Par Roger_Chemouni (Roger_Chemouni) le vendredi 25 juin 2004 - 19h39:

FILMS

LE FILS D ELIAS de Daniel Burman


Nous avions aimé en 2002 « En attendant le messie » qui montrait la communauté juive argentine au travers l’histoire d’un groupe , d’une communauté en révolte contre leurs sorts net leurs vies. Ici c’est aussi une communauté qui est observée dans un lieu clos parfois étouffant tant les personnages s’exilent en plein air .Ce lieu est la galerie marchande du quartier juif de Buenos aires . Cette communauté contient Ariel doux rêveur et narrateur , sa mère Sonia qui tient une boutique de lingerie depuis que son mari Elias est parti s’installer en Israël, Osvaldo vendeur hypothétique qui ne vend plus rien , ces italiens réparateurs de radios et ces coréens exilés pour raison d’amour . que veut Elias cet être instable qui se console d‘une mère trop présente et d’un père absent dans les bras de Rita une belle blonde gérante d’un cyber café. Elias désire un passeport étranger, un travail à l’étranger , le retour à ses racines polonaises et de ce père énigmatique qui les a abandonné . Son retour inopiné va t-il freiner la démarche frénétique d’ Elias qui traverse toujours rapidement la ville comme pour échapper à celle ci.
Daniel Burman signe son œuvre la plus remarquable après le décevant « Toutes les hôtesses vont au paradis » par un style vif très nouvelle vague (caméra à l’épaule, tournage dans la rue parmi la foule) un symbolisme appuyé (cette communauté solidaire et en souffrance peut être un microcosme de la société argentine) des thèmes d’actualité (la recherche identitaire et celle du bonheur) par une interprétation homogène (De Daniel Hendler son interprète favori qui a obtenu comme le film lui même l’Ours d’Argent à Berlin) par sa narration (lev protagoniste présente son entourage et le monde dans lequel il tente de vivre). Tous ces éléments en font un film pertinent et remarquable.

Par Maurice (Maurice) le vendredi 25 juin 2004 - 09h09:

cher Hajklouf je vous ai deja ecrit que que les yaoudi ont toujours été appelé par leur frere
musulmans frere de sang par Ismael avant meme l'arrivée de Mohamed " Yaoudi "cela venir Judee comme le corse meme a paris s'appelle Corse et il a le droit d'y aller en Corse quand il veut il pose des bombes quand on l'ennuie. Le Palestiniens est un arabe venant donc d'Arabie donc un colonisateur d'Israel Le colonisé pousse le colonisateur quand il peut Reflechis HADAK

Par Cacouboulou (Cacouboulou) le vendredi 25 juin 2004 - 18h14:

Cacouboulou : Pour le Hajklouf.

Mr Hajklouf, malgre ton clavier avec l’accent que je n’ai pas, tu ferais mieux de retourner a l’ecole communale, pour apprendre a parler francais, car le charabia que tu nous injecte de derriere ton moucharabie, il nous casse les krarz !

Si tu veux, tu viens chez nous a Matmata, on va te matmater, ..........................!, et
t’apprendre a causer le bon Francais.

Viens seulement, tous le monde t’attends !

Signe : Cacouboulou Premier.

Par Nao (Nao) le vendredi 25 juin 2004 - 18h17:

Bravo a Mme Bayefsky qui n'a pas mis de gant pour dire a l'ONU en pleine face ce que nous avons tous sur le coeur.

One Small Step
Is the U.N. finally ready to get serious about anti-Semitism?
BY ANNE BAYEFSKY
Monday, June 21, 2004 11:15 a.m.

(Editor's note: Ms. Bayefsky delivered this speech at the U.N. at a conference on Confronting Anti-Semitism: Education for Tolerance and Understanding, sponsored by the United Nations Department of Information,
this morning.)

I appreciate the opportunity to speak to you at this first U.N. conference on anti-Semitism, which is being convened six decades after the
organization's creation. My thanks to the U.N. organizers and in particular Shashi Tharoor [the undersecretary-general for communications and public information] for their initiative and to the secretary-general for his willingness to engage.

This meeting occurs at a point when the relationship between Jews and the United Nations is at an all-time low. The U.N. took root in the ashes of the Jewish people, and according to its charter was to flower on the strength of a commitment to tolerance and equality for all men and women and of nations large and small. Today, however, the U.N. provides a platform for those who cast the victims of the Nazis as the Nazi counterparts of the 21st century.

The U.N. has become the leading global purveyor of anti-Semitism--intolerance and inequality against the Jewish people and its state.

Not only have many of the U.N. members most responsible for this state of affairs rendered their own countries Judenrein, they have succeeded in almost entirely expunging concern about Jew-hatred from the U.N. docket.

From 1965, when anti-Semitism was deliberately excluded from a treaty on racial discrimination, to last fall, when a proposal for a General Assembly resolution on anti-Semitism was withdrawn after Ireland capitulated to Arab and Muslim opposition, mention of anti-Semitism has continually ground the wheels of U.N.-led multilateralism to a halt.

There has never been a U.N. resolution specifically on anti-Semitism or a single report to a U.N. body dedicated to discrimination against Jews, in contrast to annual resolutions and reports focusing on the defamation of
Islam and discrimination against Muslims and Arabs. Instead there was Durban--the 2001 U.N. World Conference "Against Racism," which was a
breeding ground and global soapbox for anti-Semites. When it was over U.N.

officials and member states turned the Durban Declaration into the centerpiece of the U.N.'s antiracism agenda--allowing Durban follow-up
resolutions to become a continuing battlefield over U.N. concern with anti-Semitism.

Not atypical is the public dialogue in the U.N.'s top human rights body--the
Commission on Human Rights--where this past April the Pakistani ambassador, speaking on behalf of the 56 members of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, unashamedly disputed that anti-Semitism was about Jews.

For Jews, however, ignorance is not an option. Anti-Semitism is about intolerance and discrimination directed at Jews--both individually and collectively. It concerns both individual human rights and the group right
to self-determination--realized in the state of Israel.

What does discrimination against the Jewish state mean? It means refusing to admit only Israel to the vital negotiating sessions of regional groups held daily during U.N. Commission on Human Rights meetings. It means devoting six of the 10 emergency sessions ever held by the General Assembly to Israel. It
means transforming the 10th emergency session into a permanent tribunal--which has now been reconvened 12 times since 1997. By contrast, no
emergency session was ever held on the Rwandan genocide, estimated to have killed a million people, or the ethnic cleansing of tens of thousands in the former Yugoslavia, or the death of millions over the past two decades of
atrocities in Sudan. That's discrimination.

The record of the Secretariat is more of the same. In November 2003, Secretary-General Kofi Annan issued a report on Israel's security fence,
detailing the purported harm to Palestinians without describing one terrorist act against Israelis which preceded the fence's construction.

Recently, the secretary-general strongly condemned Israel for destroying homes in southern Gaza without mentioning the arms-smuggling tunnels operating beneath them. When Israel successfully targeted Hamas terrorist
Abdel Aziz Rantissi with no civilian casualties, the secretary-general denounced Israel for an "extrajudicial" killing. But when faced with the 2004 report of the U.N. special rapporteur on extrajudicial executions detailing the murder of more than 3,000 Brazilian civilians shot at close range by police, Mr. Annan chose silence. That's discrimination.

