Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
December 20, 2008

Avraham Burg - A Gerechter

A short NYT portrait of Avraham Burg, an Israeli politician who became a gerechter (chassidey, righteous).

[F]our years ago Mr. Burg not only walked away from politics, but also basically walked away from Zionism. In a book that came out last year and has just been translated and released in the United States, he said that Israel should not be a Jewish state, that its law of return granting citizenship to any Jew should be radically altered, that Israeli Arabs were like German Jews during the Second Reich and that the entire society felt eerily like Germany just before the rise of Hitler.
...
MR. BURG has shifted the title of his book over the years. When he was writing it, he called it “Hitler Won.” When he published it in Hebrew he called it “Defeating Hitler.”

Partly, he said in the interview, his thinking is evolving, and partly his American editors made some smart cuts and suggestions. But it also seems clear that he has modified and adjusted his arguments, especially for a foreign audience. The English version does not have some of his more alarming assertions in the Hebrew one — for example, that the Israeli government would probably soon pass the equivalent of the Nuremberg laws, with provisions like a prohibition on marriage between Jews and Arabs.

So the editors thought that was too much for the foreign audience to take?

Aside from such: Let me recommend last years discussion/interview about the book between Burg and Ari Shavit in Haaretz (part 1 and 2):

The end may be optimistic, but throughout its entire course the book repeatedly equates Israel with Germany. Is that really justified? Is there sufficient basis for the Israel-Germany analogy?

"It is not an exact science, but I will describe to you some of the elements that go into the stew: a great sense of national insult; a feeling that the world has rejected us; unexplained losses in wars. And, as a result, the centrality of militarism in our identity. The place of reserve officers in society. The number of armed Israelis in the streets. Where is this swarm of armed people going? The expressions hurled publicly: 'Arabs out.'"
...
Are you concerned about a fascist debacle in Israel?

"I think it is already here."

Posted by b on December 20, 2008 at 02:59 PM | Permalink

Comments

"...for example, that the Israeli government would probably soon pass the equivalent of the Nuremberg laws, with provisions like a prohibition on marriage between Jews and Arabs."

No need to do so, such marriages have never been possible, Israel does not have civil marriage only religious marriages are recognized.

As to fascism, allthough the Likud is embrionically fascist, I don't think we can classify Israeli society as such, colonialist and racist would be the correct qualifiers.

And I think the most striking similitude between Nazi Germany and Jewish Israel is the belief, shared by both, on their exceptionalism as a chosen race. Actually I wonder how much of Hitler's racial view was drawn directly from Judaism.

Posted by: estouxim | Dec 20, 2008 5:42:57 PM | 1

I know several "liberal" sites in the US it will be a pleasure to post this on. The megaphone trolls will go mad!!!!

Posted by: seneca | Dec 20, 2008 8:59:25 PM | 2

I'll give ya twenty quid if you post it on Daily Kos.

Posted by: D. Mathews | Dec 20, 2008 9:39:18 PM | 3

Sokath, his eyes uncovered..

Posted by: Tosk59 | Dec 21, 2008 12:04:47 AM | 4

What matters is not comparing Israel's 56-year run with the Third Reich's 12-year run.

What matters is where Israel is pointed -- toward harsher racism and genocide against a burgeoning population of Others. Palestinians, Arabs, Persians, who are all brothers of the same Jordanian religions but blood enemies of the sands everyone considers sacred to themselves alone.

Israel is pointed toward banishing and eliminating whomsoever lives in Greater Israel. If in 56 more years we review Israel again, and find that the 112-year old nation now spans what used to be Syria, Lebanon, plus huge tracts of Jordan and Egypt, and yet still needs to build a bomb-proof wall around its holdings, will anyone be surprised?

Israel cannot survive as a nation on what it has, and it cannot quit and go elsewhere. It either melds and merges with the larger Arab population it cannot keep up with birth-wise, or it does whatever it takes to eliminate and drive off those populations.

Peace was never possible, and never will be.

Posted by: Antifa | Dec 21, 2008 12:49:45 AM | 5

I'll give ya twenty quid if you post it on Daily Kos

There is a lengthy debate on the book at TMPcafe book club.
Starting here:
http://tinyurl.com/7s74lt
http://tinyurl.com/8mrvlj
Avraham Burg himself
http://tinyurl.com/9reyyc

There are more threads that you can follow there.

