Buzzflash
del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Mixx it!
RedditIt is an assumption almost universally acknowledged among the liberal American intelligentsia that while the Israeli occupation is repressive and abhorrent, Israel itself is an open, fully democratic state with a lively, argumentative and very free press.
Perish the thought. After spending three months in Israel on a fellowship, I can say that nearly every member of the liberal Israeli intelligentsia I've talked to says something quite different: that their country's media are seriously diseased, failing to provide the minimal level of fair reporting and serious critical inquiry that are crucial pillars of an open society.
Americans who don't read Hebrew or watch Israeli television news may get a skewed view of the spectrum, assuming that Ha'aretz, the smaller-circulation daily read mostly by intellectuals and the political classes--and foreigners, who devour its English-language edition online--is representative, and that critical columnists and reporters like Gideon Levy, Akiva Eldar and Amira Hass are sprinkled throughout the Israeli media. It isn't, and they aren't. The larger-circulation dailies Yediot and Ma'ariv, as well as the Jerusalem Post and television news, are tilted much more to the right--just like the mainstream US media, which certainly have nothing to teach Israel in this regard.
And as for being an open, fully democratic state, most people I talk to speak of a chilling of dissent in recent years, running in parallel with the election of increasingly right-wing governments. The nadir came during the recent Gaza "war." I've seen a microcosm of this myself here in Beer-Sheva, at Ben-Gurion University. A few days ago, Noah Slor, who is in the graduate program in BGU's department of Middle Eastern studies, was arrested by police at the request of campus security and detained for several hours for quietly handing out leaflets opposing a bill now before the Knesset that would make it a criminal offense to commemorate Nakba Day (the day in May when Palestinians mourn the catastrophe of their dispossession and expulsion, which for Jews is a celebration of independence). She was doing this in a spot right outside the main campus gate, where students traditionally hand out everything from party announcements to information about political rallies, with never a bother from security.
Student activists and professors attest to a pattern of politically motivated harassment by campus security. Indeed, Slor, an activist with Darom le Shalom (the South for Peace), a recently formed group of Arabs and Jews in the Beer-Sheva area who "struggle against racism and for equality and coexistence between Arabs and Jews," told me that at the time of her arrest, a security officer told her, "Listen, don't pretend you're so naïve--I've seen you in past demonstrations. Everything is recorded and written, everything is documented." She can't prove it, but she's convinced security went after her because she was protesting the Nakba Day legislation; "that was the subtext," she told me.
The students were not going to take this sitting down. That same night, about sixty or so held a demonstration protesting the arrest, gathering at a university ceremony attended by the board of governors and other dignitaries. The students put masking tape over their mouths and held up signs saying "The Security Department Runs the University" and "Security Department = Secret Police." (In a response to questions about the incident, university spokesperson Amir Rozenblit said students are not allowed to distribute fliers on campus--why in the world not?--and that Noah was handing them out "in an area considered part of the campus"--even though it was outside the main gate. He also claimed one security guard was detained as well as Noah.)
The stifling of dissent was pervasive during the Gaza campaign. Nitza Berkovitch, a BGU sociologist, said, "I think the media was completely and truly mobilized. There was complete support of the war." A few days after the start of the war, in late December, a group of Arab and Jewish students held a peaceful demo against it. The police soon arrived and demanded that they disperse. They agreed, but as they were folding their signs, several were tackled by police, dragged to cars and held for hours, accused of "rioting." There was another demonstration in mid-January, this one even more moderate, with people holding signs calling for peace and an end to violence on both sides. Again, the same thing happened: dozens of police arrived and roughed up the crowd, arresting several. One BGU student, Ran Tzoref, was put under house arrest for a month.
Harsh repression of Palestinian citizens is a deeply engrained practice in Israel. Recent incidents indicate there may be a loosening of constraint on repression of Jewish dissent as well. Hundreds of Israelis were arrested for protesting the Gaza campaign, probably most of them Palestinian but many Jewish as well. Tzoref told me, "I was in protests in the occupied territories, and they acted the same here. For me it was shocking that riot police came to the university and attacked us. This was never done before, not on this scale." Berkovitch said, "It was like I was in a South American dictatorship. It was as if an arbitrary order had been given nationwide that a certain number of people needed to be arrested--it was a simple matter of intimidation."
Certainly the Gaza campaign brought out the worst in the apparatus of repression, which was fueled by a public mood of vengeance and hatred of Palestinians, which was itself heightened by the Hamas rocket barrages. (Berkovitch told me that many passers-by at the January demonstration shouted abuses at the protesters, calling them traitors and saying things like "Jews should kill more Arabs." "So much hatred I've never encountered in my life," she said.) The trend is worrying, but it should be emphasized that in general, Israeli Jews, unlike Palestinians, still enjoy a remarkable degree of freedom to speak out on almost any issue.
With a far-right government that is not only determined to avoid serious negotiations with the Palestinians but is actively promoting settlement growth; that shows all the signs of preparing for war against Iran and is actively stoking public paranoia on that front; that increasingly sees Palestinian citizens as a menace, as the enemy within, the contradictions of a nation that claims to be both Jewish and democratic are fraying. How can a state that imprisons 4 million Palestinians behind ghetto walls, bypass roads and a blockade, and treats another 1.5 million as second-class citizens, be democratic? BGU geography professor Oren Yiftachel calls Israel an ethnocracy (the title of a recent book of his); the late Hebrew University sociologist Baruch Kimmerling called it a "Herrenvolk democracy." Whatever you call it, if Israel continues along its current path, the repression will necessarily intensify, and the avenues for free expression will become ever more constricted. The old joke about Prussia was that it was an army masquerading as a state. Is Israel destined to become Prussia on the Mediterranean?
Share this article
- Atrios
- Arts and Letters Daily
- The Caucus
- Campus Progress
- Crooks and Liars
- The Daily Gotham
- Daily Kos
- Echidne of the Snakes
- Ezra Klein
- FAIR
- Feministe
- Feministing
- Firedoglake
- Glenn Greenwald
- Gothamist
- In these Times
- Hendrik Hertzberg
- Huffington Post
- Hullabaloo
- Matthew Yglesias
- Media Matters
- Mother Jones
- My DD
- New York Review of Books
- Openleft
- Pam's House Blend
- Pandagon
- Political Wire
- The Progressive
- RaceWire
- Real Clear Politics
- Roberto Lovato
- Romenesko
- Swing State Project
- Talking Points Memo
- Ta-Nehisi Coates
- Tapped
- Tech President
- Tompaine
- The Washington Note
- Utne Reader
- Wonkette
- ZNet
RSS
If Israel does indeed become prussia on the Mediterranean, it is a grim failure and crushing of the Zionist goal of a century-and-a-half. Theodor hetzl would not like how his dream has become a nightmare of racism and apartheid.
Posted by The Goods at 05/27/2009 @ 10:40am
this is unfortunate.
Posted by ibbleblibble at 05/27/2009 @ 10:56am
Imagine how the average American citizen would feel to see college students protesting the Declaration of Independence just before the 4th of July.
While not entirely analogous, it certainly provides something akin to the emotions that most Israelis feel when they see some of their own students demonstrating in favor of those who wish to destroy all Jews.
Posted by antisocialist at 05/27/2009 @ 11:00am
posted by ROANE CAREY on 05/27/2009 @ 09:17am
If you want to understand how much of a "civil society" Israel is - if you want to understand whether the nation is "an open, fully democratic state", then all you have to do is look at the governments that Israelis vote into power, and the actions of the nation over time.
