« Hamas willing to accept a Palestinian state within the internationally recognized 1967 borders and offer Israel a long-term ceasefire; meanwhile, UN running out of Gaza food aid as a result of Israel's blockade | Wordie's Blog | We Need to Fix The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) BEFORE We Develop a National Electronic Medical Records Database UPDATED! »
On Gaza: Say it, Mr. Johndroe. Say it.
Say the word that's always missing from White House pronouncements about the situation in Palestine. Say the word that we never hear when the administration talks about how Hamas is a terrorist organization that wants to destroy Israel. You know the word, Mr. Johndroe. It's Occupation.
O-C-C-U-P-A-T-I-O-N, Mr. Johndroe, that's the word that was curiously missing from your vocabulary in yesterday's press conference and the one you gave today on behalf of President Bush. But your failure to mention this inconvenient word wasn't entirely unexpected, since it's been entirely missing from the vocabulary and understanding of the adminstration over these past eight years.
(A quick note: Are you especially busy this holiday season? Don't become intimidated by this post's length! Just scroll down to nearly the end, click on the link to the J Street petition to end the Gaza violence, go to the page and sign it and viola, you're done! And thank you!)
Without the word, Occupation, it's entirely impossible to truly understand what's going on in the Israel-Palestine conflict. It's not a small oversight. The people of Palestine have lived under brutal Occupation for 40 long years. Under Occupation, they've seen the loss of their property and livelihoods, their very lives and hope for the future. How can one possibly speak about the conflict and overlook the Occupation?
Under Occupation, the Palestinian population has been subjected to daily insults, and far worse, at the hands of the Israelis. They have seen their property confiscated and homes demolished, their people detained and tortured, often on the most specious grounds, they've been subjected to constant insults and abuse from the IDF and violence and destruction of property at the hands of the illegal Israeli settlers, they've been prevented from working to support their families; they've watched helplessly as the olive trees that have provided a source of livelihood to their families for generations are destroyed and the culprits get off with a slap on the wrist from the Israeli authorities, they've had their families torn apart and residency revoked for specious reasons that serve the Israeli goal of eliminating the Palestinian population of Jerusalem, they've waited for hours at checkpoints and roadblocks that they need to pass in order to carry on the regular activities of daily life: work, school, a visit to the doctor.
Fifty-one Palestinian citizens have died during the course of the eight years of the Bush administration because of Israeli restrictions on movement that prevented them from getting needed medical care. To Palesinians, those deaths don't represent mere statistics, they represent real people that they have known and loved. Just this year, 2,222 innocent Palestinian non-combatants were killed in the Palestinian territories by Israeli security forces, the majority of them in Gaza. Compare that to the 19 Israelis who died over the entire 8 years of the Bush administration because of the Hamas rocket fire into Israel. Did the administration never consider the message that's being given to the Arab world about how we Americans value the worth of an Arab life when we simply ignore the deaths of innocent civilians while railing vehemently against the relatively few Israeli deaths? How could our government give Israel the official, if tacit, imprimature of the U.S. to continue the bombings?
Illegal Settlements in the Occupied Territories
A map of Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territories can be found here. The areas in yellow indicate Palestinian settlements; those in dark purple, mid-purple and light purple indicate the areas of illegal Israeli settlement. Note how the areas of Israeli settlement are distributed throughout the West Bank. If Israel is successful in retaining most of the larger settlements in any final peace agreement, the remaining Palestinian land will be effectively divided into a series of discontiguous areas - Bantustans cut off one from another - and the hopes for a truly viable Palestinian state will be quashed. That's what the ongoing Israeli effort to establish "facts on the ground" by settling illegally in the territories is all about.
