Today I was sent an op-ed, written by celebrated Israeli journalist, Yaron London, titled “The Victory of Cruelty”. In this op-ed, the man, who was apparently once known as the “peace camp man”, calls for another “disproportionate” blow to Gaza and disregard for ‘international public opinion“. The words ethics and morals aren’t mentioned once, the word law appears in regards to that wayward Islamic law (waywardness only implied, this is strictly my own syllogism). So how does it happen that Peace Camp Man stirs bloody violence and unethical criminality? I blame Zionism.
Peace Camp Man and Compassion
London seems to understand the problem and at the time of the 2006 Israel-Hezbollah war he had written:
Had we not driven out the Arabs who had settled in the Land of Israel, we would not have been able to build a stable country for the Jewish people, however, that’s how we created the Palestinian exile, which is the root cause of our problems.
Of course, I’ll argue till my face goes blue that indigenous don’t settle in the land they were born on- they just live there, and that the country for the Jewish people is anything but stable, but at least the technical admission of guilt is there. Nevertheless, Peace Camp Man doesn’t learn much from his own mistakes and in the same article, before the war is even over, he contemplates more destruction and the expansion of the already-not-so-stable-Jewish-lifestyle, at the expense of the faceless masses [since I can’t shut up, a few sarcastic notes are included in blue]:
“The next war is inevitable [why, are we planning on slaughtering more innocent civilians?], and we may assume that rockets will once again be fired on our home front, and are likely be worse the next time around. It has been proven that an offensive strategy that employs conventional weaponry does not eliminate the enemy [is Israel a ticking time bomb?], particularly an enemy prepared to destroy its own country in order to achieve a delusional victory. [The Zionist chronic displacement disorder strikes again!]
Israeli war tactics, according to which we must transfer the fighting to enemy land as quickly as possible, will not always be implemented.
We should, therefore, fortify ourselves, build protected spaces in every area where people congregate, accelerate the development of anti-missile solutions, improve the services rendered to those suffering the consequences of war, and plan the strategy by which we shall continue working under fire.” [I also suggest the known tactic of “duck and cover”.]
Peace Camp Man on Ethical Hypocrisy
That was 2006, but apparently the drastic change of Peace Camp Man already happened by 2005:
Ehud Asheri wonders (“Shock Treatment,” Haaretz, February 4 [Hebrew]) what led me to recommend a drastic escalation of the military strikes on Gaza (in an article in Yedioth Ahronoth and a radio interview with Razi Barkai). In so doing he represented many who wondered what had happened to the “peace camp man.”
In this 2005 piece, London reprimands said Ehud Asheri on his ethical hypocrisy:
How’s this for a paradox: Conduct that Asheri judges as moral will lead to the death of many more people than conduct he deems immoral… Asheri and those who agree with him are sentencing us to ethical hypocrisy, the opposite of morality. I suspect they fear more for spoiling Israel’s moral image than they care for the state’s existence.
I believe those who are in fear of the state’s image, also fear for its existence. I also believe Asheri was referring to his conscious and not the state, when he said:
The question of whether this will contribute to solving the problem is irrelevant. The true question is whether anyone is prepared to live in such a country.
London’s smearing of the left is typical war-mongering propaganda. In true Harry S. Truman style, he excuses his support for massacring a lot of people, with the claim that it will prevent the death of a lot of people. The big irony is, again, that he gets the facts right:
We have killed about 1,000 people in the clashes with the Palestinians in Gaza, half of whom were unarmed and most of whom were not involved in the fighting.
The Peace Camp Man’s conclusion, in the following sentence:
Since our combat methods are not leading to victory, there is no doubt that a great many more people not actively fighting us will die.
What is victory exactly? Or as I was constantly asking throughout “operation Cast Lead”: What’s the goal? Is there a deadline? At least a body-count quota… give me something, so I know the bloodshed stops at some point. But since Yaron “trigger happy” London doesn’t define victory, but only uses it as a filler for an illusionary spot on the horizon, all he’s doing is setting us up for what we already have: Another 62 years of bloody colonization.
