The NS article quotes a guy named Gerald Steinberg, who runs an NGO called, er, NGO Monitor. It's just about the most craven, disingenuous and bloody silly thing that I've ever read (and I've read a lot of bollocks)...
Consider the demented logic that staggers through this paragraph...“The public relations and media battle is a central arena in the Arab-Israeli conflict, and the image of victimisation is a core part of the Palestinian strategy. B'Tselem's video campaign has become an integral part of this battle, and there is no parallel which highlights Palestinian violence or provocations that lead to Israeli responses shown in the videos. If such videos existed, this would reduce the strength of the victimisation myth. It is morally important to prevent Palestinian violence from undermining Israel's moral standards.”
Steinberg believes that Israelis responding to the actions of some Palestinians with disproportionate violence is the fault of all Palestinians. It's similar to a man kicking a woman half to death after someone that looked a bit like her slapped his friend.
Certainly, there have been provocational acts, but when one's provoked it remains one's responsiblity to decide how - or, indeed, whether - one responds. One is culpable for this response. As B'Tselem's Sarit Michaeli has said...
“To me, no provocation allows someone to beat an old farmer with a baseball bat."The rationale can only come from racism; the notion that a homogeneous people can bear collective responsibility. Then it doesn't matter who gets hit, and it doesn't matter how often. 'Cos these Palestinians, y'know, they provoke...they're violent...they have strategies...
No comments:
Post a Comment