Independent Media Center, Israel

platitudes as opposed to facts
author: jsuslovich

It is hard to argue against platitudes. All can agree that peace is good, that bullies are bad, that not all Palestinians are evil, that not all Israelis are paragons of virtue, that it is not right to take away someone else's land, etc. But the real world is not made of simple choices. To cut someone with a knife is bad - unless you are a surgeon trying to save his life. To kill someone is bad - but not in self defense. To take someone's land is bad - but not if that will save innocent lives and who decides to whom the land belongs.

When a group takes action in support of only one side in a conflict then it means that they have decided that only that side has any justice to it. (or that they don't really care) Have any "peace advocates" tried to close down a Palestinian bomb factory? Have they demonstrated against Arafat paying for bombs? Have they demonstrated against the Iraqi cleric who ordered that any one who sells land to a Jew be killed (keep in mind that there has been a large Jewish population in Araq since well before Islam and the Arab empire came into being)? Have they protested the Jordanian law that allows citizenship to any one except a Jew? Have they demonstrated in favor of the return in Hebron of the land that belonged to Jews before the massacres of the 1920s? Have they demonstrated in front of Hamas headquarters when Hamas makes a statement that they will never allow any Jews to stay in Palestine and emphasizes its point by firing a few missiles into Israeli towns hoping to kill someone (anyone)?

Why not?

I have exchanged comments with more than one "peace activist" on this web site. When the lack of logic of their pious staemetns is exposed, they have been forced to concede that their position is really that there should be no Jews allowed in Israel. If they recognized two legitimate albeit conflicting claims then they would have to admit that Israel has on numerous occassions offered to share the land only to have the offer thrown back in its face along wiht a dose of fire and blood.

Should Israel build the fence? Perhaps you don't remember that the fence was (and still is ) opposed by the fervent right wing in Israel as being the creation of a de facto PAlestinian state. It was the left that wanted it as a way to stop attacks into Israel without massive occupation of the west bank. Do you have a better idea? And don't suggest that a unilateral removal of all Jewish towns in the West bank would do the trick. There were constant Arab attacks against Israel when the west bank was controlled by Jordan. Not to mention the question of rights. There were Jewish "settlements" in the west bank before 1948 - they were all destroyed by the Arabs (I am not using the word Palestinians because in those days there was no such thing).Why should the west bank be judenrein. Isn't that apartheid?

The problem is that many of the Arabs do not see peace as a goal - only victory. Even now the during the three month ceasefire one constantly hears: "If you don't release all the prisoners we will go back to killing you. If you don't allow Arafat free rein - Ditto. never mind that this was not part of the "road map". It's: Do what we want or else.

Why don't you get the Palestinians to reject war and accept peace - even if they have to COMPROMISE and accept less than they would like to have. If that ever happened any Israeli Prime Minister that refused to go along would be voted out of office so fast you wouldn't have time to organize a demonstration against him.

Why aren't ISMers truly peace activists? Because they aren't doing any thing that could conceivably lead to peace.

They just want the Palistinian Arabs not to suffer while their leaders and neighbors are busy killing Jews.

(C) Indymedia Israel. Unless otherwise stated by the author, all content is free for non-commercial reuse, reprint, and rebroadcast, on the net and elsewhere. Opinions are those of the contributors and are not necessarily endorsed by Indymedia Israel.