new this week on Peacepalestine

["mary" <humdrum2 at libero.it>]

· Who's to blame for the pain? - Groups like The Parents Circle, with members of bereaved families seek dialogue to bring about reconciliation between Israelis and Palestinians. But there seem to be strings attached. Now, I am all in favour of reconciliation. But, let's try to see what that means. First, it is to realise there is a deep conflict that is difficult to transcend just with good will alone. One must recognise that which is "right" and where the "other" has been violated and not treated in a way that is "right". It doesn't mean that BOTH parties are "wrong". When both parties feel justified, the reconciliation is much more difficult. http://peacepalestine.blogspot.com/2005/08/whos-to-blame-for-pain.html

· Map of Israeli land conquest in 1948 – New feature! Photos and maps.  This map is part of a complete presentation on the Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine compiled by the great Salman Abu Sitta of the Palestine Land Society. http://www.plands.org/

We must not forget, this land was inhabited by another people. It was not empty, they had their own society, agriculture, language, customs. http://peacepalestine.blogspot.com/2005/08/map-of-israeli-land-conquest-in-1948.html

· Even Escape is an Art - Fabio Mini – An Italian General writes a most interesting article: In general, an “exit strategy” (how to leave a foreign war theatre) is not so much a strategy as an organisational matter. It is sufficient to have it clearly laid out who is the winner and who is the loser. If one wins, the exit takes place with fanfare and medals; if one loses, the organisational matter is actually simplified: either the winner holds them prisoner, or they are kicked out mercilessly. The exit becomes a real strategy when the “level of capitulation” is reached, that is, the limit of toleration of the losses and costs, when one is no longer able to contain the adversary, when the military or political usefulness of the action of war is nil and when major losses or breakdown must be avoided. The most complex exit strategies and the most inauspicable are obviously those to enact when who has won or lost is unknown, or if one pretends to have won when they really have lost. It is the case of the situations of a deadlock in which neither of the contenders is able to prevail and the variation of equilibrium of forces itself, of behaviour and motivation, could determine the defeat of one or the other.

In the last fifty years of military history, as well as that of international politics, we have seen the armed forces that were the strongest in the world debate among themselves over the dilemma of the exit strategy, precisely for the triple incapacity of bringing the victory, admitting the defeat and dealing with the deadlock. The Americans have begun the negative series with the Korean War (the first that had not been won, as General Harrison, who signed the armistice, admitted) and with Vietnam (a defeat). The Soviets followed in Afghanistan, the Chinese in Vietnam and a bit, all of the others, we Italians included, in Somalia. Wars that have been won and exits that are simply organisational have taken place only in the Falklands and Grenada: two small islands. http://peacepalestine.blogspot.com/2005/08/even-escape-is-art-fabio-mini.html

· Palestinian Landloss from 1946 to 2000"> - the map which presents the various stages of land theft. http://peacepalestine.blogspot.com/2005/08/palestinian-landloss-from-1946-to-2000.html

· Bertrand Russell, Erich Fromm and Isaac Asimov on Palestinian Refugees – The thoughts of three great minds on the Palestinian refugee problem. http://peacepalestine.blogspot.com/2005/08/bertrand-russell-on-palestinian.html

· Lana Habash - Divide and Conquer: The Politics of Palestinian Human Rights - "Israeli civilians" within the Green Line are portrayed quite differently from Israeli settlers of the West Bank and Gaza, despite the similarities in their material relationship to the indigenous people of Palestine. These people are often portrayed in American media as innocent individuals who "want to live in peace" with their neighbors. These "civilians" are also settlers on Palestinian land occupied through military force. They live in houses and on property that belongs to Palestinian refugees. They claim rights to land and resources that have been taken by force and over which they maintain exclusive control under a system of laws based on racist ideology. The vast majority of these Israeli civilians advocate for separation and segregation. Even the Israeli Peace movement continues to maintain that Israeli injustice in Palestine does not include the forced displacement of Palestinians in 1948, but rather only the occupation of Palestinian land since 1967. These civilians fight for the preservation of their privileges as Jews within Israel that allow them to buy land (Palestinians cannot), travel freely (Palestinians cannot), settle in historic Palestine permanently (Palestinians born and raised in historic Palestine cannot return despite international laws guaranteeing their right to do so), express their political opinions freely without fear of detention or torture (Palestinians who are considered Israeli citizens do not enjoy this freedom), enjoy education, electricity, and free use of the water of historic Palestine (Palestinian "Israelis" often have none of these freedoms in the unrecognized villages). http://peacepalestine.blogspot.com/2005/08/lana-habash-divide-and-conquerthe.html

· Gilad Atzmon - The Tyranny of Pronouns on the Road to Fascism - Indeed, Livingstone and Blair represent two different and opposing worldviews. While Ken describes a liberal society comprised of many different people searching for their own authentic voice, Tony is articulating some radical nationalist thoughts. For Blair, the whole is far greater than its parts. For Blair, society is by far more vital than its members. The state is more important than its citizens. Blair articulates his worldview by cluttering it up with pronouns and assigning them intrinsic value. For Blair, the ‘we’ is obviously far more valuable than the ‘they’. http://peacepalestine.blogspot.com/2005/08/gilad-atzmon-tyranny-of-pronouns-on.html

· Singling out Muslims is Un-American -  by Mansour El-Kikhia:  In spite of what some say, America was never intended to be solely a Christian country. It was a land occupied by individuals running away from religious oppression. The Constitution separates church and state, and the first presidents can be described more as deists than adherents to any particular religion. Why, then, is religion being injected into the legal, political and educational systems? And, more important, why are we doing that at a time when we are urging Muslims to separate religion from politics and law? This leads me to only one conclusion. In much of the Arab and Muslim worlds, religious societies are trying to change secular governments, while in the United States a religious government is trying to change a secular society. http://peacepalestine.blogspot.com/2005/08/singling-out-muslims-is-un-american.html