THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 16, 2023
And to an occupation: Last Saturday, it appeared as a front-page report in the New York Times.
In their report, Hartocollis and Saul sifted through a war of words which is currently being fought on some college campuses. Online, their report appears beneath these dual headlines:
After Antisemitic Attacks, Colleges Debate What Kind of Speech Is Out of Bounds
Pro-Palestinian students say that they are speaking up for an oppressed people, but critics say that their rhetoric is deeply offensive.
What sorts of claims are antisemitic? What sorts of claims are not? The reporters tried to puzzle that out. Along the way, they wrote this:
HARTOCOLLIS AND SAUL (11/11/23): Pro-Palestinian supporters are quick to push back, asking whether any criticism of Israel and Zionism is acceptable.
They say that the cries of antisemitism are an attempt to stifle speech and divert attention from a 16-year blockade of Gaza by Israel, backed by Egypt, that has devastated the lives of Palestinians...
Stating the obvious, a great deal of "criticism of Israel" is routinely taken to be acceptable, as is completely appropriate. But how about that term "blockade?" Does the Times regard that as a reasonable description of ongoing Israeli policy with respect to Gaza? Or was that simply an account of what the "pro-Palestinian supporters" had said?
The reporters provided a link, and so we decided to click it. It took us to a second news report by the Times—a news report which appeared online in the immediate aftermath of the slaughters of October 7.
The report didn't appear in print editions. Also, the report was rather brief.
That said, it may have signaled a certain semantic decision on the part of the Times. Where Barack Obama recently referred to an "occupation," the Times seemed willing to go with "blockade" in the case of Gaza:
Gaza Has Suffered Under 16-Year Blockade
Held in place by Israel and Egypt, the blockade restricts imports to the region and prevents most people from leaving.
For some Gazans, Saturday morning’s surprise Palestinian attack into southern Israel seemed a justified response to a 16-year Israeli blockade. Others worried that the coordinated attack would only add to Gaza’s misery as the tiny enclave braced for a large-scale response from Israel.
The Palestinian territory of Gaza has been under a suffocating Israeli blockade, backed by Egypt, since Hamas seized control of the coastal strip in 2007. The blockade restricts the import of goods, including electronic and computer equipment, that could be used to make weapons and prevents most people from leaving the territory.
More than two million Palestinians live in Gaza. The tiny, crowded coastal enclave has a nearly 50 percent unemployment rate, and Gaza’s living conditions, health system and infrastructure have all deteriorated under the blockade.
Israel says the blockade is necessary to stop the flow of arms into the territory, but Palestinians and aid groups say it is collective punishment and exacerbates dire economic and social conditions.
In this brief report, Raja Abdulrahim freely refers to the "blockade" of Gaza—an action Israel says "is necessary to stop the flow of arms into the territory."
Abdulrahim doesn't refer to an "occupation" of Gaza. In other news reports, the New York Times, rightly or wrongly, has routinely referred to the West Bank as being occupied by Israel. But we haven't found a news report in which the Times refers to a current or ongoing "occupation" of Gaza.
We mention this because of Professor Dershowitz's recent passionate meltdown. He said there's no "occupation" at all—not in Gaza, not in the West Bank—and he said that Barack Obama had been "lying through his teeth" when he used that term.
As we noted this morning, different people, and different organizations, have different views on this particular semantic and legal matter. Also, discussion becomes impossible when people are swept away by the passionate intensities they may understandably feel.
By the way, has that 16-year blockade been necessary? That's the position of Israeli's government. Discussion, debate and the search for solutions must proceed from there.
"There is no occupation," the passionate professor said. He voiced that judgment about both Gaza and the West Bank.
The professor has every right to give voice to that view. But then, he began to shout and yell and to call decent people names.
Despondently, top experts say that we human beings are inclined to behave in such ways. "The adults are frequently worse than the kids," one sad expert declared.
Nothing hinges on whether it is a blockade or an occupation. Why is Somerby wasting so much time on this?
ReplyDeleteBecause of Russia or Roy Moore or something?
DeleteI find it offensive that Somerby trivializes this conlict in which so many have died by nipicking words for no reason.
Delete
ReplyDeleteIf you're so interested in Gaza, Bob, I would recommend Chris Hedges' A Gaza Diary.
It's not current (2001), but you'll get the idea of what's been going on there:
"Yesterday at this spot the Israelis shot eight young men, six of whom were under the age of eighteen. One was twelve. This afternoon they kill an eleven-year-old boy, Ali Murad, and seriously wound four more, three of whom are under eighteen. Children have been shot in other conflicts I have covered–death squads gunned them down in El Salvador and Guatemala, mothers with infants were lined up and massacred in Algeria, and Serb snipers put children in their sights and watched them crumple onto the pavement in Sarajevo–but I have never before watched soldiers entice children like mice into a trap and murder them for sport."
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteHedges' opinion - based upon 7 years of living in occupied Palestinian territory - will likely be dismissed by armchair/heavily biased commenters here who have no firsthand experience. Their black and white world is more easily grasped, however inaccurate.
DeleteIlan Pappe is a Jewish/Israeli historian whose opinion on recent events cannot as easily be dismissed as antisemitic, as does DIC of Obama for the heresy of calling Palestinian life miserable. An October 19 lecture on the subject:
humanityrenewed.com/ilan-pappe-zionism-is-a-racist-ideology/
Correction: Hedges was the Times Middle East Bureau Chief for 7 years, not embedded in Palestine the entire time but spent weeks at a time in Gaza.
DeleteBob, there are some ideologues who, due to their line of work, should display less passion than they long to demonstrate.
