Caught Between Sobbing And War Chants

By Gilad Atzmon
Online Journal Contributing Writer

Jul 22, 2008, 00:17

Monitoring the current Israeli collective pornographic lament in the Hebrew press, I found, to my amazement, a critical editorial written by Dr Mordechai Keidar, an Israeli right-wing academic.

“Our enemies,” says Keidar, “see in front of them a frenetic, emotional, weeping, corrupted, hedonistic, possessive and liberal nation. People who grab and eat, people who lack historical roots, people who are short of ideology, naked of values, lack a sense of solidarity. People who are only concerned with the ‘here and now,’ people who are happy to pay any price without taking into account the grave consequences of their reckless behaviour.”

It is slightly encouraging to find out that someone in Israel may realize how severely the Israeli reality is viewed. Keidar grasps how pitiable the current collective mourning festival appears to outsiders and Israel’s neighbours in particular. As much as one can empathise with the pain of the soldiers’ families, Regev and Goldwasser were IDF soldiers in uniform serving a very hostile army. When abducted they were in a military patrol on the disputed Lebanese border. For those who still didn’t get the picture, they were soldiers rather than merely ‘innocent civilians.’ They were theoretically capable of defending themselves. The case of Gilad Shalit is not very different. Shalit, who is presented in the world media as an ‘innocent victim’ was nothing less then a post guard in an Israeli concentration camp, namely Gaza. Shalit, like Goldwasser and Regev, was wearing an IDF uniform when captured. Neither Regev, Goldwasser nor Shalit were victims. They were all serving a state that employs some devastating genocidal tactics including starvation, ethnic cleansing and assassination of those it views as its enemies.

However, it is rather astonishing to find out how short the Israeli collective memory is. The failed IDF rescue of Regev and Goldwasser, following Hezbollah’s successful ambush evolved into Israel launching the Second Lebanon War. In an act of retaliation, retribution and vengeance Israel demolished Lebanon’s infrastructure, it flattened southern Lebanon towns and villages as well as some neighbourhoods in Beirut. It killed thousand of Lebanese civilians. Somehow the Israelis managed to forget all of this. The only thing the Israelis see is two black coffins. They even managed to neglect the fact that in return they themselves traded 190 plain coffins containing the bodies of Hezbollah militants.

The Israelis are pretty gifted in seeing themselves only. In their eyes, their pain is somehow superior to the pain others feel. Yet something puzzles me. In the light of the Israeli collective necrophilic weeping event I find myself rather confused. If Israel and the Israelis can hardly get over two tragic Israeli military casualties, how will they be able to cope with the global war they insist upon launching against Iran. If the Israelis cannot cope with two coffins, how will they ever be able to cope with Tel Aviv turning into the site of a mass grave? Their war cries suggest that this is something they seem to insist upon involving themselves in.

MORE...

Gilad Atzmon is an Israeli jazz musician, author and political activist.

ONLINE JOURNAL: http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_3522.shtml

"The Israelis are pretty gifted in seeing themselves only. In their eyes, their pain is somehow superior to the pain others feel."

Wallowing in self pity seems to be the Israelis' forte.

I can readily dispute.

Whatever the people of a nation are like as individuals (always very varied), nations as organizations usually run on self-interest - and short-term self-interest at that.

As for wallowing in self-pity, it's a common human characteristic and most people and countries do a lot of it; but if it was the Israelis' *forte*, they would probably never have got a state in the first place, and certainly never have maintained it this long.

joining in to fulfill a biblical prophesy. It's ridiculous and it destroys lives.

How? You think people can build a country in the desert, and win wars, by wallowing in self-pity? (Note: I am not at this point saying that their role in the wars was or wasn't justified; just that they didn't win them by sitting and sobbing that 'woe is me', and they wouldn't have won that way either!)

Or are you making the very ugly suggestion that Hitler really didn't do that much harm to the Jews, and their complaining about it and valuing a homeland for their safety is just being sorry for themselves?

Do you want Israel not to exist? And do you think that the USA's existence is somehow more justifiable (on the backs of many murdered Native Americans)? Or the UK's or Australia's or practically any other country's?

And only a minority of pro-Israel Americans support Israel to fulfil a biblical prophecy. Most just support it as a strategic ally.

Your post isn't worth any more words than that.

