if you don't happen to take part in that system of illusions and self-deception, what you say is incomprehensible
jeudi, août 26, 2010
Israélien palestinien! Un arabe israélo-arabe! Un arabophone palestinien israélien!
If you - an individual or a nation - are free, and determine your own future, you might do so for good or for evil. You might even do irreparable harm to *yourself*.
[...]
As for why I’m critical of "the principle of national self-determination", that’s because ‘nation’ or ‘people’ is constantly used to mean ‘ethnic group’. So interpreted, the ‘principle of national self-determination’ is one of the most destructive ideals ever advanced.
We might suppose there is an ethnically homogeneous population on some planet, and members of that population wants the same thing. Their interests never clash with the interests of other populations on the planet - maybe there *isn’t* any other population on the planet. Should they be able to determine ‘their destiny’? Sure, why not - as long as they do this for good, not evil.
[...] Self-determination wouldn’t even make a strong case for Palestinian statehood. Are the Palestinians a ‘nation’ in the ethnic sense? Well, what happened to them being Arabs, and to Arab nationalism?
"Another Israeli spokeswoman, Tzipora Menache, stated that she was not worried about negative ramifications the Israeli onslaught on Gaza might have on the way the Obama administration would view Israel. She said 'You know very well, and the stupid Americans know equally well, that we control their government, irrespective of who sits in the White House. You see, I know it and you know it that no American president can be in a position to challenge us even if we do the unthinkable. What can they (Americans) do to us? We control congress, we control the media, we control show biz, and we control everything in America. In America you can criticize God, but you can't criticize Israel."
[...]
The Israeli spokesman, Nachman Abramovic demonized Palestinian children stating "They may look young to you, but these people are terrorists at heart. Don’t look at their deceptively innocent faces, try to think of the demons inside each of them … I am absolutely certain these people would grow to be evil terrorists if we allowed them to grow… would you allow them to grow to kill your children or finish them off right now? … honost and moral people ought to differentiate between true humans and human animals. We do kill human animals and we do so unapologetically. Besides who in the West is in a position to lecture us on killing human animals. After all, whose hands are clean?"
Comme le titre l'indique, on peut douter de l'authenticité des citations, mais le message est punché. Ceci-dit, voici du Max Blumenthal pour rester sur du solide.
"Let the Jews, who claim to be the chosen race, prove their title by choosing the way of non-violence for vindicating their position on earth." -Mahatma Gandhi, 26 novembre 1938
Richard Martineau et Patrick "garde-barrière" Huard [1][2] se ressemblaient hier à TLMEP. Huard est un faible, on n'utilise tout simplement pas l'homme de paille devant un auditoire de cette taille, surtout en se référant à des propos tenus, dans la tête dudit auditoire, quelques minutes plus tôt. J'ai beaucoup ri en entendant Martineau s'exclamer "Moi, moi, moi", mais un peu moins quand il a suggéré aux lock-outés de quitter leur emploi, et été indisposé quand il a attaqué l'émission et son supposé manque de partialité: affirmation sur affirmation appuyant PKP, et le culot de faire semblant de ne pas accepter le rôle qu'il tenait, et pour lequel on l'avait invité. D'un côté les travailleurs en lock-out et les solidaires, de l'autre les business-as-usual, cadres et autres. Mais on a bien élu Jian Cheurray: la mauvaise foi doit plaire aux couillons que nous sommes. Intellectuel québécois: "nous devons refuser cette appropriation canadienne de la commémoration de la conquête", Ti-clin des médias (e.g. MF Bazzo, Esther Bégin): "Ça veut donc dire qu'on ne peut rappeler l'évènement?"
Tout à la dévotion de l’alliance dominante, on trouve les commandos du consensus: les éducateurs, les communicateurs, les experts en relations publiques, les leaders religieux et les moralistes, les artistes “corrects” qui suivent les directives et maintiennent l’état d’hypnose collective de la population dont Orwell nous avait prévenu et qui est nécessaire au consensus.
