START A PETITION 25,136,189 members: the world's largest community for good
START A PETITION
x

OP-ED: It's May 14---Happy 64th Birthday, Israel


World  (tags: world, israel, politics, GoodNews, government, news, society )

Cal
- 838 days ago - foxnews.com
Today, the modern State of Israel celebrates her 64th birthday. A nation rich in history beyond its young age - the birthplace of the three modern monotheistic religions and the center of the Jewish people - the small country is a prime example of what c



Select names from your address book   |   Help
   

We hate spam. We do not sell or share the email addresses you provide.

Comments

Past Member (0)
Monday May 14, 2012, 4:49 am
Thank you Cal for the article.
 

Past Member (0)
Monday May 14, 2012, 4:59 am
thank you for this
 

Jennifer C. (172)
Monday May 14, 2012, 5:06 am
Thanks for the information.
 

David C. (29)
Monday May 14, 2012, 6:07 am
The small country is a prime example of what can be accomplished with through will to bomb, overrun, take land, from people that live next to you.
 

michael hall (42)
Monday May 14, 2012, 6:13 am
NAKBA....Illegal and immoral to come to a land declare yourself a state without the voting or the input of the people who've been living there for thousands of years doncha think? If i went to your home and occupied a room and everything in it mine,would you find that upsetting? Now you know how the palestinians feel...
 

Ira Herson (13)
Monday May 14, 2012, 6:47 am
Thank you Cal,
 

tasunka m. (334)
Monday May 14, 2012, 6:58 am
64 The beatles song comes to mind
" will you still need me, will you still feed me, when I'm 64?" We surely do and will. Yom huledet sameach.
 

Alexander Werner (53)
Monday May 14, 2012, 2:39 pm
Michael, such "Nakbas" happen in Canada pretty much every day when some illegal visitors are kicked out. For an Arab to be considered "A Palestinian" and be entitled to UNWRA pension and benefits, one of his ancestors had to live in the territory of modern Israel some time between Jun 1946 and May 1948.

These two years give him/her full benefits for life, transferred for their descendants forever.

This, when Israeli refugees from Arab countries - large in numbers - got nothing and no official recognition.

This UNWRA sounds like the lergest world scam ever - ONE BILLION BUCKS A YEAR - EVERY YEAR - FOREVER!

Arabs living under Islmist rule of Hamas is Gaza are also f-ing refugees!!! Their Saudi Arab brothers cover about 6% - their oil production in an hour.

How do they feel? They must feel like having a good laugh every time Western taxpayes send them another cheque no matter how hlf-bankrupt their own countries are. Western Taxpayers should not really expect Saudi princes to contibute more - like a day of oil production, that would be bad for the house, harem and garage maintenance.
 

Alexander Werner (53)
Monday May 14, 2012, 4:48 pm
Oh, almost forgot: Happy Birhtday, Israel!

Remain strong and happy!

 

NicoleAWAY W. (625)
Monday May 14, 2012, 5:56 pm
nice post Cal!
 

Stephen Brian (23)
Monday May 14, 2012, 6:41 pm
I'm glad to see Israel doing this well after so long, and I have very good reason to believe the situation there will improve dramatically, in a lot of ways, in the near future.

Michael, if you can find me anyone who has been living anywhere for thousands of years, and I'll find you Mel Brooks. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dnLqLHWDg5E
More seriously, everybody there was given a chance to give input. Jews said "Yes, let's split the land. We want a state." Palestinians mostly said, "No, we don't want Jews to have a state here." Both sides negotiated it in the most uncivil way from 1947-1949, and the pro-Israel faction came out ahead. New rounds of uncivil negotiation arose in 1967 and 1973, and in a more long-term way in 1956, and there has been a long series of uncivilly-expressed complaints throughout its history. The net-result of those re-negotiations was that Israel expanded, which is a great demonstration of the age-old wisdom. "Quit while you're not as far behind as you would otherwise be." I think that has yet to sink in, though. You see? Everybody had a great deal of input.
 

Birgitta S. (231)
Monday May 14, 2012, 6:46 pm
Thank you Cal.
 

Carmen S. (611)
Monday May 14, 2012, 7:43 pm
thanks Cal
 

Kaly White (0)
Monday May 14, 2012, 8:27 pm
My best friend is 52 years old, he again announced the marriage,
------ over50date.Com---- he found his true love once again, it is a good place, for older people, there is no deceit, only to find their own true love, what are you waiting for, come join
 

Stan B. (124)
Tuesday May 15, 2012, 12:33 am
Ignore the ignorant knockers. Israel has contributed more to humanity than all its crazy neighbours put together.
A very Happy 64th birthday to Israel and all the wonderful people who live there.
 

Abdessalam Diab (153)
Tuesday May 15, 2012, 3:56 am
The Real Story of How Israel Was Created

By Alison Weir

October 11, 2011 "Information Clearing House" - To better understand the Palestinian bid for membership in the United Nations, it is important to understand the original 1947 U.N. action on Israel-Palestine.
The common representation of Israel’s birth is that the U.N. created Israel, that the world was in favor of this move, and that the U.S. governmental establishment supported it. All these assumptions are demonstrably incorrect.
In reality, while the U.N. General Assembly recommended the creation of a Jewish state in part of Palestine, that recommendation was non-binding and never implemented by the Security Council.
Second, the General Assembly passed that recommendation only after Israel proponents threatened and bribed numerous countries in order to gain a required two-thirds of votes.
Third, the U.S. administration supported the recommendation out of domestic electoral considerations and took this position over the strenuous objections of the State Department, the CIA, and the Pentagon.
The passage of the General Assembly recommendation sparked increased violence in the region. Over the following months the armed wing of the pro-Israel movement, which had long been preparing for war, perpetrated a series of massacres and expulsions throughout Palestine, implementing a plan to clear the way for a majority-Jewish state.
It was this armed aggression, and the ethnic cleansing of at least three-quarters of a million indigenous Palestinians, that created the Jewish state on land that had been 95 percent non-Jewish prior to Zionist immigration and that even after years of immigration remained 70 percent non-Jewish. And despite the shallow patina of legality its partisans extracted from the General Assembly, Israel was born over the opposition of American experts and of governments around the world, who opposed it on both pragmatic and moral grounds.
Let us look at the specifics.

Background of the U.N. Partition Recommendation
In 1947 the U.N. took up the question of Palestine, a territory that was then administered by the British.
Approximately 50 years before, a movement called political Zionism had begun in Europe. Its intention was to create a Jewish state in Palestine through pushing out the Christian and Muslim inhabitants who made up over 95 percent of its population and replacing them with Jewish immigrants.
As this colonial project grew through subsequent years, the indigenous Palestinians reacted with occasional bouts of violence; Zionists had anticipated this since people usually resist being expelled from their land. In various written documents cited by numerous Palestinian and Israeli historians, they discussed their strategy: They would either buy up the land until all the previous inhabitants had emigrated or, failing this, use violence to force them out.
When the buy-out effort was able to obtain only a few percent of the land, Zionists created a number of terrorist groups to fight against both the Palestinians and the British. Terrorist and future Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin later bragged that Zionists had brought terrorism both to the Middle East and to the world at large.
Finally, in 1947 the British announced that they would be ending their control of Palestine, which had been created through the League of Nations following World War I, and turned the question of Palestine over to the United Nations.
At this time, the Zionist immigration and buyout project had increased the Jewish population of Palestine to 30 percent and land ownership from 1 percent to approximately 6 percent.
Since a founding principle of the U.N. was “self-determination of peoples,” one would have expected to the U.N. to support fair, democratic elections in which inhabitants could create their own independent country.
Instead, Zionists pushed for a General Assembly resolution in which they would be given a disproportionate 55 percent of Palestine. (While they rarely announced this publicly, their stated plan was to later take the rest of Palestine.)
U.S. Officials Oppose Partition Plan
The U.S. State Department opposed this partition plan strenuously, considering Zionism contrary to both fundamental American principles and U.S. interests.
Author Donald Neff reports that Loy Henderson, Director of the State Department’s Office of Near Eastern and African Affairs, wrote a memo to the secretary of state warning:
[S]upport by the Government of the United States of a policy favoring the setting up of a Jewish State in Palestine would be contrary to the wishes of a large majority of the local inhabitants with respect to their form of government. Furthermore, it would have a strongly adverse effect upon American interests throughout the Near and Middle East ….” [Citations.]
Henderson went on to emphasize:
At the present time the United States has a moral prestige in the Near and Middle East unequaled by that of any other great power. We would lose that prestige and would be likely for many years to be considered as a betrayer of the high principles which we ourselves have enunciated during the period of the war.
When Zionists began pushing for a partition plan through the U.N., Henderson recommended strongly against supporting their proposal. He warned that such a partition would have to be implemented by force and emphasized that it was “not based on any principle.” He went on to write:
[Partition] would guarantee that the Palestine problem would be permanent and still more complicated in the future ….
Henderson went on to emphasize:
[proposals for partition] are in definite contravention to various principles laid down in the [U.N.] Charter as well as to principles on which American concepts of Government are based. These proposals, for instance, ignore such principles as self-determination and majority rule. They recognize the principle of a theocratic racial state and even go so far in several instances as to discriminate on grounds of religion and race ….
Henderson was far from alone in making his recommendations. He wrote that his views were not only those of the entire Near East Division but were shared by “nearly every member of the Foreign Service or of the Department who has worked to any appreciable extent on Near Eastern problems.”
Henderson wasn’t exaggerating. Official after official and agency after agency opposed Zionism.
In 1947 the CIA reported that Zionist leadership was pursuing objectives that would endanger both Jews and “the strategic interests of the Western powers in the Near and Middle East.”
Truman Accedes to Pro-Israel Lobby
President Harry Truman, however, ignored this advice. Truman’s political adviser, Clark Clifford, believed that the Jewish vote and contributions were essential to winning the upcoming presidential election and that supporting the partition plan would garner that support. (Truman’s opponent, Dewey, took similar stands for similar reasons.)
Secretary of State George Marshall, the renowned World War II general and author of the Marshall Plan, was furious to see electoral considerations taking precedence over policies based on national interest. He condemned what he called a “transparent dodge to win a few votes,” which would cause “[t]he great dignity of the office of president [to be] seriously diminished.”
Marshall wrote that the counsel offered by Clifford “was based on domestic political considerations, while the problem which confronted us was international. I said bluntly that if the president were to follow Mr. Clifford’s advice and if in the elections I were to vote, I would vote against the president ….”
Henry F. Grady, who has been called “America’s top diplomatic soldier for a critical period of the Cold War,” headed a 1946 commission aimed at coming up with a solution for Palestine. Grady later wrote about the Zionist lobby and its damaging effect on U.S. national interests.
Grady argued that without Zionist pressure, the U.S. would not have had “the ill-will with the Arab states, which are of such strategic importance in our ‘cold war’ with the Soviets.” He also described the decisive power of the lobby:
I have had a good deal of experience with lobbies but this group started where those of my experience had ended …. I have headed a number of government missions but in no other have I ever experienced so much disloyalty …. [I]n the United States, since there is no political force to counterbalance Zionism, its campaigns are apt to be decisive.
Former Undersecretary of State Dean Acheson also opposed Zionism. Acheson’s biographer writes that Acheson “worried that the West would pay a high price for Israel.” Another Author, John Mulhall, records Acheson’s warning:
[T]o transform [Palestine] into a Jewish State capable of receiving a million or more immigrants would vastly exacerbate the political problem and imperil not only American but all Western interests in the Near East.
Secretary of Defense James Forrestal also tried, unsuccessfully, to oppose the Zionists. He was outraged that Truman’s Mideast policy was based on what he called “squalid political purposes,” asserting that “United States policy should be based on United States national interests and not on domestic political considerations.”
Forrestal represented the general Pentagon view when he said that “no group in this country should be permitted to influence our policy to the point where it could endanger our national security.”
A report by the National Security Council warned that the Palestine turmoil was acutely endangering the security of the United States. A CIA report stressed the strategic importance of the Middle East and its oil resources.
Similarly, George F. Kennan, the State Department’s director of policy planning, issued a top-secret document on Jan. 19, 1947, that outlined the enormous damage done to the U.S. by the partition plan (“Report by the Policy Planning Staff on Position of the United States with Respect to Palestine”).
Kennan cautioned that “important U.S. oil concessions and air base rights” could be lost through U.S. support for partition and warned that the USSR stood to gain by the partition plan.
Kermit Roosevelt, Teddy Roosevelt’s nephew and a legendary intelligence agent, was another who was deeply disturbed by events. He noted:
The process by which Zionist Jews have been able to promote American support for the partition of Palestine demonstrates the vital need of a foreign policy based on national rather than partisan interests …. Only when the national interests of the United States, in their highest terms, take precedence over all other considerations, can a logical, farseeing foreign policy be evolved. No American political leader has the right to compromise American interests to gain partisan votes ….
He went on:
The present course of world crisis will increasingly force upon Americans the realization that their national interests and those of the proposed Jewish state in Palestine are going to conflict. It is to be hoped that American Zionists and non-Zionists alike will come to grips with the realities of the problem.
The head of the State Department’s Division of Near Eastern Affairs, Gordon P. Merriam, warned against the partition plan on moral grounds:
U.S. support for partition of Palestine as a solution to that problem can be justified only on the basis of Arab and Jewish consent. Otherwise we should violate the principle of self-determination which has been written into the Atlantic Charter, the declaration of the United Nations, and the United Nations Charter — a principle that is deeply embedded in our foreign policy. Even a United Nations determination in favor of partition would be, in the absence of such consent, a stultification and violation of U.N.’s own charter.
Merriam added that without consent, “bloodshed and chaos” would follow, a tragically accurate prediction.
An internal State Department memorandum accurately predicted how Israel would be born through armed aggression masked as defense:
[T]he Jews will be the actual aggressors against the Arabs. However, the Jews will claim that they are merely defending the boundaries of a state which were traced by the U.N. …. In the event of such Arab outside aid the Jews will come running to the Security Council with the claim that their state is the object of armed aggression and will use every means to obscure the fact that it is their own armed aggression against the Arabs inside which is the cause of Arab counter-attack.
And American Vice Consul William J. Porter foresaw another outcome of the partition plan: that no Arab State would actually ever come to be in Palestine.
Pro-Israel Pressure on General Assembly Members
When it was clear that the partition recommendation did not have the required two-thirds of the U.N. General Assembly to pass, Zionists pushed through a delay in the vote. They then used this period to pressure numerous nations into voting for the recommendation. A number of people later described this campaign.
Robert Nathan, a Zionist who had worked for the U.S. government and who was particularly active in the Jewish Agency, wrote afterward, “We used any tools at hand,” such as telling certain delegations that the Zionists would use their influence to block economic aid to any countries that did not vote the right way.
Another Zionist proudly stated, “Every clue was meticulously checked and pursued. Not the smallest or the remotest of nations, but was contacted and wooed. Nothing was left to chance.”
Financier and longtime presidential adviser Bernard Baruch told France it would lose U.S. aid if it voted against partition. Top White House executive assistant David Niles organized pressure on Liberia through rubber magnate Harvey Firestone, who told the Liberian president that if Liberia did not vote in favor of partition, Firestone would revoke his planned expansion in the country. Liberia voted yes.
Latin American delegates were told that the Pan-American Highway construction project would be more likely if they voted yes. Delegates’ wives received mink coats (the wife of the Cuban delegate returned hers); Costa Rica’s President Jose Figueres reportedly received a blank checkbook. Haiti was promised economic aid if it would change its original vote opposing partition.
Longtime Zionist Supreme Court Justice Felix Frankfurter, along with 10 senators and Truman domestic adviser Clark Clifford, threatened the Philippines (seven bills were pending on the Philippines in Congress).
Before the vote on the plan, the Philippine delegate had given a passionate speech against partition, defending the inviolable “primordial rights of a people to determine their political future and to preserve the territorial integrity of their native land.”
He went on to say that he could not believe that the General Assembly would sanction a move that would place the world “back on the road to the dangerous principles of racial exclusiveness and to the archaic documents of theocratic governments.”
Twenty-four hours later, after intense Zionist pressure, the delegate voted in favor of partition.
The U.S. delegation to the U.N. was so outraged when Truman insisted that they support partition that the State Department director of U.N. affairs was sent to New York to prevent the delegates from resigning en masse.
On Nov. 29, 1947, the partition resolution, 181, passed. While this resolution is frequently cited, it was of limited (if any) legal impact. General Assembly resolutions, unlike Security Council resolutions, are not binding on member states. For this reason, the resolution requested that “[t]he Security Council take the necessary measures as provided for in the plan for its implementation,” which the Security Council never did. Legally, the General Assembly Resolution was a “recommendation” and did not create any states.
What it did do, however, was increase the fighting in Palestine. Within months (and before Israel dates the beginning of its founding war) the Zionists had forced out 413,794 people. Zionist military units had stealthily been preparing for war before the U.N. vote and had acquired massive weaponry, some of it through a widespread network of illicit gunrunning operations in the U.S. under a number of front groups.
The U.N. eventually managed to create a temporary and very partial cease-fire. A Swedish U.N. mediator who had previously rescued thousands of Jews from the Nazis was dispatched to negotiate an end to the violence. Israeli assassins killed him, and Israel continued what it was to call its “war of independence.”
At the end of this war, through a larger military force than that of its adversaries and the ruthless implementation of plans to push out as many non-Jews as possible, Israel came into existence on 78 percent of Palestine.
At least 33 massacres of Palestinian civilians were perpetrated, half of them before a single Arab army had entered the conflict, hundreds of villages were depopulated and razed, and a team of cartographers was sent out to give every town, village, river, and hillock a new Hebrew name. All vestiges of Palestinian habitation, history, and culture were to be erased from history, an effort that almost succeeded.
Israel, which claims to be the “only democracy in the Middle East,” decided not to declare official borders or to write a constitution, a situation which continues to this day. In 1967 it took still more Palestinian and Syrian land, which is now illegally occupied territory, since the annexation of land through military conquest is outlawed by modern international law. It has continued this campaign of growth through armed acquisition and illegal confiscation of land ever since.
Individual Israelis, like Palestinians and all people, are legally and morally entitled to an array of human rights.
On the other hand, the state of Israel’s vaunted “right to exist” is based on an alleged “right” derived from might, an outmoded concept that international legal conventions do not recognize and in fact specifically prohibit.
[Detailed citations for the above information are available at "The History of Israel-U.S. Relations, Part One."]
This item was first posted at Antiwar.com


 

Abdessalam Diab (153)
Tuesday May 15, 2012, 6:04 am
Now as you know how Israel was created,I say happy birthday Israel.Hope when you celebrate your 65 birthday you will also celebrate the birthday of a neighbouring Palestinian state and sharing Jerusalem as a capital for both of the Palestinians state and the Israeli's.
 

wolfNoFwdsPls a. (135)
Tuesday May 15, 2012, 6:15 am
"Happy Birthday" USraHell ??? Argggh.
But I'm not even going to say "happy birthday Palestine".
What I will say (if I should live to see it) is "happy birthday humankind" - on that day when occupation, opression and genocide on Earth have come to an end.

> as you know how Israel was created
some of it I know, much of it I don't.
--
" In 1967, following a war between Israel and the countries of Syria, Jordan and Egypt, Israel militarily occupied the West Bank, Gaza Strip, and East Jerusalem.
- That year, the United Nations Security Council passed Resolution 242 calling on Israel to withdraw from the Occupied Territories.
- Israel has yet to comply.
- Today, 3 million Palestinians live under illegal military occupation.
- Today, the lives of both Israelis and Palestinians are plagued by daily violence and insecurity. "
-- "Peace, Propaganda & the Promised Land" (2004)

And as to the ORIGINS of this conflict:
" The Zionists were by far the more powerful and better organized force, and " --though all-too-many people seem to believe so-- it's NOT as if Israel would have been founded in peace and harmony, and was then attacked by the bad, blood-thirsty ragheads,
BUT
" [B]y May 1948, when the state of Israel was formally established, about 300,000 Palestinians already had been expelled from their homes or had fled the fighting, and the Zionists controlled a region well beyond the area of the original Jewish state that had been proposed by the UN. Now it's then that Israel was attacked by its neighbors - in May 1948; it's then, after the Zionists had taken control of this much larger part of the region and hundreds of thousands of civilians had been forced out, not before. " pp 131-132 in 'Understanding Power: The Indispensable Chomsky'
----
NO JUSTICE, NO PEACE.


 

wolfNoFwdsPls a. (135)
Tuesday May 15, 2012, 6:18 am

The Real Story of How Israel Was Created - by Alison Weir, October 11, 2011 online (with links) @ antiwar.com

 

Abdessalam Diab (153)
Tuesday May 15, 2012, 8:48 am
Einstein Letter Warning Of
Zionist Facism In Israel
Letter That Albert Einstein Sent to the New York Times
1948, Protesting the Visit of Menachem Begin


Letters to the Editor
New York Times
December 4, 1948
TO THE EDITORS OF THE NEW YORK TIMES:
Among the most disturbing political phenomena of our times is the emergence in the newly created state of Israel of the "Freedom Party" (Tnuat Haherut), a political party closely akin in its organization, methods, political philosophy and social appeal to the Nazi and Fascist parties. It was formed out of the membership and following of the former Irgun Zvai Leumi, a terrorist, right-wing, chauvinist organization in Palestine.
The current visit of Menachem Begin, leader of this party, to the United States is obviously calculated to give the impression of American support for his party in the coming Israeli elections, and to cement political ties with conservative Zionist elements in the United States. Several Americans of national repute have lent their names to welcome his visit. It is inconceivable that those who oppose fascism throughoutthe world, if correctly informed as to Mr. Begin's political record and perspectives, could add their names and support to the movement he represents.
Before irreparable damage is done by way of financial contributions, public manifestations in Begin's behalf, and the creation in Palestine of the impression that a large segment of America supports Fascist elements in Israel, the American public must be informed as to the record and objectives of Mr. Begin and his movement. The public avowals of Begin's party are no guide whatever to its actual character. Today they speak of freedom, democracy and anti-imperialism, whereas until recently they openly preached the doctrine of the Fascist state. It is in its actions that the terrorist party betrays its real character; from its past actions we can judge what it may be expected to do in the future.
Attack on Arab Village
A shocking example was their behavior in the Arab village of Deir Yassin. This village, off the main roads and surrounded by Jewish lands, had taken no part in the war, and had even fought off Arab bands who wanted to use the village as their base. On April 9 (THE NEW YORK TIMES), terrorist bands attacked this peaceful village, which was not a military objective in the fighting, killed most of its inhabitants ? 240men, women, and children - and kept a few of them alive to parade as captives through the streets of Jerusalem. Most of the Jewish community was horrified at the deed, and the Jewish Agency sent a telegram of apology to King Abdullah of Trans-Jordan. But the terrorists, far from being ashamed of their act, were proud of this massacre, publicized it widely, and invited all the foreign correspondents present in the country to view the heaped corpses and the general havoc at Deir Yassin. The Deir Yassin incident exemplifies the character and actions of the Freedom Party.
Within the Jewish community they have preached an admixture of ultranationalism, religious mysticism, and racial superiority. Like other Fascist parties they have been used to break strikes, and have themselves pressed for the destruction of free trade unions. In their stead they have proposed corporate unions on the Italian Fascist model. During the last years of sporadic anti-British violence, the IZL and Stern groups inaugurated a reign of terror in the Palestine Jewish community. Teachers were beaten up for speaking against them, adults were shot for not letting their children join them. By gangster methods, beatings, window-smashing, and wide-spread robberies, the terrorists intimidated the population and exacted a heavy tribute.
The people of the Freedom Party have had no part in the constructive achievements in Palestine. They have reclaimed no land, built no settlements, and only detracted from the Jewish defense activity. Their much-publicized immigration endeavors were minute, and devoted mainly to bringing in Fascist compatriots.
Discrepancies Seen
The discrepancies between the bold claims now being made by Begin and his party, and their record of past performance in Palestine bear the imprint of no ordinary political party. This is the unmistakable stamp of a Fascist party for whom terrorism (against Jews, Arabs, and British alike), and misrepresentation are means, and a "Leader State" is the goal.
In the light of the foregoing considerations, it is imperative that the truth about Mr. Begin and his movement be made known in this country. It is all the more tragic that the top leadership of American Zionism has refused to campaign against Begin's efforts, or even to expose to its own constituents the dangers to Israel from support to Begin.
The undersigned therefore take this means of publicly presenting a few salient facts concerning Begin and his party; and of urging all concerned not to support this latest manifestation of fascism.
ISIDORE ABRAMOWITZ
HANNAH ARENDT
ABRAHAM BRICK
RABBI JESSURUN CARDOZO
ALBERT EINSTEIN
HERMAN EISEN, M.D.
HAYIM FINEMAN
M. GALLEN, M.D.
H.H. HARRIS
ZELIG S. HARRIS
SIDNEY HOOK
FRED KARUSH
BRURIA KAUFMAN
IRMA L. LINDHEIM
NACHMAN MAISEL
SEYMOUR MELMAN
MYER D. MENDELSON
M.D., HARRY M. OSLINSKY
SAMUEL PITLICK
FRITZ ROHRLICH
LOUIS P. ROCKER
RUTH SAGIS
ITZHAK SANKOWSKY
I.J. SHOENBERG
SAMUEL SHUMAN
M. SINGER
IRMA WOLFE
STEFAN WOLF.
New York, Dec. 2, 1948
http://pulpnonfiction.blogspot.com


 

Suzy F. (94)
Tuesday May 15, 2012, 9:47 am
Israel must allow the Palestinians to live and prosper!
 

Abdessalam Diab (153)
Tuesday May 15, 2012, 10:08 am
Thank you Suzy for this comment. Yes Palestinians must be allowed to live and prosper on the Palestinian land in a free independent state. This will only happen by ending the Zionist occupation and stopping the stealing of their land by Israel and giving it to Zionist settlers.
 

Charles O. (209)
Tuesday May 15, 2012, 10:58 am
Thank you, Abdessalam Diab.

> Prior to [the 1947] period, the United States had been viewed very favorably in the Arab world. As a result of extensive private American educational, philanthropic, and missionary activities and the absence of American imperial involvement, most Arabs perceived the United States to be a champion of self-determination, human rights, and democratic freedoms.

-- Cheryl A. Rubenberg, Israel And The American National Interest, p. 27

All of that goodwill has been lost -- and the reason it has been lost is made crystal clear by the horrifying article you posted.

. .

> Henderson went on to emphasize:

> > “At the present time the United States has a moral prestige in the Near and Middle East unequaled by that of any other great power. We would lose that prestige and would be likely for many years to be considered as a betrayer of the high principles which we ourselves have enunciated during the period of the war.”

-- Alison Weir, "The Real Story of How Israel Was Created", 11 Oct 2011

That is it, exactly. Truman betrayed every American principle and turned the rule of law into a farce when he caved in to the Zionists (Jewish fascists).

. .

So why did Truman do it? Perhaps the explanation lies in another article I encountered this week.

http://www.dcdave.com/article5/120510.htm -- The 1947 Stern Gang attempt to assassinate Truman

The author of this article quotes Margaret Truman's biography of her father. According to the daughter,

> A number of cream-colored envelopes about eight by six inches, arrived in the White House, addressed to the President and various members of the staff. Inside them was a smaller envelope marked “Private and Confidential.” Inside that second envelope was powdered gelignite, a pencil battery and a detonator rigged to explode the gelignite when the envelope was opened.

The daughter's account is confirmed by another source, Ira R.T. Smith's 1949 recounting of his fifty years of service in the White House Mail Room.

Truman was not the only official the Zionists tried to assassinate. The London Sunday Times, in a 2006 story, mentions the attempt to assassinate British Foreign Secretary Ernest Bevin. You mention Folke Bernadotte, the Swedish diplomat who rescued many several thousand Jews from the Third Reich. In this case, the Zionist assassins succeeded -- on 17 Sep 1948. The head of the Stern Gang, Yitzhak Shamir, went on to become an Israeli Prime Minister.

. .

Zionism is a form of fascism, and fascism is the ideology of national suicide. Fascism inverts the moral order, so that we come to celebrate war and despise peace.

This moral inversion is not viable. The fascist cancer eventually self-destructs -- but first it ravages and destroys the host. The host, in this case, is the human race: Jews and non-Jews alike suffer because of the black hole of injustice spawned in 1947.

. .

See "FAQ: What's wrong with Israel?"

> As the world slowly tries to emerge from barbarism -- for instance, through the human rights movements for which Israel has such contempt -- Israel mockingly drags it back by sanctifying the very doctrines of racial vengeance that more civilized forces condemn.

> Israel brings no new evils into the world. It merely rehabilitates old ones, as an example for others to emulate and admire.

-- Michael Neumann, "What's So Bad About Israel?", *Counterpunch*, 06 Jul 2002
 

Charles O. (209)
Tuesday May 15, 2012, 12:00 pm
What's more, Israel was never actually attacked in 1948.

> The civil war raging in Palestine was transformed into a formal war after the Israeli proclamation of independence, when Arab regular armies from Syria, Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon, and Transjordan, together with token troops from Saudi Arabia, joined the resistance efforts of the local Palestinian Arabs. The war began on May 14, 1948, and lasted until January 7, 1949, when Egypt notified Bunche that it was ready to negotiate a cease-fire under U.N. sponsorship. It should be noted, though, that with the sole exception of the Egyptian army of 10,000 men that crossed the Negev desert (the status of which had not yet been decided), the Arab armies engaged the Israelis in the area of Palestine designated as the Arab state, not the territory of the Jewish state.

-- Cheryl Rubenberg, /Israel And The American National Interest/, 1986, University of Illinois Press, p. 44

Note well: All of the military engagements occurred OUTSIDE of the Zionist partition and inside the remainder of Palestine -- the 44% that the U.N. neglected to steal. This means that Israeli forces were operating OUTSIDE of Israel -- i.e., that Israel was the aggressor.

The Arab regimes, shamed into providing the fleeing Palestinians with token assistance, were NOT invading Israel. Moreover, Simha Flapan tells us that one of these regimes, Transjordan, was actually colluding with Israel. This was the result of a deal reached at a meeting in the fall of 1947 between Golda Meir and King Abdullah of Transjordan. The two had agreed to divide the Palestinian partition between themselves.

Although never actually attacked, Israel got to don the mantle of the Infinite Victim, while the real victims languished in refugee camps in Lebanon and Gaza.
 

Suzy F. (94)
Tuesday May 15, 2012, 12:11 pm
A link to a very sad letter: http://electronicintifada.net/blogs/linah-alsaafin/thaer-halahlehs-letter-his-daughter-my-beloved-lamarforgive-me
 

Alexander Werner (53)
Tuesday May 15, 2012, 1:12 pm
Abdessalam Diab wrote: "Yes Palestinians [Arabs] must be allowed to live and prosper on the Palestinian land in a free independent state. This will only happen by ending the Zionist occupation and stopping the stealing of their land by Israel and giving it to Zionist settlers."

Sorry, this it cheer nonsense. No Arab state allows its citizen to live and prosper. Egypt is starving, opressing minorities and debating ridiculous Sharia laws about sex with the dead and sex slavery. Syria is in war torn between Shia and Sunni Islamic sects. Iraq is under civil wars. Islamic terrorism and intolerance is suffocating other Arab countries. Jordan is struggling quietly with Islamists.

All of the Arab countries, created by colonial powers paying for the loyalty of some princes, are NOT build on the only ideology that could give them prosperity: democracy and capitalism. Tribal mentality, religious fervor and intolerance are not the way for the future.

They should all learn from Israel, how on a tiny piece of land, TEN THOUSAND times less than Arabs got, Israelis transformed the desert into a garden, while Palestinian Arabs - under Hamas rule in Gaza - turned modern art Israeli hothouses into a desert.
 

Charles O. (209)
Tuesday May 15, 2012, 3:39 pm
Wow, Bob A., you are immersed in Zionist propaganda right up to your eyeballs.

Democracy? Look at what happened when Palestinians in Gaza refused to vote for Israel's corrupt Fatah collaborators and chose Hamas instead: Israel and the U.S. tried to strangle the electorate, and when that failed, they armed Fatah and fomented civil war. The economic strangulation of Gaza continues to this day, all because Gazans refused to vote for Israel's terrorist henchmen in 2007.

Democracy? Half of the people living in Israel-Palestine have been stripped of their rights and rendered stateless. Israel occupies them, Israel taxes them, Israel bombs them, Israel controls what they may build, where they may go, what roads they may use. And yet these people do not get to vote in Israeli elections. They have no ability to influence the regime that rules them, no representation.

Democracy? Were the people of Iraq given a chance to vote on whether they would be "Liberated"? No: Politicians 10,000 miles away decided their fate. What kind of "democracy" is that?

The U.S. has become the biggest military empire in history. It has bases in more than 100 countries. When countries deviate from U.S. and Israeli dictates, the U.S. uses military force to make them obey. The people who live in these countries do not get to vote in U.S. elections, yet the U.S. determines their fate.

Democracy? Look at the U.S. itself. No matter who we vote for, we get more war, more debt, more tyranny, more subservience to Israel. In the supermarket, we have fifty different brands of cereal, but in the polling place, we have only one brand to choose from, the Globalist War Party. Is that democracy? People in Iran can choose between six or seven parties. Why can't we Americans have that kind of choice, that kind of freedom?

. .

You give us rhetoric about the SIZE of Israel. Size is irrelevant. If a gang came and took over your backyard and started building nuclear bombs there, wouldn't you have a problem with that? The U.S. is a million times larger than your backyard, and yet your backyard MATTERS. It matters because YOU matter, rights matter, life matters.

That's a principle Zionists cannot understand. When they kill a thousand people and we condemn them, they reply brazenly that they "could have killed a million" and they expect an award for their "Restraint". This kind of thinking is absolutely insane. Human beings aren't trash that you can compact and dispose of by the ton!

. .

Finally, we come to your "making the desert bloom" canard. Palestinians love their land, which is why they are still clinging to their land despite 64 years of terror. THEY are the ones who made the desert bloom -- with their orchards and their 100-year-old olive trees. The Zionists simply stole what was already there, and sometimes, as Israel Shamir explains, they lied:

> We are master-sellers of illusion, and as long as there are buyers, we shall provide. In 1946, a group of dedicated men from all over the world came to Palestine under the aegis of the UN. They were sent to prepare the ground for [the] partition of the land. Among other places, they came to the southernmost kibbutz Revivim in the arid Negev, and came across a wonderful flowerbed with roses, anemones, and violets in front of the kibbutz office. In their report, the members of the delegation expressed their amazement and stated, "Jews make the desert bloom, let them have Negev".

> As they left, the kibbutz youngsters went out and pulled the flowers out of [the] sand: they [had] bought fresh flowers [the] same morning on the Jaffa market and [had] planted them as props for the duration of the visit. This small outlay transferred Negev with its two hundred thousand Palestinians to the Jewish state. [The] Majority of them were expelled across the newly drawn border, to the camps of Gaza or Jordan. It was cruel and useless: even now, fifty years later, Negev south of Beersheba has [a] smaller population than in 1948.

> In order to populate depopulated lands, Mossad broke and terrorised [the] Jewish communities of North Africa. The Jews were brought in, sprayed with DDT lice-killer and placed into refugee camps that soon became towns of Netivot, Dimona, Yerucham. They are still there, in the towns of unemployment and misery, drawing social benefits and probably disliking Ashkenazi Jews as much as anybody could. Not in vain, they write "Ashkenazim to Auschwitz" on the walls of their towns.

-- Israel Shamir, "The State Of Mind", 15 Dec 2001
 

Charles O. (209)
Tuesday May 15, 2012, 3:50 pm
Thank you, Suzy F.!

http://electronicintifada.net/blogs/linah-alsaafin/thaer-halahlehs-letter-his-daughter-my-beloved-lamarforgive-me

> Lamar my love: I know that you are not to be blamed and that you don’t yet understand why your father is going through this battle of hunger strike for the 75th day, but when you grow up you will understand that the battle of freedom is the battle of going back to you, so that I can never be taken away from you again or to be deprived of your smile or seeing you, so that the occupier will never kidnap me again from you.

