When your argument’s been lost, just give it one more toss
reach into the hasbara stash for Khhhhammass, Khhhhammasss, Khhhhammas.
If the ‘terrorists’ produce inconvenient facts and you’re feeling that familiar lack
reach into the hasbara stash for Khhhhammass, Khhhhammasss, Khhhhammas.
So your logic’s in a knot and lies are all you’ve got
reach into the hasbara stash for Khhhhammass, Khhhhammasss, Khhhhammas.
Nothing thrills like raw hate, you can never underrate
The benefits of the hasbara stash and Khhhhammmmass, Khhhhammasss, Khammmasss.
The problem is all theirs, so please remember in your prayers
The goddamn, nasty, convenient stash of Khhaammmmass, Khhhhammmass, Khhammmass.
Out of these 22 were militants and 4 were civilians who were in the area of IAF strikes, but were not involved in the rocket fire.
Turkey’s PM Erdogan is adamant, correctly referring to the Israeli strikes as
“state terror,” saying that the Turkish people must “remember that Gazans are our brothers, and will always remain so.”
The use of the word “militants” by the media grates – Palestinians who resist their criminal Occupier term themselves “resistance fighters”. Far more courtesy is extended by the media to the fighters who challenge the Syrian dictatorship than Palestinian people who are entitled under international law to resist their occupier, including with the use of violence within the terms of the Geneva Conventions. The vast majority of Palestinian protest is non-violent – and this protest too is suppressed brutally by Israel. Perhaps the terminology differs not primarily because of any stranglehold the Israel lobby has on media perceptions, but because of western guilt, white supremacism, and the fact that Palestinians are seeking self-determination from settler colonial invaders who identify and are identified with the West. If the fake democracy of ethnosupremacist Israel was not associated with the West, no doubt Palestinians would be termed freedom fighters by the white supremacist western media too.
The Palestinian Centre for Human Rights says 70 people have been maimed by Israel’s attacks, putting further strain on Gaza’s hospitals which are frequently without power due to Israel’s vicious siege.
Kamal Abu Obada, the Deputy Director of the Intensive Care Unit at al-Shifa hospital, is constantly aware of the risks that the patients he cares for are facing. “For me as a doctor this is all very depressing. All the time I’m working to keep the patients alive and when the electricity is cut they are all at risk. If something happens to them my efforts were all in vain.”
The latest Israeli bombardment of the people of Gaza was opportunistic, switching media and the Israeli public’s attention from Netanyahu’s failure to obtain support from Obama for an immediate Iran strike, and as a routine pressure valve through spectacle – the regular maintenance of Israel’s fascist sociopolitical cycle, and possibly to escalate pressure for war against Iran [Netanyahu is now conflating Gaza into his Iranian nuke fantasy]. Israel’s military gameplayers would have known that their initial assassination of two Popular Resistance Committee leaders, Zuhair Al-Qaisi and Mahmoud Al-Hannani, would be met with rocket retaliation from an infuriated resistance who have lived under Israel’s gruelling closure – collective punishment of a civilian population – for 1736 days. For Israel’s Channel 10, the latest sadism is regarded lightheartedly as a football game.
Like flies to wanton boys are Palestinians to Israel. It kills them for its sport.
A JPost article ratchets up the awful dehumanisation of Palestinians, terming Israel’s strike as “mowing the lawn”.
“The systems are designed to protect military bases, even if this means that citizens suffer discomfort during the days of battle.”
Under siege, the people of Gaza have nowhere to hide, and nowhere to escape to, making Israel’s deliberate criminal attacks all the more terrible and malevolent. Death can arrive in an instant from an invisible point in the skies. The Gaza rockets are regarded as illegal as they have no modern targeting systems and thus whether intended or not, target civilians. Yet many of Israel’s military installations are located close to population centres. The people of Gaza do protest their incarceration by Israel non-violently, but who is there to witness their demonstrations? The people of Israel whose regime determines the lives and deaths of the people of Gaza, are remote. Approaching the apartheid fence means one is shot at by Israel’s armed-to-the teeth Occupation troopers. For most Israelis, and for the rest of the world who applauds Israel’s crimes, the Palestinians of Gaza are inconvenient lesser humans of the wrong ‘colour’, viewed abstractly and depersonalised on television.