It's ugly bigotry when people say it about Palestinians and just the same filth when applied to Israelis.

the author is Gilad Atzmon

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilad_Atzmon

He is also an anti-Semite.

You do understand the concept of bigotry, yes?

Since you edited, I must do so as well. Anti-Semites are anti-Semites. Jews don't get a "free pass." Look up the definition of 'anti-Semitism,' perhaps, it will help you.

was to add "rather than anti-Semite" so as not to be misunderstood, if I had left it you might have thought I was referring to you.

Still doesn't change what I had to say. When you said self-hating I figured you meant self-hating Israeli, glad to see you threw in the Jewish part.

so does that make me an anti-Semite or self hating well at the paternal half or what?

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

nope not Atzmon. And will confess I was slow to the punch you were insinuating that I was conflating Jew and Israeli, however to me the term "anti-Semite" applies to non-Jews who hate Jews any nationality on either part and "self hating" can apply to any group

Jews can be anti-Semites. Go ahead, look up the definition of anti-Semite and report back if you find a legitimate definition which excludes Jews.

and you knew that when you posted, however prove I purposefully conflated Jew and anti[Semite, which IMHO is your aim, and by the the way in my post I did "to me" the term generally applied to non-Jews.

Because they don't make any damn sense. Why should I waste my time with "proving" something I never claimed?

I am relieved you understand the accurate definition of anti-Semite can include Jews, though the accurate definition is not the one you choose to use for your own personal use for some reason.

I'm amused that you think that it's not ugly bigotry just because an Israeli said it.

what is more amusing is that its bigotry because it was said about Israel, but then you must believe when DUer's talk about Republicans it's bigotry, otherwise its hypocrisy

and a totally spurious comparison.

however I tend to give more leeway when people are talking about their own group, even Palestinians

You might validly compare Israel to America, or the Republicans to the Likud, but not the Republcans to Israel.

Here is a more valid analogy, on the other side.

The Lebanese-born American journalist Brigitte Gabriel has said:

'The difference, my friends, between Israel and the Arab world is the difference between civilization and barbarism. It's the difference between good and evil .... this is what we're witnessing in the Arabic world, They have no SOUL !, they are dead set on killing and destruction. And in the name of something they call "Allah" which is very different from the God we believe.... because our God is the God of love.'

Do you think that she is bigoted against Arabs and Muslims?

Do you think she should get a free pass because she is of Arab origin herself?

If your answers, like mine, are Yes to the first and No to the second - then surely the equivalent applies to Atzmon!

why shouldn't she, it is free speech which should be allowed,is she bigoted, from the sample it would sound so, however and admitting I know nothing about her I am going by her name, she is a Christian Arab and was she raised in the US? To be honest to my experience some of the most critical of the Arab world note that in this case Arab world is code for Muslim, not to mention big time Bush supporters are American Christian Arabs.

However, one can consider someone bigoted, and still think that they should have freedom of speech. But I have freedom of speech to criticize them!

Brigitte Gabriel was raised in Lebanon, not the US. She was born in 1965 and emigrated to the US in 1989.

You are right that she's Christian and that this might influence her views of Muslim Arabs. However, even Muslim-born Arabs can be Islamophobic. Wafa Sultan was born in Syria to a Sunni Muslim family, and now lives in the USA. Here is a recent gem from her mouth:


“ "I have decided to fight Islam; please pay attention to my statement; to fight Islam, not the political Islam, not the militant Islam, not the radical Islam, not the Wahhabi Islam, but Islam itself...Islam has never been misunderstood, Islam is the problem....(Muslims) have to realize that they have only two choices: to change or to be crushed."


Note once again that I'm not suggesting that any of these people should be gagged. I'm just suggesting that (a) they are all bigoted against their cultures of origin; and (b) none of them should be regarded as an ally or truth-teller by progressives.

"anti-Semitism" crap used to silence opinions other than hard-line Israeli rhetoric.

He doesn't just say that Israel has done bad things, or that Palestinians are right in the conflict, etc. He says that Israel is the 'ultimate Evil' to which there is 'no comparison', not even Hitler, etc. (See post 24).

If someone said that America, or Britain, or Palestine, or Iran was the 'ultimate Evil', wouldn't you think they were bigoted? Same goes for Israel. Opposing the view that Israel is the 'ultimate Evil' does not equate with hard-line Israeli rhetoric - unless you subscribe to a dichotomy that 'everyone who is not with us is against us'.