> When you grow up you will understand how injustice was brought upon your father and upon thousands of Palestinians whom the occupation has put in prisons and jail cells, shattering their lives and future for no reason other then their pursuit of freedom, dignity and independence. You will know that your father did not tolerate injustice and submission, and that he would never accept insult and compromise, and that he is going through a hunger strike to protest against the Jewish state that wants to turn us into humiliated slaves without any rights or patriotic dignity.

-- Thaer Halahleh, letter to his two-year-old daughter, 12 May 2012
 

Mary Donnelly (47)
Tuesday May 15, 2012, 4:04 pm
Thanks Cal.
 

Stephen Brian (23)
Tuesday May 15, 2012, 5:25 pm
Hi Abdessalam :)

The U.N. did not create the state. It does not have that kind of power or authority. The GA voted to recognize it and grant it membership. There is a huge difference between being a state and a member of the U.N.

There are two other details of which you should probably be aware:
First, the Deir Yassin massacre was carried out by Irgun, which was attacked and destroyed by Haganah, the militia which eventually became the Israeli army. Its commanders were relieved of any sort of military command and its rank-and-file was incorporated into Haganah (likely due to the fact that those were a lot of combatants and Haganah was still in the middle of a war). That's right, the faction which drove the attack on Deir Yassin was finally defeated by what was later called the Israeli army. How you manage to blame the Israeli army for the actions of a force it very obviously and effectively opposed, I don't know. Maybe you could explain that to me.

second, Herut was considered a fringe party. Its maximum number of seats ever was 17 out of 120, in a protest-vote following a scandal. It was defeated similarly to its leader's previous faction, Irgun. While the organization remained intact, eventually merging into Likud, the political position which raised objections very obviously disappeared. Herut originally, under Begin, had as its most extreme position a total opposition to any ceasefires with Arab states in 1949. Three guesses which Israeli PM was the first to sign a peace treaty with an Arab state, Egypt. Either he had an incredible change of heart or other members drove the extremism and were defeated. Either way, the primary objectionable drives of Herut were definitely defeated before Israelis gave it power.
 

Stephen Brian (23)
Tuesday May 15, 2012, 6:26 pm
Hi Charles,

An envelope's worth or powdered gelignite? Do you know what gelignite is? To turn it into a powder, you would have to dilute its active ingredient, a liquid (nitroglycerin) until it pretty much loses all of its explosive power. An envelope's worth of powdered gelignite is a stinky prank, if that, not an assassination-attempt. The Stern Gang, having been a militia for some time at that point, would have known this. Next time you post a crazy conspiracy-theory, try to keep it vague enough that it can't be so easily disproved.

Regarding the "rehabilitation of old evils", can you give me an example? I'm serious. A lot of acts which are normally dismissed as "evil" are nothing of the sort, and Israel faces circumstances for which the usual rules of conduct were not written. It looked like you recognized this in our other discussion.

I don't know how you get the idea that Israel was not attacked in 1948: You went head and described the attack immediately after. I know you see it as joining into an ongoing defense, but in that case we should probably discuss the beginning of the conflict, however far back you feel like going. If you plan to insist that no attacks occurred within Partition-Israel, how do you explain the attack on Tirat Tzvi, on the convoy to Yehiam, the closure of the Negev, and all the attacks on Jewish communities in the region supposedly under U.N.-protection?

I could go on, but I think we have established that you need to start reading the history.
 

Glamour Girlcat (28)
Tuesday May 15, 2012, 8:01 pm
A toast, dear Israel
With a Mazel Tov Cocktail.
Happy 64
May you have many more!
 

Lloyd H. (46)
Tuesday May 15, 2012, 9:15 pm
Thanks Cal for the masterful piece of whitewashed propaganda. TOMATOES!?! What the hell, the tomatoe originates in South America, introduced to Europe and the Jews by the Spanish. Israel produces less than 10% of what China does, not even being in the top 5 producers and the vast majority of active breeding programs are in the USA at various Universities and Corporate R&D departments. Although I will admit to seeing a definite Israeli-Tomatoe resemblance due to the fact that Tomatoes are 'nightshades' and toxic root, stem and leaf with only the Tomatoe fruit being safe to eat.
And 'brought irrigation to remote African villages' while at the same time Israel control, limits or denies water to the Israeli created and controlled Palestinian Ghetto.
And one must never forget that at the forefront of Israeli 'security and technology' is an ILLEGALLY gotten 200+ warhead nuclear deterrent not to be controlled by any of the Non-proliferation treaties that Israel has never designed and ratified. Gee that sounds a lot like what Israel wants to declare war on Iran for trying to do. Perhaps the case of their neighboring states not recognizing their right to exist stems from Israels refusal to recognize the right of Palestine to exist, while continuing to violate agreements made in reading new settlements, land grabs that are also banned by the Israeli Supreme Court.
 

Charles O. (209)
Tuesday May 15, 2012, 9:19 pm
Hello Stephen B. --

You write:

> Next time you post a crazy conspiracy-theory, try to keep it vague enough that it can't be so easily disproved.

I posted no such thing. I posted factual information taken from the historical record. The essential distinction between fact and theory is another one of the many distinctions Zionists try to erase.

Your blithe claim that these letter-bombs were mere "pranks" is a theory. According to one of my sources, the Ira R.T. Smith book, this theory was refuted by the police:

> Police exploded one experimentally and said that it was powerful enough to kill a man.

. .

You ask me to give you an example of an evil rehabilitated by Israel. Fascism inverts the moral order, reversing good and evil, so examples are not hard to find. Take, for example:

* ethnic supremacy
* ethnic segregation
* war
* terror
* military occupation
* dehumanization
* assassination
* executing aid workers
* gunning down children
* demolishing homes
* torture
* theft
* deceit
* sadism
* blaming the victim
* projecting one's own crimes onto the victim
* censorship
* theocracy

Israel defends and legitimizes all of these evils, because it claims that its alleged end -- a "Homeland" for "The Jews" -- is so supremely noble that any and all means are justified in pursuing that end.

. .

You ask:

> how do you explain the attack on Tirat Tzvi, on the convoy to Yehiam, the closure of the Negev, and all the attacks on Jewish communities in the region supposedly under U.N.-protection?

When did these attacks occur? Did they occur before or after the Arab countries came to the aid of the Palestinians? There were massacres on both sides that occurred prior to the outbreak of war. Let's not conflate this internal strife with an external invasion by Arab forces. The latter never happened. It is the Zionist forces that did the invading.
 

Abdessalam Diab (153)
Wednesday May 16, 2012, 12:59 am
Thank you Charles for uncovering the ugly face of the Zionist entity. YES theft is just one charactaristic features of what is called Israel and its government.

Israeli government challenges the law to embrace illegal settler outposts

RAMALLAH/TEL AVIV, 14 May (IRIN) - Israeli settlers east of the separation barrier in the central West Bank occupy the land most critical for any future final status agreement under a two-state solution. But instead of limiting settlement expansion, critics say the Israeli authorities are setting a dangerous precedent by legalizing new outposts and undermining the law.

God gave us this land 3,000 years ago," an Israeli bus driver said on the way from Jerusalem towards the Israeli settlement of Psagot. "This land is ours. It's not for the Arabs," he added, as the bus crossed from Jerusalem into the occupied West Bank, continuing its way through the rocky landscape east of Ramallah.

Psagot is home to about 1,600 Israeli settlers and the seat of the Mateh Binyamin Regional Council, which is one of six councils providing municipal services to more than 300,000 Israelis who live in 124 officially recognized settlements in the West Bank.

While all settlements in the occupied Palestinian territory (oPt) are illegal under international law, more than 90 so-called outposts are illegal even under Israeli law. One such illegal settlement is Migron, where about 322 Israeli settlers live in caravans on 36 hectares of privately owned Palestinian land.

Migron is one of several cases where the Israeli government has tried to circumvent Supreme Court decisions on the evacuation of illegal structures, instead supporting settler interests. For the first time since 1996, the government led by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu formally created new settlements this April by legalizing the three outposts of Rechalim, Sansana and Bruchin.

"There is a big change of policy happening," Talia Sasson, a former Israeli chief-prosecutor who wrote the influential Sasson report [ http://www.mideastweb.org/sassonreport.htm ] on government support for illegal outposts, told IRIN. "I believe that the price for removing an illegal outpost has become too high to pay, for the Israeli government."

When Netanyahu formed a new unity government with the centrist Kadima party on 8 May, some analysts said this could bring along changes, while Palestinian officials immediately called upon the new government to freeze settlement activity. [ http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/palestinian-official-israel-s-new-unity-cabinet-must-freeze-all-settlement-activity-1.429019 ] But, many warned that settlers were only gaining in strength, holding onto occupied land at any price.

Now, say analysts, state support for settlements and illegal outposts has crossed a point of no return, undermining the rule of law and threatening Israeli democracy.

"What happened around Migron and other outposts is a total earthquake of Israeli constitutional balance," Dror Etkes, an Israeli expert on land issues in oPt, told IRIN. "There is a major clash coming up between the government, the settlers and the Supreme Court. By legalizing the outpost, the government made clear that it neither cares about national, nor about international law."

The government had asked the Supreme Court to delay Migron's demolition for three years, which the court rejected, and tried to delay the implementation of another court decision on the demolition of the illegal Ulpana neighbourhood in the Beit El settlement. Efforts are reportedly under way to pass a bill to retroactively legalize Ulpana. This would force the Supreme Court to declare the law unconstitutional.

Experts say legalization of settlements endangers any future solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict under the terms of a two-state solution.

"Nineteen years after Oslo and 13 years after a final settlement was supposed to be reached, prospects for a two-state solution are as dim as ever," the International Crisis Group (ICG) said in a recent report [ http://www.crisisgroup.org/en/regions/middle-east-north-africa/israel-palestine/122-the-emperor-has-no-clothes-palestinians-and-the-end-of-the-peace-process.aspx ] which called for a new paradigm.

Migron "compromise"

The caravans of Migron stand high on a hill close to the Palestinian villages of Burqa and Ein Yabrud. Only 2km further down, bulldozers were digging into the rocky soil, building a new Migron for the outpost's 50 families, where they will move on 1 August, according to an agreement reached between the settlers and the government after the Israeli Supreme Court had ruled that the illegal structures be removed.

Migron's residents are confident old Migron will remain, alongside the new Migron that is being built for them.

"Today's Migron should become an educational institution for soldiers, or we transform it into a farm," Itai Hemo, a resident from Migron, told IRIN. "In any case, the evacuation will provoke a strong reaction from settler communities all around. We won't be able to control that."

The government's "compromise" with the settlers effectively blocked the Supreme Court decision to demolish the illegal outpost. This only strengthened the settlers' self-confidence.

"Netanyahu legalized the outposts and showed his clear intentions. It is a statement to all settlers and residents of illegal outposts that the government continues to support them," Lior Amichai, who works for Peace Now's Settlement Watch Project, told IRIN.

Observers say illegal outposts impact negatively on neighbouring Palestinian communities.

"This is the area of Migron in 1999," Dror Etkes said, looking at a satellite image that shows huge planted fields that once belonged to nearby Palestinian villages. "And this is Migron today," he continued, pointing out the built-up area of Migron on another satellite image. "Hundreds of dunams in agricultural land were taken away from the villages, severely affecting their livelihood. And a settler road closed off Palestinian access."

"The heart of Israel"

Migron's residents are national-religious settlers who make up about 80 percent of Israelis living east of the separation barrier, on land that would become part of a Palestinian state under any realistic final status agreement.

They are driven by the belief that settling the land is both a national and religious duty, and compared to secular and Ultra-Orthodox settlers, they are more unwilling to leave the land for compensation, past surveys have shown. [ http://www.haaretz.com/news/poll-25-of-settlers-east-of-fence-prepared-to-leave-homes-1.174523 ]

"Eighty percent of what happened in the Bible happened here. This is the heart of Israel, also geographically. If we don't have [a] presence here, it would mean the end of Israel," Miri Maoz Ovadia, liaison officer from the settlers' umbrella organization, the Yesha Council, told IRIN.

Strategically located on a hill like most outposts, Migron's residents have lived in illegal structures since 2002. The Israeli Ministry of Housing and Construction generously funded them with more than US$1 million, according to the so-called Sasson report.

"Coming here was not only an ideological decision. I simply love this place," Itai Hemo said, while resting on the porch in front of his caravan, overlooking the picturesque landscape.

"When you look into the Bible, you will see many of the holy places that are actually here," he added. "But the conflict about the land is a political one. Any researcher will tell you that Palestinians came from other Arab countries. But it doesn't mean we have to expel them. Co-existence is possible."

But the details of this "co-existence" are far from anything that could be acceptable to Palestinians.

"The West Bank is separated into area A, B and C. Israel would annex area C, where all of today's settlers live, while offering citizenship to the Palestinians there. Area A and B would get some kind of autonomy," Miri Maoz Ovadia said.

An estimated 150,000 Palestinians live in Israeli controlled area C, [ http://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/Full%20Report_69.pdf ] which makes up over 60 percent of the West Bank. About 70 percent of it is off-limits for Palestinian construction.

Influencing the state

The Israeli settlers who live in illegal outposts and settlements east of the barrier appear to have effective channels of influence to the government, the military and state institutions.

"Before Gaza-settlements were evacuated in 2006, we organized demonstrations. But the evacuation of Gush Katif (Gaza settlements) broke the movement," Miri Maoz Ovadia said. "We also understood that Gaza was emotionally not in the heart of Israel, but the West Bank is. We have other channels of influence today."

Today, the regional councils and the Yesha Council increasingly focus on advocacy, bringing politicians to speak in illegal outposts and attracting Israelis through tourism and volunteering. "We want to bring the heart of Israel to Judea and Samaria (the West Bank)," Ovadia added.

Since the Israeli High Court ordered the evacuation of Migron, politicians have come to pay tribute, many from Netanyahu's Likud party. "We had a lot of members of Knesset [parliament] here. At least 30," Itai Hemo said.

One of them was Reuven Rivlin, speaker of the Israeli parliament. During a January visit to the outpost, Rivlin called on the government "to take responsibility" and not to relocate or evacuate Migron.

The influence of settler ideology on the Likud was further boosted by the rise of the national-religious politician Moshe Feiglin.

"That Feiglin got 25 percent of Likud's votes, affects the whole party. It pushes all others who compete with him towards a more extreme position," Talia Sasson said. Feiglin advocates a greater Israel and encourages all Palestinians to leave.

"Of Likud's 130,000 party members, 9,000 are settlers. Because they always vote as a united bloc, they are very strong," Dror Etkes said. Other analysts estimated that at least 20 percent of Likud's members are settlers.

Another sphere of influence is the Israeli army, where settlers volunteer. In addition, the settler councils actively attract more and more Israelis to participate in pre-army volunteer programmes.

Asked whether a future confrontation between settlers and the army over Migron was possible, Miri Maoz Ovadia replied: "61 percent of the settlers from here volunteer in combat units. It would be a fight against ourselves."

But their increasing influence on the army and politics could make future demolitions or evacuations more difficult to implement.

"From Gaza they evacuated some 8,000 people. But the West Bank is different. It is in the heart of the country; 350,000 settlers are impossible to evacuate," she added.

Radicalization

While most settlers pursue their interests non-violently, radicalized settlers have also directed attacks against Palestinians, left-wing Israelis and the Israeli state.

The weekly average of such attacks by settlers resulting in Palestinian casualties and property damage increased by 144 percent in 2011 compared to 2009 [ http://www.ochaopt.org/documents/ocha_opt_settler_violence_map_april_2012_english.pdf ] An ideologically driven radicalized movement has grown in West Bank outposts over the years, following a strategy called "price-tag attacks", meant to increase the price the government has to pay for demolishing illegal outposts.

"We are dealing here with two main ideological dimensions - both coming from Jewish religious teachings which place the conflict with the non-Jew at the centre of their teachings," said Ofer Zalzberg, a senior analyst with the ICG.

"The first comes from the teachings of anti-statist religious leaders like Rabbi Ginzburg of the Yitzhar outpost. The second from Rabbi Meir Kahana's teachings. The young activists who follow such political-theologies often come from broken and disaffected families," he added. The two Rabbi's justified violence against Arabs and objected to partitioning the land.

Analysts also say radicalization among settler youth is linked to decreasing loyalty to the state, partly as a result of past government support for the Oslo agreements, which many national-religious settlers see as incompatible with the messianic reading of Jewish law.

Most national-religious settlers oppose the "price-tag movement", but have one goal in common: pressuring the government to not to demolish outposts.

"The settlers are playing a dangerous game. They condemn the radicalization and violence, but at the same time, are using it silently to pressure the government not to demolish outposts," Hagit Ofran, head of Peace Now's settlement watch project, told IRIN.

Dror Etkes said most settlers are represented by the Yesha Council which seeks to influence the state through formal channels, while there is a more radical minority in outposts around Hebron and Nablus.

"The Council uses the radicals to tell the government: 'If you don't compromise our interests, you will have to deal with these radicals'," he added. "There is a mutual interest."

ah/eo/cb[ENDS]


This report on line: http://www.IRINnews.org/report.aspx?ReportID=95445

 

Abdessalam Diab (153)
Wednesday May 16, 2012, 1:10 am
Hi Stephen Brian
Does it make any difference to say that Diryassin massacre had been committed by Haganah,Irgun or anyother group? Aren't they all Zionist terrorist gangs which killed Palestinians,terrified them ,forced them to leave their homes,property and land?
 

Abdessalam Diab (153)
Wednesday May 16, 2012, 1:13 am
Bob Alergon
I'll not give you a chance to fill your pockets with Zionist money.
 

Stan B. (124)
Wednesday May 16, 2012, 2:46 am
Abdessalam. You are jealous of Israel's success which is not surprising as you live in a failed country. I've told you before go visit Israel and see what a real democracy looks like.
Israel is thriving and Egypt is going from developed to under developed.
Time you woke up to the real world instead of the Muslim propaganda you seem unable to escape from.
 

Cal Mendelsohn (984)
Wednesday May 16, 2012, 2:53 am
LLOYD H--thanks for joining in the celebration of the Jewish State!

Please refrain from attacking the messenger instead of the message. If you want to post an article to the counter of this "Whitewashed Propaganda" as you so eloquently put it do so, or you can always just change the channel and find something more appealing. Your blunt negativity and sarcasm are unwarranted and astounding . Do something for yourself and independently to promote your own causes but don't rain on my parade!
 

Mary P. (157)
Wednesday May 16, 2012, 3:06 am
Thanks Cal! How sic is this?? Celebrating 64 years of inflicting pain and suffering on
Mankind!!! May the evil Zionist Regime be rewarded in full, for every crime it committed against humanity! Their evil deeds wil come back to bite them very soon! Justice will prevail and
Truth will overcome Falsehood! The good True Jewish people of israel will oust this evil cancer(zionist) out
Of their government when the time is right!
 

Mary P. (157)
Wednesday May 16, 2012, 3:22 am
Stan b, "You are jealous of Israel's success "
You mean israel's success at murdering innocent men, women and babies!
Israel's Success in 'stealing and evicting people from the OWN lands!
Israel's Success at making the young Jewish soldiers into Murderers!
Israel's Success in depriving fellow human beings of a decent basic
Living!
Israel's Success at building high walls to imprison and isolate fellow human beings!
Israel's Success in engaging in the evil apartheid system!

Such 'SUCCESSES' of israel will only Appeal to People like you and your uncompassionate
Friends!!
 

Mary P. (157)
Wednesday May 16, 2012, 3:39 am
Michael Hall, Lloyd H, Wolf a, Abdesselam and Charles,Thank you for caring and spreading the Truth and Reality of the israel\palestine conflict. Very educating indeed! We know who
the Oppressors(israel) and who the Victims(palestinians) are! Israel cannot
hide under the label of 'victims' anymore as the Truth is out there for the
People of the world to read for themselves now, thanks to internet and alternative
Medias!!
 

Suzy F. (94)
Wednesday May 16, 2012, 5:29 am
On the 77th day of the Palestinian prisoners' hunger strike, SUCCESS:

http://popularstruggle.org/content/palestinian-prisoners-score-heroic-victory
 

Lloyd H. (46)
Wednesday May 16, 2012, 6:36 am
well Cal if you are not part of the message why is it your parade. I also note, you slick dismissal of my statements as 'unwarranted and astounding' 'negativity and sarcasm' while not disproving any thing that I stated. Israel has an illegally gotten Nuclear Warhead stockpile of more than 200. Israel has not signed and ratified a single Nuclear Treaty, banned cluster bombs. And while their Humanitarian Water Works in Africa are definitely good deeds, their treatment of the occupants of Palestinian Ghetto that Israel created and controls is not a Humanitarian Good. And perhaps one of 'my causes' is to rain on Parades with pretty floats that cover up ugly truths. And quite frankly I always find it 'appealing' to not change the channel and stay informed about the Nations and their issues/agendas that have the Direct Potential of Dragging the US, my Nation/Parade, into another War of Aggression in the Middle East costing more US lives and treasure while recruiting more Anti-US terrorist jihadi around the world that does nothing to increase US security, the US economy or reputation. The only notable segments of the US population, I left out the Jewish Community because there nearly as many Anti-War and Pro-Palestinian Jewish groups as there are War mongers and Anti-Palestinian ones, that are backing Israeli aggression against Iran are the war profiteer NEO-CONS and the Evangelical/Rapture seekers who only back Israel because Jerusalem must exist to be filled with all the Jews for the End Time to be realized.
 

Charles O. (209)
Wednesday May 16, 2012, 6:56 am
Hello Abdessalam Diab. Let me quote from the article you posted:

> But instead of limiting settlement expansion, critics say the Israeli authorities are setting a dangerous precedent by legalizing new outposts and undermining the law.

> God gave us this land 3,000 years ago," an Israeli bus driver said on the way from Jerusalem towards the Israeli settlement of Psagot. "This land is ours. It's not for the Arabs," he added, as the bus crossed from Jerusalem into the occupied West Bank, continuing its way through the rocky landscape east of Ramallah.

-- "Israeli government challenges the law to embrace illegal settler outposts", *IRIN News* (UN), 14 May 2012

Here we see the inversion of the moral order that occurs under fascism. Where an outside observer sees theft and racist thuggery, the fascist sees a Glorious Return to Biblical Tribalism. He lives in a world of self-delusion, a circle of self-reinforcing ignorance. The basis for his delusion is his inability to see his victims as fellow human beings. He has made an idol out of ethnicity, and that idol then enables him to justify criminal behavior.

Why do these illegal colonies receive public services? The colonists might be a lot less arrogant and deluded if they were cut off from the state they despise and forced to fend for themselves.

. .

> The only feature common to all mental disorder is the loss of sensus communis (common and communal sense) and the compensatory development of a sensus privatus (private sense) of reasoning.

-- Immanuel Kant (quoted by Hillman in Healing Fiction, p. 117)

The fascist repudiates his larger sensus communis -- his connection to the human race -- and hides in the cave of his own ethnicity.
 

Abdessalam Diab (153)
Wednesday May 16, 2012, 11:16 am
Palestinian Prisoners Score Heroic Victory
Struggle to End Israel’s Oppression and International Complicity Continues

15 May 2012 -- Nearly a month into the Palestinian prisoners' hunger strike, a historic victory has been achieved, as Israeli authorities were forced to comply with the prisoners’ main demands. Coinciding with the Palestinian commemoration of the 64th anniversary of the Nakba, the systematic campaign of ethnic cleansing that uprooted most Palestinians from their homeland around 1948, the prisoners’ victory has heightened hope about the prospects for Palestinian freedom, justice, self determination and the return of refugees.

This important triumph for the Palestinian popular struggle could not have been reached without the unwavering resolve of the prisoners themselves, grassroots mobilization in their support in Palestine, and the immense wave of effective solidarity and calls for holding Israel accountable that the strike has triggered around the world.

More than a thousand people around the globe have pledged to undertake a 24-hour hunger strike in solidarity with the prisoners, to take place this Thursday. While the solidarity hunger-strike has been called off, due to the prisoners' victory, injustice and illegal repression continue in Israeli prisons.

Emphasizing imprisonment as a critical component of Israel’s system of occupation, colonialism and apartheid practiced against the Palestinian people, Palestinian civil society and human rights organizations have called for intensifying the global Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) campaign to target corporations profiting directly from the Israeli prison system. In particular, we call for action to be taken to hold to account G4S, the world’s largest international security corporation, which helps to maintain and profit from Israel’s prison system, for its complicity with Israeli violations of international law.
 

Alexander Werner (53)
Wednesday May 16, 2012, 12:44 pm
Abdessalam, "I'll not give you a chance to fill your pockets with Zionist money."???

Do you want Zionists to KEEP their Zionist money for themselves, instead of giving them to me???

Are you a hidden Zionist sympathizer, who would rather have Zionist money spent on Zionist Enterprize, than in Canada? Wow, be careful exposing such views on the Internet, the Muslim Brotherhood may kill you for even less drastic ideas. Don't forget, all Egyptian Presidential candidates consider Israel to be an enemy, it means that Egypt may lose Sinai again - and now it may be for longer, than before Sadat.

And you will not give me a chance to fill your pockets with Egyptian money either, because Egypt does not have the money. Egypt is busy discussing sex with the dead and blowing pipelines to Israel, instead of making those money. Pretty soon Egypt with eat all the reserves left from Mubarak's time, US Aid won't last forever either, and then what?

Feeding hungry with prayers will result only in Jihad and death...
 

Stephen Brian (23)
Wednesday May 16, 2012, 6:25 pm
Hi Charles,

It looks to me, fro the reports, like the letter never reached Truman. It stopped with Smith in the mail-room, and Smith was also the original source on the story. Unless you can find some serious police-records, I am going to have to conclude that he made it up because unless that was a ridiculous envelope, it couldn't have been that powerful. Modern blasting gel has apparently 85% of the energy-density of TNT, which explodes with 4184000 joules per kg. Let's be really, really generous to 1947 and the Stern Gang, and assume their blasting gel matches modern stuff, and that they could powder it while only diluting the active ingredient by a factor of about 10 (though I suspect the factor would be closer to 100), and that they could fit as much as 50 grams of the stuff (about the weight of 11 sheets of paper) without raising suspicions, and with any chance of it actually reaching the president. Putting that all together, that is the equivalent of 5 grams of blasting gel, or 17,782 joules total. That sounds like a lot, and it is when that is straight mechanical energy, but has to be converted to concussive force from a distance. Now, assuming roughly 30 cm from a letter to the head of the person opening it, that force would be spread over roughly 1.2 square meters before reaching anything where an injury could be life-threatening, and strikes about 0.037 square meters of face. Converting joules to foot-meters (weird unit, but you'll see why) that gives almost exactly 4,000 lbs- * M total energy, of which about 123 joules delivered to the face. That's not so much energy, so no fatal injury from energy, so let's check force. Deriving by distance to get force, we get about 735 newtons spread over the face, or a little under 20 kilopascals. The Earth's atmosphere naturally gives about 1000 kilopascals all the time. If you want to check my numbers, go ahead. In the meantime, I'm going to have to assume that Smith lied.

Now, regarding evils, don't you remember the discussion we just had about what makes an act good or evil? Yeah. When I asked you for examples, I meant specific acts and the surrounding circumstances, not the B.S. list of claims without context and evil feelings to which you attribute those acts which you gave.

The attacks I listed were in 1948, after the Arab armies deployed.

Hi Abdessalam,

Should Egyptians rise up against their current government over the repression suffered under Mubarak after the coming election? Aren't both regimes just the Egyptian government? In 1994, should Nelson Mandela have been held responsible for the previous regime's apartheid?

Actually, for relevant purposes, the Zionist groups had about as much in common as Mandela and the preceding apartheid regime. Irgun and Lehi split off from Haganah specifically because it refused to attack Palestinian population-centres except in immediate retaliation for attacks originating from them. Of course, in a war people get scared, forced to leave their homes due to military operations, and killed. However, Haganah did its best to minimize all of that where possible. In the one major operation where it could not afford to avoid aggressively forcing people from their homes, Plan Dalet, orders were given specifically to drive people out only if forces based out of those population-centres could not be eliminated without forcing the people out. Without controlling the territory where those communities were, it could not have secured its logistics for purposes of the war, it would have been destroyed, and the war would have ended right there.
 

Alexander Werner (53)
Wednesday May 16, 2012, 6:50 pm
Mary P; "Israel cannot hide under the label of 'victims' anymore as the Truth is out there for the People of the world to read for themselves now, thanks to internet and alternative Medias!!"

Mary, a BILLION of Arabs from 22 Arab countries, many oil rich, with armies measured in tens of millions are watching a good moment to attack Israel with 7 million people, including one million of Arab citizen. You better specify in brackets who is the victim like you did, because for many people Arab aggressions stays deep in memory.

You may call Islamist-run hate websites "Altrnative media", but that won't contribute to peace.
 

Abdessalam Diab (153)
Thursday May 17, 2012, 1:33 am
Bob
I am sorry to disappoint you. Your Zionist dreams will never come true.
 

Rob and Jay B. (122)
Thursday May 17, 2012, 1:45 am
Michael, Mary P (the paid Islamist hatemonger from the Islamic Propaganda Centre in Durban), Abdessalem and all the other Israel haters,

Let's hear you all condemn the centuries of Islamic invasion, imperialism, mass murder and oppression of other peoples, cultures and religions. Such silence. Islam swept across a large are by violence and the sword murdering millions (80million in India alone!) and forcing its backward, primitive, arrogant and ignorant tribal ideology on everyone in its brutal, hateful path - including Israel and Jerusalem, which Muslims claim belongs to them, tho Islam didn't even exist in its changed form until well after the Jews had built Jerusalem centuries before, when Islam was still the old pagan religion of the Arabs (and more tolerant and peaceful too) with its chief deity, Allah (not the god of Abraham).

Let's hear your condemnation of Islam's crusade to invade and rule Jerusalem for centuries, and for its arrogant, hateful desecration of the holiest site in Judaism, the Temple Mount, by building Islam's Dome of the Rock and al-Aqsa mosque on it and not even allowing the Jews to stand on the site and pray. (Not to mention its destruction of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre and the tomb of Jesus).

What a bunch of hypocrites you all are. The Jews have been driven out and from pillar to post and it is their land. Israel is a bright light of progress and freedom surrounded by the dark oppression, superstition, fear, oppression, repression and intolerance of ignorant Islamic occupied lands.

Palestinian rule is brutal, intolerant, corrupt and repressive. Christians, non-Sunnis and gays are being persecuted brutally and driven out, just as they all are in every other Muslim occupied land. And you want Israel to be ruled by these backward tyrants? That would put the light out fast.

Where Islam rules, freedom dies.

The Jews at only just over 14mn people have produced 185 Nobel Prize winners, mostly for science, medicine and math. Islam with about 1.5billion people has produced almost nothing but underwear bombs, death, homophobia, child abuse, oppression and misery. It stifles imagination and progress. It has produced a mere 10 Nobel winners, mostly for 'Peace', and a couple of these winners have been persecuted by Muslims for not being 'real' Muslims or being too tolerant.

Let's hear you all condemn Islamic aggression, occupation, invasion, desecration of holy sites, mass murder, intolerance, ethnic cleansing and genocide (going on right now in several islamic dominated places), intolerance and oppression.

Come on Abdessalem and Mary P - you never ever ever will admit or apologize for the centuries of Muslim brutality, occupation, oppression, intolerance etc. Let's hear you renounce Islam's command to kill those who criticize or leave it and of gay people. You never have, have you? You have no credibility.

You here who join with these propagandists for this cult of hate and death are no better than they are.
 

Abdessalam Diab (153)
Thursday May 17, 2012, 1:57 am
Stephen
I asked you few questions about the difference between the crimss whether it is committed either by Irgun or Haganah as I don't see any difference.The killing is the killing and the crime is the crime.Instead of answering the question you started talking about what this gang and that gang has done.
I invite you to read the following article about the birth of Israel which is based on on classified documents from the Jewish Agency and its affiliated organizations seized by the British Mandate Police, materials that confirm that the Zionist controlled Jewish community intended to remove the Arab inhabitants of Palestine from their land and make the whole of Mandate Palestine a Jewish State, an intent that continues to the present day as the new book, The Plight of the Palestinians: a Long History of Destruction, available at Macmillan.com, demonstrates.)

By William A. Cook

May 12, 2010 "Information Clearing House" -- “Jewish villages were built in the place of Arab villages. You do not even know the names of these Arab villages, and I do not blame you because Geography books no longer exist, not only do the books not exist, the Arab villages are not there either … There is not one single place built in this country that did not have a former Arab population.” (Moshe Dayan, Address to the Technion, Haifa, as quoted in Haaretz, 4-4-1969)

Thus began in November of 1947 what is euphemistically called the ethnic cleansing of Palestine by the combined forces of the Jewish armies, the Haganah, the Stern, and the Irgun as they drove more than 700,000 Palestinian Arabs from their homes leaving them destitute, homeless and abandoned without a country in what is now the largest refugee Diaspora in the world.

More truthfully, the plight of the Palestinians that began so ruthlessly in 1947, and is now called the Nakba, was an intentional, calculated campaign to force the Palestinian Arabs out of Palestine, a systematic genocide of a people as defined by the United Nations in its adoption of Genocide Convention, Article II.

The United Kingdom had mandatory authority from the League of Nations to govern the Palestine area with the establishment of the Palestine Mandate in 1922. Prior to the official implementation of the Mandate in 1922, the British Government had enunciated a “declaration” concerning the desirability of His Majesty’s Government in the “establishment of a national home for the Jewish people,” called the Balfour Declaration. Command Paper 1922 from the Avalon Project at Yale Law School underlines this intent: “His Majesty’s Government therefore now declare unequivocally that it is no part of their policy that Palestine should become a Jewish State.”

The View from Inside the Mandate

One of the curious ambiguities that surrounds the decade that preceded the declaration by the Jewish leaders in Palestine of the state of Israel is the dearth of information and perspective from the British Mandate forces governing Palestine between 1940 and May 15, 1948, the date of implementation of the partition resolution. Fortunately, Sir Richard C. Catling has left us a file that provides insight into conditions that prevailed in Jerusalem while he was Deputy Head of the Special Branch of the Criminal Investigation Division in Jerusalem in 1944 and a year later Assistant Inspector General. Catling’s “TOP SECRET” file has lain untouched in the Rhodes House archives of the Bodleian Libraries of Oxford University until two years ago.

Two documents dominate the file with 62 appendices of evidence totaling close to 500 pages of materials. The first is a dispatch sent to the Secretary of State, dated 16th of October, 1941, by the High Commissioner of Palestine, Harold MacMichael, labeled “Most Secret”; the second, a Top Secret “Memorandum on the Participation of the Jewish National Institutions in Palestine in Acts of Lawlessness and Violence,” prepared by the Criminal Investigation Department headquarters, The Palestine Police, Jerusalem, dated July 31st, 1947. [Sir Richard C. Catling, #145, Mss.Med. S20] 1

What should be obvious now, with the materials preserved by Sir Richard C. Catling, is the truth about the creation of the state of Israel: acceptance of UN Resolution 181 by the Jewish Agency Provisional Government as the designated Jewish state was not done with intent to abide by the goal of the UN General Assembly, to provide a state for two peoples in the land of Palestine, but rather to use it as a means to gain eventual control of all the land and cleanse that land of its indigenous people to whatever extent possible. Put bluntly, as the chapters in Macmillan’s new book, The Plight of the Palestinians attests (to be released in June), the current government in Israel continues the practices of past Israeli governments: cleanse the land of its rightful inhabitants to make that land part of the Jewish state. This is what is termed in numerous chapters in this volume, “slow motion genocide.”

