next »

[pyshnov]

The purpose of the article is to convey to the public the idea that ending the occupation of Arab land should be dependent upon finding solutions for Jewish identity and other Jewish problems such as democracy in Israel, Jewish religious feelings, understanding of Zionism, etc.

The author does not mention the international law relevant to Israeli occupation and this, of course, is another purpose of the article - the public must forget about the international law.

The concern is "how this ancient people, the Jews, should fit into a modern political order". And the author never says that to fit into a modern political order, the Jews must obey the law.

The concern is that "the state [Israel] is in conflict with the Palestinian nation". He never says that the "conflict" has a clear solution according to the law - withdrawal from the occupied land - and that there are two UN resolutions making it clear what the Jews must do.

He speaks of the "chronic civil war between Israelis and Palestinians", I repeat - "civil war". It's the first time I see this particular distortion of the law.

He says: "...the occupation undermined the very moral grounds on which Zionism rests...". Is this all that the occupation "undermined"?

He is mentioning the concept of "chosen people", but the article only affirms that Jews are the chosen people who are the one and only side that decides, purely relying on their own interest, the destiny of everyone who is in "conflict" with them.

This article is an example of how the very intelligent and perfectly civil language can be put in service of savages. The outward appearance of the author's contribution is as clean and orderly as were the fascist uniforms at the beginning of WWII.