Useful web sites

Twitter Updates

    follow me on Twitter

    « Does the Jerusalem Post have a sense of humour? | Main | AUT-NATFHE: two steps back »



    Bravo. And bravo for Ben Gurion too.


    i doubt that the people involved would have had difficult figuring out who took the footage even if the cameraman had given or sold the film to someone a few degrees removed from him.

    people involved in the killing would have known who was close by and it wouldn't have been very hard to figure out who to blame.

    he has a family to protect. and the pa is a madhouse.


    Anonymous-- you may or may not be right. According to the story, the cameraman followed the terrorists in his car (so for some considerable distance) and remained hidden during the atrocity. In the chaos that was around at the time, I doubt if they were keeping tabs on the large numbers of press around.

    He also had the choice of giving the story to a press agency and using the video in confidence to verify it. In his own accounts, according to Lisa's comments, he mentioned loyalty (in the sense of the broad loyalty to wanting to avoid giving Palestinians an even more negative image)as one of the key issues.

    He himself didn't cite reprisal as the key issue. After all, it could still operate to this day, but he chose to present the story and show the video to the journalists, and the other Palestinian journalists supported him.

    There are Palestinian journalists and human rights workers now who are risking their lives to report gangsterism and intimidation despite the risks and their obvious identifiability.

    The fact that the media (apart from the Jerusalem Post and sometimes Ha'aretz) doesn't publicise their battles makes it easier for the gangsters and terrorists to win.


    While I certainly endore Ben-Gurion's fine words, the reality back then was not nearly as clear-cut as this (admittedly condensed, tangential) mention implies.

    The "organized yishuv" ran its own clandestine militia at the time, and engaged in anti-British activities as well.

    Isn't it a bit late to dredge up this old smear, implying that the Likud is somehow not legit? From here in Israel, it's clear to many that the self-righteousness projected by Israel's Labor/left factions have been hamstringing our progress to a healthy, combative, truly democratic civic culture for more than half a century now.

    Currently, the Likud is striving mightily to liberalize our economy and introduce much-needed transparency in our political system. And what are the other options on offer in the upcoming elections? A throwback to (Ben-Gurion's!) socialist cronyocracy, or a move "forward" (Kadima) to unscrupled fascism.


    This reality leaves offhand phrases like "the terror groups whose leaders later led the Likud party" naked and blushing... not to mention inaccurate, as Netanyahu never was in the underground.


    I had no intention of implying the Likud is not legit. I am not expressing any opinions on the Likud itself, which anyway was only constituted long after the establishment of the state of Israel. I also understand the Ben Gurion comment to have referred to particular acts of terrorism.

    I think it is no accident that the former terrorist associations of key Likud leaders of the past were what helped to keep them out of power for thirty years after the founding of the state of Israel. Of course I do not refer to Netanyahu, only to the particular people in the leadership of Irgun and Lehi who subsequently became the leaders of the Likud of their day.

    I quote Ben Gurion, because I think he was absolutely right, and continues to be right, on the issue of totally and unequivocally renouncing terrorism and organizing to root it out from one's own side.

    In doing so, I do not advocate him or his policies. My post is not about that. In fact, the discussion grows out of my admiration of the stance taken by Sharansky on this matter. He served in a Likud-led coalition, but that's neither here nor there to me. His understanding of what democracy is, and what it has to be, are central to my political views. That doesn't necessarily imply my endorsement of other political positions he may advocate.

    As you will see if you have read my post on Amir Peretz, I am not taking a particular stance on him as a leader either.

    This post is not about the Israeli elections. It is about the need for all of us to unite against terrorism,and not take up mistaken loyalty positions in order to preserve the supposed honour or reputation of our own side.


    I agree, and I also admire and share Sharansky's positions. I also understand that this was tangential to your main point.

    ... but articulate folks like Sharansky are being sidelined in Israeli politics (at least partially) by the lingering ghosts of the old Mapai/Likud stereotypes. Peretz in particular is a conjuring/divining/lightning rod for long-simmering racial and political divisions.

    The preoccupation with these old rivalries - particularly by the left-tilting media - has pushed the debate about Israel's democratic character to the margins of public awareness.

    And the persistence of these stereotypes/historical memes - and their deployment by the leftist elite to bolster their aura of inevitability - has a direct impact on the ability of people like Sharansky and Netanyahu to lead when they ARE elected, and to carry forward the structural reforms we so desperately need.


    It is unfortunate to see that you are simply doing something that you think should be perceived good, while denouncing those of Palestinians and pro-Palestine. If you give yourself the right to speak and just crimes such as Mohammad al-Durra's and show it as fake, I (don't)wonder where and who on earth would be those who believe/create/spread such lies?

    I can't even think of comparing such a lie to true stories and facts represented by activists like thecutter and umkahlil. I always said, truth hurts, and I guess this is what you are suffering from. While on Yale's blog you say "... I would like to let you know how I dealt successfully with attacks on Lisa and myself (and others) by Umkhalil. She was forced to remove the offending pages. It is also a decisive way of dealing with offensive commenters..." Instead of accepting facts as facts, you go on calling true challenges as hate, offensive and trolls. Of course you will not feel short of finding support to such claims, specially that it distracts everyone from the moral of the stories they present, to a personal attacks and flames.

    Tell me, how did you force umkahlil to take off her post? Why are you so sure that she can put it back? What makes you proud of suppressing a human voice? ..... I know the answer.... you will call them (and me) hate and racist and antisemitic and blah blah blah... pathetic!

    Wouldn't it be fair and just to try to see others as "humans with rights", just like yours, just for a while? or you believe Ben Gurion's "..let us rise up against terror and its agencies, and smite them..." is your right, but the same by Palestinians suffering from Israeli terror and massacres is not right?!

    Wakeup, look with two eyes, one on your side, one on other side!


    This book is so brazenly pro-Arab and anti-Israel, so patziran in its selection of facts, as to be utterly breathtaking. While the back material says that the book is relentlessly fair , it is certainly not. Nor is it, as the title suggests, some neutral bit of history for beginners, an Arabs and Israel for Dummies kind of book.The first page says, I swear to you, I cannot see how any fair-minded person with an IQ over fifty can believe the Zionist/Jewish/Israeli version of what happened in the Middle-East. The last paragraph of the book has this conclusion: Although I don't think that Israel benefits anyone, including the Jewish people, I don't expect Israel to quit the Middle East. So what do I want? I want a few famous American Jews Norman Mailer Woody Allen to stand up and say, let's quit lying to the world and to ourselves. We stole Palestine. We stole it.' While there are plenty of pro-Israel, anti-Arab books that are just as biased, if you're looking for balance, this isn't the book for you. The only value this book has is to learn a decidedly and profoundly pro-Arab point of view.

    The comments to this entry are closed.

    August 2015

    Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
    2 3 4 5 6 7 8
    9 10 11 12 13 14 15
    16 17 18 19 20 21 22
    23 24 25 26 27 28 29
    30 31          
    Blog powered by Typepad