Certains sont conscients et responsables de façonner l’image de la réalité qui convient à l’alliance dominante, mais la majorité de ceux qui collaborent à cette oeuvre en sont inconscients. Il réagissent comme on sait qu’ils réagiront aux impulsions qu’on leur transmet: on montre du sang, ils pleurent; on montre du fric, ils se courbent.
[...] but you’ve said in a recent analysis that this has been Israeli policy almost from the founding of the state, the attack on civilian populations. Could you explain?
NOAM CHOMSKY: They say so. I was just quoting the chief of staff—this is thirty years ago, virtually no Palestinian terrorism in Israel, virtually. He said, “Our policy has been to attack civilians.” And the reason was explained—you know, villages, towns, so on. And it was explained by Abba Eban, the distinguished statesman, who said, “Yes, that’s what we’ve done, and we did it for a good reason. There was a rational prospect that if we attack the civilian population and cause it enough pain, they will press for a, what he called, “a cessation of hostilities.” That’s a euphemism meaning cessation of resistance against Israel’s takeover of the—moves which were going on at the time to take over the Occupied Territories. So, sure, if they—“We’ll kill enough of them, so that they’ll press for quiet to permit us to continue what we’re doing.”
Actually, you know, Obama today didn’t put it in those words, but the meaning is approximately the same. That’s the meaning of his silence over the core issue of settling and takeover of the Occupied Territories and eliminating the possibility for any Palestinian meaningful independence, omission of this. But Eban [inaudible], who I was quoting, chief of staff, would have also said, you know, “And my heart bleeds for the civilians who are suffering. But what can we do? We have to pursue the rational prospect that if we cause them enough pain, they’ll call off any opposition to our takeover of their lands and resources.”
On Saturday December 27, the latest US-Israeli attack on helpless Palestinians was launched. The attack had been meticulously planned, for over 6 months according to the Israeli press. The planning had two components: military and propaganda. It was based on the lessons of Israel's 2006 invasion of Lebanon, which was considered to be poorly planned and badly advertised. We may, therefore, be fairly confident that most of what has been done and said was pre-planned and intended.
That surely includes the timing of the assault: shortly before noon, when children were returning from school and crowds were milling in the streets of densely populated Gaza City. It took only a few minutes to kill over 225 people and wound 700, an auspicious opening to the mass slaughter of defenseless civilians trapped in a tiny cage with nowhere to flee.
Le modèle Patrick Lagacé, c'était avant l'internet
Sur cette femme ayant survécu au pacte de suicide, Christianne Charette ne voyait que l'absurdité de traumatiser encore plus une victime. La veille, elle répondait à un item de la chronique magazine de Nicolas Langelier portant sur la réintroduction du màle alpha comme focalité du désir féminin par "Au lieu d'un loser qui n'a pas d'ambition disons?". On entend dans le documentaire A Death in the Family, en reprise ce soir 23:00, la nièce de Bill Mullins-Johnson, injustement condamné pour le viol et le meurtre de sa belle-fille de 4 ans, déclarer "si j'avais un fusil, je le tuerais... on n'emprisonne pas quelqu'un pour rien". Je pense à ça. Aussi, ne manquez pas la suite de l'entrevue du Dr Michel de Lorgeril chez Pinard, dimanche prochain.
12 règles infaillibles pour publier des nouvelles en provenance du Proche Orient dans les grands médias
1. Au Proche Orient, ce sont toujours les Arabes qui attaquent les premiers et c’est toujours Israël que se défend. Cette défense s’appelle « représailles ».
2. Ni les Arabes, ni les Palestiniens, ni les Libanais n’ont le droit de tuer des civils. On appelle cela du « terrorisme ».
3. Israël a le droit de tuer des civils. Cela s’appelle de la « légitime défense ».
4. Lorsque Israël tue des civils en masse, les puissances occidentales demandent qu’il le fasse avec plus de retenue. Cela s’appelle « réactions de la communauté internationale ».
