Jeff Blankfort writes:
I finally got to to San Francisco
last week and went to see Waltz with Bashir. It was as I expected,
designed to make the Israeli soldiers appear as victims and use the
massacre at Sabra and Shatila–which we are explicitly told was
committed by Chritsians– as a disguise for the far greater crimes that
the Israelis , including, I suspect, the soldiers involved in the
movie, had committed against Palestinian and Lebanese civilians in the
three plus months that elapsed from the June 6,1982 invasion to
mid-September when the massacre was committed.
last week and went to see Waltz with Bashir. It was as I expected,
designed to make the Israeli soldiers appear as victims and use the
massacre at Sabra and Shatila–which we are explicitly told was
committed by Chritsians– as a disguise for the far greater crimes that
the Israelis , including, I suspect, the soldiers involved in the
movie, had committed against Palestinian and Lebanese civilians in the
three plus months that elapsed from the June 6,1982 invasion to
mid-September when the massacre was committed.
The vast majority who will have seen the film will never know that the Israelis, as in Gaza,broke
a cease-fire, that they killed over 17,000 civilians,wounded tens of
thousands more using white phosphorous and cluster bombs, besieged Beirut
for 76 days, and as in Gaza, attacked ambulances and refused to let Red
Cross vehicles bring aid and medical supplies to wounded civilians.
When I was in Israel
in 1983,I interviewed a number of Israeli reservists who had become
part of Yesh G'vul, the reserve soldiers refusal movement, some of whom
had refused to serve from the beginning,and some who went into Lebanon
with the 80,000 man invading force and then, outraged at the atrocities
they saw their fellow soldiers committing, refused to return. What
they told me a year after the invasion was totally different than the
message contained in the film, which no doubt explains why the Israeli
consulates around the country are promoting it. The former Israeli tank
officer with whom I stayed outside of Jerusalem
told me that every building on the road to Beirut had been blasted by
Israeli tanks, what I thought was an exaggeration until I took a trip on
the road myself. Another resister, also a tank commander, told me that
they had left nothing more than a meter high in the refugee camp of Ain
Helweh outside of Sidon. This was pretty evident from the nature of the
rebuilt houses when I visted there in 1983. In relation to the truth of
that war,the film is a lie. The director Ari Folman, like Israel, is
still in denial.
in 1983,I interviewed a number of Israeli reservists who had become
part of Yesh G'vul, the reserve soldiers refusal movement, some of whom
had refused to serve from the beginning,and some who went into Lebanon
with the 80,000 man invading force and then, outraged at the atrocities
they saw their fellow soldiers committing, refused to return. What
they told me a year after the invasion was totally different than the
message contained in the film, which no doubt explains why the Israeli
consulates around the country are promoting it. The former Israeli tank
officer with whom I stayed outside of Jerusalem
told me that every building on the road to Beirut had been blasted by
Israeli tanks, what I thought was an exaggeration until I took a trip on
the road myself. Another resister, also a tank commander, told me that
they had left nothing more than a meter high in the refugee camp of Ain
Helweh outside of Sidon. This was pretty evident from the nature of the
rebuilt houses when I visted there in 1983. In relation to the truth of
that war,the film is a lie. The director Ari Folman, like Israel, is
still in denial.
