Wednesday, December 17, 2014

Refuting Noam Chomsky on Israel Part I

Nadene Goldfoot                                                                       
Hamas missiles-2014 saw them hit Tel Aviv and Jerusalem causing Israel to live in bomb shelters.

Noam Chomsky is a PhD in Linguistics.  Somehow he's become the advant guarde against Israel, the darling of the Palestinians.  He's Jewish, one of ours who goes against the ultimate continuance of Israel for his own reasons unknown to me.  This article is a rebuttal of an interview by Democracy Now's PhD Amy Goodman.  Noam managed to answer with words   full of inciting and false statements.   Noam Chomsky is probably THE most critical of all of Israel's critics, except maybe his friend, Norman Finkelstein, who is now not welcome to enter Israel, his missives have been that repulsive.  The group, Democracy Now,  is a far leaning leftist group who reputedly are not in favor of Israel's decisions, of which J Street is an example,  so in a 6 page printout of the interview, I do not see any direct questions about particular points one might at least see with Wolf Blitzer of CNN, let's say. I see a scattering of everything he brings up caustically.  Amy is playing the part of moderator for Noam's blitzing of Israel. This Part I only covers the first 1 1/2 pages of the interview.
Hezbollah's missile launcher-Palestinians are not the only enemy Israel faces.  Hezbollah is in Lebanon, Shi'a Islamist 
Noam  has a very myopic viewpoint about Israel's existence.  His method of argument is that of leaving out facts and inferring falsehoods.  He speaks only of the results as the Palestinians see it, which is the side he takes.

His first attack on Israel was the January 1976 UN Security Council resolution calling for a 2-state settlement on the internationally recognized border brought by Egypt, Jordan and Syria. This came only 3 years after the Yom Kippur War when Muslims attacked when all Jews attended their synagogues on their holiest day of the year. This sneak attack showed their deepest intentions against Israel.   The USA vetoed the resolution of those who were  the attackers. " was fought between June 5 and 10, 1967 by Israel and the neighboring states of Egypt (known at the time as the United Arab Republic), Jordan, and Syria."   Such a resolution was again vetoed by the USA in 2011 by Obama over the expansion of "settlements."  Noam argues that it's the settlements that are illegal as well as infrastructure projects supporting them.

My contention, and that of people supporting Israel, is that there is a history here and decisions that divided the territory into areas A, B, and C.  From my own blog, "Evidently the USA in no longer regarding the Oslo Accords as having any merit, for they are allowing the Palestinians, in planning their Palestine, to have a terrorist led government.  Area A was to be exclusively Arab, no Jews.  Area B was to be all Arab.  Area C was to have "full Israeli civil and security control" and the plan was for Israel to withdraw from 13% of it, but they only were able to withdraw from 2% and the actions of the Arabs caused them to perform Operation Defensive Shield, meaning the Arabs had attacked more than could be tolerated which showed no peaceful intent.  Hamas really brought this on themselves.  Israel retains 61% of Judea-Samaria.  The Palestinians also have Gaza as part of their state which has 141 square miles." Noam wants a border when the Palestinians cannot contain their attacks, a border limiting Israel's already teeny area as it is that would be indefensible. I'm sure glad he's not Israel's general.     

Area C in Judea-Samaria, scene of Israel's ancient history of Israel and Judah found in the Bible ,  is now threatened by the USA being first to recognize an unsettled Palestine with a Fatah-Hamas government patterned after Lebanon's that will not have any Jews living in it.  Area C was allowed to have Jews in the Oslo Accords.  It amounts to 375,000 Jews who live there as of  2013, probably a few more today.  The city of Ariel is the capital of  this Judea-Samaria district. The 3 other cities are Betar Illit, Ma'ale Adumim and Modi'in Illit that house Jews.   When the Assyrians attacked Israel in 720 BCE, the northern Kingdom fell and was renamed Shomron (Samaria).  Judah was created after King Solomon had died in 920 BCE and his son, Rehoboam,  became king.  At the time of 722 BCE, Ahaz was king.  The area of the Judea and Samaria district covers only 2,270 square miles which is but a portion of the ancient lands of Judah and Samaria. " 1  For comparison, Oregon is made of 98,381 square miles.  
Mayor  Nir Barkat of Jerusalem, won 2nd term Oct 2013

"In 1990 Congress declared that "Jerusalem is and should remain the capital of the State of Israel" and "must remain the capital of the State of Israel" and "must remain an undivided city in which the rights of every ethnic and religious group are protected."  George Bush declared, "We did not approve of the status quo before 1967; in no way do we advocate a return to it now."  Secretary of State James Baker stated, "clearly, Jews and others can live where they want, east or west, and the city must remain undivided." 2  It was at the end of 1967's Six Day War when Israel won against all odds that Israel united all of Jerusalem which took in the eastern part where Arabs were living.  They could not give benefits to 3/4 of their capital and not to the Arab side.  They have one mayor, Nir Barkat, who started his 2nd term October 2013.  