At the U.N., the language of human rights is hijacked not only to discriminate but to demonize the Jewish target. More than one quarter of the resolutions condemning a state's human rights violations adopted by the commission over 40 years have been directed at Israel. But there has never been a single resolution about the decades-long repression of the civil and political rights of 1.3 billion people in China, or the million female migrant workers in Saudi Arabia kept as virtual slaves, or the virulent racism which has brought 600,000 people to the brink of starvation in Zimbabwe. Every year, U.N. bodies are required to produce at least 25 reports on alleged human rights violations by Israel, but not one on an
Iranian criminal justice system which mandates punishments like crucifixion, stoning and cross-amputation of right hand and left foot. This is not legitimate critique of states with equal or worse human rights records. It is demonization of the Jewish state.

As Israelis are demonized at the U.N., so Palestinians and their cause are deified. Every year the U.N. marks Nov. 29 as the International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People--the day the U.N. partitioned the British Palestine mandate and which Arabs often style as the onset of al nakba or the "catastrophe" of the creation of the state of Israel. In 2002,
the anniversary of the vote that survivors of the concentration camps celebrated, was described by Secretary-General Annan as "a day of mourning and a day of grief."

In 2003 the representatives of over 100 member states stood along with the secretary-general, before a map predating the state of Israel, for a moment of silence "for all those who had given their lives for the Palestinian people"--which would include suicide bombers. Similarly, U.N. rapporteur John Dugard has described Palestinian terrorists as "tough" and their efforts as characterized by "determination, daring, and success." A commission resolution for the past three years has legitimized the Palestinian use of "all available means including armed struggle"--an absolution for terrorist methods which would never be applied to the self-determination claims of Chechens or Basques.

Although Palestinian self-determination is equally justified, the connection between demonizing Israelis and sanctifying Palestinians makes it clear that the core issue is not the stated cause of Palestinian suffering. For there
are no U.N. resolutions deploring the practice of encouraging Palestinian children to glorify and emulate suicide bombers, or the use of the
Palestinian population as human shields, or the refusal by the vast majority of Arab states to integrate Palestinian refugees into their societies and to offer them the benefits of citizenship. Palestinians are lionized at the
U.N. because they are the perceived antidote to what U.N. envoy Lakhdar Brahimi called the great poison of the Middle East--the existence and
resilience of the Jewish state.

Of course, anti-Semitism takes other forms at the U.N. Over the past decade at the commission, Syria announced that yeshivas train rabbis to instill racist hatred in their pupils. Palestinian representatives claimed that

Israelis can happily celebrate religious holidays like Yom Kippur only by shedding Palestinian blood, and accused Israel of injecting 300 Palestinian children with HIV-positive blood.

U.N.-led anti-Semitism moves from the demonization of Jews to the disqualification of Jewish victimhood: refusing to recognize Jewish
suffering by virtue of their ethnic and national identity. In 2003 a General Assembly resolution concerned with the welfare of Israeli children failed (though one on Palestinian children passed handily) because it proved impossible to gain enough support for the word Israeli appearing before the word children. The mandate of the U.N. special rapporteur on the "Palestinian territories", set over a decade ago, is to investigate only "Israel's violations of . . . international law" and not to consider
human-rights violations by Palestinians in Israel.
It follows in U.N. logic that nonvictims aren't really supposed to fight back. One after another concrete Israeli response to terrorism is denounced by the secretary-general and member states as illegal. But killing members of the command-and-control structure of a terrorist organization, when there is no disproportionate use of force, and arrest is impossible, is not
illegal. Homes used by terrorists in the midst of combat are legitimate military targets. A nonviolent, temporary separation of parties to a
conflict on disputed territory by a security fence, which is sensitive to minimizing hardships, is a legitimate response to Israel's international legal obligations to protect its citizens from crimes against humanity. In
effect, the U.N. moves to pin the arms of Jewish targets behind their backs while the terrorists take aim.

The U.N.'s preferred imagery for this phenomenon is of a cycle of violence.
It is claimed that the cycle must be broken--every time Israelis raises a hand. But just as the symbol of the cycle is chosen because it has no beginning, it is devastating to the cause of peace because it denies the possibility of an end. The Nuremberg Tribunal taught us that crimes are not committed by abstract entities.

The perpetrators of anti-Semitism today are the preachers in mosques who exhort their followers to blow up Jews. They are the authors of Palestinian Authority textbooks that teach a new generation to hate Jews and admire their killers. They are the television producers and official benefactors in authoritarian regimes like Syria or Egypt who manufacture and distribute programming that depicts Jews as bloodthirsty world conspirators.

Listen, however, to the words of the secretary-general in response to two suicide bombings which took place in Jerusalem this year, killing 19 and wounding 110: "Once again, violence and terror have claimed innocent lives in the Middle East. Once again, I condemn those who resort to such methods."

"The Secretary General condemns the suicide bombing Sunday in Jerusalem. The deliberate targeting of civilians is a heinous crime and cannot be justified by any cause." Refusing to name the perpetrators, Mr. Secretary-General,
Teflon terrorism, is a green light to strike again.

Perhaps more than any other, the big lie that fuels anti-Semitism today is the U.N.-promoted claim that the root cause of the Arab-Israeli conflict is the occupation of Palestinian land. According to U.N. revisionism, the occupation materialized in a vacuum. In reality, Israel occupies land taken in a war which was forced upon it by neighbors who sought to destroy it. It
is a state of occupation which Israelis themselves have repeatedly sought to end through negotiations over permanent borders. It is a state in which any abuses are closely monitored by Israel's independent judiciary. But
ultimately, it is a situation which is the responsibility of the rejectionists of Jewish self-determination among Palestinians and their Arab and Muslim brethren--who have rendered the Palestinian civilian population hostage to their violent and anti-Semitic ambitions.

There are those who would still deny the existence of anti-Semitism at the U.N. by pointing to a range of motivations in U.N. corridors including commercial interests, regional politics, preventing scrutiny of human rights violations closer to home, or enhancement of individual careers. U.N. actors and supporters remain almost uniformly in denial of the nature of the pathogen coursing through these halls. They ignore the infection and applaud the host, forgetting that the cancer which kills the organism will take with it both the good and the bad.

The relative distribution of naiveté, cowardice, opportunism, and anti-Semitism, however, matters little to Noam and Matan Ohayon, ages 4 and
5, shot to death through their mother's body in their home in northern Israel while she tried to shield them from a gunman of Yasser Arafat's
al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades. The terrible consequences of these combined motivations mobilized and empowered within U.N. chambers are the same.

The inability of the U.N. to confront the corruption of its agenda dooms this organization's success as an essential agent of equality or dignity or democratization.

This conference may serve as a turning point. We will only know if concrete changes occur hereafter: a General Assembly resolution on anti-Semitism adopted, an annual report on anti-Semitism forthcoming, a focal point on anti-Semitism created, a rapporteur on anti-Semitism appointed.

