A friend just told me one of the 6 six soldiers who died in the previous attack in Gaza, was in her class. In an article in Haaretz, families talk about their sons:

Sarah Neuman, the mother of Eitan Neuman of Jerusalem, spoke of the price of educating her son to love his country. “He loved the Hebrew language and the State of Israel and touring every part of it. He loved every bush, stone and flower. We raised our children to volunteer, and this is the price I’ve had to pay.” She did not criticize his army service in the Gaza Strip. “We believe in the army. They decided Eitan should serve in Gaza, and I was very proud of him. I knew he was there and cannot say that what he did was a mistake.”

Shaul Mofaz says that “Gaza operations are essential, unavoidable.” What a price to pay.

17 thoughts on “Gazazel

  1. Chutzpah defined:
    The Settlers’ Council is accusing Peace Now organizers of Saturday’s demonstration in Rabin Square of cynicism.
    The Yesha Council said “it is inappropriate to hold a rally at this time, while our slain soldiers have not even received their proper burials… The deaths of the soldiers should not be exploited for political gains. We need to be sensitive towards the grieving families who are wallowing in pain and sorrow.”
    (Ari Shavit) “The words are harsh, but they have to be said: The young guys of Givati who were blown up with their armored personnel carrier on Tuesday in Gaza differ from all of their comrades who have been killed here since September 2000. They differ, because they are no longer the victims of extremist Islam. They are no longer the victims of Arafat’s insanity. They are the victims of the settlement enterprise.”

  2. Maybe the Yesha Council and Bush-Cheney campaign manager Marc Racicot aren’t reading the same playbook. But as Reb Shabbtai Zisel ben Avraham (Bob Dylan) wisely sung, “Take what you have gathered from coincidence…”
    The Bush campaign has repeatedly accused the senator of “politicizing” Iraq. Bush-Cheney chairman Marc Racicot told reporters Wednesday that Kerry is relentlessly “playing politics” and exploiting tragedy for political gain.

  3. asaf, you still have not given me any evidence that the israeli military has a pattern or policy of conducting war crimes.

  4. assisnation of suspects while killing human surroundings, collective punishments..
    War crimes are NOT israeli policy. While state terrorism is. War crime is a legal definition. In many cases war crimes are created. terrorizying the palestinain lives is a policty.
    http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/engMDE151452002 (numbers have doubled since)

  5. Asaf,
    That’s a pretty lame argument for “state terrorism” in the context of the overall situation. You simply cannot select out the fact that the best you can say of Palestinian leadership is that it is not at all interested in undoing the Hamas-Jihad-Martyrs capabilities, and stopping the intifada. Together this is an ongoing violation of the Oslo Agreements. You cannot fairly place the burden of responsibility entirely on Israel for this violence and label it “state terrorism.”

  6. the PA also has a lot of responsibility and there is a LOT to blame for the situation, on arafat and his corrupt elite.
    On the other hand, since Israel destroyed the PA’s power in Operation Shield and is systematically ignoring arafat and referring to him as irrelevant, it would be unfair on the Israeli said to put most of the burden on the PA. unfortunately i am not a palestinian so i can try to make sure that my side takes full responsibility for its action.

  7. Sorry Asaf, but you misunderstood. Again, the BEST thing you can say about the PA is it violated Oslo by not disarming Hamas-Jihad-Martyrs, and stopping the intifada. At the same time, it is not unrealistic to speculate that it is perhaps in Fatah’s best interest to maintain chaos and avoid having to lead in any manner of genuine statecraft. This returns to the idea, hardly extreme by any reasonable standard, that there is no longer any partner in the PA to negotiate with, if there ever really was.
    Just as it is reasonable to suggest that the international community could do well by discouraging Israel from enabling more settlement outposts, it would be nice to see the same international community apply pressure on the Arab-Muslim establishment to break the taboo of rejectionism toward Israel and Zionism.
    Not being Palestinian is hardly a legitimate excuse for avoiding criticism of Palestinian leadership. If it were, then Palestinians, Arab and Muslim leadership, and any non-Israelis at all should feel somewhat inhibited from heaping the criticism it consistently upon Israel.

  8. Further, I am not interested in “blaming,” as you put it, any party to the conflict. Rather it should be the obligation of interested third parties to hold the principals in the conflict to their responsibilities. No more, no less.

  9. Whoops….
    In my post of 6:19, I wrote: “Just as it is reasonable to suggest that the international community could do well by discouraging Israel from enabling more settlement outposts, it would be nice to see the same international community apply pressure on the Arab-Muslim establishment to break the taboo of rejectionism toward Israel and Zionism.”
    Should read: “…it would be nice to see the same international community apply pressure on the Arab-Muslim establishment to break the taboo against recognition of Israel and Zionism.”

  10. the taboo against recognition of Israel and Zionism – what kind of taboo is that? even if you think that the 1988 and 1993 declarations were meaningless, the fact that they were public shows that there is no taboo anymore.

  11. I mean the member nations of the Arab League and the Organization of Islamic Conferences and their UN delegations. Only four nations between the roughly 54 nations between them even recognize the legitimacy of their fellow UN member nation. Consider for a moment the effect on the Israeli electorate’s sense of security such a move toward normalization would have. If all or most of them actually implemented it, with ambassadorial exchange with Israel, don’t you think we’d see an Israeli leadership that would expand on the work of Rabin and Barak?

  12. Asaf-
    you dont support israeli killing of hamas leaders?
    Wow, i knew you were a peacenik, but i didnt know it went that far. I cant think of a better way for israel to protect itself, while at the same time, minimizing civilian death.

  13. Hoping won’t make it happen, Asaf. We need this idea to come from genuine human rights and peace movements. A voice here or there won’t do it. It needs to catch fire.

  14. Hoping won’t make it happen, Asaf. We need this idea to come from genuine human rights and peace movements.
    One way is for Jews to start changing Arab minds — as in, becoming part of the Arabic-language mediascape, just as the way we are in so many other languages.
    Currently Arabic-language broadcasters and newspaper know that their audiences include, basically, no Jews. Jews are talked about, but not talked to or with.
    Maybe it’s time to change that — sort of a widely-dispersed lobbying process by simply showing up. How many Jews watch Al Jazeera or MBC? Read Al Hayat or Asharq Alawsat? What if we did, and let them know it? Small steps, but these folks are honestly never exposed to Jews as speaking subjects, only as abstract Others. Once you’re part of the audience, you can write back.
    So. Anyone know if the various foundations, etc. funded Arabic-language training for Jews? If they’re going to start?

  15. 8opus, I like the idea, but I am afraid that the greatest problem in the situation you describe is one of design rather than default. For example, Al Jazeera is essentially funded and run by the sultanate of Qatar, and Al Arabiya was launched from Saudi Arabia to counter what is perceived as the anti-Saudi bias of Al Jazeera. So the media in which you would have Jews “show up,” are not really the market driven enterprises that would be effected by it, or one that such participation would realisticly influence. In terms of competition, Israel has launched an Arabic language satelite station, but I’m not certain of any effects or projected potential from it yet.
    A difficult but still more promising route to take is perhaps through international human rights NGOs. Such organizations like Amnesty and HRW, while not specifically signing on to the infamous 2001 Durban NGO statement never really challenged it either, allowed its release and becoming tainted by its ideological perversion of universal human rights principles. But there is a lesson there for us and those organizations as well. It is effectively arguable that national rights precede individual rights in the arena of universal human rights. More demand could influence such organizations to take a stronger line on advancing regional recognition of more than only Arab national rights in the Middle East.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

The reCAPTCHA verification period has expired. Please reload the page.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.