In the the West Bank and East Jerusalem, the population of illegal settlers in Palestinian territory has reached 443,702 under the disinterested watch of this administration (download xls spreadsheet - note that this number is based upon the 2007 statistics, the actual number will be higher when the 2008 statistics are released). Further, it's been demonstrated that the the route of the Separation Wall, supposedly constructed for security reasons by Israel, in fact was designed in order to give Israel maximum opportunity to appropriate valuable Palestinian farmland and water resources. And the illegal settlement activity, according to a March 2008 report by the Israeli human rights group, Peace Now, significantly increased after the Annapolis conference, which you claimed today represented a significant step forward and a meaningful accomplishment of the Bush administration. But why should it have stopped, considering the letter Bush wrote to Ariel Sharon in 2004, essentially giving the OK to Israeli settlement activity, something in complete violation of international law and which no other U.S. President ever had done? Why is it that the administration always forgets to mention that all the Palestinian violence you decry has occurred under the constant backdrop of illegal and often violent settlement activity by Israeli settlers on the land that your administration claims is destined ostensibly to become part of the future Palestinian state? Why does the administration constantly call the Palestinians to task, while ignoring all Israeli violations of the agreements that are supposed to lead toward peace?
Occupation has for 40 years deeply and destructively affected the lives of every single Palestinian: Fatah and Hamas, Muslim and Christian, fighter and non-combatant. Recent reports estimate that half of the children of Gaza suffer from PTSD. Now, Israel tacitly has been given the green light by the U.S. for the virtual destruction of Gaza, and there's little real hope in sight. Why did you not demand that Israel stop the bombing?
Today in the press conference, Mr. Johndroe, you made much of the humanitarian supplies from the U.S. that supposedly now will be delivered to Gaza, but we've heard that story before; once the crisis appears over and the eyes of the world turn away, the relief suddenly disappears. And besides, where have we been during all the months of suffering that our own policies in the area have done so much to create in the first place? For how many Palestinians will such aid simply come too late?
You said that President Bush has "laid good groundwork that will ultimately lead to a two-state solution," but came closest to acknowledging the truth when you noted, "it's [the peace process] not something that's going to advance in the immediate near term. However, true to the Occupation-blind approach of the administration (which is no doubt also a result of the Presidential advisors you said were involved in the administration's response - Cheney, and Steve Hadley), you blamed the problem entirely on Hamas' actions. Did you not realize how this delay of any solution in the near term serves the purposes of Israel, by allowing it more time to put yet more settlers in the Occupied Territories, creating more facts on the ground and thereby further destroying any chance of a viable Palestinian state? Not to mention that you're allowing the most intransigent members of Hamas - the ones who are determined to derail any peace process leading to a two state solution - to gain politically from this latest horror when you don't hold Israel responsible for the disproportionality of it's retaliation.
Repeat after me, Mr. Johndroe, The violence is a result of 40 years of Occupation. Oh, I know that Israel claims that Gaza is no longer under Occupation, since Israeli troops were withdrawn in 2005, and the administration appears to agree with that. So here's another term for you, Mr. Johndroe, International Law. Under international law, Israel remains in Occupation of Gaza, because although it withdrew it's security forces and dismantled the Gaza settlements, it has retained complete control over Gaza. It instituted a blockade which has prevented the most basic requirements of human daily life from reaching the citizens of Gaza, many of whom aren't even Hamas' supporters. This amounts to collective punishment, a crime under international law. The economy of Gaza has come to a near standstill. Desperately needed medical supplies cannot reach the people of Gaza due to the Israeli blockade, and the delivery of electricity has been interrupted, seriously compromising medical care in Palestinian hospitals. Fishermen are harrassed when they set out into Palestinian waters in the Mediterranean in order to provide food supplies to Gaza. There are inadequate food supplies in general because of the Israeli blockade. Israel controls the airspace. Practically no one is allowed to leave Gaza. Under international law all these actions represent a continuing Occupation and are illegal, not to mention immoral.
So despite your claims, Mr. Johndroe, about the wonders of the Annapolis conference and the great strides President Bush has made toward a two-state solution, the true Middle East legacy of this administration is represented by that one sadly forgotten word.
Occupation. Say it, Mr. Johndroe.
*********************************************************************************** Take Action! Stop the violence in Gaza! Sign J Street's petition to demand that the United States intervene to bring about an immediate resumption of the ceasefire between Israel and Hamas. J Street is the new pro-peace Israel lobby.
And/or, sign the Washington Report on Middle East Affair's petition to end Israeli harassment of travelers and journalists in the Occupied Territories
Additional sources: Relief Web's Gaza Humanitarian Situation Report 28 Dec 2008
For some additional information on conditions in the Occupied Territories, check out one or more of the power point slide shows offered by Peace Now on their website.
