« Previous | Main | Next »

Avraham Burg on "post-Zionism"

Post categories:

Robin Lustig | 13:20 UK time, Monday, 9 March 2009

Avraham Burg is a former Speaker of the Israeli Knesset (parliament) and former chairman of the World Zionist Organisation. He's written a highly controversial book arguing that it's time for Israelis (and Jews elsewhere) to "get over" the Holocaust. The book is called "The Holocaust Is Over; We Must Rise from Its Ashes". You can hear my interview with him here.

(broadcast on Newshour, BBC World Service, 2 March 2009)

UPDATE: audio link now fixed.















Comments

  • 1. At 2:25pm on 09 Mar 2009, Jackturk wrote:

    Robin, the audio link doesn't seem to be working so I haven't heard the interview but judging by his article in the 'Guardian' he is a man of much experience and wisdom.

    One of the passages from his article is even more relevant today:-

    "Israel, having ceased to care about the children of the Palestinians, should not be surprised when they come washed in hatred and blow themselves up in the centres of Israeli escapism. They consign themselves to Allah in our places of recreation, because their own lives are torture. They spill their own blood in our restaurants in order to ruin our appetites, because they have children and parents at home who are hungry and humiliated. We could kill a thousand ringleaders a day and nothing will be solved, because the leaders come up from below - from the wells of hatred and anger, from the "infrastructures" of injustice and moral corruption."

    [Unsuitable/Broken URL removed by Moderator]

    Complain about this comment

  • 2. At 2:52pm on 09 Mar 2009, Jackturk wrote:


    For some strange reason my post '1' has been removed.

    All it contained was an appreciation of Avraham Burg and a passage from his 'Guardian' article in Sept. '03 with a link!!!!

    Complain about this comment

  • 3. At 3:15pm on 09 Mar 2009, Jackturk wrote:

    From the BBC's MESSAGEBOARDS web page:-

    "You have a general question about how the message boards work. Please post your question as a message on the board itself. The hosts or other board members will reply. This helps other people who may have the same question."
    .

    My question is:- If a complaint is received about a post, is the post removed immediately or is it scrutinised first?

    If it is removed immediately, this plays into the hands of those who would wish to censor the information because they know that 'moderation' takes such a long time and some posts even disappear for ever under 'moderation'.

    Complain about this comment

  • 4. At 3:31pm on 09 Mar 2009, Jackturk wrote:

    UPDATE: audio link now fixed.

    I must be deaf then :-)

    Complain about this comment

  • 5. At 5:39pm on 09 Mar 2009, Electric-Badger wrote:

    Here is the link to Avraham Burg's article in the 'Guardian' Sept. '03. Hope I have better luck than jackturk. Anybody who denounces violence should be heard. Especially a reformed Zionist.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2003/sep/15/comment

    Complain about this comment

  • 6. At 00:40am on 10 Mar 2009, ilbeback wrote:

    Hi. See you tomorrow.

    Complain about this comment

  • 7. At 01:14am on 10 Mar 2009, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    Santayana said "those who do not learn the lessons of history are condemned to repeat them"....only next time they may not survive the experience. Avraham Burg should have that tatooed...on his wrist.

    Besides everything else, Burg is a liar. There is no connection between pre-world war II Germany and Israel today. A dangerous fool who gives Israel's enemies ammunition. I'm sure they will feature his words prominently and repeatedly in their hate filled propaganda. Every group has its mentally defective members...including Jews.

    Complain about this comment

  • 8. At 09:41am on 10 Mar 2009, Jackturk wrote:

    7 MarcusBarbarius

    "Every group has its mentally defective members"

    Including US Zionists eh Marcus!

    How's the painting coming on?

    Complain about this comment

  • 9. At 11:19am on 10 Mar 2009, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    JackDreck, Your picture makes The Portrait of Dorian Gray look like Marilyn Monroe.

    Complain about this comment

  • 10. At 11:49am on 10 Mar 2009, Jackturk wrote:


    Robin, thanks for the interview, after listening to it, I got the impression that the 'Zionism' Avraham Burg thought he had signed up to is not the one that emerged. There are probably many Zionists who were as misconceived about Zionism because at the time they subscribed to its philosophy, they had no idea of its history, nor the natural conclusion of its concept i.e. institutional racism.

    The population of Israel has been swelled by millions of Zionist Jews who did not go there because they were persecuted or harassed at home, they went there attracted by the offers of the Israeli government, totally ignoring and in many cases delighting in, the fact that they would be displacing the rightful inhabitants from their land and property.

    I admire Burg for his courage in at last publicly recognising the downside of Zionism and I hope, as an Israeli of some standing, he will continue to argue, both inside and outside Israel, that there is an alternative to the vicious and sadistic nature of the present Israeli leaders.

    9 MarcusBarbarius
    Marcus, how very Freudian that you should choose 'The Portrait of Dorian Gray', it's a perfect metaphor for Zionism!

    Complain about this comment

  • 11. At 11:26pm on 10 Mar 2009, ilbeback wrote:

    This is an excellent article by Avraham Burg and very concise. It fits with a much of what I have discovered through my own efforts, with the exception of the first sentence:

    'The Zionist revolution has always rested on two pillars: a just path and an ethical leadership.'

    But since the author was probably speaking of his personal vision for the 'Zionist revolution' and is trying to show how far short of this vision modern Israel has fallen, this is an understandable claim. Many people who profess to be Zionists, probable think in terms of a 'just path and an ethical leadership' and other positives. They view Zionism through rose tinted spectacles, but do not wish to see the reality of what Zionism has become. It is certain that a far greater reaction would come from the Israeli people if they were forced to confront the victims of Zionism, as it is currently expressed.

    Little has changed on the political front or within Israeli society since Avraham Burg rote this article. If anything, things have got worse for the Palestinians. The only hope for change is pressure from outside. Perhaps the 'diaspora Jews', as Burg suggests, may play an important role in this. When committed Zionists become disillusioned with the way Israel is heading, they are often the best people to analyse precisely what is wrong with the entire system. Their critique is often quite devastating, and this surprises people used to hearing toned down versions from Western critics who are nervous of being branded anti-Semitic.

    In practical terms. The solution to the Israel / Palestine conflict, is relatively simple, as Burg suggests. The problem is that there is a huge power asymmetry between the Israelis and the Palestinians. Most of the compromise would need to be made by those with all the power, in order to provide a settlement which could be viewed as bordering on fair. There is an equal asymmetry between what Israelis believe about themselves and the reality. Learning that you are not only wrong, but horrendously wrong is never going to be painless.

    This article reminds me of one written by Avi Shlaim (Oxford professor of international relations). Avi Shlaim served in the Israeli army and has never questioned the state's legitimacy. But its merciless assault on Gaza has led him to similarly devastating conclusions:

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/07/gaza-israel-palestine

    Complain about this comment

  • 12. At 00:25am on 11 Mar 2009, Jackturk wrote:

    Like those who accepted the rewards offered by Bernard Madoff and Allen Stanford without enquiring into their legitimacy, in many cases because they had an inkling there may be a fiddle, many Zionist Jews have seen Zionism as some sort of dream but either haven't bothered, or were too afraid, to think it through for fear it was a mirage.

    The hard-line militant Zionists have taken advantage of this illusion and constructed an edifice which is testament to selfishness and bigotry and in doing so have embroiled the world in a conflict which need never have happened.

    Zionism is a lost cause and without doubt it will eventually disappear, the question is, how many people will have to suffer in the meantime before its demise?

    Complain about this comment

  • 13. At 01:52am on 11 Mar 2009, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    This ham-Burg-er clown and his little gang can spout off all they want to. It won't change the fact that Natanyahooooo is the Prime Minister of Israel and I don't thing he sees it Burg's way.

    Complain about this comment

  • 14. At 08:06am on 11 Mar 2009, Jackturk wrote:

    13 MarcusBarbarius

    "and I don't thing (sic)"

    That's the trouble Marcus, you just don't thing :-)

    Complain about this comment

  • 15. At 2:29pm on 11 Mar 2009, SteveGNyc wrote:

    All of the Russian Jews I have spoken to who live in New York City are very forthcoming about how they fled a life of discrimination and hatred in Russia.

    They came to America and Israel to be full citizens. Your wild theories about plum offers from the Israeli governemnt are fiction.

    Now that same Russian population in Israel is rising to defend themselves from Arab extremists who want to murder them.

    Looks like they learned one good thing from Russia. When threatened, you fight back.

    Complain about this comment

  • 16. At 5:43pm on 11 Mar 2009, Electric-Badger wrote:

    There are obviously two sides to the Israeli/Palestine conflict and therefore two distinct viewpoints offered on this and other blogs. A common thread throughout the postings from people who oppose the latest actions of the IDF has been links to articles, videos and evidential material to INFORM the reader. The opposing posts also have a common theme – bigoted language bordering on racism - is their stock reply. When one Jew can suggest to another Jew - that he should have something tattooed on his wrist - with all the evil connotations that invokes - I despair.

    I wonder if the people of Israel know what is being said it their name.

    Complain about this comment

  • 17. At 8:20pm on 11 Mar 2009, TrueToo wrote:

    16. Electric-Badger,

    When you say, "bigoted language bordering on racism," you must surely be talking about the anti-Israel crowd and not the Israel supporters unless you have been reading the wrong blog.

    And spare us your "despair." I note you don't "despair" about Burg comparing the Israelis to Nazi Germany in the early stages - i.e. slyly suggesting that Israel could in fact become like Nazi Germany. This despicable comparison is regularly trotted out by the worst of the anti-Israel crowd and the anti-Semites and it is no less despicable when it is made by a Jew and an Israeli. Burg really should be ashamed of himself.

    Complain about this comment

  • 18. At 9:52pm on 11 Mar 2009, Jackturk wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 19. At 11:54pm on 11 Mar 2009, Electric-Badger wrote:

    17 TrueToo

    Ridicule away TrueToo – I do my fair share. I chose the word ‘despair’ carefully. When the IDF and their leaders use tactics and armaments that result in the death of 400 children – I DO DESPAIR. When a native born Israeli is maligned for daring to stick his head above the parapet – I DO DESPAIR. When the leaders of Israel use the language quoted in JackTurks post – I DO DESPAIR. When one Jew can suggest to another Jew - that he should have something tattooed on his wrist - with all the evil connotations that invokes - I DO DESPAIR.

    I despair that the head-bangers could possible have their way.

    Complain about this comment

  • 20. At 11:57pm on 11 Mar 2009, Richard_SM wrote:


    Ref #15 SteveGNyc

    What you call "wild theories" are actually hard facts. Financial inducements to attract Jews to move to Palestine has been a government policy for many years. There are various programmes designed to assist their passage and encourage residency, particuarly if they decide to join the Israeli militia.

    http://www.mahal-idf-volunteers.org/

    Jewish families living in Iran were being offered $50,000 packages to migrate in 2007. The Society of Iranian Jews dismissed them as "immature political enticements" and said their national identity was not for sale.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/jul/12/israel.iran

    It's pure racial discrimination when such incentives are offered to those whose ancestors left the land over 2000 years ago, but re-admission is denied to others who were actually born there. I appreciate you weren't aware of the Israeli immigration policy when you you posted your comments - but now that you are, you'll no doubt want to reassess your position.