They generally vote for regimes so utterly militarist and brutal towards the Palestinians as to hearken back to our era of Manifest Destiny, in the 19th century.
Their nation engages in war of aggression after war of aggression. Before the barbaric slaughter in Gaza, there was the barbaric slaughter in Lebanon. And before that, the barbaric transformation of Gaza into an open-air concentration camp. And before that, the barbaric occupation of Gaza. And before that, the barbaric occupation of southern Lebanon. And throughout it all, the ongoing barbaric expropriation of land and resources in the West Bank, along with the "dispossession" of the Palestinian people there.
The Israelis have used bulldozers, soldiers, and assassination to take lands from the Palestinians, and to give these lands to fanatical "settlers", one of whom is now the Foreign Minister of Israel.
The Israeli people have voted for this behavior for decades. Israel is not an elightened Western democracy. Israel is a colonial entity founded recently by fanatical, militant Western Europeans lacking any conscience in the pursuit of their project. Israelis eagerly support behavior, that if exposed completely to the American public, would shock our consciences. The Israeli military on a daily basis commits acts that, if committed by the US military, would result in court-martial after court-martial.
Posted by syfriendly at 05/27/2009 @ 11:04am
Posted by antisocialist at 05/27/2009 @ 11:00am
Don't expect any sympathy for the protestors from Larry...remember, same guy who said-
"We used to incarcerate and even shoot traitors. Today we just call them the "anti-war left"----Posted by lvliberty1 at 06/12/2008
Supreme Court Judges Obama Right on Constitution posted by John Nichols on 06/12/2008 @ 11:13am
Posted by Mask at 05/27/2009 @ 11:05am
Posted by Mask at 05/27/2009 @ 11:05am
Tell us Mask, would you be out there in a similar vein, protesting the 4th of July and the American Independence? Would you think that Americans are hateful if they thought you a traitor for doing so?
Posted by antisocialist at 05/27/2009 @ 11:09am
" ... "It was like I was in a South American dictatorship. It was as if an arbitrary order had been given nationwide that a certain number of people needed to be arrested--it was a simple matter of intimidation." ..."
Not a *South American* dictatorship - a *South African* dictatorship. Apartheid South Africa is the perfect comparison for Israel.
Posted by syfriendly at 05/27/2009 @ 11:10am
Imagine how the average American citizen would feel to see college students protesting the Declaration of Independence just before the 4th of July.
Posted by antisocialist at 05/27/2009 @ 11:00am
PROUD!
proud to be in a place where you have the FREEDOM to protest what you feel is unjust.
PROUD!
proud to see that their children are alive and willing to think on their own.
PROUD!
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/27/2009 @ 11:15am
Posted by antisocialist at 05/27/2009 @ 11:09am
My point Larry is ...you were happy to equate "shooting traitors" with people protesting a war they didn't agree with.
So AT THE LEAST, given the "importance of Israel to God's plan" (your view as well), pretty much "anything goes" for the protestors in Israel as far as Israeli Security forces, huh?
Posted by Mask at 05/27/2009 @ 11:17am
PROUD!
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/27/2009 @ 11:15am
Explain for me FZ the "pride" that comes from being ashamed of who you are?
Explain the "pride" of supporting those who wish to kill you?
Posted by antisocialist at 05/27/2009 @ 11:17am
If you want to understand how much of a "civil society" Israel is - if you want to understand whether the nation is "an open, fully democratic state", then all you have to do is look at the governments that Israelis vote into power, and the actions of the nation over time.
Posted by syfriendly at 05/27/2009 @ 11:04am
hmmm....
so you blame me for mr. harper's "governing"?
••
people are easily duped. and fear is an effective tool of the duper.
••
this is exactly what jesus, moses, and mohammed had in mind: the ultimate security state testing ground.
shipping and handling extra.
••
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/27/2009 @ 11:21am
Explain for me FZ the "pride" that comes from being ashamed of who you are?
•• this statement is not a logical follow-up to my statement.
Explain the "pride" of supporting those who wish to kill you?
•• this statement is not a logical follow-up to my statement.
Posted by antisocialist at 05/27/2009 @ 11:17am
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/27/2009 @ 11:25am
larry,
which is more important to you, ¿oxygen or the declaration of independence?
do you wish to break out the fire hoses to disperse the oxygen protesters?
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/27/2009 @ 11:29am
My point Larry is ...you were happy to equate "shooting traitors" with people protesting a war they didn't agree with.
So AT THE LEAST, given the "importance of Israel to God's plan" (your view as well), pretty much "anything goes" for the protestors in Israel as far as Israeli Security forces, huh?
Posted by Mask at 05/27/2009 @ 11:17am
Do you even begin to understand the ramifications of protesting against your own country and in support of the people wanting to kill you?
That would be like having a Nazi parade in Times Square on the 4th of July in 1944.
Posted by antisocialist at 05/27/2009 @ 11:31am
which is more important to you, ¿oxygen or the declaration of independence?
do you wish to break out the fire hoses to disperse the oxygen protesters?
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/27/2009 @ 11:29am
are you stoned?
Posted by antisocialist at 05/27/2009 @ 11:31am
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/27/2009 @ 11:21am
I don't believe that it is vaguely possible to compare Canada to Israel. The Canadian people did in fact vote in to power the Harper government, and can be seen as accountable, but the Harper government is not committing grave international crimes on an ongoing basis, or flouting decades of international rulings against Canada, or attempting to start wars. Likewise, I don't hold YOU as an individual accountable for Harper were Harper to do pursue any of those things, though the *Canadian people* would be accountable. I don't hold any specific Israeli accountable for Netanyahu/Lieberman, but the Israeli people as a body assuredly ARE accountable, unless they want to pretend that their government has been imposed on them and that there were armed soldiers and police in the streets forcing them to the polling stations.
Posted by syfriendly at 05/27/2009 @ 11:49am
Posted by antisocialist at 05/27/2009 @ 11:31am | ignore this person | warn this person
Actually, your analogy is very bad - the NAZIs were not enemies of the US until we went to war against them. It's good that we did, but the pro-NAZI rally in Times Square on July 4 you prattle about - the analogy is bad - NAZI's were not the enemies of the existence of the US nation, Tory monarchists were.
Likewise, Israel was not conceived of as a response to NAZI Germany. Israel was conceived of substantially prior to the rise of Fascism.
The people of Israel, which includes Arabs, should be allowed to observe Israeli "Independence Day" however they choose, if Israel wants to be a "free society". Instead, the Israeli Arabs, whom most Israelis regard as "jigaboos", are denied their share of the freedom. The fact that their homeland was destroyed by the creation of Israel is verboten for public view in Israel.
Posted by syfriendly at 05/27/2009 @ 11:54am
Posted by antisocialist at 05/27/2009 @ 11:31am
Again, not going for your "analogies", Larry...going for your view on protestors.
As noted, you equate anti-war protestors with "traitors who would have once been shot"...
you see Israel as "vital to God's plan" (more important than anybody else, even the USA)....
ergo, given those two beliefs, would you REALLY object to all protestors against the Likud Government of Israel...being jailed ...interminably? Or even executed?
If not...why not...again, given those two positions above???
Posted by Mask at 05/27/2009 @ 12:01pm
Again, not going for your "analogies", Larry...going for your view on protestors.
