Lunatics, vol. 22

 In response to this:

https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/22/business/larry-summers-harvard-antisemitism/index.html

Larry Summers blasts Harvard over antisemitism: ‘I have lost confidence’

EXCERPT – why Summers calls Penslar a terrible choice to head a taskforce on antisemitism

Prof. Derek Penslar

I wrote:

What's the problem with Prof. Penslar's statements? Everything is true:

1. Criticism of Israel is NOT antisemitism. In fact, 95% of "antisemitism" are mere just criticism of the evil Israeli government (not Israel itself).

2. Israel’s long-standing occupation of Gaza has yielded a regime of apartheid.

3. The ultimate purpose of the controversial judicial overhaul is to ethnically cleanse all territories under Israeli rule of their Palestinian population.

(Sorry Ms. Barbara Stern, your email address was not yet listed as Spam).

Norman cohen (ishahrofah@gmail.com) wrote:

The Effendi comes across as a secular leftist fool as much as Wolfensohn comes across as a stupid fool.

       With Israelis like the Effendi in control, Israel would not last long.

Netanyahu will go down in history as rescuing Israel from Marxism, enabling Israel to become the economic and technological powerhouse that it is today.  It is the key to Israel's future as the USA turns into shit.

I agree that it's time for new leadership in Israel.

     A time always comes for new leadership.

My Israeli friend, Sherwin Pomeranz, a columnist and blogger as well as international businessman, is making suggestions for when the time comes.

As with Golda Meir, there is a right time to step down.

                                         Norman

On January 23, Norman cohen (ishahrofah@gmail.com) wrote:

A lawsuit has been filed against Harvard.

      We'll see how that goes.

                        Norman

I wrote:

You can just as well sue the wind for breaking down houses during a hurricane.

You can just as well sue Gravity for killing you when you fall from a 10 story building.

You can just as well sue the explosives that killed 10 Israeli soldiers last night (no wait, update: 21 men), in the War to Save Netanyahu's Ass (my son was there to help recover the bodies).

That's the reality - Israel became an Apartheid state under Netanyahu. The war continues because making a pause to release hostages - means the end of his government.

And you guys helped in making this happen, by supporting those evils. That's how you will be remembered in history.

But we, all Israelis, will bring him down, be it by new elections or by force, in the next few weeks. The rage is already starting.

Stay tuned.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zIYtVEZOnlE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pqzD-5Nhebk

https://www.aljazeera.com/program/newsfeed/2024/1/21/anti-government-protesters-demand-new-elections-in-israel-amid-gaza-war

Howard Berglas (howard@btcapital.ca) wrote:

Effendi is the Hamas postor boy for the west.

Barry is harmless.

Joy DB (jdbresumes@aol.com) wrote:

Avner's very ugly and disgusting letter (OMG, that bastard is filled with such HATE and sheer IGNORANCE!!) is a prime example of why I blocked his nasty and very ugly emails last year from ever darkening my in-basket!!  But I'm not blaming you, Howard, for your own keeping my email on your thread; that's just how "the cookie crumbles;" and, in this case, at least my early decision to block him has been MORE that justified!!  But I'm also grateful to at least be aware of (and reinforced in my initial decision!) what those total yidiots (like Avner!) are thinking!!   Joy DB

Howard Berglas (howard@btcapital.ca) wrote:

Avner is not an idiot . He is pure evil.

A chat I had: Boycott Israel

I had a little chat with a scholar presented in an email to me, as a "non-Jewish Scottish professor". Dr. Denis MacEoin is an expert in Middle Eastern affairs and was a senior editor of the Middle East Quarterly. He wrote this letter to his students, of The Edinburgh Student's Association to boycott all things Israeli, in which they claim Israel is under an apartheid regime.

Dr. MacEoin's blog: http://mid-eastplus.blogspot.co.il/



TO: The Committee Edinburgh University Student Association.