But I challenge the secretary-general and his organization to go further--if they are serious about eradicating anti-Semitism:
a.. Start putting a name to the terrorists that kill Jews because they are Jews.
b.. Start condemning human-rights violators wherever they dwell--even if they live in Riyadh or Damascus.
c.. Stop condemning the Jewish people for fighting back against their killers.
d.. And the next time someone asks you or your colleagues to stand for a moment of silence to honor those who would destroy the state of Israel, say no.

Only then will the message be heard from these chambers that the U.N. will not tolerate anti-Semitism or its consequences against Jews and the Jewish people, whether its victims live in Tehran, Paris or Jerusalem.

Ms. Bayefsky is a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute and an adjunct professor at Columbia University Law School.

Copyright © 2004 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Par Nao (Nao) le vendredi 25 juin 2004 - 18h23:

Un excellent article ou tout est dit..

HAIM HARARI, a theoretical physicist, is the Chair, Davidson Institute of Science
Education, and Former President, from 1988 to 2001, of the Weizmann Institute of Science.

During his years as President of the Institute, it entered numerous new scientific fields and projects, built 47 new buildings, raised one Billion Dollars in philanthropic money, hired more than half of its current tenured Professors and became one of the highest royalty-earning academic organizations in the world.
Throughout all his adult life, he has made major contributions to three different fields: Particle Physics Research on the international scene, Science Education in the Israeli school system and Science Administration and Policy Making.
A View from the Eye of the Storm Talk delivered by Haim Harari at a meeting of the International Advisory Board of a large multi-national corporation, April, 2004.

As you know, I usually provide the scientific and technological "entertainment" in our
meetings, but, on this occasion, our Chairman suggested that I present my own personal view on events in the part of the world from which I come. I have never been and I will never be a Government official and I have no privileged information.
My perspective is entirely based on what I see, on what I read and on the fact that my family has lived in this region for almost 200 years. You may regard my views as those of the proverbial taxi driver, which you are supposed to question, when you visit a country.

I could have shared with you some fascinating facts and some personal thoughts about the Israeli-Arab conflict. However, I will touch upon it only in passing. I prefer to devote most of my remarks to the broader picture of the region and its place in world events. I refer to the entire area between Pakistan and Morocco, which is predominantly Arab, predominantly Moslem, but includes many non-Arab and also
significant non-Moslem minorities.

