Saturday, July 09, 2005

Regarding "Orange-haired aide appeals Knesset ban" + picture (*) "New, modern checkpoints between PA and Israel", Ha'Aretz, July 7th 2005: It might be true that the new state-of-the-art checkpoints will make life less difficult for Palestinians who want/have to pass through or enter Israel, but it seems a bit cynical to say that they "serve" these Palestinians. If anything, these checkpoints serve Israel and Israel's security forces. Also, I was surprised that the parliamentary aide to MK Blumenthal who died his hair to protest the disengagement claims that his being denied entry to the Knesset "violates both the Basic Law on Human Dignity and Liberty, and the Basic Law on Freedom of Occupation". I am sure that not the first meaning of 'occupation' that I could think of was meant here, but doesn't Mr Harmelin think that it is ironic that he refers to two basic laws that do not apply in any way to the Palestinians, no matter how many modern and user-friendly checkpoints will be put at their service?
(*) The picture and its caption I could not find on the website of Ha'Aretz. It appears also on the website of the IDF Spokesperson. Notice how many grammatical and other errors the press release contains. Again, I know that my English is far from being perfect, but I always thought that all official written statements are read by some senior editor ( or somebody who knows English pretty well ) before being published.

No comments: