Demo against rightist Israeli writer, Dublin 6th June, 18.30;

by Topper Mon Jun 05, 2006 23:42

Sorry guys, I'm afraid we're not gonna let you decree who we may protest against and who we must consider a "leftist". If we followed that logic, we'd have to agree that Sharon and Olmert are nice cuddly moderates, and Shimon Peres is a courageous man of peace. We'll judge people by their record, thanks very much, and when they advocate war crimes, we'll describe them as war crimes advocates.

by Ron Mon Jun 05, 2006 09:22

Go one, demonstrate at the wrong target, shoot your own leg, as Eastern Eye said.
Next time, while you'll refer to someone as a "war crimes advocate", and he will really be, people will treat him as a leftie.
Goodluck to you.

by Ali H. Sun Jun 04, 2006 17:06

that can be used to "justify" present and future anti-Palestinian pogroms to be conducted by the Israeli "Defence" Force. For sure the Nazis, Black and Tans and Northern Unionists are familiar with this kind of rhetoric, as are the survivors of the holocaust.

by David L - IPSC Sat Jun 03, 2006 09:31

In response to the above comments - firstly Yehoshua didn't propose withdrawl to the 1967 borders - he wants to annex the major settlement blocs and leave Jerusalem an open question until the Palestinians are softened up enough to make concessions.

Secondly, he has publicly supported the annexation Wall - which is stealing Palestinian land NOW, displacing Palestinians NOW - and ensuring any future Palestinian state will be a series of disconnected bantustans. This simply means Israel continuing the present war it is waging against Palestinians.

Which brings us to the important point - Yehoshua is not supporting war crimes in a theoretical sense, but war crimes which Israel is committing now.

Whether or not mainstream Israelis consider this position leftist is, as I've mentioned before, pretty bloody irrelevant.

by eastern eye Fri Jun 02, 2006 23:33

In the quote you gave, Yehoshua refers to a case inwhich the Palestinian state will start a war with Israel.

Q: Beyond the political argument, there are those who say that a unilateral withdrawal could trigger an eruption of violence, maybe even a full-scale war.

A: "I don't think so. They tried to scare us before the withdrawal from Lebanon, too. It's possible that there will be a war with the Palestinians. It's not necessary, it's not impossible. But if there is a war, it will be a very short one. Maybe a war of six days. Because after we remove the settlements and after we stop being an occupation army, all the rules of war will be different. We will exercise our full force. We will not have to run around looking for this terrorist or that instigator - we will make use of force against an entire population. We will use total force.
"Because from the minute we withdraw I don't want to know their names. I don't want any personal relations with them. I am no longer in a situation of occupation and policing and B'Tselem [the human rights organization]. Instead, I will be standing opposite them in a position of nation versus nation. State versus state. I am not going to perpetrate war crimes for their own sake, but I will use all my force against them. If there is shooting at Ashkelon, there is no electricity in Gaza."

All Yehoshua is saying, that in case of a war after the withdrawal, it would be state-against-state war, and not war against terrorists as it is now. No electricity in Gaza in case of shooting at Ashkelon (a city in the center of Israel, 57 km south of Tel Aviv) is quite just.

You do shoot your own leg in this demonstration, and not serving anyone interests here: you don't do favore for Palestine here, not for Israel, not to yourself.
Since Yehoshua is considered leftist, and even have a reputaion of someone who speaks against it abroad instead of making a serious discussion inside Israel - no one will take it seriously, if they will ever hear about it.

by Fintan Lane - Anti-War Ireland Fri Jun 02, 2006 22:30

Have you actually read through the full paragraph highlighted above? Try these lines, for example:

"We will make use of force against an entire population. We will use total force. Because from the minute we withdraw, I don't want to know their names."

Against an ENTIRE population.

by No vested interest Fri Jun 02, 2006 22:21

Any israeli public figure calling for a wthdrawal to pre '67 borders and an end to occupation and dismantling of settlements (unless I am reading that wrong) is not a 'rightist' israeli in my book.