    Complain about this comment

  • 21. At 03:33am on 12 Mar 2009, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    The Israelis are in the sweet spot calling the shots. Rockets still come zooming in from Gaza every day giving justification to keeping the status quo. They fall harmlessly most of the time but once in awhile they will injure or kill someone reminding the Israeli population and the world that the Palestinians are mad dog terrorists who cannot be allowed out of quarrantine let alone have a state. The Palestinians are still at each other's throats while still making noises about unity. The quartet has all but given up, the roadmap has reached a dead end just as I always predicted. Hamas still won't meet the criteria set for them by the quartet, especially the US. Iran is impotent and heading for its own financial crisis. If it ever really can manufacture a nuclear weapon, the Israelis have the power to blow them away at any time. And even the Arabs governments are mostly silent about the Palestinians never having really given a damn about them anyway and just paying them lip service. Now how could the Israelis have asked for better.

    Keep up the good work you guys.

    Complain about this comment

  • 22. At 09:13am on 12 Mar 2009, Jackturk wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 23. At 10:52am on 12 Mar 2009, Jackturk wrote:

    21 MarcusBarbarius

    "Now how could the Israelis have asked for better."

    Don't be modest Marcus, they could have had you for Prime Minister!

    Complain about this comment

  • 24. At 11:37am on 12 Mar 2009, Jackturk wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 25. At 3:48pm on 12 Mar 2009, fsuth09 wrote:

    MarcusAureliusII check this video out:

    Israel Admits: "No Hamas Rockets Were Fired During Ceasefire"

    Complain about this comment

  • 26. At 11:22pm on 12 Mar 2009, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    futs,
    Even if it's true (and I'm not wasting my time visiting any of your links) rockets were constantly being fired at Israel from Gaza. As the government in charge, Hamas didn't even try to stop them. In fact it probably aided and abetted it...if it wasn't directly responsible through individuals not easily identifiable as associated with Hamas. The PLO under Arafat, the so called moderates were no better. When Israel complained that Arafat wasn't doing anything to stop the violence being perpetrated on Israelis from Palestinian territory, his reply was that he was not going to do Israel's policing for it. So Israel has been and continues to do its "policing" for itself.

    Natanyahoooooo!

    Complain about this comment

  • 27. At 11:44pm on 12 Mar 2009, TrueToo wrote:

    19. Electric-Badger,

    You should study the Israeli-Arab conflict more closely and using objective sources. Then you will notice that the Arabs habitually exaggerate the civilian death toll while keeping quiet about their own terrorist death toll.

    The IDF is doing its own investigation and has challenged the 400 dead children allegation. You might be interested in following that up. You might also be interested to note that Hamas attacked a number of Fatah members, shooting many in the knees and killing many others. I have no doubt these were magically transformed into "civilian deaths caused by Israel." Also, don't forget to factor in the use of human shields by Hamas. That is a war crime - or it would be a war crime if Hamas were a government of a country. But I guess they can be let off the hook because they are simply a terrorist group.

    Don't be fooled by the quotes pumped out as part of the propaganda from jackturk and the rest of the crew. Closer observation will establish that they have been taken out of context or otherwise fiddled with.

    Don't rely on the left wing media, including the BBC, for accurate information on this conflict. In short, do some independent research and you will be better equipped for the debate.

    Complain about this comment

  • 28. At 00:17am on 13 Mar 2009, TrueToo wrote:

    11. ilbeback wrote:

    "This is an excellent article by Avraham Burg and very concise. It fits with a much of what I have discovered through my own efforts..."

    You mean your own efforts of a few months sitting glued to anti-Israel blogs? By your own admission, you "have no stake in Gaza and HAD little interest in the Palestinians until recently."

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2009/01/bbc_and_the_gaza_appeal.html#comment1890

    Far better minds than yours have wrestled with the complexities of the Israeli-Arab conflict for years. They have studied it for years. But you come to your arrogant and ignorant conclusions while still a total novice in the field. No wonder you can conclude that the Israelis are identical to the Nazis.

    Only an ignoramus (or someone deliberately trying to whip up hatred against Israel) could come to such a conclusion. I guess in your case it's both.

    26. MarcusAureliusII,

    If the anti-Israel crowd here had a genuine desire to learn anything they would do a serious study of your comments since you get to the heart of the matter. Unfortunately, the last thing they want to do is learn.

    Complain about this comment

  • 29. At 08:41am on 13 Mar 2009, Jackturk wrote:

    26 MarcusBarbarius

    Anyone who is not an inveterate Zionist, unlike you of course, and bothers to look at the history of the conflict, cannot fail to reach the simple uncomplicated conclusion:-

    Zionist terrorists forced the majority of Arabs out of their homeland and began a campaign to colonise the land for themselves. Because the Arabs objected, they were attacked with overwhelming force and even criticised for resisting.

    In an effort to try and cover their tracks, the Zionist's propaganda machine, financed by the USA, sprung into action to introduce spurious arguments about ancient land rights, who hit who first and any number of other distractions. They even tried to re-write the history books to justify their claims.

    These are facts and any non-Zionist account of history will bear them out. All arguments to justify Zionist actions since the start of the colonisation process are meaningless.

    Complain about this comment

  • 30. At 09:46am on 13 Mar 2009, ilbeback wrote:

    28. At 00:17am on 13 Mar 2009, TrueToo wrote:
    'Far better minds than yours have wrestled with the complexities of the Israeli-Arab conflict for years. They have studied it for years. But you come to your arrogant and ignorant conclusions while still a total novice in the field. No wonder you can conclude that the Israelis are identical to the Nazis.

    Only an ignoramus (or someone deliberately trying to whip up hatred against Israel) could come to such a conclusion'



    TT. It is possible for a person who is only 20% open-minded to come to a balanced understanding of the Israel / Palestine conflict in an afternoon – if they want to.

    Israel has all the power to initiate peace. But Israel cannot stop abusing that power and doesn't want peace, which will hinder it's expansionist vision. The rocket throwers are a desperate reaction to Zionist neo-colonialism, but they will eventually be sidelined and will disappear once Israel has the courage and fortitude to give the Palestinian people their rights and learns to treat them with respect. It's not rocket science

    What is hard to comprehend in a lifetime, is the mindset of the bigoted defenders of Zionism who can see no wrong in their sides actions, even as they descend into to behaviour akin (in some respects) to that of Nazi Germany. I have never said that Israelis are identical to Nazis across the board so please be honest about this.

    I in no way apply this label to all Jews or even a majority of Jews. It is principally aimed at the Zionists calling the shots in Israel at present and their ardent supporters and enforcers. There are many Jews who are close to saints. The fact that there are growing similarities between the Zionist leadership, for example, and Nazis is a simple objective fact, which people across religious and political divides have noted, including Jews.

    It believe that it would appear to most impartial observers that I have came closer to the truth in a few months than you have in a lifetime of Zionist groupthink. Trumpeting the same old tune year on year, is not the same as having a long distinguished experience of a topic. My arguments will hopefully progress, whereas yours appear to be stuck in a timewarp as Uri Avery observes:

    http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=12074

    If I have been driven to the same conclusions in a few months as a man who has lived a lifetime of experience, then I have nothing to be ashamed of.

    Complain about this comment

  • 31. At 09:49am on 13 Mar 2009, Jackturk wrote:

    29 TrueToo

    When I replied to Mr.Barbarius I hadn't read your two posts 27 and 28 so please include yourself in the response.

    In your posts you have perfectly illustrated my point about spurious interjections. You continually side-step the substantive arguments and accuse me of 'fiddling propaganda' Please give me examples and if necessary, I will be pleased to un-fiddle it for you.

    Meanwhile, please study carefully the words of Vladimir Jabotinsky one of the early Zionist leaders, influential in the founding of Israel:-

    "There can be no voluntary agreement between ourselves and the Palestine Arabs. Not now, nor in the prospective future. I say this with such conviction, not because I want to hurt the moderate Zionists. I do not believe that they will be hurt. Except for those who were born blind, they realised long ago that it is utterly impossible to obtain the voluntary consent of the Palestine Arabs for converting "Palestine" from an Arab country into a country with a Jewish majority.

    The native populations, civilised or uncivilised, have always stubbornly resisted the colonists, irrespective of whether they were civilised or savage."
    Jewish Herald, 26th November 1937.


    For those who are unaware, Jabotinsky also founded 'Irgun' one of the terrorist groups that carried out the massacre of Arabs at Deir Yassin, which was said to have been a significant incident in the founding of Israel.

    At least Marcus has the good sense not to want to discuss the historical issues because he knows very well that Zionists have no defence, perhaps you should take that into account as you continue to try and defend the indefensible.

    Complain about this comment

  • 32. At 10:01am on 13 Mar 2009, TrueToo wrote:

    Before Robin Lustig's post on the Israeli elections drops off the bottom of the page, I'd like to point out that ilbeback is in very dubious company indeed with his stale old comparison of Israelis to Nazis. But I guess he welcomes the company:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/worldtonight/2009/02/israels_election_did_anyone_wi.html#comment408

    I note that neither he nor anyone else on these blogs has responded when I point out that Hezbollah does the Nazi salute, that the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem met Hitler and enthusiastically planned to implement the "Final Solution" - i.e. the genocide of the Jews - in Palestine, that Iraq had a pro-Nazi government in the 1940s, that Hamas has the destruction of Israel and the killing of Jews in its charter, that practically the last Jew has been driven out of most Arab countries.

    Sorry to draw people's attention to these inconvenient bits of evidence among the many that point to the pro-Nazi ideology and activity of the Arab side of the Israeli-Arab conflict. It must be confusing and distracting when you are so intent on your Israel-bashing.

    Complain about this comment

  • 33. At 10:27am on 13 Mar 2009, Jackturk wrote:

    32 TrueToo

    On a number of occasions I have tried to post this response but it has been bombed by the moderators who say it contains copyright material. If anyone can point that out before it gets bombed again I would be grateful.

    15 SteveGNyc

    "All of the Russian Jews I have spoken to who live in New York City are very forthcoming about how they fled a life of discrimination and hatred in Russia."

    Steve, I don't doubt your word, there is racism in Russia against many groups just as there is in Europe and the USA but there is some evidence that thousands of Jews are actually returning to Russia.

    http://uk.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUSL118299720080506

    I wonder if those Jews that you spoke to in NYC didn't go to Israel because they don't believe in Zionism?

    "Your wild theories about plum offers from the Israeli governemnt are fiction."

    Don't take my word for it, look at the official Israeli government web site:-

    http://www.gov.il/FirstGov/TopNavEng/EngSituations/ESNewImmigrantsGuide/ESNIBenefitsToNewImmigrants/

    "Now that same Russian population in Israel is rising to defend themselves from Arab extremists who want to murder them."

    Steve, hasn't it sunk in yet that in order for those immigrants, whether Russian or not, to be there, Arab land was stolen, is still being stolen and the rightful inhabitants expelled altogether?. It is also Ironic that some of the most militant Israelis are Russian Zionist Jews.