As noted, you equate anti-war protestors with "traitors who would have once been shot"...
you see Israel as "vital to God's plan" (more important than anybody else, even the USA)....
ergo, given those two beliefs, would you REALLY object to all protestors against the Likud Government of Israel...being jailed ...interminably? Or even executed?
If not...why not...again, given those two positions above???
Posted by Mask at 05/27/2009 @ 12:01pm
Again, they are not protesting against Israeli policies.
They are protesting in support of those enemies of Israel that want to destroy them.
Posted by antisocialist at 05/27/2009 @ 12:03pm
Posted by antisocialist at 05/27/2009 @ 12:03pm
Wait a minute, Larry, let's again look at your own standards ...and logic-
IN YOUR VIEW....1. Is not ANY action by the Likud government a means of defending Israel against those who wish to destroy it?
2. Is not ANY opposition to that "supporting enemies of Israel who want to destroy it"?
Ergo, oppose Likud....support those who want to destroy Israel?
Or are there Likud policies on the Palestinians that one CAN "legitimately" protest?
Posted by Mask at 05/27/2009 @ 12:15pm
Or are there Likud policies on the Palestinians that one CAN "legitimately" protest?
Posted by Mask at 05/27/2009 @ 12:15pm
Again, it is akin to US citizens demonstrating for the Japanese or Germany during WWII.
Posted by antisocialist at 05/27/2009 @ 12:18pm
If you asked leftist students in the US about the American MSM, they would provide the same answer as did the Israeli students about the Israeli MSM. As you will recall, the entire spectrum of american MSM, including liberal establishments like tghe NYTimes, fully supported the US invasion of Iraq (even though unlike Hamas in Gaza, Iraq wasn't shooting rockets at the US.) If you ask US leftist protestors, they will tell you that US police officers aggressively repress their movement with arrests that interfere with their right to protest.
So, is the US society diseased and fraying? This column is dribble. Israel, like all countries, is far from perfect. Given the besieged conditions Israel has faced for 60 years (some more recently it shares the blame for), it is not surprising that Israelis have developed distrust and even hatred for Arab militants. But Israel falling apart as a democratic, liberal society. The columnist apparently would like to think so. too bad for her.
Posted by gren at 05/27/2009 @ 1:07pm
Posted by antisocialist at 05/27/2009 @ 12:18pm
So it is IMPOSSIBLE to oppose a Likud policy...and not support those who want to destroy Israel?
If there are "exceptions", please list one.
Posted by Mask at 05/27/2009 @ 1:09pm
Posted by antisocialist at 05/27/2009 @ 12:18pm
So would it have been traitorous to protest the internment of U.S. citizens of Japanese descent during WW2? Last time I checked, the U.S. government formally apologized for it and offered compensation.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_ American_internment#Reparations_and_redress
Posted by zmann at 05/27/2009 @ 1:15pm
Sometime ago, before the present government, Haaretz had a foreign poll, that rated Israel as one of the most aggressive countries in the world. They were rather surprised by the rating?
Posted by pjcasey at 05/27/2009 @ 1:24pm
The election of Netanyahu after 2 years of Hamas rocket attacks on Sderot and the PA again rejecting a peace offer based on the principles identified by President Clinton after Camp David, is no more of an indictment of Israelis or Israel democratic liberal society than were the elections of Reagan and Bush re: americans and American liberal democratic society.
Posted by gren at 05/27/2009 @ 1:32pm
So it is IMPOSSIBLE to oppose a Likud policy...and not support those who want to destroy Israel?
If there are "exceptions", please list one.
Posted by Mask at 05/27/2009 @ 1:09pm |
You are still trying to conflate issues. I am not talking about protesting Likud policies.
These students are protesting in favor of celebrating with Arabs who oppose the existence of Israel.
There is no reason to keep revisiting this
Posted by antisocialist at 05/27/2009 @ 1:43pm
buried in the column is the admission that "Israeli Jews...still enjoy a remarkable degree of freedom to speak out on almost any issue." In other words, the conclusion and entire thrust of the column is contradicted by the author's own admission.
Posted by gren at 05/27/2009 @ 1:54pm
tell antisocialist
As much as I sympathize with Israelis would are inflammed and outraged at Israeli Arabs celebrating an anti-Israeli theme and occassion, nevertheless Israel should protect the right to do so, Arab or Jew. The crackdown is understandable, but nevertheless wrong. That said, that is not a critical problem, and Israeli Arabs who live near the '67 border have made clear their opposition to a boundary line that would place them in an independent Palestinian state as opposed to remaining in Israel. That's all anyone really needs to know. Reality wins over rhetoric every time.
Posted by gren at 05/27/2009 @ 1:59pm
These students are protesting in favor of celebrating with Arabs who oppose the existence of Israel.
There is no reason to keep revisiting this----Posted by antisocialist at 05/27/2009 @ 1:43pm
Well, 1. Where do THEY say that? Or again, is it just your "divine revelation"?
2. No, the reason you don't want to revisit it is....you see the dichotomy you've constructed. That being "Support all right-wing/Likud policies towards Palestine....or you want to see Israel destroyed"...no "middle ground."
And as usual when illogical and such inane "black or white" statements eventually emerge from you....you want to drop it.
Posted by Mask at 05/27/2009 @ 2:18pm
Again, they are not protesting against Israeli policies.
They are protesting in support of those enemies of Israel that want to destroy them.
Posted by antisocialist at 05/27/2009 @ 12:03pm
This is not true, Larry. Israeli Jews were protesting against Israeli policy and actions. They were not offering themselves up for murder.
Posted by cka2nd at 05/27/2009 @ 3:36pm
I have no love for the political and economic elites of the Arab world, and I am part of a political tradition that has long condemned as counter-productive the reliance on terrorism in struggles for any kind of liberation, but really, is it so hard to understand the anti-Semitism that now infests the Palestinian population? Dispossesed and treated like animals, is it so shocking that some Palestinians are filled with hatred and anger? And if anyone thinks that the average Israeli has suffered to the degree that the average Palestinian has over the last 60 years, you are delusional.
Israel is fast approaching a purely apartheid model. Hopefully, new leaders will arise in both the Palestinian and Jewish communities who will pull both sides back from the brink. We are starting to see inklings of that on the Palestinian side, while the Israelis remains stuck on a very bad road with no end in sight.
Posted by cka2nd at 05/27/2009 @ 3:46pm
On the issue of Israel, we have here their reality, naked, and exposed - they are going to attempt to coerce the Obama Administration into doing nothing while they continue expropriate West Bank lands illegally:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/28/world/middl eeast/28mideast.html?ref=global-home
Israel is an unrepentant rogue nation.
Posted by syfriendly at 05/27/2009 @ 3:56pm
Posted by cka2nd at 05/27/2009 @ 3:46pm
I'm not so sure the apartheid example works. In South Africa, the majority black population was discriminated against by a tiny white minority, but both were citizens of the country. In Israel, Palestinians are not Israeli citizens, and the populations are roughly equal in size. It's a horrible tyranny against Palestinians, that is true, but it's not specifically apartheid of the South African type.
Posted by zmann at 05/27/2009 @ 3:57pm
This is not true, Larry. Israeli Jews were protesting against Israeli policy and actions. They were not offering themselves up for murder.
Posted by cka2nd at 05/27/2009 @ 3:36pm
I took it straight from her post.