5. Ni les Palestiniens ni les Libanais n’ont le droit de capturer des soldats israéliens à l’intérieur d’installations militaires équipées de sentinelles et de postes de combat. Il faut appeler cela « séquestration de personnes sans défense ».
6. Israël a le droit de séquestrer, à n’importe quelle heure et n’importe où, autant de Palestiniens et de Libanais qu’il lui plaira. Le chiffre actuel tourne autour de dix mille, parmi lesquels 300 sont des enfants et mille sont des femmes. Il n’est pas nécessaire de fournir la moindre preuve de culpabilité. Israël a le droit de garder en détention indéfiniment des prisonniers, même si ceux-ci sont des personnalités démocratiquement élues par les Palestiniens. On appelle cela « emprisonnement de terroristes ».
7. Quand on mentionne le mot “Hezbollah”, il est obligatoire d’ajouter dans la même phrase : « soutenu et financé par la Syrie et par l’Iran ».
8. Quand on mentionne « Israël », il est catégoriquement interdit d’ajouter : « soutenu et financé par les Etats-Unis ». Cela pourrait donner l’impression que le conflit est inégal et que l’existence d’Israël ne court aucun danger.
9. Dans les informations concernant Israël, il faut toujours éviter qu’apparaissent les locutions suivantes : « Territoires occupés », « Résolutions de l’ONU », « Violations des Droits de l’Homme » et « Convention de Genève ».
10. Les Palestiniens, comme les Libanais, sont toujours des « lâches » qui se cachent au milieu d’une population civile qui ne les aime pas. S’ils dorment chez eux, avec leur famille, cela porte un nom : « lâcheté ». Israël a le droit d’anéantir, avec des bombes et des missiles, les quartiers où ils dorment. Cela s’appelle : « des frappes chirurgicales de haute précision ».
11. Les Israéliens parlent mieux l’anglais, le français, l’espagnol ou le portugais que les Arabes. C’est pourquoi ils méritent d’être interviewés plus souvent et, donc, d’avoir plus souvent que les Arabes l’occasion d’expliquer, au grand public, les règles ci-dessus pour la rédaction des nouvelles (règles 1 à 10). On appelle cela « la neutralité journalistique ».
12. Toutes les personnes qui ne sont pas d’accord avec les susdites Règles sont, et il faut que cela se sache, des « terroristes antisémites hautement dangereux »
"sympathetic photographers take pictures of children who pretend to be injured, and once they are published in Western newspapers these claims become fact."
"En réponse"... mon oeil ! Le cycle OPPRESSION-RÉPRESSION constitue la phase préliminaire au TRANSFERT des palestiniens hors Israël, cet État-voyou, raciste et criminel.
Before saying a word, I’d like to express some severe personal discomfort, because anything I say will be abstract and dry and restrained. The crimes against Palestinians in the Occupied Territories and elsewhere, particularly Lebanon, are so shocking that the only emotionally valid reaction is rage and a call for extreme actions. But that does not help the victims. And, in fact, it’s likely to harm them. We have to face the reality that our actions have consequences, and they have to be adapted to real-world circumstances, difficult as it may be to stay calm in the face of shameful crimes in which we are directly and crucially implicated.
[...] Bostonians could read in the Boston Globe a few days ago that at the Taba Conference in January 2001—now quoting—“Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak accepted ideas floated by President Bill Clinton that would have produced a Palestinian state in 97 percent of the West Bank and 100 percent of Gaza,” but these forthcoming gestures failed. The evil Palestinians refused Israel’s generous offers, keeping to their time-honored insistence on seizing defeat from the jaws of victory and proving they’re not partners for negotiation.
Well, there’s one fragment of truth in this conventional fabrication: there was a conference in Taba. And, in fact, it did come close to a possible settlement, but the rest is pure invention. In particular, the conference was terminated abruptly by Prime Minister Barak. The truth is completely unacceptable, so the facts are either suppressed, as they generally are, or, as in this case, just inverted. And we can expect a good deal more of that. Actually, the truth about the Taba Conference merits attention. That week, in one week in January 2001, that was the one moment in thirty years when the United States and Israel abandoned the rejectionist stance that they have maintained in virtual isolation until the present.