    For example, Avigdor Leiberman one time Deputy Prime Minister said of Palestinian prisoners:-

    "It would be better to drown these prisoners in the Dead Sea if possible, since that's the lowest point in the world"Guardian, 25.07.03

    and

    "if it were up to me I would notify the Palestinian Authority that tomorrow at ten in the morning we would bomb all their places of business in Ramallah"The Independent, 6.02.09

    It seems that when the most religious of the Russian Jews actually get to Israel they don't find it particularly conducive to practising their religion:-

    http://www.ynetnews.com/Ext/Comp/ArticleLayout/CdaArticlePrintPreview/1,2506,L-3604558,00.html

    Maybe this is why a large proportion of those that stay seem to be of the militant Zionist persuasion and religious freedom is not their main motive for being there.

    "Now that same Russian population in Israel is rising to defend themselves from Arab extremists who want to murder them."

    Steve, if you found yourself kicked off your land by people from another country who had been 'bussed in' to replace you, wouldn't you object in whatever way you could?. Particularly if those immigrants were only brought in in the first place to create a false majority against you.

    In that situation, would you consider yourself to be an extremist?

    Complain about this comment

  • 34. At 10:40am on 13 Mar 2009, fsuth09 wrote:

    Jackturk wrote:

    Zionist terrorists forced the majority of Arabs out of their homeland and began a campaign to colonise the land for themselves. Because the Arabs objected, they were attacked with overwhelming force and even criticised for resisting.

    In an effort to try and cover their tracks, the Zionist's propaganda machine, financed by the USA, sprung into action to introduce spurious arguments about ancient land rights, who hit who first and any number of other distractions. They even tried to re-write the history books to justify their claims.


    Sums up the history in 2 short paragraphs.

    About the re-writing of the history books, one know fact is that the zionist propaganda went as far as even to rewrite the world map.

    Complain about this comment

  • 35. At 11:07am on 13 Mar 2009, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 36. At 11:16am on 13 Mar 2009, fsuth09 wrote:

    @MarcusAureliusII

    You forgot to mention that pigs can fly too.

    Complain about this comment

  • 37. At 11:38am on 13 Mar 2009, dceilar wrote:

    You would have thought Marcus, with his feelings on Europeans, would want the Eurotrash out of Israel and Palestine.

    Complain about this comment

  • 38. At 11:46am on 13 Mar 2009, fsuth09 wrote:

    @dceilar, pure hatred in Marcus.

    Why Marcus?

    Complain about this comment

  • 39. At 1:52pm on 13 Mar 2009, TrueToo wrote:

    20. Richard_SM,

    Do you know what would happen to the Jews of Iran if they showed the slightest support for Israel or the slightest interest in moving there? Do you imagine that Iran is a benevolent democracy?

    Right near the bottom of your Guardian article we have this:

    A Jewish businessman, Ruhollah Kadkhodah-Zadeh, was hanged in 1998, apparently for allegedly helping Jews to emigrate.

    Israel has always supported Jews under threat anywhere in the world. It's bizarre that you find something "racist" about that. Israel also helps its enemies when they are in dire straits. The "racist" Israelis are currently helping black Sudanese Muslims fleeing the slaughter by Arab Muslims in Sudan - those who are not shot by their Egyptian brothers as they try to cross the border into Israel. There's is a powerful irony in the fact of Muslims fleeing other Muslims to find comfort and support from Jews.

    And I see you are one of those who think that there were no Jewish communities in Palestine for 2000 years. In fact, Jews have always maintained their link to the land between the Jordan River and the sea, there has always been a Jewish presence on the land and at times the Jewish communities thrived there. You need to study history from a reliable source, not pro-Palestinian propaganda texts.


    31. Jackturk

    I see you have copied and pasted yet another page out of your anti-Israel file. Where's the context and where's the link to the article? Or don't you want this information revealed?

    But I'm expecting you to do some genuine research of the evidence and that really is expecting too much of you.


    33. Jackturk,

    How many Arabs (they were not calling themselves Palestinians back in 1948) were expelled by the Jews and how many left of their own accord, encouraged by their leaders to leave so that they could return once the Arab armies had driven the Jews into the sea? And how many fled because they thought the Jews would do to them what they would have done to the Jews had the situation been reversed?

    And why didn't the forefathers of today's 1,3 million Israeli Arabs leave? They chose to stay, obviously.


    34. fsuth09 wrote:

    "About the re-writing of the history books, one know fact is that the zionist propaganda went as far as even to rewrite the world map."

    You don't "rewrite" a map, you redraw it. Try to get the propaganda from your funny websites properly organised.

    Complain about this comment

  • 40. At 2:14pm on 13 Mar 2009, Jackturk wrote:

    32 TrueToo

    "Sorry to draw people's attention to these inconvenient bits of evidence among the many that point to the pro-Nazi ideology and activity of the Arab side of the Israeli-Arab conflict. It must be confusing and distracting when you are so intent on your Israel-bashing."

    I'm pleased to draw your attention to the following letter, signed by amongst others, the great Albert Einstein. I'm also pleased to help in any way I can, your further education into the background of Zionism. It must be very confusing for you when, having learnt one version, you are now faced with the truth:-

    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........"
    http://www.physics.harvard.edu/~wilson/NYTimes1948.html

    It is thanks to you and Marcus etc., for trying to defend Zionism, that all of this information is being brought to the attention of the public. Please continue with your posts in this regard, it's a pleasure to assist you on the road to your epiphany.

    Complain about this comment

  • 41. At 2:28pm on 13 Mar 2009, dceilar wrote:

    #39 TT

    How many Arabs (they were not calling themselves Palestinians back in 1948) were expelled by the Jews and how many left of their own accord, encouraged by their leaders to leave so that they could return once the Arab armies had driven the Jews into the sea? And how many fled because they thought the Jews would do to them what they would have done to the Jews had the situation been reversed?

    So, what's stopping Israel allowing these people to return to their homes?

    Complain about this comment

  • 42. At 2:46pm on 13 Mar 2009, fsuth09 wrote:

    TT wrote:

    You don't "rewrite" a map, you redraw it.

    Sorry I mean't "redraw". What was I thinking!

    Complain about this comment

  • 43. At 5:15pm on 13 Mar 2009, TrueToo wrote:

    40 Jackturk,

    So no link to the Jabotinski quote, right? And no response to any of my points, just more lies and vile propaganda. I have read many accounts of Deir Yassin. That one is riddled with lies, the worst of them being that there were no Arabs fighters at Deir Yassin.

    This is why you are not worth debating but occasionally your propaganda needs to be exposed.

    41. dceilar,

    I guess in 1948 the Arabs of Palestine (apart from the small number who were actually driven out by the Jews) had a few alternatives as the Jews of Palestine were faced with the genocidal and unprovoked onslaught from the armies of five Arab countries:

    *Leave so that the invading armies could annihilate the Jews and then return to claim all the land.

    *Flee out of (unwarranted) fear that the Jews would do to them what they would have done to the Jews had the roles been reversed.

    *Fight on the side of the invading Arabs. (Quite a few thousand did.)

    *Accept the offer of the Jews to stay in their homes and villages and do nothing.
    (Must have been a few hundred thousand of them because those who did, and their descendants, now represent Israel's 1.3 million Arab citizens.)

    Interesting how the choices one makes in life affect one's future.

    Now who do you think Israel should accept back, along with their descendants:

    *Those who fought with the invading Arabs.

    *Those who fled in unwarranted fear of the Jews.

    *Those who left willingly, anticipating their return once the Jews had been annihilated.






    Complain about this comment

  • 44. At 7:39pm on 13 Mar 2009, Richard_SM wrote:


    Ref #39 TrueToo

    I'm well aware a small number of Jews were living alongside Palestinians before 1900, but are you denying Israel's immigration policy allows Jewish settlers from all over the world, whose only connection is their faith, yet prevents the return of Arabs who were born in Jaffa, Jerusalem and Majdal?

    There's a civil war in Sudan, and many who have fled, some towards Israel - but perhaps they were heading for Palestine? Israel can't take much credit - it has imprisoned most of the Sudanese refugees.

    As for persecution and restriction of movement of Iranian Jews, the same Guardian article also said, "Despite the absence of diplomatic ties with Israel, Iranian Jews frequently go there to visit relatives." Nice for some - I'm sure the Palestians are envious.

    Complain about this comment

  • 45. At 7:49pm on 13 Mar 2009, dceilar wrote:

    #43 TT

    You know what they say: ask a simple question . . .

    ----------------------------

    I remember someone on this blog telling me that the Arabs were not driven out of their homes, but they fled! I was informed that they fled because Arab leaders over exaggerated the European invaders ruthlessness in the hope that it'll inspire them to fight. It did the opposite - they grabbed what they could and fled!

    Is Israel going to allow them to return to their homes?

    Complain about this comment

  • 46. At 8:32pm on 13 Mar 2009, Richard_SM wrote:


    TrueToo

    There have been precisely the same number of deaths in Northern Ireland this week as Israel suffered prior to their offensive on Dec27. Unlike Palestine, NI was not under siege - nor had Britain killed six republicans - yet still there has been an outbreak of violence.

    Would you recommend the British Military sends RAF fighter-bombers to devastate the homes and infrastructure, kill around 1300 and injure a further 5000 in pursuit of peace?

    Complain about this comment

  • 47. At 8:39pm on 13 Mar 2009, Electric-Badger wrote:

    Post 27. At 11:44pm on 12 Mar 2009, TrueToo wrote:19. Electric-Badger, - You should study the Israeli-Arab conflict more closely and using objective sources.

    I accept your challenge.

    Give me the evidential evidence and I will read it with an open mind.

    Complain about this comment

  • 48. At 9:13pm on 13 Mar 2009, TrueToo wrote:

    44. Richard_SM wrote:

    "I'm well aware a small number of Jews were living alongside Palestinians before 1900..."

    I like this "small number" statement. In fact, at various times of history there was quite a large number of Jews on the land, funnily enough many of them in Gaza. And they weren't living next to "Palestinians" because the Arabs were not yet calling themselves Palestinians. That came in the sixties.

    Regarding the "return," perhaps you think those Arabs who fought on the side of the invading Arab armies against the Jews in 1948 and their descendants should be allowed to return. Israel is not required to commit suicide.

    African Sudanese refugees heading for Palestine? That's a novel thought. I would guess that after their slaughter at the hands of their Arab brothers in Sudan and their killing at the hands of Egyptian guards in camps and at the border the very last place they would want to be would be Palestine. If they wanted to go to Palestine they would go through a tunnel at the Rafah crossing into Gaza and not cross through the Sinai into Israel.

    They are initially jailed in Israel because they are from a hostile country and Israel has to jail them by law but they are then freed and there are community organisations taking care of them and finding them work. Please show me one Arab country that would treat African refugees from a hostile country practising another religion in this humane fashion. Such an Arab country does not exist.

    Here's some interesting information about Iran's political system. A Jew can vote for a Muslim, but a Muslim cannot vote for a Jew.

    Complain about this comment

  • 49. At 9:30pm on 13 Mar 2009, fsuth09 wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 50. At 9:53pm on 13 Mar 2009, TrueToo wrote:

    46. Richard_SM,

    I'm not qualified to discuss Northern Ireland and Britain. I know very little indeed about that conflict. But I can see that there is a serious need for you to put the Israeli-Arab conflict into perspective.