Once again, just like in his latest article, London fails to admit that our violent oppression of the Palestinian people is the root cause of all our problems. Out of paranoid fear of what- at the time- has yet to happen, and in spite of the natural disgust the international community may feel towards a murdering entity, he prescribes the following:
A truce with Hamas will cost us and the Palestinians a higher price than we are paying now.
Let me add that measures of the kind we have taken recently will spare us the need to use draconian steps. Tightening the siege on Gaza and threatening to tighten it more have raised loud protests, but reduced the rocket fire and helped to write a different set of rules in the campaign against people with no moral inhibitions whatsoever.
Rather logically, the UN Security Council wrote down claus #1 of Article 33 of the Charter of the United Nations, which Israel signed (bolds by me):
The parties to any dispute, the continuance of which is likely to endanger the maintenance of international peace and security, shall, first of all, seek a solution by negotiation, enquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements, or other peaceful means of their own choice.
To finish off this highly esteemed public personality’s call for carnage, London exhibits the typical Israeli gross disrespect for international law (or common sense):
If the relative calm continues, it will be further proof that harsh, clear vision is better than sympathetic blindness.
Peace Camp Man on Cruelty and Victory
I began this article with London’s latest op-ed. Seems like the results of “operation Cast Lead”, which he deems “a shame, but not a disaster” have done nothing more, but embolden his hawkish stance:
The operation’s results are the victory of cruelty. It’s unfortunate. It’s brings us back to reality. It calls for conclusions. As time passes, the world, which as a short memory, will forget the harsh sights in Gaza, because more difficult sights, in other places in the world, will take up all the free space in the collective mind’s hard drive. The Gazans will be the only ones to remember. If we are proven false, we must arouse their memory with fire.
Did I say hawkish? I meant sociopathic. How else do you explain the admission of cruelty and its casual dismissal as “unfortunate”? How else do you explain that when one commits an act of admitted cruelty (differing “right” from “wrong”), their conclusion is to “arouse memory with fire”? And who talks with that kind of savage zeal, but a zealot?
It’s true that Yaron London is only one man, but he undoubtedly mirrors the majority of Israeli opinion, as evidenced by the fact that he’s coanchor of one of the most popular political shows in Israeli television. This fact also makes it clear how much influence he has over his already brainwashed target audience. A typical comment to this op-ed looks like this:
“International opinion shouldn’t be a consideration at all.
In the days before Israel started obsessing over international opinion, Israel was highly respected, by friends and foes alike, as a gutsy little nation. Now that Israel stupidly does obsess over international opinion, we are subject to endless condemnation. Nobody respects a nation which doesn’t respect itself. Israel needs to do what is right for our nation. Internatinal opinion shouldn’t be a consideration at all.
Chaim, Israel (12.29.09)” [#1]
“The Israeli left re-learning what it knew in1948
Why did it take , so much time? (12.29.09)” [#3]
“Yaron and the Adrenaline
Sometimes, the Leftist Yaron takes a Zionist stance. Good for him. Good for us.
The problem is, that it doesn`t take long,.Once his adrenaline level lowers, he becomes what he really is: A Leftist.
Nora Tel Aviv (12.29.09)” [#10]
To Peace Camp Man and all these sociopathic zealots, I’d just like to say that as time passes, the world, which is slowly freeing itself from imperial rule, will only be exposed to more and more of the harsh (try “horrific”) sights in Gaza, along with more difficult sights (how do you measure?), in other places in the world, because there is no end to the free space in the collective mind’s hard drive. The Gazans will not be the only ones to remember. If we are proven false, let’s hope no one feels the need to arouse our memory with fire.
One thought on “Peace Camp Man – Profile of a Zionist Pacifist”
Well said, Tali!