<Indeed, Slor, an activist with Darom le Shalom (the South for Peace), a recently formed group of Arabs and Jews in the Beer-Sheva area who "struggle against racism and for equality and coexistence between Arabs and Jews," told me that at the time of her arrest, a security officer told her, "Listen, don't pretend you're so naïve--I've seen you in past demonstrations. Everything is recorded and written, everything is documented." She can't prove it, but she's convinced security went after her because she was protesting the Nakba Day legislation; "that was the subtext," she told me.
The students were not going to take this sitting down. That same night, about sixty or so held a demonstration protesting the arrest, gathering at a university ceremony attended by the board of governors and other dignitaries.>
Posted by antisocialist at 05/27/2009 @ 4:01pm
One more time.
The apartheid argument is ridiculous. Both Barak and Kadima (Livni) proposed a peace treaty based on an independent palestinian state on 94% of the West Bank. The comparison to South Africa is completely bogus.
The Palestinians could have their own country if they give up their claim to 6% of the West Bank, all of Jerusalem (Israel has offered Palestinian sovereignty over a significant part of East Jerusalem, including the Arab quarters of the Old City) and the right of return. If a quarter of the amount of criticism that is directed at Israel was directed at the Palestinians for not making a limited compromise of their claims, this conflict could be settled. (If the PA announced its willingness to make that compromise tomorrow, even Netanyahu would have no choice but to conclude a permanent peace on that basis.)
Posted by gren at 05/27/2009 @ 4:22pm
The zionists are undoubtedly the most efficient, most organized, most consistent, pervasive, invasive and persuasive organized crime syndicate in human history.
Posted by DejaVu at 05/27/2009 @ 8:49pm
The zionists are undoubtedly the most efficient, most organized, most consistent, pervasive, invasive and persuasive organized crime syndicate in human history.
Posted by DejaVu at 05/27/2009 @ 8:49pm | ignore this person | warn this person
That is quite a statement considering the sheer vastness of human history
Posted by CPT at 05/27/2009 @ 9:39pm
I have read that Netanyahu considers Iran to be the modern manifestation of the Amalekites. Amalek must be exterminated completely by Israelites in each generation, according to the Old Testament, the Hebrew Bible. Therefore, a nuclear war of extermination upon Iran must occur in our times to exterminate modern Amalek and all Amalekites. Read the analysis: http://news.beiruter.com/node/75854
It would be impossible to contain a nuclear war on such a scale, therefore our times must end in Global Thermonuclear War.
Posted by magicmystic at 05/27/2009 @ 10:08pm
"Prussia on the Mediterrainean"
Leftist like Demoncrats are consistent. Its not just the politics of personal destruction they major in, but now they extend it perversely in attempts at politics of national destruction. This must have the blessings of the U.N.!
How else can you charactorize the derrogatory euphanism of this title in attempt to ascribe to Israel as practicing a racist nationalism. More accurately it is the Arabs (so-called) palestinians, syrians, iranians etc. fomenting hatred, arming, and empowering their stooges ,arabs in palestine' and their terrorist hate groups that are the racist!
Posted by BigPasture at 05/27/2009 @ 10:31pm
"The larger-circulation dailies Yediot and Ma'ariv, as well as the Jerusalem Post and television news, are tilted much more to the right--just like the mainstream US media,"
WTF????????????????????????????????????????????
Posted by bleedingheart at 05/27/2009 @ 11:57pm
unless they want to pretend that their government has been imposed on them
Posted by syfriendly at 05/27/2009 @ 11:49am
ay, there lies the rub.
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/28/2009 @ 01:00am
Posted by antisocialist at 05/27/2009 @ 11:31am
larry,
what if there were a movement to reunite the u.s. with mother england?
, a movement so popular that it gained majority status with u.s. voters.
would it be fair to stifle the anti-independence voice?
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/28/2009 @ 01:04am
Thank you Roane Carey for the article. You capture well the feelings of people here, in Israel, who are speaking out for equality and justice.
the commentators before, who tried to compare Israel to the US or to Canada - i don't understand why this is necessary. Israel was born out of a world of hatred. it was the silencing of dissent that allowed 6,000,000 of us to be slaughtered.
i, and many of my friends, are being intimidated with police coming to our homes because we disagree with Israeli policies - not with Israel's existence! it is my wish to secure Israel's existence as a country of democracy and freedom that pushes me and others like me to speak out for equality and justice. i and more and more of my Jewish friends have been arrested while demonstrating quietly. under no circumstances can that be seen as even remotely ok.
during the last week at least three new laws have been brought up, and have passed various stages of legislation, criminalizing dissent: Not allowed to commemorate the Palestinian Naqba of 1948, Not allowed to say that Israel should be anything other than "Jewish and Democratic", and - must show "Loyalty" to your state. ie - must insist on more privileges to its Jewish citizens, and must not criticize this. Please use the more sane leadership in the US to help us stop this crazy trajectory in our country.
Dr. Yeela Raanan, Sapir College, Israel.
Posted by yallylivnat at 05/28/2009 @ 04:51am
Posted by yallylivnat at 05/28/2009 @ 04:51am
Sorry to inform you of this, Dr Raanan...
but according to our local evangelical Christian right-winger...
You want to "destroy Israel" and your Jewish friends?....aren't really Jews.
Posted by Mask at 05/28/2009 @ 07:40am
Posted by yallylivnat at 05/28/2009 @ 04:51am
Good luck, my friend.
Posted by zmann at 05/28/2009 @ 07:49am
Posted by snowball666 at 05/28/2009 @ 07:48am
And by THAT analogy, though he would of course deny it, Larry would, 150 years ago, be one of the "The only good Injun is a dead Injun!" types.
Posted by Mask at 05/28/2009 @ 09:17am
Posted by snowball666 at 05/28/2009 @ 07:48am
What complete nonsense. The Jews never attempted to destroy the Arabs. It is the Arabs who declared war on the Israelis from the moment they became a nation and have never ceased that war.
There is no charter in Israel that Arab nations shall never be allowed to exist.
<Article Twelve: Hamas in Palestine, Its Views on Homeland and Nationalism Hamas regards Nationalism (Wataniyya) as part and parcel of the religious faith. Nothing is loftier or deeper in Nationalism than waging Jihad against the enemy and confronting him when he sets foot on the land of the Muslims. And this becomes an individual duty binding on every Muslim man and woman; a woman must go out and fight the enemy even without her husband's authorization, and a slave without his masters' permission. This [principle] does not exist under any other regime, and it is a truth not to be questioned. While other nationalisms consist of material, human and territorial considerations, the nationality of Hamas also carries, in addition to all those, the all important divine factors which lend to it its spirit and life; so much so that it connects with the origin of the spirit and the source of life and raises in the skies of the Homeland the Banner of the Lord, thus inexorably connecting earth with Heaven. When Moses came and threw his baton, sorcery and sorcerers became futile.
Article Thirteen: Peaceful Solutions, [Peace] Initiatives and International Conferences [Peace] initiatives, the so-called peaceful solutions, and the international conferences to resolve the Palestinian problem, are all contrary to the beliefs of the Islamic Resistance Movement. For renouncing any part of Palestine means renouncing part of the religion;>
Posted by antisocialist at 05/28/2009 @ 09:50am
"For renouncing any part of Palestine means renouncing part of the religion;>"-----Posted by antisocialist at 05/28/2009 @ 09:50am
Uh, Larry...if you replace "Palestine" with "Israel"....isn't that YOUR position?