"The Jews have the legal right to settle the land assured by treaty and  protected  by Article 80 of the U.N. charter.  The Jewish right of settlement in the area is equal to the right of the existing Palestinian population to live there."  Eugene Rostow, former U.S. Under Secretary of State. 1990. 3

According to Eugene Rostow, a former Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs in the Johnson Administration, Resolution 242 gives Israel a legal right to be in the West Bank. The resolution “allows Israel to administer the territories” it won in 1967 “until 'a just and lasting peace in the Middle East' is achieved,” Rostow wrote in The New Republic (10/21/91). During the debate on the resolution, he added, “speaker after speaker made it clear that Israel was not to be forced back to the 'fragile' and 'vulnerable' [1949] Armistice Demarcation Lines.”  Rostow was the Dean of Law of Yale University. 3

Noam finally concedes saying that "for a long time, there has been an overwhelming international consensus in support of a settlement along these general lines set in January 1976 which continues to the present. (p 2)  "According to Noam Chomsky, claims that the Palestinian leadership reject the international consensus calling for a Palestinian state with borders along the Green Line are not consistent with the documented record.  (Again, denial of facts.)  Smaller elements in the Palestinian leadership, even inside Hamas, have called for a two state settlement based on the pre-June 1967 borders (the Green Line) Although Hamas's official policy is committed to Israel's destruction, Ismail Haniya, the prime minister of the unity government until June 2007, has spoken of a long-term truce with Israel if Israel withdraws from territory occupied in 1967."  This Israel finds unsafe to do.  Of course it's exactly what Hamas would want to happen.  Go back to indefensible lines.  So here we see Noam denying facts with Haniya lying about their intentions.  

Then he says that Israel rejects a settlement of these terms...devoting extensive resources to ensuring that it will not be the support of the USA-military, economic, diplomatic and ideological--by establishing how the conflict is viewed and interpreted in the US and within its broad sphere of influence.

Sounds like sour grapes to me that we realize the importance, need and legality of Israel's position.  To accuse Israel is ensuring that it will not be implemented is insane.  That's not FACT, that's INFERENCE; false inference.  

Noam throws in conjecture as if it is history.  The next line of his argument:
there's no time here to review the record, but its general character is revealed by a look at what has happened in Gaza in the past decade, carrying forward a long history of earlier crimes. 

Already he's telling you they've committed crimes, which I strongly refute, but he doesn't tell us what crimes;   just inference again, setting up the reader to see Israel as the bad guys.

Then he tells us that last August, August 26 (what year is not mentioned) a ceasefire was reached between Israel and the PA...Then he brings up a pattern of ceasefires but takes an opposing Israel position that is not realistic to me.  He says Israel disregards it and continues its steady assault on Gaza, including continued siege, intermittent acts of violence, more settlement and development projects, often violence in the West Bank...

This onslaught is obnoxious!  Facts show that it is always Gaza who has not observed the ceasefires.  They have been known to take this time to rearm in preparation for their Hamas charter goal; to attack Israel.  They spell it out.  Why does Noam ignore these facts?  

He goes on with :  until some Israeli escalation elicits a Hamas response...  again inference without fact; giving Hamas an excuse to respond?  Outlandish!  They don't really need an excuse, you know.  As soon as they are ready again with ammunition, they commence.  What sort of escalation is he talking about?  