Posted by: Hoss | Dec 21, 2008 1:06:06 AM | 6

Israeli blockade 'forces Palestinians to search rubbish dumps for food'

The figures collected by the UN agency show that 51.8% - an "unprecedentedly high" number of Gaza's 1.5 million population - are now living below the poverty line. The agency announced last week that it had been forced to stop distributing food rations to the 750,000 people in need and had also suspended cash distributions to 94,000 of the most disadvantaged who were unable to afford the high prices being asked for smuggled food.

"Things have been getting worse and worse," said Chris Gunness of the agency yesterday. "It is the first time we have been seeing people picking through the rubbish like this looking for things to eat. Things are particularly bad in Gaza City where the population is most dense.

Posted by: b | Dec 21, 2008 2:19:34 AM | 7

Peace was never possible, and never will be.

this is what my best friend just told me (she's jewish) about 20 minutes ago. pardon my drunk/drugness in advance. impaired blogging and all that. she ask me what i thought the goals of the neocons were. she said a 2 state solution will never work. i said well what the f they aren't just going to pack up and leave (meaning the israelis). she said israel shouldn't be there and i said good luck w/that line of thought.

this was after i said i didn't give a flying whatever who the O appointed as long as he made an accommodation for palestinians. she said we should stop giving israel money.

she said jerusalem should be an international city under international law or something like that. we both agreed fanatical right wing jews were the problem but she also said fanatical palestinians were a problem too and then i said maybe they wouldn't be a f'ing problem if they weren't the target.

she said it is an impossible situation. jesus fuck. the end game seems to be to make the arabs out to be freakazoids therefore however they are treated is what they deserve. really, seriously what can be done? massive amounts of money and support for a palestinian state although one state is obviously the optimum and that will never fly in this time and age..

we both agreed the majority of normal folks both jews and arabs just want peace and the problem is the radical right wing evil ones that won't ever let that happen.


Posted by: annie | Dec 21, 2008 3:11:21 AM | 8

Like many others here I now have to force myself to consider the plight of the people of Gaza. The siege has been going on so long, the USukEU pressure mounting relentlessly. Yet there is less indication now of a break in the solidarity of the citizens of Gaza that there was 3 years ago when the insane decision was made to try and overturn the result of a fair and open election.

An election free of the duress of some ME countries and also free of the rank corruption of Israeli elections.

The reasons I have to force myself to consider Gaza and the West Bank are not just that too much contemplation of the depth of suffering makes one akin to a war porn junkie, it is also because if one wants to really consider all facets of this horror one must also wade through pages of condescendingly irrelevant and over intellectualised garbage such as that posted on the TPM links someone hooked to above.

These idjits who know nothing of Palestine and it's people but who keep making pronouncements about what is the best way forward in the ME (in the pre 2001 sense when amerikans meant Israel Palestine when they spoke of the ME) because they are 'jewish' whatever the fuck that means in the secular societies most inhabit. Of course the blatherings of those who are 'jewish' because they follow the whole judeaist theology are even less informed and less rational than the secular bullshit artists.
Who cares what those fuckers decide. The dire situation the amerikan empire is currently in reinforces the simple reality - what happens in the Jordon valley, whether the ill fated, racist and evil israel experiment finally ceases this decade or the next, won't in any way be dependent on what fat assed, pasty faced zionists pontificate on, no matter whether they are dribbling out of Tel Aviv or Brooklyn.

The power rests with the Palestinians now as it always has. They will end this horror when they finally decide enough is enough. Every house bulldozed down, every child murdered by the israeli gestapo, serves only to hasten that day.
Yes it has been 52 years, not the shortest time infidels have tried to occupy jerusalem but definitely not the longest either, nevertheless this occupation will end in exactly the same manner as all the other attempted colonisations - in a sea of blood and misery for the invaders.

Posted by: Debs is dead | Dec 21, 2008 3:30:28 AM | 9

Even the UN isn't allowed to criticize . . .

Posted by: Antifa | Dec 21, 2008 4:39:56 AM | 10

London Review of Books: If Gaza falls . . .

Israel’s siege of Gaza began on 5 November, the day after an Israeli attack inside the strip, no doubt designed finally to undermine the truce between Israel and Hamas established last June. Although both sides had violated the agreement before, this incursion was on a different scale. Hamas responded by firing rockets into Israel and the violence has not abated since then. Israel’s siege has two fundamental goals. One is to ensure that the Palestinians there are seen merely as a humanitarian problem, beggars who have no political identity and therefore can have no political claims. The second is to foist Gaza onto Egypt.
...
The breakdown of an entire society is happening in front of us, but there is little international response beyond UN warnings which are ignored. The European Union announced recently that it wanted to strengthen its relationship with Israel while the Israeli leadership openly calls for a large-scale invasion of the Gaza Strip and continues its economic stranglehold over the territory with, it appears, the not-so-tacit support of the Palestinian Authority in Ramallah – which has been co-operating with Israel on a number of measures. On 19 December Hamas officially ended its truce with Israel, which Israel said it wanted to renew, because of Israel’s failure to ease the blockade.