Posted by Mask at 05/28/2009 @ 11:08am
Uh, Larry...if you replace "Palestine" with "Israel"....isn't that YOUR position?
Posted by Mask at 05/28/2009 @ 11:08am
Your attempt fails because there was no nation of "Palestine" when Israel became a nation.
Posted by antisocialist at 05/28/2009 @ 11:25am
Posted by antisocialist at 05/28/2009 @ 11:25am
But, it's the same thing semantically, isn't it?
You attack them for being religious fanatics who will accept NO part of Palestine being surrendered, thus proving their radicalism and lack of faith in any peaceful negotiation with them.
Yet YOU will accept NO part of Israel being surrendered (even demanding the West Bank and Gaza which are only occupied, not incorporated...yet) and do so because of your religious/political ideology.
Same thing. As far as "Palestine" existing as a nation, Israel didn't exist for almost 1900 years, so that's just a matter of time...nothing more.
Posted by Mask at 05/28/2009 @ 12:01pm
Same thing. As far as "Palestine" existing as a nation, Israel didn't exist for almost 1900 years, so that's just a matter of time...nothing more.
Posted by Mask at 05/28/2009 @ 12:01pm
You simply cannot make that leap of logic.
The land had only ever existed as either the Nation of Israel or land that was occupied by other nations such as the Roman Empire, Syria, the Byzantine Empire, The Ottoman Empire, Greece, Persia (ancient Iran), and the British Mandate. So between the time that the Romans disbursed the majority of the Jews out of Israel until 1948, no other nation ever existed in that land.
No Arab peoples EVER declared that land to be a nation until 1967 when the PLO charter was introduced. It was always treated by the Arabs as part of either the Caliphate or part of Syria.
Posted by antisocialist at 05/28/2009 @ 12:51pm
Posted by antisocialist at 05/28/2009 @ 12:51pm
Again, small semantic details, Larry.
Your criticism of Hamas was that it rejects peaceful solutions and that it believes that "renouncing any part of Palestine means renouncing part of the religion".
Just like you....'cept Israel instead of Palestine.
Posted by Mask at 05/28/2009 @ 1:17pm
Again, small semantic details, Larry.
Your criticism of Hamas was that it rejects peaceful solutions and that it believes that "renouncing any part of Palestine means renouncing part of the religion".
Just like you....'cept Israel instead of Palestine.
Posted by Mask at 05/28/2009 @ 1:17pm
You simply cannot be more wrong; you are making the liberal moral equivalency argument that simply doesn't hold up.
Israel never committed to exterminating another people or nation.
Hamas does.
Israel did not kick out another nation, nor are they doing so now.
Hamas and Fatah seek to do so to Israel
Neither Hamas nor Fatah have now or ever had any legitimate claim to the land.
They were not overthrown by the Israelis.
Posted by antisocialist at 05/28/2009 @ 1:25pm
Posted by antisocialist at 05/28/2009 @ 1:25pm
Simple question Larry...
Does renouncing any part of Israel mean renouncing part of the Jewish or "true" Christian religion? Yes or No?
Posted by Mask at 05/28/2009 @ 1:34pm
Simple question Larry...
Does renouncing any part of Israel mean renouncing part of the Jewish or "true" Christian religion? Yes or No?
Posted by Mask at 05/28/2009 @ 1:34pm
Your question is not simple since I don't believe it is a direct question.
If you mean that a Jew or a Christian cannot criticize Israel, that would be incorrect.
If you mean is it acceptable for a Christian or a Jew to renounce the existance of Israel? The answer is no.
Posted by antisocialist at 05/28/2009 @ 1:43pm
Posted by gren at 05/27/2009 @ 4:22pm
One more time.
The "offers" made by successive Israeli governments all include Israel's maintaining effective control over the West Bank and the Jordan River valley by the placement of military outposts and the continued existence of roads to be used exclusively by Israelis. The network of roads, settlements and outposts would, as it currently does, slice up the West Bank into isolated, economically non-viable bantustans, hence the legitimate part of the comparison with apartheid.
Not to mention that the occupation of the West Bank is illegal under international law, so Israel has no basis for demanding the right to keep 6% of it. Ditto Jerusalem.
Frankly, I hope the Palestinians never give up the right to return, since Israel's founding was an act of imperialist and crypto-religous/ethnic theft. That doesn't mean I believe the Jews should leave, let alone be driven into the sea, but I favor a secular, socialist and single state of Palestine.
Posted by cka2nd at 05/28/2009 @ 1:50pm
Not to mention that the occupation of the West Bank is illegal under international law, so Israel has no basis for demanding the right to keep 6% of it. Ditto Jerusalem.
Frankly, I hope the Palestinians never give up the right to return, since Israel's founding was an act of imperialist and crypto-religous/ethnic theft. That doesn't mean I believe the Jews should leave, let alone be driven into the sea, but I favor a secular, socialist and single state of Palestine.
Posted by cka2nd at 05/28/2009 @ 1:50pm
Let's work backwards..
What you favor certainly will never occur, because even the Arabs don't want that.
Secondly, as I noted to Mask, Israel never took away land from another nation.
In 1948, Jordan invaded Israel along with 10 other Arab nations. They occupied the West Bank and Jerusalem. In 1967 when they again invaded Israel, Israel was successful in taking back the West Bank and Jerusalem from Jordan.
It was never the land of any other Arab group. No nation existed there. The fact that leftists like yourself embrace this cause is reflective of a hatred of Judaism rather than upholding international law.
NO INTERNATIONAL LAW has been violated by the existence of Israel or it's holding of the West Bank and East Jerusalem. There is none that can be cited.
Resolution 242 that is quoted so often, was itself rejected by the Arabs at the time. Furthermore, 242 is a NON BINDING
Posted by antisocialist at 05/28/2009 @ 1:59pm
Resolution 242 that is quoted so often, was itself rejected by the Arabs at the time. Furthermore, 242 is a NON BINDING
Posted by antisocialist at 05/28/2009 @ 1:59pm
Sorry about the premature posting.
242 is a NON BINDING RESOLUTION. It carries no weight of law or enforcement.
Posted by antisocialist at 05/28/2009 @ 2:00pm
Posted by antisocialist at 05/28/2009 @ 1:43pm
I asked the exact and SPECIFIC question, I wanted an answer to, Larry. I'll slightly re-phrase it.-
If a person renounces ANY part of Israel (as you understand the geographical boundaries to be)...does that mean that they have renounced part of the Jewish or "true" Christian religion? Yes or No?
Posted by Mask at 05/28/2009 @ 2:38pm
If a person renounces ANY part of Israel (as you understand the geographical boundaries to be)...does that mean that they have renounced part of the Jewish or "true" Christian religion? Yes or No?
Posted by Mask at 05/28/2009 @ 2:38pm
It's a bizarre question and I had to think for a bit to even grasp what you are asking.
Israel does have a right to determine their boundaries, apart from what I believe or what anyone else believes.
But no individual has a right to renounce what Israel determines is their nation.
But if Israel rebels against G-d and surrenders what G-d has given them, they are not losing part of their faith, they are rebelling against G-d and they will probably see punishment for doing so.
That's why Pat Robertson was correct when he stated that Sharon was in danger of rebuke for going against G-d.
The connection then to the Jewish and the Christian faith would be that an individual supporting that kind of renouncement would like Israel, be rebelling against G-d.
This is not something that can be claimed by Islam. Neither the land of Israel nor Jerusalem are even mentioned in the Qu'ran.