May I be permitted to say a few words to members of the EUSA?  I am an Edinburgh graduate (MA 1975) who studied Persian, Arabic and Islamic History in Buccleuch Place under William Montgomery Watt and Laurence Elwell Sutton, two of Britain 's great Middle East experts in their day.  I later went on to do a PhD at Cambridge and to teach Arabic and Islamic Studies at Newcastle University .  Naturally, I am the author of several books and hundreds of articles in this field.  I say all that to show that I am well informed in Middle Eastern affairs and that, for that reason, I am shocked and disheartened by the EUSAmotion and vote.

I am shocked for a simple reason: there is not and has never been a system of apartheid in Israel .  That is not my opinion, that is fact that can be tested against reality by any Edinburgh student, should he or she choose to visit Israel to see for themselves.  Let me spell this out, since I have the impression that those members of EUSA who voted for this motion are absolutely clueless in matters concerning Israel, and that they are, in all likelihood, the victims of extremely biased propaganda coming from the anti-Israel lobby.

Being anti-Israel is not in itself objectionable.  But I'm not talking about ordinary criticism of Israel.  I'm speaking of a hatred that permits itself no boundaries in the lies and myths it pours out.  Thus, Israel is repeatedly referred to as a "Nazi" state.  In what sense is this true, even as a metaphor?  Where are the Israeli concentration camps?  The einzatsgruppen?  The SS?  The Nuremberg Laws?  The Final Solution?  None of these things nor anything remotely resembling them exists in Israel, precisely because the Jews, more than anyone on earth, understand what Nazism stood for.

It is claimed that there has been an Israeli Holocaust in Gaza (or elsewhere).  Where?  When?  No honest historian would treat that claim with anything but the contempt it deserves.  But calling Jews Nazis and saying they have committed a Holocaust is as basic a way to subvert historical fact as anything I can think of.

Likewise apartheid.  For apartheid to exist, there would have to be a situation that closely resembled how things were in South Africa under the apartheid regime.  Unfortunately for those who believe this, a weekend in any part of Israel would be enough to show how ridiculous the claim is.

That a body of university students actually fell for this and voted on it is a sad comment on the state of modern education.  The most obvious focus for apartheid would be the country's 20% Arab population.  Under Israeli law, Arab Israelis have exactly the same rights as Jews or anyone else; Muslims have the same rights as Jews or Christians; Baha'is, severely persecuted in Iran, flourish in Israel, where they have their world center; Ahmadi Muslims, severely persecuted in Pakistan and elsewhere, are kept safe by Israel; the holy places of all religions are protected under a specific Israeli law.  Arabs form 20% of the university population (an exact echo of their percentage in the general population).

In Iran, the Bahai's (the largest religious minority) are forbidden to study in any university or to run their own universities: why aren't your members boycotting Iran?  Arabs in Israel can go anywhere they want, unlike blacks in apartheid South Africa.  They use public transport, they eat in restaurants, they go to swimming pools, they use libraries, they go to cinemas alongside Jews - something no blacks were able to do in South Africa.

Israeli hospitals not only treat Jews and Arabs, they also treat Palestinians from Gaza or the West Bank.  On the same wards, in the same operating theatres.

In Israel , women have the same rights as men: there is no gender apartheid.  Gay men and women face no restrictions, and Palestinian gays often escape into Israel, knowing they may be killed at home.

It seems bizarre to me that LGBT groups call for a boycott of Israel and say nothing about countries like Iran , where gay men are hanged or stoned to death.  That illustrates a Mindset that beggars belief.

Intelligent students thinking it's better to be silent about regimes that kill gay people, but good to condemn the only country in the Middle East that rescues and protects gay people.  Is that supposed to be a sick joke?

University is supposed to be about learning to use your brain, to think rationally, to examine evidence, to reach conclusions based on solid evidence, to compare sources, to weigh up one view against one or more others.  If the best Edinburgh can now produce are students who have no idea how to do any of these things, then the future is bleak.