Why do I put aside Israel and its own immediate neighborhood? Because Israel and any problems related to it, in spite of what you might read or hear in the world media, is not the central issue, and has never been the central issue in the upheaval in the region. Yes, there is a 100 year-old Israeli-Arab conflict, but it is not where the main show is. The millions who died in the Iran-Iraq war had nothing to do with Israel. The mass murder happening right now in Sudan, where the Arab Moslem regime is
massacring its black Christian citizens, has nothing to do with Israel. The frequent
reports from Algeria about the murders of hundreds of civilian in one village or
another by other Algerians have nothing to do with Israel. Saddam Hussein did not
invade Kuwait, endangered Saudi Arabia and butchered his own people because of
Israel. Egypt did not use poison gas against Yemen in the 60’s because of Israel.
Assad the Father did not kill tens of thousands of his own citizens in one week in El
Hamma in Syria because of Israel. The Taliban control of Afghanistan and the civil war
there had nothing to do with Israel. The Libyan blowing up of the Pan-Am flight had
nothing to do with Israel, and I could go on and on and on.
The root of the trouble is that this entire Moslem region is totally dysfunctional, by any
standard of the word, and would have been so even if Israel would have joined the
Arab league and an independent Palestine would have existed for 100 years. The 22
member countries of the Arab league, from Mauritania to the Gulf States, have a total
population of 300 millions, larger than the US and almost as large as the EU before its
expansion. They have a land area larger than either the US or all of Europe. These 22
countries, with all their oil and natural resources, have a combined GDP smaller than
that of Netherlands plus Belgium and equal to half of the GDP of California alone.
Within this meager GDP, the gaps between rich and poor are beyond belief and too
many of the rich made their money not by succeeding in business, but by being
corrupt rulers. The social status of women is far below what it was in the Western
World 150 years ago. Human rights are below any reasonable standard, in spite of the
grotesque fact that Libya was elected Chair of the UN Human Rights commission.
According to a report prepared by a committee of Arab intellectuals and published
under the auspices of the U.N., the number of books translated by the entire Arab
world is much smaller than what little Greece alone translates. The total number of
scientific publications of 300 million Arabs is less than that of 6 million Israelis. Birth
rates in the region are very high, increasing the poverty, the social gaps and the
cultural decline. And all of this is happening in a region, which only 30 years ago, was
3
believed to be the next wealthy part of the world, and in a Moslem area, which
developed, at some point in history, one of the most advanced cultures in the world.
It is fair to say that this creates an unprecedented breeding ground for cruel dictators,
terror networks, fanaticism, incitement, suicide murders and general decline. It is also
a fact that almost everybody in the region blames this situation on the United States,
on Israel, on Western Civilization, on Judaism and Christianity, on anyone and
anything, except themselves.
Do I say all of this with the satisfaction of someone discussing the failings of his
enemies? On the contrary, I firmly believe that the world would have been a much
better place and my own neighborhood would have been much more pleasant and
peaceful, if things were different.
I should also say a word about the millions of decent, honest, good people who are
either devout Moslems or are not very religious but grew up in Moslem families. They
are double victims of an outside world, which now develops Islamophobia and of their
own environment, which breaks their heart by being totally dysfunctional. The
problem is that the vast silent majority of these Moslems are not part of the terror and
of the incitement but they also do not stand up against it. They become accomplices,
by omission, and this applies to political leaders, intellectuals, business people and
many others. Many of them can certainly tell right from wrong, but are afraid to
express their views.
The events of the last few years have amplified four issues, which have always
existed, but have never been as rampant as in the present upheaval in the region.
These are the four main pillars of the current World Conflict, or perhaps we should
already refer to it as "the undeclared World War III". I have no better name for the
present situation. A few more years may pass before everybody acknowledges that it
is a World War, but we are already well into it.
The first element is the suicide murder. Suicide murders are not a new invention but
they have been made popular, if I may use this expression, only lately. Even after
September 11, it seems that most of the Western World does not yet understand this
weapon. It is a very potent psychological weapon. Its real direct impact is relatively
minor. The total number of casualties from hundreds of suicide murders within Israel
in the last three years is much smaller than those due to car accidents. September 11
was quantitatively much less lethal than many earthquakes. More people die from
AIDS in one day in Africa than all the Russians who died in the hands of Chechnyabased
Moslem suicide murderers since that conflict started. Saddam killed every
month more people than all those who died from suicide murders since the Coalition
occupation of Iraq.
So what is all the fuss about suicide killings? It creates headlines. It is spectacular. It
is frightening. It is a very cruel death with bodies dismembered and horrible severe
lifelong injuries to many of the wounded. It is always shown on television in great
4
detail. One such murder, with the help of hysterical media coverage, can destroy the
tourism industry of a country for quite a while, as it did in Bali and in Turkey.
But the real fear comes from the undisputed fact that no defense and no preventive
measures can succeed against a determined suicide murderer. This has not yet
penetrated the thinking of the Western World. The U.S. and Europe are constantly
improving their defense against the last murder, not the next one. We may arrange
for the best airport security in the world. But if you want to murder by suicide, you do
not have to board a plane in order to explode yourself and kill many people. Who
could stop a suicide murder in the midst of the crowded line waiting to be checked by
the airport metal detector? How about the lines to the check-in counters in a busy
travel period? Put a metal detector in front of every train station in Spain and the
terrorists will get the buses. Protect the buses and they will explode in movie theaters,
concert halls, supermarkets, shopping malls, schools and hospitals. Put guards in front
of every concert hall and there will always be a line of people to be checked by the
guards and this line will be the target, not to speak of killing the guards themselves.
You can somewhat reduce your vulnerability by preventive and defensive measures
and by strict border controls but not eliminate it and definitely not win the war in a
defensive way. And it is a war!
What is behind the suicide murders? Money, power and cold-blooded murderous
incitement, nothing else. It has nothing to do with true fanatic religious beliefs. No
Moslem preacher has ever blown himself up. No son of an Arab politician or religious
leader has ever blown himself. No relative of anyone influential has done it. Wouldn’t
you expect some of the religious leaders to do it themselves, or to talk their sons into
doing it, if this is truly a supreme act of religious fervor? Aren’t they interested in the
benefits of going to Heaven? Instead, they send outcast women, naïve children,
retarded people and young incited hotheads. They promise them the delights, mostly
sexual, of the next world, and pay their families handsomely after the supreme act is
performed and enough innocent people are dead.
Suicide murders also have nothing to do with poverty and despair. The poorest region
in the world, by far, is Africa. It never happens there. There are numerous desperate
people in the world, in different cultures, countries and continents. Desperation does
not provide anyone with explosives, reconnaissance and transportation. There was
certainly more despair in Saddam’s Iraq then in Paul Bremmer’s Iraq, and no one
exploded himself. A suicide murder is simply a horrible, vicious weapon of cruel,
inhuman, cynical, well-funded terrorists, with no regard to human life, including the
life of their fellow countrymen, but with very high regard to their own affluent wellbeing
and their hunger for power.
The only way to fight this new “popular” weapon is identical to the only way in which
you fight organized crime or pirates on the high seas: the offensive way. Like in the
case of organized crime, it is crucial that the forces on the offensive be united and it is
crucial to reach the top of the crime pyramid. You cannot eliminate organized crime by
5
arresting the little drug dealer in the street corner. You must go after the head of the
"Family".
If part of the public supports it, others tolerate it, many are afraid of it and some try
to explain it away by poverty or by a miserable childhood, organized crime will thrive
and so will terrorism. The United States understands this now, after September 11.
Russia is beginning to understand it. Turkey understands it well. I am very much
afraid that most of Europe still does not understand it. Unfortunately, it seems that
Europe will understand it only after suicide murders will arrive in Europe in a big way.
In my humble opinion, this will definitely happen. The Spanish trains and the Istanbul
bombings are only the beginning. The unity of the Civilized World in fighting this
horror is absolutely indispensable. Until Europe wakes up, this unity will not be
achieved.
The second ingredient is words, more precisely lies. Words can be lethal. They kill
people. It is often said that politicians, diplomats and perhaps also lawyers and
business people must sometimes lie, as part of their professional life. But the norms of
politics and diplomacy are childish, in comparison with the level of incitement and total
absolute deliberate fabrications, which have reached new heights in the region we are
talking about. An incredible number of people in the Arab world believe that
September 11 never happened, or was an American provocation or, even better, a
Jewish plot.
You all remember the Iraqi Minister of Information, Mr. Mouhamad Said al-Sahaf and
his press conferences when the US forces were already inside Baghdad.
Disinformation at time of war is an accepted tactic. But to stand, day after day, and to
make such preposterous statements, known to everybody to be lies, without even
being ridiculed in your own milieu, can only happen in this region. Mr. Sahaf
eventually became a popular icon as a court jester, but this did not stop some
allegedly respectable newspapers from giving him equal time. It also does not prevent
the Western press from giving credence, every day, even now, to similar liars. After
all, if you want to be an antisemite, there are subtle ways of doing it. You do not have
to claim that the holocaust never happened and that the Jewish temple in Jerusalem
never existed. But millions of Moslems are told by their leaders that this is the case.
When these same leaders make other statements, the Western media report them as
if they could be true.
It is a daily occurrence that the same people, who finance, arm and dispatch suicide
murderers, condemn the act in English in front of western TV cameras, talking to a
world audience, which even partly believes them. It is a daily routine to hear the same
leader making opposite statements in Arabic to his people and in English to the rest of
the world. Incitement by Arab TV, accompanied by horror pictures of mutilated
bodies, has become a powerful weapon of those who lie, distort and want to destroy
everything. Little children are raised on deep hatred and on admiration of so-called
6
martyrs, and the Western World does not notice it because its own TV sets are mostly
tuned to soap operas and game shows. I recommend to you, even though most of
you do not understand Arabic, to watch Al Jazeera, from time to time. You will not
believe your own eyes.
But words also work in other ways, more subtle. A demonstration in Berlin, carrying
banners supporting Saddam’s regime and featuring three-year old babies dressed as
suicide murderers, is defined by the press and by political leaders as a “peace
demonstration”. You may support or oppose the Iraq war, but to refer to fans of
Saddam, Arafat or Bin Laden as peace activists is a bit too much. A woman walks into
an Israeli restaurant in mid-day, eats, observes families with old people and children
eating their lunch in the adjacent tables and pays the bill. She then blows herself up,
killing 20 people, including many children, with heads and arms rolling around in the
restaurant. She is called “martyr” by several Arab leaders and “activist” by the
European press. Dignitaries condemn the act but visit her bereaved family and the
money flows.
There is a new game in town: The actual murderer is called “the military wing”, the
one who pays him, equips him and sends him is now called “the political wing” and
the head of the operation is called the “spiritual leader”. There are numerous other
examples of such Orwellian nomenclature, used every day not only by terror chiefs
but also by Western media. These words are much more dangerous than many people
realize. They provide an emotional infrastructure for atrocities. It was Joseph Goebels