Réalisé entièrement par D.Odz Scénario par Loco Locass et D.Odz
Cliquez ici pour télécharger en format WMV haute résolution (36 Mo). Cliquez ici pour télécharger en format WMV moyenne résolution (15 Mo). Cliquez ici pour télécharger en format WMV basse résolution (8 Mo).
Cliquez ici pour télécharger en format Quicktime haute résolution (31 Mo). Cliquez ici pour télécharger en format Quicktime moyenne résolution (15 Mo). Cliquez ici pour télécharger en format Quicktime basse résolution (9 Mo).
■□■□■□■□■□■□■□
Des forts en gueule de la communauté juive de Montréal ne se privent pas de stigmatiser la nation. Leur hostilité tapageuse prend des contours toujours plus nets. Leur propre réputation dans le monde ne manquera pas de souffrir de leur démesure et de leurs calomnies - Citoyenneté québécoise - virulence kasher, Bernard Frappier
1. "There is a huge gap between us (Jews) and our enemies not just in ability but in morality, culture, sanctity of life, and conscience. They are our neighbors here, but it seems as if at a distance of a few hundred meters away, there are people who do not belong to our continent, to our world, but actually belong to a different galaxy." Moshe Katsav, Président d'Israël, Jerusalem Post, 10 mai 2001.
2. "The Palestinians are like crocodiles, the more you give them meat, they want more". Ehud Barak, Prime Minister of Israel at the time – 28 août 2000, Jerusalem Post, 30 août 2000.
3. "[The Palestinians are] beasts walking on two legs." Menahim Begin, discours au Knesset, cité dans Amnon Kapeliouk, "Begin and the Beasts". New Statesman, 25 juin 1982.
4. "The Palestinians" would be crushed like grasshoppers ... heads smashed against the boulders and walls." Premier Ministre d'Israël, lors d'un discours à des colons juifs, New York Times, 1er avril 1988.
5. "When we have settled the land, all the Arabs will be able to do about it will be to scurry around like drugged cockroaches in a bottle." Raphael Eitan, Chef de cabinet de l’armée Israélienne, New York Times, 14 avril 1983.
6. "How can we return the occupied territories? There is nobody to return them to." Golda Meir, Premier Ministre d'Israël , 8 mars 1969.
7. "There was no such thing as Palestinians, they never existed." Golda Maier, Premier Ministre d'Israël. 15 juin 1969.
8. "The thesis that the danger of genocide was hanging over us in June 1967 and that Israel was fighting for its physical existence is only bluff, which was born and developed after the war." Matityahu Peled, général Israélien, Ha'aretz, 19 mars 1972.
9. "If I were an Arab leader, I would never sign an agreement with Israel. It is normal; we have taken their country. It is true God promised it to us, but how could that interest them? Our God is not theirs. There has been Anti - Semitism, the Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz, but was that their fault ? They see but one thing: we have come and we have stolen their country. Why would they accept that?" David Ben Gurion (premier Premier Ministre d'Israël): cité par Nahum Goldmann dans Le Paraddoxe Juif, pp121.
9a. Ben Gurion en 1948 : "We must do everything to insure they ( the Palestinians) never do return....The old will die and the young will forget."
10. "We have to kill all the Palestinians unless they are resigned to live here as slaves.", Chairman Heilbrun du comité de réelection du général Shlomo Lahat, maire de Tel Aviv, octobre 1983.
11. "Every time we do something you tell me America will do this and will do that . . . I want to tell you something very clear: Don't worry about American pressure on Israel. We the Jewish people, control America and the Americans know it." Ariel Sharon, Premier Ministre d'Israël, 3 octobre 2001, en conversation avec Shimon Peres, tel que rapporté sur radio Kol Yisrael.