    During the worst years of the Second Intifada, between 2000 and 2005, Palestinian terrorist murdered 1000 Israelis, 700 of them civilians. They were killed in suicide attacks on buses and in restaurants, in drive-by shootings and in attacks on homes and in Kassam rocket attacks. In one incident, two terrorists stopped a car driven by a pregnant mother with her five young children and pumped bullets into them until they were sure that all were dead. In another incident, a terrorist infiltrated a kibbutz and killed a mother and her two young children while she was desperately trying to protect them from the bullets with her body. In another, two young teenagers playing truant from school were stoned to death in a cave by a terrorist mob.

    Israel responded by killing terrorists and their leaders whenever it could and building the fence/wall, which went a long way towards stemming the terror attacks. But they still tried, and still are trying to get through the check points to kill Jews.

    Largely frustrated in these attempts, Hamas and company turned increasingly to the rocket attacks, effectively turning large areas of southern Israel into places under siege and making normal life impossible. Israel endured this for years, only trying to neutralise the rocket launchers and kill the crews but the breaking point came when Hamas started firing longer range Iranian missiles at cities 40 kilometres from Gaza and stepping up the frequency of the rocket fire to as much as 100 rockets per day. Hence the attack on Gaza.

    I hope that helps put things in perspective for you. As I said I don't know much about the conflict on your side of the world but I doubt that the IRA was trying to destroy Britain all those years. And I have no doubt that if Britain had faced the kind of terror I have just described, it would have responded at least as strongly as Israel did in Gaza.

    Complain about this comment

  • 51. At 10:06pm on 13 Mar 2009, fsuth09 wrote:

    Most of the Britain are now aware of the terrorist activity of Israel, i.e. the recent war, the planning, the attack and the propaganda.

    Many like myself, did some research and are shocked to discover the history of terror the Israeli are committing on a regular basis.

    As TT has so many times used the zionist propaganda to justify the violence. Blaming and pointing the figure to anyone and everyone.

    I have got to take my hat off to those zionist posters for proving my point, everytime!

    Complain about this comment

  • 52. At 11:15pm on 13 Mar 2009, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 53. At 00:04am on 14 Mar 2009, fsuth09 wrote:

    Marcus how old are you? Pre-teen?

    First of all, you are obviously being offensive by calling me futso and implying I'm a pig.

    How low can you go?

    Thank you for demonstrating your true colour.

    Complain about this comment

  • 54. At 03:38am on 14 Mar 2009, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 55. At 1:34pm on 14 Mar 2009, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    Ludwig, you're mad!

    That was an ad for a beer commercial about 30 years ago and referred to "Mad" King Ludwig II of Bavaria.

    http://www.german-way.com/ludwig.html

    Complain about this comment

  • 56. At 1:40pm on 14 Mar 2009, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    The older I get, the more irony I see in life. It seems to me, everyone gets pretty much what they deserve. That goes for individual, nations, and entire "peoples." They may not like it but they earned it. Does that include the Palestinians? Without a shadow of a doubt AFAIAC. Europe's turn is coming. And although they sometimes don't like to admit it, Britain is part of Europe too. What a shock it always seems to be when people finally suffer the inevitable consequences of their own folly. They never seem to see it coming. Stupid is as stupid does.

    Complain about this comment

  • 57. At 01:02am on 15 Mar 2009, Jackturk wrote:

    39 TrueToo

    "I see you have copied and pasted yet another page out of your anti-Israel file. Where's the context and where's the link to the article? Or don't you want this information revealed?
    But I'm expecting you to do some genuine research of the evidence and that really is expecting too much of you."


    Sorry to keep you waiting, unlike you, this is not my full time job. Anyway, pleased to oblige, you can find Jabotinsky's writings here:-

    http://www.jabotinsky.org/Site/content/t5.asp?Sid=10&Pid=149

    "How many Arabs (they were not calling themselves Palestinians back in 1948) were expelled by the Jews and how many left of their own accord"

    This must be one of your more ridiculous questions! Why would Arabs whose families had lived in 'Palestine' for thousands of years suddenly just leave of their own accord? The answer is, they didn't, they were either chased out or intimidated to leave by, among others, the Irgun terrorists who threatened them with the same fate as those they massacred in Deir Yassin. As a result, more than 300,000 Arabs left.

    Zionist revisionist history of course tries to suggest that the Arabs left because they were advised to by their leaders, broadcasting on Arab radio stations, telling them to get out temporarily so that Arab forces could attack the Zionists. Research has shown that there were no such broadcasts.

    "And why didn't the forefathers of today's 1,3 million Israeli Arabs leave? They chose to stay, obviously."

    You've answered your own question, so why ask? Yes, of course some Arabs stayed, just as Hitler didn't manage to remove all Jews from Germany.

    43
    "So no link to the Jabotinski quote, right?"

    Not so fast TT, in your eagerness to discredit my post you did not wait for a response, the link is above.

    "I have read many accounts of Deir Yassin. That one is riddled with lies, the worst of them being that there were no Arabs fighters at Deir Yassin."

    If you are referring to the letter describing the massacre of Arab villagers at Deir Yassin, signed by Einstein, are you accusing him of telling lies?

    According to contemporary accounts, almost all of the young men from Deir Yassin were away, working as stone cutters in Jerusalem. The only people left were women, children and old men, 7 of whom were on guard the night the Jewish terrorists attacked. According to the Red Cross, approximately 250 villagers were massacred but only 4 terrorists were killed, this shows how lightly defended the village was.

    Even though the Jewish Agency condemned the attack, they still used it as an excuse to intimidate Arabs into moving, by leafleting them, suggesting that they may also suffer the same fate as those in Deir Yassin if they did not move.

    Complain about this comment

  • 58. At 01:08am on 15 Mar 2009, Jackturk wrote:

    56 MarcusBarbarius

    "The older I get, the more irony I see in life."

    The irony is that you can't see the irony in your own post.

    Complain about this comment

  • 59. At 03:15am on 15 Mar 2009, Richard_SM wrote:


    Irony indeed.

    http://www.presstv.com/detail.aspx?id=88491&sectionid=351020202

    Complain about this comment

  • 60. At 10:10am on 15 Mar 2009, Jackturk wrote:

    59 Richard_SM

    Thanks Richard, I missed that, it seems to reinforce the view of Avraham Burg. Post Zionism indeed, here's hoping.

    Complain about this comment

  • 61. At 10:21am on 15 Mar 2009, luacene wrote:

    Sorry to burst ur bubble guys but that website is an Iranian propoganda rag which calls holocaust deniers "distinguished academics." And therefore i wouldnt trust one thing that it said.

    Complain about this comment

  • 62. At 10:34am on 15 Mar 2009, fsuth09 wrote:

    The older I get, the more irony I see in life. It seems to me, everyone gets pretty much what they deserve

    What goes around eventually comes around. Israel will get "what they deserve".

    Complain about this comment

  • 63. At 11:40am on 15 Mar 2009, Jackturk wrote:

    61 Luacene

    "Sorry to burst ur bubble guys but that website is an Iranian propoganda rag which calls holocaust deniers "distinguished academics." And therefore i wouldnt trust one thing that it said."

    Like the British funded BBC, (British propaganda rag?) PressTV is an Iranian funded media which says it tries to give all sides. Therefore it has also published articles attacking holocaust deniers.

    http://www.presstv.com/Detail.aspx?id=58900&sectionid=3510303

    Should these also not be trusted?

    Complain about this comment

  • 64. At 1:18pm on 15 Mar 2009, Richard_SM wrote:


    There's been lot of steam coming off the home page of 'Zionist Organisation of America' since Obama took office:

    They criticise Obama's appointment of George Mitchell because he has said "Palestinians and Israelis are equally at fault for the lack of progress."

    I love this one. They're mad at Sec Clinton for not rebutting that "Palestinians live under Israeli occupation without freedom and liberty, thereby helping to legitimize a false basis of Palestinian incitement to hate Israel."

    They say Sec Clinton is "racist" following her comments about Israeli settlements in the West Bank. Wow !

    The US pledge of $900million for Gaza receives some condemnation - it will "prolong the conflict" the ZOA say.

    And they definately don't like Sec Clinton's "strong public pressure on Israel to expedite the flow of humanitarian aid into Gaza."


    Complain about this comment

  • 65. At 1:31pm on 15 Mar 2009, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    I don't see how Israel could be in a better position. By having an American team which has distanced itself to a slight degree from the Bush administration's more realistic assessment of the situation at least in public at a time when the Israeli population at large is in no mood to make any more concessions to the Palestinians now having been shown clearly that the roadmap and land for peace won't bring them peace, the US has virtually guaranteed that no progress will be made. This means that the status quo will continue for a long time and the separation and disparity between Gaza and the West Bank will continue to grow. As a result, the chances for a single Palestinian terrorist state will diminish. As the Palestinians in Gaza become more desperate, their propensity to lash out and attack Israel whom they see as their enemy will grow too diminishing the chances for a settlement even more. Naturally, Israel will strike back, harder and harder each time. It's a cycle Hamas has guaranteed won't be broken.

    Complain about this comment

  • 66. At 1:44pm on 15 Mar 2009, Jackturk wrote:

    64 Richard_SM

    They have also criticised Obama's intended appointment of Charles Freeman, who had been named to head the National Intelligence Council, which produces security assessments.

    If Americans only knew.

    The Israeli lobby have objected and effectively vetoed Freeman's appointment because he said such awful things as "American identification with Israel has become total".

    "The tactics of the Israel Lobby plumb the depths of dishonour and indecency"Charles Freeman

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7938277.stm

    Complain about this comment

  • 67. At 1:58pm on 15 Mar 2009, fsuth09 wrote:

    Ariel Sharon quoted:

    "I vow that if I was just an Israeli civilian and I met a Palestinian I would burn him and I would make him suffer before killing him."

    "Everybody has to move; run and grab as many hilltops as they can to enlarge the settlements, because everything we take now will stay ours. Everything we don't grab will go to them."

    "All the prime ministers have built the settlement blocs, but I built more than all of them, ... Settlement continues there and will continue."

    Ehud Barak quoted:

    "If we thought that instead of 200 Palestinian fatalities, 2,000 dead would put an end to the fighting at a stroke, we would use much more force...."

    Benjamin Netanyahu quoted:

    "Israel should have exploited the repression of the demonstrations in China, when world attention focused on that country, to carry out mass expulsions among the Arabs of the territories."

    ...and so on. It's a cycle Israel has guaranteed won't be broken.

    Complain about this comment

  • 68. At 2:29pm on 15 Mar 2009, Jackturk wrote:

    65 MarcusBarbarius

    "This means that the status quo will continue for a long time"

    i.e. Israel will continue to oppress the Palestinians.

    Green shoots of discontent with Israel in the USA? :- Jerusalem Post

    Complain about this comment

  • 69. At 2:57pm on 15 Mar 2009, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    Jackdreck, I told you before but maybe you have forgotten that the Palestinians are doing it to themselves. The Israelis are only reacting in the only possible way that is in their self interest at self preservation. They tried it other ways before and they failed. I know you think that Israel as a Jewish state has no right to exist. Personally I think Britain as an Anglo Saxon nation has no right to exist either and that they should go back where they came from, Germany, or wherever and the land should be returned to the Druids or Celts or whoever but that is neither here nor there.

