is not by chance. It is the result of some very effective campaigning by pro-Palestinian groups whose aim is to establish de facto a virtual country in world opinion. And we can see the very dangerous results of this. In the minds of many the Palestinians have indeed already succeeded in claiming Gaza, the West Bank and part of Jerusalem as their own, despite the fact that none of these territories was ruled or administered by a Palestinian state or government prior to 1967 and despite the fact that repeated attempts at negotiation on this subject by Israel have inevitably been scuppered by the Palestinians themselves.
The failed Palestinian leadership knows that whilst it has the ability to make life for the Israelis close to intolerable, it cannot outdo Israel militarily. It therefore employs other methods to acheive its aims -PR.
Organising a ‘cultural event’ in another country’s capital city is a classic. As I said above, the venue could have been any one of the West Bank towns which the PA does already control, but no -it had to be Jerusalem because it had to have the effect of indicating to the world that evil Israel supresses Palestinian art and culture in their ‘own’ capital city. It isn’t their capital city yet. If they lay down arms and negotiate it may yet be, but we cannot allow them to gain it by stealth if we want there to be an Israel alongside a Palestinian state.
I also think that if we want a future Palestinian state to have any sort of normality to it -for the sake of its citizens and its neighbours -it has to come about through negotiation, not through armed struggle or PR trickery. A leadership capable of compromise and negotiation which will stick to agreements it has signed has to grow within the Palestinian ranks -otherwise the fate of the ordinary Palestinian people will be no different to what it has been up to now. For too long they have suffered under corrupt leaders who know only cruelty and violence as a modus operendi.
My opinions may not fit the classic left-wing model to which you are used. I have been knocking around in this world for enough years to know that for the most part life does not comply with convenient categorisation. I have lived in the Middle East for long enough (over 30 years) to know that individual events and occurences need to be thought about and weighed up afresh each time and that they cannot and should not be judged according to a blanket ‘party line’.

I’m finding it hard to find information on this in the Israeli press.

Here’s the most detailed article on it that I can find.

In occupied Jerusalem, Lit Fest can’t avoid politics
Monday, 25 May 2009 03:13 Added by PT Editor Beesan M.Ramadan

jerusalemcult West Bank, May 24, (Pal Telegraph) – On its opening day, Israeli soldiers walked past piles of books for sale and commemorative PalFest’09 tote bags into the Palestine National Theatre to tell the owner that the Palestine Festival of Literature was an event organized by the Palestinian Authority and therefore illegal.

Writers, poets, diplomats and artists were herded onto the street. The event to foster discussion about literary themes and techniques was off to an ominous start.

“The PA has nothing to do with PalFest,” said local organizer Omar Hamilton following the forcible eviction. The event is sponsored by the British Council, UNRWA, the AM Qattan Foundation and the Sigrid Rausing Charitable Fund. It is hosting 20 authors, 17 from abroad, in a six-day traveling literary workshop.

The authors are a diverse group, including Kenya born, Tanzaniya-raised Canadian immigrant and winner of the Giller Prize, M.G. Vassanji, and British writer and actor Michael Palin, best known for his work on the Monty Python films and his latest novel, Hemmingway’s Chair. Most have never been to Palestine before, and are meant to discuss literature and literary themes to groups of literati and university students across the West Bank and East Jerusalem.

“You’d be wrong to think that in each session people were discussing politics, it doesn’t happen, it doesn’t come up at all,” said festival organizer Victoria Brittain an hour before armed soldiers told her to evacuate the Palestine National Theatre. “[Politics] is separate from the talks, precisely because everybody is talking about literature.”

‘We don’t talk about politics, but our presence is political’

There is a political dimension to the event, however, explained participating author Jamal Mahjoub. “The fact that you have writers coming from all over the world…all of this is somehow in its self a political statement, because you are saying, ‘This is what we want;’ we want to be able to address Palestinians in cultural terms and that is political.”

Suheir Hammad, who was also set to be interviewed before the opening events, was too harrowed from her five-hour interrogation at the Allenby Bridge to sit down and discuss literature.

The festival seems on both sides of the line between literature and politics, as is often unavoidable in Palestine. Honoring Al-Quds Capital of Culture 2009, the group chose to begin and end their tour of Palestine in Jerusalem. Another political feature of the tour is that it travels to Palestinians, because most cannot travel to them; the political and geographical fragmentation of the West Bank means most young men have a difficult time traveling from the north to the central West Bank, or the south to the north, etc.

“The thing that was striking [to me about] last year,” said Mahjoub, who is the only returning author from last year’s festival, “was that it was about literature, and not politics.” That, he emphasized, “is what created the bond between the audiences and the writers, particularly at the universities.”

Literature binds Palestinians to a world they are cut off from

When authors from Africa, India, the UK, Canada, Australia and the Middle East all talk about “departure” as a theme in a work or in various works, explained Mahjoub, it “creates that bridge to allow the Palestinian experience to come out through a cultural dimension, through cultural expression – not political.” This festival offers, he explains, “a sense of recognition between the authors and the audiences…the fact that your experience is not unique to you… a recognition that these authors are talking to you about things you understand.”

That is what literature does, he said.

As the presenters and audience members from the opening night panels got comfortable at the French Cultural Center, a few blocks away from the Palestinian National Theatre, theatre owner Jamal Ghosheh stood up to speak.

“If the occupation is afraid of a literature festival,” he said, addressing the elephant in the room of literature buffs and the culturally inclined, “than they are very fragile indeed.”

Ghosheh then addressed another central, and also political, reason for the importance of the festival and its return to the area. “We need you,” he said to the authors and organizers, “we need you because we do not want the occupation to succeed in sealing our minds,” like it had already sealed off the West Bank and Gaza, was the implicit undertone.

But the workshops themselves are not political, all insist.

“The idea is not to come and present a platform for political debate but to give space for the Palestinian culture aspect to meet the cultural lives of these authors who come from very diverse backgrounds; that is creating a space in which a part of the Palestinian experience that is not reflected normally in the media can come out; and for me that’s the main point,” said Mahjoub.

Back to the books

Organizers said they hoped the workshops, which will continue in Ramallah on Sunday, Jenin on Monday, Bethlehem on Tuesday, Hebron on Wednesday and back to Jerusalem Thursday, will go off with less drama of the political sort.

“Nobody’s stopped us from going on the walk through the hills,” organizer Hamilton said over the phone. The group was set to follow the steps of Rajah Shehadeh, who wrote Palestine Walks, and is participating in the 2009 festival.

Shehadeh will also present his work during the panel discussion on “Registering Change: Landscape and Architecture” at the Sakikini center Sunday evening. Shehadeh’s observations of the changes wrought on the Palestinian landscape since his boyhood will be discussed alongside Palin’s novel about a small-town postal worker whose life is shaken up when a new and modernizing manager is brought into the mix. Well known Palestinian author Suad Amiry will join the conversation with her book on her coming of age under occupation and her changing landscape of exile between Amman, Damascus, Beirut and Cairo.

It is the hope of festival organizers that discussion will once again be on expression and literature, on creativity and humanity and not on themes relating to Palestinian politics. “The theme of every meeting is around the texts,” explained Brittain, “We did not choose these because they are relevant to the Palestinian issue; we absolutely didn’t.”

Themes of change, of relocation, distance, departure and travel, it seems, are prominent not just in the Palestinian case.

Indeed, the politics of PalFest’09 as well as the literature being presented have a humanist and universal element that speaks to the modern age and many of the issues that people the world over grapple with.

Mahjoub put it best when he spoke of his own work around conflict in Darfur. “Emotionally we understand things better through fiction,” he said. “Fiction allows you to describe conflict in a way that is at once more simple than the reality and more complete than reportage, than the news. Because you create it within a human emotional context, a landscape that you created with families and people.” His next project, however, is a non-fiction work on the genocide that country witnessed in recent years, which will grapple with the facts, not the emotions of the story.

The artists at PalFest’09, as fiction and non-fiction writers, poets and filmmakers, bind the emotional with the factual in an event that speaks to both, and of the impossibility of separating the two.

http://www.paltelegraph.com/palestine/west-bank/939-in-occupied-jerusalem-lit-fest-cant-avoid-politics

“Canada minister blasts ‘dangerous’ leftist-Islamist anti-Semitism” http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1087973.html

Something of a theme at HP and relevant to the motives of criticisng Israel.

Meanwhile, here’s a video of the first day of the event. According the article (or about to be -moderation) posted, the festival is non-political.

Whether it is or not, I am not saying, is not necessarily a reason for obstructing it.

I can’t watch the wretched video because my connection’s pathetic, but you may decide yourselves:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cJU7-9r-pVA&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.palfest.org%2Fvideo.html&feature=player_embedded

“I’m sure it’s a fine work. I don’t wish to denigrate it. My point is a wider one about the call for neutral sources”

Indeed, cheshirewest, it is a wider point. It belongs to a philosophy book.

But if you want to have the best possible idea of what transpired in the negotiations of Camp David, you need to get down to earth and read Ross’ book.

It delivers what it says: an inside view of the peace process.

It has its limitations, you need to know all the outside context first. For example, Ross talks about negotiations about reducing the size of the Palestinian forces to its agreed numbers in the Gaza-Jericho Agreement, without telling us how many more policemen the Palestinians had already fielded on contradiction of the Agreement.

