From: Eli Horwatt (email suppressed)
Date: Sun Jan 11 2009 - 09:50:41 PST
It seems very strange that this conversation initiated from the rather
neutral call for images from Gaza to be recorded.
From Malgosia, I observe what has become a typical reactionary response to
attempts to represent in the media what Israel is effectively preventing by
restricting foreign journalists into Gaza.
Most of the time, I think Zionists become angry amidst legitimate critiques
of Israel because they presume that critics either a) believe the country
shouldn't exist or b) believe that Palestinians have the right to violently
resist the occupation through the killing of civilians. Is it possible for
you, Malgosia to accept that someone may not support either of these
positions AND YET still critique Israel?
Everyone know Hamas is a violent terrorist organization launching rockets
from schools and civilian domiciles; i doubt anyone here condones that.
BUT, you are effectively stating that it is sad, but civillians are
justifiably killed when Hamas launches rockets from these areas. I think
this is ethically short sighted. As a democratic state that all people
should demand act responsibly in times of war, it is INDEFENSIBLE for
attacks to occur against schools. What should the army do? They should send
in ground forces. I know that this is difficult and may at times be
ineffective; but you know what? Too Fucking Bad. No matter who is using a
school rocket attacks (which is more than a provocation, but Hamas' means of
winning the P.R. battle against Israel by causing more Palestinian civilian
deaths) Israel cannot justify shelling schools. Doing so implicitly suggests
that the civilians are complicit (which is obviously not always true) or
that Hamas is somehow directly responsible (which is absurd).
How can firing missles into civilian areas be defended on this
listserve--amongst Hamas or the Israeli military.
On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 12:09 PM, malgosia askanas <email suppressed> wrote:
> I love it: first you question whether Frameworks is the right place to
> debate politics, and then you follow it up with a provocative reply to my
> post - to which, however, I am not supposed to reply (if I want to be a good
> citizen) because Frameworks is not the right place to debate politics. Oy,
> it's all smoke and mirrors.
> And I also love the fact that you are attacking me for one-sidedness and
> flawed arguments, but you are not impelled to make any such reply to the
> people who emit idiotic one-liners, like "a replay of the Warsaw ghetto".
> These are neither one-sided nor flawed?
> And then you proceed to put things on my mouth - another hallowed
> technique. No, I did NOT say anywhere that the entire 800 casualty figure
> is a result of Hamas using human shields. Most of it is the result of
> Israel doing what it has set out to do - striking back at Hamas. And you
> know what? To say that "the weapons of Hamas are the weapons of the poor",
> as if that qualified Hamas' actions for some special dispensation and
> Israeli tolerance, is condescending toward Hamas. And so is the "what do
> you really, really know about Islam" argument. These kinds of "arguments",
> which are designed to stir up the interlocutors' bad conscience and
> Christian guilt, are only too ubiquitous in the discourse about this war.
> And, contrary to what several of you have been implying, they are just as
> ubiquitous and pervasive in the mainstream media as they are on this list -
> after all, bad conscience and Christian guilt is precisely what nourishes
> and sustains mainstream media these day.
> Frameworks may not be the right place to debate politics, but it definitely
> is the right place to debate the meaning and political usage of images.
> This thread started with someone asking for donations to send cameras to
> Gaza. In these days of routinely staged and doctored images, is a
> "documentary" image really worth a thousand words? What IS a "documentary"
> image worth - without knowledge of the matter, without understanding and
> thought (all of which require words) - other than as a tool to stir up a
> knee-jerk reaction?
> Marco wrote:
> Wow, that's really one-sided, and with flawed arguments.
>> First of all, a question to FRAMEWORKS: is this the right place to debate
>> politics ???
>> Second: Your point about 800 dead palestinians vs 14 israeli dead. Right.
>> Are you somehow implying that those 800 died because Hamas used them as
>> shields, maybe as a way to attract international media attention, and pity?
>> What view you have of the ethical precepts of Islam? What do you really,
>> really, know about Islam? I don't think your argument is admissible nor
>> I think that the ratio of 800 (of which 200 children?) vs 14 (only
>> soldiers if I'm not mistaken) says what is what. A massacre is taking place
>> before our lazy eyes. The rockets of Hamas are weapons of the poor, the only
>> thing left to them to say that they exist and will resist Israeli's state
>> I suggest that, before making empty claims about how to reach peace, you
>> steer away for a while from whatever newspapers and news you read, and
>> carefully examine facts, which are actually easily found on non-aligned
>> internet sources than in American media.
>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: malgosia askanas <email suppressed>
>>> Sent: Jan 10, 2009 3:24 PM
>>> To: email suppressed
>>> Subject: Re: Cameras for Gaza
>>> Shelly Silver wrote:
>>> 800 palestinians dead
>>>> 14 israelis dead
>>> We truly live in a new world - where wars are required to be waged in
>>> such a way as to make sure one's own casualties are comparable to those of
>>> the enemy. Well, I propose that if Hamas doesn't like these figures, they
>>> should agree to a real cease-fire, recognize Israel's right to exist, and
>>> stop terrorrizing the Israeli population. This would be a very
>>> hope-inspiring first step towards an acual peace-process.
>>> And if the Red Cross is "shocked" at civilian casualties, they should
>>> carefully examine Hamas' own treatment of Palestinian civilians - such as
>>> Hamas' practice of using homes and schools for warehousing of weapons and
>>> launching of missiles, or their practice of using civilians as living
>>> For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.
>> Marco Poloni, Korsörer Strasse 1, D-10437 Berlin
>> gsm +41.78.6322028, skype marcopoloni
>> For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.
> For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.
For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.