sábado, 19 de julio de 2014
POUR LA FRANCOPHONIE
DIMANCHE 20 JUILLET :Cérémonie d’hommage aux Justes de la Nation au Parc de Sceaux à 15h30
FRANCESES , DOMINGO 20 DE JULIO, CEREMONIA EN HONOR A LOS JUSTOS EN EL PARC DE SCEAUX A LAS 15 H 30
DIMANCHE 20 JUILLET
Cérémonie d’hommage aux Justes de la Nation au Parc de Sceaux à 15h30
CARTA DE LA LIGA DE DEFENSA JUDÍA DE FRANCE
La Ligue de Défense Juive es una organización sionista, afirma que la única protección del pueblo judío contra la arbitrariedad y la violenci es Israel, estado judío soberano.
La Ligue de Défense Juive en France es la emanación ideológica del movimiento fundado por el rabino Meir Kahana en los EEUU , afirma ser un movimiento patriótico y nacionalista judío.
La Ligue de Défense Juive apoya un discurso pacifista, pero resuelto y sin debilidad, incita a los judíos de France a realizar la aliyah.
La Ligue de Défense Juive desde su creación está presente en todos los lugares, para proteger a los judíos de France contra la violencia verbal y física de sus enemigos.
La Ligue de Défense Juive consciente del peso pagado con su sangre por los judíos ,a causa del odio, en un pasado más o menos cercano, declara defende al pueblo judío contra todas las formas modernas de odio antijudío , antisemitismo, judeofobia, antijudaismo y antisionismo.
La Ligue de Défense Juive se declara en conflicto ideológico con todos los defensores de ideologías genocidas y aquellos que buscan minimizarlas por cobardía, corrupción u oportunismo.
Por ello sus miembros se comprometen a mantener una vigilancia tanto ideológica como deportiva para poder detener todas las amenazas físicas de los enemigos del pueblo judío,que nunca han dudado en usar la fuerza,
Su misión principal es educar a la juventud en el deber y necesidad de hacer su Aliyah.
Transmitir las riquezas del patrimonio judío y el excepcional espíritu del éxito del sionismo.
Damos los útiles para combatir ideológicamente y físicamente, con legítima defensa , a los bárbaros primitivos que apoyan la desaparición de los judíos y del estado de Israel .
Promover los argumentos históricos y culturales de la legitimidad de Israel ante la mayor cantidad de personas.
REchazar el mito del pueblo palestino.
Inculcar las nociones eficaces y operacionales a sus miembro, merced a un entrenamiento físico regular de autodefensa permitiendo a sus miembros poder defenderse,y ayudar llegado el caso, a todo miembro de la comunidad con dificultades.
Asegurar con debates y discusiones,una formación óptima sionista y la toma de conciencia de sus realizaciones concretas.
Crear y reforzar un sentimiento comunitario grande entre jóvenes que comparten los mismos fines, con fraternidad y camaradería.
Ayudar a la realización del sueño e todo judío, de vivir en paz en la tierra de Israel.
ISRAEL ES UNA AFRENTA CONTRA EL ISLAM , SU HONOR Y SU VIRILIDAD, SEGÚN SU CULTURA.
"The threat to Arab honor did not come from a worthy foe, like the Western Christians, but by from Jews, traditionally the most passive, abject, cowardly of the populations over which Muslims ruled. [...] the prospect of an independent state of should-be dhimmis struck Arab leaders as more than humiliating. It endangered all Islam. Thus Rahman Azzam Pasha, the head of the newly formed Arab League, spoke for his “honor group” when he threatened that “if the Zionists dare establish a state, the massacres we would unleash would dwarf anything which Genghis Khan and Hitler perpetrated.” As the Armenians had discovered a generation earlier, the mere suspicion of rebellion could engender massacres. [...] The loss in 1948, therefore, constituted the most catastrophic possible outcome for this honor-group: Seven Arab armies, representing the honor of hundreds of thousands of Arabs (and Muslims), were defeated by less than a million Jews, the surviving remnant of the most devastating and efficient genocide in history. To fall to people so low on the scale that it is dishonorable even to fight them—nothing could be more devastating. And this humiliating event occurred on center stage of the new postwar global community, before whom the Arab league representatives had openly bragged about their upcoming slaughters. In the history of a global public, never has any single and so huge a group suffered so much dishonor and shame in the eyes of so great an audience."