B'tselem, the Israeli human rights organization, has a collection of photographs that describe the conditions in the Occupied Territories far better than words can do.
O-C-C-U-P-A-T-I-O-N, Mr. Johndroe, that's the word that was curiously missing from your vocabulary in yesterday's press conference and the one you gave today on behalf of President Bush. But your failure to mention this inconvenient word wasn't entirely unexpected, since it's been entirely missing from the vocabulary and understanding of the adminstration over these past eight years.
(A quick note: Are you especially busy this holiday season? Don't become intimidated by this post's length! Just scroll down to nearly the end, click on the link to the J Street petition to end the Gaza violence, go to the page and sign it and viola, you're done! And thank you!)
Without the word, Occupation, it's entirely impossible to truly understand what's going on in the Israel-Palestine conflict. It's not a small oversight. The people of Palestine have lived under brutal Occupation for 40 long years. Under Occupation, they've seen the loss of their property and livelihoods, their very lives and hope for the future. How can one possibly speak about the conflict and overlook the Occupation?
Under Occupation, the Palestinian population has been subjected to daily insults, and far worse, at the hands of the Israelis. They have seen their property confiscated and homes demolished, their people detained and tortured, often on the most specious grounds, they've been subjected to constant insults and abuse from the IDF and violence and destruction of property at the hands of the illegal Israeli settlers, they've been prevented from working to support their families; they've watched helplessly as the olive trees that have provided a source of livelihood to their families for generations are destroyed and the culprits get off with a slap on the wrist from the Israeli authorities, they've had their families torn apart and residency revoked for specious reasons that serve the Israeli goal of eliminating the Palestinian population of Jerusalem, they've waited for hours at checkpoints and roadblocks that they need to pass in order to carry on the regular activities of daily life: work, school, a visit to the doctor.
Fifty-one Palestinian citizens have died during the course of the eight years of the Bush administration because of Israeli restrictions on movement that prevented them from getting needed medical care. To Palesinians, those deaths don't represent mere statistics, they represent real people that they have known and loved. Just this year, 2,222 innocent Palestinian non-combatants were killed in the Palestinian territories by Israeli security forces, the majority of them in Gaza. Compare that to the 19 Israelis who died over the entire 8 years of the Bush administration because of the Hamas rocket fire into Israel. Did the administration never consider the message that's being given to the Arab world about how we Americans value the worth of an Arab life when we simply ignore the deaths of innocent civilians while railing vehemently against the relatively few Israeli deaths? How could our government give Israel the official, if tacit, imprimature of the U.S. to continue the bombings?
Illegal Settlements in the Occupied Territories
A map of Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territories can be found here. The areas in yellow indicate Palestinian settlements; those in dark purple, mid-purple and light purple indicate the areas of illegal Israeli settlement. Note how the areas of Israeli settlement are distributed throughout the West Bank. If Israel is successful in retaining most of the larger settlements in any final peace agreement, the remaining Palestinian land will be effectively divided into a series of discontiguous areas - Bantustans cut off one from another - and the hopes for a truly viable Palestinian state will be quashed. That's what the ongoing Israeli effort to establish "facts on the ground" by settling illegally in the territories is all about.
In the the West Bank and East Jerusalem, the population of illegal settlers in Palestinian territory has reached 443,702 under the disinterested watch of this administration (download xls spreadsheet - note that this number is based upon the 2007 statistics, the actual number will be higher when the 2008 statistics are released). Further, it's been demonstrated that the the route of the Separation Wall, supposedly constructed for security reasons by Israel, in fact was designed in order to give Israel maximum opportunity to appropriate valuable Palestinian farmland and water resources. And the illegal settlement activity, according to a March 2008 report by the Israeli human rights group, Peace Now, significantly increased after the Annapolis conference, which you claimed today represented a significant step forward and a meaningful accomplishment of the Bush administration. But why should it have stopped, considering the letter Bush wrote to Ariel Sharon in 2004, essentially giving the OK to Israeli settlement activity, something in complete violation of international law and which no other U.S. President ever had done? Why is it that the administration always forgets to mention that all the Palestinian violence you decry has occurred under the constant backdrop of illegal and often violent settlement activity by Israeli settlers on the land that your administration claims is destined ostensibly to become part of the future Palestinian state? Why does the administration constantly call the Palestinians to task, while ignoring all Israeli violations of the agreements that are supposed to lead toward peace?
