 |
|
|
Thursday, April 14 2005Quality Problems at Reuters and Atlantic Monthly
To receive communiques in your inbox, simply signup above. Please use the comments below for discussion of this communique. Further points on the Atlantic Monthly article 'Will Israel Live to 100?' (req. registration to view): * Says Schwartz, 'Even assuming that a comprehensive settlement could be reached, Israel's long-term prospects are bleak.' How's that for cynical? Is there any doubt that a country that's weathered everything Israel has for the past 55 years, and managed to forge a 'comprehensive settlement', would figure out how to handle the demographic issue? * Schwartz repeatedly refers to the conflict as a longstanding 'Palestinian - Zionist contest (or conflict)'. A far more accurate term is 'Arab-Israeli conflict', for there was no meaningful 'Palestinian' identity until the late 60's. Moreover, Schwartz refers even to Arab Israelis as 'Palestinians', despite the fact that most Arab Israelis would not define themselves that way. * Schwartz suggests that the motivation for Sharon's disengagement plan was his 'fearing that more and more Palestinians believe time is on their side, and that they will thus be tempted by the 'one-state solution.' Actually, Sharon has repeatedly stated that his plan is motivated by security concerns, and it was bourne of the lack of a Palestinian peace partner. * What is the basis for Schwartz's claim that until 1967, Arab Israelis lived 'under military rule'? * What 'territory', 'existing peace plans', and 'cantons' does Schwartz refer to here?: Sharon's unilateral efforts at disengagement—which would have preserved more Jewish settlements and granted the Palestinians less territory than do existing peace plans, and which would have created a separate but hardly sovereign Palestinian entity composed of detached cantons—have spurred Abbas to enter negotiations. Sharon's plan does not detail what territory Palestinians receive in a final settlement. It focuses only on Gaza and four Israeli communities in the northern West Bank.
TrackBackTrackBack URL for this entry: Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Quality Problems at Reuters and Atlantic Monthly: CommentsNo Samuel this is not the way. Defaming one's adversaries does no one any good in the long run, especially without hard evidence. There is plenty of evidence however of evil intent as with attacks on civilians in Israel, media spouting inflammatory material, miseducation of Arab schoolchildren towards hatred. We do not need to be inventing more stuff. As to Mr Schwartz he is obviously a bottle is half empty man, whereas I am a bottle is half full man. Consequently while I do not foresee full diplomatic relations between Iran and Israel in the near future (see MEMRI.org today statement by Khatami) there could be a period at least of no war as with Egypt and Jordan and including possibly Lebanon and Syria. Sabra and Shatilla will not go away for Sharon. Unfortunate for him that it happened on his watch. And while he was not guilty as his opponents state he nevertheless carries that baggage. In my view this makes his recent statesman like gestures all the more convincing and valuable. Having myself heard first-hand from a former Lebanese soldier who was there that night (with a Phalangist gun at his head, watching Phalangists shoot at Israeli troops who were trying to approach), and having also heard from Israeli reservists who had fought there, it is clear that the Israelis completely underestimated the murderous rage that was driving all sides in that conflict, and failed to comprehend the full measure of hatred the Lebanese had for the PLO fighters who had escaped Jordan after Black September, and then turned the south of Lebanon into "FatachLand", their own violent mafia state. That the IDF would have prevented the slaughter if they'd known it was coming is clear; Israeli soldiers there were physically sickened when they saw, in the morning light, what the Phalangists had done. I do not pretend to understand even half the horror of that awful civil war; and I cannot fathom, for example, how Syrian paratroopers could cut out the hearts of captured prisoners, or how Phalangist militiamen could wear the blood of their slain enemies in vials around their necks. I do understand, though, that the Arab world still fails to take responsibility for the way that fellow Arabs, then and now, continue to kill each other in the most horrible ways. Instead, they take the easy way out, and say that "all miseries come from Israel". As long as they do so, they will fail to improve their own situations. And as long as reporters like Mr. Schwartz buy into those lies, they are collaborating in this act of calculated ignorance. "Moreover, Schwartz refers even to Arab Israelis as 'Palestinians', despite the fact that most Arab Israelis would not define themselves that way." Well, methinks most "Arab Israelis" would indeed identify themselves this way. One hears them doing so again and again, to the obvious discomfort of many Jewish Israelis. >Schwartz suggests that the motivation for Sharon's disengagement plan was his 'fearing that more and more Palestinians believe time is on their side, and that they will thus be tempted by the 'one-state solution.' Actually, Sharon has repeatedly stated that his plan is motivated by security concerns> I agree with Schwartz on this. Moreover, this does count as