Last week, I had intense feelings of foreboding for several days prior to the attack, and put them down to a possible scientific explanation – the intense solar storm due to irradiate the upper atmosphere. Now, I’m not so sure. Several times in my life, I’ve had similar sensations associated with premonitions of deaths of people with whom I have an emotional connection – a feyness inherited from my Scottish grandmother. I have been so discomforted I’ve been unable to blog till now about Israel’s latest war crimes, confining myself to social media. As I write I feel miserable, disappointed in the sum of the world’s humanity that Israel’s vile crimes are applauded openly. Hillary Clinton’s noxious hypocritical cheerleading is particularly appalling. Indigenous Palestinian people, like so many other Indigenous folks before them and still, have suffered many years of gross indignities, humiliations and lack of basic human rights courtesy of predominantly northern European invaders and their descendants. Israel’s colonialism and apartheid are crimes against humanity. Does a criminal regime really have a “right to defend itself”, its existing crimes, by committing more crimes? Are not Palestinians (and Bahrainis who also resist a tyrannical western darling regime), like Syrians, Libyans, Tunisians, or Egyptians, entitled to defend themselves from a criminal regime?
Initially the IOF attempted to sell its latest war crimes against the people it occupies as a strike back against perpetrators of the last year’s killings at Eilat. This calumny was swiftly exposed as propaganda by Max Blumenthal, Ali Abunimah and others.
Home Front Defence Minister Matan Vilnai confirmed Israel had reached an unwritten “understanding” with militant groups in Gaza.
“Apparently things are calming down and this round of confrontations appears to be behind us,” he told public radio.
Defence Minister Ehud Barak echoed him. “This morning the situation is relatively quiet,” he told reporters.
In Gaza, an Islamic Jihad spokesman said the radical group was willing to respect the deal, but Israel must end its targeted killings of militants.
“We accept a ceasefire if Israel agrees to apply it by ending its aggressions and assassinations,” Daud Shihab told AFP.
Both parties warned the agreement would be shortlived if the other side stepped out of line.
“Our message is clear,” Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told a conference of senior civil servants in Jerusalem. “Calm will bring calm. Anyone who disturbs it, or even tries to disturb it, will be in our gun sights.”
“Any Israeli violation requires a strong response by all factions,” said Fawzi Barhum, a spokesman for Gaza’s Hamas rulers, who have been seeking Cairo’s help to restore calm.
The truce, he said, “was not meant to tie the hands of the resistance and its right to respond forcefully to the killings and attacks”.
News of the agreement emerged early on Tuesday after Cairo brokered what an Egyptian intelligence official described as a “comprehensive and mutual” truce.
“An agreement on ending the current operations between the two sides, including a halt to assassinations, came into force at 1am,” he told AFP, saying the deal resulted from “intensive contacts” with both sides.
But Vilnai denied Israel had agreed to halt the assassinations.
“Anyone involved in terrorism against Israel needs to know that they are in our sights,” he warned.
Senior Israeli defence ministry official Amos Gilad said the deal had been concluded with Egypt, without direct contact with Gaza’s Hamas rulers.
“We have agreed to quietness on condition there will be quietness.”
No spokesperson from Gaza has been on any news bulletin I’ve heard. No name has been given to any of the dead in Gaza. No age, gender, occupation, personhood has been ascribed to any of those murdered. They are deemed non-persons, their deaths are not worthy of condemnation. Rockets are worthy of condemnation but not bombs. Potential injuries are worthy of condemnation but not actual deaths of actual people. Some politicians are ‘concerned’ by the violence, never calling for Israel to stop it.
Professor Joseph Massad is one of the world’s great thinkers on the Middle East. His address is presented on Edward Said’s birthday, November 1, in 2011 at the James A. Baker III Institute for Public Policy.
‘And this really means that my detractors are pretty much left in a hopeless situation — they do not posses the intellectual means to silence me or my criticism, so instead, they revert to smear campaigns: they label me an ‘anti Semite’, a ‘Neo Nazi’, a ‘racist’, and so on. Tragically enough for them, no one out side of the Jewish political circuit takes any of these empty accusations at all seriously anymore.’
The signatories, including my (non-Jewish) own, on this article ‘“Not Quite “Ordinary Human Beings” – Anti-Imperialism and the Anti-Humanist Rhetoric of Gilad Atzmon‘ which exposes how Atzmon’s views serve zionism and imperialism may not convince him they do not aim to silence him, as he claims, but to advance legitimate criticism of his faulty positions, or that at the least a substantial number of them come from ‘outside the Jewish political circuit’. Yet racist views have no place in solidarity struggles grounded in human rights and international law.
Apparently, Atzmon does fail to recognise the depth of his non-Jewish critics – and he throws a pathetic character assassination and woeful strawmen at As’ad AbuKhalil, who is one of the signatories, to conflate As’ad into his manufactured framework, despicably calling Professor AbuKhalil a collaborator – a term with dangerous connotations.