Occupation has for 40 years deeply and destructively affected the lives of every single Palestinian: Fatah and Hamas, Muslim and Christian, fighter and non-combatant. Recent reports estimate that half of the children of Gaza suffer from PTSD. Now, Israel tacitly has been given the green light by the U.S. for the virtual destruction of Gaza, and there's little real hope in sight. Why did you not demand that Israel stop the bombing?
Today in the press conference, Mr. Johndroe, you made much of the humanitarian supplies from the U.S. that supposedly now will be delivered to Gaza, but we've heard that story before; once the crisis appears over and the eyes of the world turn away, the relief suddenly disappears. And besides, where have we been during all the months of suffering that our own policies in the area have done so much to create in the first place? For how many Palestinians will such aid simply come too late?
You said that President Bush has "laid good groundwork that will ultimately lead to a two-state solution," but came closest to acknowledging the truth when you noted, "it's [the peace process] not something that's going to advance in the immediate near term. However, true to the Occupation-blind approach of the administration (which is no doubt also a result of the Presidential advisors you said were involved in the administration's response - Cheney, and Steve Hadley), you blamed the problem entirely on Hamas' actions. Did you not realize how this delay of any solution in the near term serves the purposes of Israel, by allowing it more time to put yet more settlers in the Occupied Territories, creating more facts on the ground and thereby further destroying any chance of a viable Palestinian state? Not to mention that you're allowing the most intransigent members of Hamas - the ones who are determined to derail any peace process leading to a two state solution - to gain politically from this latest horror when you don't hold Israel responsible for the disproportionality of it's retaliation.
Repeat after me, Mr. Johndroe, The violence is a result of 40 years of Occupation. Oh, I know that Israel claims that Gaza is no longer under Occupation, since Israeli troops were withdrawn in 2005, and the administration appears to agree with that. So here's another term for you, Mr. Johndroe, International Law. Under international law, Israel remains in Occupation of Gaza, because although it withdrew it's security forces and dismantled the Gaza settlements, it has retained complete control over Gaza. It instituted a blockade which has prevented the most basic requirements of human daily life from reaching the citizens of Gaza, many of whom aren't even Hamas' supporters. This amounts to collective punishment, a crime under international law. The economy of Gaza has come to a near standstill. Desperately needed medical supplies cannot reach the people of Gaza due to the Israeli blockade, and the delivery of electricity has been interrupted, seriously compromising medical care in Palestinian hospitals. Fishermen are harrassed when they set out into Palestinian waters in the Mediterranean in order to provide food supplies to Gaza. There are inadequate food supplies in general because of the Israeli blockade. Israel controls the airspace. Practically no one is allowed to leave Gaza. Under international law all these actions represent a continuing Occupation and are illegal, not to mention immoral.
So despite your claims, Mr. Johndroe, about the wonders of the Annapolis conference and the great strides President Bush has made toward a two-state solution, the true Middle East legacy of this administration is represented by that one sadly forgotten word.
Occupation. Say it, Mr. Johndroe.
*********************************************************************************** Take Action! Stop the violence in Gaza! Sign J Street's petition to demand that the United States intervene to bring about an immediate resumption of the ceasefire between Israel and Hamas. J Street is the new pro-peace Israel lobby.
And/or, sign the Washington Report on Middle East Affair's petition to end Israeli harassment of travelers and journalists in the Occupied Territories
Additional sources: Relief Web's Gaza Humanitarian Situation Report 28 Dec 2008
For some additional information on conditions in the Occupied Territories, check out one or more of the power point slide shows offered by Peace Now on their website.
B'tselem, the Israeli human rights organization, has a collection of photographs that describe the conditions in the Occupied Territories far better than words can do.