How can keeping food and medicine from the people of Gaza protect the people of Israel? How can the impoverishment and suffering of Gaza’s children – more than 50 per cent of the population – benefit anyone? International law as well as human decency demands their protection. If Gaza falls, the West Bank will be next.

Posted by: b | Dec 21, 2008 9:10:12 AM | 11

http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_4146.shtml>X-Mas letter from Bethlehem.

Posted by: Lloyd G. | Dec 21, 2008 11:42:12 AM | 12

Was it Rip On Jew Day, yesterday?

Israel is a fact which will not go away. Nor should it. And it is inappropriate for a German from Hamburg to link to any article suggesting a functional equivalency between nazism and Israel. It's ok for other jews, like Chomsky, to do so, but not a German. Not ever.

Posted by: slothrop | Dec 21, 2008 12:05:38 PM | 13

slothrop

eat shit and die

Posted by: dan of steele | Dec 21, 2008 12:27:52 PM | 14

If you can discuss the book by Avraham Burg, can you discuss the book by Jeff Gates "Guilt by Association"? Or was it discussed here already?

Posted by: mimi | Dec 21, 2008 12:56:58 PM | 15

slothrop

you come from a state that has legislated massacres, murders, torture & coercion. & you try to attack b. it's a little rich even for you

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Dec 21, 2008 1:03:22 PM | 16

israel is left in very much the same position as apartheid south africa - to slaughter the palestinian people, or liquidate the palestinian people through the jordan option or it must make an equitable arrangement between peoples. unfortunately, the darker & i mean darker apocalyptically are the voices which are reigning in israel

there is very little reason for optimism

whatever history is common to the jewish people, israel dishonours

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Dec 21, 2008 1:12:42 PM | 17

Oh, I agree. It's uncouth for white politicians around here to oppose treaty-settled southwestern water projects (like the southern ute, ute mountain ute, animas-la plata diversion). You just can't do it.

Posted by: slothrop | Dec 21, 2008 1:17:02 PM | 18

Jaffa mosque daubed with 'Mohammed is a pig,' 'Death to Arabs'

Extremists spray-painted "Mohammed is a pig" and "Death to Arabs" early Sunday on the walls and doors of the Sea Mosque in Jaffa, sparking the fury of the Islamic Movement in the mixed Arab-Jewish city.
...
While Israel strongly protests desecration of Jewish cemeteries in Europe, there is incitement within Israel against everything Muslim, Sheikh Abu Ajweh said.

Posted by: b | Dec 21, 2008 1:23:44 PM | 19

People should actually read what Burg says. He hasn't yet made comparisons between the 3rd reich and Israel. And given what he says, I think he would thinks such a comparison cheapens and trivialises the Shoah in the the way too many zionists use the holocaust as a strawman to defend any Israeli action.
A. Burg explicitly compared Israel to the 2nd Reich, the Prussian empire of Bismarck, the one who came down at the end of WWI; he fears the same kind of militarism that plagued 1900 Germany and allowed the later rise of nazism, and hopes such kind of disastrous outcome can still be avoided - for Israel's sake as well as for Palestinians's sake. That's notably why he fears that "soon", some variations of Nuremberg laws could pass - Israel isn't there yet in his opinion, but there's a very serious possibility it can - at least to an extent - go down this way.

Posted by: CluelessJoe | Dec 21, 2008 3:39:54 PM | 20

It's a shame that the westward expansion is a taboo topic in Israeli universities.

Posted by: Lloyd G. | Dec 21, 2008 3:46:04 PM | 21

Oh, Sloth, where's your cosmopolitanism now? Part of cosmopolitanism is that anybody has a right to criticize crap wherever it's going on. If you don't think you need to be Chinese before you criticize China or any other country, for that matter, what's wrong with the goy criticizing Israel when there are rather obvious problems there?

Posted by: kao-hsien-chih | Dec 21, 2008 3:51:52 PM | 22

what's wrong with the goy criticizing Israel when there are rather obvious problems there?