‘this is somebody that we should reject from the pro-Palestinian advocacy movement. He is anti-Jewish and his offensive language against Jews and Judaism should be categorically rejected. I would put the name of Israel Shamir in the same category. Anti-Semites belong to the Zionist side, and not to our side.’
Below, Palestinian Ali Abunimah critiques Atzmon’s “theories” presented at Stuttgart in 2010.
“I do not agree at all with how he characterised the situation and the problem. And I think to use the language which blames a particular culture – he was talking about Jewish culture – is wrong, because such arguments could be made about anyone – we could blame German culture for the history of Germany, we could blame British culture for the history of British imperialism, we could blame Afrikaaner culture for apartheid in South Africa and this really doesn’t explain anything at all. So I think we should not go in that direction, and should be very clear in condemning explanations which blame a culture or a religion for a political situation. So I wanted to make that very clear.”
Further, one only has to read @GiladAtzmon ‘s twitstream to note the paucity of his concern for Palestinians and their struggle. Nearly every tweet is self-promotional, at a time when Hanaa al-Shalabi is in her 16th day of hunger strike against Israeli arbitrary administrative detention without charge or trial.
UPDATE 4/3/12
Atzmon’s apoplectic response to the MrZine article proves its theses. For Atzmon, his critics are either Tribal Marxist Jews or if Arab, Collaborators.
The tweets below demonstrate the opportunistic white supremacism which bubbles and froths up to defend Atzmon from his critics – in this case, me – by calling me Jewish, zionist and a sayanim.
I never thought that I would live to a day when an Israeli who fought (or provided “medical work”) in the Israeli invasion of Lebanon in 1982. Yes, that kind of a guy is qualified to teach me about the crimes of Zionism, when I was at the receiving ends of his bombs and car bombs and shells in 1982. I wrote again and I will write it again: there is no room in the pro-Palestinian movement for anti-Semites–and I am not saying that they may even be Israeli infiltrators sent to sabotage and stigmatize the movement. I have declared Gilad Atzmon an anti-Semite (using the general word for anti-Jewishness). Go read some samples of his anti-Jewish statements on the entry on him at Wikipedia. I signed a petition against him and will sign more petitions against him, if asked. I don’t throw labels of racist or anti-Semitic lightly but the case against this former member of the Israeli armed terrorist forces is rather clear. Here, Atzmon thinks he can offer me lessons on anti-Zionism. He is as qualified as the Saudi King giving me lessons about feminism. He and others should get the message: the Palestinian cause is too just and too precious to be polluted by haters of any kind. Anti-Semites are never welcomed in our movement. The Zionist cause is your natural home.
More hyperbole from Atzmon defender, Dr June Terpstra, who impugns a variety of motives without evidence onto the MrZine letter’s signatories. Accusing Atzmon’s critics of censorship (apparently criticism these days in some academic circles is known as ‘silencing’ and ‘censorship’ – will there be a call for an end to peer review next?), she demonstrates her affiliation with Atzmon’s supremacist beliefs and adopts his deceptive acronym for his critics – the Atzmon Defamation League (not to be confused with the Anti-Defamation League):
The ADL is opposed fundamentally to freedom of speech concerning Jewish cultural, political and religious supremacy.
She accuses the signatories of being privileged – yet does not examine Atzmon’s privilege. Perhaps she might scan his self-promotional twitstream today for clues.
UPDATE 6/3/12
More Atzmon self-promotion on twitter:
Atzmon snookers himself while attempting to trash another signatory on the MrZine article, well-known, stolidly anti-racist activist and writer, Emma Rosenthal :
In the interchange above, Atzmon definitively affirms his stance that zionism isn’t colonialism. This view is shared by zionists. Both are wrong and minimise this heinous crime against humanity. The zionist colonisation of Palestine is a classic example of settler colonialism.
Atzmon is grateful to this anon blogger, who transparently vilifies Jews as a group, for his/her support. Atzmon doesn’t even make the distinction between Jews and Jewishness when it’s a distinction his supporters fail to make. He only uses it as a strawman to those who say he’s anti-Jewish. Atzmon likes the antisemitic drivel so much he republishes it on his blog.
Atzmon’s politics rest on one main overriding assertion that serves as springboard for vicious attacks on anyone who disagrees with his obsession with “Jewishness”. He claims that all Jewish politics is “tribal,” and essentially, Zionist. Zionism, to Atzmon, is not a settler-colonial project, but a trans-historical “Jewish” one, part and parcel of defining one’s self as a Jew. Therefore, he claims, one cannot self-describe as a Jew and also do work in solidarity with Palestine, because to identify as a Jew is to be a Zionist. We could not disagree more. Indeed, we believe Atzmon’s argument is itself Zionist because it agrees with the ideology of Zionism and Israel that the only way to be a Jew is to be a Zionist.
Palestinians have faced two centuries of orientalist, colonialist and imperialist domination of our native lands. And so as Palestinians, we see such language as immoral and completely outside the core foundations of humanism, equality and justice, on which the struggle for Palestine and its national movement rests. As countless Palestinian activists and organizers, their parties, associations and campaigns, have attested throughout the last century, our struggle was never, and will never be, with Jews, or Judaism, no matter how much Zionism insists that our enemies are the Jews. Rather, our struggle is with Zionism, a modern European settler colonial movement, similar to movements in many other parts of the world that aim to displace indigenous people and build new European societies on their lands.
The statement concludes with these inspiring words:
The goal of the Palestinian people has always been clear: self determination. And we can only exercise that inalienable right through liberation, the return of our refugees (the absolute majority of our people) and achieving equal rights to all through decolonization. As such, we stand with all and any movements that call for justice, human dignity, equality, and social, economic, cultural and political rights. We will never compromise the principles and spirit of our liberation struggle. We will not allow a false sense of expediency to drive us into alliance with those who attack, malign, or otherwise attempt to target our political fraternity with all liberation struggles and movements for justice.
As Palestinians, it is our collective responsibility, whether we are in Palestine or in exile, to assert our guidance of our grassroots liberation struggle. We must protect the integrity of our movement, and to do so we must continue to remain vigilant that those for whom we provide platforms actually speak to its principles.
When the Palestinian people call for self-determination and decolonization of our homeland, we do so in the promise and hope of a community founded on justice, where all are free, all are equal and all are welcome.
Atzmon responds to the Palestinian statement on WRMEA. He denies ziocolonialism and Israeli apartheid and suggests that his followers listen to him ‘with their hearts’. If only intellectual discourse was so easy!
Activist Emma Rosenthal comments on the content of his response:
No one is censoring Atzmon. All that people are saying (and by his own definitions -see his statement above) is that his positions are not consistent with a movement for universal human rights, an anti-apartheid anti-settler-colonialist movement. And given Atzmon’s dismissal of key palestinian activists and scholars, a movement for self determination either. There are plenty of venues and contexts for Atzmon’s ideas. A klan rally for one.
We view his public political stances as anti-Jewish and counterproductive to the pursuit of justice. Atzmon has an extensive record of demonizing Jews as a people under the guise of Palestine solidarity. For these reasons,we cannot endorse events in which he takes part.
We deeply appreciate the statement put out today that re-affirms Palestinian activists’ principled stance against anti-Semitism.
UPDATE 15/3/12
A ludicrous article by Gordon Duff attempts to defend Atzmon, libelling Palestinian leaders. So who from military intelligence did the vetting of Atzmon at vt, and what was the vetting process?
And yet another Atzmon defender wades in to defend non-Palestinians. Siegel, the Palestinian struggle is led by Palestinians, not by you or Atzmon. The Palestinian struggle furthermore is not about Jewishness, Jewish culture or Judaeism.
Eisen moans about Ali Abunimah’s criticisms of Shamir and DYR. It’s like a nasty boil has been lanced and a lot of smelly pus is oozing out.
UPDATE 16/3/12
Weir wades in. She encourages people to go see Atzmon’s lectures. She quotes an unnamed “Palestinian activist” who ludicrously and tellingly accuses ‘Palestinian “academists / activists” of standing on the side of Israel and AIPAC’. The Palestinian letter is clearly written by more than 20 Palestinians and was published first on the USPCN website yet the reading comprehension of many of Atzmon’s defenders and Atzmon himself leaves much to be desired – they attack Ali Abunimah. Weir quotes Blankfort making the assumption that Ali Abunimah is responsible for the Palestinian letter:
I suspect whoever initiated the list, and it appears that it was Abumimah[sic], was pressed to do so by the Jewish left equivalent of the mainstream Jewish machers who pressure local black leaders to denounce Louis Farrakhan whenever he makes an appearance and has the audacity to speak out Jews and the slave trade which, like Zionist-Nazi collaboration, is a classic Left taboo.
Blankfort, shooting his mouth off further, then attacks Joseph Massad and Asad Abukhalil. Hey Blankfort, you didn’t waste any time in making this situation one for the exercise of your personal spite, did you? Weir fails to quote any Palestinians who support the disavowal of Atzmon’s ambit, so her position is made crystal clear by omission.