Jump Starting the State

Consider the events of April 9-11, 1948, the eradication of the citizens of the town of Deir Yassin, a month before the Agency declared the existence of the Israeli state and the implementation of the UN Resolution to partition. This massacre became then and remains the signature example of the intent of the Zionist Consultancy and its agents to ethnically cleanse Palestine of its non-Jewish inhabitants. 2

During the six months between the adoption of UN Resolution 181 and in subsequent months, the new state of Israel launched a massive military incursion into territory designated by that same Resolution for the Palestinian people, creating in its wake “three quarters of a million Palestinian refugees,” the destruction of “hundreds of entire villages … not only depopulated but obliterated …and houses blown up or bulldozed.” Walid Khalidi’s massive study focuses on 418 villages, once the homes of Palestinians, 292 completely destroyed, 90 others “largely destroyed,” the remainder replaced by Jews called Israeli settlers. 3

Perceiving the Reality

The “despatch” sent by MacMichael to the Secretary of State resulted from an investigation into the funding practices and use of those funds by various Jewish organizations.

The memorandum illustrates … the fact that the Mandatory is faced potentially with as grave a danger in Palestine from Jewish violence as it has ever faced from Arab violence, a danger infinitely less easy to meet by the methods of repression which have been employed against Arabs. In the first place, the Jews … have the moral and political support … of considerable sections of public opinion both in the United Kingdom and the United States of America. … all the influence and political ability of the Zionists would be brought to bear to show that the Jews in Palestine were the victims of aggression, and that a substantial body of opinion abroad would be persuaded of the truth of the contention. 4

Quite obviously, MacMichael understands that the Mandatory has little power at home over the zealous actions of the Zionists as they manipulate public and political opinion even as they expand their terrorism against the British Mandate government in Palestine. This is an untenable position to be in, responsible for government control and security of those under its authority, i.e. Palestinians as well as Jews, knowing that the Jews are set on driving the British out of Palestine, and knowing that the home government can offer little help.

To bolster his points, MacMichael offers the following:

… the Jews in Palestine are by no means untrained in the use of arms … large numbers have received training in the Palestine Police… or in His Majesty’s Forces. At the present time, in addition to approximately 10,000 Jews in His Majesty’s Forces, there are 5,800 in various units of the police force and 15,400 special policemen (31,000) … When to those men … are added the illicit ‘defence’ organizations of the Jews (Haganah alone had an estimated 60-70,000 men by 1945, see Mss, Med. S20 Appendix XXI), it will be evident that the Jewish people in arms would numerically and in calibre be a very formidable adversary. 5

This is in 1941before the full deployment of Jewish terrorism against the legitimate Palestine government got under way.

MacMichael and Catling found themselves missing one of Catling’s primary supports for the waging of “irregular warfare” drawn from his image of the 3-legged stool that required the support of the people, the commander and his army and the government, an image, no doubt, from his childhood in Suffolk where his family were butchers and farmers. But the situation only got worse as the end of WWII loomed. The Haganah carried out anti-British military operations, including the kidnapping, killing and booby trapping of soldiers’ bodies, conducted against the Mandate Government while the home government remained silent under the pall of Israeli Zionist propaganda. 6

But recording the acts of terrorism does not do justice to the conditions the Mandate government faced. MacMichael describes the reality of the forces aligned against the police in Palestine.

A second matter which deeply impressed me is the almost Nazi control exercised by the official Jewish organizations over the Jewish community, willy nilly, through the administration of funds from abroad, the issue of labor certificates in connection with the immigration quota…. The Royal Commission were, in my view, fundamentally at error in describing the Jewish community in Palestine as “intensely democratic”. … The Zionist organization, the whole social structure which it has created in Palestine, has the trappings but none of the essentials of democracy. The community is under the closed oligarchy of the Jewish official organizations which control Zionist policy and circumscribe the lives of the Jewish community in all directions…. The reality of power is in the Agency, with the Haganah, the illegal military organization, always in the background. 7

And so the authorities in Palestine, the legal authorities, have no power to enforce measures that would curtail terrorism against their own police. “The use of force cannot be contemplated at present as any such action would have to be on a very large scale.” MacMichael understands that he can get no help from the Jewish community, even from those who find themselves at odds with the Agency’s methods or morality. The consequences to the individual Jew for disobedience is horrendous as the second document seized from the Zionists in 1947 attests.

Between Two Worlds

Nothing makes more obvious the meaning of the “Zionist Juggernaut” than Catling’s TOP SECRET “Memorandum of the Criminal Investigation Department” of July 31, 1947.

The purpose of this memorandum is to furnish documentary evidence of the extent to which the supreme Jewish national institutions in Palestine and their principal officials have been parties to acts of sedition, violence, incitement and other offences against the laws of Palestine….The bulk of the memorandum concerns the war and post war years… the memorandum will therefore concern itself solely with an attempt to establish the links between the supreme Jewish bodies and illegal activity... 8

Catling’s memorandum begins with an understanding of the “intricate Jewish political, social and economic structure in Palestine.” A series of appendices chart these structures marking in passing that “…the Palestine Royal Commission Report of 1937 understood ‘The Agency is obviously not a ‘governing body’; it can only advise and cooperate in a certain wide field.’ But allied as it is with the Vaad Leumi, and commanding the allegiance of the great majority of Jews in Palestine, it unquestionably exercises, both in Jerusalem and in London, a considerable influence on the conduct of government” [emphasis mine]. Catling’s frustration with the actual control of the Jews over British policy in Palestine glares through this document. “This powerful and efficient organization amounts, in fact, to a government existing side by side with the Mandatory Government…” (2-3) [emphasis mine]. 9

What Catling doesn’t state in that sentence, but what he demonstrates in the memorandum, is that the Jewish Agency and its affiliated organizations are at war with the UN authority in Palestine, the British Mandate Palestine Government. The appendices include detailed information on the personnel in interlocking Jewish organizations and the function of each. The memorandum goes further. It notes that the activities of the Jewish Agency through its controlled organizations send emissaries and instructors abroad “to stir up Zionist sentiments among the Jewish communities and displaced persons, to bring pressure to bear upon the Palestine problem, to organize illegal immigration and engage in espionage.” As a result of its investigations, the Department itemizes six areas of subversive activities undertaken by the Jewish Agency against the British Mandate Government:

1. Maintenance of a secret army and espionage system;
2. Smuggling, theft and manufacture of arms;
3. Illegal immigration;
4. Violence and civil disobedience;
5. Seditious and hostile propaganda;
6. Encroachment upon the civil rights of Jewish citizens. 10

In short, the Zionist controlled Jewish Agency, the Yishuv, actively undermined the legal authority in Palestine even as it operated to undermine support for that government in Britain, placing UK forces in harms way as they attempted to fulfill their authorized responsibilities in Palestine. It also demonstrates the determination of the Agency’s leadership in undermining the very nation that gave it a means of establishing a “homeland” in Palestine through the Balfour Declaration. Needless to say, Catling and his CID forces recognized the impossible position this defiance placed them in and understood the deception and violent means used by the Zionists to ensure that their will and theirs alone would be fulfilled at any cost.

However, the real power behind their efforts, what effectively held together the multiple strands of the web, was the use of extortion on all the Jewish people in Palestine, “…the extortion of money for unauthorized funds and self imposed taxes to further the illicit political ends of the national institutions” (42). Catling’s Memorandum provides evidence of how effective this consolidation of the web’s network operated including the systematic compilation of all wage earners, measures to be adopted in event of refusal to pay, publishing of names of those who failed to contribute, deductions from salary, sanctions on businesses, compulsory assessment, withholding of immigrants certificates, and Jewish Agency officials assessments.

There follows the measures to be taken against shirkers including actions to be taken against anyone aiding a shirker. There is no need to go into the details of these imposed actions; the consequences amount to total ostracism of an individual from his/her community to kidnapping and disappearance.

For those entering the military forces of the Jewish Agency, the Hagana, there is the Hagana Oath (XVI A 157).

I hereby declare that of my own free will and in free recognition I enter the Jewish defence organization of the Land of Israel, (Irgun Haganana Haivri Be’Eretz Israel).

I hearby swear to remain loyal all the days of my life to the defense organization, its laws and its tasks as defined in its basic regulations by the High Command.

I hearby swear to remain at the disposal of the defense organization all my life, to accept its discipline unconditionally and without limit, and at its call to enlist for active service at any time and in any place, to obey all its orders and to fulfill all its instructions.

I hearby swear to devote all my strength, and even to sacrifice my life, to defense and battle for my people and my Homeland, for the freedom of Israel and for the redemption of Zion. 11

In one sense, these two methodologies of control, one imposed by fear, the second by moral obligation, make comprehensible the complete control the Zionists were able to achieve over a protracted period of time toward their distant goals. The fear imposed by extortion rests on its use in providing access to jobs, the protection offered by the “gangs” and Haganah forces, and the enforcement of the rules and regulations as itemized above.

The Haganah Oath goes deeper than fear. In effect, it declares that an individual has turned his/her conscience over to the High Command thus accepting what is right and what is wrong as determined by that authority regardless of local, state or international law, indeed, regardless of the morals, values and traditions of Judaism. This commitment is forever, to death. It is bolstered by a document issued to the Commander and Troops of the Haganah labeled “Security Instructions” that notes at the outset, “Remember, you are a member of an illegal military organization according to the Laws of the government, its existence, activity and membership of it is forbidden” The remainder of the document obligates the recruit to unconditional obedience, absolute silence, and the pragmatic and utilitarian virtues of deceit and lying. 12

Selling the Soul

From the moment an individual takes the oath, they are committed to a life of secrecy and hence of disloyalty and betrayal to those they are most intimate with in their day to day life. Neither their actions nor their true identity is discernible to those with whom they interact regularly. This is a life that encapsulates the necessity of lies, deceit, coercion, extortion, and obedience to a group that dictates the actions one must pursue; freedom no longer exists, self-direction no longer exists, loyalty to others no longer exists, indeed, friendship with others is compromised or impossible, one becomes the subject of that group, a veritable slave to their desires and wills. The mindset that promotes such control allows for spying, for deception of friends, for ostracism in one’s own community for thinking differently, for imprisonment without due process, for torture, even for extrajudicial executions. It is a total commitment to a cause that supersedes all others determined and dictated by an oligarchy in silence and subject to no legitimate institution and to no one.
Notes

1- Catling, Sir Richard C. Personal Classified “Top Secret” files. Rhodes House Library Archives. #145. Mss. Medit. S 20 (1, 2, 3, 4, 5) Appendices circa 475 pages of seized documents. Oxford: Bodleian Libraries.
2- Morris, Benny. (1999). Righteous Victims: A History of the Zionist-Arab Conflict, 1881-2001. Knopf. 208.
3- Khalidi, Walid. (1992). All That Remains. Institute for Palestinian Studies: Washington, D.C. xv.
4- MacMichael, Harold. (1947). “Memorandum on the Participation of the Jewish National Institutions in Palestine in Acts of Lawlessness and Violence” The Palestine Police, Jerusalem, 7-31-1947 in Catling file.
5- MacMichael. “dispatch.” 1.
6- Ibid., “Despatch.” 2.
7- Ibid., “Despatch.” 2.
8- Catling. “Memorandum.” 1-2.
9- Ibid., “Memorandum.” 2-3.
10- Ibid. “Memorandum.” 5.
11- Ibid., Appendix, XVIA, 157.
12- Ibid., Appendix, XXVIII, 219.

 

Abdessalam Diab (153)
Thursday May 17, 2012, 2:39 am
Talking about the current situation in Israel,Uri Avnery former kanneset member and founder of Gush Shalom wrote "A state without democracy, without equality, condemned by itself to an endless war, dominated by religious fanatics, with the gap between the abject poor and a handful of immensely rich growing from year to year – such a state will look less and less attractive to bright young people, who can easily find a better life elsewhere, while retaining their Jewish identity.

That, too, is a kind of national suicide.

I AM not, by nature, a prophet of doom. Quite the contrary.

We can easily avert all these dangers. But first of all we must recognize them and see where they are leading us.

I believe that the people of Israel – the Israeli nation – have the will to survive. But in order to survive, they must wake up from their apathetic stupor and change course – turning towards peace based on the two-state solution, separating the state from religion and building a new social order.

In the Jewish religion, suicide is a sin. It would be ironic if future historians were to conclude that the “Jewish State” committed suicide."
 

Phyllis Baxter (39)
Thursday May 17, 2012, 3:51 am
Happy Birthday Israel- all the best for the future.
 

Bernard Cronyn (31)
Thursday May 17, 2012, 4:28 am
Vy ven ve mention Chewz we hear ze zound of jackboots marching from the SS brigade of Abdessalam Diab, Charles Ho, Mary Peepee, LLOYD H. und the great wolf a. from the land of the founder of the 3rd Reich.
 

Pat A. (117)
Thursday May 17, 2012, 6:42 am
Thanks for this Abdessalam - a very interesting article. I too, like you, long for peace in the Middle East, and human rights and respect for each person. Thanks again.
 

Tommy S. (11)
Thursday May 17, 2012, 6:50 am
Happy Birthday Israel
No such thing as palestinians
Hamas interior minister, Fathi Hamad: Half of Palestinians came from Egypt and the other half from Saudi Arabia.
http://bit.ly/JRQGFS

and from facts and logic we hear

A Homeland for the Palestinians?

The need and justification of a “Palestinian homeland” has been repeated so often and so insistently that people all over the world have come to accept it as an inevitability. That “homeland,” it is generally agreed, would consist of the Gaza Strip and most of Judea/Samaria, generally referred to as the “West Bank.” Even many good people in the U.S. and even our president, a well-intentioned man, advocate a “homeland,” a Palestinian state, at the end of the so-called “road map.”?

What are the facts?
An unwarranted request. There is no such thing as a “Palestinian people.” That is a concept that, by the drumbeat of incessant propaganda, has been foisted on the world. The so-called Palestinians are the same Arabs that live in Syria, Jordan and Lebanon. Never at any time in history did the “Palestinians” have a homeland, nor did they ever demand one.

In 1947, the United Nations General Assembly voted to set up both a Jewish and an Arab state within the borders of the territories. The Arabs were allotted three contiguous areas and the enclave of the city of Jaffa. The Jews were allotted three discontiguous areas. Jerusalem was to be an international city. In order to get their homeland, the Jews reluctantly accepted the unfavorable deal. The Arabs rejected it out of hand and instead invaded the nascent Jewish state with the armies of six nations. The ragtag Jewish forces decisively defeated the aggressors and stayed in control of most of the area. Egypt retained control of the Gaza Strip, and Jordan occupied Judea/Samaria (the “West Bank”). Had the Arabs accepted the United Nations partition plan, they would have had their “Palestinian homeland” for almost 60 years. They spurned the opportunity when it was available to them.

For nineteen years, until the Six-Day War, the territories involved were under the control of Jordan and Egypt. Never during those years was there ever a demand for a “Palestinian homeland.” Only after the Six-Day War in 1967, when the territories reverted to Israeli control, did the insistent clamor for a “Palestinian homeland” arise.

Although the Israelis would probably be glad to get rid of those bothersome and rebellious people, it is regrettably not that simple. The declared goal of the Arabs, a goal never rescinded, is the destruction of Israel. Were they granted an independent state, it would geographically and strategically dominate all of Israel. Within a very short time, this “Palestinian homeland” would be bristling with the most advanced weaponry, in all likelihood including weapons of mass destruction. Arab armies would be invited to participate in what they would hope to be the final onslaught against Israel and against the hated Jews.


A view I concur with
 

Alexander Werner (53)
Thursday May 17, 2012, 7:04 am
Abdessalam, Zionist dreams ALREADY came true.

That's the Islamists dream about Caliphate did not materialize yet. It's you who will remain disappointed. And soon starving.
 

Charles O. (209)
Thursday May 17, 2012, 7:21 am
Rob and Jay B. write:

> You here who join with these propagandists for this cult of hate and death are no better than they are.

But it is Israel that does 95% of the killing in Palestine. Independent studies show that it is Israel that initiates most of the cycles of violence. And it is Israel that starts the wars. So Rob and Jay B. are merely projecting Israel's own crimes onto its victims.

War-making is the real death cult. The war-making power puts his faith in death and destruction.

. .

Rob and Jay B. write:

> Where Islam rules, freedom dies.

But it is Israel that keeps millions of people under perpetual occupation and bombardment. It is Israel that imprisons children and legitimizes torture. So Rob and Jay B. are once again projecting the crimes of the fascist regime in Israel onto the victims of that regime.

That's part of the reason why nothing changes: We are blaming the innocent and allowing the guilty to operate with impunity. Attacking and demonizing the innocent achieves nothing: We can't squeeze blood from a stone. However much we may idolize "The Jews", we will eventually be forced to face reality and return to judging people on the basis of their actual behavior.

Think of the war against Iraq. We accused Iraqis of having "WMDs", and we butchered the country on that basis, only to find out that our rulers were fed bad intelligence. The Israel-firsters who fed us the bad intelligence and promoted the holocaust in Iraq have not been held accountable. So we wasted 4,500 American lives and a million Iraqi lives and several trillion dollars, and we have nothing to show for it. This is what happens when we attack the innocent and allow the guilty to lead us into war.

. .

Rob and Jay B. write:

> Christians, non-Sunnis and gays are being persecuted brutally and driven out.

But in a recent "60 Minutes" report the Christians say that they are being driven out by Israel and by the hardships of the Occupation, not by their Muslim compatriots. Israel wants nothing more than to see Muslims and Christians slaughtering each other, but that has not happened in Palestine.

. .

Rob and Jay B. write:

> The Jews at only just over 14mn people have produced 185 Nobel Prize winners, mostly for science, medicine and math.

"The Jews" are not all alike, Rob and Jay B.. We are dealing with human beings here, not with a monolithic Master Race. Some of those individuals are brilliant in the sciences; others are brilliant in the art of oppression and war-making. When you refuse to see Jews as individuals, and judge people on the basis of their alleged genes, you are helping the political thugs, because you are putting them on the same level as the scientists.

The brilliance of the culture in science makes it all the more tragic that Jews worldwide are saddled with a fascist regime in Israel that has failed to move even an inch closer to acceptance of the native people in the last 64 years.
 

Vlasta M. (7)
Thursday May 17, 2012, 8:16 am
20% of Israelis are non-Jews...they are either Arab Muslims or Christians or Bahai'is or Buddists...and even a few Hindus....Why do you think that the Supreme Council of Baha'is (a reli9gion that started in Iran) had its headquarters in Haifa, Israel? Because Israel respects human rights of ALL individuals.

Most of Israeli Arabs would not dream living in ANY Arab country since most of those countries are corrupt and their llegal system does not respect human rights. Sharia, which is based on Koran and Hadith, does not respect human righgts and one can get beheaded for "witchcraft", for being gay, for "adultery" and particularly "blasphemy", i.e. saying anything negative about Prophet Muheme3d hwo was a pedophile polygamist (married Aisha, one of his 12 wives, when she was 6 and he was 51) and a murderer, responsible for gruesome murder (by beheading)( of 900 Jews from Medina because they did not recognize them as THEIR prophet. Most Arab countries had forced their Jews to flee the countries where they lived even before there were any Muslims and leave their property and lands there. 50% of the Jewish population of Israel (over 40% of total population) are those Jews and their descendents in Arab countries. The Arabs who now claim to be Palestinians should be resettled in those properties left by the Jews and stop the charade and dysfunctional lives on the UN dole.

The Muslims journalists who write anything negative about ANY of the Muslim governments get arrested and jailed in Arab countries, white those same journalists can bitch about Israel and Jews in Israel without punishment. Israel does not have death penalty and that is why many Arab murderers and terrorists had been exchanged for just one Israeli soldier. Arabs are using this "weakness' of Israel to kidnap Jews in order to free their murderers. In 1919, King Feisal wrote a long letter inviting Jews in because he understood that Jews are pioneers in business and science and c an make Arab countries bloom, which had been proven by Israel, which is a start-up nation. If it were not for a delusional Jew hatred that Arab teach their children, the entire Middle East could be turned into Garden of Eden again, because of the Jewish ingenuity and scholarship and many young jobless Arabs who could work on improving their countries rather then focusing their energy on destruction of what Jews had built...
 

Charles O. (209)
Thursday May 17, 2012, 8:39 am
Stephen B. writes:

> It looks to me, from the reports, like the letter never reached Truman. It stopped with Smith in the mail-room, and Smith was also the original source on the story. Unless you can find some serious police-records, I am going to have to conclude that he made it up because unless that was a ridiculous envelope, it couldn't have been that powerful.

. .

However, the article suggests that the Zionists sent several envelopes to Truman. One was tested by the police and did explode.

For more information on this and other Zionist letter-bomb assassination attempts, see Smith Hempstone, "Zionists Perfected Letter Bomb Device", 12 Dec 1972. Hempstone, a nationally syndicated columnist in the U.S. at the time, addresses Margaret Truman's claim, then offers a brief history of the Zionist use of letter bombs.

. .

> The Israelis did not invent the letter-bomb. That dubious distinction belongs to a Swede named Martin Eckenberg who killed himself in a London prison in 1910. But Zionist terrorists perfected the death-by-mail device ... and tried unsuccessfully to assassinate at least eight prominent British politicians and military figures at about the same time [Margaret Truman] says they went after Truman. .... On Sep. 3, 1947, a parcel bomb addressed to a brigadier engaged in intelligence work at the War Office exploded in a London post office, injuring two men. Two days later, eight letter-bombs mailed in Italy were detected by British counter-intelligence. ....

> With the establishment of the state of Israel in November of 1947, the flow of letter-bombs to Britain slowed but did not stop. The last one sent until this year was addressed to Gen. Sir Evelyn Barker, the former commanding officer of the British forces in Palestine. It arrived and was disarmed in the summer of 1948.

> The Israelis first used letter-bombs in their continuing war against the Arabs in 1963. ....

> Israeli letter-bombs, according to Arab sources, were used shortly before the 1967 Six-Day War to liquidate two key Egyptian intelligence officers: Maj. Mustapha Hapaz, chief of intelligence in the Gaza strip, and COl. Salah Eddin Mustafa, military attache in Amman, Jordan.

-- Smith Hempstone, "Zionists Perfected Letter Bomb Device", 12 Dec 1972.

. .

The Zionists also sent letter-bombs to Germany. According to the following report, Menachim Begin sent one such bomb to Konrad Adenauer:

> According to the Frankfurt Allgemeine Zeitung (FAZ), which cited German journalist Henning Sietz in the matter, Begin organized and funded a letter bomb sent to Adenauer, in an attempt to scupper Holocaust reparation agreements that were being negotiated between Germany and Israel at the time.

> Sietz wrote a book in 2003 on the conspiracy-like politics behind the event titled "Assassination Attempt on Adenauer: The Secret History of a Political Attack." The book narrowed down the identities of the suspected assassins but did not prove them. Now, Sietz cites new material -- a book published in a limited edition by Eliezer Sudit, who was an Israeli nationalist activist at the time and one of the co-perpetrators of the attack.

> Sudit's book, a memoir of his days in the armed underground Zionist movement Irgun, names Begin as the creative and financial force behind the assassination plot. A package bomb addressed to Adenauer exploded in the basement of the Munich police headquarters, killing a postal employee. Around the same time, letter bombs exploded at the building near The Hague where Israeli and German representatives were discussing postwar reparation accords.

-- "Report Says [Menachim] Begin Was Behind Adenauer Letter Bomb

. .

Palestinians were also targeted, of course:

> What were the Israelis doing before Munich? Before Munich -- not after-Israelis placed a bomb under the car seat of Palestinian writer/artist, Ghassan Kanafani and killed him and killed his 14-year-old niece. The teenage girl was not plotting the Munich attack when she was murdered by the Israelis; nor was her uncle. Kanafani wrote for Al-Hurriyyah magazine.

> Israel, also before Munich, sent a letter bomb to Bassam Abu Sharif, a writer and journalist, and left him with life-long scars and bodily damage, and they also sent a letter bomb to Anis Sayigh, a scholar and researcher, who was not a member of any group. But Sayigh was a really diligent researcher, and Israel did not appreciate it.

-- "'Munich': The Humanization of Israeli killers, and the Dehumanization of Palestinian civilians"

See also

* Letter and Parcel-Post Bombs

* "WAPO Reporter Extolls War Criminals, Vilifies Palestinian Poet", 30 Aug 2006
 

Charles O. (209)
Thursday May 17, 2012, 9:14 am
Stephen B. writes:

> If you plan to insist that no attacks occurred within Partition-Israel, how do you explain the attack on Tirat Tzvi, on the convoy to Yehiam, the closure of the Negev, and all the attacks on Jewish communities in the region supposedly under U.N.-protection?

> The attacks I listed were in 1948, after the Arab armies deployed.

. .

Wikipedia disagrees with you. Here is something that has gotten past wikipedia's Zionist censors:

> On February 20, 1948, before the neighboring Arab nations officially joined the 1948 Arab-Israeli War, a battalion of the Arab Liberation Army led by Muhammed Safa attacked Tirat Zvi. The Arabs were repelled, after 60 of the attackers were killed. One kibbutz member Naftali Fridlander Z"L was killed in the fighting.

-- Tirat Zvi, *wikipedia*

> Ben Ami Pachter (born 1919) planned to lead a convoy on 21 March 1948, from Kiryat Haim Haifa because supplies were short and the defenders of Kibbutz Yehiam were running out of ammunition. The 1947 United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine put Yehiam within the limits of the Arab state rather than the Jewish State. The original date had to be postponed as word reached that many enemy troops were deployed along the route. On 27 March 1948, seven trucks, loaded with supplies and personnel, set off.

-- Yehiam convoy, *wikipedia*

The Arab forces joined the conflict on 15 May 1948. According to Rubenberg, all of the military engagements occurred outside of Israel and inside of the 44% of Palestine that the U.N. neglected to steal. That implies that Israeli forces were operating outside of their partition -- i.e., that they were the invaders.

After the war, history was rewritten to depict Israel as the victim. But it is the Palestinians who fled for their lives, to refugee camps in Lebanon, Jordan and Gaza. That tells us who was actually the victim in this war.
 

Charles O. (209)
Thursday May 17, 2012, 9:36 am
> Consider the events of April 9-11, 1948, the eradication of the citizens of the town of Deir Yassin, a month before the Agency declared the existence of the Israeli state and the implementation of the UN Resolution to partition. This massacre became then and remains the signature example of the intent of the Zionist Consultancy and its agents to ethnically cleanse Palestine of its non-Jewish inhabitants. 2

> During the six months between the adoption of UN Resolution 181 and in subsequent months, the new state of Israel launched a massive military incursion into territory designated by that same Resolution for the Palestinian people, creating in its wake “three quarters of a million Palestinian refugees,” the destruction of “hundreds of entire villages … not only depopulated but obliterated …and houses blown up or bulldozed.” Walid Khalidi’s massive study focuses on 418 villages, once the homes of Palestinians, 292 completely destroyed, 90 others “largely destroyed,” the remainder replaced by Jews called Israeli settlers. 3

-- William A. Cook, "The Birth of Israel // A Tale of Lies, Deceit, and Terrorism", *ICH*, 12 May 2010

. .

Thanks for linking us to this article, Abdessalam D.. It supports what I wrote to Stephen B. -- that the Zionists themselves were the invaders. They covered their tracks by posing as Poor Helpless Victims -- but it is not the Zionists who were forced to flee and spend the rest of their lives in refugee camps!

. .

The Haganah Oath at the end of the article is more evidence that Zionism is a fascist death cult.

> From the moment an individual takes the oath, they are committed to a life of secrecy and hence of disloyalty and betrayal to those they are most intimate with in their day to day life. Neither their actions nor their true identity is discernible to those with whom they interact regularly. This is a life that encapsulates the necessity of lies, deceit, coercion, extortion, and obedience to a group that dictates the actions one must pursue; freedom no longer exists, self-direction no longer exists, loyalty to others no longer exists, indeed, friendship with others is compromised or impossible, one becomes the subject of that group, a veritable slave to their desires and wills. The mindset that promotes such control allows for spying, for deception of friends, for ostracism in one’s own community for thinking differently, for imprisonment without due process, for torture, even for extrajudicial executions. It is a total commitment to a cause that supersedes all others determined and dictated by an oligarchy in silence and subject to no legitimate institution and to no one.

-- William A. Cook, "The Birth of Israel // A Tale of Lies, Deceit, and Terrorism", *ICH*, 12 May 2010
 

Stephen Brian (23)
Thursday May 17, 2012, 10:38 am
Hi Abdessalam,

No, you asked whether it makes a difference to say the attack was committed by one group or another. Yes, of course bullets don't care who pulled the trigger. However, in terms of responses to crimes, it absolutely does matter which group committed them for the reason I gave. Two parties were guilty and one was innocent, and yet you relentlessly try to pin the blame on the successors of the one that was not only innocent, but actually stopped the guilty parties. Do you not see the problem with your response and why it is about as wrong as possible?

Cook starts by ignoring how Palestinians ended up losing their homes and implying that the move was just arbitrary crime. Tell me, if you ran a government and there was a massive housing-shortage due to infrastructure-destruction from war, would abandoned houses go to people whom you could trust to be loyal citizens, or to the people whom you had just finished fighting, and with whom there was never a formal peace-agreement? The surprising part is that any Palestinians kept their homes: The homes taken were only those of people who had left voluntarily, voting with their feet against the existence of Israel. This false assumption regarding motivation is central to his conclusion in "The View from Inside the Mandate". The failure to distinguish between different groups underlies the first paragraph of his next section, and utter failure to consider any strategic issues of war, like strategic depth and expectation of another war even in the case of victory, underlies the next. Modern conclusions drawn from his next section, regarding Jewish anti-British violence, again fail to consider the differences between the groups: Haganah did not attack British targets (except those mixed among Jordanian forces in 1948). the claim by some that Haganah was responsible for the crimes listed may have something to do with the fact that it was the primary Jewish militias, and Irgun was a splinter-group that split off from it.

Cook's next failure is actually a very common one on Care2: The armed forces ALWAYS hold power, and exercise it during conflicts, especially existential ones. They hold power because, as Mao put it, power flows from the barrel of a gun. This says absolutely nothing about whether the society is democratic in nature. What does say something is whether, outside of conflicts, the armed forces continue to exercise that power independently, or if they submit to the will of an elected government. This also underlies his comment about how there was effectively a second government in the region: Yes, where there are multiple independent armed forces, there are multiple governments, especially if the loyalty of the masses is divided between them.

His next paragraph again revolves around a failure to distinguish between the different groups. The list of crimes and surrounding commentary again fail to do that. Haganah did smuggle in arms and organize a force because it expected armed conflict the second the British left, and was already engaged in armed conflict, providing defence to Jewish populations and retaliating against Palestinian ones from which attacks originated. As for claims upon wages, should an organization which is expected to become a governing body, and in the middle of transitioning into that not set up a system of taxation? This is part of what is called "nation-building". The oath as described is pretty standard for joining any armed force: The part about "turning one's conscience" is about swearing to follow orders. I understand that Arab soldiers tend to have a problem with that so you might not recognize the error, but Cook should have known about Western culture. The secrecy was obviously necessary, and I don't think it was a betrayal: The British knew about Haganah, but as long as they didn't know too much, they could turn a blind eye and avoid a direct conflict that neither side wanted while still claiming to hold sovereignty over the region. Breaking that secrecy too badly would have led to a direct confrontation and gotten a lot of good people killed. Somehow, I don't see avoiding getting people killed as a form of disloyalty to them. Maybe Cook has a different view.

Given your failure to distinguish between the groups earlier, I understand why you might trust this drivel despite every single conclusion which it draws being totally wrong. I hope from now one you will learn better than to trust "Information Clearing House", in which I have never seen an accurate conclusion drawn.
 

Stephen Brian (23)
Thursday May 17, 2012, 10:48 am
Hi Charles :)

Here's a more complete timeline than there is on Wiki:
http://www.zionism-israel.com/his/Israel_war_independence_1948_timeline.htm
January 9, 1948: Arab Liberation army Yarmuk battalion crosses into Palestine, attacks Dan and Kfar Szold; attack repulsed with the help of the British.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_Liberation_Army
No, it was not the formal armed forces of any one country. It was, however, set up by the Arab League and its commanders consisted of two Iraqi generals, and one colonel each from Lebanon, Syria, and Jordan (Trans-Jordan at the time). That was an armed for of Arab states.

You might want to reread the oath and check my response to Abdessalam.
 

Abdessalam Diab (153)
Thursday May 17, 2012, 12:47 pm
Stephen
It seems that agin you failed to understand my comment.A crime has been committed by a Zionist terrorist gang.You confirm this fact.For me it doesn't make any difference which gang committed that crime. It is the Zionist fascist terrorist movement that commited it and this is the main feature of that movement till this second.The meek will inherit the land.

As for ICH preview of William A.Cook's book "The Birth of Israel , A Tale of Lies, Deceit, and Terrorism",The man had acsess to classified documents from the Jewish Agency and its affiliated organizations seized by the British Mandate Police, materials that confirm that the Zionist controlled Jewish community intended to remove the Arab inhabitants of Palestine from their land and make the whole of Mandate Palestine a Jewish State.If you have a point regarding what he said,you may contact him and let me know the output of your argument with him.
 

Abdessalam Diab (153)
Thursday May 17, 2012, 1:10 pm
Tommy
Palestinians are all people who lived in Palestine in peace and harmoney before the British send what has been known as Balfour declaration promising to ensure a home for Jews in Palestine confirming that this shouldn't effect neither the rights of the the existing people in Palestine nor the Jews whereever they live at that time.The then existing Palestinians included Arab Muslims , Christians and a Jewish minority.
If you are denying the existance of Palestinians in Palestine ( from the mediterranean in the west to river Jordan in the east,let me remind you with few words said by one of the founding fathers of the Zionist entity,namely Moshe Dian who said " “Jewish villages were built in the place of Arab villages. You do not even know the names of these Arab villages, and I do not blame you because Geography books no longer exist, not only do the books not exist, the Arab villages are not there either … There is not one single place built in this country that did not have a former Arab population.”
Moshe Dayan, Address to the Technion, Haifa, as quoted in Haaretz, 4-4-1969)
 

Stephen Brian (23)
Thursday May 17, 2012, 1:29 pm
Hi Abdessalam,

If I contacted all of the authors of such erroneous and probably outright dishonest works, that would be a full-time job. Despite appearances, I have a life. It doesn't matter how many classified documents the guy claims to have obtained. He made clear and identifiable errors which propagated into his conclusions in a clear and identifiable way. The article could have been an old work by Dayan or Ben-Gurion with all of the documents, but if there are errors, then there are errors. It doesn't matter who the author is or what he had.

You seem to have totally failed to grasp my point: Some groups committed crimes, but the one that survived did not. the Zionist movement as a whole was not responsible for the acts of splinter-groups which were rejected specifically for their excessive aggression, and the remaining establishment which destroyed them is certainly not culpable for crimes which it forced to end. The behaviours to which you objected were never a part of the majority of the movement, and certainly are not now.

How would you feel if I blamed all Muslims for the acts of a few? What if I blamed Egyptians for Ghaddafi's oppression of Libyans because "For me it doesn't make any difference which gang committed that crime." I mean, both groups are "fascist terrorist" Arabs after all. How's al Qaeda doing these days? I mean they're just more Arabs and "it doesn't make any difference which gang committed that crime", right? I'm sure you and those who think like you, Gert Wilders and Ayaan Hirsi Ali, would make great friends.
 

Past Member (0)
Thursday May 17, 2012, 1:48 pm
This is a wonderful thread with doughty truth seekers showing the evil of the Zionist Entity. I hope I shall be welcomed to the party with this wonderful news.

http://electronicintifada.net/blogs/ali-abunimah/israels-popularity-sinks-even-lower-2012-new-bbc-global-survey-confirms

Israel’s popularity sinks even lower in 2012, new BBC global survey confirms
Ali Abunimah

May 16, 2012

Israel, already one of the world’s most negatively viewed countries, according to an annual BBC survey, has seen its reputation sink even lower in 2012.

