Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
Since we all seem to be in a wistful mood, lets imagine the following.
Imagine if the Arab contributors to the Palestinians demanded the destruction of the refugee camps and earmarked that the billions that were given(over the past sixty years) be used to build homes and schools instead of buying arms.
Imagine if Yasser Arafat cared more for his people than his Paris bank account.
Imagine if there were not a group of people amongst the Palestinians who are intractable and will never accept Israel as a neighbor.
If you can imagine all that,you might be able to imagine peace in the region.
But, alas, it would only be meanderings of a mind that has been altered by some substance.
I think you've raised some really pertinent questions. Too bad no one wants to detail their objections or skepticism in regard to them, point by point.
As for SMac's contention that the Palestinians aren't up for "self-denial"- to the contrary. I see a society that prizes martyrdom above all other values- gruesome physical martyrdom- and in the name of territoriality at that, not religious principle. Unless they consider the two ideas one and the same- in which case I'd welcome a detailed explanation of exactly why that is.
Part of my difficulty with understanding such fierce attachment to a patch of land has to do with my personal experience, I think. I grew up as an Army brat. I never had a "hometown." I moved several times by the time I was nine years old. And several more times after that. I have very fond memories of a couple of those places. But there's a whole world out there.
If I had a choice between remaining hemmed in on a tiny patch of "homeland" and exile, I'd leave. I'd probably leave anyway, in fact.
But I know how it is. The Human Ego- particularly the Male Human Ego- would rather kill itself than loosen it's grip on its cherished ideas. Regaining a sense of proportion and sobriety isn't easy when you've pumped yourself full of self-justifications that are intertwined with emotional states like rage and anger.
What I find to be the irony is that if the Palestinians dropped that attachment and accepted exile, at least some of them or their immediate descendants might even conceivably find themselves back in the region within 50 or so years, resettling their old homesteads in a world that had lost its last, worst, most obdurate excuse for eternal territorial enmity and armed conflict. A world beyond nation-states, with communities instead of armed camps with borders.
That brings me to the other part of the issue, the supposedly most intractable issue of all: the Temple Mount.
I think the Islamic mullahs ought to, out of a genuine sense of magnaminity, simply cede the Al Aqsa Mosque and the Dome of the Rock to the Jews. Just give it back to them.
Think about it. What are the Mosque and the Dome, to the Muslims. The third holiest shrine. A mosque and shrine that Mohammed never spoke of, because it wasn't even constructed until after his death. Who is Mt. Moriah really more important to?
After all, the Muslims can still keep Mecca and Medina. They aren't going anywhere. And sure, the Al Aqsa Mosque and the Dome of the Rock might be destroyed by the Jews, once it's in their possession to do with it as they please. But those buildings have been destroyed before. Just measure the blueprints, and build a copy of the building somewhere else. It is an architectural masterpiece, after all. You don't have to be a Muslim or an Arab to recognize that.
What is the Temple Mount, to the Jews? Well, I couldn't tell you what they all think. For Jews, that's a real hot potato, I think. For some of them, I suppose it's their holiest ground. And some of them want to go the whole literal route of putting up another Temple, there. And a lot of other Jews would really get the- the willies, about the prospect of the Jews who want to return to old-time Jewish Temple worship, complete with animal sacrifices, in a reconstructed shrine with a reconstituted priesthood, etc.
What's the worst that could happen?
Personally, I don't believe in "holy shrines" made by human hands. It violates quantum mechanics, for a simple-minded monotheist like myself. Either the Universe is holy, or it isn't. And that has everything to do with the attitude of the observer, and little or nothing to do with the location of the observed. I don't know. Maybe I'm wrong. I'm re-thinking the matter already. That topic might warrant further discussion.
But speaking to this specific controversy, as an outside observer who seems to be involved whether I want to be or not, I'm tired of the impasse. Let's get it on.
I didn't "just fall off the turnip truck", either. I'm simply having a go at thinking outside of the box.
There's really only one reason you speak of "our" mythical image and it's the same language that speaks of "Bush's mandate". Menachem Begin was probably right that democracy was a greater enemy of his goals than was Nazi Germany, and from Deir Yassin on to his glorious prime ministership he made clear to the Palestinians what price they would pay for co-operating with jews and subverting his glorious race war. The palestinians are always pretended a monolith and each peaceful act of one faction was met with increased settlement land grabs or other abuses that drove some other faction to respond; and then reprisals against the moderate factions so that the nation was polarized as much as it was disenfranchised, stripped of property and herded into-what's the newspeak word, resettlement?-camps.
This has nothing to do with AIPAC, that's just a red herring to give you libbies something to distract your self with. This is much more fundamental.
It's clear, you HATE Israel, you either lie or are simply and wholly ignorant on most issues. What little knowledge you have is wholly derived from an anti-Israeli viewpoint.
Most of what you write would receive a failing grade, but on issues concerning Israel, its beyond a failure.
Let's examine just a little tid-bit.
Gary Kamiya After 60 years of lockstep U.S. support, the era of Israeli exceptionalism must end.
I had no idea I was older than 60, since the United States sold it's first defensive weapon to Israel during my lifetime, and the first offensive weapon when Johnson decided to sell Phantom jets to Israel in 1968.
It wasn't until 1962 that the US sold Israel a major weapon system. The HAWK anti-aircraft missile.
Let's see 2009 - 1962 = 60 in Kamiya years. *Rolls Eyes*
Now, be honest, did you not know this, or did you lie in your 60 years statement? Can Salon not afford a fact checker, and are you too lazy to verify what you write?
It's not as if Israel needed our weapons before then, they seemed to do fine on their own.
They would do equally fine now. The difference would be that the US would have about zero influence over Israel, and far more Palestinians would be killed, because Israeli weapons wouldn't be as accurate.
Now, an argument could be made that should be US policy, but that's not what you advance. As usual, you simply try to hold Israel to a different standard, under the guise of a double standard.
Even your little example buries Hamas complicity in Israel's response. Yes, Israel was to open the crossing, with the actual government of Palestine, not with Hamas.
Hamas seized control of Gaza, and not even Egypt has opened their crossing, because they don't want to legitimize the take over, and neither does Israel.
You know not a week went by where a rocket wasn't fired from Gaza during the cease fire. Yes, the number was greatly reduced, but the deal was no rocket fire, not reduced rocket fire. You left that part out, as usual.
Then you deliberately left out why Israel invaded just as the cease fire was to expire, to destroy a tunnel dug by Hamas under the Gaza/Israel border, the same type of tunnel used by Hamas to capture Gilad Shalit.
Hamas had little difficulty bringing in Iranian and North Korean made Grad rockets, despite the closed borders.
Hamas chose to attack, expecting there would be little response, despite being warned by Egypt there the would be a massive Israeli response.
BTW, if your example were actual fact, the US would exterminate the natives. My people no longer live in Georgia.
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Once seen as a lunatic fringe, reactionary anti-women groups are courting respectability
Salon headlines in your mailbox