who said that if you repeat a lie often enough, people will believe it. He is now being
outperformed by his successors.
The third aspect is money. Huge amounts of money, which could have solved many
social problems in this dysfunctional part of the world, are channeled into three
concentric spheres supporting death and murder. In the inner circle are the terrorists
themselves. The money funds their travel, explosives, hideouts and permanent search
for soft vulnerable targets. They are surrounded by a second wider circle of direct
supporters, planners, commanders, preachers, all of whom make a living, usually a
very comfortable living, by serving as terror infrastructure. Finally, we find the third
circle of so-called religious, educational and welfare organizations, which actually do
some good, feed the hungry and provide some schooling, but brainwash a new
generation with hatred, lies and ignorance. This circle operates mostly through
mosques, madrasas and other religious establishments but also through inciting
electronic and printed media. It is this circle that makes sure that women remain
inferior, that democracy is unthinkable and that exposure to the outside world is
minimal. It is also that circle that leads the way in blaming everybody outside the
Moslem world, for the miseries of the region.
Figuratively speaking, this outer circle is the guardian, which makes sure that the
people look and listen inwards to the inner circle of terror and incitement, rather than
to the world outside. Some parts of this same outer circle actually operate as a result
7
of fear from, or blackmail by, the inner circles. The horrifying added factor is the high
birth rate. Half of the population of the Arab world is under the age of 20, the most
receptive age to incitement, guaranteeing two more generations of blind hatred.
Of the three circles described above, the inner circles are primarily financed by
terrorist states like Iran and Syria, until recently also by Iraq and Libya and earlier also
by some of the Communist regimes. These states, as well as the Palestinian Authority,
are the safe havens of the wholesale murder vendors. The outer circle is largely
financed by Saudi Arabia, but also by donations from certain Moslem communities in
the United States and Europe and, to a smaller extent, by donations of European
Governments to various NGO's and by certain United Nations organizations, whose
goals may be noble, but they are infested and exploited by agents of the outer circle.
The Saudi regime, of course, will be the next victim of major terror, when the inner
circle will explode into the outer circle. The Saudis are beginning to understand it, but
they fight the inner circles, while still financing the infrastructure at the outer circle.
Some of the leaders of these various circles live very comfortably on their loot. You
meet their children in the best private schools in Europe, not in the training camps of
suicide murderers. The Jihad "soldiers" join packaged death tours to Iraq and other
hotspots, while some of their leaders ski in Switzerland. Mrs. Arafat, who lives in Paris
with her daughter, receives tens of thousands Dollars per month from the allegedly
bankrupt Palestinian Authority while a typical local ringleader of the Al-Aksa brigade,
reporting to Arafat, receives only a cash payment of a couple of hundred dollars, for
performing murders at the retail level.
The fourth element of the current world conflict is the total breaking of all laws. The
civilized world believes in democracy, the rule of law, including international law,
human rights, free speech and free press, among other liberties. There are naïve oldfashioned
habits such as respecting religious sites and symbols, not using ambulances
and hospitals for acts of war, avoiding the mutilation of dead bodies and not using
children as human shields or human bombs. Never in history, not even in the Nazi
period, was there such total disregard of all of the above as we observe now. Every
student of political science debates how you prevent an anti-democratic force from
winning a democratic election and abolishing democracy. Other aspects of a civilized
society must also have limitations. Can a policeman open fire on someone trying to kill
him? Can a government listen to phone conversations of terrorists and drug dealers?
Does free speech protects you when you shout “fire” in a crowded theater? Should
there be death penalty, for deliberate multiple murders? These are the old-fashioned
dilemmas. But now we have an entire new set.
Do you raid a mosque, which serves as a terrorist ammunition storage? Do you return
fire, if you are attacked from a hospital? Do you storm a church taken over by
terrorists who took the priests hostages? Do you search every ambulance after a few
suicide murderers use ambulances to reach their targets? Do you strip every woman
because one pretended to be pregnant and carried a suicide bomb on her belly? Do
8
you shoot back at someone trying to kill you, standing deliberately behind a group of
children? Do you raid terrorist headquarters, hidden in a mental hospital? Do you
shoot an arch-murderer who deliberately moves from one location to another, always
surrounded by children? All of these happen daily in Iraq and in the Palestinian areas.
What do you do? Well, you do not want to face the dilemma. But it cannot be
avoided.
Suppose, for the sake of discussion, that someone would openly stay in a well-known
address in Teheran, hosted by the Iranian Government and financed by it, executing
one atrocity after another in Spain or in France, killing hundreds of innocent people,
accepting responsibility for the crimes, promising in public TV interviews to do more of
the same, while the Government of Iran issues public condemnations of his acts but
continues to host him, invite him to official functions and treat him as a great
dignitary. I leave it to you as homework to figure out what Spain or France would
have done, in such a situation.
The problem is that the civilized world is still having illusions about the rule of law in a
totally lawless environment. It is trying to play ice hockey by sending a ballerina iceskater
into the rink or to knock out a heavyweight boxer by a chess player. In the
same way that no country has a law against cannibals eating its prime minister,
because such an act is unthinkable, international law does not address killers shooting
from hospitals, mosques and ambulances, while being protected by their Government
or society. International law does not know how to handle someone who sends
children to throw stones, stands behind them and shoots with immunity and cannot be
arrested because he is sheltered by a Government. International law does not know
how to deal with a leader of murderers who is royally and comfortably hosted by a
country, which pretends to condemn his acts or just claims to be too weak to arrest
him. The amazing thing is that all of these crooks demand protection under
international law and define all those who attack them as war criminals, with some
Western media repeating the allegations. The good news is that all of this is
temporary, because the evolution of international law has always adapted itself to
reality. The punishment for suicide murder should be death or arrest before the
murder, not during and not after. After every world war, the rules of international law
have changed and the same will happen after the present one. But during the twilight
zone, a lot of harm can be done.
The picture I described here is not pretty. What can we do about it? In the short run,
only fight and win. In the long run – only educate the next generation and open it to
the world. The inner circles can and must be destroyed by force. The outer circle
cannot be eliminated by force. Here we need financial starvation of the organizing
elite, more power to women, more education, counter propaganda, boycott whenever
feasible and access to Western media, internet and the international scene. Above all,
we need a total absolute unity and determination of the civilized world against all
three circles of evil.
9
Allow me, for a moment, to depart from my alleged role as a taxi driver and return to
science. When you have a malignant tumor, you may remove the tumor itself
surgically. You may also starve it by preventing new blood from reaching it from other
parts of the body, thereby preventing new "supplies" from expanding the tumor. If
you want to be sure, it is best to do both.
But before you fight and win, by force or otherwise, you have to realize that you are
in a war, and this may take Europe a few more years. In order to win, it is necessary
to first eliminate the terrorist regimes, so that no Government in the world will serve
as a safe haven for these people. I do not want to comment here on whether the
American-led attack on Iraq was justified from the point of view of weapons of mass
destruction or any other pre-war argument, but I can look at the post-war map of
Western Asia. Now that Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya are out, two and a half terrorist
states remain: Iran, Syria and Lebanon, the latter being a Syrian colony. Perhaps
Sudan should be added to the list. As a result of the conquest of Afghanistan and
Iraq, both Iran and Syria are now totally surrounded by territories unfriendly to them.
Iran is encircled by Afghanistan, by the Gulf States, Iraq and the Moslem republics of
the former Soviet Union. Syria is surrounded by Turkey, Iraq, Jordan and Israel. This
is a significant strategic change and it applies strong pressure on the terrorist
countries. It is not surprising that Iran is so active in trying to incite a Shiite uprising in
Iraq. I do not know if the American plan was actually to encircle both Iran and Syria,
but that is the resulting situation.
In my humble opinion, the number one danger to the world today is Iran and its
regime. It definitely has ambitions to rule vast areas and to expand in all directions. It
has an ideology, which claims supremacy over Western culture. It is ruthless. It has
proven that it can execute elaborate terrorist acts without leaving too many traces,
using Iranian Embassies. It is clearly trying to develop Nuclear Weapons. Its so-called
moderates and conservatives play their own virtuoso version of the “good-cop versus
bad-cop” game. Iran sponsors Syrian terrorism, it is certainly behind much of the
action in Iraq, it is fully funding the Hizbulla and, through it, the Palestinian Hamas
and Islamic Jihad, it performed acts of terror at least in Europe and in South America
and probably also in Uzbekhistan and Saudi Arabia and it truly leads a multi-national
terror consortium, which includes, as minor players, Syria, Lebanon and certain Shiite
elements in Iraq. Nevertheless, most European countries still trade with Iran, try to
appease it and refuse to read the clear signals.
In order to win the war it is also necessary to dry the financial resources of the terror
conglomerate. It is pointless to try to understand the subtle differences between the
Sunni terror of Al Qaida and Hamas and the Shiite terror of Hizbulla, Sadr and other
Iranian inspired enterprises. When it serves their business needs, all of them
collaborate beautifully.
It is crucial to stop Saudi and other financial support of the outer circle, which is the
fertile breeding ground of terror. It is important to monitor all donations from the
10
Western World to Islamic organizations, to monitor the finances of international relief
organizations and to react with forceful economic measures to any small sign of
financial aid to any of the three circles of terrorism. It is also important to act
decisively against the campaign of lies and fabrications and to monitor those Western
media who collaborate with it out of naivety, financial interests or ignorance.
Above all, never surrender to terror. No one will ever know whether the recent
elections in Spain would have yielded a different result, if not for the train bombings a
few days earlier. But it really does not matter. What matters is that the terrorists
believe that they caused the result and that they won by driving Spain out of Iraq.
The Spanish story will surely end up being extremely costly to other European
countries, including France, who is now expelling inciting preachers and forbidding
veils and including others who sent troops to Iraq. In the long run, Spain itself will pay
even more.
Is the solution a democratic Arab world? If by democracy we mean free elections but
also free press, free speech, a functioning judicial system, civil liberties, equality to
women, free international travel, exposure to international media and ideas, laws
against racial incitement and against defamation, and avoidance of lawless behavior
regarding hospitals, places of worship and children, then yes, democracy is the
solution. If democracy is just free elections, it is likely that the most fanatic regime will
be elected, the one whose incitement and fabrications are the most inflammatory. We
have seen it already in Algeria and, to a certain extent, in Turkey. It will happen
again, if the ground is not prepared very carefully. On the other hand, a certain
transition democracy, as in Jordan, may be a better temporary solution, paving the
way for the real thing, perhaps in the same way that an immediate sudden democracy
did not work in Russia and would not have worked in China.
I have no doubt that the civilized world will prevail. But the longer it takes us to
understand the new landscape of this war, the more costly and painful the victory will
be. Europe, more than any other region, is the key. Its understandable recoil from
wars, following the horrors of World War II, may cost thousands of additional innocent
lives, before the tide will turn.