    The Obama administration is still in the naive idealistic phase when it comes to the Palestinian conflict. I don't know if the Bush administraton was ever in that position but it might have ended when a suicide bomber detonated a bomb within about half a mile of where Secretary of State Powell was at the time during one of his early visits. That must have shaken him up a little, facing his own possible death at the hands of Palestinian terrorists. If we are lucky, the same will happen to Secretary Clinton and she and here boss will also have an epiphany. There's nothing like a terrorist bomb going off near you to shake some sense into a deluded brain. Time to forget all this nonsense about a two state solution and giving anything to the Palestinians. That they are allowed to live given their crimes is concession enough. Same goes for Europe.

    Complain about this comment

  • 70. At 3:04pm on 15 Mar 2009, fsuth09 wrote:

    MarcusAbarbarius, TT:

    Did you know that non-Jewish Israelis cannot buy or lease land in Israel?

    Did you know that Israel's settlement-building on Palestinian land increased considerably since the signing of the Oslo agreement?

    Did you know that it was not until 1988 that Israelis were barred from running 'Jews Only' job ads?

    Did you know that Palestinian refugees make up the largest portion of the refugee population in the world?

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/jan/14/when-israel-expelled-palestinians/

    Complain about this comment

  • 71. At 4:53pm on 15 Mar 2009, Jackturk wrote:

    69 MarcusBarbarius

    "Jackdreck, I told you before but maybe you have forgotten that the Palestinians are doing it to themselves."

    And I told you before that it very clever of Palestinian kids to shoot themselves in the back just for the cameras.

    Zionism is dying Marcus, face it, no matter how much you may wish it, the Palestinians are not going to roll over like puppies and accept Israel's scraps.

    Complain about this comment

  • 72. At 6:49pm on 15 Mar 2009, dceilar wrote:

    #66 & 71 Jack

    This may be wishful thinking Jack, but as lobby groups like to stay in the shadows, the resignation and comments of Freeman has put a spotlight on the role AIPAC.

    We may soon find out which politicians are in its pay and influence, how much power it has in vetoing the public will, and where their loyalities lie - either US or Israel. When the truth comes out that it is the latter the US may re-evaluate its relationship.

    When the spotlight is put on lobby groups like this, their days may well be numbered! We live in hope!

    On a slightly separate note, why didn't the Obama regime at least attempt to defend 'their' choice? They would have won - the attacks on Freeman were foundationless.

    Complain about this comment

  • 73. At 7:39pm on 15 Mar 2009, dceilar wrote:

    Thanks for Ed for unearthing this little gem: The End of Israel's Impunity?

    Complain about this comment

  • 74. At 7:43pm on 15 Mar 2009, dceilar wrote:

    See if this works?

    Complain about this comment

  • 75. At 9:04pm on 15 Mar 2009, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    Jackdreck, you think Israel as a Jewish state is going away? I think the evidence is to the exact opposite. And some of Isreal's citizens are starting to wake up to their reality. That's the most important thing, they understand who their enemies are.

    It's the chances for a Palestinian state that are evaporating. Excellent news.

    Complain about this comment

  • 76. At 9:59pm on 15 Mar 2009, Jackturk wrote:

    74 dceilar

    Yes, it worked.

    Americans and many others have been brainwashed by the Israeli lobby lead by AIPAC.

    More information on the sordid activities of AIPAC:-

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=elEUFYyffds

    Complain about this comment

  • 77. At 10:04pm on 15 Mar 2009, Jackturk wrote:

    75 MarcusBarbarius

    "Jackdreck, you think Israel as a Jewish state is going away? I think the evidence is to the exact opposite."

    O.k.where's the beef?

    Like King Canute, you can't stem the tide.

    Complain about this comment

  • 78. At 10:49pm on 15 Mar 2009, luacene wrote:

    #63

    Like the British funded BBC, (British propaganda rag?)


    Or like the Israeli funded NID. Oh wait no their some special kind of evil and their leader is a la Goebbels. Looks like double standards to me.

    Complain about this comment

  • 79. At 11:21pm on 15 Mar 2009, pciii wrote:

    #75: "It's the chances for a Palestinian state that are evaporating. Excellent news."
    Way to go Marcy, you actually admitted the depth of your feelings for a change. Care to explain why the Palestinians don't deserve a state?

    Complain about this comment

  • 80. At 11:42pm on 15 Mar 2009, Richard_SM wrote:


    Ref #66 Jack

    I heard Charles Freeman interviewed on radio about giving up his appointment. He sounded a remarkably decent man. But clearly he must be biased - for serving on the Washington based Middle East Policy Council. It has received donations from -- shock and awe horror -- Saudi Arabia -- and has questionable characters on its board like - Curtis Brand, former Chairman of ExxonMobil; Dr. Martha Neff Kessler, formerly of CIA; former Sen. and Presdential Candidate George McGovern; Frank Carlucci, former Deputy Director CIA and former US Defence Secretary.

    Freeman can hardly be independent after he's been mixing with these Islamic radicals.

    He even chose to move to Saudi Arabia to carry out his role as US Ambassador of same, instead of undertaking his duties from Washington which he could have done just as effectively.

    He speaks fluent Chinese, French, Spanish, and conversational Arabic - need I say more ! (No mention of English!)

    Such a poor choice by Obama. Almost as bad as choosing the "racist" Hilary Clinton as US Sec. of State or that George Mitchell as MiddleEast Special Envoy, who is so prejudiced he makes the most illogical claim that "both Palestinians and Israelis are equally at fault."

    No one can accuse Israel of inflexibility or obstinacy in the pursuit of a peace settlement for their people. Better to sacrifice the lives of their citizens than sit across the table and listen to:

    Yasser Arafat (wasn't born in Palestine)
    Ismail Haniyeh (was born in Palestine, but too focussed)
    Dr Richard Falk (not Jewish enough)
    Avraham Burg (Zionist but a fraction left of centre)
    Professor Avi Schlaim (Jewish but too scholarly)
    Sec of State Hilary Clinton (outright racist)
    George Mitchell (exhibits impartial tendencies).

    If Charles Freeman had taken up the position as Chair of the US National Intelligence Council he wouldn't have sat across the table with Israel of course, - but he might have dealt with some reports about Israel in the course of his duties - and nobody from Washington consulted with Israel prior to offering him the post.

    Complain about this comment

  • 81. At 11:46pm on 15 Mar 2009, Jackturk wrote:

    78 luacene

    "Or like the Israeli funded NID"

    No, not like the National Information Directorate. (NID). That body is not a news organisation, it was simply set up to, justify Israel's actions and counteract accusations of war crimes. Please show me any articles that NID has published which support war crimes accusations against Israel.

    Unlike the BBC and PressTV which do publish articles giving both sides, as far as I am aware, NID does not.

    Complain about this comment

  • 82. At 00:00am on 16 Mar 2009, ilbeback wrote:

    72. At 6:49pm on 15 Mar 2009, dceilar wrote:

    'This may be wishful thinking Jack, but as lobby groups like to stay in the shadows, the resignation and comments of Freeman has put a spotlight on the role AIPAC. '


    I strongly believe that Israel is becoming a victim of its own propaganda and perceived untouchable status. e.g.

    1. The recent unrestrained orgy of destruction in Gaza.

    2. Open boasting about the success of their preplanned (National Information Directorate) propaganda campaign in Jewish newspapers.

    3. Olmert's public boast January 11. He said he left Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice 'shamed' by getting President Bush to block her at the last moment from voting for a Gaza cease-fire resolution that she herself had hammered out over several days with Arab and European diplomats at the United Nations.

    http://www.forward.com/articles/14957/

    'I have no problem with what Olmert did,” said Abraham Foxman, national director of the Anti-Defamation League. I think the mistake was to talk about it in public.'

    4. It was Bill Clinton who drily observed after meeting the (then) newly elected Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that 'he thinks he is the superpower and we are here to do whatever he requires.'

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/netanyahu-the-leader-who-struts-like-a-superpower-1570710.html

    5. Just look at Marcus

    etc.

    When a people start to believe their own propaganda, they are surely doomed. We are seeing the beginning of the end of Zionism in its present form.

    Complain about this comment

  • 83. At 00:27am on 16 Mar 2009, Richard_SM wrote:


    Ref 61 Luacene

    Press TV is indeed Iranian. I can't help it if they if they do an interview with American International Lawyer Frankiln Lamb. That's what broadcasters do. They ask questions and he explains himself - on camera. I don't think they invented him - he's written books and had them published in USA.

    Perhaps you should be asking why the roll-on-its-back-puppy of the American media isn't carrying interviews with their fellow citizen. Would you say propaganda also involves concealing information?

    Complain about this comment

  • 84. At 00:28am on 16 Mar 2009, Jackturk wrote:

    80 Richard_SM

    In a way, I sympathise with Obama, he is young, maybe too young, to be able to recognise and drown out the constant barrage of noise from the experienced Zionist propagandists. It's a noise that in the US, is constantly in the background, like radio interference distorting the true signal but after a while it just blends in.

    The worst thing Obama can do is try and placate the lobbyists, they will simply take everything they can get and still ask for more. To be honest, he doesn't seem to have made a very good start, he has allowed himself to be engulfed by the 'Washington bubble'. If he is to make any headway in the Middle East he must have no compunction about only surrounding himself with like minded but experienced people who can discriminate and filter out the noise, assuming of course that he has a clear idea of what's required to get justice for the Palestinians.

    All this talk of 'reaching across the isle' and of consensus politics must be ditched. It's time for tough actions, well explained, whether the other side like it or not. He has the majority to do it and Americans, Jews included, will support him as long as he makes the case with courage and conviction.

    Complain about this comment

  • 85. At 00:29am on 16 Mar 2009, luacene wrote:

    #81

    Oh im sure PressTv is full of pro-Israel anti-Hamas articles or pro American imperialism. Just because it gives both sides of whether the holocaust happened (and the jews have been lying this whole time) doesn't mean it puts out balanced stories in fact it suggests the opposite.

    Complain about this comment

  • 86. At 00:33am on 16 Mar 2009, ilbeback wrote:

    The Rosetta Stone =

    A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm

    People are starting to ask questions about who really benefited from the disastrous and costly American led war in Iraq, and who was pushing for it. A paper was published in 1996 by an Israeli thinktank, the Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies. Entitled 'A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm', it was intended as a political blueprint for the incoming government of Binyamin Netanyahu. Among other things, The paper set out a plan by which Israel would "shape its strategic environment", beginning with the removal of Saddam Hussein and the installation of a Hashemite monarchy in Baghdad.

    To succeed, the paper stressed, Israel would have to win broad American support for these new policies - and it advised Mr Netanyahu to formulate them 'in language familiar to the Americans by tapping into themes of American administrations during the cold war which apply well to Israel'. The leader of the "prominent opinion makers" who wrote it was Richard Perle - now chairman of the Defence Policy Board at the Pentagon.

    Among other things, it suggested that the recently-signed Oslo accords might be dispensed with - 'Israel has no obligations under the Oslo agreements if the PLO does not fulfil its obligations' - and that 'alternatives to [Yasser] Arafat's base of power' could be cultivated. It also urged Israel to abandon any thought of trading land for peace with the Arabs, which it described as 'cultural, economic, political, diplomatic, and military retreat'.

