[A-List] Fwd: Who are the friends of Israel?
Suzanne de Kuyper
suzannedk at gmail.com
Sun Jun 6 01:40:57 MDT 2010
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Suzanne de Kuyper <suzannedk at gmail.com>
Date: Sun, Jun 6, 2010 at 9:39 AM
Subject: Fwd: Who are the friends of Israel?
To: a-list-request at lists.econ.utah.edu
Is Netherland? So easily coerced by America to do exactly whatever
they demand. It is surrounded by dikes, one bomb, ooops, and the
North Sea will flood in and decimate millions. As they did with the
Nazis who just climbed the dikes and cluster bombed the port of
Rotterdam, all doors were opened. Many of the Dutch, being Germanic
then, were already in the Nazi party anyway. Unless they have moved
elsewhere, their descendants live in lovely Holland. Angry so much
of their wealth goes to families where the women stay home wearing
headscarves and have babies, after being prompted to distrust them by
the U.S. War on Terror targeting Islam, the sixty plus years since
WW11 occupation of Holland by the U.S. has primed the hatefulness of
political leaders and film experts to reject the all Muslims that
enrich the Dutch society. Really useful for the country that saved
them from Hitler, now primes them to genuflect to America as it does
the World War Empire thing. America gives Islam the yellow star.
Italy a friend of Israel? Well, not really. Netanyahu came a-calling
for help from beleagered Berlusconi embroiled in scandals and legal
threats of wide open corruption. Mr Israel told him he would fix
everything in the new elections Berlusconi was facing should he invite
the small constantly enraged country into the E.U.. A done deal. Mr
Italy glided into another election win, after inviting Benjamin into
the Union before Netanyahu moved on the beg, cajol, threaten at the
doors of other countries.
Is the U.S. a friend of Israel? Well, not really. It is allowing
Israel indulge it's myths of Zionism as realities to fight for to the
death. A key aspect of this Zionism is to 'lawfully' exterminate any
entities who disagree, right now the Palestinian people. America is
both fueling and using Israeli rage and to have it destroy
International Law in order to better facilitate World War Empire, for,
America, not Israel. But Israel will be blamed. Useful as well.
I think that left leaning real Jewish believers who have been marching
in solidarity with Arabs and Muslims in the streets of the U.K.
protesting the attacks on the Gaza Aid Flotilla show who the friends
of Israel are. All those who disagree!
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Sid Shniad <shniad at gmail.com>
Date: Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 7:00 PM
Subject: Who are the friends of Israel?
Globe and Mail
June 4, 2010
Who are the friends of Israel?
Israel’s claim this week that its soldiers killed nine civilians in
self-defence on an aid-to-Gaza flotilla it had boarded is at best tone
deaf. It strains credibility. You attack unarmed ships at sea and when
people resist, shoot them and then blame them. It’s beyond Orwellian.
The analogies occur to anyone: Home invaders kill residents who try to
stop an assault, etc. At least there, no one would assert
self-defence. I know elaborate arguments have been unfurled to justify
the claim but that’s not my point. Whether the claim is right or wrong
isn’t even the point. It just won’t fly with most people. To them,
it’s implausible on its face. That’s where tone deafness comes in.
Whence this tone deafness? It seems to me that Israel’s leaders have
grown mindlessly, habitually dependent on asserting their own
victimization. This was often effective, based largely on sympathies
rooted in revulsion at the Holocaust and the history of Western
anti-Semitism. But this has gradually changed, due partly to the
arrival of generations who, as it were, knew not Hitler and aren’t
inclined to feel even indirectly guilty for him. The shift became
evident during the 2008 Gaza invasion and perhaps even more this week.
Yet Israel’s leaders still automatically assume the victim position.
It’s like the boy who cried victim.
Asserting big historical attitude swings is risky, so let me exemplify
this by way of Margaret Atwood. Last month, she went to Israel to
receive a large arts award from a private foundation. Beforehand, she
was besieged by pro-Palestinian groups urging her to boycott the
event. She refused, on the grounds that cultural boycotts are
counterproductive and contrary to free speech. On her return, she
wrote a piece about the experience for the Israeli daily Haaretz. She
said she’d largely ignored the issue for years, feeling all sides were
behaving badly and hoping for a good ending. But she’d had a quick
course now and it was “like learning about cooking by being thrown
into the soup pot.” Everywhere in Israel, she sensed a shadow. “The
Shadow is not the Palestinians” but “Israel’s treatment of the
Palestinians.” It seems to me this is the key to what has changed and
poses a new problem for Israel. The core for anyone examining the
situation with a fresh eye, isn’t what “they” – Palestinians – are
doing to Israelis; it’s what Israel is doing to them. “Having strayed
into the Middle-eastern neighbourhood with a mind as open as it could
be without being totally vacant, I’ve come out altered,” she wrote.
Israel no longer gets a pass, based on the past. It is remarkable how
Israeli leaders and their backers have managed to squander so much
sympathy and goodwill in so short a time – but I digress.
The question for Israeli society now is whether it will double down,
in effect, on the victim position, or adopt a new stance. Israel has
always had public voices who believed the consequence of a past of
persecution was not impunity but responsibility. Their views were
often reflected in movements and parties. But those currents have
become rarer, or less vocal. They grow silent, or acquiesce, or
emigrate. Societies that lose their internal dissent and
self-criticism have a sad and scary record, especially when combined
with a sense of victimization. There’s a unique wrinkle in the case of
“the Jewish state,” which involves the role of Jews elsewhere. Will
they contribute to the isolation, via uncritical support from abroad,
or assist in some kind of renewal, and help undo the isolation and
descent toward disaster?
And in this situation, who is a real “friend of Israel” – as they say.
Is it Margaret Atwood, who raises questions and doubts, or Stephen
Harper, who encourages Israel along the same perilous route that
brought it to this point?
More information about the A-List