ReplyDeletehttps://nypost.com/2023/11/10/news/more-than-750-journalists-sign-letter-condemning-israels-killing-of-journalists-in-gaza/
Dershowitz is a commentator. He and his fellow commentators should be allowed to admire or to hate the leadership in Israel and to use all the passionate rhetoric that they wish.
As with Obama, the public can judge the man by his words.
The same goes for blogboard sages.
However, passionate letters from DC bureaucrats whose job is to facilitate the person who occupies the WH, and from wannabe stage managers in the media, are completely out of place.
A pox on these creeps.
David recently said it’s wrong to call the settlers “settlers”. I just saw Bibi Netanyahu on TV call settlers “settlers”.
ReplyDeleteLInk please.
DeleteIt was the CBS Evening News, Thursday, November 16, 2023. I don’t know if it’s on line.
DeleteThe Times of Israel website has a couple of entries referencing the West Bank settlers today. To suggest that this is not a legitimate or commonly used term is preposterous. All one needs to do is access the website and scroll down.
DeleteDinC is often preposterously wrong, but never in doubt.
DeleteHere's Bibi with Norah O'Donnell. He refers to "the settler community" at 7:28.
Deletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2GqL97vksSM
Apart from the settler community, Israeli law allows small communities within its borders to exclude potential residents via admissions committees. This practice is ostensibly to "maintain the cultural character" of such places. I believe that there's a term for this: racism. The Times of Israel reported on this July 25, 2023 ("MKs pass controversial 'admissions committee' law, allowing towns of up to 700 homes to exclude residents"), although a law for smaller communities dates to 2011. So much for the fiction of a free and open country in which Arab citizens enjoy equal rights. But Obama's use of one word, miserable, gets him tagged an antisemitic. Nice.
DeleteAre there a lot of Palestinians who want to live shoulder to shoulder with Jews on the West bank?
Delete9:28: the law has nothing to do with Palestinians on the West Bank. It has to do with small towns excluding individuals from taking up residence who do not fulfill whatever demographic criteria are chosen as exclusionary, invoking cultural purity.
Delete9:28 again. Your question asks whether West Bank Palestinians want Israeli settlers as neighbors. Since the controversial settlements have resulted in forced displacement of West Bank Palestinians from their homes and increased violence against them, what do you think?
DeleteI'm pretty sure they would hate to see Zionists in the area.
DeleteAs for the ancestry and/or religion of their neighbors, all kinds of people - Arabs, Jews, Greeks, and many, many others lived peacefully in Jerusalem for centuries. Until militant Zionists arrived and fucked it up.
Unamused, are Palestinians holding grudges from such a long time ago that there is no possibility of them living as neighbors with Israelis? Is that what you are saying? These so-called controversial settlements have occurred after wars that were won by Israeli and lost by Palestinians and Arab nations seeking to destroy Israel. Somehow people discussing Palestinian feelings seem to lose sight of that.
DeleteIsrael is always wrong. Decade after decade, Palestinians attack Israeli civilians, with suicide bombs and with thousands of rockets, intentionally murdering babies and old people. If Israel responds militarily, Israel is criticized because their military action unintentionally kills civilians. If Israel responds non-militarily by restricting Palestinian coming in, Israel is criticized for holding the Palestinians . If Israel merely restricts the import of weapons, Israel is criticized for a "suffocating blockade".
ReplyDeleteApparently the Jews in Israel are supposed to just sit back and allow the Palestinians to murder them. Jews tried this once in Germany. It worked badly for them.
Many years ago (sorry, no link) I heard Bibi Netanyahu say, “We live in a bad neighborhood.” Well, move out! Come to America. We like legal immigrants.
DeleteWhat do you want to happen? What do you want Israel to be able to do?
Delete"Apparently the Jews in Israel are supposed to just sit back and allow the Palestinians to murder them."
DeleteWho suggested that?
I want Israel to be free to respond to aggressive attacks in any appropriate way, just as other countries are. I want Israel to be allowed to respond in a way that all these attacks will cease so that the war will end.
DeleteI would invite Israel's critics to list their allowable ways that Israel may respond to these incessant attacks.
Trump is not going to allow any legal Jewish immigrants.
DeleteYou tell us. How exactly do you want to respond? Is the current response not appropriate enough? Why not? How has Israel been prevented to respond appropriately this time?
DeleteBe careful what you ask for. 20 years ago we were violently attacked and could respond in any way we wanted and we ended up committing one of the most immoral crimes of this millennium.
What exactly is total victory?
DeleteWho is preventing Israel from total victory? How?
DeleteHow has Israel been prevented from responding appropriately to this attack? By whom?
DeleteIf Hamas is allied with Iran then maybe Israel doesn't have the power to win easily?
DeleteIf Israel is allowed to fight until they win and obtain an unconditional surrender from Hamas but by doing so it kills massive numbers of Palestinian people or displaces them, that isn't good for the Palestinian people either, is it?
DeleteIt's horribly complicated and I am very sorry you are having to go through this.
Delete@7:05 PM
Delete"Jews tried this once in Germany. It worked badly for them."
Actually, almost all German Jews emigrated before the Holocaust started in the winter of 1941-42. Most of them survived. Certainly those who immigrated to the US, UK (about a third of them, I guess) - it worked well for them.
This is not true. See:
Deletehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emigration_of_Jews_from_Nazi_Germany_and_German-occupied_Europe
Hamas should stop it's terrorism if it wants the Israeli blockade to end. Why do they think the blockade was put there in the first place?
ReplyDelete