Fateful Triangle

Aftermath6376. Who is Responsible?6.1 The Background for the InquiryWhen the reports of the massacre reached the outside world,Israel denied any knowledge of what had happened. Thispretense was quickly dropped in favor of outraged denial ofany responsibility. The official reaction of the government wasannounced on September 19, and appeared in a full page advertisementin several American newspapers. 107 The heading was “BLOOD LIBEL,” areference to traditional anti-Semitic incitement. It is a reflex reaction toaccuse critics of Israel of anti-Semitism, a device of proven effectivenessto deflect any rational discussion of the issues; see chapter 2, section2.1.The official government statement then went on to assert that “therewas no position of the Israeli army” in the area where “a Lebanese unitentered a refugee camp in order to apprehend terrorists hiding there.” Itclaimed further that “As soon as the IDF learned of the tragic events,Israeli soldiers put an end to the slaughter and forced the Lebanese unitto evacuate the camp.” These shameful lies were silently abandonedlater on. The second is not only contradicted by the eyewitness reportsof numerous journalists, but also by General Sharon’s direct testimony inthe Knesset a few days later, as already noted. 108 The IDF entered Sabralong after the killings ended and did not enter Shatila at all. The onlyalleged “intervention” cited by Sharon was a Friday order to thePhalangist liaison officer to stop the killings; even if one can believeSharon’s statement, it merely deepens the responsibility of the IDF,since at a later meeting that day the Chief of Staff congratulated theClassics in Politics: The Fateful TriangleNoam Chomsky