"Blaming one side and not mentioning the wrongs of the other side" by Yehudith Harel 12:27pm Wed Nov 13 '02 I am finished with the "two sides" discourse. I do everything in my capacity to make my audience understand that in principle one cannot equate between victims and victimizers, nor among the above mentioned cases of violence or evils: the violence of the illegitimate occupation and the legitimate resistance against it that unfortunately cannot be completely "violence free". print article "Blaming one side and not mentioning the wrongs of the other side" How a corrupt discourse contributed to the Fall of the Israeli Peace Camp Yehudith Harel This is one of the main accusations thrown in the face of anybody who dears to criticize Israeli policies. Not the worst of them though: one may hear much worse stuff like "you are antisemitic"...or " you are a self hating Jew" or even 'worse': "you are an Arab Lover" brrrrr... However, the above mentioned allegation is the one used by the more respectful and so called "objective people". So, I'd like to try to say something very briefly concerning the "blaming one side and not mentioning the wrongs of the other side". This position sounds very logical and moral indeed, and this principle should be normally made the rule. However, the problem is that we are not in a normal situation and once one starts to be so balanced and objective - one loses the main point which is that there is a 35 years old brutal Israeli Military Occupation to be ended unconditionally and without any further delay; that we are the occupiers and the strong party and that we have put ourselves in this impossible situation of occupiers to begin with and made it worse by the intensive colonization of the occupied territories, the blatant abuse of human rights and the war crimes committed by our forces against the Occupied people. We don't really show any serious intent to put an end to this occupation, for sure not now, under the present Sharonian regime. We were not so different in the past either. We were less seemingly brutal but at the same time we were engaged in a most straightforward and highly sophisticated effort to colonize these territories by "creating irreversible facts on the ground", and by doing so rendering any political compromise based on the "Two State Solution" practically impossible. On the other hand we have not offered the Palestinians the other possibility: to keep the land unified and live together in full equality in one Democratic State for all, like any other normal Democratic Modern Nation State. I must say straightforward that I prefer this solution as the best of the two. Coming back to the main issue, which concerns the kind of discourse we use. One can find "the more balanced discourse" - putting the blame on both sides - in that of the Zionist Left. The traditional position, or rather deliberate strategy of the Zionist Left - Meretz and Peace Now has always been to be very careful and always use a carefully balanced discourse. They were always so careful to talk to the "two sides", to stress that "the two sides are equally responsible" for everything. They always appeal to the two sides to stop the violence etc...They were so careful in this respect that their own constituency forgot who is the Occupier and who is the occupied, who is the mighty military power in the region and who is a powerless and stateless people, and WHY did all this mess start to begin with.... This specific discourse veiled the facts and distorted the reality and the chain of events before and after Oslo and in the aftermath of the outburst of the present Intifada. Consequently people here didn't pay attention that there has been no real peace process almost since the beginning of Oslo in 1993. The colonization process has never stopped, not for one moment - not under Rabin who started the so called "By Pass" roads and strengthened the "strategic settlements" in East Jerusalem and elsewhere, not under Netanyahu who intensified the settlement activity all over and not under Barak either. One must know that during Barak's term the actual number of settlers who entered the West Bank and Gaza was bigger than in the equivalent time of Netanyahu's term...There was a steady growth if 12% in the number of settlers during his short term. And this was Barak the "Peace maker" who "overturned every stone in the quest for Peace and who bravely sacrificed his political career in this course..." Isn't this what one can hear all the time? Getting back once again to "the balanced discourse". The Zionist left always calls "to stop the Violence on both sides" and pays such careful attention to address both sides as if they were equal in their respective positions, in power, in responsibility, in accountability and culpability. By doing so the Zionist Left creates a corrupt and incorrect equation