These kind of criticisms is the one that has any value, and you can only do it after you read the book.

Wider points about knowledge leave them for Epistemology 101.

Exactly, it delivers an insider’s view of the Oslo peace process from the point of view of one of the American negotiators. An extremely valuable piece of evidence.

But my point is about the call for neutral accounts of events, not whether Ross’s book is good or not.

“…Your ego is more important than the truth then? How priggishly pompous!…”

And potentially dangerous too, Capuchin, in the light of what it adds to the “drip, drip, drip” of anti-Israel propaganda by people who can’t be bothered to find out the facts before they come to any decision.

This fellah should be writing for Comment is Free.

By the way, I have spoken to two people from the Israeli side who were present at Taba and one told me that absolutely definitely the sticking point was right of return and the other that that this was completely incorrect, it was the status of Jerusalem. Each said that the other was wrong because ‘I was there.’ When I said that the other was there too, they said that this other person didn’t know what they were talking about.

“But my point is about the call for neutral accounts of events, not whether Ross’s book is good or not.”

If your point is a call for neutral account of the events, I can only answer that every neutral account of the events will be exactly like Ross’ account. I know that because I read the book. Prove me wrong: read the book and come back here with arguments.

Israelinurse, you have just GOT to be an HP regular with your post at 10:10am.

You are correct. The idea that the Palestinians have created a virtual Palestine which they sustained into an almost real one by their self-martyrdom and self-infliction. They have reneged on every peace process and demand things they never had. I have read/listened to the disgusting lie “Jews have stolen Palestine” but isn’t it relevant to remark that the Palestinians are trying to steal something they in fact rejected.

In 1948 they rejected Res 181, giving them a state and tried to take it all by war. They lost. In 1967 the Arabs tried again, they lost even more. Surely, awarding the Palestinians a State is to reward the Arabs for war and attempted Genocide.

I don’t deny that they should have some sort of statehood and identity but since their roots are also Jordanian and Syrian then why not become an autonomous region of Jordan?

I disagree with a lot of what Alex writes but come on, it’s clear he loves Israel and wants the very best for it.

Israelinurse, re the teargas cannister incident at Biliin, could you post here an authoritative link which reports the outcome you talk about honestly rather than tells us a story for which there has blatantly been no research done?

Your contributions here are excellent.

Like others I am trying to determine what parameters are used by the auto-moderating mechanism because it seems arbitary. I think its to do with posting frequency and number of words. We’ll see. I’ll give it half an hour!

Say What?, you’re behind the curve.

Israelinurse: “Organising a ‘cultural event’ in another country’s capital city is a classic.”

The event took place in East Jerusalem; over which the international community does not recognise Israeli sovereignty. UN Resolution 478 declares Israeli annexation of the east null and void. As a result of the 1980 Jerusalem Law, no country now maintains its embassy in Jerusalem.

As for your views, I can get a much more developed view of them in Boogie Ya’alon’s autobiography, thank you very much.

Alex: according to international law, every country has the right to determine the location of his capital. Israel has chosen Jerusalem. Deal with it, Telavivi.

What Fabian just said.
The nonsense that this mythical “international community” can dictate to Israel where its capital is, is classic anti-Semitism. It’s not even necessary to invoke “international law”, as Fabian just did: it’s a purely internal Israeli matter.

What Fabian just said.
The nonsense that this mythical “international community” can dictate to Israel where its capital is, is classic anti-Semitism. It’s not even necessary to invoke “international law”, as Fabian just did: it’s a purely internal Israeli matter.

Chas N-B, are you a friend of Alex Stein’s, because it appears that your friendship is clouding your judgement if you are.

“..it’s clear he loves Israel and wants the very best for it… “

Really? In what way? By this publishing this sort of ill-researched twaddle and then refusing to change it where it is untrue because

“… it ain’t his thing?”

If this sort of selling out is indicative of loving Israel, Stein has no idea of the consequences of such a twisted idea of what “love” is.

Your loyalty to him is touching, however.

David T: ‘There is a difference between using existing settlements as a bargaining chip, and building new ones.” Netanyahu did not say that Israel would build new settlements, but that it would allow natural growth of existing ones. There is a difference.

Why do you think Obama said “a Jerusalem undivided” at his AIPAC speech? Is Obama a liar, incompetent or is it deeper USA policy despite the protestations.

When Netanyahu recently said “Jerusalem undivided” the state dept. said that Jerusalem was supposed to be part of a final status agreement.

Well, if Israel says “Jerusalem is our ancient capital and the capital of modern Israel” and Palestinians say “We have a lot of Arab citizens in East Jerusalem so we want it to be our capital city” doesn’t natural fairness suggest that Israel’s claim is stronger since there is no suggestion that Arabs can’t remain in East Jerusalem whereas a Palestinian claim will suggest that no Jews can live in East Jerusalem. Also, we have seen what Arabs have done to Jerusalem when they had sovreignty over it.

Fabian – I’m not objecting to Jerusalem being Israel’s capital (although I would prefer TA, but that’s another story), I’m objecting to it occupying the eastern part of the city. That should be clear.

Someone – Does that mean that Germany should have the right to declare Strasbourgh its capital?

And again, you’re both deliberately ignoring the issue. Once Jerusalem is two capitals for two states (Peace Now activists will be distributing flyers with that very message for anyone who’s in TA for White Nights on Wednesday), countries will happily return their embassies there.

Saywhat – I’m not sure who I’ve sold out to, given that HP give no money. Plus you’re conflating this article and the one about Bil’in, please try and be clearer. As for my love of Israel, if it isn’t clear, it’s embodied in my aliyah, my army service (serving a year when I only had to do six months), my work for an Israeli amutah, and my commitment to doing what I can to make Zion all it can be. What’s your claim?

Paul, 9:11 -
Indeed, we have seen this complete denial of reality time and time again. The useful idiots in the West buy it wholesale, because it gives a semblance of justification (in their eyes) to the anti-Semitism of the last few years.

And what Capuchin and Mitnaged said about Alex’s ego and his shameful refusal to change the accusation of murder on his blog.

I’m objecting to it occupying the eastern part of the city.

ie. the kotel, Jewish quarter, temple mount, city of David.

The funny thing is that you think that bending to the Palestinian position vis-a-vis Jerusalem renders you as willing to make peace – in distinction to those who think that the Jewish places in Jerusalem must remain Israeli.

Don’t you realize that the next step is demanding that “refugees” settle into Israel proper? No doubt you would then try to split the difference again and advocate settling “some” refugees” while still maintaining an Israel distinct from Palestine.

People like yourself never wake up to the fact that there is an deadly adversary who has his own interests and doesn’t care at all about yours.

“Someone – Does that mean that Germany should have the right to declare Strasbourgh its capital?”

Look at the map and tell me which country Strasbourgh is in. Is it enclosed within the same coloured line that surrounds Germany? If yes, then sure.

“And again, you’re both deliberately ignoring the issue”

Another mind-reader. Amazing. Perhaps you should set up a circus act called The Amazing Alexini.

“Once Jerusalem is two capitals for two states (Peace Now activists will be distributing flyers with that very message for anyone who’s in TA for White Nights on Wednesday)”

I don’t care what leaflets Peace Now distributes. They are not the Israeli Knesset.

“countries will happily return their embassies there.”

Jews no longer run their affairs on the basis of making the foreign offices of other nations happy. You really haven’t grasped the fundamental point of Zionism, have you?

Alex: “I’m objecting to it occupying the eastern part of the city.”

We are not occupying it. It is ours. Do you want to give it away? Make the Palestinians pay its price.

They can always refuse to pay, and have their capital in Ramallah, or Jericho. Or Amman.

Ohad -

“ie. the kotel, Jewish quarter, temple mount, city of David.”

Ah, but to people like Alex, with nil grasp of Jewish history (both concrete and spiritual), these are merely parts of the “absurd and unnecessary myth of the City of Zion”, a city that never existed in actual history and/or it existed but has to be surrendered at the demand of other nations in order to make them “happy”.

The attitude of those who will accept ZERO criticism of anything Israel does is interesting. They seem very determined that nobody outside Israel has a right to try to interfere in these ‘internal matters’ and that Israel doesn’t need to run its affairs “on the basis of making the foreign officers of other nations happy”. Perhaps if Israel really is happy and able to act independently and stick two fingers up to world opinion it won’t mind if the US cuts off all aid to it. After all there are many other places in the world that need those billions of dollars for development and security.

“We are not occupying it. It is ours. Do you want to give it away? Make the Palestinians pay its price.

They can always refuse to pay, and have their capital in Ramallah, or Jericho. Or Amman.”

Would sharing really be so bad?!

I believe you have sold out your loyalties to your new country (incidentally, did you bring your own gun?) by publishing untruths about her and then refusing to add anything to your article to point out that you had been “mistaken.”

You have also sold out to whatever is good journalism by not researching, by publishing for effect, and by adding to the hatred in the blogosphere for the country you claim to love so much.

My claim is to be honest to myself and to others about Israel’s shortcomings but not in places where my honesty may be misused and added to the hatred of her. A lot of my energies are taken up with countering the sort of hatred engendered by the half-baked “thoughts as facts” rubbish written online about her.