He does make some valid points, I suppose. The Lebanon war involved IMO a tragic and immoral over-reaction on the part of the Israelis. Neither side were angels in that war.

But the article starts off with valid criticisms, and ends up with bizarre remarks about the Israelis:

'Israelis are pretty gifted in seeing themselves only. In their eyes, their pain is somehow superior to the pain others feel. Yet something puzzles me. In the light of the Israeli collective necrophilic weeping event I find myself rather confused. If Israel and the Israelis can hardly get over two tragic Israeli military casualties, how will they be able to cope with the global war they insist upon launching against Iran. If the Israelis cannot cope with two coffins, how will they ever be able to cope with Tel Aviv turning into the site of a mass grave? Their war cries suggest that this is something they seem to insist upon involving themselves in...'

Israel has not yet 'insisted' on launching global war on Iran, and frankly I doubt very much that it will!

'...I must admit that Keidar, the Israeli right-wing zealot has a point. People who collapse in front two coffins better not initiate another international conflict. The Israelis are just not made of the right stuff. They are not exactly a nation of Spartan warriors. As much as they enjoy inflicting pain on others, they really can’t abide the idea of suffering themselves, they are clearly not ready to sacrifice, actually, they are a bunch of defeated cowards. They better run away for their lives. As Keider pointed out, their chance to survive in the region is zilch.'

If their chance to survive in the region is zilch, then how come they HAVE survived in the region for 60 years; and fought and won several wars, with plenty of suffering and sacrifice? This makes no sense. There are many things you can say about Israel, some good and some bad, but 'defeated cowards' is the one thing they are not.

grief as pornographic and necrophilic. This guy's an asshole.

I don't care if he's Israeli or Jewish,he hates Israel. How can anyone call this grief pornographic or necrophilic and expect anyone to listen to anything else he has to say.

I didn't bother going to read the rest of the article coz what I did read left a bad taste in my mouth, and it was the same sort of ickiness I felt when one poster here repeatedly made nasty and course comments about the Palestinians and the grief they collectively felt over the Nakba. Unfortunately some people are unwilling or incapable of discussing things that should be handled in a reasonably sensitive nature without bringing their lump of 2x4 with them and waving it round everywhere while they yell offensive stuff...

Not appropriate to say about any country or people.

Atzmon reminds me of people like Wafa Sultan and Brigitte Gabriel, who have also turned against their own former culture to the point of bigotry. Though I think there are few, even among bigots, who are quite as FUCKING INSANE as Atzmon.

He wrote an article in Arab News on14 August 2006 (I won't link to it) entitled: 'Let's Admit It: It is Evilness for the Sake of Evilness

It includes the lines: '

'To regard Hitler as the ultimate evil is nothing but surrendering to the Zio-centric discourse. To regard Hitler as the wickedest man and the Third Reich as the embodiment of evilness is to let Israel off the hook. To compare Olmert to Hitler is to provide Israel and Olmert with a metaphorical moral shield. It maintains Hitler at the lead and allows Olmert to stay in the tail....It is about time we internalize the fact that Israel and Zionism are the ultimate Evil with no comparison.

... We all have to de-Zionise ourselves before it is too late. We have to admit that Israel is the ultimate evil rather than Nazi Germany. ..
Abe Foxman and the ADL are correct for a change, we all need a reality check. We should never compare Israel to Nazi Germany. As far as evilness is concerned, we should now let Israel take the lead.'


Describing any country as the 'ultimate Evil with no comparison' means that he's too full of hate to be taken seriously.

BTW, he doesn't live in Israel any more; he parked himself on us some time ago, and now lives in London.

If you don't mind, I'd appreciate the link so I can enjoy the article in full.

thx.

Yeah, it turns out he's an anti-semite.
He even links to such sites as "ziomania" (a truly anti-semitic, anti-Israeli conspiracy theory site) directly from his homepage.

An Israeli anti-semitic anti-Zionist... no wonder he's the darling of counterpunch and aljazeera magazine.

A Jewish anti-semite is a real favorite!

Gilad Atzmon is right on

"If Israel and the Israelis can hardly get over two tragic Israeli military casualties, how will they be able to cope with the global war they insist upon launching against Iran."

and all the crazed fundy neo-cons ......