Pour comprendre le rejet d'Israël par les Arabes il faut essayer de comprendre dans quel cadre mental ils opèrent. C'est ce qu'a entrepris Richard Landes.
Why the Arab World Is Lost in an Emotional Nakba, and How We Keep It There. By ignoring the honor-shame dynamic in Arab political culture, is the West keeping itself from making headway toward peace? @ Tablet, par le Prof. Richard Landes
Pour comprendre le rejet d'Israël par les Arabes il faut essayer de comprendre dans quel cadre mental ils opèrent. C'est ce qu'a entrepris Richard Landes.
 |
| Enfant embrigadé par le Hamas |
[...] Arab political culture, to take one example—despite some liberal voices, despite noble dissidents—tends to favor ascendancy through aggression, the politics of the “strong horse,” and the application of “Hama rules”—which all combine to produce a Middle East caught between prison and anarchy, between Sisi’s Egypt and al-Assad’s Syria. Our inability, however well-meaning, to discuss the role of honor-shame dynamics in the making of this political culture poses a dilemma: By keeping silent, we not only operate in denial, but we may actually strengthen these brutal values and weaken the very ones we treasure.
Few conflicts offer a better place to explore these matters than the Arab-Israeli conflict.
In order to understand the role of hard zero-sum, honor-shame concerns in the attitude of Arabs toward Israel, one must first understand the role of the Jew in the Muslim Arab honor-group. For the 13 centuries before Zionism, Jews had been subject to a political status in Muslim lands specifically designed around issues of honor (to Muslims) and shame (to Jews). Jews were dhimmi, “protected” from Muslim violence by their acceptance of daily public degradation and legal inferiority. Noted Chateaubriand in the 19th century: “Special target of all [Muslim and Christian] contempt, the Jews lower their heads without complaint; they suffer all insults without demanding justice; they let themselves be crushed by blows. … Penetrate the dwellings of these people, you will find them in frightful poverty.”
For more than a millennium, Arab and Muslim honor resided, among other places, in their domination and humiliation of their dhimmi—and when the occasional reformer equalized their legal status, he struck a heavy blow to Muslim honor. Noted a British envoy on the impact of Muhammad Ali’s reforms: “The Mussulmans … deeply deplore the loss of that sort of superiority which they all & individually exercised over & against the other sects. … A Mussulman … believes and maintains that a Christian—& still more a Jew—is an inferior being to himself.”
To say that to the honor-driven Arab and Muslim political player, in the 20th century as in the 10th century, the very prospect of an autonomous Jewish political entity is a blasphemy against Islam, and an insult to Arab virility, is not to say that every period of Muslim rule involved deliberate humiliation of dhimmi. Nor is it to say that all Arabs think like this. On the contrary, this kind of testosterone-fueled, authoritarian discourse imposes its interpretation of “honor” on the entire community, often violently. Thus, while some Arabs in 1948 Palestine may have viewed the prospect of Jewish sovereignty as a valuable opportunity, the Arab leadership and “street” agreed that for the sake of Arab honor Israel must be destroyed and that those who disagreed were traitors to the Arab cause.
Worse: The threat to Arab honor did not come from a worthy foe, like the Western Christians, but by from Jews, traditionally the most passive, abject, cowardly of the populations over which Muslims ruled. [...]
So, the prospect of an independent state of should-be dhimmis struck Arab leaders as more than humiliating. It endangered all Islam. Thus Rahman Azzam Pasha, the head of the newly formed Arab League, spoke for his “honor group” when he threatened that “if the Zionists dare establish a state, the massacres we would unleash would dwarf anything which Genghis Khan and Hitler perpetrated.” As the Armenians had discovered a generation earlier, the mere suspicion of rebellion could engender massacres.
