Once again, the Israeli discourse shows itself to be far more open than the American one, why? Because of diaspora Jews' presumed responsibility to guard Israel from all criticism in front of the goyim. Here is Israeli poet Natan Zach, quoted in Ynet: Israel is an apartheid state and "I don't want to live in such a state." And this:
"If I were a better swimmer, I would swim to Gaza. There are things that need to be done, like the release of Gilad Shalit, but we have boosted the jihad with our refusals" he said.
Zach further explained that in his opinion, the only possible solution to the current situation is to see "the Israeli people wake up, the current government falls, and a government of peace is established in its place – to save ourselves, not the Arabs. I don't care much about the Arabs. How can we take on the entire Arab world for eternity?" he said.
In response, Knesset Member Miri Regev (Likud) called for Zach's poems to be removed from Israel's high school exams if he does in fact participate in a flotilla to Gaza.
When is Israel going to start chiseling the inscriptions off the tombs?
More and more every day these people retreat into denial, bending all their efforts to erase the truth and prevent it from being heard.
I suppose his ‘I don’t care much about the Arabs’ contains an element of poetic irony?
It appears this Israeli poet doesn’t feel moved by universal brotherhood.
potsherd (“When is Israel going to start chiseling the inscriptions off the tombs?”)
gives a possible new meaning to the “tombs of the unknown” unless they also remove the tombs themselves.
But he’s wrong, it’s not denial but prohibition: they want people like Natan Zach to keep quiet (and he even says he doesn’t care about the Arabs!).
>> ” … to save ourselves, not the Arabs. I don’t care much about the Arabs.”
Why would he not care about ~20% of his country’s population? That seems very de-humanizing. I wonder if he’s a “humanist”…
You got it, eljay. Zach is a “humanist”. In fact, he doesn’t care much about anyone who is not exactly like him – secular, Ashkenazi (preferably German), intellectual, “left wing”, Zionist.
when are the diaspora guardians going to realize Israel is offering little return reward and will only become more difficult into the future? Do they really fear the knuckleheaded leadership of Netanyahu and Lieberman. These guys are thick and offer no world prestige. The expulsion of Palestinians has always been part of their efforts since the founding, and only the diaspora can send the message back to Israel, to take what you got and even return some, so we can save face for our people.
“”The expulsion of Palestinians has always been part of their efforts since the founding”"
++++ From the beginning of zionist ideology. But i guess that its what you have in your mind….
think folks will find this interesting and disturbing. Hillary Mann Leverett under attack for setting up an opportunity for her students to sit down and talk with President Ahmadenijad.
link to raceforiran.com
The subject she wasa teaching that class was Diplomacy; specifically in relation to Iran. Bill Kristol et al do not reflect well on America’s highest values.
Bill “bloody” Kristol does not give a rats ass about the dead , injured or displaced in Iraq or anywhere else based on his teams successful effort to invade Iraq based on false claims. If it were up to Kristol we would have all ready invaded Iran. The guy is a lunatic
Oh did I forget to say that Kristol is a pathological liar
That is disturbing.
They send her questions that she answer honestly and then, in a very revealingly calculating manner publish only what they want?
I like the level of debate going on there. Their “Richard Witty” is a lot more intelligent, and can actually write.
Even when an Israeli is willing to say Israel is an apartheid state, the overwhelming tribalism is still readily apparent. It really is fascinating.
I will let Noam Chomsky make my point about Shalit, but I will say that, under the Geneva Convention, attacking armies and their soldiers are not afforded many “rights” shall we say. Kidnapped ain’t dead. Chomsky:
Whatever one thinks about it, it is uncontroversial that capture of a soldier of an attacking army is far less of a crime than kidnapping of civilians, exactly what Israeli forces did the day before the capture of Shalit, invading Gaza city and kidnapping two brothers, then spiriting them across the border where they disappeared into Israel’s prison complex. Unlike the much lesser case of Shalit, that crime was virtually unreported and has been forgotten………
So, here is an Israeli “dissenter” who thinks first and foremost about Shalit, even though Shalit was involved in actions that Zach himself says he is opposed to. I can’t be the only person who finds this confusing/frustrating/ totally expected.
The “I don’t care much for the Arabs” comment speaks for itself. This is one of the good guys? WOW.
I must admit to qualms when we find that even the good guys say things like that. But there’s still the possibility of poetic irony.
mhughes976,
agreed.
Goodish, maybe.
Or just a cold-hearted realist who wants “to save ourselves, not the Arabs” because “[we can't] take on the entire Arab world for eternity”
Israel can handle the odd activist like Tali Fahima going off message but if it turns into a regular stream the game is up for the Zionist understanding of the world. Gaza could be the key- it’s a festering wound on the image that Israel projects onto the world and it is beginning to smell very bad.
People here and in Israel are not reading the YNET piece accurately, for whatever it matters: YNET has it that “while visiting Germany, he witnessed a huge rally where Israel was labeled as an “apartheid state.” At a rally he witnessed, Israel was labelled. Passive voice. Doesn’t say he, himself, labelled Israel as “apartheid state”. No.
I so label it. but I am not an Israeli and am not a Zionist. He says he doesn’t care about Arabs and presumably does care for Israelis (or Jews or something).
However, he does say he’d go to Gaza and wants a peace government. Amen to that.
That sounds to me like an expression of agreement with what they were saying.
[Let me repeat myself regarding the Times reporting.]
The US has been working for years to have a Munich style pact in order to make Israel’s 1967 seizure of East Jerusalem, the West Bank, and Gaza made legal. Someone needs to tell the people at the New York Times that this effort by our government makes clear that the US does not consider Israel’s occupation to be legal.
More important is that while recognizing that this is an occupation, the US fails to require that Israel uphold the laws of warfare which require the protection of the population of those under occupation. The New York Times chooses not to to report on Israel’s war crimes against those it occupies, a vastly more serious journalistic failure than the paper’s over hyped and under resourced claim that the occupation is somehow legal. Were the paper concerned about the laws of warfare, it would also be asking how those laws apply to the actions of the US, which, among other things, gives Israel the white phosphorous it uses to reduce the numbers of Palestinians living under occupation.
” I don’t care much about the Arabs. How can we take on the entire Arab world for eternity?” he said.
LMAO. Really. This is Israel. He had to build his bonafides (I don’t care about them) before he posed the big subsequent question (but….what we gonna do?). I imagine this sounds like most dissenters in totalitarian states. “Excuse me, pardon me, I dislike Jews too, but should we really be doing this?”
The pragmatic poet fears ostracism enough either to hide his true human feelings or he doesn’t have them. Either way = more bad news about the kulture of Israel.
“to save ourselves, not the Arabs. I don’t care much about the Arabs.”
Another Israeli “humanist”..Hehe