The result will come as a blow to Israeli officials and organizations who have been attempting to improve the country’s image through intensive hasbara – propaganda – campaigns.

The 2012 Country Ratings Poll, conducted by GlobeScan/PIPA for the BBC among 24,090 people around the world, and published on 10 May, "asks respondents to rate whether the influence of each of 16 countries and the EU is 'mostly positive’ or 'mostly negative.’"

The press release accompanying the full report notes briefly that "The most negatively rated countries were, as in previous years, Iran (55% negative), Pakistan (51% negative), and Israel and North Korea (both 50% negative)."
Israel: a negative influence

The detailed report elaborates:

Evaluations of Israel’s influence in the world—already largely unfavourable in 2011 — have worsened in 2012. On average, in the 22 tracking countries surveyed both in 2011 and 2012, 50 per cent of respondents have negative views of Israel’s influence in the world, an increase of three points from 2011. The proportion of respondents giving Israel a favourable rating remains stable, at 21 per cent. Out of 22 countries polled in 2011, 17 lean negative, three lean positive, and two are divided.

Not surprisingly, it was only in the US where Israel’s image improved among "Western country" publics:

Fifty per cent of Americans have a favourable view of Israel in 2012, and this proportion has increased by seven points. At the same time, the proportion of negative ratings has gone down six points to 35 per cent and, as a result, the US has gone from being divided in 2011 to leaning positive in 2012. These are the most positive views on Israel’s influence expressed in the US since tracking began in 2005.

Apart from the US, only in Nigeria and Kenya did views of Israel lean positive.
Israel loses ground among traditional allies and emerging powers

Israel’s position deteriorated in the EU as well as in emerging powers:

In the EU countries surveyed, views of Israeli influence have hardened in Spain (74% negative ratings, up 8 points) and in France (65%, up 9 points) — while positive ratings remain low and steady. Negative ratings from the Germans and the British remain very high and stable (69% and 68%, respectively). In other Anglo-Saxon countries, views have worsened in Australia (65% negative ratings, up 7 points) and in Canada (59%, up 7 points).

What’s remarkable – especially about Canada and Australia – is how out of step public perceptions are with official government policy, which in both countries has become ever more pro-Israel in recent years.

Significantly views of Israel deteriorated sharply too in South Korea, whose government has been traditionally close to Israel:

This hardening of opinion towards Israel’s influence in the world is strongly apparent in South Korea, where negative views have risen (69%, up 15 points) while positive views have decreased by 11 points (to 20%).

BRICs view Israel negatively

And the news is no better for Israel among the so-called BRICs:

Negative attitudes have also increased among the Chinese, the Indians, and the Russians. In China, a 9-point drop in positive ratings (to 23%) makes the overall balance of views even more negative (23% positive vs 45% negative). In India, negative perceptions have gone up 11 points (to 29%), and overall opinion has shifted from being divided in 2011 (21% vs 18%) to leaning negative in 2012 (17% vs 29%). In Russia, public opinion has shifted from leaning positive in 2011 to being divided in 2012 (25% positive vs 26% negative).

As for the Latin American power house, the report notes, "Brazilians continue to be strongly unfavourable to Israel’s influence, with a stable majority of 58 per cent who rate it negatively," a picture repeated in other countries of South America.
Israel is most unpopular in Egypt

The past year of political change in Israel has also done little for Israel’s image:

Among the Muslim countries surveyed, perceptions of Israel have deteriorated in Egypt (85% negative ratings, up 7 points and the highest negative percentage in the survey), and remained largely negative but stable in Pakistan (9% positive vs 50% negative) and in Indonesia (8% vs 61%).

Israel’s behavior shapes views

Can all this be put down to "anti-Semitism" as Israel’s propagandists like to insist? Not according to the BBC survey. The factors shaping views of Israel are largely political, according to the report’s analysis:

For those who held negative views of Israel influence in the world, the foreign policy of the Israeli State is by some distance the main reason explaining their negative rating (45%). The way Israel treats its own people stands out as the second most important reason (27%). Of those holding positive views, Jewish traditions and culture are cited by 29 per cent globally, closely followed by foreign policy (26%).
 

Past Member (0)
Thursday May 17, 2012, 1:59 pm
What a wonderful democracy the Zionist Entity is. Not:

http://www.jpost.com/DiplomacyAndPolitics/Article.aspx?id=270221

Knesset rejects marriage equality bill
By LAHAV HARKOV
05/16/2012 17:28
"Freedom of Choice in Marriage" bill fails; Meretz calls rabbinate and halacha extremist, dark, anachronistic, chauvinist.
Gay marriage Photo: REUTERS

The Knesset voted down a bill on Wednesday that would allow same-sex and interfaith couples to wed.

The legislation, proposed by MK Nitzan Horowitz (Meretz), would open the option of civil marriages for those who may not be wed according to Halacha (Jewish law), as well as those who choose not to be married by the Chief Rabbinate. It was rejected, with 39 MKs opposed and 11 in favor.
Related:

Bill forbidding minors to marry passes hurdle

Horowitz said there are tens of thousands of homosexual couples in Israel, and his law would help them and others who cannot exercise the basic right to be married and build a family.

“There is an extremist, dark institution deciding who may or may not get married,” he said. “The public is sick of the rabbinate.”

According to Horowitz, coalition parties betrayed their secular voters by rejecting the bill, choosing to pander to haredi (ultra-Orthodox) parties, instead.

“Now, more than ever, it is clear to the public in Israel who is for a free society and who is for haredim,” he added.

After Horowitz presented his bill, Justice Minister Yaakov Neeman gave a succinct rebuttal: “You did not bring your bill to the Ministerial Committee for Legislation, so the government’s official stance is to oppose it. Thank you.”

Meretz leader Zehava Gal-On said she is not surprised by Neeman’s opposition, because he has said he is committed to building a halachic state.

“The Knesset is adopting religious law that is anachronistic, chauvinist, racist and discriminatory, which was written thousands of years ago,” Gal-On stated, calling for separation of religion and state.

The 11 MKs in favor of civil marriages were from Meretz, Labor and Hadash, as well as Kadima MK Nino Abesadze.
 

Charles O. (209)
Thursday May 17, 2012, 2:21 pm
Stephen B. writes:

> However, in terms of responses to crimes, it absolutely does matter which group committed them for the reason I gave. Two parties were guilty and one was innocent, and yet you relentlessly try to pin the blame on the successors of the one that was not only innocent, but actually stopped the guilty parties. Do you not see the problem with your response and why it is about as wrong as possible?

. .

But I fail to see how the Haganah was innocent. Here is Ben Gurion, the head of the Haganah:

> The present map of Palestine was drawn by the British mandate. The Jewish people have another map which our youth and adults should strive to fulfill -- From the Nile to the Euphrates.

-- David Ben Gurion, Israel's founder

Here's Ben Gurion in 1947:

> Responding to those who felt the partition plan provided insufficient land for the Jewish state, Zionist Labor leader and Israel's first prime minister, David Ben-Gurion, argued forcefully for the acceptance of the partition plan, noting that since the Arabs refused the U.N. proposals, there was no danger that the borders of the partition plan would actually become the borders of Israel. Ben Gurion commented: "There will be war and in the course of the war, the borders will be changed."

-- Cheryl A. Rubenberg, Israel And The American National Interest, p. 29

For years, Ben Gurion tolerated the Irgun and the Stern Gang with a wink and a nod. He tried to distance the Haganah from these terrorist groups only when it became expedient to do so. But as Israel became established, it returned to terror -- e.g., to the 18 Oct 1953 massacre perpetrated by Ariel Sharon's group at Qibya. The two main terrorist leaders, Shamir and Begin, then went on to become Israeli Prime Ministers. So the Haganah's disavowal of terror was not genuine.

War and terror is all that keeps the Israeli regime in power -- which explains why we frequently see that regime provoking terror, with its assassination program, for example. The Zionists are, in effect, operating a protection racket. If terror were to end, Jews might begin to doubt the need for Zionist "protection", and then, with the Palestinians, they would make common cause against the fascists.
 

Stephen Brian (23)
Thursday May 17, 2012, 4:13 pm
Hi Charles :)

A little context to Ben-Gurion's statement would go a long way towards understanding it: The primary Jewish concern about the partition-plan were that the territory allotted to them was not militarily defensible. There were two possibilities, like always, peace or war. In the case of peace (deemed to be highly unlikely at the time), that would not have been an issue. In the case of war, borders normally shift to approximate the final ceasefire-lines. The Jewish-held territory at the end of the war would, by definition, be a militarily defensible region. Ben-Gurion's statement was that Jews did not need to worry about the defensibility of the borders because whichever way things went, if it mattered then they would be defensible. There is nothing aggressive about this logic.

Last I checked, Ben Gurion despised Irgun and Lehi. Not only were they splinters off his organization, drawing off his support directly, but he considered their existence incompatible with that of Israel (rightfully, I think). Have you ever heard about his statement that there had to be one army for there to be one country? That was the primary reason he had them attacked, despite their being his allies in the middle of a war. He didn't turn his back on them because they became political liabilities with their war-crimes: For entirely separate reason, he never approved of their existence.

Begin was an interesting figure: He was the leader of Irgun, but then he became the first Israeli PM to sign a peace accord with an Arab state. Either his politics shifted incredibly in the meantime, or the political drivers behind Irgun ceased to exist. Either way, yes, Irgun's political faction was completely destroyed. Lehi's faction, being practically identical to Irgun, but more extreme, was certainly destroyed by the time Irgun's was.
 

Fred H. (31)
Thursday May 17, 2012, 5:22 pm
Happy Birthday, Israel!

And, Happy Anniversary, Nakba celebrants. It has been 64 years since you failed to destroy Israel. 64 years since you decided to be the only refugees who would rather kill other people than live your own lives in your own state.
 

Alexander Werner (53)
Thursday May 17, 2012, 7:09 pm
Send a Green Star to Stephen Brian

Sending a Green Star is a simple way to say "Thank you"
You cannot currently send a star to Stephen because you have done so within the last week.
 

Alexander Werner (53)
Thursday May 17, 2012, 7:12 pm
Abdessalam, you may do something to celebrate birth of Egypt on Jun 18 - it's already 59 years, and you could list some Egyptian achievements, that you guys did since 1953.


 

Alexander Werner (53)
Thursday May 17, 2012, 7:15 pm
John, how do the Arab countries address the issue of gay marriages and marrying interface couples? I think they kill infidel men having relations with Muslim women and kill gays straight?
 

Cal Mendelsohn (984)
Thursday May 17, 2012, 7:24 pm
LLoyd==you prove my point expressly. I don't care what you think, the point is to comment on the article, not on the person posting it. Especially since you choose not to post articles of your own. You don't have to like me Lloyd--I'n not here to amuse or entertain you with what I post and don't need your approval on any level either!!!
 

Charles O. (209)
Thursday May 17, 2012, 8:44 pm
Fred H. writes:

> And, Happy Anniversary, Nakba celebrants. It has been 64 years since you failed to destroy Israel. 64 years since you decided to be the only refugees who would rather kill other people than live your own lives in your own state.

. .

Thank you, Fred, for showing us just why much of the world regards Zionists as the lowest of the low and responds to them with revulsion.

When Jews were fleeing the Inquisition, Palestinians offered them refuge. As late as 1919, Palestinians were welcoming Jews as "blood brothers".

Hoiw did ZIonists repay this generosity? --

* By stabbing Palestinians in the back.
* By denying their very existence.
* By eradicating their villages and massacring the villagers.
* By burning them alive and bulldozing homes on top of the terrified residents.
* By assassinating their poets.
* By gunning down their children.
* By turning their land into a giant concentration camp.
* By uprooting their orchards and building expressways "for Jews only" through their fertile fields.
* By strangling their economy.
* By building a 24-foot-high concrete wall through the center of their towns.

And then, as if this were not enough, Zionists project their own evil onto their victims and mock their victims and tell us that the victims did all of this to themselves.

Thank you, Fred, for helping us to see the depravity of these sociopathic narcissists.

The physical damage Zionists have inflicted on the native people is horrifying, but the spiritual damage they have inflicted on themselves is even more chilling. When we look into their eyes, we are looking into a bottomless pit.
 

Charles O. (209)
Thursday May 17, 2012, 9:07 pm
Stephen B. writes:

> A little context to Ben-Gurion's statement would go a long way towards understanding it: The primary Jewish concern about the partition-plan were that the territory allotted to them was not militarily defensible.

. .

How about a little context to Ahmadinejad's statement that the tyranny in Israel would eventually end? Zionists show no interest in understanding THAT. Instead, they continue to recite the defective "wipe Israel off the map" translation and lust for Iranian blood.

Why should we make excuses for Ben Gurion and give him miles of slack, when Zionists do not give us even an inch of slack and seek nothing but our demise?

What Ben Gurion said is perfectly clear. He called for a "Greater Israel" that reaches "from the Nile to the Euphrates". What, I wonder, did he plan to do with all of the people already residing in this "Greater Israel"? How did he plan to dispose of them?

So you are arguing that Israel's "need for defensible borders" entitled it to seize all of that land and kill all of those people? What Zionists don't understand is that other people have rights to defensible borders TOO.

Zionists don't seem to realize that other people are human. They treat other people like refuse to be bulldozed out of the way of "Greater Israel". They are sociopathic narcissists.

Israel will NEVER have "defensible borders". It can't stop making war, and with each new war, it creates new enemies. No matter where the border is drawn, Israel ensures that the people on the other side of the border will devote their lives to resisting the Zionist cancer.

Security for oneself depends on security for the other. Zionists seem to be unable to comprehend this basic law. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Zionists reject the Golden Rule, and then they whine piteously when their self-defeating policies backfire.

 

Charles O. (209)
Thursday May 17, 2012, 9:28 pm
Bob A. writes:

> Abdessalam, you may do something to celebrate birth of Egypt on Jun 18 - it's already 59 years, and you could list some Egyptian achievements, that you guys did since 1953.

. .

How much peace has Israel ACHIEVED in the last 64 years?

How much justice has Israel achieved? How much respect? How much dignity? How much joy? How much glory?

Where is the glory in storm-troopers gunning down children or aid workers?

How much security? How much freedom has Israel achieved?

Israeli Jews now cower behind a 24-foot-high concrete wall. That's higher than the ghetto walls in the Third Reich.

They live in fear of international aid workers, U.N. observers, human rights champions, peace activists, bicyclists, Jews of conscience, and two-year-old Palestinian "Terrorists". Remember a few weeks ago when Israeli storm-troopers were using their rifle buts to club bicyclists? So much fear!

What are some of the things that Israel HAS achieved?

* Fear
* Ethnic hatred
* Massacres
* Wars
* Terror

This is not about Jews. This is about a fascist ideology that holds Jews back and turns their achievements into death and destruction. It's the same ideology that afflicted the Spanish, the Italians, and the Germans seventy years ago.

Why make an idol out of this supremacist ideology? Why succumb to idolatry? Shatter this Golden Calf! Let's free ourselves from this depraved ideology, so that we can rejoin the human race and learn how to revere life and respect our fellow human beings.

THEN we will have achieved something that MATTERS.
 

Abdessalam Diab (153)
Friday May 18, 2012, 1:05 am
Sending a Green Star is a simple way to say "Thank you"
You cannot currently send a star to Charles because you have done so within the last week.
Thank you Charles.You said it all.
 

Abdessalam Diab (153)
Friday May 18, 2012, 1:24 am
Bob A. writes "Abdessalam, you may do something to celebrate birth of Egypt on Jun 18 - it's already 59 years, and you could list some Egyptian achievements, that you guys did since 1953."
An other proof of ignorance.Egypt is not 59 years old.I am sure that you have no idea even where Egypt exists.Egypt began the civilization and taught the world and in ten years from now ,you will be surprised by Egypt's achievements.Wait and see if you can ever see.

As for gays, aren't there a lot of people against same sex marriage even in USA? and why are you so enthusiastic for gays? Are you one of them?Are you also pro adultery and infidelity? Shame on you.

 

Past Member (0)
Friday May 18, 2012, 2:05 am
Bob A

"John, how do the Arab countries address the issue of gay marriages and marrying interface couples? I think they kill infidel men having relations with Muslim women and kill gays straight? "

Well, Bob, they actually don't. There are 15 Muslim countries that have no laws at all against homosexulity, including several Arab countries. There are several Arab/Muslim countries that have colonial era laws on their books against homosexuality but do not (and have not for many years) initiated prosecutions. As an aside, I'll mention that this was documented in Wiki, but after a similar discussion on another Care2 thread where I provided the links to Wiki and the sources, these entries were mysteriously edited out - more Zionist censorship. Those countries which allegedly punish "gays" severely actually only do so in aggravated cases, the most famous being the hanging of 2 teenagers in Iran. It was publicised as "persecution of gays" by Gay Middle East website but the actual truth was that the 2 lads had raped a 13 year old boy. How come Gay Middle East made this "error" which made Iran look worse than it was simply for carrying out capital punishment? Oh dear, it was revealed that it is run by a Zionist Entity citizen who had repeatedly lied about it being a Zionist front organisation and had endangered all the brave people who reported for it from all over the world. I imagine that you are getting your "information" from this source. This website was directly (with others, including the odious and repulsive Peter Tatchell) for the execution of another Iranian in 2007 who had had his conviction for raping a man quashed - in between times these revolting bandwagon climbers had organised petitions, not to claim the man's innocence of rape, but to claim him as a fellow "gay" as he had allegedly had sex with a man. 10s of 1000s of signatures were sent to Iran's judiciary and religious authorities telling them to leave this "gay" man alone. The result? He was re-arrested and hanged for homosexuality instead, the Iranian authorities citing the petitions as "evidence" that he had committed "livat", the sin of Lot. The case was a sensation in Iran and they hanged him for consistency as, although gay sex is widespread (and unpunished) in Iran, this had engendered such publicity that they were forced to carry out their own laws for once. More blood on the hands of Zionists.

Your ignorance (or is it malice?) is astounding. Either way it is loathsome.
 

Stan B. (124)
Friday May 18, 2012, 3:20 am
Abdessalem. Your country has achieved absolutely nothing for hundreds of years and it's more than likely you are going to be equally" successful " in the next few hundred years.
 

Charles O. (209)
Friday May 18, 2012, 5:52 am
Stan B. writes:

> Abdessalem. Your country has achieved absolutely nothing for hundreds of years and it's more than likely you are going to be equally" successful " in the next few hundred years.

. .

Why this obsession with material achievement -- and the total lack of interest in spiritual and political development? Are we nothing more than children, trying to impress our parents and get gold stars from our teachers and get ahead in the rat race? Is there nothing more to life?

If this technological "achievement" is how we rate countries, then the Third Reich would be near the head of the pack, right next to Israel. Germany led the way in rocketry, aviation, chemistry and nuclear physics, and German scientists were much in demand in the U.S. after the war.
 

Charles O. (209)
Friday May 18, 2012, 6:15 am
John D. writes:

> Those countries which allegedly punish "gays" severely actually only do so in aggravated cases, the most famous being the hanging of 2 teenagers in Iran. It was publicised as "persecution of gays" by Gay Middle East website but the actual truth was that the 2 lads had raped a 13 year old boy.

> How come Gay Middle East made this "error" which made Iran look worse than it was simply for carrying out capital punishment?

> Oh dear, it was revealed that it is run by a Zionist Entity citizen who had repeatedly lied about it being a Zionist front organisation and had endangered all the brave people who reported for it from all over the world. I imagine that you are getting your "information" from this source.

> This website was directly (with others, including the odious and repulsive Peter Tatchell) for the execution of another Iranian in 2007 who had had his conviction for raping a man quashed - in between times these revolting bandwagon climbers had organised petitions, not to claim the man's innocence of rape, but to claim him as a fellow "gay" as he had allegedly had sex with a man. 10s of 1000s of signatures were sent to Iran's judiciary and religious authorities telling them to leave this "gay" man alone.

> The result? He was re-arrested and hanged for homosexuality instead, the Iranian authorities citing the petitions as "evidence" that he had committed "livat", the sin of Lot. The case was a sensation in Iran and they hanged him for consistency as, although gay sex is widespread (and unpunished) in Iran, this had engendered such publicity that they were forced to carry out their own laws for once.

> More blood on the hands of Zionists.

. .

How fortunate we are, John, to have access to your first-hand information.

Most of us here in America get our information and perspective from jaded reporters who are sent to countries they despise and do most of their "reporting" from the hotel room or bar. They know little or nothing about the culture, so the information we get is very superficial.

Then, on the basis of this superficial and misleading information, we condemn entire countries and make war and waste countless lives and trillions of dollars. Our merchants of death reap windfall profits and the victims of our insanity become bitter and enraged and desperate. Finally, when the country has been reduced to rubble and blood is flowing in rivers, we congratulate ourselves on our Superior Humanitarian Philosophy.

Good Intentions pave the road to hell, especially when those intentions are guided by ignorance and greed. Neo-cons tell us that the government is not competent to run even the post office. But then, at the same time, they deem our government qualified to make war and run countries on the other side of the planet!

. .

> It is part of the general pattern of misguided policy that our country is now geared to an arms economy which was bred in an artificially induced psychosis of war hysteria and nurtured upon an incessant propaganda of fear.

-- General Douglas MacArthur

> War is just a racket.

-- Smedley Butler, USMC Major General and two-time Medal of Honor winner, 1933 speech
 

Stephen Brian (23)
Friday May 18, 2012, 9:48 am
Hi Charles :)

I don't recite the "wipe off the map" translation. I know the literal translation of what the guy said, and it was "erase its page from the book of history". The difference between the two is that one is a known Farsi metaphorical idiom meaning, when used in reference to a country, "to completely destroy" and the other is an English one meaning exactly the same thing in the same context. It is actually quite obvious that Ahmadinejad would not have used the exact same phrase for two reasons: First, idiomatic phrases, even with the same meaning, differ from language to language. Second, maps used in education-systems in the Middle East outside of Israel often do not show Israel. In that context, what exactly do you think he meant?

Zionists don't seek your demise. That is a delusion.

Where did Ben-Gurion call for a "greater Israel" stretching throughout the Middle East (apparently exactly matching Solomon's old empire)? Do you have a source this time which doesn't make up an assassination attempt and then expose itself by totally screwing up on its numbers?

Other countries do have defensible borders. Palestinians obviously don't, not having a country, but where there are borders, Arab states definitely do. Of course, nobody has a right to demand defensible borders: That, like self-determination, is a right to be taken, not given. Of course, as with other rights to be taken, if they must be taken at another party's expense, then the other party certainly has a right to try to stop that from happening.

Many Jordanians and Egyptians would disagree with your assessment of Israel's treatment of its neighbours. Lebanon and Syria have been given offers, repeatedly, to make peace. They rejected them. Syria demanded territory back from which its people used to shoot at Israeli farmers, and with no clear demonstration of good will, that was an obvious non-starter. Lebanon is incapable of making peace with Israel because there is a large armed force in its territory which has threatened the government repeatedly, Hezbollah, which claims as its raison d'etre the maintenance of armed defence against Israel. Of course, your assessment does seem to hold up under the Arabs' paradigm, where one is at war by default, until one makes peace. Until Israel pretty much surrenders and lets its people get murdered, of course they will see it as constantly aggressive as you do.

The Golden Rule only applies where there can be a reasonable expectation of reciprocity. That does not hold true at all in the Middle East for a few reasons.

First, due to internal political problems, Palestinians and the Lebanese are incapable of making peace regardless of what Israel does. It doesn't matter how peaceful Israel decides to be, or what concessions it gives. What happened to Sadat? What do you think will happen to the next Arab leader who makes peace with Israel? After demonstrating that it was better at killing Jews during the Second Intifada, immediately prior to the second Palestinian election, what happened to Hamas during that election? What do you think would happen to parties that refused to kill any, and how long would any peace they offer last?

Second, the cultures are very different so similar treatment would not yield similar reactions. What happened to the rate at which rockets were fired after it pulled out of Gaza in 2005 again? Was there any sort of reciprocal concession? No, Palestinians declared a victory for terrorism and pushed further for greater victories, launching far more rockets than before. Acts of goodwill are seen as weakness and there is zero moral compulsion among Arabs to do anything for their enemies.

There are more reasons, relating to freedom of press, education-systems, the dynamics of power, the impact of protracted conflict on identities, and I can probably think of more, but these two should suffice.
 

Stephen Brian (23)
Friday May 18, 2012, 9:53 am
Hi John,

Bad timing: http://www.care2.com/news/member/536648089/3341704
One country is at least proposing homosexual marriage while the other executes homosexuals.
Maybe you think you live in a democracy:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Same-sex_marriage_in_the_United_Kingdom
Oops, I guess not.

You're looking dumb again. You're already too far behind, but quit before you go even further.
 

Charles O. (209)
Friday May 18, 2012, 10:27 am
Stephen B. writes:

> The difference between the two is that one is a known Farsi metaphorical idiom meaning, when used in reference to a country, "to completely destroy" and the other is an English one meaning exactly the same thing in the same context.

Wow: A Farsi idiom about political history and an English idiom about geography meaning "exactly the same thing"? How very convenient! So South Africa was "wiped off the map" when apartheid "became history"? So Germany was "wiped off the map" when the Hitlerites "became history"? After all, according to you, the two idioms mean "exactly the same thing". But when I look at my map, I see Germany and South Africa still there. What can explain this? I must have an old map.

What do I think Ahmadinejad meant? Well, he was speaking optimistically about the fall of other tyrannical regimes, and he included Israel in the list, though not by name. I think Ahmadinejad meant to suggest that the millions of people who languish under Israeli occupation should not give up hope.

. .

> Zionists don't seek your demise. That is a delusion.

Really? Aren't Zionists trying to draw us into WW III. Aren't we being driven into bankruptcy by their addiction to war? Aren't they censoring our masked media and firing editors who tell the truth about Israel? Aren't they abolishing our freedom, under the guise of the bogus "War On Terror"?

Why would Zionists NOT seek our demise? Why should one of the Master Race people care about the slave races? Don't Zionists see non-Jews and Jews of Conscience as the Enemy? How can Israel have the Perfect Security it seeks, when it is surrounded by non-Jews who care about things like human rights and justice and know the true history of Israel?
 

Charles O. (209)
Friday May 18, 2012, 10:47 am
Stephen B. writes:

> Where did Ben-Gurion call for a "greater Israel" stretching throughout the Middle East (apparently exactly matching Solomon's old empire)? Do you have a source this time which doesn't make up an assassination attempt and then expose itself by totally screwing up on its numbers?

So the Zionists send letter-bombs to eight British politicians, but when Margaret Truman writes about a similar bomb sent to her father, she is "making up an assassination attempt"? Why would she do that? Fortunately, you yourself would NEVER make things up. Everybody else lies, but Zionists never do.

. .

Anyway, here is my source:


http://www.cactus48.com/verses.html -- Jews for Justice site

> The present map of Palestine was drawn by the British mandate. The Jewish people have another map which our youth and adults should strive to fulfill -- From the Nile to the Euphrates.

-- David Ben Gurion

-- also cited by Philip Greenspan, Continuing Israeli-Palestinian Historical Trends, *Swans Commentary*, 13 Feb 2006

. .

Here is a corroborating quote:

> .... We must look carefully at the question of whether transfer is possible, necessary, moral and useful. We do not want to dispossess, [but] transfer of populations occured before now, in the [Jezreel] Valley, in the Sharon [that is, the coastal plain] and in other places. You are no doubt aware of the JNF's activities in this regard. Now a transfer of completely different scope will have to be carried out. In many parts of the country new settlement will not be possible without transfering the Arab fellahin ...... it is important that this plan comes from the commission and not from us .....

> Transfer ..... is what will make possible a comprehensive settlement program. Thankfully, the Arab people have vast, empty areas. Jewish power, which grows steadily, will also increase our possibilities to carry out the transfer on a large scale. You must remember, that this system embodies an important humane and Zionist idea, to transfer parts of a people to their country and to settle empty lands. We believe that this action will also bring us closer to an agreement with the Arabs.

-- David Ben Gurion, 20th Zionist Congress in Zurich, 1937. Square brackets added by Israeli Historian Benny Morris in "Righteous Victims" p143. Text from CZA S5-1543, original texts of the speeches.

. .

And here is Ben Gurion trying to extend Israel up to the Nile:

http://chss.montclair.edu/english/furr/essays/rokach.html#CHAPTER 1: Moshe Sharett and His Personal Diary

> Nasser: Coexistence with Israel is Possible.
> Ben Gurion's Reply: Operation Gazat

> On August 14, a U.S. Quaker leader, Elmer Jackson, on a visit to Jerusalem after a meeting in Cairo with Egyptian Foreign Minister Mahmoud Fawzi, told Sharett that Nasser was still interested in normalizing relations with Israel. On October 7, the Egyptian president himself said to New York Times special envoy Kenneth Love: "No Arab says today that we should destroy Israel."18 But Israel had already made its decisions.

-- "Moshe Sharett and His Personal Diary"
 

Past Member (0)
Friday May 18, 2012, 11:02 am
Oh dear Stephen B. You are incorrect as usual. The Zionist Entity, in any case did not "propose" gay marriage as you claim, it was a private member's bill. As for the UK, the principle has been conceded of gay marriage and there is a consultation right now on implementation.

http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/publications/about-us/consultations/equal-civil-marriage/impact-assessment?view=Binary

The 4 men in Iran? Oh dear. The article is a fabrication. The information has come from a short communique from HRANA and nothing more is known apart from what was said in the communique - that 4 men had been condemned for "lavat" which can mean rape. There are no other references giving information from on the ground and Dan Littauer, the Zionist head of the Zionist front organisation "Gay Middle East", an organisation which tried to hide its Zionist Entity founding and connections, has constructed a farago of nothing with no knowledge of the case and no investigation. In addition, now that Zionist GME is invloved, these men will die.GME is claiming that they are "gay". There will be no reprieve

Now that "gay midle east" has got into the act and generated lies about these 4 men, they will surely die without any evidence at all, they have been claimed as "gay". The same dark Zionist forces including the odious Islamophobe Peter Tatchell did the same thing in 2007 when they were responsible for the execution of a man WHO WAS REPRIEVED by the Iranian judiciary after an accusation of "Lavat" that involved rape - the Zionists didn't claim he was innocent, but an innocent "gay" and the local judges swiftly reversed their decision.

http://paper-bird.net/2012/05/16/four-sodomy-sentences-in-iran-on-not-learning-from-our-mistakes/

From the link:--

Here’s the story. On Saturday, May 12 (that’s 23 Ordibehesht, 1391, in the Persian calendar) the website of Human Rights Activists News Agency (HRANA), an independent Farsi source for rights news, published the following note:

The sentence of death against four citizens in the province of Kohgiluyeh on charges of “sodomy” has been confirmed.

HRANA, a news organization for human rights activists in Iran, reports that the execution of four people named Saadat Arafi, Vahid Akbari, Javid Akbar and Houshmand Akbari has been approved.

These four persons residing in the city of Charam in Kohgiluyeh province, are facing charges of sodomy punishable by death. The charge of sodomy is an accusation often referring to sex with [persons of the] same sex.

This is very little information, and the last sentence indicates that HRANA itself didn’t know the substance of the charges — whether they involved consensual sex or rape, both of which can be included under lavat (sodomy) in Iranian law. HRANA is the only source we have; no independent account seems to turn up in any other Iranian news organ, at least not online. It’s not on the local Kogiluyeh websites, here or here or here; it’s not even on the helpful page of the province’s religious police.


That doesn’t mean it isn’t true — but it does mean HRANA’s information is probably pretty fragmentary. Charam is a small city (population 12,000 in the 2006 census) in the out-of-the-way and mountainous Kohgiluyeh and Boyer-Ahmad province in Iran’s southeast. Even HRANA doesn’t seem to draw a whole lot of news from there, judging from their website.

So the first thing a human rights activist or a journalist would do is try to reach HRANA and get more information. The real human rights activists are trying this (and I too wrote to HRANA today). Unfortunately, there are also journalists who have learned in the Doug Ireland school that speculation is what makes a story.

The HRANA piece was posted to a listserve I’m on, that same Saturday. Dan Littauer, of the dubious website Gay Middle East, is on the same list. Within a few hours he’d written a lengthy article, which was up on three British gay news sites. (The alacrity with which these articles blossom on the Web suggests a certain sparsity of fact-checking.) The piece is an educational example; it reveals how to pad out the virtual absence of detail in the HRANA piece with other non-details, until it looks like you actually know something. Naturally, Littauer didn’t reach HRANA itself; but he quotes an unnamed gay activist in Iran, as well as Iranians in London and Austria, none of whom have any direct knowledge of the case. One says, “this is the most clear statement against same sex-acts in past months.” Another: “The rhetoric of announcement makes the link between same-sex sexual activity, or sodomy with corporal punishment very clear.” I don’t quite know what the last sentence means; but of course, we don’t have any official “announcement” or “statement” to judge from. We have only the blip from HRANA, in HRANA’s own words. It’s hard to read a new government stance into that.

For an expose of gay middle east.com, here is a link:--

http://electronicintifada.net/blog/benjamin-doherty/arab-activists-question-israel-linked-gaymiddleeastcom

Poor Stephen. I'd be the one to quit if I were you before I make you look even more stupid.

 

Past Member (0)
Friday May 18, 2012, 11:05 am
More bad birthday news:--

http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=107802

EU denounces Israel’s destruction of aid projects in West Bank
Daan Bauwens


Since 2011, no fewer than 60 EU-funded structures have been demolished in the West Bank.(Mamoun Wazwaz / APA images)

May 17, 2012


EU Feels Force of Israeli Demolitions


BRUSSELS (IPS) - All 27 foreign ministers of the European Union have strongly spoken out against Israeli demolitions in Area C of the West Bank. Since the beginning of 2011 not less than 60 EU-funded projects have been demolished while 110 others are currently at risk. Several analysts claim the Israeli authorities are specifically targeting EU-funded projects.

Area C comprises about 60 percent of the West Bank and is under full Israeli military and civilian control under the Oslo Accords. The EU's focus on this area is a consequence of alarming reports that show an increase in Israeli demolitions of Palestinian homes and infrastructure, including projects paid for with European taxpayer money.

The EU’s Foreign Affairs Council called on Israel Tuesday to remove restrictions on Palestinian construction and economic development projects in Area C. It also denounced settler violence against Palestinians and asked the Israeli government to prosecute such actions. Against the background of the EU meeting, development and humanitarian agencies in the West Bank compiled new data on demolitions of EU projects. According to data gathered by the Displacement Working Group, a coordinating body of international humanitarian and development NGOs in the occupied Palestinian territory, since the beginning of 2011 at least 62 structures funded by France, Netherlands, the UK, Poland, Ireland, Spain, Sweden and the European Commission have been demolished by Israel. Water cisterns, animal shelters and people's homes, among others, are on the list of demolished structures.

The Displacement Working Group also reports at least 110 structures funded by Belgium, France, Germany, Netherlands, Poland, Spain, UK, Ireland, Sweden and the Commission currently under risk as they have received demolition or stop-work orders from Israeli authorities. The projects at risk include renewable energy projects, water cisterns, animal shelters and water and sanitation structures.

According to another recent report compiled by the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs in the occupied Palestinian territory, over a quarter of all Palestinian structures demolished in 2011 were funded by international donors including European governments and the European Union.

In response to a recent inquiry by British Member of European Parliament Chris Davies, the European Commission estimated that the cost of EU and member state funded projects damaged or demolished by the Israeli army from the beginning of 2001 until October 2011 adds up to more than 49 million euros, of which more than 29 million euros came directly from the EU. Although most of this damage took place during the Second Intifadah and the 2008 Gaza War, the Commission’s list is far from complete and leaves out the most recent data.

