Wednesday, December 9, 2009

Jews Poison Wells. Again.

Their reason for doing so is that they're evil. (That's the motivation).

The proof that they're evil is that they do it. (That's the context).

Though, truth be told, at least some of the commenters object.

Also, such allegations, standard antisemitism as they are, aren't directed only ever against Jews. Remember how throughout the 1990s we were assured the Western sanctions against Saddam's Iraq had produced precisely 500,000 dead Iraqi children, a number that didn't rise as the years passed? Remember how after the American invasion of 2003 nary a single bereaved Iraqi mother was ever produced for the cameras?

Then again, to a noticeable degree, anti-Americanism and antisemitism are related these days. They're aren't the same, not even twins or siblings, but they're easily cousins, the two phenomena. Why, even the column cited here has its anti-American undertones.


Michael W. said...

Wouldn't an uplift of living conditions in Gaza all paid for by the UN be more beneficial than the chance that these materials (ex: cement) would be used by Hamas?

From the last polls I've seen, Hamas popularity plummeted after the Gaza war. How much more reminding do they need from the blocade that Hamas "sucks"?

Or this all so Israel would have another card during Shalit negotiations?

The blocade policy needs review. How many of the blacklisted items can actually harm Israel?

t34zakat said...

Why are Jews the only people on this planet expected to facilitate the transfer of toy guns and candy to their enemies?

t34zakat said...

And it would be the 'steadfastness' of the resistance that would be credited with the lifting of the blockade, not the UN.

Yaacov said...

Michael -

The question of the blockade is a legitimate one, and I didn't deal with it in this post. The discussion would need to include the interests and perspectives of the Israelis, the Egyptians, the PA, the Americans, the EU, the Quartet - and Hamas, of course, both wings, the one in Gaza and the one in Damascus.

Any reasonable person would of course want the blockade to go away. Yet this needs to happen in a way that leaves the world a better place, not a worse one.

What makes Brittain's column so blatantly antisemitic, beyond her use of those two ancient tropes about the Jews poisoning the wells and killing the children, is her total and willful disregard of the situation. Israel is to blame, solely and entirely, end of discussion, and this is so because the Israelis are evil (no other rationale is offered).

t34zakat said...

Oh sure Yaacov, go ahead and be reasonable. I must be having a bad day, sorry Michael.

There does seem to be a debate about the blockade within the security establishment, although I;m finding it difficult to follow. Last February, Amos Gilad got into a very public argument with Olmert about linking Shalit and a cease fire agreement which presumably would have meant a least an easing of the blockade. Harel also insists thaat there is debate within the defense establishment, although I don't think he'd include Gilad oddly enough. Harel's never explained the apparent leap in logic.

Personally I’ve never been able to figure out who was for and against the linkage of Shalit and an agreement or linking Shalit and the easing of the blockade. There was a report in ynet about a new defense proposal, but there's also an awful lot of obfuscation.

But to illustrate some of the difficulties in the discussion, if one was to focus on only on products that were dangerous, then one has to severely restrict or ban dual-use commodities such as cement and sugar. The control over such items, even when moved in small amounts is very poor.

There is also evidently some anger amongst Israelis that Hamas prisoners get many privileges that Shalit doesn’t. And one can make all sorts of moral arguments on the other side, but it doesn’t remove the anger.

Besides I'm not sure it's possible for Israelis to buy the friendship of the average Palestinian. Anything that's given is ratioinalized by (at least some) Palestinians as 'well it was ours anyways so we don't have to thank you'. And if something is handed over through cooperation, it immediatly becomes collaboration. It's extremely difficult to turn this into a positive sum game.

t34zakat said...

There’s another point, if the opinion polls are to be believed, Hamas’s support increased after Cast Lead. The support only declined after it became clear that there were no immediate accomplishments for all the sacrifice. Hamas didn’t capture another soldier, it didn’t get the passages opened, it still hasn’t gotten its huge prisoner release and it didn’t refund everyone who lost money on the tunnels. That Hamas isn’t leaping at the current prisoner exchange suggests that it isn’t really desperate.

zionist juice said...

take a look at that doc from england.

and if you want at the blog of a very modern, educated, maybe even nice antisemitic journalist.

Ibrahim Ibn Yusuf said...

The column is NOT the well-poisoning blood libel, and you know it.

Never in the column does it say that Israel is deliberately poisoning the water. It rather says that Gaza's sewer system hasn't been repaired for years due to the blockade, and was further damaged during Cast Lead. As a result, high nitrate levels are found in Gaza's drinking water, which is apparently contaminated by leakages from the broken sewers.

In essence, you're blood-libeling a journalist, making her say outrageous things she never said. You need to dramatically improve your standards if you don't want this blog to become a pamphlet beyond redemption.