Posted by antisocialist at 05/28/2009 @ 2:55pm
Posted by antisocialist at 05/28/2009 @ 2:55pm
No, it's not a "bizarre question". It's a question simply based on something YOU posted.
and you know it and it's got you swallowing hard and trying to filibuster your way out of it. It's quite simple a question....same as Hamas, but reversed-
"Does renouncing any part of Israel mean renouncing part of the Jewish or "true" Christian religion? Yes or No?"
If a person renounces say, Jerusalem, to international government or half of it or a third or a city block to Palestine....are they renouncing part of the Judeo-Christianity as you understand it?
Posted by Mask at 05/28/2009 @ 3:01pm
No, it's not a "bizarre question". It's a question simply based on something YOU posted.
and you know it and it's got you swallowing hard and trying to filibuster your way out of it. It's quite simple a question....same as Hamas, but reversed-
"Does renouncing any part of Israel mean renouncing part of the Jewish or "true" Christian religion? Yes or No?"
If a person renounces say, Jerusalem, to international government or half of it or a third or a city block to Palestine....are they renouncing part of the Judeo-Christianity as you understand it?
Posted by Mask at 05/28/2009 @ 3:01pm
I don't know a better way to answer you than I did in my 2:55pm post.
Posted by antisocialist at 05/28/2009 @ 3:31pm
tell ckand
your characterization of the Israeli offer is false propoganda. President Clinton offered his plan to bridge the gap after Camp david, israel accepted, Arafat punted. There were no israeli roads, permanent military outposts.
Not only is 6% a fair compromise for peace, but consider it the price for the Arabs refusing to accept the existence of israel and provoking the '67 war, as well as the Palestinians abandoning the concept of a Palestinian state when Jordan and Egypt annexed the west bank and gaza.
do you want peace or victory. your self-righteiousness not only is based on false facts, but is a rejection of resolution and peace.
Posted by gren at 05/28/2009 @ 3:38pm
tell ckaznd
I'll give you credit for being honest about your opposition to a jewish state in the mideast. But that's why we ignore you. We're not interested in the opinions of those who would eliminate our sovereignty over our homeland.
There is room for two people. but you are greedy and hateful. so you get occupation. When you change, and accept peace, you can have peace.
Posted by gren at 05/28/2009 @ 3:43pm
I don't know a better way to answer you than I did in my 2:55pm post.----Posted by antisocialist at 05/28/2009 @ 3:31pm
Larry, you answered a long time before that.
Posted by Mask at 05/28/2009 @ 3:44pm
tell mask
Depending on what Orthodox sect one belongs to, or whether one is not Orthodox, Judaism does or doesn't prohibit Palestinian or international sovereignty over all or part of Jerusalem. The issue isn't Judaism. It's reality. International sovereignty is an oxymoron. Moreover, when Jews did not have sovereignty over the Jewish holy places between 48 and 67, they were denied access to them and the places were desecrated. Both the Old City and East Jerusalem ultimately will be divided with Jewish sovereignty over the current jewish areas and PA sovereignty over the Arab neighborhoods and the Temple mount. It is not great or practical to divide jerusalem, but given existing conditions, peace requires it.
Posted by gren at 05/28/2009 @ 4:54pm
It is not great or practical to divide jerusalem, but given existing conditions, peace requires it.
Posted by gren at 05/28/2009 @ 4:54pm
I couldn't disagree more.
<A coalition of Modern Orthodox American Jewish...Among the member organizations are the National Council of Young Israel, the Orthodox Union, the Rabbinical Council of America, Emunah Women of America, AFSI, Hineni, AJOP (Outreach), NCSY, Poalei Agudath Israel of America, ZOA, and more.
"The message has still not been received by many Jews," Rabbi Lerner said, "that the door has been opened to giving away parts of Jerusalem, including the Temple Mount, Judaisms holiest and most revered site... Our coalition means that Jewish leaders around the world are coalescing around a simple bottom-line position: World Jewry opposes Israeli negotiations which would include any discussion of ceding sovereignty over part or all of Jerusalem."
The Rabbinical Council of America (RCA), issued the following statement: "We respectfully remind the American sponsors that Jerusalem is not merely a piece of territory. Since Biblical times Jerusalem has been and remains central to Jewish faith and practice. For Jews it is in fact the holy city par excellence. To barter even parts of its sovereignty away, or to weaken its Jewish character in exchange for some ephemeral pledges of peace from an unreliable PA, poses a severe threat to the very soul and morale of the Jewish State. An undivided Jerusalem is a statement of strength and faith and thus a guarantor of peace. A divided Jerusalem is a surrender to weakness which will ultimately become a festering sore that will create misery in the region.">
http://tinyurl.com/p2pegz
Posted by antisocialist at 05/28/2009 @ 5:02pm
tell antisocialist
as I said, for one who follows certain Orthodox rabbis, Judaism prohibits giving away any of jerusalem. But most jews are not orthodox or follow different rabbis. For them, Judaism does not impose such a prohibition. Judaism has no Vatican. Torah interpretation is individually anarchistic. Even the Talmud presents both a majority and minority view on legal issues, and does not designate one as right and one as wrong. One is free to follow one's own Rabbi.
Posted by gren at 05/28/2009 @ 5:19pm
tell Gren
when the Kingdom of Judah rebelled against Babylonia in the name of YHVH, the Temple was destroyed and the people exiled. When Bar Kochba rebelled against the Romans with the blessing of Rabbi Akiva, the revolt was crushed and the people were exiled. (The Temple already had been destroyed.) Peace and sovereignty are dependent on politics and reason, not belief and faith.
Posted by gren at 05/28/2009 @ 5:36pm
as I said, for one who follows certain Orthodox rabbis, Judaism prohibits giving away any of jerusalem. But most jews are not orthodox or follow different rabbis. For them, Judaism does not impose such a prohibition. Judaism has no Vatican. Torah interpretation is individually anarchistic. Even the Talmud presents both a majority and minority view on legal issues, and does not designate one as right and one as wrong. One is free to follow one's own Rabbi.
Posted by gren at 05/28/2009 @ 5:19pm
On that we agree.
Posted by antisocialist at 05/28/2009 @ 5:44pm
(on Rabbi Lerner)-
"World Jewry opposes Israeli negotiations which would include any discussion of ceding sovereignty over part or all of Jerusalem."----Posted by antisocialist at 05/28/2009 @ 5:02pm
(On Hamas)-
"...For renouncing any part of Palestine means renouncing part of the religion;>"----Posted by antisocialist at 05/28/2009 @ 09:50am
Posted by Mask at 05/28/2009 @ 6:40pm
(on Rabbi Lerner)-
"World Jewry opposes Israeli negotiations which would include any discussion of ceding sovereignty over part or all of Jerusalem."----Posted by antisocialist at 05/28/2009 @ 5:02pm
(On Hamas)-
"...For renouncing any part of Palestine means renouncing part of the religion;>"----Posted by antisocialist at 05/28/2009 @ 09:50am
Posted by Mask at 05/28/2009 @ 6:40pm
So what? It's not the same, and that's plainly indicated in the two examples.
And Hamas is being hypocritical because there is no mention of Jerusalem in the Qu'ran.
Posted by antisocialist at 05/28/2009 @ 6:51pm
Posted by antisocialist at 05/28/2009 @ 6:51pm
No, Larry, YOU are.