You have a lot of growing up to do as a blog writer, not least because you cannot apprehend that what you say will be received in the way you want it to be received. If you are as loyal to Israel and love her as much as you and Chas N-B argue, then don’t offer your views in fora where you contribute to hatred of her or in ways which add to that hatred.

And they get it, Universal: in fact, they get a hell of a lot more than Israel does (which is mostly not “aid” at all, the usual canard of Israel-bashers); and that includes the Palestinians. Look up the figures before shooting your mouth off.
When people like you come here and say that Israel should decide where it’s capital is because of “aid” – do you make the same demand of any other country, boy? – we know what motivates them.

Ah, but to people like Alex, with nil grasp of Jewish history (both concrete and spiritual), these are merely parts of the “absurd and unnecessary myth of the City of Zion ..

In the Camp David era, “educated” Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat claimed to Bill Clinton that there was never a Jewish Temple in Jerusalem. Clinton replied that yes there was, and supposedly they started rummaging encyclopedias or something to clarify.

Almost 10 years later, such a thing is impossible to imagine. Obama (or Merkel or Brown) would just smile and say oh really that’s interesting..

Ohad – you know very well that’s not what I mean; see the Clinton parameters. As for the rest, at least I’m now clear about your rejectionism.

Someone – the point is a majority of the people there don’t want to be under our sovereignty. Do you really need to see the Israeli flag fly over Shuafat refugee camp? As for Zionism, the aim is to make us a normal, prosperous, peaceful nation, strong and confident, like other countries. It’s one thing to be have independence, quite another to exercise that independence just for the hell of it. Just because other countries are demanding something of us it doesn’t mean they are wrong. As for the issue of changing the blog, this is what I wrote over at my place, “My blog also reflects what I was feeling at the time; I don’t claim to be an unimpeachable source, and would fully expect people coming here to look at other sources as well. I’m perfectly comfortable with the idea of people stumbling upon the occasional incorrect claim that I make.”

Fabian – at least I am now clear about your rejectionism. That’s three readers today; makes it clearer about where we’ll have to agree to disagree.

WTF! Is the third time that I post this and dissapears. I send it without the link now, maybe that is the problem.

I used to think like Alex.

I thought that if I can’t walk safely in Sheik Jarrah or the Muslim Quarter of the old city, it had to become Palestinian.

The problem is that I couldn’t walk safely in several neighborhoods of Buenos Aires. But they were still part of the city.

Will I be able to walk safely through Sheik Jarrah or the Muslim Quarter if it becomes Palestinian? No. You will be knifed. Now and then, an Israeli or a tourist will be murdered. So what do we gain by giving it away?

At least if it is ours we can send our police in force to maintain order. Do you trust a Palestinian with a gun? I don’t.

This looks like a classic mess up.

The festival is political, and no doubt objectionable on all kinds of grounds. But Arab East Jerusalem is going to be part of a Palestinian state (not Jewish East Jerusalem, Arab).

Banning the festival looks like a real blooper for the Netanyahu-Lieberman era.

From the “Life of Ali (a fair translation of Brian)”:

Ali, PLLFF (Palestine Liberation Literature Festival Front) member, played this time by Michael Palin, is daubing graffitti on a Jerusalem wall:

Yalla lech ha bayta Yaoud (Hebreo-Arabic for: Judean go home)

Israeli Border Police: That’s not how you say “Judeans go home” in Hebrew. Now. what’s Hebrew for “Judean”?

MP: Er, Yehud?

ISP: What number?

MP:: Plural. Yehudim?

ISP: Now the verb.

MP: L’lechet. Lech?

ISP: Which number?

MP: Er, plural. Lechu?

ISP: Right, etc.

Finally they arrive at “Yehudim lechu habayta”

ISP: Now, write that out one hundred times.

(Please excuse my Hebrew, which is a little rusty)

As for the rest, at least I’m now clear about your rejectionism.

I indicate that I believe the Jewish parts of Jerusalem should be Israeli (and that Palestinian “refugees” should not be settled into pre-67 Israel) – and for that you label me a “rejectionist”. Mah Pitom.

“It’s one thing to be have independence, quite another to exercise that independence just for the hell of it. Just because other countries are demanding something of us it doesn’t mean they are wrong.”

Claiming Jerusalem and the historic Temple Mount as the Jewish capital is “just for the hell of it”? Now I know with even greater certainty that I was entitely right in my post of 10:58, and elsewhere on this point.

Obviously other countries get aid. But aid always comes with strings attached, and so I would have thought that you, as such a vehement proponent of Israel’s independence from outside influence, would perhaps be demanding that the Israel rejects any further funds from the US government. Your suggestion that I must be motivated by anti-semitism is sadly predictable.

“But Arab East Jerusalem is going to be part of a Palestinian state”

I didn’t realise you were one of the prophets also, Zkharya II. I thought you had more sense than that. Maybe it will, maybe it won’t. The “Palestinians” sure are making every possible effort to ensure that this never happens.

“at least I am now clear about your rejectionism”

Rejectionism? What am I rejecting, Alex? Seriously?

“Do you really need to see the Israeli flag fly over Shuafat refugee camp?”
Oh, Yes, Alex, because Shuafat is the problem!

Perhaps if Israel really is happy and able to act independently and stick two fingers up to world opinion it won’t mind if the US cuts off all aid to it. After all there are many other places in the world that need those billions of dollars for development and security

My guess is that Israel KNOWS the USA cannot cut its aid because if it did then Russia would step in and lots of USA technology secrets would be an open book.

I think that its a truism that while the USA is the the Grandaddy Big Bucks, Israel is its favourite grandson.

Poster at HP are certainly willing to criticise Israel. Settlers regularly get a bashing as does Lieberman. But there is a difference between legitimate criticism and lies.

correction to previous post –

“..not least because you cannot apprehend that what you say may not be received in the way you want it to be received..”

“Your suggestion that I must be motivated by anti-semitism is sadly predictable.”

Which is the predictable standard response; and merely repeating this mantra doesn’t prove that you are not.
No other country – NO OTHER COUNTRY – is told that it must have its capital where some other country tells it to. The fact that you demand this of Jews proves that you are.

SayWhat – It wasn’t a rhetorical question; what’s your claim?

According to the US Jerusalem is the capital of Israel. The congress said so in a bill and demanded the US embassy to be moved there.
I think the US governments sign waivers every six months or so.

Sorry, Fabian – can you explain that last sentence?

Someone – the point is a majority of the people there don’t want to be under our sovereignty. Do you really need to see the Israeli flag fly over Shuafat refugee camp

And what if settlers in the West Bank don’t want to live under the sovreignty of a Palestinian state.

Wouldn’t a fair answer be to grant West Bank settlers dual citizenship of a Palestinian State under Palestinian rule and East Jerusalem residents a dual citizenship under Israeli rule. Now, if they don’t accept that then they can move out and go to a Palestinian State just as settlers can choose to move back to Israel.

Someone – once again, nobody is saying that Israel can’t have its capital in Jerusalem. They are saying that Israel can’t occupy Palestinian East Jerusalem. Please acknowledge this distinction. As for the question of the Temple Mount, please see the Clinton parameters.

Fabian from Israel – you tell me. Where do you stand on the issue of Palestinian statehood? Also, I don’t know where you get the idea you can’t walk safely in Sheikh Jarrah or the Muslim Quarter. I’ve walked there lots of times, as have many other Israelis, and have had no problems, although obviously one should keep an eye on ‘events’ before going. As for trusting Palestinians with a gun (imagine how you’d react if someone said the same about Jews with a gun), you should have a quiet word with General Dayton – http://www.bicom.org.uk/news/news-archive/us-general-dayton-praises-new-pa-security-forces

Ohad – given that, you’re really going to have to let them have Shuafat. But in case I’m mistaken, where do you stand on the issue of Palestinian statehood?

No other country – NO OTHER COUNTRY – is told that it must have its capital where some other country tells it to.

You sound just like Chinese officials complaining that Western pro-Tibetan independence campaigners are motivated by anti-Chinese racism and colonial attitudes. I hope you are consistent in your steadfast defence of all state sovereignty and advocation of non-interference in the affairs of other nations. Otherwise you’re just a standard chauvinistic nationalist who happens to be a supporter of Israel.

I have told you, Alex – to fight the sort of Jew-hatred masked as anti-Zionism which is fed by the misinformation which blog authors who claim to “love Israel” incite.

You say you love your country and have given proof. Why not write your criticisms of her in your own country where they may do some good, rather than abroad where they are latched onto by people of opinion but very little brain and used to give a specious stamp of approval for their hatred – along the lines of “if an Israeli Jew thinks like this, then it must be true…” which is Comment is Free’s facile and pernicious approach to the I/P issue.

Come to think of it you write a lot like Seth Freedman – in fact, if your name wasn’t under this article, I might be forgiven for believing that CiF’s pet Israeli had written this. Did you and he attend the same creative writing seminars?

Jimmy Carter “read” Ross’ book, just enough to misrepresent the maps in it and place distorted facsimiles in his ‘classic’ “Peace, Not Apartheid” without ever soliciting permission from Ross who complained to no avail. And then there was Clayton Swisher (now a correspondent for Al Jazeera) who despite never attending a single meeting (he was some kind of intern with escort duties), published a book exonerating Arafat and blaming Israel for the lack of a comprehensive peace settlement following Oslo.