On Feb. 13 of this year the Israeli army demolished an ancient water cistern which had been restored by the Polish NGO Humanitarian Action with funding from the Polish Foreign Ministry. As is mostly the case, the Israeli army argued there was no permit to build the structure. The Israeli Civil Administration and army maintain the right to demolish any structure that was built without such a permit.

But human rights organisations on the ground say it is almost impossible to obtain a permit. According to recent UN data, less than one percent of Area C has been planned for Palestinian development by the Israeli Civil Administration and 94 percent of Palestinian permit applications to construct infrastructure have been rejected in recent years.

As a consequence of this policy, 10,000 Palestinian children in Area C and East Jerusalem were obliged to attend classes in tents, caravans or tin shacks at the start of the 2011 school year because of a lack of permits to build or renovate classrooms.

"The lack of permits is only one of different pretences to demolish," Ayman Rabi from the Palestinian Hydrology Group, the largest Palestinian NGO working on water and sanitation, tells IPS. "The Israeli authorities also tell us regularly the area we are building in is a security area. In the end the demolishing does not have any legal basis."

In the end of 2011, five solar and wind energy projects financed by the German Foreign Ministry received stop-work orders in the Massafer Yatta area in the South Hebron Hills. These villages are prevented from being connected to the Israeli electricity grid. Israeli authorities promised not to destroy the project but instead, on Jan. 11, 2012, destroyed the home and animal shelters of one of the Palestinian families the panels were being built for, crushing several of their goats.

On Apr. 23 this year, Israeli authorities demolished two water cisterns near Hebron built with funding from the French government. The aim of the French project was to improve water management and develop farmland.

"Most of the people in these areas are shepherds, whose animals need to graze," Ayman Rabi tells IPS. "If there is no water they are forced to leave the areas they're living in. This is exactly the aim: forcing people to leave to be able to confiscate the land and expand the settlements."

According to last December's EU heads of missions report on Area C, prior to 1967 between 200,000 and 320,000 Palestinians used to live in the area. Currently the number of Palestinians has dropped to 56,000 due to Israeli demolitions and restrictions. At the same time the Israeli settler population has grown from 1,200 in 1972 to 310,000 in 2010.

At the same time, several analysts presume the Israeli authorities in the occupied areas are specifically targeting European projects. After the incident with the German-funded solar and wind energy projects, the German press described Israel's behaviour as a riposte to the EU which published a report critical of Israel's discriminatory policy toward the Palestinians in Area C in January 2012.

"Projects in the exact same area funded by the Americans are not touched," Ayman Rabi tells IPS, "while generally speaking, all EU projects are demolished."
 

Past Member (0)
Friday May 18, 2012, 11:18 am
I am proud!

Britain is declared the centre of solidarity with Palestine, and Israel’s exports fall

As Britain is declared the ‘centre of political struggle against Israel’, exports from Israel to the EU have dropped by 16%

http://t.ymlp240.net/usqyjarajsmuadaqsadamjwuq/click.php
 

Charles O. (209)
Friday May 18, 2012, 11:53 am
Stephen B. writes:

> Lebanon and Syria have been given offers, repeatedly, to make peace. They rejected them.

. .

Let's take Israel's 1982 "Offer" to Lebanon. Hezbollah did not exist, at the time, so you can't blame Hezbollah for the outcome.

The "Offer" took the form of:

* The flight of four Israeli jet fighters over Syrian missile sites in the Bekaa Valley.

* Israeli forces in "Haddadland" letting off 5,000 rounds of machine gun fire and 40,000 rounds of small arms fire during "training exercises" in Yarin and Marouahine.

* Israeli tank maneuvers in Lebanon and called the action "intensive, excessive and provocative" in the U.N. reports.

* (On 08 Feb) 600 to 700 well-armed troops entering Lebanon on 32 buses then departing the same day.

* (On 06 Mar) A one-day feigned attack by 300 Israeli military vehicles on Khaim, a village close to routes the PLO believed the Israelis would use in a land assault.

* (On 25 Jan) An Israeli warship and several torpedo boats intercepting seven Lebanese fishing boats inside Lebanese territorial waters near Tyre.

* The sinking of two Lebanese boats.

* Several incidents perpetrated by Israeli and Haddad forces stationed at Bayadah.

* (On 21 Apr) Israeli planes striking deep inside Lebanon, bombing three alleged Palestinian targets and killing twenty-three persons, in "retaliation" for the death of an Israeli soldier killed by a land mine in southern Lebanon.

* (On 09 May) The renunciation of the cease-fire by Prime Minister Begin

* Israeli bombardment of PLO headquarters in southern Lebanon, killing eleven and wounding fifty-six, few of whom were connected with the PLO.

All of these actions were brazen violations of the 1981 cease-fire. Israel's aim throughout was to provoke the PLO into responding and thus providing Israel with the pretext it needed for the planned war against Lebanon. But the PLO maintained discipline and refused to take the bait.

In the West Bank and Gaza, Israel's "Offers" took the form of:

* The mid-March dismissal of seven elected pro-PLO mayors.

* Protests, repression, and rebellion.

* Extensive personal and collective harassment;
* Detaining individuals without charge;
* Mass round-ups of people for interrogation;
* Imposition of curfews on whole villages for days and weeks on end;
* Blowing up of homes of relatives of individuals suspected of political actvism;
* Deportations;
* Increased censorship of Palestinian newspapers;
* Closing of Palestinian universities for lengthy periods (Bir Zeit, for example, was closed for four months);
* Strict censorship of university curriculums;
* Promulgation of a list of several thousand prohibited books.

* Israeli soldiers frequently breaking into university dormitories at night and dragging students to military headquarters.

* Jewish vigilante groups detaining and harassing Palestinans at will.

* In one six-week period, the killing of thirteen Palestinian civilians by Israeli soldiers and settlers.

* The use of torture against Palestinians -- some aspects of which were enunciated in a memorandum written by Lieutenant General Rafael Eitan and communicated to Colonel Yaakov Hartabi who passed it along to all levels of the military administration in the West Bank.

But Lebanon and the PLO refused to respond to all of these "Generous Offers".

Finally, Israel turned to its friend, Abu Nidal -- an arch-terrorist and a deadly foe of the PLO. Nidal obliged by making an assassination attempt on Israel's dovish ambassador to Britain, Shlomo Argov.

Britain quickly identified and arrested the assassins. On 06 Jun, Margaret Thatcher announced that a hit-list had been found on one of the assassins. The PLO's London representative was one of those to be assassinated by Nidal's group.

Disregarding the evidence, Israel blamed the attack on the PLO, then proceeded with its attack on Lebanon. 18,000 Lebanese were murdered, and 200,000 were rendered homeless, by operation "Peace for Galilee".

The Israeli attack led to the formation of Hezbollah.

One has to be an utter sociopath to label this slaughter "Peace for Galilee". Peace is the least likely result when one attacks innocent people and murders them by the thousands. If Zionists are judged by their behavior, then one sees that war not peace, is what they seek. War and terror is what keeps them in power.

 

Charles O. (209)
Friday May 18, 2012, 12:01 pm
Stephen B. writes:

> Syria demanded territory back from which its people used to shoot at Israeli farmers, and with no clear demonstration of good will, that was an obvious non-starter.

. .

Moshe Dayan was there and describes the "action":

> Moshe Dayan, the celebrated commander who, as Defense Minister in 1967, gave the order to conquer the Golan... [said] many of the firefights with the Syrians were deliberately provoked by Israel, and the kibbutz residents who pressed the Government to take the Golan Heights did so less for security than for the farmland... [Dayan stated]

> They didn't even try to hide their greed for that land... We would send a tractor to plow some area where it wasn't possible to do anything, in the demilitarized area, and knew in advance that the Syrians would start to shoot. If they didn't shoot, we would tell the tractor to advance further, until in the end the Syrians would get annoyed and shoot. And then we would use artillery and later the air force also, and that's how it was... The Syrians, on the fourth day of the war, were not a threat to us.'

-- The New York Times, 11 May 1997
 

Charles O. (209)
Friday May 18, 2012, 12:31 pm
Stephen B. writes:

> The Golden Rule only applies where there can be a reasonable expectation of reciprocity. That does not hold true at all in the Middle East for a few reasons. First, due to internal political problems, Palestinians and the Lebanese are incapable of making peace regardless of what Israel does.

. .

I'd say that it is Israel that fails to reciprocate.

Hamas has offered the Zionists a ten-year truce.In 2008, Hamas sought to curtail the launching of the tin-can rockets from Gaza. Initially, Israel refused to negotiate. The people of Sderot under the bus. Eventually, however, pressure from Turkey and Egypt forced Israel to come to the table and reach an agreement with Hamas. Hamas honored the terms of the agreement; Israel did not. Rocket fire from Gaza all but ceased, but the deadly Israeli incursions continued, along with the economic strangulation.

Zionists reject the Golden Rule, not just in practice, but also in principle. They put their faith in military might, not in reciprocity and mutual self-interest. Since Jews make up a very small percentage of the world's population, the Zionist strategy is suicidal: However much might Israel may have, it is not enough to dominate the entire world! Israel then falls back on the Samson Option: Blowing itself up and going down in a blaze of self-pity. Zionists do not seem to be smart enough to see the self-defeating flaws in their ideology and strategy.

There is no way to fix this suicidal ideology: It needs to be repudiated and jettisoned. It should have been buried seventy years ago, when we buried other forms of fascism.

Zionists tell us that much of the world wants "The Destruction of Israel". But the real threat to Israel comes from Israel itself -- from its suicidal bellicosity and its addiction to war-making. The Zionists themselves destroyed Israel long ago -- when they tore up Resolution 181 and began to massacre the native people. They themselves stripped Israel of legitimacy. What they need is a mirror.
 

Abdessalam Diab (153)
Friday May 18, 2012, 12:32 pm
Stephen writes "What happened to Sadat? What do you think will happen to the next Arab leader who makes peace with Israel?"
The same question to you > What happened to Yitzhak Rabin who dared to sign the Oslo accords with PLO ? I dare say that his assassination is the reason behind all obstcles put by Israeli leadership on the path for peace.The cowered leadership since then is afraid to have the same end as Rabin if they proceed towards peace.
 

Abdessalam Diab (153)
Friday May 18, 2012, 1:02 pm
Thank you Charles for responding to Satan" comment about Egypt achievements. Satan actually is absolutely ignorant and knows nothing about the brain drain USA and other countries are adopting regarding prominent Egyptian scientists who were and still are offered irresistible offers to work for USA federal agencies like NASA, universities and research centers. I can give names. I have been told personally in a meeting in Washington in mid 1980's with high officials in USIS that " once an American federal agency,university or research center needs the services of an Egyptian scholar,you better bid him good bye" even if this contradicts the USIS regular rules that J1 visa holders must return to their country.
The best doctors in UK are Egyptians. Egypt had spread education in all Arab countries by Egyptian teachers paid by the Egyptian government.Doctors,nurses,Engineers,technologists,University faculty,accountants,technicians,judges .........etc.

Despite all conspiracies against Egypt since 1840 and the creation of the Zionist entity to exhaust all Egypt efforts and resources,Egypt could survive.Egypt had given a lesson to the whole world how to revolt peacefully and force a strong corrupted regime to step down to start an new era when its people feel that the country is theirs and sooner Egypt will,gods will,step forward and achieve a happy future for its people and the world.
 

Stephen Brian (23)
Friday May 18, 2012, 3:45 pm
Hi Charles,

Do you know what the word "idiom" means? Neither one was about history or geography.

Germany was not wiped off the map: It was not completely destroyed. Only the Nazi party was.

The answers to your first set of questions are all the same: "No."

As for the claims implicit in your second set, the best phrase to describe them is "Not Even Wrong." In case you're unfamiliar with that phrase, it means that the whole framework in which you developed the claims is so badly flawed that it could never produce anything correct. The whole "Master race" thing is part of your delusions, not at all a part of Zionism. No, Zionists do not see all non-Jews or other Jews as enemies. As for Israeli security when surrounded by countries that care about human rights and such, that is wrong on two levels: First, do you really think Syria cares about human rights? How are they treating Palestinians in Lebanon? Wasn't there violent religious intolerance in Egypt recently? Just in case you thought I was just going to point out problems with all Arab states, no, last I checked, Jordan seemed pretty okay.

Margaret Truman appears to have gotten the story from Smith. She is not an independent source, nor even a source at all on the matter.

The link you gave me doesn't work. I checked "Jews for Justice". A story from Wednesday shows how much these guys do their homework: It talked about Israeli manufacturing of drones for the U.S. and how they were dangerous and would be used to terrorize people. Last I checked, and that was about a month ago, Israeli drones were unarmed and useful for surveillance only. Today's top story is even better:
"BBC slammed for blanking historic hunger strike" ... four days after
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-18062016 . Now, I don't have a problem with people who, after doing due diligence produce an informed opinion and disagree with me politically. People who fail to do what was for me under 1 minute of research (a single Google search) and then start screaming about nonsense, on the other hand, well, you can imagine what I think of them. Find a better source.

The Morris quote does not look at all like advocacy of violent expulsion to me. In fact, it looks like Ben-Gurion said explicitly that his organization did not have the right to force such a transfer and he personally wanted to avoid doing any such thing. His comment looks more like an endorsement of the Partition Plan which, like in India, would have demanded population-transfers than anything else. Just out of curiosity, was this quote from before or after the Partition-endorsed transfers in India turned bloody? Would Ben-Gurion have had any reason to suspect things could have turned violent?

When it comes to Lebanon, I was referring to offers in the 1990s and 2000s, not ISrael's securing of its border-region against spillover from the Lebanese Civil War.

Regarding the West Bank, would you say Palestinians' quest for peace took the forms of rockets, mortars, and suicide-bombers?

I discussed the quote from Dayan with Margaret a long while back. Do you support the Syrians' decision to shoot at a non-threatening tractor because it was driving around, not a permanent structure or armed vehicle to claim territory, in between the lines? Would you likewise support an Israeli soldier who shoots at a Palestinian for coming too close to a barrier? If you would not support these things (and I consider them together because failure to support only one would be thoroughly hypocritical) then why should one side be considered responsible for violent aggressive acts of the other? Syrians could have foiled this "devious" plot by just not shooting at a tractor.

Now you think that Israel would have someone assassinate its own ambassador??? I've called you a conspiracy-nut before, and I don't like to repeat myself. Just because this should be amusing, why would Israel have him assassinated rather than just recalled and given a job where he could do no harm?

You really think the assassination-attempt was the cause for the invasion? What about the other 239 attacks on the list? The attack was high-profile, certainly, but far from the big reason. Also, Israel's reference to the PLO was only partly wrong: Abu Nidal was a former member of Fatah. I suspect they got lumped together because as far as Israel was concerned, they were equivalent.

I think we discussed the 2008 offer before: The problem was that other organizations in Gaza did not honour it. Hamas may have stopped, but then it demanded that Israel not reprise against other groups. The biggest problem with the ceasefire was that the negotiations were a sham from the start: Hamas had no place at the table because it could not police the other groups, so it could never offer a true ceasefire or peace. The rockets would just keep coming. Almost worse, during that time, Hamas accumulated anti-tank weaponry which, for its purposes, was only even potentially useful against Israel. That does not imply any intent to turn that ceasefire into peace, and that means Hamas intended to break it once it was properly armed to do some real damage. Israel opted not to wait for that.

Try again.

Hi Abdesslaam :)

Rabin was assassinated. Peres, who, if I recall correctly, was actually in the original secret meetings from which the modern "peace process" grew, then took over. The assassin was arrested and further attempts for peace, like those by Barak, led to no threats of violence. The big difference is that Israeli political parties are unarmed. Barak's offer may have been rejected in the Knesset, but at least he could make it without really fearing for his life. Also, his tenure is proof that your comment about later leaders being afraid to follow Rabin's lead is totally false.

John,
You are well-known to be an apologist for murderers. I expected nothing more from you this time. Your comment about whether a private member or the country is just silly. What matters is the vote itself, the attitudes of the people, and the society which would render such a thing politically non-suicidal: He got support from 11 out of 50 voting MKs. Do you really think that 22% of Israeli parliamentarians would commit political suicide randomly? It's that ridiculous belief, or the possibility that Israeli society generally doesn't have a problem with homosexuals. Pick one. Regardless, this should settle the matter:
http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/36810/three_in_five_israelis_back_same_sex_marriage/
Of course, I don't expect facts to matter to you. I do wish you could continue to live in your little dreamworld without irritating anyone else.
 

Past Member (0)
Friday May 18, 2012, 5:15 pm
Stephen, he got support from 11 out of 100 active MPs. So 11% of active MPs voted for the private bill, not 22% "committing political suicide".

The facts, as recounted even by the odious Littauer's GME are these:--

Gay Middle East editor in Israel, Shabi Gatenio, said the government has been rejecting gay rights for decades and is not surprised by today’s decision.

Speaking to Gay Star News, he said: ‘It is a hypocrisy that this government, this prime minister and foreign minister have objected to every pro-gay law we have wanted to pass but are flagging up its positive record on gay rights abroad.’

Dan Littauer, executive editor of Gay Middle East, told GSN that progress in LGBT rights in the state of Israel has almost universally come through the higher courts, with very little coming from government policy or legislation.

He said: ‘The Israeli government has done very little for LGBT rights and used propaganda to present itself as a progressive country.

‘No government in Israel has legislated for marriage equality. The current government has extreme religious right-wing elements which are known to be actively homophobic and oppose any LGBT legislation.’

And as for the slur that I am an apologist for murderers, put up or shut up.

 

Stephen Brian (23)
Friday May 18, 2012, 9:07 pm
Hi John,

Only 50 voted on it. Also, there are 120 seats in the Israeli parliament.

Now, didn't you say that GME was totally disreputable on another thread very, very recently.
http://www.care2.com/news/member/536648089/3341704
http://www.care2.com/causes/israel-rejects-gay-marriage.html
Something about it making up castles in Spain? I actually would like to see that story.
Of course, because as far as you're concerned every dishonest source must somehow draw its dishonesty from Zionism, as you claimed on the other thread regarding GME, you'll go ahead and say that they would never lie about Israel. I have news for you: GME is biased to claim that homosexuals are persecuted everywhere because that belief raises its apparent importance and the profile of the issues with which it deals ... because it is "Gay Middle East". Of course, anybody with half a brain would have known better. Now, I could go and look up relevant Israeli law regarding secular homosexual unions and compare it to that of other countries, but why should I bother going to all that trouble to disprove a claim from a source which you already call disreputable?

Calling you an apologist for murderers is not a slur. It is the most reasonable interpretation of your posts praising Hezbollah, calling Assad peace-loving, and here, denying persecution of homosexuals in Iran.
 

Charles O. (209)
Friday May 18, 2012, 10:20 pm
Stephen B. writes:

> Do you know what the word "idiom" means? Neither one was about history or geography.

Incredible! It seems like we cannot even communicate in plain English, much less Farsi. You impose your "idiomatic" interpretation on a statement that is perfectly clear, and arrive at an altogether different meaning. In this way, you bend reality to fit into Zionist ideology and its system of paranoid delusions.

. .

> The answers to your first set of questions are all the same: "No."

That's exactly my point: The two idioms are NOT "exactly the same". The fall of a tyrannical regime is not the same as the eradication of a country. One is temporal, the other spatial. One involves a regime, the other a people. How can you possibly conflate the two?!

. .

> The whole "Master race" thing is part of your delusions, not at all a part of Zionism.

And yet Zionists claim that rights derived from an alleged affiliation with an ancient tribe supersede modern property rights that pertain to individuals. If I claim to have the imaginary "Jewish Gene", then I am entitled to do anything I please to people who lack this imaginary gene: I can seize their property, I can destroy their homes, I can starve them, I can humiliate them, beat them, terrify them, kill them. I am the Master, and they are my slaves. That is the essence of Zionism right there.

. .

> No, Zionists do not see all non-Jews or other Jews as enemies.

But Zionists argue that Jews need a special fortress "Homeland". Why? Because non-Jews cannot be trusted. Non-Jews have nothing better to do than persecute Jews and genocide Jews. If non-Jews were worthy of trust, then there would be no need to forcibly divide Jews and non-Jews. There would be no need to create a special ghetto state just for Jews. So this notion that non-Jews are the Enemy is implicit in Zionism. And we see that implicit premise frequently expressed when Zionists speak: They are constantly vilifying and denigrating other ethnic groups and religions, and they seldom have anything positive to say about non-Jews.

. .

> Wasn't there violent religious intolerance in Egypt recently?

Yes, but Egypt does not make religious intolerance axiomatic or ideological. Egypt does not start with the premise that Christians and Muslims are incompatible species. Egypt does not promote ethnic supremacy or separation.

. .

> Margaret Truman appears to have gotten the story from Smith. She is not an independent source, nor even a source at all on the matter.

Appears to you -- but not to me. As the daughter of Harry Truman, isn't it possible that she spoke to her father and got part of the story from him? I suppose that possibility never occurred to you.

. .

> The link you gave me doesn't work.

That's why I gave you a second link. The original "Jews for Justice" link was not working when I tried it. Perhaps the server is temporarily down, or perhaps the site has fallen victim to Zionist censorship. I can't say which.

. .

> A story from Wednesday shows how much these guys do their homework

Since I have shown some of your own statements to be wrong, it seems like you too have a problem with homework. At any rate, you find one detail that an organization gets wrong, and on that basis you try to discredit the entire organization and everything it ever published. Here we see one of the many forms of Zionist censorship in action.

. .

> The Morris quote does not look at all like advocacy of violent expulsion to me.

Ben Gurion is explicitly calling for an entire population to be torn from their land and deposited in some other country. Such a massive "expulsion" would obviously entail violence. Here again, we see Zionists behaving like the "Master Race", or like God Himself: They have put themselves in charge of deciding where other ethnic groups should live. To them, other ethnic groups and religions are just pawns to be moved about or discarded.

. .

> Would Ben-Gurion have had any reason to suspect things could have turned violent?

Incredible! Empathy and common sense scream out the answer! Put yourself in the place of the victims. They have been attached to the land for generations, they work the land, they love the land, they have built their homes there, their towns there -- and suddenly, ideologues from Europe come along and tell them they must abandon everything and transplant themselves in the middle of a desert somewhere. How should they respond?

It seems as if Zionists naively expect their victims to die quietly and are mystified when that does not happen. The total absence of empathy is astonishing!

. .

> Regarding the West Bank, would you say Palestinians' quest for peace took the forms of rockets, mortars, and suicide-bombers?

Israel, not Palestine, is the dominant power here. Israel has military, economic, political and media dominance. It is Israel, not Palestine, that controls the situation, so the responsibility for peace rests with Israel -- the occupying power. Palestinians are fighting for survival. Peace is a luxury they cannot afford.

This is not a contest between equals. Blaming the people under occupation is like blaming the rape victim for the lack of peace between the victim and the rapist. International law gives occupied people a right to resist. This is especially true in the case of Palestine, where the occupying power wantonly violates the Geneva Conventions.

. .

> Syrians could have foiled this "devious" plot by just not shooting at a tractor.

But as Dayan states, the tractor kept advancing. How far should Syrians have allowed the Israelis to advance? All the way to Damascus? here too, you seem to fault the victims for refusing to die quietly. Don't the Syrians have a right to defend their border?

. .

> Now you think that Israel would have someone assassinate its own ambassador???

Well Argov was a dove. He was probably hated by the hawks. By having him assinated the hawks killed two birds with one stone -- they got rid of a nuisance (Argov) and created the pretext for starting the war. It wouldn't be the first time that Zionists have killed fellow Jews. Think of the bombing of the King David Hotel, for example -- 15 of the 91 people killed by Menachim Begin's Irgun terrorists were Jews. The fascist poses as the protector of his ethnic group, but he actually puts his ideology first and treats his fellow human beings as expendable.

. .

> I think we discussed the 2008 offer before: The problem was that other organizations in Gaza did not honour it.

Actually, it was honored by other organizations. The rate of launches fell to one or two a month, and those one or two may have been the work of Israeli collaborators and provocateurs.
 

patrica and edw jones (190)
Friday May 18, 2012, 10:57 pm
Have come to the conclusion that where Israel is concerned - there is always envy, jealousy and hatred. This is simply because a UN Resolution approved the creation of the State of Israel in 1947. The land given to the Jews was poor, untended and swampy in areas. The Jews - ever industrious - turned this land into the Jewel of the Middle East.........clever and resourceful people are the Jews- so unlike their Arab neighbours who invent nothing, love nothing and prefer to fight for what is NOT rightfully theirs. Palestinians make trouble wherever they set foot - that is why they were kicked out of Egypt and Jordan. The only country to offer them refuge? WHY ISRAEL OF COURSE.
 

patrica and edw jones (190)
Friday May 18, 2012, 11:00 pm
oH - FORGOT TO SAY ' HAPPY BIRTHDAY ISRAEL - AND MANY HAPPY RETURNS. BE'AHAVAT YISRAEL, SHALOM.
 

Stan B. (124)
Saturday May 19, 2012, 12:58 am
John D. " And as for the slur that I am an apologist for murderers, put up or shut up."
You were the only person I've ever come across who tried to justify the murder of the Fogel family and the slaughter of Israeli athletes at the Munich Olympics.
Or don't these evil crimes count as murder in your small, twisted mind?
 

Past Member (0)
Saturday May 19, 2012, 2:51 am
The Fogel parents? Filthy ethnic cleansing, land stealing fascists who had it coming to them. What else did they expect going to a war zone where there is no redress in law for the dispossessed? Moreover, they were child abusers, taking their children to that place to be indoctrinated into their own filthy ideology. Mourn their deaths? I've got better things to do.

Munich? An attack on Zionist Entity soldiers who were off duty, something the Palestinians learned from the Zionists who attacked and killed off duty Palestinian frreedom (and civilians) all the time. Get over it.
 

Rob and Jay B. (122)
Saturday May 19, 2012, 6:10 am
Here's a related article on still more corruption in the Palestinian Entity: http://www.care2.com/news/member/296771588/3344109

John D the homophobic Islamist propagandist who never sees an Islamic atrocity he doesn't whitewash, defend and deny without the slightest compassion for the victims. He's been on the article about the latest murders by the Islamic Dictatorship of Iran saying it is all a Zionist plot to discredit this wonderful, humane, peaceloving Islamic Paradise of Iran.

He makes the same tired leftist rants promoting the brutal, corrupt Palestianian Entity that persecutes gays, Christians, Shi'as and has sat on its lazy, unproductive butt living off the welfare of the hated infidels for decades while Israel and its Jewish leaders have prospered and contributed to world knowledge and progress earning over 180 Nobel Science prizes while the oppressive Islamic dominated world has only produced a tiny 10, despite that there are 100 times more Muslims than Jews in the world.

Spain translates and publishes more books in one year than all the Arab/Islamic occupied nations have in the past 1000. Islam stifles imagination and progress. If the Islamisists of the Palestinian Entity take Israel over it will turn into another Islamic oppressed, backward state, just like all those that surround it.

Name one Islamic ruled land that contributes anything to scientific, medical, modern knowledge.

John D is so riled about Israeli 'occupation' but he praises the invasion and occupation of the Western Sahara by his beloved Morocco that has driven 200,000 into refugee camps in Algeria and has been condemned for its brutality to the Sahwaris of the Western Sahara. He believes everything and anything spewed by the propaganda machine of Morocco or any Arab/Islamic entity. He could see a beheading in person and still deny it. Watch the excellent documentary by Javier Bardem on the police state Morocco has forced on the people of Western Sahara: "Sons of the Clouds: the last colony"

As for his (and the equally hateful Charles O) absurd common statement that Islamic occupied lands don't even outlaw gay people, that doesn't mean they tolerate us either. Not one Islamic ruled nation voted for the French/EU UN resolution to stop state persecution and killing of LGBT people. Not one. That says it all about your 'tolerant' Islamic rule. Every Islamic ruled country walked out of the recent UN Human Rights Council's attempt to add sexual orientation to the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The only human rights abuses John D, Mary P, Abdessalem and Charles O care about are only those that relate to the Jewish created homeland of Israel or the USA. What hypocrites. Hitler would be so proud of you all!
 

Past Member (0)
Saturday May 19, 2012, 6:23 am
Brought to you by the morons who actually stated that they would be murdered for being gay if they came to Morocco.
 

Carola May (20)
Saturday May 19, 2012, 6:35 am
John D IS a piece of work, as are all the other Israelophobes/Islamists here. John claims to be an atheist but knows all the phrases all the other Islamists parrot and is just as blindly hateful as the rest of them. Now he even has the audacity to state that all the Islamic hatred toward Israel has nothing to do with 'Jews' and Islam's commands for Muslims to kill them all before their day of resurrection, but just the compassion of the Muslims for their Palestani brothers, whom they do nothing for and persecute those who live in their lands.

Come on John D, Mary P, Abdessalem, Charles O and the rest of you Jew-hating Islamisists, let's hear you all renounce/condemn:

The desecration of the Jews' holiest site, the Temple Mount, with the conquering, invading and occupying Muslim's arrogant building of the Dome of the Rock and al Aqsa mosque. Talk about 'occupation'.

The Muslim invasion, conquest and occupation of Jerusalem.

Islam's command to kill all the Jews.

The brutality and corruption of the Palestinian Entity and its persecution of Christians, gays, Baha'is and Shi'ites.

These are simple 'human rights' issues you should be able to condemn surely. Let's hear it then. Do you condemn any of these? Of course none of you do. Islam has never apologised for any of the genocides, ethnic cleansings, invasions and occupations, destruction of other peoples' cultures and countries over the past 1400 years of its violent conquest, nor have any of you here ever done so, nor ever expressed dismay over the estimated 270million people killed in the spread of the cancer of Islam (80million alone in India!).

What a bunch of hypocrites. None of you denounces the terrible ethnic cleansing and genocide against non-Muslims going on right now in many Muslim occupied lands - Nigeria, Egypt (where Coptic Christians are the remnants of the original Egyptians before the Islam/Arab invasion, occupation and colonisation of Egypt), Turkey (3million Christians slaughtered last century and they are still destroying the churches/monasteries left behind), Indonesia, Malaysia, Iran, Iraq etc etc etc.

Let's hear you Islamists condemn the Islamic authority that recently issued the fatwa to destroy all the churches in the Gulf Region. Such silence from you all.

 

Rob and Jay B. (122)
Saturday May 19, 2012, 6:52 am
BTW John, we realize everything that contradicts your warped Islamic world view you think is because of the 'Zionist Entity'and the evil Jews who rule the whole world (you probably even believe in the Islamist 'Protocals of the Elders of Zion', that Nazi fairytale of ugly Jew hatred so popular with Muslims), and all Islamic dominated, occupied lands love gay people and give them full and equal rights (which in Islamic lands isn't much, granted).

Here's a good long study of Iran's systematic persecution and murder of over 4000 gay people since the Islamic Dictatorship gained power and it is from Human Rights Watch: http://www.hrw.org/reports/2010/12/15/we-are-buried-generation-0

You keep saying the meaningless mantra 'many Islamic countries don't even have laws against being gay', like that matters to homophobic Islamist hatemongers. Well, the homophobic hatemongering Islamic Dictatorship of Iran has no laws against being 'gay', as such, either, but they rule by glorious Islamic Sharia law which calls for their killing (the 'people of Lut' - old Mohammed copied that story wrong too).

Meanwhile Israel has taken in many gays fleeing persecution in surrounding Islamic occupied hate states, and Israel, while still having a ways to go for full equal rights for LGBT people, has welcomed them into their military long before it was even an issue in the US. What Muslim ruled land does that?

There is nothing more sad than an anti-gay self-hating homosexual like you. (Remember 'Gay Morocco' - can't trust those Moroccans?) How can you live with yourself.

Ask your Islamist friends here if they renounce the Islamic command to kill gay people. None of them ever have, nor will they. We've asked them many times. Do you renounce it? Such a simple question. You're a useful dhimmi to them now, but...
 

Charles O. (209)
Saturday May 19, 2012, 7:25 am
Above we see the conflict between ideology and reality.

The ideologues tell us that Israel can do no wrong. It is the Apple of God's Eye. We're led to believe that the Israelis today are the same people who followed Moses through the desert 3,000 years ago. And the billion or so people in the religions and ethnic groups targeted by Israel all deserve to die. The ideologues offer only one final "solution": a new crusade, a new religious war, a new genocide. They use selective indignation to whip themselves into a self-righteous frenzy.

The realists argue that people should be judged by their behavior, not by their alleged genes or tribal affiliations. They see religious war as abhorrent and fantastically counter-productive. They are willing to criticize the targeted people, but they are not willing to demonize religious and ethnic groups.

Those of us on the sidelines need to choose: Ideology or reality. War or peace. Life or death.

Will we judge people as collectives, on the basis of an alleged affiliation with biblical tribes, or will we judge people as individuals, on the basis of behavior?

Will we retreat further into the cave of ethnicity and pointless strife, or will we identify with humanity and foster cooperation?

I say that we should let the ideologues speak. The more they rant, the more they reveal themselves.
 

Charles O. (209)
Saturday May 19, 2012, 7:47 am
Patricia and Edw J. write:

> Have come to the conclusion that where Israel is concerned - there is always envy, jealousy and hatred. This is simply because a UN Resolution approved the creation of the State of Israel in 1947.

. .

The U.N. was created to foster peace, not war. If a U.N. resolution fosters sixty-four years of war, then maybe there is something wrong with the resolution!

Maybe there is something wrong with using terror and assassination to pressure world leaders into forcibly dividing people along ethnic lines. Maybe there is something wrong with rewarding terror. Maybe there is something wrong with dispossessing hundreds of thousands of people. Maybe there is something wrong with stealing 56% of Palestine and planting a fascist time-bomb in the heart of the Middle East.

For more information on this satanic divisive resolution and its aftermath, see:

* Alison Weir , "The Real Story of How Israel Was Created", 11 Oct 2011 (posted above)

* William A. Cook, "The Birth of Israel // A Tale of Lies, Deceit, and Terrorism", ICH, 12 May 2010 (posted above)

. .

Do I envy the fascists? Absolutely not! I thank god that I am NOT one of these soulless murderous aparatchiks.

I don't even envy the people in the Israeli peace movement: They have more courage than I have!
 

Rob and Jay B. (122)
Saturday May 19, 2012, 7:57 am
Here's a great article contrasting Israel's and the Palestinians' treatment of gay people - night and day:

"Israel, Palestine, and Gays"

by Paul Varnell (http://igfculturewatch.com/2002/08/28/israel-palestine-and-gays/)

LET'S TAKE A QUIZ. No peeking at the answers directly below.

1. Which Middle Eastern country has no sodomy laws nor uses vague charges such as "offenses against religion" or "immoral conduct" to prosecute and imprison gays and lesbians?

2. Which Middle Eastern country has a variety of gay organizations which safely conduct gay advocacy efforts?

3. Which Middle Eastern country has a gay and lesbian community center in its capital city?

4. Which Middle Eastern country holds annual Gay Pride parades?

5. Which Middle Eastern country has members of parliament who actively support and speak out on behalf of gays and lesbians?

6. In which Middle Eastern country did the head of state meet with gay activists?

7. Which Middle Eastern country lets gays and lesbians join its military services?

8. Which Middle Eastern country has broadcast programs about gays and lesbians on its television stations?

9. And a bonus question: When gays in Palestine are forced to flee persecution, what Middle Eastern country do they usually flee to?

Answers:

Israel
Israel
Israel
Israel
Israel
Israel
Israel
Israel
Israel

The contrasting treatment of gay men in neighboring Arab countries such as Saudi Arabia and Egypt is well known: Gays are beheaded or sentenced to long prison terms.

What seems less well known, however, is the appalling treatment of gays under Yassir Arafat's Palestinian Authority in the West Bank and Gaza. At least it was less known until Yossi Klein Halevi wrote about it in the August 19th New Republic. Palestine makes rural Texas look like San Francisco.