You attack Hamas by saying "They can't be negotiaged with...they won't give up any of Palestine for Israel...those fanatics think it would be a renouncing of their religion!!!!"
and then YOU turn around and proclaim that a person can't be a "real Jew" (or a "real Christian") if they agree to give up any part of Israel, especially any part of Jerusalem.
You are just like those you hate, Larry. As Nietzche might say, you stared into the Abyss and it stared back.
Posted by Mask at 05/28/2009 @ 6:57pm
No, Larry, YOU are.
You attack Hamas by saying "They can't be negotiaged with...they won't give up any of Palestine for Israel...those fanatics think it would be a renouncing of their religion!!!!"
and then YOU turn around and proclaim that a person can't be a "real Jew" (or a "real Christian") if they agree to give up any part of Israel, especially any part of Jerusalem.
You are just like those you hate, Larry. As Nietzche might say, you stared into the Abyss and it stared back.
Posted by Mask at 05/28/2009 @ 6:57pm
You really have your wiring shorted today.
The issue with Hamas isn't simply about negotiations. Hamas says that Israel and the Jews need to be exterminated.
Secondly, why would Israel give up something to someone who never owned it?
That is a part of the puzzle that you keep sidestepping.
There has never been another nation in that land other than Israel.
There has never been another nation other than Israel that proclaimed Jerusalem as it's capital.
Those are the facts and there is no argument you can make to counter that.
<THE HAMAS CHARTER
("Hamas" = "Harakat Muqawama Islamiyya", Islamic Resistance Movement)
Preamble:..."Israel will rise and will remain erect until Islam eliminates it as it had eliminated its predecessors." The Imam and Martyr Hasan al-Banna
Article Seven - THE UNIVERSALITY OF HAMAS
Hamas has been looking forward to implement Allah's promise whatever time it might take. The prophet, prayer and peace be upon him, said:
"The time will not come until Muslims will fight the Jews (and kill them; until the Jews hide behind rocks and trees, which cry: O Muslim! there is a Jew hiding behind me, come on and kill him!
Cited by Bukhari and Muslim">
Posted by antisocialist at 05/28/2009 @ 7:09pm
More to Mask.
<Article Thirteen PEACEFUL SOLUTIONS (PEACE) INITIATIVES AND INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCES
(Peace) Initiatives, the so-called peaceful solutions, and the international conferences to resolve the Palestinian problem, are all contrary to the beliefs of the Islamic Resistance Movement. For renouncing any part of Palestine means renouncing part of the religion; the nationalism of the Islamic Resistance Movement is part of this faith, the movement educates it members to adhere to its principles and to raise the banner of Allah over their homeland as they fight their Jihad: "Allah is the all-powerful, but most people are not aware."
There is no solution to the Palestinian problem except by Jihad. The initiative, proposals and International Conferences are but a waste of time, an exercise in futility. The Palestinian people are too noble to have their future, their right and their destiny submitted to a vain game...>
Posted by antisocialist at 05/28/2009 @ 7:14pm
The Godfather of the PLO and Hamas, Amin Al Husseini
http://tellthechildrenthetruth.com/gallery/
the promise to him by Hitler
<The Fuhrer then made the following statement to the Mufti, enjoining him to lock it in the uttermost depths of his heart:
1. He (the Fuhrer) would carry on the battle to the total destruction of the Judeo-Communist empire in Europe. 2. At some moment which was impossible to set exactly today but which in any event was not distant, the German armies would in the course of this struggle reach the southern exit from Caucasia. 3. As soon as this had happened, the Fuhrer would on his own give the Arab world the assurance that its hour of liberation had arrived. Germany's objective would then be solely the destruction of the Jewish element residing in the Arab sphere under the protection of British power. In that hour the Mufti would be the most authoritative spokesman for the Arab world. It would then be his task to set off the Arab operations, which he had secretly prepared. When that time had come, Germany could also be indifferent to French reaction to such a declaration.>
In 1943, Amin Al-Husseini is made Prime Minister of Pan-Arab Government by Nazi regime. His headquarters are in Berlin.
He plans construction of concentration camp [xxxii] in Nablus (Palestine) to implement the "final solution" in Palestine to exterminate the Jews there, as an extension of Hitler's plan.
Mufti becomes close friend of Heinrich Himmler, Head of SS (Nazi Officers). Amin Al-Husseini is given a private tour of Aushwitz death camp by Himmler[xxxiii], where he insists on seeing first-hand the murder of Europe's Jews.
http://tellthechildrenthetruth.com/amin_en.html
Posted by antisocialist at 05/28/2009 @ 7:36pm
Zionism was founded as a secular colonialist ideology whose goal was the total dispossession of a native people. Palestine at the time was itself one of the most secular of Arab societies. The religious fervor worked up since on both sides, as in Northern Ireland, is a cloak for nationalist extremism and on the Zionist side, has degenerated into a racism which is all the more ironic as the Palestinians, according to the latest scholarship in Israel, are most likely the true Semitic descendants of the original Jews who never left the land and converted to Christianity and, later, Islam. (cf. Dr Shlomo Sand) The supposed Roman dispersal of the Jews is a discredited myth invented in the nineteenth century. Zionism as an ideology was unpopular with the majority of Jews and only the Holocaust gave it an urgent relevance. Descendants of converted Khazars inflamed by a fiction of 'roots' or, (with the often non-Jewish Russians), for the good life, and aided and armed by a cynical Congress, have declared ruthless war upon a refugee people. The history of the West regarding the Palestinians is one of the most unsavory in modern times and in the U.S. is also one of the most cowardly.
Posted by palvenn at 05/29/2009 @ 12:02am
Posted by antisocialist at 05/28/2009 @ 7:36pm
Getting desperate now, huh, Larry? Nazi references?
So if we leap over to some on your Right in the past...like Lindbergh, Father Coughlin, PRESCOTT BUSH and their relationships with Hitler....same standard?
Simple fact is on the "religious aspect" and "giving up land for peace"...you're no different from Hamas. No different.
Posted by Mask at 05/29/2009 @ 07:55am
hey Palvenn
the old Bullwinkle Show had a segment called Fractured Fairy Tales, in which the tales were retold in a contrary but more amusing way. Your alternative recasting of history is just as entertaining, though obviously with much more sinister motivations.
Posted by gren at 05/29/2009 @ 09:24am
Posted by gren at 05/28/2009 @ 3:43pm
We're not interested in the opinions of those who would eliminate our sovereignty over our homeland.
--Spoken as a representative of a nation that has stolen its homeland from its residents based on old religous dogma.
but you are greedy and hateful. so you get occupation. When you change, and accept peace, you can have peace.
--Spoken like a true imperialist and/or colonist/settler.
Yes, there is room for two people, but there will be no peace as long as one group demands the right to dominate the other group, even in the bantustan states that they allow the dominated to set up.
Posted by cka2nd at 05/29/2009 @ 10:36am
Posted by gren at 05/28/2009 @ 3:38pm
From The Nation on the myth of the Generous Offer from Israel to the Palestinians:
Parallax and Palestine D.D. Guttenplan | March 11, 2002 issue
In Palestine, a Dream Deferred Bashir Abu-Manneh | December 18, 2006 issue
Posted by cka2nd at 05/29/2009 @ 10:40am
tell skaznd
there is no dispute (amongst realists) that there must be an independent (though demilitarized with security internationally guaranteed) Palestinian state on approximately 94% of the West Bank (plus some 3 - 4% land compensation), with no Israeli settlements, roads or military bases. But the decendents of the Palestinian refugees must be resettled in the Palestinian state.