between two kinds of violence: the Violence of the colonization and occupation which are in contravention to International law and legitimacy, and the violence generated by this occupation and the legitimate de-colonization struggle, a struggle that is a reaction to a result of 35 years of military occupation and ongoing and ever increasing and intensifying colonization process. I know pretty well that legitimate liberation struggles have their red lines and I do not condone suicide bombings. On the contrary - I believe that these acts are both immoral by definition and both counterproductive for the Palestinian Liberation struggle. But we as political people are not engaged in moral teachings but rather in politics and political statements. We must remember that while the Palestinians were very nice and subservient - not at all "violent", before the first Intifada ( before 1987 ) they didn't get anything at all. Nobody recognized their rights and even the Zionist Left didn't recognize the PLO ... and nobody was talking to them about Ending the Occupation. Their economy became subject to the needs of the Israeli economy, they became the cheap rightless and used foreign labour of the Israeli industry and their market became a most convenient market for our products. The Palestinian colleges were not allowed to develop freely, there was no freedom for political organization nor freedom of the press. ( BTW - it is little wonder indeed why the Palestinian Society does not have a rich democratic experience...) Furthermore - there was a quiet transfer going on ever since 1967 and tens of thousands of Palestinians went abroad as a result of the systematic strangulation of the Palestinian economy and their consequent need to go abroad in search for a living and for higher education. Many of these people were not allowed to come back by all kinds of administrative regulations. (Anybody who went out and didn't come back for 3 years was automatically denied from his residence rights!!! ) These became the so-called "displaced persons" who make up more than 300.000 people after 67!!! Moreover, after Oslo the colonization and Bantustanization of the Palestinian Occupied territories intensified with cutting their land into bits and pieces by the so called "by pass roads" and the proliferation of settlement all over the country in addition to the enlargement of the settlement blocks. And then came Barak's "most generous offers" - the ones intended to legitimize the above mentioned reality on 88% of the remainder of their land...( Only 22% of their historical Homeland) Only in Clintons offers were there some more realistic offers made but Barak himself officially NEVER offered more than 88%...+ all the restrictions that would not allow for a viable and really sovereign Palestinian state to come into existence. This was the reason for the outbreak of the last Intifada - the growing frustration and despair and the realization on behalf of the Palestinian grassroots and the civil society, that the negotiations lead nowhere, but serve as a cover for the ongoing colonization and the skilful and cunning creation of more "facts on the ground" that would later be used by Israel as a pretext for demanding more Palestinian concessions arguing that "there are facts on the ground that cannot be changed and that past wrongs cannot be addressed by new wrongs" - I.e. uprooting settlers and their children who have already been born on the formerly and more recently stolen Palestinian Land... These kinds of arguments - among other things - made by the Israeli Left made me quit their circles and convinced me of the necessity to change my discourse and adopt one that is both sincere and honest and also accurate. I came to the belated conclusion that being vague and elusive about the real facts on the ground and using an indirect and "beautified" discourse of "elusions" just in order to be "Politically Correct" in my circles - create a false consciousness that can lead us nowhere. As I have described it - this discourse lead to the collapse of the Israeli Peace camp because people didn't understand "What got into the Palestinians and why did they resort to violence and terrorism" and not continue with the cosy peace talks in all those beautiful hotels and resorts all over the world... Therefore I am finished with the "two sides" discourse. I do everything in my capacity to make my audience understand that in principle one cannot equate between victims and victimizers, nor among the above mentioned cases of violence or evils: the violence of the illegitimate occupation and the legitimate resistance against it that unfortunately cannot be completely "violence free". At least I do not know such a historical precedence, and don't tell me about the Mahatma Gandhi because he was shot dead. Yehudith Harel add your comments Source file