Because I know after five years here where these discussions go: "Israel is the shit on the world's asshole," etc. I don't think anyone here really believes america is irremediably evil. But, not so Israel. And this "not so" boils down to one obscene aversion: that the most oppressed people in human history gallingly defend themselves with statehood.

And then the next step as debs reminds us: they should stop being so secular, you know.

We already know about the contradictions of the project to create a sanctuary for these people.

So, I wonder sometimes the motivation for this bit of perennial israel-cum-jew-bashing.

Posted by: slothrop | Dec 21, 2008 5:05:49 PM | 23

whoops. They should stop being so sectarian...

Posted by: slothrop | Dec 21, 2008 5:09:59 PM | 24

slothrop

let me be brief. i do believe that u s imperialism is irrevocably evil & it's evil will dissapear when its empire is on its knees - which appears closer today than anytime in my life

israel, on the other hand is a historical aberration which came about from a confluence of a crazed zealot minority within the jewish community, a balfour agreement & in the end the political demand of j v stalin who was the political backbone to the state of israel's existence. it was his will more than any other which created this historical aberration

what ought to have happened is that austria & a significant if not all of bavaria should have become the state of israel. that would have been the logical geographical answer. the work of consolidating that would have elimenated any possibility of messianic politics

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Dec 21, 2008 6:02:02 PM | 25

I completely defer to your intelligence about these matters.

But wherever created, such a state would always need to reconcile democracy with the concept of a jewish homeland. We already know this problem.

I don't understand the aim of the post. I don't claim b is some secret jew-hater. I'm just saying that this sort of post tends to have a kind of unintended recursive effect in that the acknowledgment of the well-known contradiction only leads to condemnation of this incessantly deliberate need of people to be such jews who, I guess, demand subjugation so they can justify zionism in order to crush dirty arabs. It seems to me a vile history lesson, and especially when delivered by a german.

Posted by: slothrop | Dec 21, 2008 6:21:24 PM | 26


@13
And it is inappropriate for a German from Hamburg to link to any article suggesting a functional equivalency between nazism and Israel. It's ok for other jews, like Chomsky, to do so, but not a German. Not ever.

I'm sorry but I do'nt see what being from Hamburg has to do with anything. And actually, it looks like intimidation.

The situation in Palestine/Israel is very very serious. While reasonable people may disagree on the extent of whats going on & where its headed, I personally would not preclude that a massive crime against humanity may lie ahead. Yes Israel has become an apartheid state thats dehumanizing the Palestinians. And while I do not expect to ever see Palestinians sent into gas chambers, everyday people in Gaza are dying already, from everything from aggression, disease & hunger.

Posted by: jony_b_cool | Dec 21, 2008 6:43:02 PM | 27

... that the most oppressed people in human history gallingly defend themselves with statehood...

Do you really believe that or is it just something you read on the paper?

It's the second time today I come across that statement, the other on a portuguese blog and in both cases such argument was used, together with "Israel is only defending itself" to justify the unjustifiable, the destruction of a culture and the dispossession of people who had nothing to do with such alledged opression, to fullfill a colonial project rooted on the age of the most murderous colonialism.

The portuguese poster was also claiming that the "jewish reocupation" of Palestine was tainted with the regretfull but unavoidable expulsion and killing of "arabs" but that due to the long history of suffering of the "jewish people" that was excusable and they had that right, since it was a question of survival.

I really don't know if the "jewish people" are the most oppressed people in the history of mankind. I don't even know where to look for that contest, but one thing I'm sure of, and that is that the "jewish people" were not sent to brazilian, caribean and southern US plantations, they were not sent to the Potosi mines, to die extracting the silver that created the industrial revolution, they where not exterminated like Patagonians or Australian natives to make room for the sheep that kept Manchester's factories going.

If I recall correctly, Slothrop, the rulers of the "jewish people" where busy making deals with the rulers that promoted such slavery and destruction when not promoting them directly, and in the case of the ancestors of those that today claim the right to a divine promised land, the ashkenazi from the Polish Lithuanian commonwealth, they where busy administrating the serf manned domains of feudal lords, and collecting their taxes, no wonder they where rather unpopular. But of course, after 1648 things where not quite the same...

And please don't tell me they didn't have statehood, Uncle Stalin was kind enough to provide for a Jewish Autonomous Oblast somewhere in Siberia 20 full years before the birth of the Israeli home for the poor suffering jews.