12. "We declare openly that the Arabs have no right to settle on even one centimeter of Eretz Israel... Force is all they do or ever will understand. We shall use the ultimate force until the Palestinians come crawling to us on all fours." Rafael Eitan, Chef de cabinet de l’armée Israélienne - Gad Becker, Yediot Ahronot, 13 avril 1983, New York Times 14 avril 1983.
13. "We must do everything to ensure they [the Palestinian refugees] never do return." David Ben-Gurion, dans ses mémoires, 18 juillet 1948, cité dans Ben-Gurion: the Armed Prophet, Michael Bar Zohar, 1967, p. 157.
15. "We should prepare to go over to the offensive. Our aim is to smash Lebanon, Trans-Jordan, and Syria. The weak point is Lebanon, for the Moslem regime is artificial and easy for us to undermine. We shall establish a Christian state there, and then we will smash the Arab Legion, eliminate Trans-Jordan; Syria will fall to us. We then bomb and move on and take Port Said, Alexandria and Sinai." David Ben-Gurion, mai 1948, de Ben-Gurion, A Biography, Michael Ben-Zohar, Delacorte, New York,1978.
16. "Jewish villages were built in the place of Arab villages. You do not even know the names of these Arab villages, and I do not blame you because geography books no longer exist. Not only do the books not exist, the Arab villages are not there either. Nahlal arose in the place of Mahlul; Kibbutz Gvat in the place of Jibta; Kibbutz Sarid in the place of Huneifis; and Kefar Yehushua in the place of Tal al-Shuman. There is not a single place built in this country that did not have a former Arab population." Moshe Dayan, discours au Technion, Haifa, rapporté par Haaretz, 4 avril 1969.
17. "We walked outside, Ben-Gurion accompanying us. Allon repeated his question, What is to be done with the Palestinian population?' Ben-Gurion waved his hand in a gesture which said 'Drive them out!'" Yitzhak Rabin, extrait des ses mémoires publié dans le New York Times, 23 otobre 1979.
18. "We shall reduce the Arab population to a community of woodcutters and waiters", description de Rabin de la conquête de Lydda, apres l’achèvement du Plan Dalet. Uri Lubrani, conseiller spécial du Premier Ministre Ben-Gurion's sur les affaires arabes, 1960. De The Arabs in Israel, Sabri Jiryas.
19. "There are some who believe that the non-Jewish population, even in a high percentage, within our borders will be more effectively under our surveillance; and there are some who believe the contrary, i.e., that it is easier to carry out surveillance over the activities of a neighbor than over those of a tenant. [I] tend to support the latter view and have an additional argument:...the need to sustain the character of the state which will henceforth be Jewish...with a non-Jewish minority limited to 15 percent. I had already reached this fundamental position as early as 1940 [and] it is entered in my diary." Joseph Weitz, chef du département de la colonisation de la Jewish Agency. De Israel: an Apartheid State, Uri Davis, p.5.
20. "Everybody has to move, run and grab as many hilltops as they can to enlarge the settlements because everything we take now will stay ours... Everything we don't grab will go to them." Ariel Sharon, Ministre des Affaires étrangères, lors d’une rencontre des membres du parti d’extrême droite Tsomet, Agence France Presse, 15 novembre 1998.
Remarque: Chaque famille de colons israéliens choisissant d'aller à l'encontre du droit international en s'installant dans les territoires occupés est récompensée de $ 30.000. Ceci est rendu possibleen grande partie grâce à des subventions fiscales, prêts et aide U.S. qui servent à financer d'autres services permettant que l'argent puisse être détourné vers l'établissement de colonies de peuplement en dehors d'Israël dans les territoires occupés.
21. "Spirit the penniless population across the frontier by denying it employment... Both the process of expropriation and the removal of the poor must be carried out discreetly and circumspectly." Theodor Herzl, fondateur de la World Zionist Organization, faisant référence aux Palestiniens, Complete Diaries, entrée du 12 juin 1895.