Victims and victimizers by Jacques 4:35pm Wed Nov 13 '02 print comment "I do everything in my capacity to make my audience understand that in principle one cannot equate between victims and victimizers" I agree but who according to you are the victims and who are the victimizers ? add your comments

watch your LANUGUAGE by yehuda 5:47am Fri Nov 22 '02 print comment what does Zionism have to do with anything? We are talking about a LEGITIMATE nation called ISRAEL! add your comments

Try to read, Jacques by John Veldhuis 2:32pm Fri Nov 22 '02 print comment Read this "We must remember that while the Palestinians were very nice and subservient - not at all "violent", before the first Intifada ( before 1987 ) they didn't get anything at all. Nobody recognized their rights and even the Zionist Left didn't recognize the PLO ... and nobody was talking to them about Ending the Occupation. Their economy became subject to the needs of the Israeli economy, they became the cheap rightless and used foreign labour of the Israeli industry and their market became a most convenient market for our products. The Palestinian colleges were not allowed to develop freely, there was no freedom for political organization nor freedom of the press. ( BTW - it is little wonder indeed why the Palestinian Society does not have a rich democratic experience...) Furthermore - there was a quiet transfer going on ever since 1967 and tens of thousands of Palestinians went abroad as a result of the systematic strangulation of the Palestinian economy and their consequent need to go abroad in search for a living and for higher education. Many of these people were not allowed to come back by all kinds of administrative regulations. (Anybody who went out and didn't come back for 3 years was automatically denied from his residence rights!!! )" and you'll see that in Yehudith's view (and mine) the victims are quite clearly the non-Israeli people living in the occupied territories, and the ones that used to live there and weren't allowed to return. add your comments

Israel a legitimate state. by John Veldhuis 2:36pm Fri Nov 22 '02 print comment Well, so is Iraq. So what's your point? add your comments

The Palestinian human bombs legitimacy by Amos 6:12pm Fri Nov 22 '02 print comment It seems that Yehudith Harel is not totally free yet from the Israeli "left" establishment mantras. The suicide bombings is the only means left for the Palestinians, and it is very affective at that, causing havoc, fear and hysteria among the Zionists. It is a perfectly legitimate unconventional weapon in their guerilla war, still very far both in "morality" and affectivity from the terrible means and weapons used by the occupier. But I notice with much satisfaction that more and more ex-leftist Zionists are coming to the conclusion that a two-state solution is neither practical nor realistic (which was always clear in my mind) and that the ultimate result of the occupation will be the annexation of the West-Bank and Anza, and the establishment of a multinational democratic state. This will be of course the just end of the Jewish-Zionist State which lost everything in its greediness for more and more land. add your comments

Suicide Bombers work for a Zionist PR firm by Peter Kropotkin 4:57am Sun Nov 24 '02 print comment How can you say that suicide bombing is the only effective way for the Palestinians resist? For one, they have chosen military targets effectively in more traditional guerilla warfare techniques lately as in the Hebron case. Secondly, you say "and it is very affective at that, causing havoc, fear and hysteria among the Zionists" Well, it is definitely 'affective' which according to the Websters dictionary means "Influenced by or resulting from the emotions," however, I really don't think that it is 'effective' in the sense that you give. Yes it causes havoc fear and hysteria amongh the 'Zionists' (interesting term you use in this case, considering that not all of the people the suicide bombers kill are zionists), but do you really think that it gets them closer to their goal? Maybe if their goal is pure, emotional, non-tactical revenge? But what they do cause is entrenchment of right-wing hard line Israeli ideology. If I didn't know better, I would say that the suicide bombers are actually working in a PR Firm for Sharon's government. I think that a much more effective strategy would be many more mass peaceful demonstrations of a refusal to abide by Israel's closure and curfew policies (like in Nablus a couple of months ago), much more participation in joint demonstrations with groups like Ta'ayush, and even strategic guerilla attacks against explicitly military targets. This would be much more effective in undermining the position of the Sharon governemnt and gaining international solidarity for the Palestinian cause. One can understand how someone get into the terrible situation where they are willing to blow themselves up in an act of emotional revenge, but justify it? Give it tactical recognition and legitamacy? That is going a bit too far. add your comments

So what's the difference? by Amos 1:45pm Sun Nov 24 '02 print comment First, I had a typing error in my previous comment - I meant of course "effective" (not "affective”). What is the difference between a Palestinian who blows himself in a civilian crowd, which includes women and children, and a Zionist pilot who drops a 1 ton cluster bomb on a densely populated slum, or a Zionist tank gunner who shoots dead a young Palestinian with an anti-tank shell, etc, etc? Peaceful demonstrations? They tried that as well and just made it easier for the Zionists to slaughter them. But the so called Zionist “Left” joined all the demagogic hypocrites in the public, among the politicians and in the press – and calls the Palestinian struggle against the occupation “terrorism”, riding the horse of probable the stupidest US President. And lastly, here is my definition for a “Zionist”: A Jew who lives (willingly or not)in the Colonial state of Israel, no matter what are his political views (and that includes me…) add your comments