I’m not changing my blog; retroactively changing what I write ain’t my thing.

Alex, I didn’t ask you to retroactively change what you wrote. I asked you to update your blog given that you commented on this thread that you are now “willing to hold up on the murder charge…”. Apparently updating your blog when new information comes to light that changes your previous held certainties, ain’t your kind of thing either. I mean it isn’t as if Jimmy Carter updated the new editions of his book after Dennis Ross complained about the plagiarized maps.

Saywhat – I have had a column in Haaretz, and will hopefully have another one this coming Thursday, although on another topic entirely (the Jewish-Kashmiri dialogue group that I’ve set up). Plus I’m down to review the latest Benny Morris for the books section. I don’t believe I can be held responsible for how people may or may not distort what I write.

As for me and Seth, he’s going for the 500,000 sold, I’m going for the Nobel. Wish us luck!

Someone: I said that the US Congress recognizes that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel, but chickenshit US governments sign waivers to postpone moving the embassy to its new location.

“Where do you stand on the issue of Palestinian statehood?”
Alex, I am now an agnostic. I think that we want it more than the Palestinians, because we want to get rid of them the nice way. But they want Tel Aviv and Haifa.

Dividing Jerusalem: is it necessary to get rid of the demographic problem?

Notice that I don’t say “peace”. I don’t trust the Palestinians and I have no problem saying that. They will start another war. Or they will continue the war of attrition from their new state.

As for me and Seth, he’s going for the 500,000 sold, I’m going for the Nobel. Wish us luck!

Hard leftists are often narcissists.

Blasting Israel is a good way to get cachet in Europe.

“They are saying that Israel can’t occupy Palestinian East Jerusalem.”

Then they are talking through the backs of their heads. There is no such entity as “Palestinian East Jerusalem”. There never HAS been such entity as “Palestinian East Jerusalem”.

Lbnaz – there are lots of things I don’t update on; it’s not the function of my blog. I write one or two pieces a week, the rest is bits and bobs. I see no reason to write an update specifically on this issue. If people are interested they are more than capable of researching it for themselves and following it on these threads.

I see no reason to write an update specifically on this issue.

Concerned about your street cred w/ “Anarchists against the wall”" and the ISM??

Say What?? -the report was in an article on english Ynet on 22/5/09. Unfortunately I did not save a copy and don’t seem to be able to extract it from their archives. The article itself was about the 75th armoured division and their work in protecting the security barrier -which they say is harder than being in Gaza.
I have e-mailed the Israeli government and asked them to provide me with a copy of the report of the investigation. Hopefully it will arrive before this thread expires.

Sri Lanka is peaceful these days, isn’t it?

“Yes but surely you must realise that this is because the Israel-Palestine conflict has been ongoing for many decades now, has destabilised the region, and ergo has global repercussions, so this is why people around the world view the conflict (which includes competing claims over Jerusalem) as an important issue and their politicians take stances on it”

A “stance” is not the same thing as demanding that those pesky Jews move their capital to where “we” tell them to.

“I’m someone who agrees that Israel receives a disproportionate amount of unfairly negative attention comapred to other countries, but I think it’s mad (and offensive) to say this is all down to anti-semitism, which is just a bit desparate.”

The DISPROPORTIONATE amount of UNFAIRLY negative attention is entirely down to anti-Semitism. But maybe you don’t understand what anti-Semitism (or any other racism) actually is.

“You sound just like Chinese officials complaining that Western pro-Tibetan independence campaigners are motivated by anti-Chinese racism and colonial attitudes. I hope you are consistent in your steadfast defence of all state sovereignty and advocation of non-interference in the affairs of other nations. Otherwise you’re just a standard chauvinistic nationalist who happens to be a supporter of Israel.”

Utter bollocks from start to finish. The Tibetans never started a genocidal war – let alone several – against China or the Chinese; and Lhasa has never been the historical capital of China. This spurious “analogy” is exactly what I would have expected from ignorant-cum-Israel-hating people like you.

Universal:

“Would sharing really be so bad?!”

Hitherto the PA has insisted that Israel, for instance, withdraw from every part of the Old City, including the Jewish quarter and Western Wall.

“They seem very determined that nobody outside Israel has a right to try to interfere in these ‘internal matters’ and that Israel doesn’t need to run its affairs “on the basis of making the foreign officers of other nations happy”.”

Well, where do you stand on the Jewish state, Mr allegedly Universal? Does it make you happy? Do you have a right to interfere in internal Israeli affairs?

“Perhaps if Israel really is happy and able to act independently and stick two fingers up to world opinion it won’t mind if the US cuts off all aid to it.”

Fortunately the US is not the “world opinion” to which I suspect you allude.

Geoffrey Alderman recently wrote this article in the JC:

http://www.thejc.com/articles/why-bibi-and-obama-cosied

Why Bibi and Obama cosied up

From The Jewish Chronicle
Geoffrey Alderman
May 21, 2009

It was in the interests of both the American and the Israeli leaders to act realistically

On Monday, Israeli Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu met US President Barack Obama in one of the most minutely choreographed get-togethers in the history of diplomatic relations. The President can claim an overwhelming mandate to break with the policies of the Bush era. The Prime Minister can claim an overwhelming mandate to protect Israel’s interests in the international arena.

It is fashionable to regard Israel as a vassal state of the USA, dependent on it for arms and money, and for support and protection at the UN. Given this fashionable view, there was a great deal of media speculation, prior to Monday’s meeting, that Obama would “read the riot act” to Netanyahu and that Netanyahu might lose his temper and bluntly refuse, thus precipitating a private and even, perhaps, a public showdown. But this is not what happened at all.

It must be remembered that Obama is a first-term President. If he wants a second term, he will have to earn it. This is unlikely to happen if he alienates those many Jews who backed him last November (around 80 per cent of the American-Jewish vote). For Obama, much more than for Netanyahu, Monday’s meeting had to be a success, a positive encounter with Israel’s leader, not a negative one.

Obama — who is nothing if not a good schmoozer — was never going to confront Netanyahu with demands that were bound to be refused. To evacuate the West Bank by next week, for instance, or to permit Israel’s Jewish population (some 5.7 million) to be swamped by five million Arab “refugees” exercising a “right of return”.

Over the past few weeks, I have had private dialogues with some of Israel’s most implacable enemies within what I shall term the western academic community. Here were otherwise intelligent people speaking as if Netanyahu was going to agree to sign Israel’s death-warrant at Obama’s insistence.

“My friends,” I told my fellow academics, “you are living in cuckoo-land.” And I reminded them of the famous aphorism of Bismarck: “politics is the art of the possible”.

Both Netanyahu and Obama understand this only too well. I have never been one of Bibi’s most enthusiastic admirers but I have to say that, thus far into his current premiership, he has not put a foot wrong. He appears — certainly for the moment — to have tamed the volcanic Avigdor Lieberman, who, as Israel’s Foreign Minister, behaved impeccably during his own visit to London earlier this month.

Bibi’s inclusion of Ehud Barak in his government was a stroke of genius. Netanyahu the Likudnik heads a centrist government. Whatever concessions he makes in any resumed peace negotiations will therefore have been endorsed by those who represent a broad spectrum of Israeli opinion.

We can be sure that President Obama was advised of this — if he had not already worked it out for himself. Travel restrictions on Palestinians can certainly be eased. Some outlying Jewish settlements in the West Bank can certainly be dismantled — and if with a modest amount of well-publicised force, so much the better.

But the major areas of Jewish settlement are not going to be evacuated. For Arab “refugees” there will be no “right of return”, only compensation, balanced by compensation (for which Shas members of Netanyahu’s cabinet are already pressing) for Jews expelled from Arab lands.

Netanyahu, in spite of his public pronouncements to the contrary, appears to have indicated to the American President that he might even acquiesce in the establishment of an independent Palestinian-Arab “homeland” (to use the Pope’s well-chosen phrase) on the West Bank and Gaza — provided its government recognises Israel as a Jewish state.

The major foreign-policy disagreement between the US and Israel is not, in fact, in relation to the Palestinians, but is to be found in their respective approaches to Iran. Obama entered office believing that Iran’s present leadership can be appeased. Netanyahu does not share this view.

Neither do the governments of Egypt or Saudi Arabia. If Obama has any sense, he will have listened carefully to what his Israeli guest had to say on this subject at the White House this week.

“Yes but surely you must realise that this is because the Israel-Palestine conflict has been ongoing for many decades now, has destabilised the region, and ergo has global repercussions, so this is why people around the world view the conflict (which includes competing claims over Jerusalem) as an important issue and their politicians take stances on it”

A “stance” is not the same thing as demanding that those pesky Jews move their capital to where “we” tell them to.

My view on Palestinian statehood is not so different from Fabian’s.

But was I wrong on how you would react to the Palestinian demand regarding refugees?

Would be really “block the peace” rather than agree to allow millions of Arabs to populate Israel? Aren’t you concerned that you would appear to be a “rejectionist”? How would you get your Nobel?

The rest is in the mod queue, for some unexplained reason.

“I’m someone who agrees that Israel receives a disproportionate amount of unfairly negative attention comapred to other countries, but I think it’s mad (and offensive) to say this is all down to anti-semitism, which is just a bit desparate.”