Advertisement
Wordie:
I recommend this post because it is excellent in form and content, and because I agree with much of what you write, with some exceptions, and principally to the extent that, whatever the cause of the violence, it does not answer the question that I think is at the forefront of the crisis in Gaza now, and that is whether and to what extent, Israel has the right to defend its citizens up to Ashkelon and Ashdod and now beyond Sderot and eastward all the way to Beer Sheeva.
That said, so much of us simply talk past each other so often, and it is important to point out that both you and I have signed the J Street petition. It has been crafted in a way that both you and I can execute it with full knowledge and understanding of what it means, and first and foremost, that it calls for a concerted effort to bring about a complete and mutual ceasefire on both sides of the Gazan border. May it be so.
Bruce
December 31, 2008 10:01 AM | Reply | Permalink
OK, Bruce, let's stipulate that rockets fired into Israel from Gaza are acts of war. And rockets and bombs fired into Gaza are acts of war.
The interminable imprisonment and strangulation of 1.5 million Gazans is collective punishment. It is more than an act of war, it is a war crime.
December 31, 2008 12:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks, Bruce.
The question you raise is a difficult one. Certainly all states have a right to defend themselves. I suppose my answer can be found in the statistics I cited - 2,222 innocent Palestinians dead in one year compared to 19 innocent Israelis in 8 years. The disproportionality is staggering, in my view. All warring states tend to demonize their adversaries, but such staggering statistics indicate that the Israelis have so far dehumanized the Palestinians that they do not feel their lives are worth anything, compared to even one Israeli. And I find it hard to understand how so many people in our own country, not to mention our government, are not asking questions about that. Not all of those who are dying in Gaza are Hamas supporters. Sadly, I can only conclude that we too have come to see the Palestinians as having no value.
Can we also both say that a people being strangled by blockade has a right to defend themselves as well?
December 31, 2008 2:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
I realize I dashed off my earlier reply a little to quickly. The 19 Israeli deaths that I spoke of were total deaths from the Gaza rocket fire in 8 years. These deaths have become the Israeli justification for the bombing of Gaza, in which there are now more innocent civilian casualties on the Palestinian side in less than a week of Israeli bombings than there had been in an entire 8 years on the Israeli side.
Whatever Israel's right to defend itself may be, what's going on now goes far beyond that. Once a country has decided to be an Occupier, it necessarily takes on the risks and costs of that, in my view. But that part - the Occupation part - seems always to be glossed over by those who then complain about the terrorists. And when I talk about risks and costs, I'm not saying that the killing of innocents is ever to be condoned. What I'm saying is, what did you expect?
The Israeli statistics are from a recent UK Guardian article; the Palestinian death statistics were found on the btselem website. I've linked both above. Sorry I didn't make myself clear earlier.
December 31, 2008 3:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wordie:
No need to apologize for anything, please. I wish we could have more level-headed discussions around here and I appreciate that you took the time and made the effort to post on the right side of the page. Sorry I didn't respond earlier but I'm trying to get out of the office and avoid the crowds around the block--who are already and insanely waiting to watch the ball drop in Times Square in the cold and snow. Sometimes youth is not wasted on the young.
Of course a nation must defend itself if it is being strangled by a blockade. As to proportionality, I remain to be convinced about the current circumstances. I really don't think it's a question of counting bodies but please don't think I'm condoing the killing of innocents. It's eating away at me this week to be perfectly honest with you. I guess I'm comforted to some extent that there is a J Street that can help show the way to a more even-handed approach in Israel and Palestine, and I'm heartened that someone like you Wordie with strong but studied views is willing to give J Street a chance to make change. Candidly I had the impression that lots of folks to my "left" were already unimpressed by J Street and its agenda. Let's hope that neither of us is disappointed.
Happy New Year to you and yours.
Bruce
December 31, 2008 4:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
I guess I'm troubled that we still aren't talking Occupation here, although I'm glad you recognized that the Gazans have rights to self defense too. And I don't see how we can avoid the question of proportionality, with statistics as stark as the ones I posted. The thing that strikes me is that I don't think many in this country are aware just how relatively few Israel deaths there have been - I wasn't aware of it. The reports over the years had given me the impression that there were hundreds of Israelis that had been killed. Again, any death is unacceptable, but I just can't understand how Israel can rain down such utter destruction on Gaza, bombing public places like police stations and universities and mosques, and killing so many people, when it's own losses have been relatively light.