Our disagreement about the past doesn't matter because the past becomes irrelevant once Israel, the PA and the arab countries make peace in the present so the future can finally be different.
Posted by gren at 05/29/2009 @ 12:52pm
tell ckaznd
the misspelling of your name was unintended (typo) and signifies nothing.
Posted by gren at 05/29/2009 @ 12:58pm
The Zionists are in process of transformation; they are about to undergo skin color change, as they come under more pressure to stop the thievery of Palestinian land.
Trying to shift attention to Iran is one way to refocus attention from the mounting criticism over the Jewish settlements. One more effective way used by the Zionists to deflect pressure is by instigating false-flag incidents; like manufacturing clashes with Hamas. It was reported that the Chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff, Mike Mullen, has preempted the Zionist's deception by telling his Israeli counterpart: There will be no USS Liberty Part II. Mullen was hinting at the Israel's attack on the USS Liberty, killing 34 sailors and wounding 174, and then claiming it was a mistake. That warning showed the US concern of potential Israeli false-flag attack on a US vessel in the Gulf to blame Iran.
It is becoming more and more difficult for the Zionists to perpetuate their lies about wanting peace, and thus it is high time to pull their mass reserve of lie and deception. One effective strategy will be to undermine Obama's domestic agenda to reduce his approval rating and to make him easier target for their mainstream media. It was the AIPAC official and Israeli Spy, Steve Rosen, who proclaimed once that he can have the signatures of 70 US Senators on a napkin in 24 hours. Well, Zionist Rosen was proven correct. At the request of AIPAC, 76 Senators and over 280 house members signed a letter asking Obama not to pressure Israel on the settlements. The only question is whether the signatures were collected on a napkin, but nevertheless, the Zionists proved again that they can pull strings with their employees on Capitol Hill.
Posted by CripThink at 05/29/2009 @ 2:22pm
How many years until somebody (maybe Palestinians armed by Iran, maybe somebody else) gets a nuclear weapon and makes all arguments moot?
When will all the houses, Arab, Jewish, even Dr. Raanan's Bedouin friends' houses, all be demolished in the fireball?
Which will happen first, global warming or the war that sterilizes everything within 200 km of Jerusalem?
Posted by Mistral at 05/29/2009 @ 2:26pm
Iran and N Korea are mocking Obama
<Less than two years ago, on September 6, 2007, the IAF destroyed a North Korean-built plutonium production facility at Kibar, Syria. The destroyed installation was a virtual clone of North Korea's Yongbyon plutonium production facility.
This past March the Swiss daily Neue Zuercher Zeitung reported that Iranian defector Ali Reza Asghari, who before his March 2007 defection to the US served as a general in Iran's Revolutionary Guards and as deputy defense minister, divulged that Iran paid for the North Korean facility. Teheran viewed the installation in Syria as an extension of its own nuclear program. According to Israeli estimates, Teheran spent between $1 billion and $2b. for the project.
It can be assumed that Iranian personnel were present in North Korea during Monday's test. Over the past several years, Iranian nuclear officials have been on hand for all of North Korea's major tests including its first nuclear test and its intercontinental ballistic missile test in 2006.
Moreover, it wouldn't be far-fetched to think that North Korea conducted some level of coordination with Iran regarding the timing of its nuclear bomb and ballistic missile tests this week. It is hard to imagine that it is mere coincidence that North Korea's actions came just a week after Iran tested its solid fuel Sejil-2 missile with a range of 2,000 kilometers.
continued
Posted by antisocialist at 05/29/2009 @ 4:38pm
Iran and N Korea are Mocking Obama continued
<North Korea's intimate ties with Iran and Syria show that North Korea's nuclear program, with its warhead, missile and technological components, is not a distant threat, limited in scope to faraway East Asia. It is a multilateral program shared on various levels with Iran and Syria. Consequently, it endangers not just the likes of Japan and South Korea, but all nations whose territory and interests are within range of Iranian and Syrian missiles.
Whereas appearing interested in reaching an accommodation with Washington made sense during the Bush presidency, when hawks and doves were competing for the president's ear, today, with the Obama administration populated solely by doves, Iran, like North Korea, believes it has nothing to gain by pretending to care about accommodating Washington. This point was brought home clearly by both Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's immediate verbal response to the North Korean nuclear test on Monday and by Iran's provocative launch of warships in the Gulf of Aden the same day. As Ahmadinejad said, as far the Iranian regime is concerned, "Iran's nuclear issue is over."
There is no reason to talk anymore. Just as Obama made clear that he intends to do nothing in response to North Korea's nuclear test, so Iran believes that the president will do nothing to impede its nuclear program.>
http://tinyurl.com/nqaloc
Posted by antisocialist at 05/29/2009 @ 4:39pm
News now that Obama is training Arabs to kill Jews
<Last Friday, Yediot Aharonot reported that at a recent lecture in Washington, US Lt.-Gen. Keith Dayton, who is responsible for training Palestinian military forces in Jordan, indicated that if Israel does not surrender Judea and Samaria within two years, the Palestinian forces he and his fellow American officers are now training at a cost of more than $300 million could begin killing Israelis.
Assuming the veracity of Yediot's report, even more unsettling than Dayton's certainty that within a short period of time these US-trained forces could commence murdering Israelis, is his seeming equanimity in the face of the known consequences of his actions. The prospect of US-trained Palestinian military forces slaughtering Jews does not cause Dayton to have a second thought about the wisdom of the US's commitment to building and training a Palestinian army.>
http://tinyurl.com/nqaloc
And less you argue that this post came from the Jerusalem Post, the information was also carried by a different journalist on Common Dreams- Robert Dreyfuss (a familiar name to the Nation)
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2009/05/11-4
So, Obama is training Arabs for so-called self defense, but his people state they are on a 2 yr timetable; either Israel concede to the Arabs or USs trained troops will begin killing Israelis.
Obama, change you don't want to believe in.
Posted by antisocialist at 05/29/2009 @ 4:48pm
The bottom line - how does the Holocaust, Arab hostility, etc. justify the petty land theft by the "settlers" from the Palestinians? And HTF does going along with this criminal action help America in the eyes of the World?
Posted by rvajs at 05/30/2009 @ 12:24pm
I use the term "petty", not because the scope of the theft is "petty", actually it is quite large; but, because the tactics are so "petty" - always a flimsy excuse - security, now it is "natural growth". And there is never, ever compensation for the Palestinians despite the fact that America, over the years, has given the Israeli government enough money to have bought the wretched land; it is as though, the Zionists get pleasure out of stealing the land. All of this sophistry from the Zionists with their "explanations" of how the Palestinians really don't exist, but, also deserve this treatment is all rubbish. America should shun Israel like we did apartheid South Africa.
Posted by rvajs at 05/31/2009 @ 06:37am
I don't know why you guys continue to debate someone like that "antichrist".
When someone who doesn't even live in the "holy land", sits in his comfortable home somewhere in Brooklyn or Brookline or Santa Barbara while spouting all kinds of religious dogma you might as well be arguing with a Taliban.
For people like that, the world and everything in it is always seen through a prism of some religious text.
That's the very definition of fundamentalism. Debating a religious nut job is akin to arguing with a brick wall.
Posted by Josh999 at 06/01/2009 @ 12:58am