The DISPROPORTIONATE amount of UNFAIRLY negative attention is entirely down to anti-Semitism. But maybe you don’t understand what anti-Semitism (or any other racism) actually is.

My comments on the silly Tibet comparison are in the mod queue.

“Also, I don’t know where you get the idea you can’t walk safely in Sheikh Jarrah or the Muslim Quarter. I’ve walked there lots of times, as have many other Israelis, and have had no problems, although obviously one should keep an eye on ‘events’ before going.”

The fact is that the distinguishing characteristic of terrorism is that it attacks suddenly and randomly. You have been lucky.

Maybe you can explain to all of us, which “events” were happening when this kid got knifed?
US student knifed by Arabs in e. J’lem
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull&cid=1233304715382

Let’s try posting again, on Tibet:

Utter bollocks from start to finish. The Tibetans never started a genocidal war – let alone several – against China or the Chinese; and Lhasa has never been the historical capital of China. This spurious “analogy” is exactly what I would have expected from ignorant-cum-Israel-hating people like you.

“although obviously one should keep an eye on ‘events’ before going”

The fact that you “obviously” have to keep an eye on “events” tells the story.
I was naive and lucky, or maybe things really were OK then, which I think must have been the case, when in 1975 (?) I spent the night with a girl at her student digs on Mount Scopus. At dawn, I simply walked down on my own and up by the Damascus Gate and so on to Jaffa Street and my hotel.

“I’m someone who agrees that Israel receives a disproportionate amount of unfairly negative attention comapred to other countries, but I think it’s mad (and offensive) to say this is all down to anti-semitism, which is just a bit desparate.”

That’s a fair observation, Universal. I’m sorry if I was too harsh.

>>> The DISPROPORTIONATE amount of UNFAIRLY negative attention is entirely down to anti-Semitism.

Who decides what is DISPROPORTIONATE and UNFAIR?

To what do you attribute the disproportionate amount of uncritical or positive/favorable coverage that Israel receives (not everywhere, but certainly in the mainstream media of USA, Germany and UK, for example)?

Leftist media are usually critical of Israel but they are only seen by leftist activists, not by Joe Public.

Say What?? -the report was in an article on english Ynet on 22/5/09. Unfortunately I did not save a copy and don’t seem to be able to extract it from their archives.

Here’s the link: http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3720056,00.html

And here’s the bit in the article recounting what the investigation into the killing of Bassam Abu Rahma discovered:

In light of the incident in which a Palestinian protestor was killed in the same area about a month ago, the IDF has changed its instructions in terms of the firing of smoke bombs so as not to physically harm the demonstrators, although an investigation into the incident revealed that the bomb hit an electric cable and was shifted towards the Palestinian man.

And Alex, as far as your statement that updating is not “the function of your blog”, bear in mind that in the future when journalists, pundits and bloggers publish things that you later find out were not necessarily warranted, should you want to hold them to account, your criticism will hold about as much water as a sieve as long as you are constrained by the temporarily, self-serving notion that others should do as you say, not as you do.

Ohad – re. anarchists against the wall, you’re exactly right. As for the refugees; I think they should be able to go to the future State of Palestine, not the State of Israel. I can’t be clearer than that. Regarding the Nobel, I’m going for literature, not peace.

Fabian – there’s infinite more chance of me getting hurt in a road accident while I travel to and from work each day, yet you wouldn’t warn me against getting on the bus. Of course there have been violent incidents in the past, the chances of getting hurt still remains minimal.

Thanks, Israelinurse.

The sure way to combat the lies and half-truths and idiocies of opinion masquerading as facts which passes for “journalism” nowadays is to argue with them from reliable sources.

Please do post the link when and if you get it. I shall look out for it.

Universal why should it not be down to antisemitism? After all Islamists and Israel’s Arab neighbours don’t bother to distinguish between “Israeli” and “Jew” in their invective.

And Alex, you just don’t get it, do you – the bit about honesty in what you write? Sure people can research for themselves, but don’t you accept that by the time they do so, (if they are so minded that is, for what you write may confirm their prejudices so they may well not bother) the damage by the “mistakes” you have made is already done?

Don’t you accept any responsibility at all for being honestly informative, or is your own ego more important than that?

>>> Otherwise you’re just a standard chauvinistic nationalist who happens to be a supporter of Israel.

Hit the nail on the head there. Israeli chauvinism is in reality not that different from any other, except that Israeli chauvinists have a special way to close down discussion.

They call eveyone who disagrees an antisemite (or if the person is Jewish, a “self-hating Jew”).

Rather like US black activists used to call everyone who disagreed a white supremacist (if white) or an Uncle Tom (if black).

You can’t expect rational debate with chauvinists.

However, it is fun to rattle their cage now and again.

‘As for your views, I can get a much more developed view of them in Boogie Ya’alon’s autobiography, thank you very much.’

Well you don’t HAVE to read anything I write if you don’t want to Alex, but is sticking your fingers in your ears, closing your eyes and shouting ‘rejectionist!’ really going to help?
If you hope to see, as I do, a proserous and peaceful Palestinian state existing side by side with Israel in our lifetimes then you need to take a couple of things into account.
One is that you need to persuade a majority within Israel that this Palestinian state is not going to result in their annihilation. At the moment the PA is not terribly convincing on this issue, never mind Hamas of course.
Two -you and the rest of the Peace Now camp need to recognise that other people’s opinions, fears and suspicions are based on past experience. The people who don’t think exactly as you do are not all some kind of right wing racist reactionary dinosaur. They are real people with legitimate views. If you can’t climb down from the very high tree of moral superiority inhabited by the far left and recognise this, there will be no hope for any kind of end to this conflict.

Israelinurse – once again, you’re ascribing views to me I don’t hold. I understand where peoples’ fears come from, but there has to be a difference between that and hysteria, and it mustn’t detract from putting pressure on the government to do the right thing when it comes to unilateral measures we can take which will strengthen our security, for example by stopping building in the settlements.

SayWhat – I’ve said over at my place that once we have something more conclusive (which I’m trying to get at the moment), I will post again on the topic.

“Literary events should be literary events and not political ones”

And this should be enforced? Nice.

“Fabian – there’s infinite more chance of me getting hurt in a road accident”

Alex: as Norman Geras not such a long ago explained, people are understandably more pissed off by damages that depend on human intention than on those who do not.

My father was killed in a road accident. A colleague of him was driving. I talked with his colleague and accepted that accidents do happen. If my father were murdered by a Palestinian terrorist, I would kill him on the spot. That is the difference.
You are being obtuse on purpose.

How’s the thesis coming along Jon?

>>> If my father were murdered by a Palestinian terrorist, I would kill him on the spot.

That kind of rage is understandable. So too is the rage felt by Palestinians when their loved ones are murdered by the IDF.

Fabian – the discussion was about likelihood of being hurt, not about getting pissed off about it.

Well done, Alex. I shall await it with interest.

“Fabian – the discussion was about likelihood of being hurt, not about getting pissed off about it.”

Alex: you can reduce the likelihood of being hurt by an Arab to zero if they just stopped terrorism. Accidents, however, will still happen.

Alex: You cannot separate both issues.

Road accidents are a risk everybody is willing to take. You cannot live without risks. And nobody decided that you cannot take a walk in a neighborhood where there are lots of traffic accidents.

But terrorism is not the same kind of risk. Because it depends on human motivation.

And it is the subjective appraisal of each person what counts in the end.

You have been lucky. No Arab tried to kill you. Yet.

As for the refugees; I think they should be able to go to the future State of Palestine, not the State of Israel. I can’t be clearer than that.

The question isn’t what you think.

The question is: how long will you as a “peaceseeker” hold out once it becomes clear that there is no possibility for peace with the Palestinians unless you accept their demand?

3 months? 6 months?

Remember: the second you admit that no compromise is possible you have become a “rejectionist” ie. no better a human than Benny Morris. Can your self-concept deal with that? I doubt it.

But if they do -And I hope they don’t- they won’t ask you if you “disagreed vigorously with Fabian from Israel” before they stab you in the back. Nobody will care about your opinions. That is terrorism. The Palestinian specialty.

Alex, you can’t be held responsible for what people read in to what you write, except when you knowingly or unwittingly mislead (having done little or no research or fact checking), or, after having misled and it having been called to your intention, refuse to publish anything which corrects the misinformation.

And you have admitted that “… retroactively changing what I write ain’t my thing…”

So, unless you publish an update which sets out what actually happened rather than your opinion, you are indeed responsible for making it easier to read all sorts of distortions into what you write.

You seem to be doing OK in Israel. Why not confine yourself to publishing there where you might do more good than harm?

A Must see!
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1088054.html
WATCH: Palestinian official says two-state solution will destroy Israel
May 7, 2009

“Israel Air Force aircraft have scattered pamphlets over the Gaza Strip warning residents to stay away from the border, The Associated Press reported Monday.”

“Gaza’s Health Ministry said a 10-year-old boy was struck by a box of leaflets and moderately hurt during Monday’s airdrop.”

Alex, MURDER!!!

“To what do you attribute the disproportionate amount of uncritical or positive/favorable coverage that Israel receives (not everywhere, but certainly in the mainstream media of USA, Germany and UK, for example)?”

I see that the lunatics have arrived. He’ll tell us next that the BBC has a “disproportionate amount of uncritical or positive/favorable coverage” of Israel.