    Writing in the Guardian (September, 2002), 6 months before the war in Iraq, Brian Whitaker said:

    'With several of the "Clean Break" paper's authors now holding key positions in Washington, the plan for Israel to 'transcend' its foes by reshaping the Middle East looks a good deal more achievable today than it did in 1996. Americans may even be persuaded to give up their lives to achieve it.'

    The six-year-old plan for Israel's 'strategic environment' remains more or less intact, though two extra skittles - Saudi Arabia and Iran - have joined Iraq, Syria and Lebanon on the hit list.'

    Complain about this comment

  • 87. At 00:42am on 16 Mar 2009, Jackturk wrote:

    82 ilbeback

    You have it exactly, the arrogance of those in power in Israel will be their undoing. Marcus recognises it, it's easy to tell by his posts, which are more to reassure himself than to project an air of confidence in the stability of the Zionists.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lEKLmJyZxN8&NR=1

    Although I hope to see Rice et al in court one day for war crimes, it's a pity that she wasn't set up somehow now against the Israeli leaders, "hell hath no fury etc"

    Complain about this comment

  • 88. At 00:42am on 16 Mar 2009, Richard_SM wrote:


    Ref #72 dceilar,

    You raise a good point. The ZOA ousted Charles Freeman because he drew the salary that went with the post of Pres. of Washington based Middle East Policy Council - succeeding former Sen. George McGovern. The MEPC receives donations from a wide range of sponsors - one of which was Saudi Arabia. That, claims the ZOA, is proof he can't be impartial as chair of NIC.

    Perhaps it is - but then it raises far more questions about Capitol Hill.

    Complain about this comment

  • 89. At 00:49am on 16 Mar 2009, Jackturk wrote:

    85 luacene

    As long as it puts out both sides, then the discerning viewer, which I assume you are, can make up their own mind.

    Got any war-crime stories critical of Israel from NID yet?

    Complain about this comment

  • 90. At 01:07am on 16 Mar 2009, luacene wrote:

    #89

    So you accept that PressTv is as much an agent of the Iranian government as NID is of the Israeli government? Then why is the NID equated to Nazism while Presstv gets the privelege of your viewing.

    Complain about this comment

  • 91. At 01:08am on 16 Mar 2009, Richard_SM wrote:


    Ref #84 Jack,

    Possibly - but I don't think 47 is too young to know when you're being - lets say - mucked about. And I suspect his style will be consensus through superior argument - not the cynical offerings we've seen over the last eight years.

    We'll see. All factions know they have some currency - it's where they choose to spend it.

    Complain about this comment

  • 92. At 01:25am on 16 Mar 2009, Jackturk wrote:

    90 luacene

    "So you accept that PressTv is as much an agent of the Iranian government as NID is of the Israeli government?"

    No

    According to journalists, British and American, who work for PressTV, although it is funded by the Iranian government, it is not controlled by them. Unlike NID which solely exists to put the views of the Israeli government.

    By the way, I'm not that naive that I don't recognise that PressTV will be biased towards Iran in some of its output and I view its content accordingly.

    I hope that you also recognise the bias of NID, oh and I never equated NID to Nazism, it may have been in an article I linked to.

    Complain about this comment

  • 93. At 01:45am on 16 Mar 2009, Richard_SM wrote:


    Ref # 90 Luacene,

    It's not a difficult concept to grasp.

    Press TV presents many sides, on many issues to a broad audience, from an Iranian perspective.

    The NID delivers one side on one issue to targets.

    Complain about this comment

  • 94. At 01:48am on 16 Mar 2009, Jackturk wrote:

    91 Richard_SM

    Maybe it's because I'm quite a bit older that I see him as a whippersnapper :-)

    He did demonstrate wisdom during the campaign when dealing with religious differences, lets hope that wisdom stays with him.

    Regarding consensus, I hope you're right but we've seen demonstrated on these boards and elsewhere, that when dealing with Zionist zealots, consensus is absolutely impossible, not only do they not listen, they go out of their way to vilify and undermine anyone who gets in their way. let's be clear, as far as they are concerned, it's war.

    An older person who has seen it all before and has armoured themselves against it, is much more likely to withstand it than a younger person with much of their career ahead of them.

    Complain about this comment

  • 95. At 01:58am on 16 Mar 2009, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    crosseyes

    "Care to explain why the Palestinians don't deserve a state?"

    Sure, lots of reasons. Here's a couple that come to mind instantly.

    1. They are not one people. There is no such thing as a Palestinian people. That was an invention, a fabrication made from whole cloth after the 1967 war. They don't even occupy a contiguous area. Gaza was administered by Egypt, the West Bank was part of Jordon. Neither country wants them back, they want nothing to do with them. All they really are are the Arabs who happened to live in those areas.

    2. They don't want to live peacefully with their neighbor Israel, they want to destroy it. They never felt otherwise. At the first opportunity to vote, they voted for leaders of a party whose sole unifying program was to destroy Israel. If they had a state it would be a terrorist state controlled by Iran. That state should never see the light of day, it would be a danger to the entire region and Arab governments from Egypt to Saudi Arabia know it.

    The good news is that it doesn't look like such a disaster will happen at least not any time soon. And that's a good thing.

    Complain about this comment

  • 96. At 02:10am on 16 Mar 2009, ilbeback wrote:

    luacene

    Biasses ere evident in Jewish media also. I like to think I can recognise bias on both sides. In an article in 'Jewish World', Iran's only Jewish MP criticizes 'anti-human' Israeli acts, but the article conveniently drifts into a discussion which might lead Zionists to 'understand' why he is saying things against Israel:

    'Like many people in Iran, members of minorities which also include Christians and other faiths can be reluctant to publicly criticize its ruling establishment...'

    This would never happen in Israel of course.

    http://www.ynet.co.il/english/articles/0,7340,L-3540651,00.html

    Complain about this comment

  • 97. At 02:16am on 16 Mar 2009, Richard_SM wrote:


    Ref #90 Luacene

    As Jack wrote, Press TV have many international presenters and journalists - not many are Iranians.

    Andrew Gillighan, former BBC Defence Reporter.
    Nick Ferrari, cynical presenter at London's LBC
    Tariq Ramadan, Swiss intellectual.
    Lauren Booth, Humanitarian and ex PM Tony Blair's sister in law.
    Yvonne Ridley journalist previously with Sunday Express in Britain.
    James Whale, confrontational/shock-jock and comedic TV presenter.
    Mike Mendoza, radio presenter with many stations inc BBC and founder of Jewish radio station
    George Galloway. British politician.
    Derek Conway, British politician

    Many shades, many colours !

    Complain about this comment

  • 98. At 02:46am on 16 Mar 2009, pciii wrote:

    Marcy,

    Disregarding the inaccuracies and sweeping generalisations in your comment, the following sounds like a good starting point for deserving a state:

    "All they really are are the Arabs who happened to live in those areas."

    That and the fact that your preferred solution would appear to be the destruction of these people.

    Complain about this comment

  • 99. At 10:18am on 16 Mar 2009, fsuth09 wrote:

    When will the [Unsuitable/Broken URL removed by Moderator] hatredend, if it begins at an early age?

    There's another video there that shows an aid worker being stoned by young children because she's there to help the Palestininans. She's bloodied and not even the Israeli guard standing by bats an eyelid.

    You might also want to refresh your memory on the day when the [Unsuitable/Broken URL removed by Moderator]Israeli children signing the bomb, with love for their Palestininan friends. Aww, how lovely of them!

    Complain about this comment

  • 100. At 10:20am on 16 Mar 2009, fsuth09 wrote:

    ...and then you say "They don't want to live peacefully with their neighbor Israel"

    Complain about this comment

  • 101. At 10:34am on 16 Mar 2009, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 102. At 10:38am on 16 Mar 2009, Jackturk wrote:

    95 MarcusBarbarius

    "All they really are are the Arabs who happened to live in those areas."

    Marcus, even for you the above statement portrays a level of crass ignorance and stupidity that is hard to imagine. It could equally apply to any population in the world, including yours.

    Let's be honest here, what we're talking about in 'Palestine' is dispossession, ethnic cleansing and colonisation, the Israelis call it 'transfer'.

    The Ottoman census records show 'Palestine' was widely inhabited in the late 19th and early 20th century. In 1914 there were 738,000 Arabs and 59,000 Jews - 8% of the population.

    Since the first Zionist Congress in Basel in 1897 and the delegation sent to Palestine to look at the possibility of expanding the Jewsh population, the Zionists made a decision to take over that land.

    In 1926, our old 'friend' Jabotinsky said:-

    " ... the tragedy lies in the fact the there is a collision here between two truths .... but our justice is greater. The Arab is culturally backward, but his instinctive patriotism is just as pure and noble as our own; it cannot be bought, it can only be curbed ... force majeure."


    You and millions of other Americans are either ignorant through choice, prejudice, indoctrination, or lack of a proper education. Whatever the reason, the USA with the help of the UK in the beginning has allowed the Zionists to carry out one of the most blatant acts of ethnic cleansing in modern times.

    http://www.kibush.co.il/show_file.asp?num=553

    Over 8.5 million Palestinians, including those in the scattered refugee camps, are not going away and the sooner the Zionists and the world wake up to that fact, the better.

    Complain about this comment

  • 103. At 10:52am on 16 Mar 2009, TrueToo wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 104. At 10:58am on 16 Mar 2009, TrueToo wrote:

    97. Richard_SM,

    Funny list you have there. You could power an old locomotive with the continual anti-Israel steam that many of that crew emit.

    Complain about this comment

  • 105. At 11:04am on 16 Mar 2009, fsuth09 wrote:

    Why these zionists don't want to live in peace is a mystery.

    Complain about this comment

  • 106. At 11:05am on 16 Mar 2009, pciii wrote:

    #101, Marcy, yes of course your right. It all makes such sense now you've stated the facts in a clear and concise way. Sorry I ever doubted you.

    Complain about this comment

  • 107. At 11:19am on 16 Mar 2009, fsuth09 wrote:

    #101, Thank you MarcusAbarbarius for making it clear.

    Complain about this comment

  • 108. At 11:55am on 16 Mar 2009, dceilar wrote:

    Jack (@102), the encroachment into Palestinian areas by Israelis shows them to be your typical European colonialist from the nineteenth century! They see all non-Europeans as inferior to themselves - that includes the USA.

    These Europeans have a superiority complex and until they recognise that they are one being amongst many other beings they are condemned to follow the road of colonialism which, as Z. Bauman explained, leads to holocaust.

    Complain about this comment

  • 109. At 12:17pm on 16 Mar 2009, Jackturk wrote:

    108 dceilar

    I agree, maybe it is as a result of our 'civilised' societies.

    More spinelessness by the BBC?:-

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/mar/16/bbc-rejects-caryl-churchill-israel

    Complain about this comment

  • 110. At 12:27pm on 16 Mar 2009, Jackturk wrote:

    Obama humiliated by AIPAC, more on the 'Freeman' story:-

    http://zope.gush-shalom.org/home/en/channels/avnery/1237069006/

    Complain about this comment

  • 111. At 12:30pm on 16 Mar 2009, dceilar wrote:

    #109 Jack

    Thanks for the link.

