Hi Alan. Do you have any comments about these Israeli atrocities against the Christian and Moslem Palestinians in southern Lebanon? There are dozens of documented such atrocities by Jewish Israeli citizens. These atrocities are not atrocities commited in the distant past but atrocities that continue even as we speak.
The author of the article is a Jewish Israeli citizen who was an eyewitness of the atrocities. Do you consider these acts O.K. since they are committed by what you call the "choosen people" against "gentile" Moslems and Christians?
How about comments from these "holy" Zionist "christians" who support and justify every Israeli atrocity? The untold atrocities are all God's doings according to Zionist "christians" who support whatever Israel does without question.
------------------------
Indignation of an Israeli Writer: Ari Shavit
Cana: 102 Faceless Dead
We killed 170 people in Lebanon, most of whom were
refugees, during the month of April, 1996. Many of
them were women, old people and children. We killed 9
civilians, one a 2 year old girl and one, a centenarian, in
Sahmour, on April 11th. We killed 11 civilians, including
7 children, in Nabatyeh, on April 18th. In the UN Camp
in Cana, we killed 102 people. We made sure to inflict
death from a distance. In a very secular manner, without
the archaic idea of sin, without the antediluvian worry to
consider man in the image of God, and without the
primitive proscription, "You shall not kill!"
Our solid alibi is that we are responsible for nothing, that
the responsibility falls on Hezbollah. A most doubtful
alibi. For when we decided to launch a massive attack
on the civilian region of South Lebanon (while Israel ran
no vital risk), we decided, ipso facto, to spill the blood
of X number of civilians. When we decided to drive half
a million people out of their homes and to shell those
who remained behind (while in Israel, we did not have
one single victim), we decided, in fact, to execute
several dozen of them. This (alibi) allowed us to make
such cruel decisions without seeing ourselves as rotten.
We killed them because the increasingly wider gap
between the sacrosanct character that we attribute to
our own lives and the more limited character we give to
theirs, allowed us to kill. We believe, in the most
absolute manner, with the White House, the Senate, the
Pentagon, and the New York Times on our side, that
their lives do not have the same weight as ours. We are
convinced that with Dimona (Israel's atomic site), Yad
Vashem and the Shoah Museum in our hand, we have
the right to compel 400,000 people to evacuate their
homes in 8 hours. And we have the right, at the end of 8
hours, to consider their homes as military targets. And
we reserve the right to rain 16,000 shells on their
villages and their populations. And we reserve the right
to kill without any guilt feelings.
But all this cannot alleviate the gravity of the massacre,
Israeli style, and our responsibility for its execution. For
it is perpetrated, in general, in places to which we give
free range to immoderate violence.
The shelling of Cana was executed according to the
rules, orders and objectives of operation, "Grapes of
Wrath." There is something wrong in these rules, orders
and objectives. Something that is no longer human.
Something that touches on the criminal.
And all of us, without exception, were an integral part of
this machine. The public supported the media, who
supported the government, who supported the Chief of
Staff, who supported the inquiry officer, who supported
the officers, who supported the soldiers who fired the
three shells that killed 102 in Cana.
Nothing can prevent Cana from becoming an integral
part of our biography. Because, after Cana, we did not
denounce the crime, we did not want to subject the
affair to the eyes of the law, we merely wanted to deny
the horror and go on with our current affairs. That is
how Cana is part of ourselves -- like one of the features
of our face.
As the massacre perpetrated by Baruch Goldstein (in
the Cave of the Patriarchs on Muslims while praying)
and the crime committed by Ygal Amir (like the
reactions to them) were manifestations of rotten seeds in
the heart of the national-religious culture, the massacre
of Cana is no less extreme a grain of rottenness in the
heart of secular Israeli culture: its cynicism, brutality,
instrumentalism, egocentrism of the powerful; this
tendency to blur the frontier between good and evil,
between permitted and prohibited; this tendency not to
require justice, not to care about truth.
The manner in which contemporary Israel has
functioned during and after Cana shows that modern,
rational Israeli life conceals a terrifying aspect.
Ari Shavit/Haaretz/New York Times Syndication.
Ari Shavit is a writer and columnist of the Israeli
newspaper, Haaretz. He lives in Jerusalem. (Translated
from Hebrew in "Liberation" of May 21, 1996.) |
