Dear Colleagues, see url: http://cryptome.org/2014/07/il-global-language-dictionary.pdfI was watching tv last night on BBC2 news where there was an interview conducted with a spokesman for the government of Israel, regarding the conflict between them and Hamas. The reporter asked the usual questions about alleged atrocities committed, the killing of many Arab children and civilians through massive bombings and shootings, whether such mass bombing by the Israel government on mosques, schools and hospitals was disproportionate and so on. The reporter got nowhere, every question was fended off, by either another question or by referring to failings in UK or US military actions in the past...or appeals to the common interests and common language of democracy, liberty and equality and so on...without referral to collateral damage of course...that is an American term for surgical operations which overstep the mark.
Apparently, it is getting rid of Hamas that is the problem. If only Hamas would disappear and the people of Gaza could see sense, instead of supporting terrorism and teaching their children to hate Jews and the Israelis and their way of life, using practical examples of what is happening to them every day; then everything would be hunky dory and Arabs and Israelis would be able to live in peace together for ever and ever, just as they do in Israel, with a grateful Israel as the rich, benevolent employer and occupier, being willing to supply all those necessaries and luxuries of life, such as peace, food, water and beach surfing and sun bathing in perfect peace and harmony. What a lovely, optimistic outlook to have on life...the power of positive thinking...Seneca gone mad...
I have noticed this strategy any number of times and of course all government spokesman of any country use these tactics to fend off, delay accountability or divert the question away from that which is at hand. The thing was, that I have seen this strategy used so many times by the Israelis, they really are quite skilled and clever at it. So much so, I wondered how it was developed and where it came from. The answer lies in the above url. The Global Language Dictionary published by the Israel Project is a document which is confidential and not supposed to be published for public consumption...though you can find it on cryptome. I can't think why...Maybe the Palestinians and the people of the Gaza strip and West Bank should read it and learn from it and then the two countries and nations and cultures would be able to get on better together. I wonder if it is published in Arabic...
It is a pity about the lack of resources from which Israel suffers of course, and the vast amounts of oil which lies out to sea within easy reach if it weren't for the Gaza strip lying in between, with all sorts of claims being made on who owns it and who has the right to exploit it. Pity too about the huge wall that is being built around the Palestinians, enclosing Israel itself in a huge camp, with the ostensible reason to protect it from incursions by the Arab terrorists and the rockets which are being fired into their territory. Pity too, about the water which Israel needs to supply its people and industries in a very hot country, and the fact that the rivers run through lots of Arab states and not through Israel. Pity too, that the Israelis have had to give back some of the land they have illegally annexed for the creation of living settlements with the aim of creating a greater Israel.
The alleged recent statement too, by the Deputy Speaker of the Knesset, if true, certainly shows that the wrong kind of lessons have been learned from the Second World War, in my view. see url:
I have no answer to the Arab Israeli conflict...of course, and I have no desire to blame As Spike Milligan once said, "I think that war is barmy"...though, it is interesting to note that the Scots and English and other nation states in our disunited kingdom managed to overcome their national and border disputes a couple of centuries ago, and though they may not live in perfect harmony, at least they manage to resolve their conflicts peaceably, without killing or torturing one another apart from the through the savage thrust of debate and demonstration. I suppose that is one of the ways of defining democracy and democratic practices...although it leaves plenty of scope for other ways of allowing for the expression of dissent or other points of view. The Americans too, had their Civil War, the question is, their representatives had to sit down and resolve their differences afterwards, and in such a way that it didn't lead to more armed conflict. Did it achieve anything which couldn't be achieved through jaw jaw, rather than waw waw?
It's a funny ole world right enough.As Karl Marx said in relation to the Parish Commune of 1889. "History goes in circles, the first time it happens it is a drama, the next time a farce".