a "security concern". Of course, it's not only the Palestinians who'd be tempted by that "one-state solution" but Europeans too. It appears Sharon prefers to work towards implementing a 2-state solution as a base on which progress will be made when and if the Palestinians are ever ready to do so. There are few guarantees in life. However, one guarantee is that there will never be a Jewish state and Arab "Palestine" living side by side in peace. It would be difficult to find a single Arab who honestly believes that. That vision is to lull Israel to her doom. The real goal of the P.A., terrorists etc. is to take over all of Israel and drive Jews away, murdering many in the process. That is what we are confronting. Deep down inside almost every ISraeli and Jew knows it. We must not fall prey to soothing delusions. The so called "two state solution" is nothing more than a war tactic. Israel's enemies freely acknowledge that among themselves. There is no peace process. There is another phase in the war. Israel needs proper leadership to win the war. Israel needs new leadership. Sharon, Peres and cohorts won't do. A proud new Israel is arising. Slowly but surely. There are few guarantees in life. However, one guarantee is that there will never be a Jewish state and Arab "Palestine" living side by side in peace. It would be difficult to find a single Arab who honestly believes that. That vision is to lull Israel to her doom. The real goal of the P.A., terrorists etc. is to take over all of Israel and drive Jews away, murdering many in the process. That is what we are confronting. Deep down inside almost every ISraeli and Jew knows it. We must not fall prey to soothing delusions. The so called "two state solution" is nothing more than a war tactic. Israel's enemies freely acknowledge that among themselves. There is no peace process. There is another phase in the war. Israel needs proper leadership to win the war. Israel needs new leadership. Sharon, Peres and cohorts won't do. A proud new Israel is arising. Slowly but surely. The world is full of conflicting opinions on almost any subject - especially Israel. However, I strongly believe that Israel will be present and healthy at age 100, even if Mr. Schwartz is expressing his doubts and fears. I want to quote now a famous writer (who is himself quoting the most authoritative figure on this subject) the Prophet Ezekiel: "Thus says the LORD GOD: 'When I have gathered the house of Israel from the peoples among whom they are scattered, and am hallowed in them in the sight of the Gentiles, then they will dwell in their own land which I gave to my servant Jacob. And they will dwell securely, when I execute judgments on all those around them who despise them. Then they shall know that I AM the LORD their GOD'." -- Ezekiel 28: 25-26 It is true that the outward manifestations of the present situation would inhibit a peaceful 2-state solution, but an actua, change in circumstances may lead to an abrupt change in Somewhere there must be..at least a small majority.. of Arabs that value their own life, and that of their families...more than the death of Jews.... and when they realize that they must act in order to realize the welfare of their families....then maybe there could be peace Schwartz seems to forget that Israel is a nuclear power and would blow up the entire place rather then surrender. Also as a previous poster has written, it is not a Palestinian-Zionist conflict, it is an Arab World-ISrael conflict. Typical that the author is one of those types of Jews which we are all too familiar with. Also ever since Michael Kelly's unfortunate death in Iraq, The Atlantic has gone down hill. You can hear Benjamin Schwarz elaborate on, and engage in a discussion of his article, here: http://www.onpointradio.org/shows/2005/04/20050406_a_main.asp I find these articles like "Will Israel live to 100" to be grossly insulting. Why don't people like Schwarz write articles like Sharon "merely" disregarded the danger posed by the Phalangists? Seems like you engaged in some of your own whitewashing of the record here. I accept your version of the story, but our tradition clearly teaches, "Lo taamod al dam reecha" - do not stand idle while your neighbor's blood is shed. disregarding this type of danger is no "mere" oversight, and Sharon's negligence in this case is exactly what his own countrymen have taken him to task for over the last 20 years. he is not a murderer - but the captain of the ship takes responsibility for what happens on his watch. I served in the same Tzahal Sharon did - you don't make excuses that it was someone else's fault. It seems like many here consider there to be "one arabic world". A strange conclusion. Even though most arabs support the palestinian cause, it doesn't mean they are the same. It is like claiming that all latin speaking countries (france, spain, italy etc) are of same "race". For me the only solution would be a secualar state, including muslims, christians and jews, like it has been before. The thought of a "jew state" makes me shiver. No state should be constituted by religion. This of course includes muslim states as well. Religion is a part of nations, but should not constitute them. (please disagree, but not on the base of a biblical quote, most religions have a holy book, and it is getting us nowhere just beating each other with it) Post a comment[Comments are held for approval before appearing.]
|