According to Halevi, one young man discovered to be gay was forced by Palestinian Authority police "to stand in sewage water up to his neck, his head covered by a sack filled with feces, and then he was thrown into a dark cell infested with insects." During one interrogation Palestinian police stripped him and forced him to sit on a Coke bottle.

When he was released he fled to Israel. If he were forced to return to Gaza, he said, "The police would kill me."

An American who foolishly moved into the West Bank to live with his Palestinian lover said they told everyone they were just friends, but one day they "found a letter under our door from the Islamic court. It listed the five forms of death prescribed by Islam for homosexuality, including stoning and burning. We fled to Israel that same day," he said.

The head of a Tel Aviv gay organization told Halevi, "The persecution of gays in the Palestinian Authority doesn't just come from the families or the Islamic groups, but from the P.A. itself."

Palestinian police have increasingly enforced Islamic religion law, he said: "It's now impossible to be an open gay in the P.A." He recalled that one gay man in the Palestinian police went to Israel for a short time. When he returned to the West Bank, Palestinian Authority police confined him to a pit without food or water until he died.

A 17-year-old gay youth recalled that he spent months in a Palestinian Authority prison "where interrogators cut him with glass and poured toilet cleaner into his wounds."

The U.S. State Department, which more and more seems to be living on some other planet, blandly noted in a 2001 human rights report, "In the Palestinian territories homosexuals generally are socially marginalized and occasionally receive physical threats." That's one way to put it.

In the last few years, Halevi reports, hundreds of gay Palestinians, mostly from the West Bank, have fled to Israel, usually to Tel Aviv, Israel's most cosmopolitan city. Many are desperately poor, he says, "but at least they're beyond the reach of their families and the P.A."

So it seems clear that Israel is the one country in the region in which gays have legal rights as citizens and live in safety and freedom.

Oddly, however, some gays and lesbians over on the anti-capitalist ("progressive") left sympathize with Palestinian terrorists and support the Palestinian Authority. One such fledgling group calls itself "Queers for Palestine," another is named "Queers Undermining Israeli Terrorism" (as if trying to stop terrorism against Israeli civilians is itself terrorism).

To be sure, no one should argue that gays and lesbians must support Israel just because it is vastly more gay-friendly. They don't. They may feel that some other political principles are more important than gay-friendliness.

But gays who support Palestine, and they seem almost entirely on the far reaches of the political left, give the lie to the frequent demand made by gays on the left that the rest of us must support some "progressive" politician or position because it supposedly benefits gays, even though doing so would compromise or violate some basic political principle we as individuals may hold.

Keep "Queers for Palestine" in mind next time some gay left advocate says that because you are gay you have to support some approved "gay" position. And remember the pit, the sewer water, the bag of feces and the toilet bowl cleaner.
 

Charles O. (209)
Saturday May 19, 2012, 8:09 am
Patricia and Edw J. write:

> The Jews - ever industrious - turned this land into the Jewel of the Middle East.........clever and resourceful people are the Jews- so unlike their Arab neighbours who invent nothing, love nothing and prefer to fight for what is NOT rightfully theirs.

When you make such statements, you tell us that you know nothing about the people targeted by Israel. Let me introduce you to one of these people:

Rafeef Ziadah -- "We teach life, sir!"

( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aKucPh9xHtM&feature=player_embedded )

. .

Let's take your statement and replace "Jew" with "German" and "Arab" with "Jew" and see how it sounds. E.g.:

> The Germans -- ever industrious --

Wow, how ironic. It sounds like something we might have heard in the Third Reich, seventy years ago. Have we learned nothing, since then?

I'm an American raised in the Christian tradition. I reject collectivism and give the individual primacy over tribe and state. I invite you to do the same. Notice that Christ addresses Jews as individuals. Some -- the Pharisees -- he berates. He does not make an idol out of "The Jews".
 

Charles O. (209)
Saturday May 19, 2012, 8:41 am
Hello Rob and Jay B..

I wish the 3,000,000 Palestinians could enjoy the same rights that gays enjoy in Israel!

It seems like you oppose sexual discrimination but wholeheartedly support ethnic discrimination. Why not oppose ALL discrimination. Why not respect ALL people and treat all people as human beings?

Wouldn't that be a lot simpler than the current system?
 

Charles O. (209)
Saturday May 19, 2012, 9:00 am
Carola May writes:

> Let's hear you Islamists condemn the Islamic authority that recently issued the fatwa to destroy all the churches in the Gulf Region. Such silence from you all.

If this is happening, it is a consequence of the religious war that you Zionists so gleefully support and promote.

Obviously, I condemn the destruction of churches. That's one reason why I strongly opposed Clinton's 1999 aggression against Yugoslavia and the ensuing take-over of Kosovo by the Islamic KLA narco-terrorists. Many historic churches were torched by these thugs.

But the rival thugs -- the Zionists -- are no better. In fact, they're a lot worse, because they seek a far larger war, and their war-making is the ultimate cause of all of this thuggery.

As late as 1919, Arabs were hailing Jews as "blood brothers" and welcoming their influx into Palestine.

As late as 1947, Arabs were applauding the U.S. as a beacon of freedom.

This goodwill has been destroyed, and we are now on a downwards spiral, going straight to hell. The promoters of war advise us to continue along this spiral -- dig ourselves out by digging the hole deeper. That makes no sense to me.

I am trying to put on the breaks and slow the descent. That is why I do not join in the rounds of gleeful condemnation and accusation. It's just not helpful. It makes things worse, not better. It leads to more churches being torched.

Where the war-makers preach dehumanization, I recommend rehumanization. Treat the targeted people like human beings, and support those who respect human rights.

Reverse direction. Turn the downwards spiral into an upwards spiral. We don't need this apocalyptic war to the death with over a billion people in our cross-hairs. We don't need it. It's stupid. It's insane.
 

Stephen Brian (23)
Saturday May 19, 2012, 12:00 pm
Hi Charles,

You REALLY need to look up what "idiom" means. Taking things non-idiomatically, you would have to conclude that there really is a "book of history" and that countries' pages can be erased from it. The meaning of the idiom is extremely clear, and it has absolutely nothing to do with a specific government or policy. Erasing a country's page from the book of history means destroying it so thoroughly that future generations would not even know it existed. This is the obvious meaning, and one confirmed by Farsi-speakers.

I know your point was that the two are not the same. Your point was wrong.

No, the claim to rights is not generally based upon some gene or ancient history. The history is used within the Jewish community to stir up support for Israel, and its primary use prior to 1948 was to get Jews to identify publicly as a nation which is considered entitled, under current conventions, to self-determination. If you want to understand the essence of a movement, ask its supporters. As a rule, supporters of a movement see nothing wrong with its core so they will have no problem proudly telling what it is. Some may see it as politically incorrect, but if you do not identify yourself as an opponent, they will open up. This is true of every political movement including Zionism. What you should never do is look at what its opponents claim and then pretend that you know better than its supporters what they are about. You don't know the essence of Zionism because you never asked, or if you did ask, you did not listen to the answer.

That's right: History has demonstrated repeatedly that Jews cannot trust their security to non-Jews. That does not make all non-Jews enemies. It only means that there are enemies among them, and that non-Jews will not reliably stick their necks to protect Jews. There is a huge difference between "will not fight for you" and "enemy". You would need an enormous blind-spot not to see that, so your real question here is why you have that blind-spot.

The Egyptian government does not take religious incompatibility as an axiom, and neither, generally, does the Israeli. Egyptian society, on the other hand, includes a violent element that does, which is large enough that normal policing doesn't work effectively.

When I said the organization didn't do its homework, I referred to central points of multiple articles drawn only from the organization's homepage. Do you want me to look up more?

A much larger mass-displacement of populations was expected to run peacefully in India at about the same time. With 64 years' hindsight, we can see the results. At the time, no, people were not generally expected to react violently when told to go to their newly independent homelands. In fact, Ben-Gurion had far less reason to expect such trouble than most: A lot of Jews had recently voluntarily done something similar, and were certainly not violently opposed to it. Prior to the Indian partition, he would have had no reason to expect violent opposition to displacement, and even after that, he may have thought it was idiosyncratic to India, unlikely to happen in the Middle East.

So long as both sides are armed, neither one individually has control over the situation. Responsibility lies on all armed factions. Equality of power doesn't matter.

Had the tractor reached the Syrian lines, the driver could have been arrested for crossing the border without a visa in a normal "order him out of the vehicle and only fire if he resists" arrest, not a "shoot first, ask questions later" response. That's how far an unarmed vehicle could have gone. Alternatively, they could have placed landmines in front of their lines and placed signs informing everybody not to drive there.

You're still assuming that they needed Argov to die to set off the war, and that they wanted a war. They had 239 other attacks on their list. The relation between the assassination of Argov and the Lebanon war is similar to that between the assissantion of Archduke Ferdinand and WWI. The war was coming one way or the other, and Argov's death just happened to be the first way that arose.

Now you're saying Israel launched dozens of rockets and mortars from Gaza against its own people? That's almost funnier. No, the 208 recorded rocket and mortar attacks from Gaza between June 18, 2008, and October of that year were not from Israelis. They were 208 violations of the ceasefire.
 

Charles O. (209)
Saturday May 19, 2012, 12:28 pm
Stephen B. writes:

> The war was coming one way or the other,

Yes, because Ben Gurion, from 1918 onwards, had the hots for Lebanese territory.

. .

> From the beginning, Zionists advocated a "Jewish State" not just in Palestine, but also in Jordan, southern Lebanon, and the Golan Heights as well. In 1918 Ben-Gurion described the future "Jewish state's" frontiers in details as follows:

> > "to the north, the Litani river [in southern Lebanon], to the northeast, the Wadi 'Owja, twenty miles south of Damascus; the southern border will be mobile and pushed into Sinai at least up to Wadi al-'Arish; and to the east, the Syrian Desert, including the furthest edge of Transjordan" (Expulsion Of The Palestinians, p. 87) Click here to view the "Greater Israel" map that was submitted by the Zionists to the peace conference after WWI.

> In an article published by Ben-Gurion in 1918, titled "The Rights of the Jews and others in Palestine," he conceded that the Palestinian Arabs have the same rights as Jews. He explained that Palestinians had these rights since they had inhabited the land "for hundreds of years". He stated in the article:

> > "Palestine is not an empty country . . . on no account must we injure the rights of the inhabitants." Ben-Gurion often returned to this point, emphasizing that Palestinian Arabs had "the full right" to an independent economic, cultural, and communal life, but not political. (Shabtai Teveth, p. 37-38)

> But Ben-Gurion set limits. The Palestinian people were incapable by themselves of developing Palestine, and they had no right to stand in the way of the Jews. He argued in 1918, that Jews' rights sprang not only from the past, but also from the future. In 1924 he declared:

> > "We do not recognize the right of the [Palestinian] Arabs to rule the country, since Palestine is still undeveloped and awaits its builders." In 1928 he pronounced that "the [Palestinian] Arabs have no right to close the country to us [Jews]. What right do they have to the Negev desert, which is uninhabited?"; and in 1930, "The [Palestinian] Arabs have no right to the Jordan river, and no right to prevent the construction of a power plant [by a Jewish concern]. They have a right only to that which they have created and to their homes." (Shabtai Teveth, p. 38)

> In other words, the Palestinian people are entitled to no political rights whatsoever, and if they have any rights at all, these rights are confined to their places of residence. Ironically, this statement was written when the Palestinian people constituted 85% of Palestine's population, and owned and operated over 97% of its lands!

-- David Ben-Gurion-A Brief Biography & Quotes, 23 Oct 2001

. .

> Ben-Gurion "had a dream" to annex southern Lebanon to the "Jewish state", and to establish a Christian state north of the Litani River. At the beginning of the 1948 war, he stated:

> > 'The Muslims rule of Lebanon is artificial and easily undermined. A Christian state ought to be set up whose southern borders would be Litani River. Then we'll form an alliance with it." In the coming years he repeated this idea, and according to Moshe Sharett, Moshe Dayan (who was Israeli's chief of staff in the early 1950s) responded favorably to this idea and who according to Sharett said: "In his [Dayan] view, all we need to do is to find a Christian Lebanese officer, perhaps no higher than a captain, and win him over or buy him with money, so that he would declare himself the savior of Maronite population. Then the Israel army would enter Lebanon, occupy the territory in question and establish a Christian government which would form an alliance with Israel." Sharett himself considered this an "awful" idea. (1949, The First Israelis, p. 10 & Righteous Victims, p. 497)

> What's ironic that this "awful" idea was precisely executed thirty later by Manahem Bagin and Ariel Sharon during the Israeli invasion and occupation of Lebanon between 1982-2000.

-- Expansionism (or The Greater Israel), 03 Dec 2001
 

Charles O. (209)
Saturday May 19, 2012, 12:45 pm
Stephen B. writes:

> No, the 208 recorded rocket and mortar attacks from Gaza between June 18, 2008, and October of that year were not from Israelis.

. .

See:

"Rockets and Mortars Fired From Gaza in 2008

How do you arrive at 208? I count 19 rockets and 18 mortars fired after the ceasefire.

Here's the figures for the entire year:

* Jan: 136 rockets, 241 mortars
* Feb: 228 rockets, 257 mortars
* Mar: 103 rockets, 196 mortars
* Apr: 373 rockets, 145 mortars
* May: 206 rockets, 149 mortars
* Jun: 153 rockets, 84 mortars (before 18 Jun ceasefire)
* Jun: 5 rockets, 3 mortars (after 18 Jun ceasefire)
* Jul: 4 rockets, 8 mortars
* Aug: 8 rockets, 3 mortars
* Sep: 1 rockets, 3 mortars
* Oct: 1 rockets, 1 mortars
* Nov: 125 rockets, 68 mortars
* Dec: 361 rockets, 241 mortars
 

Stephen Brian (23)
Saturday May 19, 2012, 2:08 pm
Hi Charles,

Did you miss the part about the 239 other attacks? It doesn't matter whether they wanted the territory, which was turned into a no-man's land rather than settled (as would have been the case in real expansionism). There was a civil war in Lebanon and, just like the current one in Syria is spilling over into Lebanon, and just like civil conflict in Libya spilled over into its neughbours, that civil war was going to spill over the border into Israel. That's what the operation was about.

I know that the original desired territory was well beyond the current borders of Israel. At the time, non-Arabs generally thought of Arabs as a single people. Even among Arabs there were and still are the pan-Arabist Baath parties which relied upon this belief. Zionists of the time thought in terms of dividing the Middle East between Arabs and Jews, not dividing just the Palestine Mandate between the two groups. In terms of the whole region, Zionists of the time still didn't actually ask for terribly much.

This is also why Ben-Gurion did not believe that Palestinian Arabs had the full political rights which they claimed: As part of a larger people, they would have every right to go and join their people in other Arab states, but no right to demand separate territory from them. They would have rights to personal property, but not to sovereignty over public or uninhabited lands. Also, the "owned and operated over 97% of its lands" is absolute trash. First, the Palestinian tenant-farmers mostly worked on lands owned by people not living in the area. This is how the Zionists bought the land on which they lived. Second, nobody has ever operated 97% of current Israel's lands. Most of that territory is uninhabited and (due to high temperatures and a lack of irrigation) currently uninhabitable. Remember, the whole land is in question when it comes to sovereignty, not just private property.

Sorry about the wrong number. I feel silly: I misread the numbers of attacks: Where there were 5 rockets and 3 mortars, I read 53 total attacks. (I was actually annoyed that the two were not listed separately when, of course, they were.) That still leaves 37 violations, or roughly two per week of the ceasefire, so qualitatively nothing really changes. That ceasefire was violated dozens of times by groups in Gaza, unless you still entertain the crazy notion that Israel fired on itself 37 times.
 

Stan B. (124)
Saturday May 19, 2012, 4:49 pm
John D. Israel haters come pretty low but you are without doubt the lowest of the low.
Take a bow.
 

Past Member (0)
Saturday May 19, 2012, 5:04 pm
Thakk you Stan B. I am honoured and gratified that you cannot refute the factual articles I post, so you have to resort to name-calling and smears.
 

Stan B. (124)
Saturday May 19, 2012, 9:02 pm
John D. You should be certified not gratified.
 

Charles O. (209)
Saturday May 19, 2012, 10:36 pm
Stephen B. writes --

> There was a civil war in Lebanon and, just like the current one in Syria is spilling over into Lebanon, and just like civil conflict in Libya spilled over into its neughbours, that civil war was going to spill over the border into Israel. That's what the operation was about.

So that explains why Israel killed 18,000 innocent people and rendered another 200,000 homeless.

What if the victims had been Jewish. Would we make excuses for a country that kills 18,000 Jews and makes 200,000 Jews homeless? I hope not. So then we are left with a huge double-standard: Killing Jews is wrong, but killing non-Jews is just fine.

. .

> Zionists of the time thought in terms of dividing the Middle East between Arabs and Jews,

And what gave Zionists (invaders from Europe) the right to inflict this poisonous deadly divide on the people of the Middle East? Do Zionists have themselves confused with God? What insane arrogance!

What did these Zionists plan to do with Arab Jews? -- take a sword and slice them in two?

And WHY? WHY were Zionists so eager to impose this fatal division on the region?

. .

> That ceasefire was violated dozens of times by groups in Gaza, unless you still entertain the crazy notion that Israel fired on itself 37 times.

So the number of attacks fell from hundreds to a handful, but the Zionists sees nothing significant here? That tells us that he really doesn't care about the people of Sderot. He exploits them for propaganda purposes, but is perfectly happy to see them bombarded. And maybe he has a point: After all, the tin rockets do very little damage. They are basically a nuisance. So it is perfectly reasonable to think that the Zionist would have his collaborators launch a few rockets, so that Israel can reap a huge propaganda victory at almost no cost.
 

Stephen Brian (23)
Sunday May 20, 2012, 12:09 am
Hi Charles :)

Roughly 18,000 Lebanese were killed by war during the 1982 war, but it is important to note that there were two wars going on at the same time in Lebanon and Israel was not the only other country invading Lebanon at the time. Syria was there as well, also killing Lebanese (those allied with Israel), and then there was the fighting between the Lebanese National Movement, the PLO, and 12 other militias which were already fighting. Israeli forces are not responsible for civilians killed by other groups. I'm not saying its didn't kill any civilians: Urban warfare always does that. However, the 18,000 is a massive overestimate.

Let's look at the costs and benefits of the war: The obvious cost is that some of the 18,000 Lebanese people who died during that period would not have died in the civil war. To get a fair estimate, of the real toll of that war, let's consider that it was one year out of a 15-year Lebanese civil war, and subtract off one fifteenth of the dead of that civil war. The only numbers I can get for the dead of the civil war are from Wiki, 130,000-250,000 (or more) and uncited. Let's go with 150,000 (not counting the excess deaths themselves) to make the math easier, so we can subtract about 10,000 from the dead. That leaves the cost at about 8,000 excess Lebanese dead, which sounds about accurate given the number dead in the attack on Beirut.

Now let's look at the benefits: The population of Lebanon in 1990 was about 3,000,000. Israel's Northern District is about a fifth of that of Israel. In 1990, that was about 900,000 people, or 30% of that of Lebanon. Nobody had any way of knowing this at the time, but the war was roughly half over when Israel invaded. Again going with that 150,000 figure and assuming the spillover had 10% of the population-proportional intensity, Israel would have seen a little over 2,000 of its people killed had the war spilled over. On the other hand, I suspect the mechanism of spillover would have been Christian militias crossing the border for cover and then trying to continue their campaign in Lebanon but basing in Israel, drawing attacks upon themselves in Israeli territory, so the population-proportionate intensity may have been well over 10%.

Strictly speaking, this (extremely rough) math puts Israel trading 4 Lebanese lives for each Israeli. It sucks in a general humanitarian way, but the job of a country's armed forces is to protect its citizens, not those of other countries, and certainly not those of countries with which it was at least formally at war since independence. (Lebanon and Israel never signed a peace agreement after 1948.) Attacks on Israel are generally unjustified because the attackers have non-violent options and, while I don't expect you to believe this, without the attacks, their own people are generally not at risk.

What gave Zionists the right to divide the Middle East? Nothing. They didn't think in terms of them dividing it themselves. They thought in terms of the Madnate-powers which had conquered it and been entrusted with preparing it for independence, and thus had the right to divide it as they saw fit, doing so. They expected Arab Jews outside of Israel to move to it peacefully (which happened) and Arab Muslims to leave peacefully. Why were they so eager to impose this division? They needed a state they could defend and govern, and where should they have put it? I understand there was an offer in Africa, but given the need for political backing by the rest of the Jewish community, including religious Jews, only one place was viable.

Thirty-seven is not just a handful. Combined with Hamas' acquisition of anti-tank weapons, it implied no intent to maintain the ceasefire indefinitely. All those rockets that were stockpiled were going to hit Sderot and other towns anyways.
"After all, the tin rockets do very little damage."??? Qassam MK2 rockets carry 10 kg fertilizer-bombs (or TNT). The newer ones carry 20 kg. The MK1s are apparently no longer used. The casings turn to pretty nasty shrapnel. Would you be willing to put your money where your mouth is and stand around one while it detonates? Sderot suffers so few casualties because nearly every structure in the town contains some sort of bomb-shelter and the whole town is rigged with an early-warning system.

Hi John,
More rationalization of murder, I see. This time it's the Fogel family. I see. Of course calling you an apologist for murderers was just a slur. Frankly, it was more along the lines of flattery. What you really are is much, much worse.
 

Stephen Brian (23)
Sunday May 20, 2012, 12:22 am
Hi again John,

I'm sure E.U. imports from Israel will drop even further as the Euro crashes and its economy goes into another recession. I bet you'll be extra proud then.
 

Past Member (0)
Sunday May 20, 2012, 12:56 am
Hello Stephen.

The Fogel parents took a risk. Moreover, they were loathsome racist individuals. They lost out. Get over it.
 

Past Member (0)
Sunday May 20, 2012, 1:12 am
Stephen

"I'm sure E.U. imports from Israel will drop even further"

They will, for whatever reason.
 

Charles O. (209)
Sunday May 20, 2012, 7:15 am
Stephen B. writes:

> Would you be willing to put your money where your mouth is and stand around one while it detonates?

. .

The resident of Sderot is a lot safer than the residents of the Occupied Territories. Let's look at some numbers:

457 Palestinians killed by Israel in 2007 *
92 Palestinian children killed by Israel in 2007 *
10 Israelis killed by Palestinians in 2007 *
22 Israelis killed by Qassam rockets since 2000 +

* Gideon Levy, "Twilight Zone / The children of 5767", *Haaretz*, 28 Sep 2007

+ "Qassam rocket", wikipedia

So the number of Palestinians killed by Israel in one year is about TWENTY TIMES GREATER than the number of Israelis killed by Qassams over the last TWELVE YEARS!

Using the sort of calculations you use to justify the aggression against Lebanon, Israel launching Qassam's against itself could be very easily justified. The gain to Israel far outweighs the loss. Israel gets to do an encore performance of its Poor Helpless Defenseless Little Israel act, while depicting Palestinians as Savage Insane Unstoppable Diabolical Genocidal Hate-Filled Subhuman Aggressors. And all it costs is a little inconvenience for the residents of Sderot.


 

Charles O. (209)
Sunday May 20, 2012, 7:56 am
Stephen B. writes:

> The obvious cost is that some of the 18,000 Lebanese people who died during that period would not have died in the civil war.

So you're arguing that the chance of being killed in the civil war was a justification for Israel's killing in 1982? You should get a job working for the cigarette industry. You could make the argument that society saves health care costs when people die before they have a chance to get old, and you could then call for the government to subsidize the Poor Helpless Defenseless Little cigarette corporations.

Anyway, the wikipedia article makes no mention of the danger of "spill over". After all, Israel retained a twelve-mile-wide "security zone" from its 1978 invasion of Lebanon ("Operation Litani").

According to the wikipedia article, the real purpose of Israel's 1982 invasion was to "drive out the PLO":

> In August 1981, Israeli prime minister Menachem Begin was re-elected, and in September, Begin and his defense minister Ariel Sharon began to lay plans for a second invasion of Lebanon for the purpose of driving out the PLO. Sharon's intention was to "destroy the PLO military infrastructure and, if possible, the PLO leadership itself; this would mean attacking West Beirut, where the PLO headquarters and command bunkers were located".[17]

> Sharon also wanted to ensure the presidency of Bashir Gemayel in Lebanon.[citation needed] In return for Israeli assistance, Sharon expected Gemayel, once installed as president, to sign a peace treaty with Israel, presumably stabilizing Israel's northern border.[citation needed] Begin brought Sharon's plan before the Knesset in December 1981; however, after strong objections were raised, Begin felt compelled to set the plan aside. But Sharon continued to press the issue. In January 1982, Sharon met with Gemayel on an Israeli vessel off the coast of Lebanon and discussed a plan "that would bring Israeli forces as far north as the edge of Beirut International Airport".[citation needed] In February, with Begin's input, Yehoshua Seguy, the chief of military intelligence, was sent to Washington to discuss the issue of Lebanon with Secretary of State Alexander Haig.[citation needed] In the meeting, Haig "stressed that there could be no assault without a major provocation from Lebanon".[18]

-- "Lebanese Civil War", *wikipedia*

So Israel tried for months to get the PLO to create that "major provocation", but the PLO refused to take the bait. So Israel was forced to turn to Abu Nidal, a bitter foe of the PLO. Then Israel blamed the PLO for Abu Nidal's assassination attempt, and sold the attack to the U.S. as a "major provocation" justifying Israeli aggression.

. .

> Thus, for example, the PLO is understood to be simply a "terrorist organization" because of its operations against Israeli civilian targets, but Israeli state terrorism directed at Arab civilian targets is portrayed as "self-defense" and "retaliation".

> The magnitude of American misunderstanding of the Arab-Palestinian-Israeli conflcit is suggested, in one example, by the little-known statistic that the total number of Israeli civilians killed in all acts of terrorism from 1967 to 1982 was 282, less than the number of Arab civilians killed in _one Israeli bombing raid of Beirut on July 17-18, 1981.

-- Cheryl A. Rubenberg, /Israel And The American National Interest/, p. 3
 

Charles O. (209)
Sunday May 20, 2012, 8:24 am
Stephen B. writes:

> [Zionists] expected Arab Jews outside of Israel to move to it peacefully (which happened) and Arab Muslims to leave peacefully. Why were they so eager to impose this division? They needed a state they could defend and govern, and where should they have put it? I understand there was an offer in Africa, but given the need for political backing by the rest of the Jewish community, including religious Jews, only one place was viable.

. .

So Zionists expected their machinations to produce a huge CONTRACTION in the sphere of Jewish influence in the Middle East? Under the Zionist plan, Jews throughout the Middle East would abandon their connections, move to Israel, and effectively ghettoize themselves. Jews would no longer be spread throughout the Middle East. Instead, they would be concentrated in one little ghetto. The Middle East would then be divided -- Jews on one side of the wall and non-Jews on the other side.

And this was the Zionist plan to "Avert Another Holocaust"? The plan seems far more likely to engender genocide than avert it! Under Zionism, "Never again!" is transformed into "Again and again!"

But the ZIonist leaders were not quite as naive as Stephen B. suggests. They knew that millions of people would not uproot themselves PEACEFULLY. Their social engineering would require the massive application of FORCE and TERROR. Terror was used to force much of the Palestinian population out, and, as Naeim Giladi informs us in "The Jews of Iraq" (http://www.jewsagainstzionism.com/zionism/impact/iraqijews.cfm), false-flag terror was used by the Zionists against fellow Jews to induce Jews to move to Israel and make "aliya" (ascent) -- or as derisive Arab Jews came to call it, "yerida" (descent).

Yes, the Zionists "needed a state". Their "need for a state" outweighed everything else. Under the guise of defending the Jewish people, they defended their state and sacrificed the people. They became politicians.

. .

> Instead of Zionism being the hope of the Jews, their blood was to be the political salvation of Zionism.

-- Lenni Brenner, Zionism In The Age Of Dictators, 1983, p. 238
 

Past Member (0)
Sunday May 20, 2012, 9:09 am
Have you seen this? The video can be seen at the link.

http://electronicintifada.net/blogs/ali-abunimah/murder-fun-and-morale-shocking-video-lethal-israeli-attack-sleeping-palestinian

Murder for fun and "morale": Shocking video of lethal Israeli attack on sleeping Palestinian prisoners
Ali Abunimah

May 17, 2012



The camera follows heavily armed Israeli security personnel raiding a prison dormitory, shouting at the prisoners to get out of bed, and that they would be shot if they didn’t obey orders.

The prisoners can be heard screaming in terror at the surprise attack. It was a night of brutal and lethal violence that Israeli participants would describe as one that was "beautiful" and "happy."

One of the Israeli attackers shouts, amid flashes, flame and smoke: "I want to open these gates and take care of these little sons of whores." Other Israelis shout vulgar Arabic insults at the prisoners regarding their mothers.

Prisoners writhe in agony and fear. One can be seen – in images reminiscent of Abu Ghraib – lying on the ground as an Israeli points a gun at him shouting "lie on your stomach!"

Others are shot without apparent reason.

These are scenes from a video that was shown in April 2011 by the investigative program Ovda on Israel’s Channel 2 television station. The violent attack it records against the Palestinian prisoners on 22 October 2007 was real, but it was carried out as a "training exercise" for Israeli security personnel at Ketziot Prison to boost their "morale" and "motivation."

One Palestinian, Muhammad Ashqar, was killed. No one has been charged in connection with his death although Israel recently agreed to pay compensation to his family.

This video, Ovda said, is one "the whole system" has been trying to keep under wraps for more than three years.

The deputy commander of the Israel Prison Service would rate his men’s performance in this horrifying and murderous violence with a "ten."

This shocking video and the events around it provide a rare glimpse into the lives of thousands of Palestinian prisoners held in Israel’s jails, more than 2,000 of whom recently completed a 28-day hunger strike against the cruel and inhumane treatment they receive.
Raising "morale" and "motivation"

Control of Ketziot Prison in the southern Naqab (Negev) region of historic Palestine was handed to the Israel Prison Service (IPS) from the Israeli army in 2007. The IPS then promised to toughen its handling of the prisoners, according to the Ovda narrator.

According to Addameer, Ketziot, also known as Ansar or Negev Prison, is a primary detention place for Palestinians held in "administrative detention" without charge or trial.

One of the goals of the 2:00 am "training drill" shown in this video was to "raise the morale and motivation for the prison staff," according to Ovda, citing IPS documents.

The video is captioned "Massada Unit Training - archive," which is described as "the most combative unit in the prison service."

The "training" task given to the unit was to search for contraband in one of the prison’s wings.

The use of Palestinians – not just prisoners – as training guinea pigs for Israeli violence did not end with this incident. On 27 March, Rashad Shawakha, 28, was killed in cold blood in an attack on the West Bank village of Rammoun that was part of a "traning exercise" by an Israeli undercover unit.
A declaration of war

Palestinian prisoners during the Israeli attack at Ketziot Prison

But as far "as the prisoners are concerned," the narrator says, "the surprise incursion by masked fighters into the prison has only one meaning – a declaration of war."

The prisoners however are "stunned," and resistance is "insignificant." Meanwhile a voice is heard on the video of one of the Israeli personnel saying "the shooting is correct" (3:28) meaning that the shooting we hear in the background is authorized.

"This is not live fire," the narrator says, meaning regular bullets are not being used, "but these demonstration-dispersing measures could also kill."

But of course there was no demonstration to be dispersed. The prisoners had been asleep – in barred dormitories and in tents on the heavily-fortified prison’s grounds – when they were attacked with weapons that Israel authorities refuse to identify.

And presumably the prisoners did not know it wasn’t live fire and that they weren’t about to be killed. And the weapons used did kill on that night.

As things got out of hand, two commanders sent the Massada Unit fighters to storm the other wings of the prison.

At one point, an Israeli officer can be seen and heard speaking into a microphone as he faces the burning prison enclosure. He shouts in broken Arabic, "to all the prisoners, for the last time, whoever comes out and lies down on his stomach, we will not shoot him" (7:23).

"This is the last time before we shoot at everyone," he says (7:50).

The attackers, the narrator notes, shot with abandon despite the darkness.
An unknown weapon

A Palestinian identified as "Nabil" a former prisoner at Ketziot, told Ovda that the weapons fired by the Israelis caused extreme pain. "It strikes your body, and explodes," Nabil said (8:15).

A second former prisoner who is not identified said that the weapons contain marbles.

Nabil, showing marks on his back, explained, "I was hit on the back and I couldn’t bear it, imagine if it hit me in the head, or the eye or another sensitive area."

The IPS, Ovda said, refused to disclose what weapon they used against the prisoners.
"One of the Arabs is wounded" - the murder of Muhammad Ashqar

Muhammad Ashqar lies fatally wounded and unattended on the ground

"Dani, Dani, one of the Arabs is wounded," an Israeli attacker is heard saying (9:01).

The camera pans to a man lying on the ground, with blood on his head.

Other voices, off camera: "Is there anyone there taking care of him?" "No, no-one, only Dima [a Russian name] is there with him."

The man lying on the ground unattended is Muhammad Ashqar, who was due to be released in a few months. There is no evidence he was doing anything to threaten his attackers.

Asqhar "had been jailed nearly two years before the incident for membership in Islamic Jihad," according to Haaretz which reported on 3 May that Israel agreed to pay 1.2 million shekels ($312,000) in compensation to his family.

But, the newspaper added:

However, the State Prosecution’s Office closed the case against the guards involved in the search, which ended with a dead prisoner, 15 injured prisoners, 15 injured guards and a burned section of the jail.

It also noted:

The authorities first told the family that Ashkar had been shot while trying to escape, his father, Seti Ashkar, told Haaretz. Afterward they said he had accidentally been shot during the riot.

Muhammad’s brother Loai, was also held at Ketziot prison without charge or trial during the 22 October 2007 attack.
Prisoner shot while negotiating with guards

Moments after the footage of Ashqar lying on the ground the video shows another prisoner emerge from one of the buildings into the yard (10:00). The Israeli attackers are negotiating with him. Yet in the midst of talking to him and for no apparent reason, they shoot at him. He falls to the ground with blood pouring from a wound in his leg. No one attends to him.

Sitting on the ground, the wounded prisoner tries to treat himself, shouting at the other prisoners in the tent to come out, presumably lest they suffer the same fate.
Shot without provocation

Smadar Ben Natan, a lawyer representing the family of Muhammad Ashqar told Ovda that she found:

The Massada Unit fighters shot the prisoners even when there was no danger to their lives;
The commanders’ initial plan was to tie the prisoners to their beds while they were still asleep, but that plan was shelved at the last moment;
The Ketziot wardens were insufficiently trained.

"Ten"

When asked how he’d grade the wardens and fighters involved, Dov Lutzki, Deputy Prison Service commander told Ovda, "I’d give them a ten. This event ended up with lethal, tragic results of a prisoner being hurt when there was no intent to get to that result, but from then until this very day night searches are a routine way to handle security prisoners."

Dov Lutzki, Deputy Commander of the Israel Prison Service, gave his troops a "ten."

When asked if "raising morale" was a good enough reason to mount such an operation, Lutzki responded: "A warden must believe in his own ability. He has to understand that his position is important, that he is protecting the homeland via the way he does his job. Every attempt to express weakness is immediately seen by the other party as an opportunity to achieve additional achievements."
Unfit prison commander promoted

The commander of Ketziot at the time of this attack was Shlomi Cohen. He had a history of "messy complications" after two prisoners escaped from the Shikma prison in Ashkelon that he previously commanded, according to Ovda. An investigation committee suggested that Cohen’s suitability to command a "security prison" be "reconsidered" and yet he was promoted and placed in charge of Ketziot.