So, Slothrop, if all these Yidish speaking hollocaust survivors would have established a homeland in, for instance, the Rhur, and expelled all germans from Düsseldorf, Bonn and Köln, I would say there was ample justification for that, after all the russians did take Königsberg and east Prussia as war spoil, everybody took some bit of Germany then. But wtf had the palestinians to do with the suffering of jews in WW2?

You see Slothrop, the diference between the descendents of those that where enslaved by european colonial enterprise and your "most oppressed people" is that the former had and have no need to oppress others on account of past oppression and now they call themselves Brazilian, Cuban, American, Bolivian or Australian, and are proud of that, while the latter are, with increasing and honorable exceptions, proud of their racist colonial "homeland".

Posted by: estouxim | Dec 22, 2008 12:12:46 AM | 28

Slothrop,

I bring up your earlier defense of cosmopolitanism for a reason. Cosmopolitianism abhors tribalism. It requires that people give up their tribal identities and assimilate into some "cosmopolitan" mode of behavior that overrides their tribal norms, reducing their tribal characteristics to something inconsequential. Tribalism, on the other hand, sees the tribal characteristics of a group as sacred and something worth defending, to the death if necessary. Israel's current problems are the direct cosnequence of its tribal characters.

Of course, this is hardly new: Serbs and Croats did fine under Tito, if they were good "Yugoslavs," "cosmopolitans" within that country's borders, but the state fell hard on those who insisted on being "Serbs" and "Croats"--but they couldn't erase them and set the stage for the trouble of past two decades. Tibetans under Chinese rule do fine if they are good "'cosmopolitian' Chinese," but those who insist on being "Tibetans" suffer harshly, and so on. Playing along with your neighbors and giving up on your tribalness pays in peace and stability. Insisting on being tribal invites trouble. It is tempting for us to apply the same logic to Israel and say, if they insist a bit less on being "Jewish," a lot of problems will go away. (One thing that I'd like to applaud Bernhard for is that he holds consistent views on both Israel and Tibet--which many people do not.)

But, I do find one trouble with this line of argument--and this is also the fundamental flaw in Avraham Burg's argument. For many European Jews, assimilation failed and failed miserably. I'd read (can't remember where...darn!) that many German Jews refused to leave Germany even after Kristalnacht not just because other countries wouldn't take them but because they felt they were so German that they couldn't even think of leaving "their" country. Of course, the Nazis didn't see it that way and the Holocaust effectively wiped out the assimilated Jews of Europe--leaving only the rejectionists, i.e. the Zionists, as "the" Jewish force in the postwar world. In that sense, the Holocaust was unique: it refused to accept voluntary assimilation and integration by a supposedly alien tribe and forced them into the category of the "other," without any recourse for those excluded to show that they are indeed not "other." One does have to accept that, as the victims of this tragedy, there is some rationale for Israel as the "Jewish" state, at least for its defenders. In that sense, blanket condemnation of Israel is flawed: it is the product of a unique historical tragedy and one can't pretend it doesn't matter.

But, in that token, one does have to ask: can this go on indefinitely? Not without a lot of bloodshed over a very long time. Burg's question, I think, is whether that's worth it. He is asking, just because the assimilationist experiment failed once, it should be given up forever? That I'm not sure anyone can answer--and one should definitely tremble before even trying to answer it. The assimilationist experiment that failed didn't just "fail," it failed catastrophically. How can anyone ask somebody to try it again, knowing how tragic its cosnequences were.

No, I'm not going to pretend I know the answer.

Posted by: kao-hsien-chih | Dec 22, 2008 5:28:18 AM | 29

Israel's appeals fuel Hamas' anger

The warning came as Israel kicked off a campaign to muster international support for any major military offensive to try to halt rocket fire from the impoverished Palestinian territory.
...
In a letter to the UN chief Ban Ki-moon, Israel’s envoy to the United Nations, Gabriela Shalev, said the Jewish state would respond to continuing rocket fire, foreign ministry spokesman Yigal Palmor said.

The foreign minister Tzipi Livni, leader of the main governing Kadima party, has ordered Israeli ambassadors around the world to emphasise that Israel “will not hesitate to react militarily if necessary” to protect its citizens.

She is also due to meet foreign ambassadors to Israel and speak with her counterparts abroad.

“The world must understand that the situation in southern Israel is intolerable for hundreds of thousands of citizens exposed to rocket fire,” Mr Palmor said.

“We cannot remain with our arms crossed. Either the international community intervenes or we will have to act,” he said.


So what should the international community do?

Typical Israeli hypocrisy. They want to again mass-kill people in Gaza and will do so. The reason this time is simply the election campaign in Israel.