I do not object to well-documented criticism of Israel .  I do object when supposedly intelligent people single the Jewish state out above states that are horrific in their treatment of their populations.  We are going through the biggest upheaval in the Middle East since the 7th and 8th centuries, and it's clear that Arabs and Iranians are rebelling against terrifying regimes that fight back by killing their own citizens.

Israeli citizens, Jews and Arabs alike, do not rebel (though they are free to protest).  Yet Edinburgh students mount no demonstrations and call for no boycotts against Libya, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, and Iran.  They prefer to make false accusations against one of the world's freest countries, the only country in the Middle East that has taken in Darfur refugees, the only country in the Middle East that gives refuge to gay men and women, the only country in the Middle East that protects the Bahai's...  Need I go on?

The imbalance is perceptible, and it sheds no credit on anyone who voted for this boycott.  I ask you to show some common sense.  Get information from the Israeli embassy.  Ask for some speakers.  Listen to more than one side.  Do not make your minds up until you have given a fair hearing to both parties.  You have a duty to your students, and that is to protect them from one-sided argument.

They are not at university to be propagandized.  And they are certainly not there to be tricked into anti-Semitism by punishing one country among all the countries of the world, which happens to be the only Jewish state.  If there had been a single Jewish state in the 1930's (which, sadly, there was not), don't you think Adolf Hitler would have decided to boycott it?

Your generation has a duty to ensure that the perennial racism of anti-Semitism never sets down roots among you.  Today, however, there are clear signs that it has done so and is putting down more.  You have a chance to avert a very great evil, simply by using reason and a sense of fair play.  Please tell me that this makes sense.  I have given you some of the evidence.  It's up to you to find out more.

Yours sincerely,

Denis MacEoin



I wrote to Dr. MacEoin:

One can be a very well educated scholar, and yet be ignorant about the state of his own research.
Who said that Israel was a Nazi state? All we said was that there are some Judo-Nazis in Israel, which is true. Did the police manage to catch the (presumable Jewish) murderers of Ali (18 month old) and his father Saad Dawabsha? No. If the killers were Arabs, you can be sure they would have been caught in a few days.

Yes, PM Netanyahu visited the remaining of the Arab family, and promised to catch the killers. Being Israelis, we all know quite well what Netanyahu's promises are worth.

Israel is an apartheid state - I'm willing to be honest enough to admit that this is not a fact, but it's my own interpretation. But it's based on every reasonable standard. In my opinion, no counter-propaganda can refute this.

If this legitimate criticism of (not Israel, but the Israeli government) is regarded anti-Semitism, them I don't believe there is any anti-Semitism in the world, beyond the regular racism to any race other that the Jews.

I encourage Scottish students to go ahead and boycott everything Israeli, to save my country from its evil government. Thank you!

Cheers,
Avner E.

Yet another answer to Ms. Max Coutinho

Dear Ms. Continho,

First, I must apologize to you, Ms. Continho, for not recognizing that you belonged to the better gender. I should have noticed this from your language, sorry about that…

To the point: the majority of Palestinians elected Hamas (in the Gaza Strip only!), not because the majority of Palestinians have become so fanatically religious or anti-peace (although the Israeli government is giving them all the reasons to be so), but – because Hamas, in addition to being a terrorist organization, is also a welfare organization and jobs provider. This is much like the Shas party of Israel, which is an ultra-orthodox, anti-democratic political party (they don’t allow women in their roster; they are being led by an orthodox Rabbi strictly according to the Jewish Halachic rules – or so they say, I wish that it was even partially true; etc.); their supporters are not necessarily religious at all (they are what we call “traditionalists”), but they still elected this party, for providing long education days with hot meals to their children, and jobs to the parents.

In short, electing Hamas doesn’t make the Palestinian public any less innocent, compared to the Israeli public which elected this evil and dishonest government.