The loss in 1948, therefore, constituted the most catastrophic possible outcome for this honor-group: Seven Arab armies, representing the honor of hundreds of thousands of Arabs (and Muslims), were defeated by less than a million Jews, the surviving remnant of the most devastating and efficient genocide in history. To fall to people so low on the scale that it is dishonorable even to fight them—nothing could be more devastating. And this humiliating event occurred on center stage of the new postwar global community, before whom the Arab league representatives had openly bragged about their upcoming slaughters. In the history of a global public, never has any single and so huge a group suffered so much dishonor and shame in the eyes of so great an audience.
So, alongside the nakba (catastrophe) that struck hundreds of thousands of the Arab inhabitants of the former British Mandate Palestine, we find yet another, much greater psychological catastrophe that struck the entire Arab world and especially its leaders: a humiliation so immense that Arab political culture and discourse could not absorb it. Initially, the refugees used the term nakba to reproach the Arab leaders who started and lost the war that so hurt them. In a culture less obsessed by honor and more open to self-criticism, this might have led to the replacement of political elites with leaders more inclined to move ahead with positive-sum games of the global politics of the United Nations and the Marshall Plan. But when appearances matter above all, any public criticism shames the nation, the people, and the leaders.
Instead, in a state of intense humiliation and impotence on the world stage, the Arab leadership chose denial—the Jews did not, could not, have
The Arab leadership’s interpretation of honor had them responding to the loss of their own hard zero-sum game—we’re going to massacre them—by adopting a negative-sum strategy. Damaging the Israeli “other” became paramount, no matter how much that effort might hurt Arabs, especially Palestinians. “No recognition, no negotiations, no peace.” No Israel. Sooner leave millions of Muslims under Jewish rule than negotiate a solution. Sooner die than live humiliated. Sooner commit suicide to kill Jews than make peace with them.
Yet somehow, however obvious these observations are, their implications rarely get discussed in policy circles. Current peace plans assume that both sides will make the necessary concessions for peace, that compromise can lead to an acceptable win-win for both sides. As one baffled BBC announcer exclaimed,“Good grief, this is so simple it could be resolved with an email”; or as Jeremy Ben-Ami puts it, “It would take sixty seconds to lay out the basic solution.” But it’s only simple if you assume that Arabs no longer feel it’s a hard zero-sum game, that any win for Israel is an unacceptable loss of honor for them, that their “honor group” no longer considers negotiation a sign of weakness, compromise, shameful, and any peace with Israel, any Israeli “win” no matter how small an insult to Islam. During and (more remarkably) after Oslo, it became a matter of faith among both policy makers and pundits that the old era of Arab irredentism was gone. As one NPR commentator noted (during the intifada!), “Any Palestinian with a three-digit IQ knows that Israel is here to stay.” [...]
Even among the most Westernized Arabs, the wound of Israel’s existence cuts deep, as does the instinct to accuse Israel for Arab failures. Ahmed Sheikh, editor in chief of Al Jazeera, blames Israel for the lack of democracy in the Arab world:
The day when Israel was founded created the basis for our problems. … It’s because we always lose to Israel. It gnaws at the people in the Middle East that such a small country as Israel, with only about 7 million inhabitants, can defeat the Arab nation with its 350 million. That hurts our collective ego. The Palestinian problem is in the genes of every Arab. The West’s problem is that it does not understand this.
Sheikh’s conclusion is not that ending the fight with Israel might lead to democracy, but rather that once the West lets the Arabs win against Israel, then they’ll build democracies.
[...] while Yasser Arafat’s “no” at Camp David shocked Bill Clinton, Dennis Ross, and a public fed on the idea of a win-win peace process, those familiar with the values of Arafat’s primary honor-group predicted that rejection. If “that which has been taken by force must be regained by force,” then nothing Arafat “got” in negotiations could possibly wash away the shame of a cowardly stroke of the pen that legitimized Dar al Harb in the midst of Dar al Islam. As a result, while Bill Clinton and Ehud Barak (and, reportedly, some younger Palestinian negotiators) mourned, Arafat returned to the Middle East a hero. [...]