22. "One million Arabs are not worth a Jewish fingernail." Rabbi Yaacov Perrin, 27 février 1994, N.Y. Times, Feb. 28, 1994, p. 1
Jeudi dernier, j'ai écouté Christianne Charette en reprise le soir, et ça m'a donné le goût d'en développer l'habitude. Checkpoint 303 y était, et Christianne était toute excitée ! La page Radio-Canada de l'entrevue contient l'info nécessaire. Aussi au programme ce jeudi, l'habituel tour de table Petrowski-Legault s'est transformé en un féroce débat Curzi-legault sur le projet de loi sur la citoyenneté du P.Q. Petrowski s'est faite discrète, mais punchée: elle a appelé à un renforcement de la loi 101 et a mentionné un phénomène en croissance, ces commis bilingues qui refusent de répondre en français; non pas que j'apprécie les clerks unilingues.
Hier, je zappe au TVA 22 heures. Images de la commission Bouchard-Taylor. Un illuminé s'étend sur la nécessité d'expulser les musulmans, parce que le fanatisme homicidaire serait la loi d'Allah. Les commissaires ne bronchent pas. Puis un type vient au micro, et expose qu'alors que 30,000 juifs consomment cachère au Québec, l'ensemble des québécois doit se taper la facture de 150 millions. Bouchard 'pète les plombs' comme le dit Rich Martineau (lire le commentaire de David 'Antagoniste' Gagnon), et accuse l'homme d'antisémitisme ! Le seul, je dis bien le seul accommodement religieux qu'on nous facture, et c'est le seul dont on ne peut parler, gare à vous et garde-à-vous ! Reportage suivant, en apparence commandé par le duo dynamique Steven Smilovitch et Fo Niemi, deux honnêtes citoyens québécois qui ne cherchent qu'à servir la justice et la paix. Aucune mise en contexte sur ces québécophobes. Le sujet du reportage est sans importance, son objet, lui...
Robert Fisk was one of the first journalists to be present at the scene of the horrific murders in Lebanon, September 17th, 1982. He has published a number of different books and currently writes columns for The Independent newspaper. The following is extracted from his book, "Pity the Nation."
What we found inside the Palestinian camp at ten o'clock on the morning of September 1982 did not quite beggar description, although it would have been easier to re-tell in the cold prose of a medical examination. There had been medical examinations before in Lebanon, but rarely on this scale and never overlooked by a regular, supposedly disciplined army. In the panic and hatred of battle, tens of thousands had been killed in this country. But these people, hundreds of them had been shot down unarmed. This was a mass killing, an incident - how easily we used the word "incident" in Lebanon - that was also an atrocity. It went beyond even what the Israelis would have in other circumstances called a terrorist activity. It was a war crime.
Jenkins and Tveit were so overwhelmed by what we found in Chatila that at first we were unable to register our own shock. Bill Foley of AP had come with us. All he could say as he walked round was "Jesus Christ" over and over again. We might have accepted evidence of a few murders; even dozens of bodies, killed in the heat of combat. Bur there were women lying in houses with their skirts torn torn up to their waists and their legs wide apart, children with their throats cut, rows of young men shot in the back after being lined up at an execution wall. There were babies - blackened babies babies because they had been slaughtered more than 24-hours earlier and their small bodies were already in a state of decomposition - tossed into rubbish heaps alongside discarded US army ration tins, Israeli army equipment and empty bottles of whiskey.
Where were the murderers? Or to use the Israelis' vocabulary, where were the "terrorists"? When we drove down to Chatila, we had seen the Israelis on the top of the apartments in the Avenue Camille Chamoun but they made no attempt to stop us. In fact, we had first been driven to the Bourj al-Barajneh camp because someone told us that there was a massacre there. All we saw was a Lebanese soldier chasing a car theif down a street. It was only when we were driving back past the entrance to Chatila that Jenkins decided to stop the car. "I don't like this", he said. "Where is everyone? What the f**k is that smell?"