moral equivalence does not legitimate make by Peter Kropotkin 3:46pm Sun Nov 24 '02 print comment Amos says: "First, I had a typing error in my previous comment - I meant of course "effective" (not "affective”)." I know...I was giving you the benefit of the doubt, because while the suicide-bombing is affective, it is definitely not effective, unless you mean by effective that it is effective in giving a sense of legitimacy to Sharon's psycho government and to Israel's foreign policy platforms in general. Amos says: "What is the difference between a Palestinian who blows himself in a civilian crowd, which includes women and children, and a Zionist pilot who drops a 1 ton cluster bomb on a densely populated slum" The answer to this, obviously, is nothing...In fact, if anything, it is Israel who bears the brunt of the guilt. As is stated in the article by Sara Roy "there is no moral equivalence or symmetry between the occupier and the occupied, no matter how much we as Jews regard ourselves as victims" (http://indymedia.org.il/imc/israel/webcast/42956.html) Amos says: "Peaceful demonstrations? They tried that as well and just made it easier for the Zionists to slaughter them." Really? Which peaceful mass demonstration was this that led to a slaughter of the type you speak about? I know of the Nablus demonstration, and that didn't turn into a slaughter. I have been to several demonstrations with Ta'ayush and the Palestinians were on the street but there was no slaughter (tear gas and beating yes, but both against Israelis and Palestinians). Amos says: "But the so called Zionist “Left” joined all the demagogic hypocrites in the public, among the politicians and in the press – and calls the Palestinian struggle against the occupation “terrorism”...And lastly, here is my definition for a “Zionist”: A Jew who lives (willingly or not)in the Colonial state of Israel, no matter what are his political views (and that includes me…)" The Zionist "left"...well definitely, they have at times called the Palestinian struggle against occupation "terrorism", but is this true of the non-zionist left? Oh yah, the non-zionist left doesn't exist because any Jew who lives in the region is by definition a zionist regardless if they think that there should be a Jewish state or not. Interesting definition of zionism. It includes people who want to live in a non-jewish state, or even a muslim state, as long as they are Jewish...even if they want to violently expunge the state of Israel, they are Jewish, they live here, so they are zionist...Whatever...so I guess you are also a legitimate target of the Palestinian struggle, because you are a Jew who lives here and is violently opposed to the Jewish state (the opitomy of a Zionist). But what about all the Palestinians who have been killed by suicide bombers? Are they legitimate targets? You do know that in numerous attacks, Palestinian bystanders have also been killed. In fact in a bombing in Haifa several months ago, a large portion of the dead were Palestinians. But even more than that, you are mixing the fact of moral equivalence (or should I say immoral equivalence) with effectivity and legitimacy. And while I agree with you that the acts are morally equivalent (actually on the side of Israel there is much more moral culpability) and even understandable, I completely disagree, and I believe the facts on the ground also disagree, with your points that they are either legitimate or effective. add your comments

The effectivity of of the human bombs by Amos 4:08am Mon Nov 25 '02 print comment The Jewish Israeli media doesn't report and the Jewish Israeli public doesn't care a bit about what really happens in the occupied territories. They don’t care so much what happens to the settlers and more or less understand actions against the occupying military forces. Only the human bombs get full coverage and attention, and will ultimately sink in the realization that the Colonial occupation can’t go on and the only way to stop the more then 100-year war is one multinational-secular-democratic state. (Ironically, this will be the result of the struggle between the religious fanatics from both sides, who want exactly the opposite: one state on the whole land, but extremely national/racist and ruled by the “laws of god”. add your comments

Wow!! by Jeff 7:30pm Mon Nov 25 '02 print comment Wow!!! I am writing a paper on the media coverage of the conflict. I was doing a survey of the Indymedia sites to find which country had the most anti-Israel rhetoric. I am surprised to report that this site wins hands down. It amazing to me that the posts on this site are more extreme then on any other indymedia site or many islamic websites. Of the 30+ sites I looked at The only site that was morecritical of Israel was the jakarta site which blamed Israel for the bali attacks as well as the washintont sniper. No other site has people posting pro-suicde bomb attacks. I am just curious if any Israelis/Jews on this site support the suicide attacks? Thanks Jeff add your comments

