Palazzi is even more outré than Gamla, whose views represent a significant part of the Israeli spectrum; Palazzi doesn't even represent the viewpoint of moderate, Western educated Muslims, which I think is a good thing because, frankly, Palazzi is wrong, a "crow-catcher" trying to find accomodation with wide-scale injustice. I think Quisling is the right word.
Yet you had no problems with citing fringe Israelis and American Jews to support your argument...
In another time Palazzi's views would not have been seen as so extreme. That mainstream, Western-educated Muslims denounce the guy as a quisling shows us how closed-minded they can be.
And citing Hamas begs the question of how Hamas came to be in the first place-- I think everyone knows Hamas' views on it in the first place, but no one asks why they feel that way except to blame Islam. I think everyone who knows anything knows why extremist Israeli groups exist, on the other hand. In fact, you yourself give part of the reason.
Okaaaaaayyy... so I'm supposed to believe that extremist Israeli groups arose on their own while extremist Muslim groups merely arose as a reaction to the Israelis. Well, you're just as bad as the Zionist press you so loathe. Fighting lies with lies... how is this going to solve any problems?
Said's "Occidentalism". Heh. Sauce for the gander.
Your goose is cooked. Anytime Said refers to "The West" as a monolith, which is something he does quite frequently, he is being an occidentalist. The funny thing is that Said knows that he has this problem and his response is along the lines of: "Maybe I wasn't the best person to write about 'Orientalism' but I did it and it got people thinking and I'm glad." The problem is still there and is one of the major factors preventing meaningful discourse between USA/Europe and the Third World.
Yes, all of Said's work
All of it? Really? Well, all those contradictions will cause sleepless nights for the Said fan... Heck, the guy can't even keep his autobiography straight. And forget reading his pre-1967 stuff...
Nur Masalha's A Land Without A People. This documents from extensively cited Hebrew sources the attempt to make the myth of a land without a people for a people without a land into a reality through violence. Really bursts the victim-blaming bubble.
Masalha's okay and Palazzi's not? Did it ever occur to you that your bias might be a bad thing?
And finally, my ultimate views on the topic can be paraphrased from Oscar Wilde. "It's either Zionism, or the Arabs. One of them has to go." Mutually exclusive claims unfortunately require mutually exclusive solutions. On the Israeli side, however, the price is much lower--giving up an ideology and a view of history. The price for the Arab side I don't think I want to contemplate. But how it will pan out is a question of whose boot is on whose neck, and the overwhelming nuclear power will likely sit where it wants regardless of history, morality, or the heartfelt outrage of a billion people.
The "price" for Israelis a whole lot higher than "giving up an ideology and a view of history." They would give up freedom and self-determination. They end up in a pre-World War II situation again. And I'm sure Yemen won't welcome 500,000 Jews will open arms.
If you want an idea of how callous you sound I'll turn the tables on you: Why can't the Arabs just leave Israel alone? It would only a require a minor tweak in their already hypocritical ideology and warped view of history. The price Israelis would pay is unthinkably high.
As for "blame game", a point I missed, I am firmly in the belief that there is a Root Cause, and we really have to take the time to unwind the call stack to see what's throwing that damn exception...
dbx -c middleeasternhistory.c
History is not analagous to a call stack. You have oversimplified history and made a very arbitrary decision about where it begins.
You see through Western lies, please forgive Westerners if we see through yours.
[ Parent ]