Livni will kill, kill, kill to get more rightwing votes.

Posted by: b | Dec 22, 2008 1:59:15 PM | 30

Peace was never possible, and never will be.

Even today, the US could enforce it in a flash.

Of course that will never happen, the US now pointedly has only that little toe hold in the ME and it will support Isr. to the death. It has tied its destiny to domination in the ME and to put is very short, killing ‘Arabs’ and maintaining its hold on oil and other resources, mostly thru hoped for control without much thoughts about production, territorial arrangement, labor, finance, development, or anything else. The coming melt down will destroy them both. In about 15 years?

Gaza Gas, just of google, see dates, all this has a long complicated history:

http://www.inss.org.il/upload/(FILE)1188134584.htm>link

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9906E6DB1038F936A2575AC0A9669C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all>link

Not saying it is the only motivation, part of the picture.

Posted by: Tangerine | Dec 22, 2008 2:42:22 PM | 31

Israel is a fact which will not go away. Nor should it. And it is inappropriate for a German from Hamburg to link to any article suggesting a functional equivalency between nazism and Israel. It's ok for other jews, like Chomsky, to do so, but not a German. Not ever.

I object to this.

It must be the first time ever that I am wildly enraged. (Still keeping calm though, barely.)

Ppl have stupid (imho) opinions, it’s no matter, they have their religious bents, which I respect, they argue about politics, economics, Keynes and Mises, they get their hair in a twist; Morality serves as a blanket... One makes the best out of of it, or not, sometimes one can conciliate, sometimes not or only much later...sorry getting incoherent

But to actually state - flat out -

that a person of a certain nationality / ethnicity / background / religion or whatever has no right to a certain opinion, while someone else with a different provenance (or fame) does ...that is something I have never come across before (on the internet, in public discourse since the middle 90s.)

Not ever.

I didn’t read the rest of the comments down.

Posted by: Tangerine | Dec 22, 2008 2:44:59 PM | 32

[snark]

Tangerine et Kao et Estouxim: SlothTroll is the resident Throp in the bar...

R'giap always tries some form of dialog, but... usually it leads nowhere...

[eom]

Posted by: rudolf | Dec 22, 2008 6:05:00 PM | 33

Hebron Agonistes: Too Much For Israel

The road from Kiryat Arba to the Tomb has a yellow (that's right, yellow) line on it, indicating that no Arab is allowed to walk on it; the settlers push their baby-strollers freely, while army jeeps patrol up and down, and Arab kids watch from third floor windows, many of them with iron screens to protect them from rocks, etc.The settlers have set up a synagogue on the land of Ja'abri family--another family in the way--which the Israeli High Court has declared illegal, and the army has taken down over 30 times, only to have the "minyan" rebuild it. During prayers, their children often throw rocks, etc., onto the homes of the Ja'abris.
...
WHERE DOES THIS leave us? The simple fact is, this problem is too big for Israel. We will need the world's involvement; anyone who tells you something different is either covering for the settlers, or afraid for electoral reasons to appear squishy about Israeli autonomy, or arrogant, or ignorant, or thick, or all of these at once. This post is not the place to describe what involvement means, though the contours of a two-state deal have been obvious for many years. The point is, what Hebron represents cannot be solved by this deal in a few decisive months, like the evacuation of the Sinai was. New changes to the landscape will take years. Or the landscape will look like Bosnia.

Posted by: b | Dec 22, 2008 11:57:21 PM | 34

a massive crime against humanity may lie ahead

um, sorry, but where have you been the past 60+ years? Israel has been committing massive crimes against humanity for decades. Today is just the latest chapter. Try reading this.

Posted by: bea | Dec 27, 2008 11:31:13 AM | 35

...for example, that the Israeli government would probably soon pass the equivalent of the Nuremberg laws, with provisions like a prohibition on marriage between Jews and Arabs.

This has already been partially legislated: Israel bans marriage between Israeli citizens and non-citizen Arab from West Bank, Gaza, and "hostile" countries

Of course the only real targets of this legislation are Arab citizens, who are the main ones who would marry Arab non-citizens (further spreading a cancer in the heart of the state"), but it would also apply to Jewish citizens. This law is blatantly unconstitutional (oops never mind, Israel has no constitution) and violative of basic rights to family, etc. and it has even been acknowledged as such by Israel's own Supreme Court, which nonetheless approved its extension.

Posted by: bea | Dec 27, 2008 11:55:59 AM | 36

The comments to this entry are closed.

 

Site Meter