Yes, Ido! by Amos 3:07am Tue Nov 26 '02 print comment Yes, Ido! add your comments

The recalistrance of Israel will start WW111 by Lynette 5:17am Tue Nov 26 '02 print comment People in the West that support Israel's ongoing occupation against the Palestinian people are supporting a morally bankrupt Zionist regime. A regime that oppresses another people for the advancement of their own kind above their arab neighbours. Listen to their settlers talk, listen to their politicans,listen to their soldiers, listen to their elite. A few good Jews try to speak out.....but they are singled out for 'special treatment' from the 'tribe' to be ridiculed,harrassed and attacked for their humanity. Pity the honest Jew. Pity the caring Jew. Pity the Jew that speaks out for the plight of the besieged Palestinian. A people denigrated and religated to 'cockroaches', 'lice', and 'human garbage' by the grandchildren of Holocaust survivors! The Jews are so up themselves these days they cannot see the untold misery they have heaped on ordinary Palestinian families in their relentless zeal to expand their so called Er'ertz Yisrael. So JEWS........I hope the miserable few acres that you gain is worth plunging the entire world into a third world war. Fucking bastards! add your comments

YEAH!!!!!! by anzac 1:05am Mon Dec 2 '02 print comment oh YEAH, what she said!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Times infinity!!!!!! add your comments

to hell with you all by jacob 5:44pm Tue Dec 3 '02 print comment ....i have only one thing to say to all of the stupid messed up jews, crazy murdering arabs, and assorted anti semitic goyim who inhabit this sleazoid website.....you all belong in hell. add your comments

what drugs are you people taking? by Nadav 1:25am Sun Dec 8 '02 address: Australia print comment To Amos and every other Kapo on this website. What on earth happened to you, that you turned out to be such monsters? I bet you could find a reason to justify what the Nazis did to us, through some sort of perverse guilt about being Jewish. Amos, did your parents beat you as a baby, were you the geek who everybody made fun of at school? Help me out here, I'm just trying to understand where your ridiculous support of the abhorrent crime of suicide bombing comes from. add your comments

amos is an arab plant by ira 4:35pm Wed Dec 11 '02 print comment ,,i for one believe amos is a planted arab, there is no jew in the world who can think as he does.....no way no how. add your comments

amos is an arab plant by ira 4:35pm Wed Dec 11 '02 print comment ,,i for one believe amos is a planted arab, there is no jew in the world who can think as he does.....no way no how. add your comments

One positive thing by John Veldhuis 12:38pm Fri Dec 13 '02 print comment They make perfectly clear what kind of a man Sharon is, the man who promised he would make Israel safer. It seems he made a mistake, and he meant only to promise he would make Israel larger. Or else he was just lying... add your comments

Yehudith Harel is a FAKE by Yassir Arafat 12:14am Mon Dec 16 '02 print comment Yehudith Harel is yet more fake jew on Indymedia. As this site is non official "free publishing" without any control- - everyone can pretend what ever she(he) want and everyone can post what ever she want to post. I don't believe any word written on this idiotic site, running by maniacal racist hypocrites. Indy has been flooded by the fake jews, fake quotes and fake reporting, add your comments

a-men by ron 9:20pm Fri Dec 20 '02 print comment ....A-MEN to that add your comments

Definitely by Avi Harari 5:26am Wed Mar 5 '03 print comment You are definitely coocoo. add your comments

Amos makes a lot of sense. by a clinical diagnosis, 8:03am Wed Mar 5 '03 print comment Many of us wish to stop taking part in the Zionist-lie yet because of implanted Hysteria over potential outbreaks of antisemitism we are conitioned to censor ourselves and shield those zionists from their roles in the vicious policies of the Mideast and Beyond. add your comments

I DO by OFRA 8:42am Wed Mar 5 '03 print comment I STAND BEHIND THE STATEMENT ABOVE. add your comments