“Israeli chauvinists have a special way to close down discussion”

I am not aware that any discussion has been “closed down”. That dumb statement is merely the standard gambit of idiots like you.
Rational discussion? You don’t know the meaning of the word.

Sometimes I really wonder if the lunatics have taken over the asylum.

They have, Alex. Harry’s publishes your drivel.

Here’s a video of the event:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cJU7-9r-pVA&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.palfest.org%2Fvideo.html&feature=player_embedded

I iterate, the event should not have been driven from the PNT (unless there really is some issue of P.A. funding or organizing which is pertinent).

But I’d also like to post Paul Frenkel’s post again, if he doesn’t mind (or even if he does):

Paul Frenkel
25 May 2009, 6:43 am

I was at the event described. It was indeed not allowed to take place at the al-Hakawati theater (or Palestinian National Theater), and so took place a hundred meters down the road at the French Cultural Center on Salah al-Din street. The event was as you would expect. A Palestinian man in the audience launched into a long tirade about colonialism and how the Israelis ‘pretend to be natives’, making the nature of the colonialism that the Palestinians suffer a unique example of the phenomenon. The writers read from their own work. One of them said that at the airport he had immediately noticed the colonialist nature of Israel, and felt like speaking in Swahili to the ‘Arab workers’ there, who reminded him of the situation in the African country where he grew up. (Of course, the workers in question were almost certainly Israeli Jews).

There was no mention of peace. There was no mention of compromise. There was no mention of Israelis or Jews possessing any rights whatsoever. Oh, Mordechai Vanunu was there as well, sitting in the front row with his Norwegian girlfriend.

Personally I think the authorities should have let the event go ahead at the al-Hakawati, as the people there represented the pathetic tail-end of the western supporters of secular Palestinian nationalism, a phenomenon which is currently in the process of dying, as anyone who spends any time in the West Bank (or Gaza, obviously) could tell you.

However, they didn’t, which caused the participants the unimaginable horror of having to walk a hundred yards down the road to watch the same silly burblings in the elegant setting of the French cultural center, surrounded by languid French cultural workers smoking cigarettes. There were no police or Border Police anywhere in the vicinity. Everyone seemed pleased with themselves, well fed and happy.

The causing of distress to a sensitive British oleh as a result of the banning can also now be added to the list of Zionist crimes.

The unimaginable horror of the evening’s events was later discussed at length in the American Colony bar, after which everyone went off to bed.

Paul Frenkel
25 May 2009, 9:11 am

Well the theme of the discussion was ‘departures’, and all the writers read a little from one of their works and then answered questions. I didnt hear Claire Messud’s reading. In the discussion, she noted her own nomadic background and her father’s origin among the Algerian pieds noirs.

The discussion generally wasn’t bad and tried to stick to the theme of the evening.

What characterized the whole event wasn’t overtly anti-Jewish or anti-Israeli anger, but rather something much deeper and more profound, which I think will be recognisable to anyone who has spent a lot of time around Palestinian and broader Arab nationalism – namely, a startlingly complete refusal to accept that there is any validity whatsoever to Israeli or Jewish identity. Israelis were reduced to a kind of cartoon ‘colonialist’, and the fiction was maintained by all present that this ‘colonialist’ figure was recognisable and interchangeable in all times and at all places.

Personally, however, I feel the soldiers who shut the event down were yobs for doing so.

Joshua

Your comment :

“Given how Britain behaved during World War II (collaboration in the Holocaust, commission of genocide at Dresden, direct collaboration in quite possibly the worst genocide in human history at Hiroshima and Nagasaki)”………

could have been spoken by Goebbels or Streicher.

You are an absolute disgrace, certainly towards the State of Israel and the Jewish people. Given how many British were killed in both WW1 and WW2 ( including members of my own family ) and the many Palestinian Jews at that time who fought in the Jewish Brigade attached to the British Army, you ignorant comments are dreadful and beneath contempt. Get out.

Alex Stein
25 May 2009, 9:37 am

Lbnaz – as I wasn’t at the event, I would have found it hard to hear anything. I’m not changing my blog; retroactively changing what I write ain’t my thing.

What can I really say Alex except that you should not be writing for intelligent people.

Having said that, if the festival was in any way P.A. related, then, yes, I can see why shutting it down could be appropriate.

Why should Israel let the P.A. trumpet its exclusory nationalist narrative from Israeli juristiction while it continues to have, to put it nicely, difficulties recognising the legitimacy of any Jewish national presence in the land at all, never mind Jerusalem or the Old City?

Lbnaz – as I wasn’t at the event, I would have found it hard to hear anything. I’m not changing my blog; retroactively changing what I write ain’t my thing.

I’ve re-read this, and it is as bad as I remember. This really ought to disqualify Alex from being taken seriously ever, ever, ever again. It reminds me of the time Sunny accused Andrew Anthony of supporting the Iraq War, and then claimed to have been only joking.

“Why should Israel let the P.A. trumpet its exclusory nationalist narrative from Israeli juristiction…

You are absolutely right, zkharya.

After all there is quite enough trumpeted about the PA’s exclusory nationalist narrative within Israeli jurisdiction by Israelis like Alex Stein, who, in any other Middle Eastern country, would be branded traitors and treated accordingly by whatever passed for law there.

Palestinians when their loved ones are murdered by the IDF.

So Palestiniajns hate Israelis and Jews because a few of them were unfortunately ‘murdered’ by IDF.

Thousands more Israeli have been “murdered” by Palestinians than the other way around. Doesn’t that mean Israelis are allowed to hate Palestinians infiniteloy MORE based on your comment?

Alec – can you be clearer about what the problem is with what I wrote?

I wasn’t at the event, so having a go at me based on what I heard or didn’t hear there doesn’t make sense. My argument that it was wrong to stop it taking place in the Jerusalem Theatre stands whether or not I was there or not.

As for the issue of me not retroactively changing my writing, I’ve explained the point very clearly.

As for Ohad & Fabian, with you two you don’t have to scratch very hard, it’s just a shame you can’t be more reasonable/civil in what you say.

There’s a video of it here – starts from 2.06 http://www.palfest.org/video.html
To those that criticise my position, I’d refer you to what a more right-leaning individual has written over at my place, “I’ve just read though 30-40 comments on HP’s and some of these pro-Israel posters disappoint me. I know they mean well, but sometimes it’s more important to say, “Listen, this isn’t a smart move on Israel’s part – we are doing to them what we don’t want done to ourselves”

As for the issue of me not retroactively changing my writing, I’ve explained the point very clearly.

Yes, for those who missed it, you said that you are pandering to extremists eg. your anarchist friends.

As for Ohad & Fabian, with you two you don’t have to scratch very hard, it’s just a shame you can’t be more reasonable/civil in what you say.

Say what you like about me, but my remark about your likely response to negotiations about the Palestinian refugee problem was pretty much correct was it not?

“After all there is quite enough trumpeted about the PA’s exclusory nationalist narrative within Israeli jurisdiction by Israelis like Alex Stein, who, in any other Middle Eastern country, would be branded traitors and treated accordingly by whatever passed for law there.”

I think some if not most of the personal responses to Alex here are really bad. Alex just posted the story and his initial reaction. Were it not for him, we wouldn’t even know about it. Perhaps the festival is P.A. organized or funded: those at the festival say not. Prima facie, without knowing any more details, closing the festival seems pointless at best, an own goal at worst.

sometimes it’s more important to say, “Listen, this isn’t a smart move on Israel’s part – we are doing to them what we don’t want done to ourselves”

OK fine.

But what we are talking about is a minor blip on the radar screen. Whereas you are screaming bloody murder and claiming Israel is turning into Iran.

Ohad – I do hope you caught the irony of my anarchists remark. As for the refugee issue, lets cross that bridge when we come to it. I see little point in speculating.

Zkharya – thanks

As for the refugee issue, lets cross that bridge when we come to it. I see little point in speculating.

Amazing. Alex comes close to admitting that he has no principles or red-lines, and that he would rather turn Israel into an unliveable hell-hole than consider the possibility that peace with the Palestinians might not pan out.

I do wonder if you have a family, and if you have thought about what would happen to them if our gov’t is forced down the path you are seeking.

No Ohad, I simply don’t share your assumption that we can’t come to an agreement with the Palestinians over the refugee issue. I believe we can; you believe we can’t – let’s cross that bridge. If you are right, then I shall admit I was wrong about the possibility of coming to a peace agreement.

To clarify: I am not a friend of Alex, although we have spoken over email a few times and I read his blog regularly. I disagree with a hell of a lot of what he writes. As I said, though, I fully believe he acts out of a love of Israel and I’m dismayed by the insinuations otherwise.

It is a little strange to watch people in the West telling an Israeli what he can and cannot say about his own country. I am also uncomfortable with the apparent underlying belief of those who are so keen for him to be silenced. It is as if they do not agree that Israel is a great country, perfectly able to withstand scrutiny and criticism.

Do people like Alex really give fuel to the global hatred of Israel and to antisemitism? Or are the Israel-bashers of the world going to hate Israel and/or Jews whatever Alex does or doesn’t do? Indeed, it might be that some people will warm to Israel when they see how moral, and self-critical its people are, albeit misguidedly in some cases. During my visits to Israel the self-criticism of Israelis is one of the many things that has staggered me about the place. It’s remarkable how a country under such threats has remained this way. Who knows, maybe that is one of the reasons behind its survival.