As to your point, that Hamas are using innocent people as “human shields”: this is much like the Jewish settlers, who put their women and children’s lives at risk, by living in towns and villages provocatively built inside and far out in Palestinian territory. Not to mention, that the IDF (the Israeli military) is “cowardly using” (as you said about Hamas) local residents, uninvolved in combat, as human shields during search missions. This procedure was eventually banned by Israeli Supreme Court, but has been used nonetheless occasionally.

As for your (own) interpretation to the Declaration of San Remo: well it is, in my humble opinion, completely wrong. Here’s why: the November 2, 1917 declaration (known as “the Balfour Declaration”), upon which San Remo’s was based, called for “a national home for the Jewish people”, and as you rightly mentioned, must not “prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities”. If you are so meticulous in reading the civil and religious rights as not pertaining to “national aspirations”, then you must be just as meticulous as to acknowledge, that a “national home” does not necessarily mean an independent state! Because, although the Israeli government has long ago acknowledged the right of the Palestinian minority for self-government, it has always done its best to deprive them form giving this a political implementation, but rather fulfil this be some kind of “autonomy”, whatever that means. Don’t get me wrong, I am all for a Jewish State in the land of Israel; I have fought for it, and I brought my boys up to do the same. But if the 1917 declaration does not imply a state for the Palestinians, then honesty obliges that it does not imply a Jewish state, just as well. Not to mention, that the end goal, “to protect the civil and religious rights” as you said, has never been fully achieved – as an official government committee (the Or Committee, 2000) has clearly stated.

Fast forwarding to 1947: the UN resolution, taught in Jewish school as “calling for the establishment of a Jewish State”, actually called for establishing two states, Jewish and Palestinian, the last part omitted from the curriculum for some reason.

But I will give you that (something that the Right-wingers fail to do to us on the Left), that there could be an interpretation to the legal issue, which is different than mine. My point it simple: the legal situation is not what really matters (and this is what I meant by saying “irrelevant” in my post). Because, even if the Palestinians do not have the right for their own state, from the international law point of view – then what do we do with them? If we don’t give them full civil rights (which you actually agreed to do, and that includes the right to vote – which would lead to a Muslim Prime Minister pretty soon, and, in many people’s view – the end of the Zionist project) – if we don’t give them that and hold them as second-class residents, then Israel cannot be truly regarded as a democratic state. We can’t expel them, we can’t hold them occupied – so what do we do? The only answers I have heard so far from fellows in the Right are – Israel Trust in God almighty, or that we should just wait for them to learn to accept us and the wonderful life we generously give them here, or that they will just go away.

Regarding Apartheid: No, Ms. Continho, about 2 million Palestinians are NOT allowed to vote for the Israeli government. Can’t you see that you defeat your own argument? – You claim that the Palestinians do not deserve their own state, yet at the same time you exclude them from the Israeli public, when you claim that in Israel, everybody has the right to vote! So it’s either you are against a Palestinian State, which renders all Palestinians under Israeli control lack the basic right to control their own fate, or – you claim that voting is free for all in Israel, by which the occupied territories are excluded from Israel.

And regarding sexual relations – it is not illegal to have inter-race relationship; but almost anybody who will try to date somebody from the different religion will soon find out that it’s nearly impossible. For this, by the way, I blame both sides and not only the Jews.

For your knowledge, I do acknowledge “the fact that the Palestinians murder civilians”, and I don’t “refuse to criticize them for that poor approach”. In fact, in most Arab countries, thousands of people have been murdered and abused by their own people, and I attribute this to the poor moral standards in effect in those countries, especially in Syria but also some in Palestine. This by the way has nothing to do with Islam, but with the nasty and cruel regimes in those countries in modern times. In short, those who did it are primitive criminals, justifying their crimes by a distorted and inhuman interpretation of the Islam, a phenomenon which, I must say, is very common in the modern era in many Muslim societies. But this can’t justify killing civilians by individual Jews (like Dr. Baruch Goldstein, who is considered a martyr by a great part of the fundamental Jewish right wing), but also by the Israeli military!

