The criminal actions of an occupation regime, are certainly not limited to its military machine, but are spread across its whole civil society. Without the support of wide sectors of civil society, any military occupation would crumble. The Israeli brutal occupation is successful over more than four decades, exactly because it is supported by the elites – academic, financial, artistic and cultural – and is carrying out such policies which they not only support, but actively promote and justify, in the face of world criticism and international law, not to mention morality.

The article below, which appeared today in Ha’aretz – Israel’s liberal daily in the past, now only holding to that title by publishing Gideon Levy and Amira Hass – is an overdue critic of one of the most venal of the academic supporters of the Gaza carnage, Prof. Asa Kasher of Tel Aviv University. Kasher has not only written the ‘ethical’ guidelines for the IOF, but also justified the murder of civilians in Palestine and Lebanon. For those who wonder about the academic boycott, I strongly suggest reading this short but effective piece.

It’s all kosher for Kasher: Ha’aretz

By Gideon Levy

Whoever said that intellectuals are keeping silent? Who claimed that academia is ensconced in an ivory tower? And who dared to think that Israel lacks a moral voice? One day, when historians take the time to examine Israel’s brutal offensive in Gaza, otherwise known as “Cast Lead,” they will settle a score with political leaders and officers who were responsible for committing war crimes. They will delve deep and denounce the enablers of this nation, the whitewashers and apologists, those who let the Israel Defense Forces win at any cost, even if it was the heaviest moral cost possible.
The main target on their list will be Mr. Ethics, Prof. Asa Kasher, the Israel Prize-winning philosopher and author of the IDF’s Code of Conduct. Kasher glossed over every transgression during this war. He’s the one responsible for that toxic “IDF spirit” – which holds that when it comes to protecting soldiers, anything goes for the IDF.
This flimsy fig leaf of a man bears as much moral responsibility as the political leaders who made the decisions and the soldiers who carried out their orders. He’s the philosopher who removed the reins, the intellectual who whitewashed everything. It is thanks to him and those of his ilk that Israelis can feel so self-righteous. When the world said in near unison, “War crimes,” Kasher said, “We are the most moral army in the world, no one is better than us.” If this is how a philosopher of ethics speaks, who needs propagandists?
Advertisement
He wasn’t always like this. He now says in every possible forum, “If it comes down to a choice between a neighbor and an IDF soldier, the preference is the soldier,” and “The lives of our soldiers is of more interest to me than the dignity and well-being of the Palestinians.” He has also said that there is no justification for endangering the lives of soldiers in order to prevent the killing of civilians living “next to a terrorist.” But he once thought and wrote differently.
As a radical activist at the height of the first Lebanon war, Kasher, who is also one of the founders of the soldiers’ refusal movement Yesh Gvul, courageously appeared at a news conference with Nathan Zach, Dan Miron and Yeshayahu Leibowitz. Kasher, who for some reason sees Leibowitz as his patron and mentor, wrote in a letter to Haaretz: “Against the backdrop of news reports on thousands of noncombatant Lebanese and Palestinians who were harmed during Israel’s military operations, and given the complete justification of these instances given by the prime minister, it is every decent man’s duty to express unreserved opposition to the prime minister’s treatment of innocent civilians who are caught in the middle of a war he initiated.”
What has changed since then? Kasher has changed. Every decent man continues to believe that unnecessary killing of civilians is a criminal act. The war in Gaza was no less cruel than the war in Lebanon. Universal ethics remain today what they were then. Only Kasher’s ethics have radically changed. If only his statements hadn’t been so damaging, we could ignore the bewildering change in his positions. Yet for years he has been co-opted by the defense establishment and the IDF as their rubber stamp, solely because of the profound change he underwent. Now he serves as their flack and rationalizer, the philosopher lackey.
In recent days, the United Nations’ Goldstone report has been denounced as “anti-Semitic propaganda,” and white phosphorus bombs have become “legitimate weapons.” Why? Kasher heard from an IDF colonel that when a phosphorus bomb fell near him, nothing happened to him. And what about the 200 children who were killed? They were of “legal adult age – 15 to 18 years – and they took an active part in the war.” What about the killing of Dr. Ezzeldeen Abu al-Aish’s daughters? He is responsible for their deaths. The bombing of hospitals? This, too, is permitted. Kasher knows that terrorists were hiding in their basements.
The IDF Spokesman’s Office could not have phrased it any better. The Foreign Ministry’s spin doctors could not have deceived any better. This is how Kasher has whitewashed the assassinations and resultant killing of innocent civilians. He also thought that the IDF did not do enough killing in Jenin. The army, Kasher thought, should have warned the civilians beforehand, and “whoever stayed, let the blood be on his head.” This is how generals who try to justify their criminal actions speak. But an intellectual? An expert on ethics?

What is the world coming to? Listen to Kasher and look at us. This is the man who symbolizes our morality and this is how we behave. Why should we complain about Defense Minister Ehud Barak? Why should we excoriate Chief of Staff Gabi Ashkenazi? What is so objectionable about a general who planned and a soldier who carried out the order, when above them hovers this toxic spirit that emanates directly from the halls of humanism, philosophy and ethics, and which through mere words provides cover for this awful abyss?

