-Caveat Lector-
From
http://argument.independent.co.uk/commentators/story.jsp?dir=140&story=282652
}}}>Begin
09 April 2002 06:58 GMT+1
Home > Argument > Commentators
Robert Fisk: This will be the week when we see who runs the US- Israeli alliance
'Since US soldiers are blindfolding and gagging Muslim prisoners, why should Mr
Sharon worry?'
08 April 2002 Internal links Israeli sniper kills man inside holy shrine Europe
threatens Israel with sanctions Blair adopts Bush's language over Saddam Blair
tries to calm the doubters The comic turn forgets his lines in a Texas double act
Defiant Saddam vows to defeat America Eerie calm in the streets Army says it has
killed 200 Palestinians since the assault began Powell offers Israelis more time
Sharon denounced in worldwide protests George Bush: Enough is enough. The
violence must end Leading article: The real links between Israel, Iraq and al-Qa'ida
So what's the surprise? Suddenly Israel doesn't want to take our advice. Ex-general
Ariel Sharon prefers to go on wrecking the Palestinian Authority, tearing up the Oslo
agreement in the name of his Holy War on terror. Why should he worry about the
scandalous number of civilian casualties among the Palestinians? After all, didn't
America wreak its own revenge – killing thousands of innocent civilians in one of the
poorest countries on Earth – after the crimes against humanity of 11 September? I
must admit, though, to a grim satisfaction when I heard President George Bush's
puzzled, uncomprehending response to Mr Sharon's refusal to withdraw his army
from the West Bank.
The Israeli Prime Minister is, after all, the man who sent his army into Lebanon in
1982 to "root out Palestinian terror'' – note the identical rhetoric, as well as the
same
cast of characters – and whose "elite'' Israeli forces killed up to 17,500 people,
almost all civilians. Mr Sharon is the man who then sent Israel's vicious Phalangist
allies into the Beirut refugee camps of Sabra and Chatila, after which they
massacred 1,700 Palestinian civilians. For this he was held "personally responsible''
by Israel's own commission of inquiry. Evidence now emerging in Beirut suggests
that most of the slaughtered refugees were actually killed in the two weeks following
the original massacre – after the survivors had been handed back to the Phalange by
Israel's own soldiers
So why should Mr Sharon stop now? If Mr Bush wants to rein in his reckless ally, why
doesn't he ask Mr Sharon a few questions? Why doesn't he ask what has happened
to the more than 1,000 Palestinian prisoners who have disappeared into Israel's
hands over the past two weeks? What happened, for example, to the five men,
blindfolded and trussed up like chickens whom I discovered in the Jewish settlement
of Psagot? What happened to the masses of young men I saw being taken in a bus
with its windows wired over, a bus that made its way around Jerusalem and headed
west on the Tel Aviv highway. How many of these young men are now being tortured
either in interrogation centres or in the Russian Compound, the main torture
compound in West Jerusalem?
But since Mr Bush's soldiers are experts in blindfolding and gagging Muslim
prisoners – and putting them in front of drumhead military courts – why should Mr
Sharon worry? For month after month, as Mr Sharon tore up the Oslo agreement, put
the building of Jewish colonies on Arab land into overdrive and sent out his death
squads to murder Palestinians, the Bush administration – fearful of offending the
Israelis – allowed him to do what he wanted. In response to the wicked Palestinian
suicide bombings, Bush expressed outrage. In response to Israel's aggression, he
called for restraint – and then did nothing.
Again, what's the surprise? For months the American media has refused to tell its
viewers and readers what is going on in the occupied territories. Its newspapers have
indulged the insanity of writers who have been encouraging Mr Sharon into ever-
more-savage acts. What are we supposed to make – for example, of a recent article
in The New York Times by William Safire, referring – as usual – to Jewish civilians
murdered by Palestinians but to Arab civilians "caught in the crossfire'', "crossfire"
being the nearest many journalists will dare to go in saying that the culprits were
Israeli.
Safire plays the old game of talking about the occupied territories as "disputed''
rather than occupied, a grotesque distortion of the truth upon which the State
Department insisted in a policy paper sent out by the Secretary of State, Colin
Powell.
But Safire adds a new threat to journalists who might wish to tell the truth: "These
are
disputed territories'' he writes, "to call them 'occupied' reveals a prejudice against
Israel's right to what were supposed to be 'secure and defensible' borders.'' You can
see the way the argument is going. If we have a 'prejudice' against Israel's rights,
it's
only a short step to call us anti-Semitic. But what is one to make of this nonsense?
Am I supposed to pretend that the soldiers who blocked my car and pointed their
guns at me in the West Bank last week were Swiss? Am I to believe that the rabble
of soldiers shouting at Palestinian women desperate to leave Ramallah were
Burmese?
Safire regularly takes phone calls from Mr Sharon (and then insists on telling us of
Mr Sharon's latest fantasies), but my old chum Tom Friedman in his ever-more-
Messianic column in The New York Times, has almost gone one better. "Israel
needs to deliver a military blow that clearly shows terror will not pay,'' he announced
last week. What, in God's name, is an American journalist doing when he urges Mr
Sharon to go to war? Friedman was with me in the Sabra and Chatila camps. Has he
forgotten what we saw? Last week, however, Friedman was also amiably advising
the Palestinians to turn to non-violent resistance à la Gandhi.
For Friedman, "a non-violent Palestinian movement appealing to the conscience of
the Israeli silent majority would have delivered a Palestinian state 30 years ago...''
Needless to say, when Westerners, including two Britons, protested peacefully in
Bethlehem – and were wounded by an Israeli soldier who shot at them, Friedman
was silent.
The reason why the Palestinians turned to suicide bombing, according to Friedman,
was not despair over the occupation – occupation which, of course, Safire tells us we
mustn't refer to – but because "the Palestinians are so blinded by narcissistic rage''
that they have lost sight of the sacredness of human life.
And so it goes on. Having bestialised the Palestinians over so many years, why
should we be surprised when a society eventually produces the very monsters we
always claim to see in them? Even Mr Bush's speech last week in which he
dispatched Mr Powell on his "urgent'' mission of peace – allowing him a lazy seven
days to reach Israel, reserved its venom for the Palestinians. And yet, after all that,
he fails to see why Mr Sharon might choose to keep his army in the field.
So this week will be a crucial one in the American-Israeli relationship, a real test of
the Bush presidency. We shall find out who – the US or Israel – runs America's
policy in the Middle East. It would be nice to think that it was the former. But I'm
not
sure.
End<{{{
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Forwarded as information only; no automatic endorsement
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material
is distributed without charge or profit to those who have
expressed a prior interest in receiving this type of information
for non-profit research and educational purposes only.
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
"Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do not believe
simply because it has been handed down for many generations. Do not
believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many. Do
not believe in anything simply because it is written in Holy Scriptures. Do not
believe in anything merely on the authority of Teachers, elders or wise men.
Believe only after careful observation and analysis, when you find that it
agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all.
Then accept it and live up to it."
The Buddha on Belief, from the Kalama Sutta
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
"Always do sober what you said you'd do drunk. That will
teach you to keep your mouth shut."
--- Ernest Hemingway
<A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/";>www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
<A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html";>Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
<A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/";>ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