Cohen’s propensity for brutality is something he attested to himself. In one video clip shown by Ovda, the commander is seen lecturing two prisoners, "it is true that for the past year and a half you’re living in much harsher conditions, because it turns out that’s the only way to keep you."
A night of fun and "happiness"

At one point, possibly after the attack the cameraman asks one officer to pose for a picture "as a souvenir of the events in Ketziot." The officer in a blue shirt and helmet approaches, smiling (6:30).

As we hear gun shots and see flames in another sequence, an off-camera voice says in Hebrew, "what beauty" or fun. Another calls out, "this is really beautiful! Film! Film!"

Dima – presumably the same Dima who filmed the dying Muhammad Ashqar – is summoned to film as the Israeli attackers joke and laugh.

One starts singing a song about how happy things were before he was born.

"It’s happy, eh. It’s a happy day today."

"It’s happy, eh. It’s a happy day today," another Israeli says. A comrade responds: "That’s what you wanted. For sure, brother, it’s the most beautiful thing. Excellent."

The Israel Prison Service issued this statement, according to Ovda:

Within one hour the whole prison was lying on the ground, yelling that they surrender. We intend to send the prisoners to trial, to punish them and to demand that they pay for the damage.

It is this incomprehensible, gratuitous cruelty and inhumanity that undoubtedly helped spark and will sustain the Palestinian prisoners movement.

With thanks to Dena Shunra for assistance with translation from Hebrew and analysis.
 

Abdessalam Diab (153)
Sunday May 20, 2012, 1:37 pm
Farewell Israel?

Video

Is the American-Jewish romance with Israel coming to an end? Are the American Jews known for their liberal views distancing themselves from Israel? Or is it simply an overstatement? Do they support the current Israeli policies? Does the Israeli lobby represent their views? And do they have a strong connection to the Holy Land? Cross Talk with Norman Finkelstein, Daniel Pollak and Mouin Rabbani.

May 16, 2012 - Video By RT

It deserves the time you will spend watching the video . Plaese watch :

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article31340.htm
 

Stan B. (124)
Sunday May 20, 2012, 3:34 pm
And a very Happy Jerusalem Day to all the wonderful people of Israel.

Israel Celebrates Jerusalem Day
by Arutz Sheva Staff

" On Saturday night and Sunday Israelis will celebrate Jerusalem Day, which marks the reunification of Jerusalem in the 1967 Six Day War after 19 years of Jordanian occupation of the eastern part of the city.

The outnumbered Jewish defenders of the Old City and its Jewish residents, who had lived there continuously for hundreds of years, were forced to evacuate during Israel's War of Independence. The Jordanians destroyed 48 of the 49 synagogues they overran, used gravestones from the ancient Mount of Olives Cemetery for latrines and closed the Old City to Jews.

Synagogues were full Saturday night as many Israelis held special, festive prayer sessions in honor of the 45th anniversary of the capital’s reunification, declared a minor Jewish holiday by Israel's Chief Rabbinate. Some synagogues recite the Hallel prayer in the morning and recite some of the holiday prayers. Memorial services are also held for IDF soldiers who fell freeing the city.

The government will hold a special session Sunday at Ammunition Hill in Jerusalem, which was the site of some of the Six Day War’s fiercest battles and where 36 paratroopers died. During the session the government will vote on a series of motions aimed to develop Jerusalem in terms of tourism, economy and more."



 

Carol Dreeszen (364)
Sunday May 20, 2012, 4:27 pm
HAPPY HAPPY BIRTHDAY ISRAEL!!!! May you have an indefinite LIFE TIME!!!! God Bless Israel!!!!
 

Charles O. (209)
Sunday May 20, 2012, 4:33 pm
> It is this incomprehensible, gratuitous cruelty and inhumanity that undoubtedly helped spark and will sustain the Palestinian prisoners movement.

-- Ali Abunimah, "Murder for fun and 'morale': Shocking video of lethal Israeli attack on sleeping Palestinian prisoners", *Electronic Intifada*, 17 May 2012

The "incomprehensible, gratuitous cruelity and inhumanity" is another of the many parallels between the Zionists today and the fascists of seventy years ago. We see a similar break-down of discipline occurring in the U.S. military.

The troops in a fascist state are left with an impossible task, because the regime has divorced itself from reality. When things stop making sense, the troops regress to sadism and primitive urges take over.

. .

> ... when David returned from the slaughter of the Philistine, the women came out of all the cities of Israel, singing and dancing, to meet King Saul, with timbrels, with songs of joy, and with instruments of music. And the women sang to one another as they made merry.

> "Saul has slain his thousands And David his ten thousands"

> And Saul was very angry, and this saying displeased him; he said "They have ascribed to David ten thousands, and to me they have ascribed but thousands..." And Saul eyed David from that day on.

-- 1 Samuel 18:6-9
 

Charles O. (209)
Sunday May 20, 2012, 4:43 pm
Carol D. writes:

> HAPPY HAPPY BIRTHDAY ISRAEL!!!! May you have an indefinite LIFE TIME!!!! God Bless Israel!!!!

The only god likely to bless this fascist regime is Moloch, the ancient Hebrew deity.

. .

> How the Lord has covered Daughter Zion with the cloud of his anger ! He has hurled down the splendor of Israel from heaven to earth; he has not remembered his footstool in the day of his anger.

-- Lamentations 2:1-3
 

Stephen Brian (23)
Sunday May 20, 2012, 5:07 pm
Hi Charles,

No, Israel would gain nothing by creating a pretext for attack against Palestinians. It also gains nothing by having a town converted into a great big bomb-shelter and spending to put an Iron Dome defense-system in there. In your cost-benefit analysis, there is no benefit.

The Wiki article does not directly mention spillover. That is a remarkable oversight. It does, however, mention attacks from Lebanon against a perceived ally of one side in the conflict which would have continued. That, too, is a form of spillover.

No, I did not argue that the chance of being killed in the civil war justifies an attack. I used it to note that only the excess deaths, beyond those which would have happened due to the war anyways, should be counted as a result of the invasion.

Like you noted, Israel was waiting for a major provocation. With 239 other attacks on the list, do you really think one wasn't coming no matter what Israel did or didn't do? It is crazy to think that ISrael would pull a totally needless false-flag attack on itself. Of course, you need to believe this in order to continue believing that it is the root of so much trouble.

A major part of the difference between the PLO's targeting of civilians and Israel's targeting of civilian areas is that if Palestinian militias laid down arms, there would be peace, while if Israel did so, there would be genocide. For proof of the former, look at Israel's military dominance: If it wanted a massacre, there would be one, and not the tiny 1300 dead from Cast Lead. I am talking about real national-scale massacres here, on at least the hundreds of thousands-scale. For the result of Israel laying down arms, look at what happens when Arabs go to war with each other: Check out Iraq and Kuwait, or even Iraq and Iran. Look at the Lebanese civil war. Do you think they would be kinder to Israelis?

You're STILL going on about Israel supposedly pulling a totally unnecessary false-flag? That is crazy. I know you need to believe it in order to support your belief that Israel is the root of all the trouble, but that doesn't make it any less crazy.

Here is the problem with your description of what Zionists wanted: Jews don't hold a "sphere of influence" just wherever there are Jews. Is America under the the Hispanic sphere of influence? There are a lot of Hispanic people in the U.S. Is Israel under the Arab sphere of influence? Roughly 20% of its population is Arabs. I have a friend fromCameroon whose family works in New Zealand. Is New Zealand under the Cameroonian sphere of influence? Before the founding of the state of Israel, Jews had some influence in some places, but no real control over any region. The argument you raised about Jews concentrating and setting up a location for another genocide was raised by many Jews at the time who did not believe they could defend themselves in case of war. This is actually another reason for Israel to be in the Middle East, an answer to a question you posed earlier: Arabs suck at conventional war for at least two separate major reasons. Their armies are arguably the world's worst., despite superior technology to most African states.
 

Charles O. (209)
Sunday May 20, 2012, 8:40 pm
Stephen B. writes:

> A major part of the difference between the PLO's targeting of civilians and Israel's targeting of civilian areas is that if Palestinian militias laid down arms, there would be peace, while if Israel did so, there would be genocide.

To put this blatant lie to rest, google "Israel kills non-violent".

Or look at Israel's treatment of the West Bank. No matter how abject and peaceable Israel's victims become, it is never enough. Nothing but death will satisfy the Zionists -- the peace of the grave.

If people resist, Israel attacks them with tanks. If they don't resist, Israel attacks them with bulldozers.

95% of the killing in Palestine is done by Israel. Moreover, independent studies show that most cycles of violence are initiated by Israel. War and terror is all that keeps the Israeli regime in power. The Zionists are operating a protection racket.
 

Stephen Brian (23)
Monday May 21, 2012, 1:13 am
I just ran the Google search and found nothing at all which contradicts my statement.

Yes, Israel has killed a large number of people reported as being non-violent. Now let's look at the first story about this, the one about protesters in the Golan Heights last June. There was a civil war just across the border (the Syrian conflict has been going on for quite some time) and a bunch of hostile civilians approached a military checkpoint. Three guesses what happens when hostile civilians from populations known to include non-uniformed combatants mob soldiers, even with no obvious violent intent. If there is a non-uniformed combatant among them and they get too close, the soldiers are dead. That's why they stop before they get that close, voluntarily or not.

Story #2 was from New Year's day, 2011. She inhaled too much tear gas. I recall the story. The crowd was too thick for her to get out, she was especially sensitive to the gas (if I recall correctly, she had preexisting respiratory trouble) and the landscape was such that the gas got trapped rather than disperse. It was a terrible accident, but certainly not indicative of a murderous pattern.

From what I understand, a lot of the nastier injuries come from getting hit with tear-gas canisters. I understand Israel has tried padding them and changing its strategy when using them (area denial rather than crowd-dispersion, aiming them low so that if they hit someone, it's in the legs, and launchers to fire them over people's heads and have them release gas while passing over the crowd before landing beyond it) to avoid this problem.

You get the picture.

I'd like to see some statistics on that "95%". Wiki seems to disgree with you: It has over 2,000 Palestinians dead from factional fighting, including the Fatah-Hamas conflict, but not including the results of Hamas' tyranny. For your number to be accurate, that would require over 38,000 Palestinian deaths at Israeli hands, somewhat more than the reported 14500 total deaths from the conflict since 1948. To get a better picture, let's look at numbers since things heated up in the First Intifadah: I don't see a proper citation, but the number in Wiki is all I have to go on right now: They have 2019 Palestinian deaths at Palestinian hands and 1503 Israeli deaths, totalling 3522, and 6385 Palestinians killed by Israel.

That, however, is totally irrelevant. The question is not who kills more, but who would kill more if able. The death-ratio is accounted for primarily by five factors: First, Israel protects its civilians very effectively (as seen in Sderot) and is highly loss-averse in its operations due to the conscript-nature of its army. Second, Palestinian militias' defensive strategy revolves around using dead civilians for propaganda to get Israel to stop its operations. They deliberately put their own people in danger regularly, seeking to fight in populated areas. Third, there is civilian mentality. Watch a video of Indian civilians' reaction to the attacks in Mumbai. Now watch a video of Palestinian civilians during fighting around them. Fourth, there is the vast difference in technology. Israeli weapons are vastly superior and defensive systems are currently arguably superior even to American, while Palestinians militias rely upon the cover of friendly cities (which gets civilians killed) and use highly imprecise weapons. Fifth, there is a vast difference in training. The only reason Israel is not outright up to NATO standards in training is because it runs a conscript-force. I have some hope that may change soon (which would actually be very good for Palestinians). Palestinian militias, on the other hand, have some of the worst trained forces in the world for conventional combat. None of those five reasons, however, would mean a thing if Israel laid down arms. Look again at the differences in mentality, strategy, and aggression (or its flip-side, loss-aversion). Now tell me which way these all point.
 

Past Member (0)
Monday May 21, 2012, 2:58 am
Stephen

"aiming them low so that if they hit someone, it's in the legs,"

This would explain why a Palestinian peaceful protester was shot in the head by one from a distance of a couple of yards last month and was killed, I guess?
 

Charles O. (209)
Monday May 21, 2012, 8:16 am
Stephen B. writes --

> That, however, is totally irrelevant. The question is not who kills more, but who would kill more if able.

First, some of your facts are wrong. Israel hides behind civilians all the time. Using evidence from Israel's 2006 attack on Lebanon, Jonathan Cook has shown that Israel sites its missile launchers in Arab villages, so that the Arabs are forced to serve as human shields for Israeli missiles.

See Jonathan Cook, "Evidence of Israeli 'Cowardly Blending' Comes to Light", *antiwar.com*, 05 Jan 2008

Others have reported that Israel straps Palestinian children on the hoods of jeeps, so that the children serve as human shields for Israeli troops.

Frequently, in these forums, Zionists try to erase the distinction between themselves and Jews. For example, they tell us we "Hate The Jews" when we condemn Zionist atrocities. Here, Zionists are using the entire Jewish community as a human shield, and deflecting the blame for Zionist crimes onto all Jews, even Jews of Conscience who vehemently oppose Zionism.

Second, your argument is based on the assumption that you are god -- that YOU know the innermost thoughts of Palestinians, that YOU know the future, that YOU know how people will react as circumstances change.

By your argument here you can justify anything and anybody, especially when you yourself get to psychologize the people you are trying to denigrate and eradicate.

You can use this argument to whitewash the Third Reich, for example: a victory for the Third Reich would have averted Dresden, Hiroshima, Nagasaki, the 67 other Japanese cities firebombed, the Korean war, the war against Vietnam, the war against Nicaragua, etc..
 

Charles O. (209)
Monday May 21, 2012, 8:35 am
Stephen B. writes:

> I just ran the Google search and found nothing at all which contradicts my statement. Yes, Israel has killed a large number of people reported as being non-violent. Now let's look at the first story about this, the one about protesters in the Golan Heights last June.

. .

When I do the search, I get 12,700,000 hits, so you may be right when you say that "Israel has killed a large number of people reported as being non-violent."

The first story that shows up for me is this: "Nonviolent Activists in Palestine Face Harassment, Prison, and ...". Here's an excerpt:

> Last Friday, at a protest against the Israeli separation barrier in the West Bank town of Bil'in, Palestinian nonviolent activist Jawaher Abu Rahmah was killed by U.S.-made tear gas fired by Israeli soldiers. This headline from the Israeli newspaper Haaretz is a fitting tribute to her legacy: "We're not looking for revenge, says family of Palestinian protester who died after rally." Her uncle Abu Nidar Rahmah's statement: "We have no problem will the people of Israel. We have a problem with the army and the occupation ... . We believe in a popular struggle, a nonviolent struggle. We don't want a violent struggle."

> Jawaher is not the first member of her family to die during a nonviolent protest. Her brother, Bassem Abu Rahmah, died in 2009 after being shot in the chest with a high-velocity tear gas grenade. Video of Bassem Abu Rahmah's death shows that he posed no physical threat to the troops that shot him. Similarly, despite the Israeli military's attempts at obfuscation, reports from activists on the scene at Jawaher's death testify that tear gas was fired before protesters were within 500 yards of Israeli soldiers.

> While prevailing media narratives focus almost exclusively on episodes of Palestinian violence -- such as sporadic rocket attacks from Gaza that killed a foreign worker in Israel in the last year -- nonviolent protests are happening on a weekly basis in the West Bank. Sometimes these events are marred by the stone-throwing of undisciplined youth. But as these fatal episodes show, and other reports from my contacts at Mennonite Central Committee partner organization Stop the Wall confirm, Israeli soldiers frequently fire tear gas, concussion grenades, or rubber-coated steel bullets without any violent provocation.

-- Ryan Rodrick Beiler, "Nonviolent Activists in Palestine Face Harassment, Prison, and ...", 07 Jan 2011

Let me highlight one thing in particular:

> "We're not looking for revenge, says family of Palestinian protester who died after rally." Her uncle Abu Nidar Rahmah's statement: "We have no problem will the people of Israel. We have a problem with the army and the occupation ... . We believe in a popular struggle, a nonviolent struggle. We don't want a violent struggle."

But didn't you just finish telling us that these are the people who will instantly "Genocide The Jews", if we let them out of their cage? "The question is not who kills more, but who would kill more if able.", you write. So either these people are lying when they say they do not seek revenge, or you do not have god-like powers to know their minds and know the future.

Let's list a few more of the stories that Google turns up:

* Israeli Forces Attack Nonviolent Protesters In Golan Heights ...
* New Year's Day in Bil'in: Israel kills female protester « P U L S E
* Israel Kills Non-Violent Protester in Palestine - YouTube
* Israel kills kids in the West Bank too - :: www.uruknet.info ...
* Israel kills 11 in Gaza air strikes
* Articles > Palestinians killed in nonviolent protests
* Israel kills civilians and Isabel Kershner justifies–as usual, of course ...
 

Charles O. (209)
Monday May 21, 2012, 9:01 am
Stephen B. writes:

> I'd like to see some statistics on that "95%". Wiki seems to disgree with you: It has over 2,000 Palestinians dead from factional fighting, including the Fatah-Hamas conflict, but not including the results of Hamas' tyranny. For your number to be accurate, that would require over 38,000 Palestinian deaths at Israeli hands, somewhat more than the reported 14500 total deaths from the conflict since 1948.

. .

I'm not going back to 1948; I'm looking at recent years. The statistics are nicely charted here:

http://ifamericansknew.org/

See especially this page:

deaths by year

"95%" is my own crude attempt to average the following figures:

2011: 8 Israelis killed and 91 Palestinians killed -- 8% and 92%
2010: 9 Israelis killed and 82 Palestinians killed -- 10% and 90%
2009: 9 Israelis killed and 1034 Palestinians killed -- 1% and 99%
2008: 35 Israelis killed and 887 Palestinians killed -- 4% and 96%
2007: 19 Israelis killed and 385 Palestinians killed -- 5% and 95%
2006: 23 Israelis killed and 665 Palestinians killed -- 3% and 97%

If we start counting at 29 Sep 2000, we get the following figures:

* Israeli children killed by Palestinians: 126 (8% of 1,602)
* Palestinian children killed by Israelis: 1,476 (92% of 1,602)

* Israelis killed: 1,096 (14% of 7,664)
* Palestinians killed: 6,568 (86% of 7,664)

. .

Amnesty International tells us that 80 Palestinian children were killed in the first three months of Intifada II. Zero Israeli children were killed.

> The majority of Palestinian children have been killed in the Occupied Territories when members of the IDF responded to demonstrations and stone throwing incidents with unlawful and excessive use of lethal force. Eighty Palestinian children were killed by the IDF in the first three months of the intifada alone.

> Sami Fathi Abu Jazzar died on the eve of his 12th birthday after being shot in the head by a live bullet fired by Israeli soldiers into a crowd of mostly primary school children. The shooting took place in the aftermath of a stone throwing demonstration. Six other children were injured by live fire in the same incident. Amnesty International delegates were present in the crowd at the time and concluded that the lives of the soldiers were not in danger.

> In the past year Palestinian children have been killed when the IDF randomly opened fire, shelled or bombarded residential neighbourhoods at times when there was no exchange of fire and in circumstances in which the lives of the IDF soldiers were not at risk. Others were killed during Israeli state assassinations, when the IDF destroyed Palestinian houses without warning, and by flechette shells and booby traps used by the IDF in densely populated areas.

> The large numbers of children killed and injured and the circumstances in which they were killed indicates that little or no care was taken by the IDF to avoid causing harm to children.

> Dina Matar, two-months-old and Ayman Matar, 18-months-old, were among nine children killed on 22 July 2002 when the IDF dropped a one ton bomb from an F-16 fighter jet on a densely populated area of Gaza city. The bomb killed 17 people. The aim of the attack was to assassinate a leading Hamas activist, who was among those killed. The following day Israel's Prime Minister, Ariel Sharon called the attack "one of the most successful operations".

> A number of Palestinian children have also died after being held up at IDF checkpoints, and delayed or even prevented from passing through to reach hospital. At least three children have been killed by Israeli settlers. In most cases the IDF does not intervene to protect Palestinians from Israeli settlers, who literally get away with murder.

AI Index: MDE 15/145/2002 (Public) News Service #165, 30 Sep 2002
 

Abdessalam Diab (153)
Monday May 21, 2012, 10:50 am
This is a testimony posted by a brave Israeli citizen.She,as many other Israelis and ten of thousands of Jews,dared to speak up and have seen the reality of the Zionist entity.This is what she posted :

Thursday May 17, 2012, 2:33 am
Just one little note on Israel, the Israeli people and Zionism: First of all, the people of Israel are as much deceived as the American people - they all believe their government is 'for' them but actually, the opossite is true. The Authorities use and abuse their own people.
Israel was created for a purpose - not a Homeland for the Jewish people - but as a Collony in the oil-rich Middle East. The rest is all myth. Jewish people immigrating to Israel soon find themselves 'fighting for survival'. If it was truly a Jewish Homeland then Holocaust survivors would be treated kindly, but THEY ARE NOT. The old people who survived the camps continued a life of misery in Israel and most die in dire poverty.
Eighteen families own Israel and the rest of the Jewish people are intended to become Serfs or Soldiers and that's the story. Nothing romantic and nothing kind. Propaganda and Mind Control are 'big' in Israel so there are many who fall into the trap of hatred - just as the Authorities perscribe. But then there are the others who are still capable of thinking and analyzing and they protest. Unfortunately, Israel is a brutal society where all resistance is twisted around into 'self-haters' and 'betrayers'.
Please know that the Israeli activist is one which I admire most because they have EVERYTHING to lose and they still continue their quest for JUSTICE.

http://www.care2.com/news/member/597720583/3340860
 

Abdessalam Diab (153)
Monday May 21, 2012, 11:38 am
ISRAEL: Water being used to coerce Bedouin villagers, says NGO

UMM AL-HIERAN, NEGEV DESERT, 29 March (IRIN) - Salim Abu al-Qi'an's family live in Israel's Negev desert in the "unrecognized" Bedouin village of Umm al-Hieran, 9km from the nearest source of clean water.

"There is no water in the village. We truck it in. It costs about 50 shekels [US$13.4] per cubic metre of water," explained the 53-year-old village leader. "There is a pipe that's about 8km long, but it's too old, and the planning authorities don't allow us to put a new one under the ground. We are asking for better access to water, a new pipe that should be close to the village."

The Israeli authorities forced Umm al-Hieran residents to move to the area where the village now sits in 1956, shortly after the military had evicted them from their original homes in the Wadi Zuballa area of the Negev desert.

In 2004, the villagers faced a new threat of expulsion, as the Southern District Planning Committee unveiled a master plan which involves once again displacing Umm al-Hieran, and building the Jewish community of Hiran in its place. According to the Israeli government, the 500 residents of Umm al-Hieran are trespassers who are illegally squatting on state land.

Some 80-90,000 Bedouin citizens of Israel live in unrecognized villages [ http://www.irinnews.org/Report/93389/ISRAEL-Opportunity-gulf-between-Bedouin-in-the-Negev ] in the southern Negev, according to a report [ http://www.acri.org.il/en/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/Prawer-Policy-Paper-May2011.pdf ] by the Association for Civil Rights in Israel. As a result of their unrecognized status, nearly every structure in these communities can be demolished at any time, and residents do not receive basic services from the state, including electricity, paved roads, healthcare facilities, schools, and water.

Constitutional right

In June 2011, however, the Israeli Supreme Court ruled that the right to water was a constitutional right, and that the state must guarantee a "minimum access to water" for the residents of the unrecognized villages. Still, the court did not specify what constituted a fair minimum.

Shortly thereafter, a Haifa court, acting as a water tribunal, rejected Umm al-Hieran's application to be connected to the local water network. The court argued that the villagers had minimum access to water, and suggested they buy water from private citizens in towns connected to the water network, or move into nearby government-planned Bedouin townships.

According to Sawsan Zaher, an attorney at Adalah, the Legal Center from Arab Minority Rights in Israel, which has represented al-Qi'an's family and the residents of Umm al-Hieran in their legal struggle, the water tribunal's decision means that "a constitutional right, which is the right to water as part of the right to a minimal standard of living, [will] be provided by private actors and not by the state. This is in contradiction to constitutional law. The duty is on the state to fulfil this right and protect it even."

Adalah has filed an appeal to Israel's Supreme Court, asking that "minimum access to water" be explicitly defined, and challenging the constitutionality of forcing Umm al-Hieran residents to purchase water from non-state actors.

"Despite the fact that they are citizens, they are not entitled to the same level of rights as other citizens of Israel. Why? Because they are living in unrecognized villages," Zaher told IRIN.

"We want you to move out"

"The purpose is not hidden any more. It is revealed and it's very official: we are not connecting you to water because we want you to move out. This is the policy. It's a kind of punishment. This is in huge contradiction with human rights and logic and humanity - to come and punish people by not giving them water for political purposes," Zaher said.

In a 9 March report, [ http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/cerd/docs/CERD.C.ISR.CO.14-16.pdf ] the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination raised concerns about Bedouin communities in Israel, particularly with regard to Bedouin home demolitions, and inequalities between Bedouin and Jewish citizens' access to land, housing, education, employment and public health.

Israel's proposed Law for the Regulation of Bedouin Settlement in the Negev, which would forcibly displace 30,000-60,000 of the 80,000-90,000 Bedouins living in unrecognized villages, should be shelved, the UN Committee found, since it legalizes "the ongoing policy of home demolitions and forced displacement of the indigenous Bedouin communities".

According to Salim Abu al-Qi'an, forcibly displacing residents of Umm al-Hieran to the nearby government-planned Bedouin township of Hura is indeed the motivation behind denying them direct access to high-quality water.

"They want to push us to leave the village and to displace us," he told IRIN. "Even though we are an unrecognized village, this is nicer than to live in Hura. There are no services there. Sewage and garbage is in the street. There's not enough space. It's another refugee camp."

jkd/eo/cb

[ENDS]


This report on line: http://www.IRINnews.org/report.aspx?ReportID=95193

 

Abdessalam Diab (153)
Monday May 21, 2012, 12:07 pm

IDF closes probe into Israeli air strike that killed 21 members of Gaza family

Military prosecution says will take no legal steps against those responsible for deaths of Samouni family, killed in their home during Operation Cast Lead.

By Amira Hass | May.01, 2012 | 7:19 PM






















































Israel's military prosecution announced Tuesday that no legal steps will be taken against those responsible for the killing of 21 members of the Samouni family during the 2009 Operation Cast Lead in Gaza.

A letter was received by the human rights group B'Tselem from Major Dorit Tuval, Deputy Military Advocate for Operational Matters. Tuval said that the case has been closed after the investigation has found that the attack on the civilians, "who did not take part in the fighting," and their killing were not done knowingly and directly, or out of haste and negligence "in a manner that would indicate criminal responsibility."

B'Tselem activists condemned the decision and called for an alternative investigatory body to probe such incidents.

On the morning of January 4, Givati commanders ordered the dozens of members of the extended Samouni family to leave the three-story house (the home of Talal Samouni), which they then turned into their outpost. The soldiers told them to gather in the one-story home of Wail Samouni, on the other side of the road and about 30 meters southeast. The Samounis took the fact that the soldiers themselves concentrated the family in one building, and saw that there were infants, children, women, elderly people and unarmed men, as insurance that they would not be harmed.

Despite the intense firing heard all around them that entire evening, the family's fears were mitigated by the proximity of the soldiers who had assembled them into the one home. Several of the Samouni men even left the house on Monday morning (January 5) to collect wood for a fire, hoping to bake pita and heat up tea.

They also called out to a relative who had remained in his home, a few meters east of them, and suggested he join them because their house was safe.

In conversations with Haaretz, the Samouni men explained how they felt safe due to the proximity of the IDF soldiers and due to the fact that the soldiers who gathered them in the house saw that they are all civilians.

According to testimonies given to Haaretz and Breaking the Silence by soldiers who took part in the attack, then-Givati Brigade commander Col. Ilan Malka concluded from UAV images of the house that armed Palestinians were inside.

He then ordered an aerial strike on the house, killing one person on the spot. When the casualties went back inside the house, another missile was shot on the house and 20 more people were killed, including three babies and six children between the ages of 5 to 16. Some 40 people were wounded.

Some of the casualties were trapped in the destroyed house, among the bodies, for three days, until the IDF allowed rescue services to arrive at the house and evacuate the bodies.

Attorney Yael Stein of B'Tselem said in response, "It cannot be that in a well-managed system no person will be found guilty of the army operation that led to the killing of 21 people who were not involved in combat, and resided in a structure on the instructions of the army – even if the attack was not done purposefully," she said.

"The manner in which the army rids itself of responsibility in this case… again illustrates the need for an investigatory body outside of the army."

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defence/idf-closes-brobe-into-israeli-air-strike-that-killed-21-members-of-gaza-family





 

Charles O. (209)
Monday May 21, 2012, 3:02 pm
So many injustices here! Count them:

* > The Israeli authorities forced Umm al-Hieran residents to move to the area where the village now sits in 1956, shortly after the military had evicted them from their original homes in the Wadi Zuballa area of the Negev desert.

* > In 2004, the villagers faced a new threat of expulsion, as the Southern District Planning Committee unveiled a master plan which involves once again displacing Umm al-Hieran, and building the Jewish community of Hiran in its place.

* > According to the Israeli government, the 500 residents of Umm al-Hieran are trespassers who are illegally squatting on state land.

* > As a result of their unrecognized status, nearly every structure in these communities can be demolished at any time, and residents do not receive basic services from the state, including electricity, paved roads, healthcare facilities, schools, and water.

* > Shortly thereafter, a Haifa court, acting as a water tribunal, rejected Umm al-Hieran’s application to be connected to the local water network. The court argued that the villagers had minimum access to water, and suggested they buy water from private citizens in town

* > In a 9 March report, the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination raised concerns about Bedouin communities in Israel, particularly with regard to Bedouin home demolitions, and inequalities between Bedouin and Jewish citizens’ access to land, housing, education, employment and public health.

* > According to Salim Abu al-Qi'an, forcibly displacing residents of Umm al-Hieran to the nearby government-planned Bedouin township of Hura is indeed the motivation behind denying them direct access to high-quality water.

-- "ISRAEL: Water being used to coerce Bedouin villagers, says NGO", 29 Mar 2012

 

Past Member (0)
Monday May 21, 2012, 3:12 pm
This is truly a disgrace, amongst so many. And these are citizens of the Zionist Entity! Imagine how much worse people in the occupied rump of Palestine are treated. Yet the Zionists here and elsewhere trumpet what a wonderful country the Entity is.

Fortunately, the truth is seeping out to the wider world:--

http://www.middleeastmonitor.org.uk/news/middle-east/3771-bbc-poll-ranks-israel-third-in-list-of-worst-countries-worldwidevb


BBC poll ranks Israel third in list of worst countries worldwide
Middle East Monitor

May 18, 2012

A poll conducted by the BBC World Service has ranked Israel in third place among the worst countries in the world, keeping company with North Korea and only just ahead of Iran and Pakistan.

The results of the global poll, organised by the BBC and covering 22 countries, showed that Israel stands among the countries with the most negative influence on the world and those which are being viewed negatively.

Iran took top spot as it was described by 55 per cent of the respondents as a "negative" state, while Pakistan was voted in second place by 51 per cent; Israel occupies third place with 50 per cent of respondents voting it as "negative".

According to the poll website, the facts about Israel's position in world public opinion are disturbing; although the opinion of Israel in the past year was negative, it has actually got worse, rising by 3 per cent of respondents from 47 to 50 per cent.

When asked for the reason for having such a negative view of Israel, 45 per cent of the participants said that it comes from the policies of the Israeli government; 27 per cent said that it was due to the "bad relationship" between Israel and its citizens.

Such a negative view was expressed by just 21 per cent of respondents from the USA, Kenya and Nigeria. America, in fact, had the most positive view of Israel, with 50 per cent of the respondents in the US regarding Israel in a good light; the highest negative percentage came from Egypt, where 85 per cent hold a negative view.

The poll showed a significant deterioration in the status of Israel in European public opinion. The results were as follows: Spain 74 per cent, France 65 per cent and Germany 69 per cent. In Britain, 68 per cent of the respondents said that their view of Israel is negative.

The negative perception of Israel among the emerging countries of the world came through as 29 per cent in India, 45 per cent in China and 58 per cent in Brazil. In Russia, the "negative" figure was 26 per cent.

The poll was an initiative of the BBC World Service and was conducted by GlobeScan poll institute with participation from the University of Maryland in the United States. It was undertaken between December 2011 and February 2012; more than 24,000 persons from 22 countries around the world took part.
 

Charles O. (209)
Monday May 21, 2012, 3:34 pm
Where have all of the Israel Uber Alles people gone? Afraid to show their faces?

. .

> A poll conducted by the BBC World Service has ranked Israel in third place among the worst countries in the world, keeping company with North Korea and only just ahead of Iran and Pakistan.

-- "BBC poll ranks Israel third in list of worst countries worldwide", *Middle East Monitor*, 18 May 2012

Iran, I can understand. After all, Iran shows indifference to human rights, has a theocratic establishment, and has been the target of demonization for the last thirty years or so. These negative factors outweigh Iran's progressive foreign policy.

But Israel is not so disadvantaged. Zionists dominate our media, plus they have a huge hasbara army busy filling the internet with disinformation and silencing critics of Israel. Plus we have millions of "Christian" Zionists who treat the Israeli regime as their Messiah. And our politicians are essentially sponsored by AIPAC.

And STILL, Israel comes out as the third worst country on the planet, with a 50% negative rating!

What would the rating be if Israel did not have the big media and the hasbara brotherhood constantly polishing up its image and covering up its crimes?
 

Past Member (0)
Monday May 21, 2012, 5:03 pm
It would be dead in the water, Charles. However, as we see, the truth is emerging and has changed minds - the Zionist Entity's rating has gone down in a year by 3 points. It already had a dreadful reputation despite the hasbara. BDS is taking its toll too. Several subsidiaries of their companies have folded and foreign companies that profit from the occupation have lost huge contracts, including Veolia. Soon foreign companies will see that they will lose more from trading with the Entity by losing contracts elsewhere than they gain in the short term. The tragedy is that many more will die, be ethnically cleansed and be maimed before this evil is removed from the world.
 

Stephen Brian (23)
Monday May 21, 2012, 6:15 pm
Hi Charles,

I remember some of the stories to which you alluded. The kids "used as human shields" were in the middle of being arrested for having thrown stones at the soldiers in the picture. They didn't have enough people to arrest all of the stone-throwers at once so they bound a few to their vehicle and went back for the rest, during which time the picture was taken.

I've read Jonathan Cook's stuff before, and he doesn't even seem to bother trying to make sense. The one you pointed out is a fine example. Israeli missiles can reach, accurately, all the way across the Gaza Strip. They would have absolutely no reason to bring the launchers into Gaza, unless those were infantry engagement-scale launchers with ranges too short to use from far away from combat. In that case, they would stay there only so long as the Israeli soldiers using them were there so yes, if the combat was in a town in Gaza, the launchers would be there. It's not even remotely close to basing them out of those towns, but Cook doesn't bother which such things as reality. Seriously, pick an article of his and I'll see how many holes I can poke in it. I doubt you could find a single one that withstands scrutiny.

The analysis is well-founded. What part, exactly, do you dispute? Is it the militias' strategy?
This is the report often credited with ending the 2006 Lebanon fighting before Israel could eradicate Hezbollah: http://www.zombietime.com/fraud/ambulance/
The Jenin hoax was intended to do the same.
Numerous fake reports came out during Cast Lead and served exactly the same purpose in protecting Hamas.
You get the picture, or maybe you don't, but any clear-thinking person would see how much Palestinian militias care about even Palestinian civilians, let alone Israeli. As for other Arab forces, look at what they do when they have power over their enemies. We discussed the Lebanon war of 1982. Look at the behaviour of the paramilitary groups, Christian and Islamic.