Par Nao (Nao) le vendredi 25 juin 2004 - 18h35:

Hakjlouf, les arabes sont les seuls responsables de leurs malheurs mais c'est tellement plus facile de blamer Israel et les Juifs, le monde occidental, les chretiens et j'en passe....
L'irresponsabilite du monde arabe, c'est de ne pas reconnaitre leur propre part de responsabilite dans leur situation actuelle.
Dans ce sens, Lire l'article d'Harari.
Il est temps que vous deveniez des Hommes et des Adultes!!!

Par Djlachem (Djlachem) le vendredi 25 juin 2004 - 01h46:

Le "grand" Hajklouf a dit:

"alors c'est la peuple israelien qui a tort. bein non ...(en réalité je ne vois pas pourquoi il n'a pas tord mais je suis sûr que dans ce site il y a des gens qui ont les possiblités de me trouver milles raisons ) )"

Bein oui...

En voilà une par exemple: si les arabes avaient respecté la résolution 181 du plan de partage de 1947, Israël serait 3 fois plus petit qu'aujourd'hui, la région serait prospère et pacifiée depuis 56 ans, et les pays arabes alentour auraient certainement bénéficié de la coopération avec Israël.

Au lieu de cela, vous avez choisi la guerre, ne pouvant supporter l'indépendance triomphante de vos anciens dhimmis. Et après avoir perdu toutes vos guerres - y compris d'ailleurs la 2e Intifada qui est en train de s'achever "en douceur" dans un flop total -, vous vous étonnez qu'après ces défaites, vous n'ayez plus, à l'arrivée, ce que vous aviez au départ.

Tu vois, Hajklouf, je me mettrai jamais à une table de poker avec toi. Les mauvais perdants, je préfère les éviter.

Par Emile_Tubiana (Emile_Tubiana) le jeudi 24 juin 2004 - 22h13:

Albert, c'est gentil d'intervenir en ma faveur.
En tunisien on dit; "BAED MA CHAB HAZOUHOU LELKOTAB" (Après qu’il a vieilli on l’a emmené au Cotab) Tu veux que Hajklouf apprenne le respect? Il ne sais même pas écrire mon nom.

Quant à Hajklouf Oui monsieur Hajklouf,si même vous auriez été un juif, j'aurai réagi de la même façon. En simple langage je n'ai pas l'envie de lire la presse israelienne encore une fois, à travers la Tunisie car je la lis en directe.
Hajklouf vous n'avez encore pas compris que pour moi, que vous soyez Juif ou Musulman c'est Kif Kif. Quand je suis à Tunis je ne vais pas critiquer qui que ce soit. Car je connais la règle de la politesse. Le proverbe arabe dit: "Eli Ja El Darek Houa Akber Men Bouk" (Celui qui vient chez toi mérite plus de respect que ton père.)Mais malgré tout puisque vous êtes venu dans notre site on vous doit tous nos respects.

Il faut que vous saisissiez une fois pour toutes que nous les Juifs aimons Israel tel qu'il est et on s'en fou des critiques des personnes comme vous, nous avons assez d'ennemis, donc il est logique que je fasse confiance à mon peuple et pas à vous.

Avez-vous quelque chose d'intéressant à nous communiquer autres que les problèmes palestiniens. Et sachez bien que je ne peux pas avoir pitié des personnes qui préfèrent la mort à la vie. S'il y a des Arabes honnêtes et qui aiment la vie, ils deviennent automatiquement mes amis. Mon conseil, profitez de l’accès que vous avez dans le site Harissa pour enrichir vos connaissances au lieu de chercher à créer des polémiques et perdre votre temps et celui des autres. Je vous donne encore un gentil proverbe tunisien: "Oucan Fatek Leklam Qoul Efhemt."( Si tu as rater les paroles dit j'ai compri.)

Par Albert (Albert) le jeudi 24 juin 2004 - 20h57:

CHANSON POUR JACO ET RAPHO.....