I don’t know how you came to put this thought in my head and words in my keyboard, that I did not criticize the Arab side. This is either a remarkable demonstration of mind-reading (albeit totally wrong), or – a demagogic argument, very typical, I must say, to the right wing rhetoric.

To claim that “the international law says that this disputed piece of land belongs to the Jewish People, period” is nothing more than reducing the argument to a level that nobody can argue, because you, the knows-all, have put a period at the end of your sentence. If you had enough intellectual honesty, you would admit that this is just your own interpretation, which I do respect, but is just as good as the opposite one.

If you conclude by your interpretation to Ismail Haniah, that “the Palestinians do not want peace and they will never recognize the Jewish State” then you show another remarkable ability of predicting the future; and in seriousness – a not-so-remarkable manner by which you comprehend the situation, if you think that Haniah represents the majority of Palestinians.

With all due respect,

Avner Efendowicz

An Answer to Ms. Max Coutinho, on Israeli Occupation of Palestine

Dear Ms. Coutinho,

As before, I would like to address your claims one at a time, which necessitates a separate post. Please refer to my new post, following this comment.

I don’t argue the right of Israel to defend itself against enemies. In fact, I was a combat soldier and officer in the Israeli military, and so have been my two boys (one of them non-officer in fact). However, I can’t agree to your phrase “at all costs”, which may point out to immoral measures. Please clarify if this is not the case: does “at all costs” include the cost of the lives of innocent Palestinian people? Or you think that there are no innocent among them? Please clarify.

I am not focusing on one side only, I am well aware that some Palestinians have committed terrible crimes. I am just puzzled and taken by the fact that this is being abused by so many right-wing speakers, to justify the wrong doings of the Israeli (I should say actually, the Zionist side). One evil cannot justify another evil. And the actions of the Israeli government at this moment in history are evil, to a great extent. The definitely don’t “abide by international agreements” in many cases, for which I can give you a few examples.

According to the International Law, “the territories” are truly occupied. The may be “disputed” as for their political future, and there is no dispute among international legal entities that they have been occupied in a war, and therefore there is no freedom and protection of the law for all who are living there – only for the Jews. Did we mention Apartheid? What is Apartheid if not separate law for different people, based on their ethnicity? Further to that, even the greatest friend of Israel never recognized its right to build the settlements, and this is the reason that the US sees even the Capital of Israel as part of the Settlement system, which is why they won’t build their embassy there!

Yes, I have read the part of the Forth Geneva Convention which is relevant. There is a dispute if Israel has the right to build settlements in the occupied territories, according to that convention. Section 49 of the Convention states that an occupier cannot transfer people into the occupied territory. Israel has signed this document, but stated that it didn’t apply to the West Bank, because – well, because it never belonged to any country. Some excuse.

On top of all that, the Israeli government, this is my interpretation as a resident of this country), is using the Settlement system in order to prevent any possible future solution; so claiming that it has the right to settle there “until its final status is resolved” is a bitter irony. Even the Israeli supreme court has acknowledged that at least some of the settlements (such as “East Matityahu”) have been built to annex Palestinian territories, and not as the State claimed in court (which was refuted by military experts), that it was built for security reasons.

What I call “irrelevant” is not because I can’t explain it (as your demagogic rhetoric suggests), but because, if Palestinians lived in those territories 100 years, 1 year or one day before the Jews came in – is irrelevant; you can’t kick them out just because the ancient Romans kicked my ancestors out – that’s not the Palestinian’s fault.

Again, your assumption that I “get a sense of deep joy when you see young Arab boy throwing rocks at Israeli vehicles and murdering people” is just another sign of your demagogia. Can’t you criticize your government’s action without feeling joy when people are murdered?