I would agree that those other comments about cutting the electricity supply to gaza etc dont give the impression that hes an exemplary human being by a long shot - but why not stage a protest at the israeli embassy instead of singling out one author ?

by David L - IPSC Fri Jun 02, 2006 20:32

The proof isn't very hard to find, to be honest - it comes straight from the horses mouth. This quote

[A]fter we remove the settlements and after we stop being an occupation army, all the rules of war will be different. We will exercise our full force. We will not have to run around looking for this terrorist or that instigator--we will make use of force against an entire population. We will use total force. Because from the minute we withdraw I don't want to know their names. I don't want any personal relations with them. I am no longer in a situation of occupation and policing and B'Tselem [the human rights organization]. Instead, I will be standing opposite them in a position of nation versus nation. State versus state. I am not going to perpetrate war crimes for their own sake, but I will use all my force against them. If there is shooting at Ashkelon, there is no electricity in Gaza. We shall use force against an entire population. We shall use total force It will be a totally different war. It will be much harder on the Palestinians. If they shoot Qassam missiles at Ashkelon, we will cut electricity to Gaza. We shall cut communications in Gaza. We shall prevent fuel from Gaza. We shall use our full force as we did on the Egyptian (Suez) Canal in 1969. And then, when the Palestinian suffering will be totally different, much more serious, they will, by themselves, eliminate the terror.
(From "A nation that knows no bounds", Ha'aretz weekend magazine, an interview with A. B. . Yehoshua, 19.3.2004).

Elsewhere he supports the annexation of Palestinian land and the building of the annexation Wall. He has never called directly for ethnic cleansing, which in Israeli terms (I'm serious here) probably does qualify him as a leftist. In reality, however...

There's more on him at this link: http://www.indymedia.ie/article/76327.

See you on Tuesday

by No vested interst Fri Jun 02, 2006 15:19

Unlike some others posting here - I have no vested interest in either promoting israel or whitewashing it's crimes.

Can anyone provide any independent proof that this author is indeed an advocate of warcrimes by israel ?

If not this protest would only serve to dilute the moral force of future protests against those from israel who deserve it.

by eastern eye Fri Jun 02, 2006 14:02

A.B Yehoshua is a leftist, one of the attendents of the Geneva Accord. He never called for war crimes to be committed against Palestinian civilians, it's a matter of a reading comprehension.
But go on, make a demo.
If it will get to the Israeli media, people will:
1. Laugh of the irony.
2. Won't understand how fool can you be.
3. Ask themselves what the hell do you want, if a leftist writer gets that treatment.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A._B._Yehoshua

by i. whitten Thu Jun 01, 2006 21:44 iwhitten at imagecomsandiego dot com san diego, calif. USA 858 761 3405

I was a 19 year old American tourist in Jerusalem in June 1967--- when your "39 year occupation" began. It began with the Egyptians kicking out the U.N. peace keepers from the U.N. mandated demilitarized Sinai and the Egyptian army moving to the border of Israel. Nasser, the Egyptian dictator very clearly stated his intention to destroy the state of Israel. Both Syria and Jordan mobilized their armies and started shooting across the borders into Israel. Several other Arab states sent soldiers to participate in the anticipated destruction of Israel and the extermination of its people. The Palestinians were demonstrating in the streets of Gaza, just like the Muslim mobs have recently demonstrated over the Danish cartoons. Israel, a tiny democracy was surrounded by much larger Arab forces that threatened to overrun the country whose leaders made it clear that the Israelis left alive would envy the dead. Unfortunately for the Arabs, they lost the war and didn't have the chance to kill all the hated Jews. If they won the war, you could cry in your Guiness for 15 minutes on the 39th anniversary of the murder of the remnants of the Jewish people instead of the "occupation". Since 1967, Israel has been waiting for a negotiating partner. They found one in Sadat--- guess what: a peace agreement, territory return, no war. What Israel wants is a negotiated END TO THE CONFLICT. What the Palestinians want is AN END TO THE OCCUPATION AND A CONTINUATION OF THE CONFLICT. These goals are not compatible and will not produce a resolution nor an end to war. When the Palestinians begin to believe in coexistance with the state of Israel, a resolution will be possible. Until then, Israel will go on building its country, improving the life of its people, contributing to the world society, and defending itself. The Palestinians will go on training their children to be suicide bombers.