'...Dans le silence....De mes vieilles annéEEEEEEEes..§§
Remonte l'écho telle une vague agitéeEEEEEE..§§§§
Mon âge, mes vingt ans passes..§§.
Sous le reflet de ma jeunesse....InsoucianteEE...§§§
En ce temps là...Je nageais et je 'volley...'§§§

Que ma mémoire....S'aventureEEE.....Aux confins...§§§§§
De mes beaux printemps....§§§.....Que j'ai bouffé sans fin...§§§§
Qui donc me rappelle....Mes images, visages et mes jasmiIIIIIns..§§§
Dans mes airs d'autrefois que je nomme ...PARFUMSSSSSS.....§§§§§§§

Dans le silence.....De mes vieilles années..§§§§
Résonne l'écho...De mes bruits passes...§§§
Et ce beau temps...Qui s'est arrêtéEEEE..§§§§§...
Depuis que ma jeunesse...A sombré..§§§§§
Dans son abîme.....SANS BOUEEEEE...§§§§§

Dans le silence........De mes vieilles anNNNèesss..§§
J'entends l'écho........Des rires enchantés..§§§
De mes camarades, mes amis d'ETEEEEE...§§§
Sur mes plages de ...MON PAYS ENSOLEILLE..§§§


Où sont donc passes mes 20 Ans..§§§§
Ils survivent dans le silenEEEce AAAAssaisonné......§§§§
Par mes reliques trépassEES..§§§
Et dans ma mémoire chancelante...§§§
Leur écho disparaît lentement....§§§§

Lorsque le silence.....Aura eu raison .......De mon écho...§§
Du peu qui me reste, ces petits restes de mon egoOOOOOOO..§§§§
Dans ma mémoire, ils s'engloutiront dans le noir.....
Sans peine, ni tristesse avec mon terroir..Dans mon tiroirRRR..§§§§


aLORSSSSSSSS... Que ceux là viennent...
Affamés et pas repus.......Ces petits vers luisants...§§
Qui vont se gaver de mon corps dormant
Sous la voûte céleste, marbre sur mon front..§§

Je viens vous direEEEE..§§§§...Bien...avant,
Que cette belle vie est sans souci et sans ennui
N'est en fait qu'une grosse pute dont en a TOUJOURS ENVIEEEEEEEEEE!


Arrivera la morrRRRt.......Qui me surprendrAAA.§§§
Sur mon lit de souvenirs, mais qui donc dira........
Il est parti, le vieil enfant D'Adra...
PAR TRES HEUREUX, ses larmes séchées sur ses joues..
LE MALHEUREUX........

Paroles d'ALBERT

Par Albert (Albert) le jeudi 24 juin 2004 - 20h33:

HAJKLOUF Serais- tu l'avocat du DIABLE et de ses sbires..????
Respecte Emile aussi...S'il te plait...!

Par Albert (Albert) le jeudi 24 juin 2004 - 20h19:

Billet de L'Agence SHARON/BREITOUNA TRIC TRACLTD
interdit de reproduction Copyright 20233.

La plupart d'entre vous connaissent ma légèreté d'esprit, il en faut parfois et je suis sur à 100% qu'il vaut mieux fréquenter un khfif qu'un balourd, ça je le sais et je sais même que vous attendez 20 heures pour lire les élucubrations d'Albert, mes analyses sèrieuses qui le sont même si Henri R.M met ce mot entre guillemets.Lui, il est sorti depuis longtemps des parenthèses grâce à son Alya.

Comme j'ai presque toujours quelque chose à dire et que je ne vous cache rien, sur la tête de Fritnè laziza, et bien le moment est arrivé pour vous dévoiler qu'il y a bien longtemps ( Tais toi la DOUDA) j'ai fais partie de l'équipage de la CALYPSO CHA CHA avec le costaud Cousteau Z'AL. J'étais son premier scaphandre juste derrière son fils . (Tawfik si tu ris j'arrête ma narration et je te laisse Mââlak(suspendu) . Voilà, ben j'avais une découverte extraordinaire à 100 000 lieux sous les mers. Une espèce que je croyais a jamais disparu et bien non , mes amis, les fonds des mers recèlent, bande d'ignorants, macaques et incultes que vous êtes tous et sauf toi L' Emile ( bech en nmout bel dahq) une minuscule amide que j'ai nommé LA ROC ACARIDIENNE! C'est mon droit de nommer mes espèces. J'ai pu donc après moult précautions l'analyser au microscope cellulaire. J'y ai constater à ma grande surprise un état d'indigence d'esprit enveloppé dans une sorte de crasse merdique qui vous on dit long sur l'état de délabrement de cet espèce ROCARIDIENNEen voie de disparition car j'ai beau encore fouillé les abîmes océanes et je n'ai pas trouvé un clown de jardin de mer , pardon un clone comme lui, car ce genre de spécimen ne se reproduit pas aisément et ne se clonent pas, cela me gêne de vous le dire c'est une question de gênes. Donc , elle est en voie de disparition et c'est tant mieux, elle ne laissera même pas une traîne noire dans mon aquarium.

Vous avez compris de quelle espèce je veux parler ....? De cette'apostrophe'au rictus insipide qui porte un costume court, presque toujours gris et dont à l'impression que ce n'est pas lui qui trottine sur les trottoirs de Paris mais plutôt son costume sombre. Alors, il pourra dire ce qu'il veut, d'autres l'ont fait avant lui, Israël et nous tous, nous ne l'absoudrons pas.

Par A_Soued (A_Soued) le jeudi 24 juin 2004 - 20h11:

LE BOUC ÉMISSAIRE

Ou "la violence et le sacré"



Pour tester la dévotion d'Abraham, D. lui ordonne le sacrifice de son fils unique. Obéissant, Abraham se rend sur le lieu du sacrifice, mais le récit biblique précise qu'un ange intervient pour arrêter son geste et un bélier, empêtré dans un buisson voisin, sera sacrifié à la place du jeune Isaac. On vient de remplacer le sacrifice d'un homme par celui d'un animal.


Dans "La Violence et le Sacré" (1972), René Girard explique comment le sacrifice d'un animal permet d'apaiser symboliquement des pulsions agressives. Par le subterfuge de la substitution d'un animal à l'être humain visé, les membres de la communauté sont préservés...
Dans les litanies religieuses antiques, le sacrifice était destiné soit à tester le dévouement des croyants, soit à calmer la colère de(s) dieu(x). En fait, le sacrifice est une affaire humaine, et, au delà des litanies, il est dans la logique libidinale des pulsions.

Le sacrifice apaise les pulsions agressives des hommes.



René Girard se demande ce qui a pu inciter les hommes à tuer leur semblable, non pas dans un geste brutal et irréfléchi, mais dans une poussée de vie consciente, créatrice de formes culturelles, se transmettant de génération en génération sous forme d'un rite codé. Le risque menaçant toute société est la violence réciproque, le cycle des violences privées qui engendrent des vengeances incessantes. Le rite sacrificiel serait la répétition d’un premier lynchage spontané qui ramène l’ordre au sein d'une communauté. Dans ce lynchage, la violence de tous contre tous se résout dans la violence de tous contre un. Apaisée par cet exutoire, la collectivité se reforme, unie autour de la victime sacrifiée. Une solidarité s'établit ainsi dans le crime.

Le rite sacrificiel est donc une violence ponctuelle et légale dont la fonction est d’opérer une libération salutaire des pulsions agressives sur une victime somme toute indifférente à la communauté, parce que marginale.