    The BBC's argument that it will undermine the impartiality of the BBC is an insult to the intelligence - it's a play, not a news item.

    I wonder what other Plays it will ban because they might express opinions.

    It's time us licence payers revolt!

    Complain about this comment

  • 112. At 1:22pm on 16 Mar 2009, Jackturk wrote:

    111 dceilar

    It begs the question, what other plays have the BBC knocked back because of impartiality and does it mean that they will no longer deal with ANY controversial subjects?

    What has the BBC been reduced to when it's afraid to offend racist thugs?

    Complain about this comment

  • 113. At 1:42pm on 16 Mar 2009, dceilar wrote:

    Our friend Ed has posted an excellent link in Justin Webb's blog that is worth reading called 'Zionism is the Problem!'

    Complain about this comment

  • 114. At 1:44pm on 16 Mar 2009, fsuth09 wrote:

    #113 dceilar.

    Thanks for pointing that out ('Zionism is the Problem!' from the LA Times)

    Complain about this comment

  • 115. At 2:43pm on 16 Mar 2009, Jackturk wrote:

    113 dceiliar

    Yes, looks like Ed is doing a good job. I noticed TT over there, too hot for him here!

    Complain about this comment

  • 116. At 3:55pm on 16 Mar 2009, Richard_SM wrote:


    Ref: #104 TrueToo,

    Anyone questioning the Israeli Government's policy is dismissed as "anti- Israel." They can be external commentators or observers from within the Jewish/Israeli/Zionist community. There's a long list, a "funny list" as you say, from the former chairman of the World Zionist Organisation to holocaust survivors - from the London Rabbis to ordinary foot soldiers within the IDF. They're all "anti-Israel."

    It matters not whether they have impeccable academic records - strict religious observance - distinguished military careers - wide diplomatic experience - or simple anecdotal examples. They're all "anti-Israel."

    Yet when we look at the Israeli politicians whose policies are questioned, we find corruption, bribery, embezzlement. Doesn't it make you wonder who is really "anti-Israel.?"

    Complain about this comment

  • 117. At 4:20pm on 16 Mar 2009, Richard_SM wrote:


    Ref # 94 Jack,

    There's always this issue surrounding experience - but it's only part of the equation - just look at "W." I think Obama appointed Joe Biden to complement his own strengths. As someone who could also regard Obama as a "whippersnapper," I have yet to identify any weakness in Obama. We all have them - no one is truly an all-rounder - but he still has me guessing. Please comment if you've detected any.

    Complain about this comment

  • 118. At 4:32pm on 16 Mar 2009, Richard_SM wrote:


    Ref: 105 fsuth09,

    "Why these zionists don't want to live in peace is a mystery."

    I don't think it is a mystery fsuth09 - I think they have driven themselves down a dead end road and they can't face travelling backwards in order to get on the right road. The Israeli politicians aren't brave enough to do that. It needs an external body to force them - and that, IMHO can only be the US, but mounting international pressure would help.

    Complain about this comment

  • 119. At 4:53pm on 16 Mar 2009, dceilar wrote:

    ~115 Jack

    I noticed TT over there, too hot for him here!

    Hotter than phosphorus?

    Complain about this comment

  • 120. At 6:41pm on 16 Mar 2009, dceilar wrote:

    ~117 Richard

    I am detecting weakness from Obama re: the Israel lobby and the selection of Freeman. Freeman's selection did not even require support from Congress! There were other selections from him that were thwarted by Congress, and the bail-out didn't go the way he wanted (apparently). The handling of Gordon Brown is another example of Obama being badly advised (one only has to look at the gifts that were exchanged!). One gets the impression that Obama is being controlled by his officials instead of it being the other way round.

    I remember reading Abraham Lincoln sacking his famous General during the civil war because he believed he wasn't effective - and the rest is history. Lincoln lead from the front, Obama is lead by his poor advisers IMHO.

    Still I am hopeful.

    Maybe we won't see the real Obama until his second term (judging by the mess the GOP is in, he's a cert!).

    Complain about this comment

  • 121. At 9:16pm on 16 Mar 2009, Richard_SM wrote:


    Ref: #120 dceilar,

    The challenges facing the Obama Administration are huge - the economy - the environment - the Middle East - National Security - and damaged international relations. They have to carry public opinion and continue to persuade lenders, like China, that America remains a safe investment. China may decide that spreading lending risk might be a safer strategy in uncertain times. This is where Washington features, because the Administration cannot be at war with Capitol Hill. There's a lot of conservatives on both sides - the small 'c' variety - the conventional or unadventurous - some are still against big government. So my view is that its important the Obama Administration choose their battles - and they've decided Charles Freeman, although unfortunate - is a battle of no strategic importance. I don't even think the matter was that important to the Israel lobby - but they were trying to recover some ground, still smarting after the Mitchell appointment. Freeman might be good - but he's not unique. They can appoint someone else of equal calibre . The Obama Administration may have even allowed this outcome - to cast light on the Israel lobby, who otherwise move in the shadows.

    Complain about this comment

  • 122. At 10:12pm on 16 Mar 2009, Jackturk wrote:

    118 Richard_SM

    Obama's weakness, o.k., take Tony Blair as an example, when he first became PM I had great faith in him and hoped that he would lead a government of honesty and integrity. After approximately twelve months I could see that my faith had been misplaced. I therefore wrote to my Labour MP expressing my misgivings and predicted almost exactly how Blair's premiership would end and the steps that would lead to it. Her reply was "you just don't like Tony Blair". Initially, there were many small incidents badly handled that lead me to my change my opinion of Blair but it was also the staff and colleagues with which he chose to surround himself that rang alarm bells.

    It's only my opinion of course and I hope that I am reading him incorrectly, but I can see Obama making similar mistakes. In Blair's case, it was through arrogance but I believe Obama is doing it for genuine but wrong reasons. He realises his weaknesses and as you said he is trying to compensate for them but some of the people he has chosen are those who endorsed many of Bush's crackpot policies. Obama seems a little scared to make a clean break with the type of people in the previous administration and they will be his downfall. Even if he can stamp his authority on them quickly, they wont have the ideological backbone to follow him of their own accord, they will be jobsworths rather than conviction politicians.

    One of the people who without doubt should be in Obama's administration is Dennis Kucinich, check out his past record in standing up to banks and utilities when he was mayor of Cleveland. He also spoke out strongly against the illegal invasion of Iraq.

    I strongly support an inquiry into both the decision to attack Iraq and Bush's decision, along with Cheyney, Rice, and Rumsfeld to endorse torture but Obama seems to be luke warm on taking it any further. Seemingly he is more content with some sort of truth commission.

    Complain about this comment

  • 123. At 11:02pm on 16 Mar 2009, Richard_SM wrote:


    Ref #122 Jack,

    I share your position about Blair - except I still had faith until October 2001 when Afghanistan announced - then faith turned to hope - which was dashed in March 2003. That did it for me.

    You're right - Obama could be another Blair - deceptive packaging - but I have to give him the benefit of doubt. On the face of it, he has made some questionable appointments - but you don't know what brief he's given them - nor what brief they had under Bush. Lets face it - none of Bush's appointments dare speak out of line. Look at the problems Colin Powell and Richard Armitage had. A lot depends on how Obama manages his appointees, what climate they work in and what direction he sends them.

    I don't know what the difference would be - legally - between an inquiry in US and a truth commission. Does one lead to to prosecutions and the other apologies? There needs to be an inquiry in Britain - and not like the Butler whitewash.

    Complain about this comment

  • 124. At 11:18pm on 16 Mar 2009, Richard_SM wrote:


    # 122 continued.

    Obama has appointed Larry Summers as Director of the White House's National Economic Council.

    In 1991 when Summers was Chief Economist at the World Bank he wrote in a memo of the "impeccable economic logic" of dumping the west's "health impairing" toxic waste in "under polluted" Africa, because the resultant cancers wouldn't have time to develop in a population with such a low life expectancy! ! ! His memo, which was subsequently leaked, concluded, "I've always thought that under-populated countries in Africa are vastly under-polluted."

    You couldn't make it up.

    Complain about this comment

  • 125. At 11:39pm on 16 Mar 2009, Jackturk wrote:

    123 Richard_SM

    One of Obama's great advantages is that he has Michelle. Listening to her speak, she seems to be down to earth and a sharp thinker of undoubted intelligence.

    I guess we will just have to wait and see.

    I second your view that we should also have a British no holds barred Iraq inquiry.

    Incidentally, Vincent Bugliosi, the lawyer who successfully prosecuted Charles Manson, has prepared a case against Bush for murder and is convinced he can make it stick, he explains it here:-

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3xP79ReW8bk

    Complain about this comment

  • 126. At 00:00am on 17 Mar 2009, Electric-Badger wrote:

    Thought for the day. - Dr. David Goldberg

    'IT MIGHT BE TIME FOR JUDAISM AND ZIONISM TO GO THEIR SEPARATE WAYS'

    How very true.

    Complain about this comment

  • 127. At 00:26am on 17 Mar 2009, Jackturk wrote:

    126 Electric

    Sounds like Dr.David Goldberg and President Ahmadinejad are on the same wavelength.

    "Zionism should vanish from the page of time"

    Complain about this comment

  • 128. At 02:26am on 17 Mar 2009, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    It's so nice to know that there is at least one place in the world where the good guys are winning.

    Complain about this comment

  • 129. At 09:48am on 17 Mar 2009, Jackturk wrote:

    128 MarcusBarbarius

    Marcus, in this context, how do you define 'good guys'?

    Complain about this comment

  • 130. At 11:08am on 17 Mar 2009, Jackturk wrote:

    To Robin Lustig

    Robin, way back in your 'Gaza Points of View' thread you seemed to give the impression that you had a view of Zionism that was let's say, somewhat benign. I don't necessarily accept that it was your personal view but in 203 you said:-

    "The normally-accepted definition of Zionism is that it is a political ideology arguing that Jews have the right to a homeland in Palestine. If you belive that the State of Israel has a right to exist, therefore, you are a Zionist."

    I hope you don't mind me asking, but in view of all of the information that has past through the many posts since then, has your view of Zionism changed at all?

    Complain about this comment

  • 131. At 11:09am on 17 Mar 2009, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    Why Jackdreck, after all this time you haven't figured it out yet? Why the good guys are the Zionist Jews of course. You know, the ones Europe tried to exterminate for a thousand years and having failed at it like everything else they do, are rooting for the Moslems to get it done right. Frankly, I think the ones the Moslems are going to exterminate are the European nation states. Eurabia will be one nation state all right but not what the EU has in mind. More like what the Taleban and al Qaeda have in mind for the world. Your own Archbishop of Cantebury has already made a concession that Sharia law will likely be adopted in parts of Britain. Are the good guys winning there? No, there are no good guys in Europe.

    Complain about this comment

  • 132. At 11:40am on 17 Mar 2009, Jackturk wrote:

    130 correction; passed

    Complain about this comment

  • 133. At 11:46am on 17 Mar 2009, Jackturk wrote:

    131 MarcusBarbarius

    Thank you for your definition of 'good guys'. I'm not going to argue with the other rubbish.

    By the way, have there been Zionists for thousands of years? - just asking.