The policy implications here are grave. The “rational” model assumes that the ’67 borders (’49 armistice lines) are the key and that an Israeli withdrawal will satisfy rational Palestinian demands, resolving the conflict. Attention to honor-shame culture, however, suggests that such a retreat would trigger greater aggression in the drive for true Palestinian honor, which means “all of Palestine, from the river to the sea.” Recently, military historian [...]
For Israelis, the stakes of these abstruse debates over the meaning and importance of honor-shame culture could not be higher. Israelis’ future depends on their ability to understand why their neighbors hate them and what can and won’t work in trying to deal with their hostility. It would constitute criminal negligence to ignore these issues. [...]
The language of Shia and Sunni Jihadis alike reverberates with the sounds of honor, plunder, dominion, shame, humiliation, misogyny, rage, vengeance, conspiracy, and paranoid fear of implosion.
It’s not that our policy makers—and here I speak of not only Israel but the democratic West—don’t take account of honor-shame dynamics. They just don’t take it seriously. For them, what they regard as childish, superficial concerns can be palliated with polite words and gestures, and then these good people will behave like rational choice actors, and we can all move forward in familiar, sensible ways. So, when the Pope Benedict’s remark about an“inherently violent Islam” set off riots of protest throughout the Muslim world, the onus was on the pope to apologize for provoking them. Only thus could one spare Muslims global derision for randomly killing—killing to protest being called violent.
But culture is not a superficial question of manners. In the Middle East, honor is identity. Appeasement and concessions are signs of weakness: When practiced by one’s own leaders, they produce riots of protest, by one’s enemy, renewed aggression. [...]
When we indulge Arab (and jihadi Muslims’) concerns for honor by backing off anything that they claim offends them, we think that our generosity and restraint will somehow move extremists to more rational behavior. Instead, we end up muzzling ourselves and thereby participating in, honoring, and confirming their most belligerent attitudes toward the “other.” They get to lead with their glass chin, while we, thinking we work for peace, end up confirming and weaponizing the Arab world’s most toxic weaknesses—their insecurity, their embrace of all-or-nothing conflicts, their addiction to revenge, their paranoid scapegoating, their shame-driven hatred. And there is nothing generous, rational, or progressive about that.
Richard Landes, a professor of history at Boston University, is the author of Heaven on Earth: The Varieties of the Millennial Experience. He blogs at the Augean Stables.
Opinión.
Gaza. Merkava de Israel
La operación en tierra enemiga prosigue, y lo hace rodeada de censura y cierto misterio.
En realidad todo lo que vamos conociendo nos llega por medio de unos filtros estrictos(normales por demás en estas horas bélicas), salvo que como los ilusos periodistas de la UE demos crédito a las manipuladas noticias de los medios árabes y sus versiones mentirosas de lo que sucede.
Israel avanza, y lo hace en unas condiciones históricas favorables pues Egipto , de modo oficioso, apoya el exterminio de los terroristas de Gaza a los que percibe , con razón, como socios de sus enemigos de la Cofradia musulmana.Una buena parte , también, de los gobiernos árabes (Arabia Saudita)han comprendido ,en cierta medida, que Hamas es un peligroso ejecutor de las ordenes de Irán , el imperio que desea engullirlos.
La ofensiva es , eso si lo sabe cualquier analista, masiva y busca la destrucción de Hamas. ¿Tan solo mediante la destrucción de sus túneles?, pues en relación con ello depende todo del alcance que demos a la expresión "túneles", porque tal red es la arteria por la que circula el yijadismo en Gaza, y si secciona se acaba con la infección.
¿Y después? Si me permiten uds. elucubrar afirmaría que Israel permanecerá, en algún modo, controlando la evolución fundamental de Gaza y no dejará que el monstruo renazca.
Es lo que deseo suceda pronto, y espero que ello evitará la repetición del fenómeno actual para , en lo posible, siempre.
Es lo lógico.
Ahora mismo estamos asistiendo a una guerra ilógica, absurda, provocada por un Hamas suicida.Ilógica salvo que uds. barajen el siguiente dato: Hamas es la pistola que dispara por orden de Irán . En esta ocasión, contra Israel.