Weir founded If Americans Knew, “an organization to be directed by Americans without bias and ethnic ties to the region, who would research and actively disseminate accurate information to the American public.” [NB : The wording on Weir’s site changed in January 2013 – see note at the foot of this post *]
Do Palestinians need Americans to interpret their predicament and to disseminate ‘accurate’ information to the American public on their behalf? Palestinians get quite enough of the US delivering bombs and military aid for the benefit of the US ruling class. Imperialism takes many forms. Can an American directed organisation really claim to be without bias and ethnic ties to the region? Do Palestinians really have to be patronised like this, as if their situation has to be reframed to make it digestible and credible to the US public?
Well, we now see how the disdain for Palestinians lurks very close to the surface amongst those who protect their own self-interest, US empire and the exclusivity of white western people to determine the context and direction of the Palestinian people’s struggle. I hope there’s a rehabilitation centre for recovering white supremacists established – it will do a roaring trade. 🙂
Another miscreant – Debbie Menon, this time from the rightwing Catbird Seat blog, wrongly blames it all on Ali, and again wrongly assumes the Palestinian article is about Atzmon’s book. She attempts to spruik for said book, bludgeoning her readers with the fallacy from authority. Laughably, Menon also waxes furiously on behalf of her favourite western polemicists who she thinks are “uterly[sic] frustrated and penniless precisely due to the lack of any support from diaspora Paletinians[sic]”. How could these ungrateful Palestinians be so remiss as to leave these privileged folks in penury!
“these strident Atzmon supporters insist that Palestinians/Arabs/Muslim/brown people live up to mythical ideological standards that they set for them. A sickening aspect here: Atzmon is seen as the prophetic voice who some how speaks for and about the Israel/Palestine situation. And yet his supporters replicate older colonialist ideals where the white man speaks for the native regardless of the native voice.”
Emma Rosenthal comments on Singh: “Singh unfortunately can’t see the similarities between Atzmon defenders and Atzmon. She is so offended by the zionist attacks, she can’t see that many of the people Atzmon attacks have been similarly targeted and how dangerous his behavior is to the movement.” I agree.
UPDATE 18/3/12
The erupted pustule continues to weep white ooze.
Out of all the vertiginous flailing strawman rants and blithers thus far in defence of Atzmon, This piece published on a blog on which Atzmon also posts, takes the cake. An avid supporter of Atzmon is willing to post a depraved poster from the notorious Elder of Ziyon site in order to attack Omar Barghouti and BDS. Laura Stuart, who tweets as @gazaboatconvoy seems to have lost the plot. This westerner has chosen to laud non-Palestinian leadership over the Palestinian struggle and the call by 200 Palestinian groups from civil society to boycott, divest and sanction apartheid Israel and has posted depraved zionist propaganda to do it. Their white supremacist narrative mirrors the corresponding zionist hasbara completely, even down to the two major hasbara memes “we feel silenced” and “this is dividing our community”. Like all bad smells, propaganda is better outed than in – noone is trying to silence Atzmon, merely to dissociate his odiferous positions from the principled human rights movement of BDS. Homework note to Laura – boycotts originated in Ireland.
This incident also highlights a phenomenon amongst a minority of solidarity activists who make the grand effort to attempt to break the blockade on Gaza and return feeling like they own the movement, not the Palestinians whom their original effort was directed toward assisting. Those folks who exploit these activists are also exploiting the struggle of Palestinian people.
“Anti-zionist zionists claim to oppose zionism but their actions are different” (he thereby allows attacks on all Jews as zionists whether they support zionism or oppose it). “Antizionists are not much different from zionists.”
“There’s a big difference between jewish marxists and marxists of jewish descent, american jews and americans of jewish descent.”
Atzmoan doesn’t ‘regard himself as a Jew anymore’ because he doesn’t want to be privileged in any discourse. Later he says ‘We are all Palestinians now.’ What sort of privilege is he assuming there?
Atzmon says “when we see the plunderous tendency of zionists to rob Palestinians, is it something invented or something we find in the Jewish heritage, the bible”. Yet it is zionism which conflates Jews, Jewishness and Jewish culture with itself. Palestinians’ problem is with Occupation, colonialism and apartheid, not with Jews, Jewishness or Jewish culture.