By stating that I said “ the Jews have no claim to their own land” you are, again, putting in my mouth words which I never said (which is quite typical to right-wing advocates, I must say). Did I say that? Or did I say that there are two nations here who are fighting for a piece of land which most of them already agree that it can be shared (read the polls, and check out the Geneva Initiative: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geneva_Initiative

or The People's Voice: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_People%27s_Voice)

You will find there the same guidelines for any future solution which has been around for more than a decade now, but the Israeli government is constantly refusing even to have one discussion about it. Strangely enough, it is supported by the big majority of Jews and Palestinians (according to polls), but one of the most stable Israeli governments ever doesn’t acknowledge them! Strange you say? Absolutely, it’s one of the mysteries of Israeli politics. More on that in the next post on my blog.

On War Criminals, on both sides

Prof. Ruth Lapidot, who is about to receive "The Israel Award," called it "a very good judicial system":
http://www.haaretz.co.il/hasite/pages/ShArtPE.jhtml?itemNo=689376&contrassID=2&subContrassID=2&sbSubContrassID=0

And, here is the reality:
http://news.walla.co.il/?w=//868931

I know that I'm going to step on very sensitive nerves here, but I have to say this: Prof. Lapidot says that since Israel has "a very good judicial system", there is no need to prosecute Military officers in the International Court. My opinion is, that prosecuting Dan Halutz, Mofaz and other major officers is the only way that these issues will be ever addressed, just as it was done against South Africa, because of the way Israel is treating her own issued reports.
As hard as it may sound to you guys, I truly think that Israel resembles the Apartheid to a great degree...


To which my dear friend Yair responded:

Avner,
Please tell me you do not support what is going on against Israeli officers in Europe. I just read about, it and about how the Hamas leaders can travel all over the world while Israeli officers can not. If you tell me you support any of this outrageous activity, it will be a new mark in our relations.
Being left wing is one thing, being anti Israeli, as you were in some events, is way way way over the limit.


So I wrote to him:

Yair,
I think that once again you confuse anti-terrorism and anti-humanism with anti-Israelism. I am an Israeli who is 100% in favor of my country, and THEREFORE I think that war criminals such as Halutz and Mofaz must be punished. Yesh Gevul has tried to bring them to court in Israel, but the supreme court has not been willing to rule in the case for a few years now. Note: they didn't say "this is not a judicial issue, therefore we wont discuss it", or: "we decree that under these circumstances, it is a necessary evil to do Targeted Killing", as you would expect if there was no case - it looks like they think that there IS a case, so they don't want to rule. Yesh Gevul didn't want to take this to the ICJ, but the "good judicial system" of Israel does not do it's duty (even to dismiss the case!), so they had no choice if they didn't want to be passive supporters of these crimes. Read Akiva Eldar for yourself! Who is supposed to take care of settlements, who the government of Israel itself declared as illegal? Where is the Attorney General? Where are the judges? This has become almost exactly like South Africa, and only international pressure can be effective here.
I am writing this with goose bumps and my hands are sweating. It's very difficult for me to be against everybody, I don't like it at all. But I truly believe in that, after thinking about this every day, a few times a day, of the past 24 years.
I once asked a Jewish lawyer who is involved in this activity, why everybody is after Israeli officers and nobody says anything about the Hamas and other terrorists. He replied that we, the Israelis, are after the Hamas, and nobody is really doing anything to Israeli war criminals. I think that he is right.
I'm sorry, our friendship is precious to me but I cannot lie to you nor to myself. I will understand you if this will be the last email you''ll read from me... Sorry for the tragic situation.

