Showing posts with label Israeli nuclear weapons. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Israeli nuclear weapons. Show all posts

Saturday, April 7, 2012


Here is an English translation of a poetic protest by Nobel Prize laureate Günter Grass, against the prospect of the Israeli extermination (“auslöschen”) of the Iranian people. The original poem as he wrote it in German, follows this English rendering. 

What Must Be Said
By Günter Grass, April, 2012


Why do I stay silent, conceal for too long
What clearly is and has been
Practiced in war games, at the end of which we as survivors
Are at best footnotes.


It is the alleged right to first strike
That could annihilate the Iranian people-- 
Enslaved by a loud-mouth
And guided to organized jubilation--
Because in their territory,
It is suspected, an atom bomb is being built.


Yet why do I forbid myself
To name that other country
In which, for years, even if secretly,
There has been a growing nuclear potential at hand
But beyond control, because no testing is available?


The universal concealment of these facts,
To which my silence subordinated itself,
I sense as incriminating lies
And force--the punishment is promised
As soon as it is ignored;
The verdict of "anti-Semitism" is familiar.


Now, though, because in my country
Which from time to time has sought and confronted 
The very crime
That is without compare
In turn on a purely commercial basis, if also
With nimble lips calling it a reparation, declares
A further U-boat should be delivered to Israel,
Whose specialty consists of guiding all-destroying warheads to where the existence
Of a single atomic bomb is unproven,
But through fear of what may be conclusive,
I say what must be said.


Why though have I stayed silent until now?
Because I think my origin,
Which has never been affected by this obliterating flaw,
Forbids this fact to be expected as pronounced truth
Of the country of Israel, to which I am bound
And wish to stay bound.


Why do I say only now,
Aged and with my last ink,
That the nuclear power of Israel endangers
The already fragile world peace?
Because it must be said
What even tomorrow may be too late to say;
Also because we--as Germans burdened enough--
Could be the suppliers to a crime
That is foreseeable, wherefore our complicity
Could not be redeemed through any of the usual excuses.


And granted: I am silent no longer
Because I am tired of the hypocrisy
Of the West; in addition to which it is to be hoped
That this will free many from silence,
Prompt the perpetrator of the recognized danger
To renounce violence and
Likewise insist 
That an unhindered and permanent control
Of the Israeli nuclear potential
And the Iranian nuclear sites
Be authorized through an international agency
Of the governments of both countries.


Only this way are all, the Israelis and Palestinians,
Even more, all people, that in this
Region occupied by mania
Live cheek by jowl among enemies,
In the end also to help us.


Translated by Heather Horn, who writes: "What Must Be Said,' is ...not exactly the prettiest prose in its original German, and the English doesn't read much better....I've tried to untangle some of the needlessly Teutonic constructions where it doesn't undo the deliberately winding and parenthetical tone too much. Even more concise German can sound circuitous to an English ear, but Grass's writing here is an extreme example..."


Was gesagt werden muss

Von Günter Grass

Warum schweige ich, verschweige zu lange,

was offensichtlich ist und in Planspielen

geübt wurde, an deren Ende als Überlebende

wir allenfalls Fußnoten sind.

Es ist das behauptete Recht auf den Erstschlag,

der das von einem Maulhelden unterjochte

und zum organisierten Jubel gelenkte

iranische Volk auslöschen könnte,

weil in dessen Machtbereich der Bau

einer Atombombe vermutet wird.

Doch warum untersage ich mir,

jenes andere Land beim Namen zu nennen,

in dem seit Jahren - wenn auch geheimgehalten -

ein wachsend nukleares Potential verfügbar

aber außer Kontrolle, weil keiner Prüfung

zugänglich ist?

Das allgemeine Verschweigen dieses Tatbestandes,

dem sich mein Schweigen untergeordnet hat,

empfinde ich als belastende Lüge

und Zwang, der Strafe in Aussicht stellt,

sobald er mißachtet wird;

das Verdikt 'Antisemitismus' ist geläufig.

Jetzt aber, weil aus meinem Land,

das von ureigenen Verbrechen,

die ohne Vergleich sind,

Mal um Mal eingeholt und zur Rede gestellt wird,

wiederum und rein geschäftsmäßig, wenn auch

mit flinker Lippe als Wiedergutmachung deklariert,

ein weiteres U-Boot nach Israel

geliefert werden soll, dessen Spezialität

darin besteht, allesvernichtende Sprengköpfe

dorthin lenken zu können, wo die Existenz

einer einzigen Atombombe unbewiesen ist,

doch als Befürchtung von Beweiskraft sein will,

sage ich, was gesagt werden muß.

Warum aber schwieg ich bislang?