Comment by Tom Pessah in response to an Atzmon defender:
a lot of right-wing zionists use accusations of antisemitism to silence criticism of zionism, which is completely wrong. It distracts attention from what Israel is doing, and in addition it also de-sensitizes people from paying attention to proper anti-jewish bigotry. You wrote that “Right wingers call him “anti-semitic” and a “fully fledged holocaust denier.” http://cindysheehanssoapbox.blogspot.com/2012/03/let-st-storm-commence.html – but this isn’t a right-wing issue. The reason why people call him that is because he is. He’s said he can’t say whether the Holocaust happened or not, because he is not a historian
http://hurryupharry.org/2011/09/17/gilad-atzmon-wont-say-whether-the-holocaust-happened-because-hes-not-a-historian/
he thinks that “65 years after the liberation of Auschwitz, we must be entitled to start to ask the necessary questions. We should ask for some conclusive historical evidence” http://www.gilad.co.uk/writings/truth-history-and-integrity-by-gilad-atzmon.html
but plenty of historians have already found conclusive historical evidence – for example, scroll down here to the Nazi letter from 12 August 1942 describing the use of poisonous gas in Auschwitz – http://www.holocaust-history.org/questions/zyklon.shtml).
On other occasions he has written that the Jews, rather than the Nazis, should be blamed for the Holocaust –
Rather than blaming the Goyim, the Germans, the Muslims, the Arabs, it is about time the Jewish subject learns to ask the 6 million $ question: “why do they pick on me?” http://peacepalestine.blogspot.com/2007/10/gilad-atzmon-open-comment-to-jsf.html
“in March 1933, long before Hitler became the undisputed leader of Germany and began restricting the rights of German Jews, the American Jewish Congress announced a massive protest at Madison Square Gardens and called for an American boycott of German goods”
http://www.gilad.co.uk/writings/judea-declares-war-on-obama-by-gilad-atzmon.html
this is a complete lie – Hitler came to power in January 1933 and this boycott was in reaction to that, so he is twisting history to portray Adolph Hitler as the victim of world jewry
he is also impressed by Wagner’s claim that “Jews were only capable of producing money-making music” – this he calls “an astute reading of the socio-economy of the show business” http://www.gilad.co.uk/writings/gilad-atzmon-wagner-again.html
he boasts that “when we studied the middle age blood libels, I again wondered out loud how the teacher could know that these accusations of Jews making Matzo out of young Goyim’s blood were indeed empty or groundless”
http://hurryupharry.org/2011/09/17/gilad-atzmon-wont-say-whether-the-holocaust-happened-because-hes-not-a-historian/
UPDATE 10/4/2012
Atzmon reiterates his denial of zionist colonialism and apartheid and zionism itself and pathetically attributes Israel to Nazism.
‘I openly contend that their entire terminology is misleading. Zionism is not colonialism, Israel is not Apartheid and the Israelis are not Zionists. Zionism is not colonialism for the Jewish ‘Settler State’ lacks a Jewish ‘Mother State’. Israel is not Apartheid for the Jewish State doesn’t want to exploit the Palestinians but to get rid of them. Israel is actually driven by Lebensraum (Living Space) philosophy. In other words, the Jewish State adopted the Nazi racist, expansionist ideology. But the Jews in our movement do not like the comparison with Nazi Germany. And also Israel is not exactly Zionism and the Israelis are not necessarily Zionists. Israel is the product of the Zionist ideology and the Israeli is basically a post revolutionary product. Hence, the Zionist/anti Zionist debate has very little significance in Israel or on Israeli politics.’
I’ve never seen so many holes dug then fallen into than in this ‘interview’. 🙂
UPDATE 30/4/12
On Deliberation, Atzmon reveals his opportunism and antipathy to BDS:
It seems to me as if the UK BDS, in its current form, operates as an Israeli PR agency. It turns to floodlight on Israeli acts, create some controversy and then let them sell out. In fact I use the same tactics, I let Greenstein, Dershowitz and Abunimah make some noise and watch Wandering Who selling out.
And:
I think that we should all say NO to Book Burning , Zionist or BDS… the principle is the same and it is always wrong !!!
The first musical entry on a youtube search for Gilad Atzmon is a fifteen minute performance at the SWP’s annual Cultures of Resistance gig in 2006; now, with another five years of Jew-baiting under Atzmon’s belt, that dalliance is passed over in SWP politics in embarrassed silence.
* Re changes to If Americans Knew show in the Wayback Machine as at January 2013.
Here’s screenshots of the old and new text from the Wayback Machine of the “Who We Are” page.
September 12 “Who We Are”
‘she founded an organization to be directed by Americans without bias and ethnic ties to the region who would research and actively disseminate accurate information to the American public.’
http://web.archive.org/web/20120922075359/http://www.ifamericansknew.org/about_us/whoweare.html
IAK “Who We Are” – January 2013
“she founded an organization to be directed by Americans without personal or family ties to the region who would research and actively disseminate accurate information to the American public.”
http://web.archive.org/web/20130115074332/http://ifamericansknew.org/about_us/whoweare.html
The mission statement wording ‘In the United States, currently the most powerful nation on earth, it is even more essential that its citizens receive complete and undistorted information on topics of importance, so that they may wield their extraordinary power with wisdom and intelligence.
…
It is the mission of If Americans Knew to ensure that this does not happen – that the information on which Americans base their actions is complete, accurate, and undistorted by conscious or unconscious bias, by lies of either commission or omission, or by pressures exerted by powerful special interest groups.’ remains the same.
All said and done it is merely a minor story about an illegal alien who stole a car, was injured in an accident, then released from hospital to have cops dump him, still injured to die the by the roadside. What are the building blocks that lead to such an atrocity?
David Grossman
Omar Abu Jariban, a resident of the Gaza Strip, staying illegally in Israel, stole a car and was seriously injured while driving it. He was released from the Sheba Medical Centre while his treatment was still ongoing and handed over to the custody of the Rehovot Police station. The police were unable to identify him. He himself was bewildered and confused. The Rehovot Police officers decided to get rid of him. According to Chaim Levinson’s account, they loaded him onto a police van at night accompanied by three policemen. He was still attached to a catheter, was wearing an adult nappy and a hospital gown. Two days later he was found dead by the roadside.
It’s a minor story. We have already read some like it and others where even worse. And when it is all said and done who is the subject of this story: an illegal infiltrator, from Rafah and a vehicle thief to boot. And at any rate it happened as long ago as 2008, there is a statue of limitation to consider. And we have other, fresher, more immediate matters which are more relevant for us to consider. (And beside all that, they started it, we offered them everything and they refused and don’t forget the terrorism.).
Ever since I read the story, I find it difficult to breathe the air here: I keep on thinking about that trip in the police van, as if some part of me had remained there, bonded on permanently and impossible to be prise out. How precisely did the incident pan out? it? What are the real, banal, tangible elements that coalesced together make up such an atrocity?
From the newspaper I gather that there were three cops there alongside Omar. Again and again I run the video clip mentally in my head: Was he sitting like them on the seat or was he lying on the floor of the van? Was he handcuffed or not? Did anybody talk to him? Did they offer him a drink? Did they share a laugh? Did they laugh at him? Did they poke fun at his adult nappy? Did they laugh at his confusion or at his catheter? Did they discuss what he was capable of while still attached to the catheter or once he would be separated from it? Did they say that he deserved what was coming? Did they kick him lightly like mates do, or maybe because the situation demanded a swift kick? Or did they just kick him for the heck of it, just because they could, and why not?
Besides, how can someone be discharged just like that from medical treatment at the Sheba Medical Centre? Who let him out in his condition? What possible explanation could they put down on the discharge papers which they signed off?
And what happened when the van reached the Maccabim checkpoint [not far from Jerusalem -tr]? I read in the newspaper that an argument ensued with the Israeli checkpoint commander, and that he refused to accept the patient. Did Omar hear the argument about him from within the van, or did they drag him out of the van and plonked him in front of the commander, replete with catheter, nappy and hospital gown for a rapid overall assessment by the latter? And the commander said no. And yalla! We are on our way again. So they returned to van, and they kept on going. And now the guys in the van are perhaps not quite as nice before, because it is getting late and they want to get back and wonder what have they done to have deserved copping this sand nigger and what are they going to do with him now. If the Maccabim checkpoint rejected him, there was no way in which the Atarot checkpoint will take him. It is now pitch black outside and by the by, while traveling on Route 45, between the Ofer military base to the Atarot checkpoint, a thought or a suggestion pops up. Perhaps someone said something and nobody argued against, or perhaps someone did argue back but the one who came up with the original suggestion carried more weight. Or perhaps there was no argument, someone said something and someone else felt that this is precisely what needs to be done, and one of them says to the driver, pull over for a moment, not here, it’s too well lit, stop there. You, yes you, move it, get your arse into gear you piece of shit – thanks to you our van stinks;, you ruined our evening, get going! What do you mean to where? Go there.
And what happens next? Does Omar remain steady on his feet, or are his legs unable to carry him? Do they leave him on the side of the road, or do physically take him there, and how? Do the haul him? Do they drag him deeper into the field?
You stay here! Do not follow us! Do not move!
And then they return to the car, walking a little bit more briskly, glancing behind their shoulder to ensure that he is not pursuing them. As if he already has something infectious about him. No, not his injury. Something else is already beginning to exude out of him, like bad tidings, or his court sentence. Come on, let’s get going, it’s all over.
