B. Michael

Mijn vriend, de filmmaker Benny Brunner stuurde me een commentaar van zijn favoriete columnist:

'Ehud Orwell's speech.
If PM has confessed to being 'entirely responsible' he should resign.
B. Michael
Israel Opinion
In the event that future historians ask for some type of document attesting to the nature and acumen of Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, it's hard to think of a more appropriate document than the speech he delivered this week to the heads of local authorities.

It was obviously a speech that had been well rehearsed. It didn't comprise any grumbling outbursts so typical of Ehud Olmert, who is known for his inadequacy to control his verbal utterances.

And because of it, its preciseness and planning, Olmert's true character came through; a transparent manipulator of words and facts; a go-getter who erroneously made his way to the top. And although each and every sentence in his address personifies this argument, lack of space only permits discussion of a small portion.
It would have been most appropriate to begin with the prime minister's opening sentence: "The decision to go to war, including the responsibility of its outcome – is entirely mine," but instead we'll leave this sentence to the end.

We'll begin, therefore, with the second sentence: "The Israeli, civilian home front was the enemy's main target, and not incidentally."

Hizbullah had one intention
But incidentally, the contrary is true. Hizbullah, explicitly and with much audacity said right from the start that it had one intention: To abduct Israeli soldiers in order to enter a prisoner exchange deal.

That's what Nasrallah said on the day of the kidnapping, and he reiterated this in his speech of "remorse" which the prime minister enjoys quoting. This time, regretfully, the civilian home front was not the enemy's primary target, and not incidentally.

Let's go to the next sentence: "Hizbullah's target was…to harm the home front, to kill, to terrorize in an attempt to spread fear, panic and to create a public outcry that would paralyze military operations."

George Orwell couldn't have put it better. Because, this was in fact Israel's declared tactic: To strike at the home front, to kill, to terrorize and so on and so forth, or as commonly put in official Israeli jargon: "To put pressure on the Lebanese government."

Additionally, contrary to common belief, the first to shift the fighting inside the other side's civilian home front was Israel. Only after the IDF bombed Beirut and Lebanese infrastructure, did the rocketing of the Israeli home front begin.

The prime minister said in that same speech that when he decided to go to war "we knew very well that rocket fire would be aimed at civilian populations." And indeed it was. The first Katyusha rockets landed inside Israeli territory only on Thursday (July 13) before dawn, just a few hours after Israel attacked the Lebanese home front.

This fact doesn't clear the Hizbullah of its responsibility for starting the war, however, even in times of frustration and rage we would do well to stick to the facts.

We surprised them
The next sentence is a spectacular sample of Olmertism: "We surprised them. The home front persevered." The prime minister knows all too well that the home front did not persevere. The home front went south, and rightfully so. Those who persevered were the ones who had nowhere to go.'

Lees verder: http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3298570,00.html