René Girard précise les conditions sociales qui "prédisposeraient" un individu à servir de bouc émissaire à la vindicte populaire, un prisonnier de guerre, un esclave, un enfant informe (ex. Œdipe a les pieds enflés), un roi parce qu’il échappe à la société par le haut ou un mendiant parce qu'il échappe à la société par le bas.

Girard rappelle qu’Athènes entretenait elle-même quelques malheureux qu'elle pouvait sacrifier, quand les tensions sociales renaissaient, par exemple lors d’une calamité collective (épidémie, famine, invasion). C’est la pratique du "Pharmakos", à la fois poison et remède.

Considérant le sacrifice comme une affaire humaine, René Girard est amené à interpréter le mythe d'Oedipe en des termes purement humains. Œdipe est un bouc émissaire parmi d'autres. L'étranger libérateur de Thèbes subit un revirement d’affection de la part de son peuple lorsque la peste s’abat sur la ville. Il est victime d’une mystification galopante et des rumeurs courent sur son compte, le parricide, l’inceste; mais ce ne sont que des fabulations, des prétextes pour exposer le roi à la vindicte populaire. Pour René Girard, chaque fois que nous rappelons ce mythe, nous devenons les témoins et les complices d’un lynchage collectif... Contrairement à Œdipe, Job a su résister aux boniments de ses amis et ne s'est pas retrouvé comme "victime expiatoire consentante", récupérant ce qu'il avait perdu.

Ceci est l’occasion pour René Girard de revenir sur les pratiques policières et en particulier sur toutes les manœuvres pour obtenir des aveux spontanés, l'adhésion de l'accusé au processus qui l'élimine, donnant par lui-même la preuve de sa culpabilité. René Girard souligne que cette volonté de produire des victimes consentantes caractérise autant les systèmes totalitaires modernes que des procédures judiciaires des inquisiteurs du moyen âge.



Le sacrifice humain est resté dans l'inconscient collectif et de temps à autre un déchaînement cruel se produit çà ou là et qui ne peut être expliqué que par le phénomène d'expiation apaisante et primitive décrit par Girard.

La hommes de la Bible ont cherché à interdire le sacrifice humain et ils ont proposé la substitution d'un animal, comme le bélier dans la "ligature d'Isaac" par Abraham.



Dans la tradition du Lévitique (Lév 16/8 à 26), deux boucs sont tirés au sort: un bouc est offert à l'Eternel en sacrifice expiatoire; l'autre, vivant, est envoyé dans le désert. Il reçoit sur sa tête toutes les iniquités, les offenses et les péchés du peuple. Il est expulsé avec le mal hors de la communauté, l'emportant avec lui vers A'zazel. Sur le plan ésotérique, il faut donner "sa part" à Satan pour l'occuper.

Le sacrifice du premier bouc est destiné à calmer la colère divine. En réalité, il apaise les pulsions agressives des hommes. Le bouc expiatoire transforme la force brutale de l'homme en faiblesse, au sens de mansuétude. À l'inverse, le bouc émissaire débarrasse les hommes de leurs "faiblesses" dues au mal pour libérer les forces du bien afin qu'elles puissent agir. Envoyé dans le désert, il va occuper A'zazel. À travers les deux boucs, il y a une transmutation entre rigueur et miséricorde, entre faiblesse due au mal et force du bien, dans le but de trouver la voie de l'équilibre, celle du milieu.



On peut mettre en parallèle l'antisémitisme moderne occidental et la menace islamiste diffuse qui menace le monde. Il faut donner au "monstre latent" une nourriture, le peuple juif, parce que différent; d'où une complicité passive dans le meurtre du millier d'Israéliens innocents par bombes humaines islamiques interposées, ou par lynchage, par décapitation, ou par sacrifice rituel, en tranchant la gorge avec un couteau aiguisé. Là il s'agit du bouc émissaire. Du côté de ceux qui tuent, il n'y a aucun mystère, leur acte procède du sacrifice, ils se sacrifient en sacrifiant les autres, afin de retrouver la voie du paradis. Ils sont les victimes d'un lavage de cerveau totalitaire. Nous sommes encore dans la période pré-abrahamique du sacrifice humain.



Albert Soued, www.chez.com/soued , le site des symboles et des rêves

Par Hajklouf (Hajklouf) le jeudi 24 juin 2004 - 15h50:

REPONSE A EMILE TUBIANE

cher, EMILE depuis quand publier un article de la presse israelienne est devenu un crime. au nom de dieu si j'etais juif aurait tu repondu avec cet accent?

j'ai publié cet article parceque j'ai trouvé qu'il excelent il essaie de sensibiliser les gens sur le malheur des enfants qu'ils soit juifs ou palestiniens et ça c'est plutot rare dans a presse arabe et israelienne

pour ce que t'as dit:"Que les parents palestiniens arrêtent d'envoyer leur enfants confronter les soldats".
c'est drôle !! toujours ce sont les palestiniens qui ont tord. même quand ce sont des enfants qui ont été tué ce sont les palestiniens qui ont tord ! et bein y'a t-il autre chose. c'est étonnant comment vous voyez les choses.

mais combien d'enfants palestiniens qui a des parents encore vivants? et combien ont ils de maisons ? et tu crois que l'armee israelienne previent les familles par email pour qu'ils se protegent ? et tu crois que quand un avion lache une bonbe il laisse le temps de rentrer chez sois ? et tu crois que quand un village est attaqué on a le temps de se rassembler et de voir chaqu'un ou il est? et tu et tu

au nom de dieu! au moins apres que leurs enfants ont ete tue , laisser leurs familles tranquille. c'est pas trops j'espere.

Par Hajklouf (Hajklouf) le jeudi 24 juin 2004 - 16h19:

dans le dernier book de CLINTON "my life"
clinton avoue qu'il a faillit a trouve un accord israelopalestinien.

mais Mr CLINTON C EST PAS VOTRE FAUTE, parce que t'as bien poussé barak et arafat a leurs limites. arafat n'acceptera jamais moins. israel n'acceptera jamais moins.

c'est la faute de barak alors. bein non parce que si on fait un sondage en israel "pensez vous que barak aurait du cédé plus (il proposé de déméntélé 20 pourcents des colonie en cijordanie) ?" la majorité ecrassante aurait dit non il ne doit pas cédé plus.

c'est la faute de arafat alors. bein non parce que si on fait un sondage dans les territoires "pensez vous que arafat aurait du cédé plus (il proposé limite de 67) ?" la majorité ecrassante aurait répondu non, on n'acceptera jamais moins que les limites de 67. disons tout le monde dira ça a part une centaine.

alors c'est le peuple palestinien qui a tort. bein non puisque c'est bel est bien son droit. il est bien noté dans la loi 2.4.2

alors c'est la peuple israelien qui a tort. bein non ...(en réalité je ne vois pas pourquoi il n'a pas tord mais je suis sûr que dans ce site il y a des gens qui ont les possiblités de me trouver milles raisons ) )


bein alors c'est la faute de qui! celle du destin? cela aurait pu être évité cela aurait pu être évité .....