Hamas cried that Egypt's ceasefire  deal gives Israel the upperhand on August 15, 2014 in Occupation Defensive Edge.  "It's Unclear if Gaza's Islamist rulers will accept the 11-point Cairo document, which provides for supervised easing of blockade, pushes off talks on seaport and airport." 4.  One can see that this ploy considering cease fires is being used to the present time.  I feel Israel feels most likely constrained because they always end with Hamas firing at Israel, showing Hamas just needed a break to get more ammunition.   
Noam never mentions that the Palestinians had started firing on southern Israel back in 2001.  The attacks increased through the First Intifada to the Second Intifada with the citizens of Israel demanding that something be done to stop them from raining down mortars, rockets and missiles.  Negotiations, warnings, threats, never a helping hand from the UN, of course, and so Israel has had to take steps of Operation Cast Lead and then recently Operation Defensive Edge.  This latest development of having to go into Gaza has been documented that Israel tried its utmost to keep from harming civilians, and my question of how can you tell who is a civilian comes to play, so they treated everyone like a civilian, which wasn't the case.  Gaza voted in Hamas, so even civilians want to see the death of Jews, which they display by bringing out candy to celebrate our deaths.  Now we have tunnels to add to to the list of mortars, missiles and rockets hitting Israel.     


Noam throws in jargon of Israel calling an operation "mowing the lawn" which only comes from Israel's escalations and Hamas's responses."  He only listens to the Palestinian version in this.  Facts again show that it is Hamas who initiates attacks.  That's the way it has been since the beginning and goes along with their charter listing their goals.  Israel's goal was-at many a time-to have a 2 state solution and to live in peace.  They've discovered that both parties have to want peace in order for peace to happen.  It's not the case with the Palestinians and their friends.   The phrase, mowing the lawn, comes from Israel knowing they had to have small goals in trying to stop Hamas; that they couldn't kill them off in one big swoop, but were trying to steer them into different thinking, contain the problem, save lives, etc, and were finding themselves doing this about every 4 years.    "In IDF slang, the process is known as "mowing the lawn." Only time will tell when the weeds will grow back."  Analysis: IDF aware Operation Pillar of Defense in Gaza not a long-term solution to Palestinian rocket fire on south ( started November 14, 2012, lasted for 8 days.) 5  We know that attacks on Israel grew to the point that both Tel Aviv and Jerusalem were hit with the newer long range missiles, bringing on Operation Defensive Edge of 2014.  

We have the Muslim Brotherhood Charter, which Hamas has copied almost verbatim, showing the obvious goals of Hamas and the surrounding Arab countries.  Today we have seen Jordan and Egypt sign peace treaties with Israel.  Syria has not, and its actions show where Abbas's head is at. Little Israel is facing many enemies.  If Chomsky thinks he is the policeman keeping Israel in check, he need not worry.  This country is based on law, and its citizens are doing such a job and have since their beginning. 

Resource:  Amy Goodman-Noam Chomsky interview 1 2 3 4,7340,L-4312017,00.html 5
update: January 1976 Green line


  1. This comment has been removed by the author.

  2. You forget the Yom Kippur War of 1973 was a war of retaliation by Egypt for the Israeli offensive of 1967 in which Israel grabbed not only the Palestinian partitioned lands and in effect, the entirety of the former mandate including the West Bank from Jordan and Gaza AND the Sinai Peninsula. Egypt simply took it back.

    In addition: Your article appears incensed that Hamas should refuse to recognize Israel and call for its destruction, vis a vi the Muslim Brotherhood Charter copied verbatim etc.

    HOWEVER, you fail to mention that since the late 1990's the Likud Charter has flatly rejected the notion of a Palestinian State anywhere west of the Jordan River. Are these too not inflammatory comments? How can the representatives of this party be taken seriously when they speak of peace and a two state solution when it is a stated Likud goal to STOP, DENY, DISAVOW a free Palestinian State. The costs for doing this have been bloody.

    The difference that Chomsky recognizes and this author is comfortable omitting is that Israel has the actual military capability to do this "wiping out" or "cleansing" as it were.

    I would refute you line by line, but it doesn't look like you are exactly melting servers over here and I value my time. So, based on those very obvious "oversights" that do not pass the sniff test I declare you a pseudo-academic wanna be. You will never be in the same league with Chomsky or even Finkelstein or even Benny Morris because you are simply not honest with yourself regarding the disingenuous nature of the Zionist Agenda and the high cost of a military occupation in term of blood and bankroll.

    Israel has the first cost-free occupation in history and when the US people wise up to this we will have a chose to continue to bankrupt the treasury on a morally bankrupt occupation or kindly ask Israel to grow up, move out, get a job and pay for its own misadventures in genocide. HASBARA FAIL.

  3. Murlin, your last paragraph shows me you know zilch about Jewish history. As for the rest, I'm not in competition with Benny Morris, the only good historian you listed here. I'm just getting facts out to counter Chomsky's lies, inuendos and very biased accounts. I'm being very honest. It's Chomsky and Finkelstein that haven't been. So dig deep for yourself.