Not sure if any of you caught the Henry Seigman essay about Sharon and the Palestinians in the NY Times Magazine a couple of weeks ago, but i just couldn't let it go without offering a different perspective (my own).

Just a few comments I'd like to share regarding the review........

1) Seigman's entire thesis is bases on a naive, fantastical notion that giving land to the Palestianians will "end the conflict", as stated in his opening paragraph. What could possibly make this guy believe that a simple piece of land is what these people truly want? Has he just now awoken from a coma? The Palestinians have shown time and again that nothing less than 100% of Israel will satiate their rabid desires.

2) Seigman's pro-Palestinian bias is clearly evident throughout the entire review. While he is quick to point out the few voices within the Israeli govt. who claim there's no evidence to support a notion of a pre-planned Intifada, he completely ignores the hundreds, if not thousands of opinions within the Israeli military and intelligence establishment, as well as the documented perspectives of many of arafats aides and associates who support the commonly held belief that the intifada was planned long before Sharon's now famous visit to the holiest site in all of Judaism. Even Marwhan Barghouti still brags about his tactical planning to launch the intifada "when the time was right" (J. Post, 11/25/05)

3) Seigman cannot conceal the fact that he is either in the employ of, or vying for some sort of recognition by Peace Now. His essay is based entirely on facts provided by this extremely biased, non-scientific organization.

I will take just a minute to dispute his/their findings. Seigman attempts to glamorize and exaggerate the size of the "new" construction developments in the territories. He states that in the almost 500 settlements there are currently 3700 new construction projects. Even if this were true, that would mean less than eight new homes per town (or, what the rest of the anti-semetic world refers to as "settlements"). But the fact remains that this figure of "new construction" is both distorted and incorrect. In reality, Peace Now considers any building project to be new construction. For instance, any new room added to an existing home, any new road added to existing towns to better accomodate current residents, and even new roofs on existing homes are considered "new construction" by this Jew-hating, arabist organization. I doubt if Seigman has ever, or even cares to, take a ride thru Samaria and Judea to actually see what this organization considers "new construction".

In the meantime, neither Seigman nor Peace Now bother to calculate any of the illegal land grabs and true "new construction" occuring on a daily basis by the palestinians in the disputed territories.

4) If the reader can get beyond Seigman's hatred of Sharon and the rest of the Jewish leadership, both past and present, he should consider where Seigman's hope for the palestinian future lies. (Please keep in mind that I write Palestinian future, b/c Seigman obviously has no concern for an Israeli future living side-by-side with a PEACEFUL neighbor). Seigman's optimism lies with a so-called "young guard" within the palestinian national movement. While Seigman devotes a significant part of his essay to what he see's as a promising future based on this new movement, his only basis for optimism lies in the fact that they seem to be clamoring for leadership that is not as corrupt as past palestinian leadership - ie. don't steal all of our money.

While this is an admirable quality to be desired from a national movement, it in no way addresses this movements intentions vis-a-vis the State of Israel. It's one thing to push for economic reform, its an entirely different thing to ask for religious tolerance and an end to terrorism. Seigman seems to think Sharon's demands for a halt to incitment, a crackdown on terrorism, and conducting peaceful negotiations are not an attempt to protect Israeli lives and allow it's citizens to live in a free and peaceful society, but instead he portrays an image of brute force in an attempt to steal someone else's freedom and property. Bullucks! His confidence in this "young guard" somehow overlooks the fact that these "young guardians" were raised in a school system flooded with hatred, incitment, and death squad training.

5) Seigman claims that the notion of a palestinian desire to annihalate the State of Israel is completely unfounded and paranoid. I wonder how he explains the fact that the PA charter constitution still calls for the destruction of Israel??? Or why their school books still teach hatred of Jews and Israelis? Why the government sponsored media runs anti-semetic programming 24/7? How does he explain the fact that their maps still do not include The State of Israel??? How does he justify the madrassas and their preaching? What about the jubilation in the streets any time catastrophe strikes Israel or the US?

Seigman obviously missed last weeks interview with Abdel Bari Atwan, editor of the London-based daily al-Quds al-Arabi, in which he described his conversation with arafat immediately after he signed the Oslo agreement. Atwan states that arafat said he agreed to sign the Oslo Accords because he was hoping the agreements would force thousands of Jews to flee Israel. (Jerusalem Post, 11/21/04)

Seigman is living in a world of fantasy, one in which he has conveniently skipped over the last 120 years of history. He has come back to life as an idealist without a cause. If only he would look into the facts a little more closely.

Just my personal thoughts.

posted by Avi G @ 01:13