Irán está testando la capacidad defensiva y de respuesta militar judía a todos los niveles mediante sus siervos de Hamas (ataques como el de hoy, contra un poblado beduino próximo a Dimona prueban el sentido de lo que acabo de afirmar, el Dome de Fer ha revelado su insuperable capacidad y los intentos suicidas de Hamas fracasaron).
¿Y ahora? Ahor Tsahal debe de proseguir una guerra relámpago ,destruir al enemigo y sus infraestructuras y retirarse de una Gaza a la que dejará bajo alguna forma de control israelí; tal control, piensen, sería algo beneficioso para los árabes pues les traería , allí, democracia y prosperidad a todos niveles.Económico, cultural y político.
Puede ser un salida muy favorable de la actual situación.
Pronto veremos hacia donde se encamina el actual problema.Espero que con ayuda de D-os Israel obre para lo mejor de todos .
Jana
Direction de le Groupe
CARTA DE LA LIGA DE DEFENSA JUDÍA DE FRANCE
La Ligue de Défense Juive es una organización sionista, afirma que la única protección del pueblo judío contra la arbitrariedad y la violencia es Israel, estado judío soberano.
La Ligue de Défense Juive en France es la emanación ideológica del movimiento fundado por el rabino Meir Kahana en los EEUU , afirma ser un movimiento patriótico y nacionalista judío.
La Ligue de Défense Juive apoya un discurso pacifista, pero resuelto y sin debilidad, incita a los judíos de France a realizar la aliyah.
La Ligue de Défense Juive desde su creación está presente en todos los lugares, para proteger a los judíos de France contra la violencia verbal y física de sus enemigos.
La Ligue de Défense Juive consciente del peso pagado con su sangre por los judíos ,a causa del odio, en un pasado más o menos cercano, declara defende al pueblo judío contra todas las formas modernas de odio antijudío , antisemitismo, judeofobia, antijudaismo y antisionismo.
La Ligue de Défense Juive se declara en conflicto ideológico con todos los defensores de ideologías genocidas y aquellos que buscan minimizarlas por cobardía, corrupción u oportunismo.
Por ello sus miembros se comprometen a mantener una vigilancia tanto ideológica como deportiva para poder detener todas las amenazas físicas de los enemigos del pueblo judío,que nunca han dudado en usar la fuerza,
Su misión principal es educar a la juventud en el deber y necesidad de hacer su aliyah.
Transmitir las riquezas del patrimonio judío y el excepcional espíritu del éxito del sionismo.
Damos los útiles para combatir ideológicamente y físicamente, con legítima defensa , a los bárbaros primitivos que apoyan la desaparición de los judíos y del estado de Israel .
Promover los argumentos históricos y culturales de la legitimidad de Israel ante la mayor cantidad de personas.
Rchazar el mito del pueblo palestino.
Inculcar las nociones eficaces y operacionales a sus miembro, merced a un entrenamiento físico regular de autodefensa permitiendo a sus miembros poder defenderse,y ayudar llegado el caso, a todo miembro de la comunidad con dificultades.
Asegurar con debates y discusiones,una formación óptima sionista y la toma de conciencia de sus realizaciones concretas.
Crear y reforzar un sentimiento comunitario grande entre jóvenes que comparten los mismos fines, con fraternidad y camaraderia.
Ayudar a la realización del sueño e todo judío, de vivir en paz en la tierra de Israel.
SHABUA TOV
23.Un Salmo por David: Adonái es mi pastor, nada me ha de faltar. En verdes praderas me hace recostar; me conduce junto a aguas tranquilas. El revive mi alma; me guía por sendas de rectitud en aras de Su Nombre. Aún si anduviere yo por el valle de la sombra de la muerte, no temeré mal alguno, porque Tú estás conmigo; Tu vara y Tu cayado, ellos me consolarán. Tú prepararás una mesa para mí ante mis enemigos; has ungido mi cabeza con aceite; mi copa está colmada. Sólo bondad y misericordia me seguirán todos los días de mi vida, y yo he de morar en la Casa de Adonái por muchos largos años.
Suscribirse a:
Entradas (Atom)