Just inside the the southern entrance to the camp, there used to be a number of single-story, concrete walled houses. I had conducted many interviews in these hovels in the late 1970's. When we walked across the muddy entrance to Chatila, we found that these buildings had been dynamited to the ground. There were cartridge cases across the main road. I saw several Israeli flare canisters, still attached to their tiny parachutes. Clouds of flies moved across the rubble, raiding parties with a nose for victory.
Down a laneway to our right, no more than 50 yards from the entrance, there lay a pile of corpses. There were more than a dozen of them, young men whose arms and legs had been wrapped around each other in the agony of death. All had been shot point-blank range through the cheek, the bullet tearing away a line of flesh up to the ear and entering the brain. Some had vivid crimson or black scars down the left side of their throats. One had been castrated, his trousers torn open and a settlement of flies throbbing over his torn intestines.
The eyes of these young men were all open. The youngest was only 12 or 13 years old. They were dressed in jeans and coloured shirts, the material absurdly tight over their flesh now that their bodies had begun to bloat in the heat. They had not been robbed. On one blackened wrist a Swiss watch recorded the correct time, the second hand still ticking round uselessly, expending the last energies of its dead owner.
On the other side of the main road, up a track through the debris, we found the bodies of five women and several children. The women were middle-aged and their corpses lay draped over a pile of rubble. One lay on her back, her dress torn open and the head of a little girl emerging from behind her. The girl had short dark curly hair, her eyes were staring at us and there was a frown on her face. She was dead.
Another child lay on the roadway like a discarded doll, her white dress stained with mud and dust. She could have been no more than three years old. The back of her head had been blown away by a bullet fired into her brain. One of the women also held a tiny baby to her body. The bullet that had passed into her breast had killed the baby too. Someone had slit open the woman's stomach, cutting sideways and then upwards, perhaps trying to kill her unborn child. Her eyes were wide open, her dark face frozen in horror.
"...As we stood there, we heard a shout in Arabic from across the ruins. "They are coming back," a man was screaming, So we ran in fear towards the road. I think, in retrospect, that it was probably anger that stopped us from leaving, for we now waited near the entrance to the camp to glimpse the faces of the men who were responsible for all of this. They must have been sent in here with Israeli permission. They must have been armed by the Israelis. Their handiwork had clearly been watched - closely observed - by the Israelis who were still watching us through their field-glasses.
When does a killing become an outrage? When does an atrocity become a massacre? Or, put another way, how many killings make a massacre? Thirty? A hundred? Three hundred? When is a massacre not a massacre? When the figures are too low? Or when the massacre is carried out by Israel’s friends rather than Israel's enemies?
That, I suspected, was what this argument was about. If Syrian troops had crossed into Israel, surrounded a Kibbutz and allowed their Palestinian allies to slaughter the Jewish inhabitants, no Western news agency would waste its time afterwards arguing about whether or not it should be called a massacre.
But in Beirut, the victims were Palestinians. The guilty were certainly Christian militiamen - from which particular unit we were still unsure - but the Israelis were also guilty. If the Israelis had not taken part in the killings, they had certainly sent militia into the camp. They had trained them, given them uniforms, handed them US army rations and Israeli medical equipment. Then they had watched the murderers in the camps, they had given them military assistance - the Israeli airforce had dropped all those flares to help the men who were murdering the inhabitants of Sabra and Chatila - and they had established military liason with the murderers in the camps
Against this background, it is especially painful for me, as an American Jew, to feel compelled to portray the ongoing and intensifying abuse of the Palestinian people by Israel through a reliance on such an inflammatory metaphor as 'holocaust.'
All quieted on the word front (pdf)[he] therefore is telling us, loud and clear, that he not only is a dedicated opponent of freedom of speech, but he believes with equal passion that it is critically important to safeguard the right to lie not in the interests of freedom of expression, which he strongly opposes, as just demonstrated, but rather in one special case: to lie in service of power and privilege.
Moi 
La Patrie 
La Santé