You can use the argument the other way regarding the Third Reich as well: Its victory would have meant massive slaughter in Europe. Those sent to the camps during the war were not the only groups on the to-be-killed list. More directly, failure to firebomb Japan would have meant the continuation of Japanese atrocities inflicted upon the Chinese. For an idea of how bad they were, they had gone on for 2 years, averaging a number of dead equal to the total dead of the nuclear strikes on Hiroshima and Nagasaki every two weeks. To perform an analysis like this, you have to take everything into account, without convenient omissions. I should not have to explain this to anyone over the age of five years.

12,700,000 hits? Really? That's about ten times as many as I got for "aliens have landed". The case you described was the second one I pointed out. Here is another article on it:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/05/world/middleeast/05mideast.html?_r=1&partner=rss&emc=rss

Your numbers left out all the Palestinian-on-Palestinian fighting in 2006 and 2007. Add 600 to the number killed by Palestinians. It also left out the fact that children, generally defined in these studies as anyone under 18, constitute over half the population of Gaza and are used as combatants by the militias. Israel does not deploy forces under the age of 18, and the random deaths from attacks are far less likely to strike any Israeli that young due to different demographic, while the random deaths of urban combat in Gaza will strike Palestinian children over half the time. Your numbers include multiple lies by omission.

I like the euphemisms used by your source. "Stone throwing demonstration" for "violent riot attacking soldiers". Very slick, and "in the aftermath of" rather than "stopping". I like it. For another one, that is the militias' defense at work: They mix military and civilian infrastructure,forcing Israel to choose between killing civilians and calling off a strike. Sometimes the strike gets called off, and sometimes the militia get fuel for propaganda.

The BBC poll did not rank countries best to worst. Even just a quick glance at the article you cited shows their methodology. They asked people how they felt about countries. That ranks them "hated" to "loved". Israel is only slightly less hated than North Korea, Iran, and Pakistan, and you continue to pretend that its supporters control the media? If Zionists controlled the media, how did that poll come out of the BBC?

I noticed your source for a lot of those allegations. Here is the problem with Amnesty: After the Jenin hoax, it refused to apologize for extensive false reporting on the grounds that it does not actually make, endorse, or even vet claims. It explained that it just works as a platform for anyone who wants to cry foul. Combined with the militias' defensive strategy, this throws absolutely every report from it on the Palestinian territories into doubt.

You said repeatedly that you wanted a "full investigation" beyond the "official story" on the 9/11 attacks. How about taking a look at a real full investigation of reports rather than gobble up every last bit of militia-propagandda?
 

Charles O. (209)
Monday May 21, 2012, 9:14 pm
Hello Stephen B.. Let's go through it, point by point. You write:

> The kids "used as human shields" were in the middle of being arrested for having thrown stones at the soldiers in the picture. They didn't have enough people to arrest all of the stone-throwers at once so they bound a few to their vehicle and went back for the rest, during which time the picture was taken.

Here are a few of the 1,910,000 reports Google turns up:

* "Israeli soldiers who used boy as human shield set free", *RT*, 21 Nov 2010

* "Israeli Soldiers ‘used child human shield’ – UN report", *RT*, 24 Mar 2009

* "Israeli using Palestinian kids as human shields", *YouTube*, 17 Mar 2007

. .

> I've read Jonathan Cook's stuff before, and he doesn't even seem to bother trying to make sense. The one you pointed out is a fine example. Israeli missiles can reach, accurately, all the way across the Gaza Strip. They would have absolutely no reason to bring the launchers into Gaza, unless those were infantry engagement-scale launchers with ranges too short to use from far away from combat.

The article is not about Gaza. Are you sure you read it? It's about Israel citing its missile batteries in the middle of Arab villages in northern Israel: The Arabs are used as human shields for the missiles.

. .

> This is the report often credited with ending the 2006 Lebanon fighting before Israel could eradicate Hezbollah: http://www.zombietime.com/fraud/ambulance/

Israel fled with its tail between its legs because the Lebanese stood their ground and Israeli soldiers were dying. What you don't understand is that the militias and the people are one. The entire population opposes Israeli occupation and aggression. The entire population seeks freedom, justice, human rights. The militia includes every family.

. .

> The Jenin hoax was intended to do the same.

There was no "Jenin hoax". Israel banned reporters, U.N. observers, and even the Red Crescent. A lot of people were missing and presumed dead. Israel began to remove bodies and had freezer trucks ready to receive the corpses. When the Red Crescent was finally allowed to enter Jenin, access was restricted and bodies were already decomposed. In these conditions, and given Israel's long history of perpetrating massacres, it was hardly surprising that Jenin was initially seen as a massacre. Israel claims that it killed "only" 56 people. Is it a massacre when 56 people are killed? If not, then what is a massacre?

. .

> Your numbers left out all the Palestinian-on-Palestinian fighting in 2006 and 2007.

And I left out traffic fatalities, muggings and deaths by drowning, all of which are irrelevant. Palestinians died when the U.S. and Israel armed Fatah and fostered a civil war.

. .

> Here is the problem with Amnesty: After the Jenin hoax, it refused to apologize for extensive false reporting on the grounds that it does not actually make, endorse, or even vet claims.

In other words, Amnesty International is not overrun with Zionist censors, so reports critical of Israel get published.

If Israel is concerned about "false reporting", then there is a simple recourse: Allow reporters, U.N observers and Red Crescent works to enter the massacre site and count the bodies. When Israel blocks access to its killing zone, it creates an information vacuum that is filled by suspicion.

. .

> How about taking a look at a real full investigation of reports rather than gobble up every last bit of militia-propaganda?

So Amnesty International, the U.N., the Red Crescent and the BBC are all working for the Palestinian militia?

How about taking a look at Israel's behavior and the unsavory ideology behind it. Get rid of this 19th-century supremacist ideology and life will become a lot more peaceful. It's a no-brainer.
 

Stephen Brian (23)
Tuesday May 22, 2012, 12:00 am
Hi Charles,

I'm not 100% sure you're clear on what is normally meant by using civilians as human shields. I mean "normally" as in, "in every other case outside of the propaganda of this particular conflict". There are three ways to do it:
First, one can force civilians to gather around during an engagement with an enemy.
Second, one can force civilians to gather around, or unnecessarily mingle among civilians, immediately before imitating an engagement with an enemy.
Third, one can gather civilians around or inside a regular military target which is expected to be attacked.

Examples of the third case include Saddam's human shields, gathered around himself and inside his palaces, which doubled as central command-centres for his military forces and were expected to be attacked.
Examples of the second include standard practice for Palestinian militias and other urban guerrillas throughout the world.
The first case is relatively rare.

Regarding Cook's article, I thought I had read it earlier, but I guess I was thinking of a different silly allegation.

I just checked over this one. First, the rights-organizations were not set up to independently and closely investigate the second charge against Hezbollah. They could not have hoped to determine whether it hid forces and munitions among civilian populations except by two means: First, they could have noticed that there was nowhere else the munitions could have been stored. As far as I am aware, Hezbollah does not set up regular outposts outside of population-centres for those purposes. Second, they could have trusted the military reports (which they were expected not to do). Their conclusion was foregone from their (lack of) methodology.

Regarding the point you raised, about Israeli artillery firing from within Israeli cities:
Yes, clearly this one was in the middle of Haifa:
http://www.lynseyaddario.com/#/middle-east/lebanon-israel-war/lebisraelwar16
The story the photographer was telling was not exactly Israeli propaganda. Why didn't he use an image of Israeli artillery inside the cities? Why aren't there ANY pictures of them? Active artillery is not exactly subtle and concealable. A lot of pictures that the Israeli government would rather not have made public are spread by its free press, advocacy-groups, and private citizens. Yet there is not a single image anywhere of these artillery pieces firing from locations surrounded by tens of thousands of people with cameras. Haifa and Tel Aviv, both hit during the fighting, are not small towns. If HRW's researchers spotted fire coming from a residential street in Zarit, they would have taken a picture ... unless that community right next to the border, right next to which the soldiers had been originally kidnapped in the event which sparking the fighting in the first place, happened to be included in the mass-evacuation of Israelis within striking range of Hezbollah.

Then we have his conflation of training-centres near civilian infrastructure and firing-positions. If the war were expected to last, then I could see fire being directed at the training-sites, though not the rest of the huge cities next to which they were located. Of course, because there was a naval base in Haifa, he explains that the fire directed at Haifa, Netanya, and Tel Aviv must have been at firing-positions. Then he went into how the Arab villagers were human shields because there was artillery around their towns. Hezbollah's worst rockets, the BM-21s, can manage tactical-scale grouping at 10 miles, roughly the distance from the border to Acre. Israeli forces may have been near towns on a strategic scale, but they were far enough away that the rockets would not have struck them unintentionally.

Now I have read the right article, and Cook is totally wrong again. Not only is he wrong, but he is so obviously wrong that he cannot claim to have honestly researched his topic. I spent under ten minutes looking up the information I used to dismantle his BS.

Here is the first problem with your claims about Jenin. The people living there said only 56 had been killed upon being interviewed by investigators from the PA. When 56 people are killed. Multiple human-rights groups said there had been an intense fight, but no massacre. The UN, the same organization that once declared Zionism to be a form of racism, said there was no massacre. The UN said that at least half of the dead were militants, though militants are often reported as civilians due to a lack of uniforms or public lists of names. If none of that is enough, how about a reporter who apparently did manage to sneak in, trying to find evidence against Israel?
http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/features/analysis-why-israel-should-let-foreign-journalists-into-gaza-1.267963

Regarding the inter-Palestinian killing: Let me see if I got this straight. You're telling me it is not worthwhile for Israel to enter Palestinian territories and try to defeat the forces that have torn the Palestinian people apart, killing hundreds of them and violently ensuring that no peaceful leadership may arise for decades? I thought you might have actually valued Palestinian lives. Also, the Fatah-Hamas fighting started when Hamas demanded control over Palestinian security-forces, which were under the executive branch of the PA to which the Fatah candidate had been elected.

Now for the central problem with reporting, and one which I really don't know how you could have managed to miss. They are not overrun with Zionist censors. In places under Palestinian control, they are overrun with Palestinian censors. The journalists fear for their lives if they report anything which reflects poorly upon Palestinian authorities. Did you hear about the wedding that Hamas massacred because dancing in the streets, part of the celebration, undermines the image it was trying to present? Palestinians don't have freedom of the press, and neither do visiting journalists.

Amnesty International's standard doctrine plays along perfectly with the militias' defensive strategy. The U.N. has three large voting-blocs which certainly do side with Palestinians in an unreasoning manner (for three separate reasons). The BBC regularly violates journalistic ethics which demand two independent sources to confirm something, or hard evidence of it, before reporting it as factual. It also pretends to get a balanced story, as though it could despite the lack of press-freedom in Palestinian territories, in order to protect the credit given to its reporting. Until 2006, the Red Cross / Red Crescent organization helped everyone in need regardless of nationality ... unless they were Israeli. Then it didn't help. It also refused to let its Israeli equivalent be recognized as a protected service (as the Red cross is in war) until 2006 on the grounds that it wanted to avoid symbol-proliferation ... despite adopting a new one arbitrarily in 2005. I don't know what its motive was, but something is up with the RC/RC. I don't expect you to understand this, but none of that implies that they work for the Palestinian militias. However, each for their own reasons is effectively, even if not in principle, allied with them.
 

Stan B. (124)
Tuesday May 22, 2012, 2:15 am
As you’ve no doubt heard, Robin Gibb of the Bee Gees died yesterday of colon cancer at the young age of 62. Only Barry Gibb remains from the Brothers Gibb. Twin brother, Maurice, died in 2003 at age 53. And their younger brother, Andy Gibb, died at age 30, in 1988. Seems the Bee Gees are sadly afflicted with early deaths. As you probably know, the Bee Gees songs on the soundtrack of “Saturday Night Fever” made them huge. But you probably didn’t know that the Bee Gees were very pro-Israel and even had their own song, entitled “Israel,” which they put out in 1971. Oddly, they never performed there, until Robin Gibb performed solo in Israel in 2007, his first time there, defying calls to boycott the Jewish nation. Below is video of that performance, singing “How Deep Is Your Love” with Israeli back-up singers and praising Israel in an interview with illusionist Uri Geller (while there is brief Hebrew in the beginning, the interview is in English at the end of the song). I loved the Bee Gees music (which remains a big part of my work out routine–the fast songs have a great beat), plus, back in the day, Barry Gibb was hot. My favorites are “Stayin’ Alive,” “Tragedy,” and “You Should Be Dancing,” all of which are below.

From Debbie Schlussel.
 

Charles O. (209)
Tuesday May 22, 2012, 5:25 am
Hello Stephen B. --

You claim that Cook's charge is disproved by the absence of photographs showing Israeli artillery firing from Arab villages. But we have no photographs showing Israeli artillery firing from anywhere, and yet we know that artillery was fired. The lack of photographs can perhaps be explained by Israel's military censorship.

> Fortunately, we no longer have to rely on Human Rights Watch or Amnesty International for a full picture of what took place during what Israelis call the Second Lebanon War. In November the Arab Association for Human Rights, based in Nazareth, published its own report, "Civilians in Danger," covering the ground its much bigger cousins dared not touch.

> The hostile climate in Israel toward the fifth of the population who are Arab has made publication of the report a risky business. Azmi Bishara, Israel's leading Arab politician and a major critic of Israel's behavior during the Lebanon war, is currently in exile under possible death sentence. Israel has accused him of treason in helping Hezbollah during the fighting, though the secret services have yet to produce the evidence they have supposedly amassed against him. Nonetheless, they have successfully intimidated most of the Arab minority into silence.

> Also, much of the report's detail, including many place-names and maps showing the location of Hezbollah rocket strikes, has had to be excised to satisfy Israel's strict military censorship laws.

-- Jonathan Cook, "Evidence of Israeli 'Cowardly Blending' Comes to Light", *Antiwar.Com*, 05 Jan 2008

. .

Thanks for the link to the war photographs. What sane person, looking at these photographs, could believe that Israel accomplished anything good with the devastation it inflicted on Lebanon in 2006? Look at the apartment buildings and homes that Israel demolished. Did these residences constitute a military threat to the regional superpower? If the Israeli regime is so weak that it is threatened by apartments and peasant homes in a foreign country, then the regime deserves to fall.

. .

Yes, of course some of the people Israel kills are militant. But that doesn't preclude them from being civilians. People have a right to defend their homes. If a thief breaks into my home and threatens my family and I try to fight him off, do I thereby lose my status and protection as a civilian? Do I become a combatant or a criminal? I didn't ask for my house to be invaded or occupied. I didn't ask to be attacked. Under international law, people living under occupation do have a right to resist.

Yes, of course the initial casualty counts were wrong, for the reason I stated earlier: Israel banned reporters, U.N. observers and the Red Crescent, so no one was there to count the dead.

Notice how Zionists have turned things around: Instead of denouncing the regime that killed 56 people and reduced part of Jenin to rubble, we now denounce the victims for providing an inaccurate count of the dead.

. .

You write:

> Did you hear about the wedding that Hamas massacred because dancing in the streets, part of the celebration, undermines the image it was trying to present?

No, and I doubt that anyone else did, either. This seems like Israeli propaganda.

. .

You write:

> Palestinians don't have freedom of the press, and neither do visiting journalists.

Others here may be better able to answer this charge. As I recall, independent media based in Europe do operate in the Occupied Territories. Visiting journalists eventually leave and recount their visits freely. Since the government in the Occupied Territories is weak and divided, censorship would be difficult to enforce.

It is the Palestinians who have frequently called for U.N. observers. It is Israel that invariably gets its satellite on the Security Council to veto these requests. That tells us who has something to hide and who doesn't.
 

Past Member (0)
Tuesday May 22, 2012, 5:31 am
Something else that is often hidden, but was revealed by brave Jews of Conscience:--

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-18149573

An Israeli human rights group has released a video that appears to show Israeli soldiers standing by while Jewish settlers open fire on stone-throwing Palestinian protesters in the West Bank, wounding one of them, reports the BBC's Rupert Wingfield Hayes.

 

Abdessalam Diab (153)
Tuesday May 22, 2012, 10:48 am
All polls of Israeli Jews reveal deep anti-Arab feeling. For instance, the Israel Democracy Institute released a poll in January 2011, which found that nearly half of Israeli Jews would not want to live next door to an Arab. Racism is strongest among the young: the Yedioth Ahronoth newspaper reported that civics teachers around the country were complaining of rampant, virulent anti-Arab racism amongst their Jewish students.

Nuri Peled-Elhanan, an Israeli professor of education and author of a book on Israeli school books,thinks “state-provided education” is a main culprit in promoting racism. Interviewed in the Guardian, she said Israeli school books describe Arabs “as vile and deviant and criminal, people who don’t pay taxes, people who live off the state, people who don’t want to develop… The only representation is as refugees, primitive farmers and terrorists.”

She added: “One question that bothers many people is how do you explain the cruel behavior of Israeli soldiers towards Palestinians, an indifference to human suffering, the inflicting of suffering. … I think the major reason for that is education.”

“Other official means” of promulgating racism include laws that are the very foundation of the Israeli state: the 1950 Law of Return and 1952 Citizenship Law, which allow every Jew in the world to immigrate to Israel and become an Israeli citizen. These same laws forbid the return of Palestinians who were forced to flee their homes from 1947 to 1952. This inequity may have made sense to those in the West who lived through the years after WWII, when the horrors of the Holocaust and general acceptance of colonialism blinded almost everyone to the injustice perpetrated against Palestinian Arabs. But it is much past time to look at the situation through Palestinian eyes.

More recent laws show racism becoming increasingly institutionalized in Israel. Adalah, the Legal Center for Arab Minority Rights in Israel, reports that “the current government coalition has proposed a flood of new racist and discriminatory bills.” One such bill legalizes “admission committees” operating in nearly 700 small towns, allowing them to reject applicants deemed “unsuitable to the social life of the community … or the social and cultural fabric of the town”—for “unsuitable applicants,” read principally “Arabs.”

http://dissidentvoice.0rg/2012/05/nazism-zionism-and-the-arab-world/
 

Abdessalam Diab (153)
Tuesday May 22, 2012, 12:19 pm
Miko Peled is an Israeli peace activist who dares to say in public what others still choose to deny. Miko was born in Jerusalem in 1961 into a well-known Zionist family. His grandfather, Dr. Avraham Katsnelson was a Zionist leader and signer on the Israeli Declaration of Independence. His father, Matti Peled was a young officer in the war of 1948 and a general in the war of 1967 when Israel conquered the West Bank, Gaza, Golan Heights and the Sinai.

He has credibility, so when he debunks myths that Jews around the world hold with blind loyalty, people listen.

Ethnic Cleansing of Invented People

By Miko Peled

January 04, 2012 "Information Clearing House" - - Mostafa Tamimi from Nabi Saleh, Bahjat Zaalan and his son Ramdan from Gaza died on my fiftieth birthday and just a few days after Newt Gingrich declared them an invented people. They were murdered by the Israeli terrorist organization, the IDF, an organization that is supported and funded by the US. One Israeli terrorist shot the invented Tamimi in the head with a tear gas canister, and another Israeli terrorist fired a rocket that murdered the invented Zaalan and his boy Ramadan. Both terrorists were educated and trained by Israel, and armed by the US. The Israeli terrorists are not invented but quite real, and they are safe, protected by the apartheid regime that trained and sent them on their missions, and the Israeli court system will make sure that they are never brought to justice. This is how Israel’s well-oiled ethnic cleansing machine operates.
The Zionist ethnic cleansing of Palestine is not a thing of the past but an ongoing campaign that is executed by three arms of the State of Israel: The education system, a dedicated bureaucracy and the security forces. The education system is dedicated to indoctrinating and producing soldiers and bureaucrats who will execute and enforce the ethnic cleansing. The bureaucracy is charged with making rules that make life unlivable for Palestinians. Rules that restrict Palestinian access to their lands, and restrict their ability to travel freely to work and school. This same bureaucracy then demands that Palestinians pay for permits to be allowed do these very same basic things that they were denied. The security forces, the most obvious of which is the IDF, are charged with enforcing the restrictions, fighting off the resistance, armed or peaceful, and terrorizing the “invented” people of Palestine.

Since my father was a general and I served as a soldier in the IDF terrorist organization, people often ask me how is it that Israeli children who are raised in a Western style democracy become such monsters once they are in uniform? The detailed answer can be found in my book, The General’s Son due out in February 2012, but the short answer is this: Education – Racism requires a mindset that is fashioned by education. In order to rationalize and justify the ethnic cleansing the Israeli education system portrays Palestinians as culturally inferior, violent and bent on the annihilation of the Jews, and at the same time, void of a true national identity. Palestinian national identity is but a figment of some anti-Semitic imagination.

Israeli children are educated to see the Palestinians as a problem that must be solved and as a threat that must be eliminated. They can go through life, as I did growing up in Jerusalem, without ever meeting a Palestinian child. They know nothing of the life or culture of Palestinians who quite often live only several hundred meters from them.

Palestinians are portrayed as an existential threat through absurd comparisons like that of Yasser Arafat to Hitler, the Palestinians to Nazis, and the Palestinian resistance to Al Qaeda. Since Israeli kids never meet Palestinians what they learn in school, particularly in the school textbooks, is all that they know. In fact it is remarkable that even though they live so close to one another, much if not all of what Israelis know about their Palestinian neighbors comes from high school text books and popular racist stereotypes. Israelis don’t know that Palestinians never had an army, that they do not posses a single tank, a single warship or fighter jet, that they don’t have a single artillery battery and do not in fact pose a military threat at all. According to a new book by Dr. Nurit Peled-Elhanan, not a single photo of a person who is a Palestinian exists in Israeli textbooks and there are millions of Palestinians in and around Israel. Israelis don’t learn about Palestinian doctors and teachers, engineers and writers. They don’t learn Palestinian poetry or prose and they don’t read the works of Palestinian historians.

At a recent lecture I mentioned the ethnic cleansing of Palestine and someone called out: “What ethnic cleansing?” People are unaware of the ethnic cleansing taking place in Palestine because Israel hides it well and the mainstream media doesn’t care enough to ask. In mainstream peace groups and dialogue groups that discuss Palestine/Israel, a basic Israeli condition is not to bring up issues like the ethnic cleansing because Israel doesn’t like to talk about it.

But for the past 64 years ethnic cleansing of Palestine is what drives the Zionist policies towards Palestinians. All Zionist governments and all Zionist political parties left right and center support the ethnic cleansing. The Israeli judicial system lets the Israeli authorities get away with abuse, theft and murder as long as they are perpetuated against Palestinians. Had these same crimes been committed against Israeli Jews they would have been prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

Zionist supporters like to bring up the fact that on November 29, 1947 the United Nations voted to partition Palestine into a Jewish sate and an Arab state. What is left out of the Zionist story is that within one year of the vote Israeli forces had managed to capture close to 80% of Palestine, destroy close to 500 Palestinian towns and villages, kill scores of unarmed civilians and force the exile of some 800,000 Palestinians.

Then, when the UN passed resolution194 in December of 1948, calling for the refugees to be allowed to return to their homes, Israel proceeded to build cities and towns, parks and highways for the use of Jewish Israelis on Palestinian land. Then the Knesset began passing laws that prohibit the return of the refugees and allow the new state to confiscate their lands.

After the war was over, the Palestinians who remained within the newly created Jewish state were forced to become citizens of a state that despised them and saw them as a “problem” and a “threat.” They were designated as “The Arabs of Israel” a designation that stripped them of a national identity and denied them any rights to the land and provided them very limited rights as citizens. From being the rightful owners of their lands and their country they now existed at the pleasure of the new owner of the land, the state of Israel. Palestinian refugees were forced into concentration camps, conveniently called refugee camps, and those that tried to return were shot. A military unit was created for the purpose of punishing Palestinian refugee who “infiltrated” back into their homeland, now called Israel. It was called Unit 101, the notorious Ariel Sharon led it and it made a name for itself as a murderous gang with a license to kill Palestinians.

So regardless of the myth, now perpetuated by Newt Gingrich among others, that says there was no forced ethnic cleansing, we know today that the creation of Israel was made possible through a systematic campaign of ethnic cleansing, conducted by the Jewish militia, involving massacres, terrorism, and the wholesale looting of an entire nation.

Newt Gingrich, being the history buff that he is, might be interested in a story I mention in my book The General’s Son, about my mother. She was born and raised in Jerusalem and she remembers the homes of Palestinians families in neighborhoods in West Jerusalem. She told me that when she was a child, on Saturday afternoons she would go for walks through these neighborhoods, admiring the beauty of the homes, watching families sit together in their beautiful gardens. In 1948 when the Palestinian families were forced out of West Jerusalem, my mother was offered one of those beautiful, spacious homes but she refused. At age 22, the wife of a young army officer with little means and with two small children, she refused a beautiful spacious home, offered to her completely free because she could not bear the thought of living in the home of a family that was forced out and now lives in a refugee camp. “The coffee was still warm on the tables as the soldiers came in and began the looting” she told me. “Can you imagine how much those families, those mothers must miss their homes.” She would ask and she continued, “I remember seeing the truckloads of loot, taken by the Israeli soldiers from these homes. How were they not ashamed of themselves?” there are thousands upon thousands of homes in cities all over the country that were taken.

Moving forward now to 1967 and the myth that Israel was fighting for its existence as it was attacked by Arab armies from all directions. Much was written about this but nothing is more revealing than the minutes of the meetings of the IDF general staff from June 1967, just prior to the war. According to the generals, one of whom was my father, Matti Peled, not only was there no existential threat but the generals clearly state that the Egyptian army needed at least a year and a half before it would be ready for war and therefore this was an opportune time to attack and destroy it. The army pressured the cabinet to authorize an attack and indeed the cabinet approved an attack against Egypt. The IDF destroyed the Egyptian army and then went on to attack Jordan and Syria. It took the IDF six days and 700 casualties to kill an estimated 15,000 Arab forces, take the West Bank, the Golan Heights and The Sinai Peninsula. One may like to think this was a miracle but it was a well-planned, well-executed attack against countries that had no viable military force. The Israeli army had thus fulfilled its goal of conquering the entire Land of Israel, and the De-Arabizing of Palestine could now proceed into the West Bank and Gaza.

Since the early days of the State of Israel the IDF made it its mission to be the most brutal bully in the region. Today the IDF has one purpose: to conduct an all out war against Palestinians by terrorizing Palestinian civilians, kidnapping children from their homes and using brutal force against protesters. We are reminded of the intensity of IDF cruelty every so often, the latest major display being the three-week bloodbath in Gaza that began on December 27, 2008. Hundreds of tons of bombs were dropped by Israeli pilots on Gaza, followed by a massive invasion of land forces. All this for the purpose of terrorizing a defenseless civilian population that includes 800,000 children.

Now that Israel has been in control of the West Bank for over four decades it had built and invested there heavily. But all of the investment and construction in the West Bank was made to bring Jews into the West Bank. Palestinian lands are being taken at an alarming pace, their homes are destroyed and thousands are incarcerated, while industry, roads, malls, schools and gated communities with swimming pools are being built for Jews only. Water, which is the scarcest resource of all, is controlled and distributed by the Israeli water authority, as follows: Per capita, Israelis receive 300 cubic meters of water per year. In comparison, per capita Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza receive 35-85 cubic meters per year, while the World Health Organization recommends a minimum of 100 cubic meter of water per person per year. But what is even worse is that per capita, Israeli settlers in the West Bank are allocated 1500 cubic meters of water per year. Jews in the West Bank live with green lawns and swimming pools while Palestinians quite often get no water at all. Perhaps invented people have no need for water.

De-Arabizing the history of Palestine is another crucial element of the ethnic cleansing. 1500 years of Arab and Muslim rule and culture in Palestine are trivialized, evidence of its existence is being destroyed and all this is done to make the absurd connection between the ancient Hebrew civilization and today’s Israel. The most glaring example of this today is in Silwan, (Wadi Hilwe) a town adjacent to the Old City of Jerusalem with some 50,000 residents. Israel is expelling families from Silwan and destroying their homes because it claims that king David built a city there some 3000 years ago. Thousands of families will be made homeless so that Israel can build a park to commemorate a king that may or may not have lived 3000 years ago. Not a shred of historical evidence exists that can prove King David ever lived yet Palestinian men, women, children and the elderly along with their schools and mosques, churches and ancient cemeteries and any evidence of their existence must be destroyed and then denied so that Zionist claims to exclusive rights to the land may be substantiated.

Once we connect the dots it is not hard to see that the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza is only a small part of the Israeli Palestinian issue. The greater issue is the ongoing ethnic cleansing of Palestine by the Zionist state. The way forward for Israelis and Palestinians alike is to oppose the ethnic cleansing by opposing all its manifestations. This means supporting the movement to boycott, divest and place sanctions on Israel, or BDS for short, it means actively participating in the popular non-violent struggle in Palestine and it means challenging the racist laws that govern Israel by defying them. There has to be a clear and unequivocal call to recognize that the IDF is a terrorist organization and its officers are war criminals. Furthermore, the reprehensible discrimination against Palestinians, whether they live in Israel/Palestine or not, practiced by the security officials at Ben Gurion airport and other points of entry to Israel/Palestine must be challenged. The struggle for a democracy in our shared homeland is no different than the struggle at Tahrir square and can in fact be seen as part of the Arab Spring.

“http://mikopeled.wordpress.com/
 

Past Member (0)
Tuesday May 22, 2012, 1:54 pm
Thank you for that article Abdessalam.
 

Stephen Brian (23)
Tuesday May 22, 2012, 6:30 pm
Hi Charles,

There is an extensive collection of photos of Israeli artillery firing in that war. One even made headlines for a week when a few families brought their kids out to a firing site and the kids wrote on the shells, one addressing it to "To Nasrallah, from Israel". (It was reported as having been addressed to children of Lebanon.) The soldiers who permitted civilians that close to a firing position faced reprimand. the first photo to which I sent you also shows Israeli artillery, and the photographer is obviously not an Israeli propagandist.

Obviously, no censorship.

I'm sure the Arab Association for Human Rights is nice and unbiased regarding a war between Arabs and Israel. Yup, a fine source there. Cook's 2nd paragraph, 1st line: Respected by whom? Later in his article, he fails to note that the targeting of civilian population centers is not only sanctioned by international law in Israeli books, but in books of international law everywhere.
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/Human_Rights/geneva1.html
Note the conditions under which a Safety Zone may not be recognized. the text of the Convention assumes that the case is unclear so that an investigation is necessary, and that the failure to meet obligations is an error to be rectified. When the violation is blatant and there is no expectation that it would be rectified as the violation is central to the violator's strategy, the zones, whether hospitals, places of worship, civilian areas, or otherwise, may simply be attacked.

Strict military censorship laws preventing publication of sites of attacks even after the war? Can you point me to them? Israeli laws are publicly available. Was the law censored too?

The "inaccurate count" was a prime example of propaganda. Also, over half of those killed were militants according to HRW and almost all according to the IDF (though I don't expect you to believe the IDF report). In urban combat, 50% correct targeting is actually far better than the norm and implies special care taken to avoid civilian deaths. Yes, of course we should be talking about how terrible that is. Maybe next time they'll just abide by regular norms of warfare and in combat on such a scale kill a few hundred Palestinians instead. That way you can feel good about yourself now, feel good about being angry at Israel later, and continue not to care about those who would not otherwise die.

If someone enters your home illegally and you protect yourself, then not only did you have the reasonable expectation that you would be harmed if you had not fought, but the person was in the middle of committing a major crime. When soldiers enter a town under their government's jurisdiction, they are not committing a crime. On top of that, if their intent were to harm civilians, a lot more would have died. No, civilians who simply refused to engage the soldiers were left alone insofar as was possible while completing the operation. This is the difference between resisting a massacre and resisting a regular military operation. Those who raised arms lost any sort of claim to civilian-status.

You didn't hear about the killing? Here you go:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1561384/Hamas-honeymoon-ends-with-torture.html
This article is about political repression, but it does make reference to one of the weddings. The one I actually had in mind was this:
http://wn.com/GAZA__HAMAS_Destroying_their_Palestinians_Brothers_Wedding_Killing_the_Bride_etc
Yeah, "Palestine Television" must be a major outlet for Israeli propaganda.

Journalists do go home and report from there. Of course, if their news-agency ever wants to send anyone to Palestinian-governed territories again without that reporter getting killed, they still have to bias their reports. The call for UN observers is one-sided, but that doesn't say anything about who has what to hide. It says which way the observers are expected to jump. The difference is that over there, UN observers are not seen as moral neutral investigators.
 

Charles O. (209)
Tuesday May 22, 2012, 10:16 pm
Hello Stephen B. --

You write:

> Obviously, no censorship.

You've got to be kidding! Military censorship in Israel is common knowledge.

. .

> I'm sure the Arab Association for Human Rights is nice and unbiased regarding a war between Arabs and Israel. Yup, a fine source there.

Why would it be any more biased than an Israeli source?

. .

> The "inaccurate count" was a prime example of propaganda.

Again, our focus should be on the killing, not on the counting!

The inaccurate count was Israel's fault, because it is Israel that did the killing and it is Israel that prevented reporters, U.N. observers and Red Crescent workers from entering the site and counting the dead.

. .

> When soldiers enter a town under their government's jurisdiction, they are not committing a crime.

Actually the soldiers are committing a crime. They're maintaining an illegal occupation, and then they're killing the people under occupation. The people under occupation have a right to resist. They didn't ask to be invaded and occupied and attacked, any more than I, as a home owner, asked to have my home invaded and occupied.

. .

> You didn't hear about the killing? Here you go:

> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1561384/Hamas-honeymoon-ends-with-torture.html

> This article is about political repression, but it does make reference to one of the weddings.

You're right. The problem is not the wedding, per se: It's the attempt to turn the wedding into an anti-Hamas political rally.

Your other link is from the Pat Robertson's "700 Club". Robertson also claims that 9/11 was caused by homosexuality and hurricanes can be moved by prayer. Enough said!
 

Stephen Brian (23)
Wednesday May 23, 2012, 11:45 pm
Hi Charles,

Military censorship for operational security is standard. However, the type of censorship which you described is simply not present there. "Military censorship" [as you use the term] in Israel is as common knowledge as the obvious fact that the Earth is flat.

It is more likely that one would find less bias in Israeli sources because Israel maintains a free press.

I did look at the killing: The proportion of civilian casualties was remarkably low. I commend Israel on the special care it obviously took to keep them out of harm's way. What remains to be considered after that is the "count". Israel kept reporters out for two reasons: First, they would have been in danger. Their exclusion was partly for their own protection. Second, Western reporters regularly act as mouthpieces for propaganda there for reasons which I described earlier. As for whose fault it is, perhaps we should look at all the news-agencies which took Saeb Erekat's word as absolute truth, ignoring their own stated policies of not reporting any account as true unless it comes from multiple independent sources or is clearly backed by evidence.

The Israeli control of the area was a central condition of the peace treaty between Israel and Jordan. By calling it illegal, you are calling the peace between Israel and Jordan illegal. Do you really want those two countries to go back to war? Would you deny them the right to make peace under whatever conditions both sides deem acceptable?

That would explain why I had so much trouble finding out what wn.com stood for. Thanks for the info about it being a 700 Club site. still, the video was still posted elsewhere. Would it have been better had I posted this copy?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vEud-cEjwQU
or if I included corroboration from the UN that Hamas opposes exactly what was said to be the wedding party's "crime" on p.15 of this report?
http://www.ochaopt.org/documents/opt_prot_crisisgroup_rulingpalestine_gazaunder_hamas_march_2008.pdf
Besides, regardless of whether the cause was the singing or the anti-Hamas theme, either one demonstrates Hamas' attitude towards free speech and by extension freedom of the press, which was the point of raising the issue of the wedding in the first place.
 
Or, log in with your
Facebook account:
Please add your comment: (plain text only please. Allowable HTML: <a>)

Track Comments: Notify me with a personal message when other people comment on this story


Loading Noted By...Please Wait

 

 
Content and comments expressed here are the opinions of Care2 users and not necessarily that of Care2.com or its affiliates.