PA move to thwart Goldstone Gaza report shocks Palestinian public: Ha’aretz

By Amira Hass

Palestinian sources tell Haaretz that Abbas request to halt vote on Gaza war probe was result of U.S. pressure.
The decision by the United Nations Human Rights Council to delay the vote on the findings of its report into the Gaza conflict – in line with a request by Palestinian Authority – has shocked the Palestinian public.
Palestinian sources told Haaretz that Abbas made the decision to delay the vote immediately after meeting with the U.S. Consul General last Thursday, without the knowledge of the PLO leadership or the government of Prime Minister Salam Fayyad, and without any consultation.
The commission which produced the report, headed by South African judge Richard Goldstone, charged both Israel and Hamas with committing war crimes during the three-week operation launched by the Israel Defense Forces in December, in an effort to halt rocket fire from Gaza on its southern communities. Israel has rejected the report and accused Goldstone of having a political agenda. The Palestinian sources said they believed that the consul general had passed on an unequivocal request from Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to ensure that the document remain on the table at the Human Rights Council.
Palestinian officials say that there was “heavy and ongoing pressure” from the U.S., which warned that the adoption of the findings in the commission’s report would stymie progress in the peace process between Israel and the Palestinians.
Abbas on Saturday made his first direct comments about media speculation on the issue, saying that his initial position had been misrepresented and that this was not a case of him withdrawing his support for the Goldstone report.
In the wake of the uproar, Abbas on Sunday ordered an internal investigation into why his own government ruled to delay the vote, the Palestinian news agency Ma’an reported.
After deliberating between President Abbas and members of the Executive Committee of the PLO, Prime Minister Salam Fayyad, President Abbas issued a decree to form a committee to find the reasons behind postponement of the debate on Goldstone’s report at the UN f Human Rights Council,” secretary of the PLO Executive Committee, Abed Rabbo, said in a statement.

And, if you wish to read the normal tenor of Ha’aretz, and see how carefully it has joined the right-wing of Zionism, the article below is one such example:

‘All-star team of Israel-haters’ at Norway school raises concern: Ha’aretz

In a move which Foreign Ministry sources defined as “unusual,” Israel’s embassy in Norway has officially protested the launch of a high profile academic seminar there delivered exclusively by lecturers known for their highly critical views of Israel.
Israel’s Foreign Minister last week described Norway’s attitude toward Israel as “hostile.”
“We were saddened to learn that a biased and one-sided seminar on Israel is taking place at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology in Trondheim,” Deputy Chief of Mission of the Israeli Embassy in Oslo, Aviad Ivri, wrote last month to the institution’s dean. The seminar, whose first session took place last month, includes lectures by Ilan Pappe, who accuses Israel of perpetrating an “ethnic cleansing of Palestine” and by Stephen Walt, the coauthor of a controversial study on the effect of the Israel-lobby on U.S. policy. It has been described by prominent scholars as anti-Semitic.
Other speakers invited by NTNU Dean Torbjorn Digernes include Moshe Zuckermann, who in a January interview for Deutschlandradio – a widely-heard German program – that operation Cast Lead cost hundreds of thousands of Gazan lives.
The members of the seminar’s organizing committee – Morten Levin, Ann Rudinow Saetnan and Rune Skarstein – have all signed a call for an academic boycott of Israel. They also brought a few Norwegian speakers, famous for their critical view of Israel.
“There’s no one on the panel with a neutral view of Israel, let alone anyone to advocate its position,” a source from the Foreign Ministry said. “Usually we do not get involved with academic forums of this sort because it’s a freedom-of-expression issue, but this all-star team of Israel-haters crosses a line,” the diplomat added.
“The overwhelming majority [of Israeli academics] oppose Pappe and Zuckerman and are rarely if ever found in seminars in Norway,” Ivri wrote.
Morten Levin from NTNU ? a state-funded institution ? replied to Haaretz’s query on the allegations by saying the objective of the lectures is to “communicate to a broad audience a deeper research-based understanding” of the situation.
“This requires a critical and careful scrutiny based on standard scientific methods,” he added. “Neither the Israeli state nor the Palestinian authority or Hamas will be defended. None of the lecturers will question the right of the Israeli state to exist.”
Responding to speculations by pro-Israeli scholars that the seminars will be a prelude to a call on NTNU to boycott Israel, Levin said: “The organizing committee of the lecture series has no formal connection whatsoever to the organization working for a boycott of Israeli academic institutions.”
The university’s dean ? who has called the seminar “praiseworthy” – did not reply to Haaretz’s request to interview him.
Tammi Benjamin, an American university lecturer from California, has called on NTNU Dean Digernes “to profoundly apologize to his students for misleading them and for supporting known hate mongers against the Jewish state.” Ronnie Fraser, a veteran U.K. activist against academic boycotts of Israel, has called on Digernes to resign.