And he, Omar Abu Jariban, what did he do then? Did he merely stand on his own feet or did he suddenly grasp what was happening, and started running and shouting that they should take him with them? And perhaps he did not realise anything, because as we said, he was confused and bewildered, and just stood there on the road or in the field, and saw a road, and a police van driving away. So what did he do? What did he really do? Started walking aimlessly, with some sort of a vague notion that somehow being a little further away would turn out somewhat better? Or maybe he just sat down and stared blankly in front of him and tried to figure it, but it was clearly beyond his comprehension for he was in no position to understand anything? Or perhaps he lay down and curled up on the ground and waiting? Why? And whom did he think about? Did he have someone, somewhere, to think about? Did the thought occur to any of those police officers, at any time during that whole night that there was someone, a man, a woman or a whole family for whom Omar was important? Someone who cared about him? Did it occur to them that it was possible, with a little bit more of an effort to locate this person and hand Omar to them?
Two days later they found his body. But I have no idea how much time had elapsed from the moment they dumped him by the roadside until he died. Who knows when it dawned on him that this was it; that his body did not have enough strength left to save himself. And even if could have summonsed the energy, he was trapped a situation from which there was no exit, that his short life was about to end here. His brother Mohammed, said by telephone from Gaza, “They simply threw him to the dogs”. And in the newspaper it says, “Horrible as it may sound, the brother accurately described what happened.” And I read it and the image turns into something real, and I try to wipe that image from my mind.
And in the police van, what happened there after they dumped Omar ? Did they talk among themselves? About what? Did they fire each other up with hatred and disgust at him, to retrospectively justify what they did? To justify what in their heart of hearts they knew stood in contrast to something. Maybe that thing was the law (but the law, they probably imagined, they could handle). But maybe it was contrary to something deeper, some deeply ingrained memory in them which they found themselves in, many years ago. Maybe it was moral tale or a children’s story in which the good was good and the bad was bad. Perhaps one of them recalled something they learnt at school — they did pass through our education system, didn’t they? Let’s say it was S Yizhar’s HaShavuy (the captive).
Or maybe the three of them pulled out their mobile phones and spoke to the wife, the girlfriend the son. At such times you may want to talk to someone from the outside. Someone who wasn’t here who did not touch this thing.
Or maybe they kept quiet.
No, silence was perhaps a little bit too dangerous at that point. Still, something was beginning to creep up the van’s interior; a sort of a viscous dark sensation, like a terrifying sin, for which there is no forgiveness. Maybe one of them yet did suggest softly, let’s go back. We’ll tell him that we were pulling his leg. We can’t go on like this, dumping a human being.
The paper says: “As a result of the police Internal Affairs investigation, negligent homicide charges were filed in March 2009 against only two of the officers who were involved in dumping and abandoning Abu Jariban. Evidence has yet to be submitted in a trial of the pair but in the meantime, one of the two accused has been promoted.”
I know that they do not represent the police. Nor do they represent our society or the state. It’s only a handful or bad apples, or unwelcomed weeds. But then I think about a people which has dumped a whole other nation on the side of the road and has backed the process to the hilt over 45 years, all the while having not a bad life at all, thank you. I think about a people which has been engaging in a brilliant genius-like denial of its own responsibility for the situation. I think of a people, which has managed to ignore the warping and distorting of its own society and the madness that the process has had on its own national values. Why should such a people get all excited over a single such Omar?
The worst aspect of the police corruption was not the kickbacks for illegal brothels and casinos that eventually dominated the media coverage – it was the gross abuse of police powers to intimidate, harass and bash political opponents. The fierce suppression of political dissent generated a real and legitimate fear amongst a whole sub-section of the community, with the most powerless such as aboriginals bearing the biggest brunt. When police can get away with physically assaulting people at will with almost total immunity, you are literally in a police state – maybe not as serious in scale as the South African regime of the time, but a police state none the less.
…
However, in my experience it was the intimidation and harassment in so many individual people’s daily lives that was the worst aspect of the police force of the time. Political activists were continually having their houses raided and searched (with the constant fear that drugs might be planted), cars were followed and often stopped and occupants questioned or searched for no particular reason. Racist behaviour by law enforcement agencies has a long history in Australia, but the mistreatment of aboriginal people in this era was extreme – all creating a suspicion and resentment which will burn deep amongst many aboriginal people for years to come, making it much harder for modern day police to do their job effectively.
It was awareness that there will never be a viable Palestinian state that prompted me to work with other Harvard students to organize a one-state conference this weekend. Our work has been informed by the uncontroversial view that all people are created equal. Assessing an environment in which Israel controls the lives of 4 million people and deprives them of basic human rights, we ask whether there is an alternative: Can the one-state solution deliver equal rights to everyone?
