Ziska points out, in a comment below:
Actually, the point I was trying to make, and failed completely to make, was that you shifted gears between the Israeli individual and the Palestininan “they”.
You could have commemorated a Palestinian victim without even softening your opposition to what “they” are doing, simply by commemorating (for example) commemorating the 18-year-old woman who was recently killed by thei’m Palestinian Authority because her uncle (who was also lilled) had implicated her in Israeli intelligence work. Or you could have commemorated apolitical Palestinians who die because of the curfew.
So what we got from you was a humane comment about real people with real lives (Israeli) followed immediately by the same old objectifying talk about “they” (the Palestinians).
I was wrong, and will remember that.
Date: 09/20/2002 00:00:00 AM
Thanks A.L. I changed the comment on my site because it distracted from the real purpose of the piece in which it occured: remembering the life of Shiri Negari. BTW, could I finish a post that I began below? I was answering a question that Ziska posed; I got cut off and I’d like to finish…here it is:[comments continue from comments made Sep 18 2002, 06:31 am…below…] I welcome a Palestinian government that recognizes the need for Israel to exist. But simple recognition doesn’t matter. Deeds matter. A declaration of non-violence is nice, but until we hear from Gandhi in Gaza City, it won’t matter. Words don’t matter. Deeds matter. So… …what if elections are held and Arafat wins or another faction wins and the Palestinian objectives stay the same? What should Israel do then? It will have no choice but to continue its policies until such time as a Palestinian government is elected that will seek peaceful co-existence with its next door neighbor. So this brings me to reason why I’m writing this. Zizka felt that you, A.L., should have or could have “commemorated” a Palestinian “victim” of violence. Excuse me in advance for saying this, but why? Why is it incumbent on you, or anyone else, to create an infrastructure of moral equivalency every time an act of violence occurs? That kind of thinking only perpetuates the idea that BOTH sides are right and BOTH sides are wrong. And THAT kind of moral decontructivism only perpetuates more violence. Not less. It will not save lives, it will only cost more lives. To use a phrase now in vogue, it only perpetuates the “cycle of violence.” We all know what the Palestinian Authority wants. And what the Israelis need. There is no moral equivalency between the two sides. In closing let me say that, yes, I feel bad for Palestinian collaborators who are murdered by the Authority for talking to Jews. But I have a question for Zizka: Where are the demonstrators in the West Bank who march through the streets with the collaborators’ dead bodies held aloft and wrapped in the Palestinian flag? Please excuse the phrase, but Zizka is asking me to be more Catholic than the Pope here. Why should I do that? Ara Rubyan More where this came from at E Pluribus Unum http://www.rubyan.com/politics
Date: 09/19/2002 00:00:00 AM
Hey Ara…I want to compliment you for being willing to look at what you’ve written and back off when you thought it appropriate…A.L.
Date: 09/18/2002 00:00:00 AM
Zizka, A.L. is not the only one with a link to the site that commemorates Shiri Negari; I do too. And I have also included a comment that you would object to. I will remove it the next time I update my site. Ara
Date: 09/18/2002 00:00:00 AM
Ziska -It’s late,and I probably shouldn’t be commenting……but to call the critics of the current bombing campaign ‘anti-political-Palestinians’ kind of sticks in my throat. My point has been all along that the Palestinian leadership have abandoned politics for something far darker.And it frosts my donuts when I see the material put out by the radical Islamists and Palestinians about the Jews (which I’m not, BTW) and then see their supporters turn and throw down the ‘racism’ challenge against critics of the ‘political Palestinians’ as you call them.Just some quick thoughts…A.L.
Date: 09/18/2002 00:00:00 AM
Ara, please explain. I made my point as mildly as I could. Even if someone hates the PLO, they don’t have to hate Palestinians killed by the PLO. Even if someone hates Palestinian militants, they don’t have to hate apolitical Palestinians who die because of the Israeli crackdown.What I suggested was that, even given A.L.’s strong anti-political-Palestinian beliefs, still, when he commemorated the humanity of an Israeli victim, he could have avoided making a snide remark about the Palestinian victims. Or he could even have commemorated the humanity of one of the Palestinian victims.One of the problems I have with supporting Israel at this time is the fact that far too many Israeli supporters hate all Palestinians, all Arabs, and all Muslims as such, regardless of anything else about them. There’s a word for this.
Date: 09/18/2002 00:00:00 AM
Zizka, I’ve already expanded my comments elsewhere in A.L.’s fine blog, but I do owe you an explanation as well, so here goes…I’m going to apologize in advance for being long-winded in explaining myself. First off, let me state that I am an American. Not an American Jew or a Jewish American or a Zionist or anything like that. I’m an American. So therefore, after 9/11, and as an American, I view the war in Israel somewhat differently than I did before. And maybe differently than you. I view it as the front line in the global war on terror. We Americans are engaged in this war, but it is the Israelis who have been engaged day in and day out for at least the past two years or longer. So, as an American, I watch them every day and think to myself, “There, but for the grace of God…”So, in the last couple of years, some things have occured to me.This war is NOT a blood feud between Sharon and Arafat. As I said, it is the front line in the global war on terror.This doesn’t make all Palestinians terrorists; that’s NOT where I’m going here. But what I AM saying is that Arafat IS a terrorist bent on the destruction of Israel. So too, is Osama bin Laden and his followers terrorists bent on the destruction of America.Just as America has vowed to erase terrorism wherever it finds it, so, too, must Israel do the same. Perhaps, then, you’ll find it odd that I strongly favor a two-state solution. However that can only come about after one side or the other finally gives up its primary objective. What is the objective on the Palestinian side? Destruction of Israel. What is the objective on the Israeli side? Survival of their state. Since Israel will cease to exist if it gives up its objective, but Palestine will not, it is clear to me what has to happen: Israel must be strong enough to withstand the the forces in Palestine that seek the eventual destruction of its next door neighbor. That said, I welcome a Palestinian government that recognizes the need for Israel to exist. But simple recognition doesn’t matter. Deeds matter. A declaration of non-violence is nice, but until we hear from Gandhi in Gaza City, it won’t matter. Words don’t matter. Deeds matter. [I have to break off here for technical reasons, but I will finish up below]
Date: 09/17/2002 00:00:00 AM
A.L. — You’re not wrong.