But here's something that might explain it. I just recently read an article at alternet, here: http://www.alternet.org/rights/116386/israel%27s_actions_are_irrational%2C_no_matter_how_much_u.s._politicians_try_to_cast_them_as_normal_/
which I hope you might take a look at, Bruce. I'm curious if you concur with the following, from the article:
I don't think I would put it in quite the same way (and I certainly hope that didn't offend you in any way), but I think I've observed something like that at times, even from among pro-Israeli posters on the left. Sometimes, even writers far to the left of the hawkish AIPAC types still write from a very Judeo-centric point of view. I don't blame anyone for having this point of view. As the writer notes, who could blame a Jewish person for feeling that way, but perhaps some of that may be what's driving the less-than-enthusiastic response of some on the left to organizations like J Street. Maybe what our own foreign policy requires is to make sure that those who are leading the way to peace take neither a Judeo-centric approach, nor an Arab- or Islamo-centric approach.
For me, my signing of the petition may be more about my wanting to have the U.S. finally government speak out against the violence, which would amount to taking a stand against the most hawkish elements in Israeli society, because I believe that's something that could eventually lead to peace. It deeply pains me to feel in part responsible for what's happening in Gaza, as my own government has given not-so-tacit support for it, not to mention all the other political, military and financial support. But even though I signed, I may also have some of the same reservations as other left-of-center folks about J Street. I'll leave that for another post though.
But a call for the end to violence is never a bad thing, what ever the reason for making it, so I also am glad we found common cause on the J Street petition.
And best wishes in the New Year to you too, Bruce.
December 31, 2008 5:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wordie:
Let me read the alternet article and I will feel more comfortable responding to it. For the moment, I think I can say, and certainly respect to Diaspora Jews, that there is a nagging and ongoing, and counterproductive presumption that non-Jews are fundamentally hostile to the Jewish People. I feel that way quite often, but I've been hanging around lefties and reasonable facsmiles thereof long enough to have forced myself to confront and challenge this presumption within myself and, thank heavens, withing my adult children. But, interestingly, none of my three older kids is as "observant" as me, and their views on all things, including Israel, are what you might expect from your standard, college or young adult progressive, left-leaning intellectual. But even my daughter who is a college senior said to me a few weeks back--I was shocked actually--that for the first time in her life she has at times been feeling "othered" as a Jew.
Anyway, it's an obstacle to peace when it forms the rationale for hard-core right or wrongers to keep their heads in the sand. My central thesis, if I have one, is that you don't help well-meaning Jews to overcome this counterproductive presumption by mocking them. It's the reason I respond so harshly, like I just did in another post, to folks who equate Israel with the Nazis. This has always been the basis for my core dispute with well-meaning guys like MJ, who I can't even deal with but, whether he knows it or not, favors positions on Israel that almost to a tee are no different than my own. It's just that his approach is to mock right or wrongers and I see a need for constructive engagement.
Anyway, I'm not doing your question justice. Let me read the alternet article and hopefully we can deconstruct this stuff some more. Ciao Wordie.
Bruce
January 1, 2009 11:49 AM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for the thoughtful reply, Bruce. I'm sorry to hear that you still sometimes feel that non-Jews are hostile to the Jewish People. I have to admit that I can only understand that feeling on an intellectual level, really, since it comes from a set of experiences that I just haven't shared in. On a personal level it is so easy, I think, when one hasn't had those experiences, to blunder one's way into further, but completely unintended, conflict. Or, if one has had those experiences, to presume the worst about something someone else has said. You and I have struggled with that ourselves.
I'd like to direct your attention to another good article that deals with these issues that was published today at dKos. It's titled, Dog Whistles- an Anti-Semitism Primer (a timely repost)", and I happen to think the dog whistle analogy is an excellent one. The premise is that Jewish people, as a result of their history, hear things that the non-Jewish person does not, much as a dog can hear sounds that are inaudible to the human ear. I personally think we all have our dog whistle tones that are derived from our personal experience. It was, in my view, a helpful article.