Weil ich meinte, meine Herkunft,

die von nie zu tilgendem Makel behaftet ist,

verbiete, diese Tatsache als ausgesprochene Wahrheit

dem Land Israel, dem ich verbunden bin

und bleiben will, zuzumuten.

Warum sage ich jetzt erst,

gealtert und mit letzter Tinte:

Die Atommacht Israel gefährdet

den ohnehin brüchigen Weltfrieden?

Weil gesagt werden muß,

was schon morgen zu spät sein könnte;

auch weil wir - als Deutsche belastet genug -

Zulieferer eines Verbrechens werden könnten,

das voraussehbar ist, weshalb unsere Mitschuld

durch keine der üblichen Ausreden

zu tilgen wäre.

Und zugegeben: ich schweige nicht mehr,

weil ich der Heuchelei des Westens

überdrüssig bin; zudem ist zu hoffen,

es mögen sich viele vom Schweigen befreien,

den Verursacher der erkennbaren Gefahr

zum Verzicht auf Gewalt auffordern und

gleichfalls darauf bestehen,

daß eine unbehinderte und permanente Kontrolle

des israelischen atomaren Potentials

und der iranischen Atomanlagen

durch eine internationale Instanz

von den Regierungen beider Länder zugelassen wird.

Nur so ist allen, den Israelis und Palästinensern,

mehr noch, allen Menschen, die in dieser

vom Wahn okkupierten Region

dicht bei dicht verfeindet leben

und letztlich auch uns zu helfen.


***

Monday, February 21, 2011

by Michael Hoffman

Here is more of the same — the insufferable Talmudic double-standard which the NY Times, in its Zionist exceptionalism, regularly undertakes when self-righteously lecturing Muslims about their alleged moral failings and ethical lapses, in this case, in the realm of nuclear weapons. Pay attention, little Muslims, as the Times imparts to you its superior morality out of Animal Farm: Pakistani nukes bad, Israeli nukes invisible!

The lead editorial in the New York Times:

 “..experts say, it (Pakistan) has already manufactured enough fuel for 40 to 100 additional weapons. That means Pakistan...could soon possess the world's fifth-largest arsenal, behind the United States, Russia, France and China but ahead of Britain and India. Washington and Moscow, with thousands of nuclear weapons each, still have the most weapons by far, but at least they are making serious reductions.”

—"Pakistan’s Nuclear Folly," NY Times Editorial, Feb. 20, 2011 (emphasis supplied).

The omission of “Israel” from the list is arrogant and brazen; the unwritten undercurrent being that the Judaic possession of nuclear weapons exists in such a vastly higher moral dimension of survival and security concerns with regard to the welfare of superior Israeli human beings, as to be off-limits to editorial consideration, journalistic scrutiny or analogies to other nations' WMD. It is an axiom: God’s Holy People must possess the bomb, while, for unholy Pakistanis to do so in anything other than token amounts, is “folly.”

The Times, in finger-pointing at Pakistan’s possession of weapons of mass destruction, enumerates the world’s nuclear powers (Russia, France, China, Britain and India), while the unmentionable power in possession of those weapons is rendered invisible. This outrageous omission, which demonstrates the degree to which Zionist ideologues operate the Times under a patina of liberal universalism,  is in keeping with official policy of the “State of Israel,” which decrees that Israeli nuclear possession is disputed, and should neither be confirmed nor denied by the media.

Questions for the New York Times

How many nuclear weapons are there in the Israeli arsenal? Have they increased in recent years? Are the Israelis determined to gain additional nuclear weapons? If so, is this determination any kind of “folly” or cause for concern? What are the Israelis doing with the advanced, nuclear-powered submarine Germany donated to them? Are the Israelis under any obligation to reduce their nuclear stockpile, or is the “existential threat” posed by “militant Islam” a sufficient alibi for having no limits? How does the New York Times rank the Israeli nuclear weapon stockpile: sixth-largest, fourth-largest, third-largest? Under what onerous conditions of repression is Mordechai Vanunu — the Judaic nuclear technician and convert to Christianity, who was imprisoned for 18 years for the “crime” of confirming the existence of Israeli nuclear weapons -- living? Why, after all those years in prison, does he still face police harassment and restrictions on his freedom of expression in “the only democracy in the Middle East"?

I’ll bet it is “anti-semitic” to ask these questions.

We should all just be good scouts and limit ourselves to worrying about Pakistani nukes, while awaiting a signal from our high-caste commissars in New York to indicate to us when (if ever) it would not be "anti-semitic” to ask probing investigative questions about the existential threat which the enormous Israeli and American nuclear arsenals pose to sovereign Muslim nations, given the Israeli and American record of invasion, and mass murder of civilians, in Lebanon, Iraq, Afghanistan and Gaza.

***

Michael Hoffman’s writing and research is funded entirely by donations from readers, and the sale of his books, newsletters and broadcasts.

****