Why the protectiveness? Of course, when we think he gets things wrong we will tell him so, as I have done in the past. But come on, Israel is a great place that can take scrutiny. We don’t need to wrap it up in cotton wool.

No Ohad, I simply don’t share your assumption that we can’t come to an agreement with the Palestinians over the refugee issue.

It’s not an assumption, it is something that has been repeatedly demonstrated in Taba, the “Geneva” theatrics, the Gaza withdrawal, the Haaretz video above etc. etc.

Even Paul Frenkel’s account of last nite’s event shows that the most secular of the Palestinian national movement is willing to accept the notion of a Jewish state.

The powers-that-be who ignor this are putting us in real danger.

Surely: … shows that the most secular of the Palestinian national movement is NOT willing to accept the notion of a Jewish state.

“Someone” is correct. … my typo.

Chas-
Not sure who wants to “silence” Alex. This notion is trumpeted by a lot of you-know-who, so I am disppointed you are putting it forward.
Those of use who disagree with his views are saying so: do you want to silence our right to do so?
The fact is that he posted a disgusting blood libel against the IDF, and is flatly refusing to post a retraction on his blog. That to me says a hell of a lot about the man, all of it negative.

Someone – we’ll make a deal. If it’s shown that the death was accidental, I’ll publish a retraction. If it’s shown that there was no cable deflecting the offending canister into the poor guy’s body, you’ll write me an apology. How does that sound?

Chas N-B – It is as if they do not agree that Israel is a great country, perfectly able to withstand scrutiny and criticism.

No problem with scrutiny and criticism.

Problem is with rank misrepresentation.

‘According to the Observer, the Palestinian literary festival opening event at the Palestinian National Theatre in East Jerusalem was closed down by the border police. The justification for this stunt was a letter from the Israeli minister of internal security banning the event on the grounds that it was a political gathering connected to the Palestinian Authority.’

Do you really feel that that it was NOT a political gathering connected to the Palestinian Authority. An attempt by the PA to say – Jerusalem is our capital.

I still don’t know what I am supposed to be rejecting, Alex.

“Someone – we’ll make a deal. If it’s shown that the death was accidental, I’ll publish a retraction. If it’s shown that there was no cable deflecting the offending canister into the poor guy’s body, you’ll write me an apology. How does that sound?”

Nonsense.You really don’t get it at all, do you?
1. At this point we DON’T KNOW whether it was an accident, manslaughter, murder or anything inbetween.
2. You have stated categorically that it was murder.
3. That makes you a liar and libeller.
4. You are refusing to admit this and apologise.
5. I am not saying it was or it wasn’t murder. I am talking about your blood libel as per above.
6. Therefore, IF it is shown in retrospect to have been murder, what you wrote categorically remains a lie at the time you wrote it.
7. I have nothing to apologise FOR, since I didn’t claim knowledge about the incident: only you did.

Fabian, I very much doubt that he knows himself. It’s all vague stuff, extremely poor argumentation and failure to grasp elementary logic. Just read through his “proposal” to me just now.

If Israel wants to compare itself to Syria or Saudi Arabia or whomever, then yes, it is better in the vast majority of ways, but I want to hold Israel to higher standards than “not as bad as a dictatorship”. It is completely fair to hold it to the same standards as I would hold any Western Democratic country.

Were any other Western Democratic country surrounded by such hostile neighbours, I doubt it would behave with the same degree of restraint consistently demonstrated by Israel.

And this whole ‘Jerusalem-Capital-of-Arab-culture’ line is one of the flimsiest, most facile attempts at cultural expropriation/imperialism I ever seen.

How could anyone take something as lame and as contrived as this seriously?

Who knows, perhaps next week China will declare ‘Cairo-Capital-of-Cantonese-culture’!

Actually, zhkarya, Alex said that it had been closed down and implied that it never took place. That was not true was it? He didn’t check his facts, did he, and in so doing he added fuel to the Israel-hating fires, didn’t he?

He has not seen fit to comment upon Paul Frenkel’s experience either. Paul says that the event took place at a different venue and that he saw no border or other police there.

So which of them is “mistaken?”

“…What characterized the whole event wasn’t overtly anti-Jewish or anti-Israeli anger, but rather something much deeper and more profound, which I think will be recognisable to anyone who has spent a lot of time around Palestinian and broader Arab nationalism – namely, a startlingly complete refusal to accept that there is any validity whatsoever to Israeli or Jewish identity. Israelis were reduced to a kind of cartoon ‘colonialist’, and the fiction was maintained by all present that this ‘colonialist’ figure was recognisable and interchangeable in all times and at all places….

This seems to echo what Yossi Klein Halevi wrote, quoted above. What have you to say, Alex?

Someone also makes valid points in his post at 4.19pm and I agree with the following 100%:

“1. At this point we DON’T KNOW whether it was an accident, manslaughter, murder or anything inbetween.
2. You have stated categorically that it was murder.
3. That makes you a liar and libeller.
4. You are refusing to admit this and apologise.
5. I am not saying it was or it wasn’t murder. I am talking about your blood libel as per above.
6. Therefore, IF it is shown in retrospect to have been murder, what you wrote categorically remains a lie at the time you wrote it.”

So I look forward to a suitable form of words on falsedichotomies which expresses the uncertainty about what is actually known about this event. It’d be at least a grown-up thing to do.

You know, the problem with your positions Alex is that you don’t believe that Israel has any right to possess the values that are under dispute. You don’t think it is yours.

The problem with that view is not only that is false, it is mainly that when Palestinians see your positions, they take them as the new starting point of the dispute.

“Well, we have the Arab neighborhoods of Jerusalem, no settlements, and the right of return for a thousands of refugees. Now, what can we ask?”

And you can bet your ass that they will ask for more land around the Gaza strip, the right of return to every single descendant of a Palestinian refugee, the Jewish neighborhoods of East Jerusalem, just for starters.

And if you give them that they will ask for the abolition of the Israeli law of return on the grounds that it is “racist”, the complete unhindered right of every Palestinian to cross to work in Israel, the right to their own army with modern weapons, armed soldiers on the walls of the Old City, and more.

It is very lucky for Israel that there aren’t many people like you in the country.

(with more like you) the Jews would be living again all of them in Nes Tziona and Rishon LeTzion.

Chas N-B, I wonder whether your comment about people wanting to silence Alex stems from your belief that he is wrong?

If he’s not prepared to be argued with then he should not have a blog.

You say,

“..Do people like Alex really give fuel to the global hatred of Israel and to antisemitism?” ”

Well, what do you think? Have you read the articles by pet Jews and Israelis on Comment is Free, for example, which are used as sticks by posters there by which to beat Israel and to blame its people and Jews all over the world simply for being who they are. They too do piss-poor or no research, make “mistakes”, tell outright lies. By writing elsewhere in similar vein Alex isn’t exactly helping to stem the tide of hatred, is he?

No, Alex and people who choose to write in the same way provide the food for this Israel/Jew-hating feeding frenzy by appealing to emotion not reason.

And for him to refuse to alter or at least qualify post hoc what he wrote, even when he has been proven to be wrong, is not a particularly endearing trait, nor does it encourage the more intelligent reader to believe a word he writes. The unintelligent who are inclined to hate Israel and Jews generally, however, are a different matter.

HairShirt – I never said it didn’t take place. And if you seem to be implying that they were made to leave the original venue by Border Police, I suggest you look at the video I’ve linked to above. What Paul says doesn’t surprise me, and it also disappoints me, but that doesn’t mean we have the right to prevent it from taking place in the theatre.

I also don’t understand where you get the idea that I’m not prepared to be argued with. All I’ve done, all day long, is calmly present my positions without getting aggressive with those who disagree. It’s a shame others can’t act in the same way.

As for the Bilin death, I’m willing to discuss it more openly: If a Palestinian threw a rock that killed a soldier, and then said he had just aimed it high in the sky but it had deflected off a cable and unfortunately killed him, what would your reaction be? In the meantime, I’m trying to find out the latest on the investigation.

Fabian – like the rest of the bullies around here, quick to descend to ad hominems. In case you’re unclear, I support something along the lines of the Geneva Initiative. So all this stuff about me giving and giving is until every last refugee is back here is absurd.

I’d like to seriously ask those who disagree with my positions to stop with the ad hominems, the insanity accusations etc etc. All it does it makes you look unreasonable.

Re what Chas said, if any of you are in Israel and want to discuss these issues face to face, I’m happy to do over hummus in the vineyard.

HairShirt – do you not think you are shooting the messenger? If the authorities hadn’t taken the absurd decision to prevent the festival from taking place in the Jerusalem Theatre, I wouldn’t be writing about it. Why don’t you complain to them? I’d also point out that nobody has proven that my claim of murder is incorrect, unless one line in a Ynet article is good enough for you. I’d remind you that the IDF originally said that Bassam was killed after a soldier fired when he was not meant to. The deflection off an electric cable seems to be a major shifting of the goalposts.

Alex, as with your comparison between road accidents and terrorism, your analogy of the gas canister with a rock thrown by a Palestinian is completely nonsense. And I am seriously doubting your ability to argue coherently.

The whole point of a gas canister is to use it instead of a bullet. To make a gas cloud around the violents.

The whole point of throwing a rock is to hit the soldier. Not to make a rock cloud to prevent violence.

You accuse me of being a bully, but I have never bullied you. I just made strong points you couldn’t refute.

Someone has said it concisely:

“1. At this point we DON’T KNOW whether it was an accident, manslaughter, murder or anything inbetween.
2. You have stated categorically that it was murder.
3. That makes you a liar and libeller.
4. You are refusing to admit this and apologise.
5. I am not saying it was or it wasn’t murder. I am talking about your blood libel as per above.
6. Therefore, IF it is shown in retrospect to have been murder, what you wrote categorically remains a lie at the time you wrote it.”

I am sorry that your ego prevents you from doing what is right.

Fabian – well exactly. In this case, though, it seems that the canister was used as a bullet, the deflection off the cable explanation notwithstanding.

As for the rest, I agreed early on in this thread to stand back from the murder claim. The dispute revolves around whether or not I should have to make an alteration on my blog. I don’t believe I do. On that topic, see this from my place –

“2. My blog also reflects what I was feeling at the time; I don’t claim to be an unimpeachable source, and would fully expect people coming here to look at other sources as well. I’m perfectly comfortable with the idea of people stumbling upon the occasional incorrect claim that I make. ”

I think that this completely fair. You can only form opinions on what you believe to be true at the time. As long as someone is open to new information, this is the correct attitude. I was watching TV yesterday and the commentators were going on about Obama’s “flip-flop”. (What it was is not important.) This is something I loathe. Being able to change one’s mind when presented with new facts or angles on an issue is an admirable trait. Staying stuck in one mindset regardless of the facts is a terrible trait. However, in politics, the former is seen as “flip-flopping” and the latter “sticking to one’s principles”. It’s infuriating!

Speaking of points that you can’t refute, I notice you haven’t bothered engaging with the issue of Dayton’s training of Palestinian security forces in Jenin and other Palestinian towns.

Btw, would you like to discuss these issues man to man over hummus in the vineyard?

I’d have thought by now that most of us were old enough and experienced enough to look a little beyond the labels. Calling a political activity a “cultural event” does not mean it is one, just as calling a partisan a “peace activist” doesn’t make him the Dalai Lhama.

If some part of Jerusalem is incorporated into a future Palestine, the PA will be entitled to hold all the cultural, political and political-masquerading-as-cultural events it wants in it’s bit of the city. Until then, it has no more right to host “literary festivals” in Jerusalem than Israel has to run one in Gaza. Though — Alex’s histrionics notwithstanding — the former is still far more likely than the latter.

Alex, the reason you should not be taken seriously until you atone for that remark is that it had to be explained to you that you were not being asked to excise the original missive, and that Corrections and Clarifications is a standard feature in the print media.

Out of interest, are you a journalist or are you a blogger? This is one of many criticisms I have of Ben White (note, I am not comparing you to that malevolent man-child). I have a significantly greater opinion of you than I do of Seth Freedman (whom, before anyone says owt, I understand is a cousin or something) who, whilst having a few good turns of phrases, will make outrageous remarks and, when called to account (often by Petra M-B) fold like a pack of cards and start with sneering and sarcasm. For a start, I think you actually have an attested record of combat service: however, if you cannot see what you’ve done wrong here, my point stands.

Alex – I was a jobnik actually; external relations for the home front.

As for the ‘corrections and clarifications’ issue (not sure where you got the idea that I thought I was being asked to excise the original missive), it’s a standard feature at newspapers, but not at blogs, where it’s up to the site-owner what he decides to do. I’ve explained why I’m not altering the original piece, and I’m sticking by that position, although I will write another piece when any inquiry comes to its conclusions, and I’m actively trying to find out what the latest on that is. By all means disagree with me; I just don’t think my position justifies you talking about ‘not taking me seriously’.

More nonsense from Alex:

“I also don’t understand where you get the idea that I’m not prepared to be argued with. All I’ve done, all day long, is calmly present my positions without getting aggressive with those who disagree. It’s a shame others can’t act in the same way.”

Aww, you are shocked that people disagree with your aggressive and bullying accusation of murder when you don’t know that a murder took place? There there, never mind, I am sure you’ll feel better tomorrow.

“As for the Bilin death, I’m willing to discuss it more openly: If a Palestinian threw a rock that killed a soldier, and then said he had just aimed it high in the sky but it had deflected off a cable and unfortunately killed him, what would your reaction be?”

This is a disgusting attempt to paint your opponents as racists, a tactic that people like you often fall back on when losing an argument. Fabian has answered this aggressive and bullying gambit already, but I’ll add this: IF a “Palestinian” had genuinely killed someone through an unfortunate accident, I’d regard it as just that, an unfortunate accident.

“like the rest of the bullies around here, quick to descend to ad hominems”

Aww, the sensitive petal! How dare they attack this parfait knight, this mahatma? Unfortunately for you, many here regard you as the bully, making accusations of murder and attempting to paint your opponents as racists through some theoretical and totally silly whataboutery (see above).

“I’d like to seriously ask those who disagree with my positions to stop with the ad hominems, the insanity accusations etc etc. All it does it makes you look unreasonable”

Hilarious. From a person who is inacapable of understanding that the onus is on HIM to prove that it was murder, not on anybody else to prove that it wasn’t (I can’t find the exact words, but this last bit is what you demanded of your opponents).

“Re what Chas said, if any of you are in Israel and want to discuss these issues face to face, I’m happy to do over hummus in the vineyard”

Oh yes, that reminds me of another of your bullying and aggressive tactics, the bit where you demanded of Chas (?) to tell you “what have you done for Israel”.

“HairShirt – do you not think you are shooting the messenger? If the authorities hadn’t taken the absurd decision to prevent the festival from taking place in the Jerusalem Theatre, I wouldn’t be writing about it. Why don’t you complain to them?”

Writing about it doesn’t excuse writing lies about it, if we are to believe Paul who was there.

“I’d also point out that nobody has proven that my claim of murder is incorrect”

Ah yes, this is the bit. You don’t understand the concept of proving that a murder had taken place before accusing somebody of murder, is that it?

“Btw, would you like to discuss these issues man to man over hummus in the vineyard?”

I gladly take your offer, but I must postpone it. My daughter is recovering from surgery, and June is going to be complicated at work. Thanks.

Fabian – refuah shlemah to her.

Someone – I’m just not responding to that. If you can’t see what’s unacceptable in the way you’ve framed your pointed, that’s your problem.

RE: And this whole ‘Jerusalem-Capital-of-Arab-culture’ line is one of the flimsiest, most facile attempts at cultural expropriation/imperialism I ever seen.

For once, mercifully, i agree with John P. Jeruslaem was a sleepy backwater in all the years it was controlled by Muslims. Today Cairo is undisputably the capital of arab culture; in the past, Baghdad and Damascus could have laid claim to the title, but Jerusalem — never.

Alex Stein

I think you should put your guardian/observer into ROOM-101 and have a long long chat with an israeli nurse.

“Someone – I’m just not responding to that. If you can’t see what’s unacceptable in the way you’ve framed your pointed, that’s your problem.”

The last refuge of the scoundrel who’s been shown up. How unsurprising.
Your entire premise of accusing people of murder (and racism, and bullying, and so on) without any foundation is unacceptable. When this is pointed out to you, you throw the toys out of the pram, like any other spoiled brat who cannot have his way.

Interesting comments here by Gabriel, David T. and Alex. The rest are ankle biters.

Quite unbelievable how some of the hard core here lay into a committed Zionist (Alex). This “we’ll have no dissent here, we support Israel!” doesn’t bode very well for Zionism itself.

Gert “some of my best friends are Jews” is drooling about the demise of Zionism again, I see.

Nobody cares what an ankle biter like you “thinks”, dad.

Ahh, this ankle-biter has noticed that the vile replica Gert is back. Msg: to vile replica, wishful thinking about the demise of Zionism/Israel is no substitute for reality. Helps me understand why Israel has and needs nukes.

There is in fact no ambiguity about the status of East Jerusalem. As the International Court Of Justice stated in its advisory opinion on the apartheid wall, East Jerusalem is part of the Occupied Palestinian Territories. Claims by Israel to have annexed it are as the court confirmed “null and void” in international law.

The suppression of Palestinian cultural and political events in the city are part of this bogus Israeli claim to sovereignty.

However, it all puts the fuss over the return of the £300 into perspective.

Alex,
So we have some agreement here. I am all for making East Jerusalem (not the Old City) part of the Palestinian Authority. There is of course the dirty little secret that this would expose. Most of the people in East Jerusalem would prefer to be part of Israel.

Stan

“East Jerusalem is part of the Occupied Palestinian Territories.”

Does that include the Jewish quarter and western wall of the Old City as well as those Jewish suburbs ethnically cleansed by the Jordaninans in 1948?

Those who speak of an eternally undivided Jerusalem are happy to see the Palestinian sections of the city rot in neglect and ruin.

With fabrications like these, who needs the Palestine Solidarity Campaign? If this is Alex Stein’s verdict on the doubling of the Jerusalem’s Palestinian population since 1967, then what other hysterical delusions are hatching inside his brain?