I can understand what you're saying about the mocking, but, OTOH, what strategy can work when those well-meaning Jews that you describe are in attack mode over those dog whistle tones that they hear, and are creating an obstacle to peace as a result? I can't speak for him, but I think MJ's approach may be based on the fact that for a very long time the only Jewish voices that were heard were those who were hearing the most unbelievably dire dog whistle tones, the ones that told them that destruction of the Jewish people was just around the corner. And because of that, as the alternet article described, they've felt the need to take "any measures they can think of to protect themselves," and further have seen the taking of those measures as not only morally justifiable, but as a moral imperative. That's why, in my view and I think in MJ's as well, our own foreign policy has for so long been dominated by only a very hawkish pro-Israel view. Can one really find constructive engagement when dealing with someone whose mindset is telling them that they and their people are at risk if they don't take the most aggressive approach and completely destroy those who they fear? This is one of the root causes for the continuance of the Occupation and it's horrors.
Of course, I'm speaking of the most extreme cases here, but one must recognize that MJ takes a lot of grief over his progressive stance. How many times has he been called "self-hating," for instance? I'm sure he's lost count - maybe mocking is the best strategy that can be devised at this particular moment for dealing with that. I know I sometimes use it as a coping mechanism myself, when pushed to the wall. I agree that it doesn't help anyone overcome counterproductive presumptions, but how else exactly does one do that? I'd surely like to know if you have any ideas, because such a productive way of persuasion is a skill I'd sure like to develop! In my experience, it's impossible to persuade someone to examine such deeply-held beliefs when they've developed out of fear.
Israel being compared to the Nazis...sigh. I don't think I have the strength to even get into that one much. Let me just throw out the idea that the person making such a comparison may also be well-meaning - problem is that there's an unintended emotional wallop that's the received message, instead of the message the person may have meant to deliver. Dog whistles again. (I do have to acknowledge that such comments are often far too easily thrown about.)
I was sorry to read that your daughter felt "othered" as a Jew. I don't know the circumstances, but it strikes me that we're all "others" to somebody, aren't we? It's so difficult talking about these things, and I appreciate it that you're giving it a try with me, Bruce.
January 2, 2009 1:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
Recommended.
December 31, 2008 3:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks, and Happy New Year!
January 2, 2009 2:01 AM | Reply | Permalink
Signed the petition and recommended. Kudos to Wordie for contributing this blog. More kudos to both Wordie and Bruce for their illuminating comments. Happy New Year to all.
December 31, 2008 7:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hi Seashell and thanks!
A Very Happy New Year to You, Too!
January 2, 2009 1:37 AM | Reply | Permalink
P.S. I wish this post remained on the recommended list. It's got the makings for some serious dialogue that we haven't seen over the past week. By the way, what do you think of Professor Avishai? I hope he remains here. I also hope that TPM takes Dan K's suggestion seriously, and tries to get some Palestinian voices in the near future.
January 1, 2009 11:52 AM | Reply | Permalink
Bruce - Like you I hope Professor Avishai stays with TPM. His last contribution was very level headed (something I continue to have a problem remaining). Perhaps because it was level headed, it gathered only 6 comments - a real shame. When MJ posts his emotional diatribes, I like too many others get my blood up and fists out. I am reconciled that I am what I am but if I keep working at it maybe less so. Happy New Year.
January 1, 2009 3:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
You to jd. Happy New Year to you and your family.
January 1, 2009 7:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hi JD. I also hope Professor Avishai will continue to post here - his thoughtful and well written posts are a valuable contribution. I noticed that one post, Hebron Agonistes: Too Much For Israel received 32 comments and the same number of recommendations; perhaps the relatively smaller amount of response to the more recent ones has more to do with the holidays. Also, I had resolved to remain in a hiatus from politics until the inauguration - I am just burnt out on politics and it was only the situation in Gaza that got me going again - and maybe others have been feeling the same way. I hope TPM will give Professor Avashai the opportunity to build up the following he deserves.
Happy New Year, JD.
January 2, 2009 2:00 AM | Reply | Permalink
I thought Avashai's Hebron Agonistes: Too Much For Israel was excellent. I applaud Josh and TPM for publishing it.
January 2, 2009 1:45 AM | Reply | Permalink