Then Yair wrote:
This is the third answer I amwriting (the previous two were not sent). I envy you Avner - you always have the answers and you always know what is right.
Let's just summarize what we do not agree upon:
Haluz = Yassin
Israel = South Africa
Avner = Mother Theresa
Yair = Kadima supporter
I believe you that your hand are shaking and I also believe that when you're older and our hands really shake you'll remember these days with shame. Just like Jane Fonda members her visit to the Vietnamese base.
Shabat Shalom


I wrote:
If you don't want to talk about this, that's fine. But your reply was unfair.
I don't have all the answers. I just have an opinion. It's different then yours, sorry about that.
Halutz is not like Yassin (he is more handsome). He is like Barguti maybe.
Israel is less racist than SA, but resembles it to the extent that deserves much criticism. Not everything that is not the holocaust, is right. The holocaust was so immense, and South Africa was SO racist, that even 1/10 of that is bad enough. Sometimes what kills an elephant, can be good to kill a fly. Mishlei Esopus.
I am no Mother Theresa. Therefore I hate, and therefore I was not sad when Arafat died, and I wont be sad when Sharon will pass away, either. That's not nice to say, and that's no Mother Theresa but that's me. You can vote Kadima if you like, no hard feelings. That's a legitimate party.
Shabat Shalosh.


Yair wrote:
One more thing.
Behind all the racism in Israel there is one thinking. WE actually do not want the Arabs in Israel to feel at home. And you know what, I can understand this. Had the Arab countries accepted us after 1948, it would have beed different, totally different. I trully believe that Israelis (all of them) would have accepted Arabs as their neighbours, their coworkers and so on. We are pretty good people inside and I truly believe we are better than others. The war situation between Arab countries and Israel (Ahmadinajad was not the first to talk like that) caused Israelis to be very suspectful towards all Arabs. That caused the discrimination (that I admit exists). And that's why comparing us to SA is wrong. You can compare us to the Greek/Turkey situation. There is not much love there and a Greek will not feel at home in Turkey. That doesn't mean Turkey is racist toward Greeks and vice versa. In SA, blacks were slaves, in Israel Israeli Arabs are not slaves, they are not first class citizens because deep inside we suspect tht they all want to get rid of us. The fact that legally they have all the rights (voting, universities and more) proves that in a perfect situation they would have been perfect citizens.
Bottom line, we (Jews) are better then other nations and that includes our army, our judicial system and more. The reason I call you Theresa is that you don't think it's enough and ignore (I think) the global reasons why things are as they are.
Having said that, we still agree that we (Israelis) have to clean the bad and rotten apples we have and we have a lot of them (because of the situation). Halutz, in my opinion, does not deserve in any context to be called one of these apples.

To which I responded:
Here you make some very good points, which I find very difficult to argue with. I agree that the Arabs did not and do not make my task as an extreme leftist very easy, because they have screwed things up much more than necessary, for their basically right cause of getting independence. The fact that they didn't accept us here 60 years (= a long time) ago is true. I can understand that they felt that they were required to pay off for the result of the holocaust, which they had nothing to do with. It is easy to get carried away by hatred when new people take over your land, even when it's done perfectly legally, and people in this situation are very much prone to instigation. Having said that, I completely don't justify taking violent measures. But I think that we can understand them, with all the evil that they (some of them) did, at least to the extent that people expect me to understand the settlers, with all the evil that they (some of them) have done. And I still believe that basically they are no different then us, but they were instigated by some evil leaders to do that. I can realte to your feeling, that we are basically good people inside, but I think that we are not aware that the Arabs feel exactly the same about themselves, and they don't understand how we can be so evil to them. This is another example of how good people can sometimes do evil things. As you know, I think that this insight applies to all people, Jews included. Sorry, but I see a complete symmetry here. This is not because I'm more sensitive than you are, I just happen to think differently for some strange reason. But in light of your good points it is very difficult for me to back this opinion of mine. I still think so but I cannot prove it. I may be just a stupid stubborn, but I think that I'm in good company of most people who wont change their minds even if you show them day from night.

We are repeating these things over and over again, but I still find it interesting.

Avner