I think that the rhetoric that has been generated by Netanyahu and other Israeli leaders and Zionist enthusiasts, has rather given the game away with respect to their intentions. In fact it has become increasingly clear that the total conquest and occupation of Palestine was always the intent of the Zionists. The chant, from “the river to the sea”, originated with the Zionists, not the Palestinians.

Then there are the comments of IDF soldiers boasting of how they have willfully killed non combabtants ‘a majority of whom are women and children’. ( That particular wail does irritate me somewhat. First of all why are women and children deemed to be more sacred than men? Secondly, of course the majority of innocents are likely to fall into that category since 50% of adults are female and if you add a few children into the mix, you are going to get a majority.) But I digress. There are numerous confirmed reports of atrocities committed by members of the IDF. That is over and above the relentless and long lasting bombardment that Gaza has suffered over the past 3 and a half months.

I heard an interesting point of view from one Scott Ritter the former UN weapons inspector and military adviser. Despite some of the more unsavory peccadillos he may or may not have engaged in, his military intelligence credentials speak for themselves and are there for all to see. Ritter has opined that in fact the Hamas attack was not a terrorist action, but rather a legitimate military one and a successful one to boot. The base that was overrun was a military one that was used not just for defence but for intelligence gathering. The people working there were military personnel, of whom 300 were killed. As for the civilians, some, were indeed killed by Hamas, (legitimate collateral damage?) but many others were killed by the IDF in their swift and violent reprisal.

Just as Israel has accused Hamas of using hospitals for military purposes, there is no doubt that the majority of Israeli kibbutzim had/have military resources including weapons.

In case you are not aware, Israel has practised a doctrine called the Hannibal Directive. This essentially involves the elimination of Israeli hostages in preference to their being held by their Palestinian enemies. Look it up. Because the military site was an intelligence gathering centre, many of those stationed there were privvy to some very sensitive information concerning Israel’s spies within Gaza. Their capture by Hamas would expose Israel’s sources. Thus their elimination was paramount.

What is interesting about Ritter’s position is that up until the immeidate aftermath of the attack, he considered himself a friend and supporter of Israel. He had worked with Israeli intelligence for many years to try and reduce the threats from Iran and Iraq. But shortly thereafter, Israel’s actions following 7th October, made him tun against Israel with a vengeance.

Have a read of this.
https://www.scottritterextra.com/p/why-i-no-longer-stand-with-israel?utm_source=profile&utm_medium=reader2

https://www.scottritterextra.com/p/the-october-7-hamas-assault-on-israel?utm_source=profile&utm_medium=reader2

Whenever I read the Wikipedia entry of a controversial figure, I find it useful to see whether the entry can be edited. Frequently, for such people, and Ritter is one of them, there is a padlock icon indicating that only approved editors may make changes, thus denying the subject the right to challenge any unfavourable claims or at least provide some balance.

But if you do not like what Ritter has to say, then I urge you to watch/listen to the very eloquent arguments put forward by the South African legal team at the ICJ.

Incidentally, I have been accused many times of being an anti-semite. Leaving aside the semantics of such a term, (the majority of Semites are not Jews and the majority of Jews are not Semites) I have been considering to what extent there is truth in that accusation. Until recently, I might have accepted, (not publicly of course, that would be madness) that there was some justification in the charge. But the more I have looked into it, I realise that it is not Jews per se, but Zionism that I so abhor. Zionism truly is an evil creed as any objective, in depth study of its nature and history will demonstrate. Fortunately there is a good number of Jews who vociferously and actively reject Zionism.

By the way, I decided to repost my original piece on my own blog. I hope Boadicea will not see fit to delete this comment, though of course it is her right to do so. Rather, I hope that it will generate some responses that will extend beyond being labelled an anti-semite.
https://sipu1.wordpress.com/

Thanks, but I have got to say, your comment looks like spam. Or should that be ham?

In any event, I do recall the above exchange and I do agree that she was quite harsh about her mother. I sort of assumed, though, that she had her mother’s approval to say such things. It would appear that she has a bit of a sense of humour. I did not know that Alexandra had written a third book. I have yet to read the second which received very mixed reviews. But based on your recommendation, I will read the last.

I hope you are well and happy. xx

PS. Damn those grocers’ apostrophes.

Do you remember that we once spoke about Alexandra Fuller’s book ‘Don’t Let’s Go to the Dog’s Tonight’? You mentioned the book and I told you that I had already read it. I told you that my Malawi cousins know the family quite well. I also said that I thought the author was unfairly unpleasant about her mother. I was shocked that one could write a book like that about one’s mother.

My sister (who was born in Zambia) has just sent me another book by Alexandra Fuller. It is called ‘Cocktail Hour Under the Tree of Forgetfulness’. There is much reference in it to ‘That Awful Book’ ie the first one. I am reading the more recent book at the moment. It gives a much better and kinder portrait of ‘Nicola Fuller of Central Africa’ as she likes to call herself in fun. I hope that you will read it too.

Enjoy the launch of the new face. Best wishesxxx

You will laugh, I am sure, but I am about to head out for the unveiling of a face. A friend of mine has just had a lift and now that the swelling has subsided she wants to show it off for the first time this evening. Cape Town women are obsessed by botox and boob-jobs. It really can get completely out of control. Women who allow themselves to grow old gracefully are generally far more attractive than those who insist in going under the knife and end up looking like startled burn victims. I am often asked for my opinion by women who are considering having something done and I am always ignored.

I had not thought about it when you first raised the waste/waist business, but it is rather in keeping with the theme of this blog. Four Candles/Fork Handles.

As an aside, I am pretty immune to teasing. I have a vast family and have, by necessity, developed a thick skin. That does not mean I am good at detecting irony and sarcasm, I am not. It just means that I don’t get offended by it.

I have been intrigued by your ‘what a waist/waste’ story for a long time. Excellent example of how things can be interpreted/translated in different ways, depending on context and perception. With a story like that, I do not need to know what the person really meant and after all, it is none of my business anyway. Wondering/wandering is far more interesting. Perhaps this is the definition of literature.

Translation is never easy and is almost always incomplete or inexact. Ultimately however, translation is always preferable to the laziness of never trying to understand. I think too that my remark about knowing that there will always be a seam of ignorance is linked to the ideas you raise about unread books. And like you, I always head for the bookshelves when I am a guest in someone else’s house.

I have not worn a ball gown for years. Actually, I have only ever owned one, and it was from a Laura Ashley sale. My sisters and I always used to go to formal affairs dressed in simple long dresses made of cotton.