    Complain about this comment

  • 134. At 12:25pm on 17 Mar 2009, luacene wrote:

    #130

    You may simplistically view all zionists as evil but zionism is indisputably the support for a Jewish State in Israel.

    #133

    Jews have always said at the end of every passover seder "next year in Jerusalem. So political Zionism may be new but the desire to return to Israel isn't

    Complain about this comment

  • 135. At 1:00pm on 17 Mar 2009, Jackturk wrote:

    134 luacene

    I certainly do not view all Zionists as evil, I fully realise that there may be Zionists who are naive and do not fully understand the implications of Zionism.

    You do of course realise that not all Jews consider themselves to be Zionists and many have recognised that if Israel is to be run as a 'Jewish State' then that is apartheid. There are many Jews who want to live in Israel but who do not want to trample on the rights of others whose families have lived there for thousands of years, largely in peace until the Zionists came along.

    Even though the founding of present day Israel was done totally in disregard of the 738,000 Arabs who lived there originally, it is too late to undo it, but it is not too late to treat the Palestinians fairly and stop the repression and ethnic cleansing that lead to Israel in the first place.

    Complain about this comment

  • 136. At 2:29pm on 17 Mar 2009, Richard_SM wrote:


    Ref # 130 Jack,

    There needs to be a further type of Zionism - perhaps 'Rancorous Zionism'?

    I'm sure there's more possibilities.

    Complain about this comment

  • 137. At 3:16pm on 17 Mar 2009, Electric-Badger wrote:

    Ref#136.

    Spiteful, Malicious, Malevolent, Barbaric, …….

    Complain about this comment

  • 138. At 3:19pm on 17 Mar 2009, Jackturk wrote:

    136 Richard

    Exactly, I've argued that for a long time. I've used 'militant Zionism', extremist Zionism, radical Zionism but I still get called anti-Semitic or 'Israel basher' so I gave up and just use the term Zionist.

    The problem is, that the ****** Zionists want to conflate whatever they stand for with those who don't quite get it so that it encourages them all, whatever flavour into attack mode.

    Oh yes, once I even used 'cuddly Zionist' to describe those who are Zionist lite but that also got me into trouble :-)

    Complain about this comment

  • 139. At 4:21pm on 17 Mar 2009, Richard_SM wrote:


    Exponential Zyonxsm

    (where y = x squared)

    Complain about this comment

  • 140. At 6:18pm on 17 Mar 2009, fsuth09 wrote:

    zionist lose its support + more public awareness = peace in the middle east

    Complain about this comment

  • 141. At 6:20pm on 17 Mar 2009, lordBeddGelert wrote:

    Hmm.. an interesting idea - we might for once get to hear about the Russian holocaust, the genocide in Rwanda and many many other mass killings that have seen upwards of six million killed.

    That said, with history teaching these days, many kids won't get to hear about the Shoah because they are too busy having the huge gaps in their knowledge of black people being 'slave traded' to hear much of anything of white people being horrible to each other...

    'History is written by the victors..' so I guess hoping that a circumspect view of history will be gained by students at a school level of education is something of a pipe dream.

    And since programmes like 'The Ascent of Man', 'Civilisation' and 'The World at War' are part of television history - don't count on the TV rectifying that problem soon...

    Complain about this comment

  • 142. At 8:33pm on 17 Mar 2009, Jackturk wrote:

    139 Richard

    How about Zion-Schism?

    Complain about this comment

  • 143. At 9:52pm on 17 Mar 2009, Richard_SM wrote:


    Ref # 142 Jack,

    I like it. What about 'off the wall Zionism.'?

    There's a blog from the Controller of Radio4 about the decision not to broadcast the play 'Seven Jewish Children' you mentioned in a post yesterday.

    It's on the Radio 4 Blog - which is linked on the What's On/Schedule, if this link doesn't work.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/radio4/2009/03/caryl_churchills_seven_jewish.html?moduserid=movabletype235_64420&pid=77363977&upm=False&asb=False&pmp=False#dnaacs

    Complain about this comment

  • 144. At 02:09am on 18 Mar 2009, _marko wrote:

    Expanding the original blog post,

    As a result of the Holocaust, can you list specific examples of:

    1) how you expect Jews/Israelis to act; what they are entitled to do? Some would feel that it is legitimate not to buy German cars for example (There are probably more important ones to list)

    2) how you expect non-Jews/non-Israelis to act; what are they entitled to do? e.g. feel sympathy, a duty to commemorate for a long time etc.

    The absence or irrelevance of these specific attitudes or actions would then indicate that people have reached the point of "getting over it".




    Complain about this comment

  • 145. At 12:27pm on 18 Mar 2009, Electric-Badger wrote:

    Ref # 139 142 143

    How about SuspiZionism.

    Complain about this comment

  • 146. At 11:07pm on 18 Mar 2009, ilbeback wrote:

    135. At 1:00pm on 17 Mar 2009, Jackturk wrote:
    'I certainly do not view all Zionists as evil, I fully realise that there may be Zionists who are naive and do not fully understand the implications of Zionism.'


    Zionist is an extremely broad term which pulls in a huge variety of different types of people. Some I would class as evil and some would have my utmost sympathy. It is however vital to choose the right target or else risk alienating natural allies. When I am debating with Ziobots like TT and Marcus, I am writing for that type of Zionists – not the nice Zionists who try to work for a homeland in ways that are not detrimental to native Palestinians. I am inclined towards Alan Harts distinction:

    'The Zionism of the book's title is Jewish nationalism, the creating and sustaining force of modern Israel. And this Zionism, political Zionism, is not to be confused with what could be called the spiritual Zionism of Judaism.'


    This is an important question, because until the various categories of Zionist are distinguished, we cannot ask questions like: well what kind of Zionist are you then? Part of the reason for Zionism success, has been its ability to find one cause which the majority of Jews can agree on. Having achieved that, those who like the 'end', but do not agree with the 'means' are slapped back into line, e.g. by attacking their lack of patriotism or by fearmongering. Splitting Zionism into two sub-sets, i.e. acceptable and unacceptable would be a good start.

    Complain about this comment

  • 147. At 11:09pm on 18 Mar 2009, ilbeback wrote:

    126. At 00:00am on 17 Mar 2009, Electric-Badger wrote:
    Thought for the day. - Dr. David Goldberg

    'IT MIGHT BE TIME FOR JUDAISM AND ZIONISM TO GO THEIR SEPARATE WAYS'

    If Judaism is to represent anything more than a religion of tribal self-interest, then the time has come for a divorce from Zionism. Initially, a large part of the strength of Zionism was to appeal to the religion of Judaism for a higher justification.

    There was always the danger, however, that the religion of Judaism would become too closely bound up with something beyond its control. Now that the dominant expression of Zionism has become an imperialistic and racist ideology, Judaism should jump ship before it becomes irreversibly tainted with the crimes being done in its name, by political Zionists.

    Complain about this comment

  • 148. At 11:14pm on 18 Mar 2009, ilbeback wrote:

    136. At 2:29pm on 17 Mar 2009, Richard_SM wrote:


    There needs to be a further type of Zionism - perhaps 'Rancorous Zionism'?



    What about 'Neo-Zionism' ?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neo-Zionism

    Complain about this comment

  • 149. At 2:21pm on 19 Mar 2009, Jackturk wrote:

    If the international blogs are any guide, millions of people across the world and in Israel are starting to see Zionism for what it really is, an attempt to justify racism, apartheid and ethnic cleansing, on the pretext of protecting Jews from anti-Semitism. Much of the condemnation is from Jews themselves who have realised that Zionism must be prised away from Judaism because it is totally against their religion and their conscience and is contributing to, not preventing anti-Semitism. In fact, many Jews say that much of the worst anti-Semitism comes from militant Zionists who are furious when their ideology is questioned.

    Many Jews who did not fully understand the implications of Zionism are now turning their back on it and are trying to explore solutions to resolve the Middle East conflict in ways that are fair and equitable in the long term to all of those in that part of the world.

    In what at first appears to be an innocuous story, the article on today's BBC news page featuring the Israeli European Song contest entry says so much. I suspect that it will have the Zionists hopping mad and flooding the BBC with complaints:-

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/7948494.stm

    The singer's fellow Arabs have urged her to step down from Eurovision because they see it as propaganda for a racist state.

    "A fifth of Israel's population are Arabs, descendants of those Palestinians who did not flee or were not forced from their homes during the 1948 war. Many see themselves as second-class citizens in the Jewish state".

    The above acknowledges what the Zionists deny, i.e. Arabs were forced out of Israel.

    However the following sticks to the Israeli line that the attack on Gaza was in RESPONSE to the Hamas rockets, when in fact it has already been established that a peace initiative was under way and the Israelis broke it - sloppy BBC comment - could be labelled as anti-Palestinian bias:-

    "On 27 December, the Israeli Defence Forces sent ground troops into Hamas-controlled Gaza in response to thousands of rockets being fired into Israel from the territory in the past few years".

    An Israeli MP telling Arab Israelis that they should lovingly accept racism and jerrymandering:-

    "I would expect from all the Arab Israelis who live here to accept the character of the state," says Danny Ayalon, a newly elected Knesset member from Yisreal Beitenu. "So they will have to accept Israel is a Jewish state and accept Jewish immigration lovingly and acceptingly".

    It can be seen from comments by Ala Hlehil, the Israeli Arab playwright, that in contradiction to Zionist statements, Arabs do not have equal rights in Israel:-

    "He argues that the only way to achieve equality between Arabs and Jews in Israel is to end Israel's occupation of Palestinian land and to abandon Zionism, the philosophy of building a Jewish state, within Israel".

    Complain about this comment

  • 150. At 4:49pm on 19 Mar 2009, dceilar wrote:

    Hey Jack

    We knew the truth would come out eventually!

    An Israeli military college has printed damning soldiers' accounts of the killing of civilians and vandalism during recent operations in Gaza.

    One account tells of a sniper killing a mother and children at close range whom troops had told to leave their home.

    Another speaker at the seminar described what he saw as the "cold blooded murder" of a Palestinian woman.

    Complain about this comment

  • 151. At 8:11pm on 19 Mar 2009, Electric-Badger wrote:

    TT, Marcus, etc. lets have your reply to the testimonies published by the military academy at Oranim College. These are eye-witness accounts from IDF.

    Spin that one!

    Complain about this comment

  • 152. At 10:15pm on 19 Mar 2009, Jackturk wrote:

    150 dc, 151 Electric

    "I still say we have the most moral army in the world" Ehud Barak.

    These thugs are a joke, they live in a fantasy world, convinced of their own rectitude whilst having zero feeling for their victims. There must be some psychiatric term for it.

    The IDF are not a professional army, they are professional cowards, supported by the likes of TT, MarcusBarbarius and the whole Zionist entity.

    Complain about this comment

  • 153. At 10:26pm on 19 Mar 2009, ilbeback wrote:

    'Breaking the Silence' is an Israeli organization of veteran Israeli soldiers that collects testimonies of soldiers. They are starting to see a picture of top down indoctrination of IDF soldiers aimed at lessening the worth of Palestinian lives and legitimizing attrocites against them:


    'In the press around the Oranim gathering and other stories about soldiers’ behavior in Gaza, we are beginning to see the IDF attempt to pin blame for soldiers’ actions – from disparaging graffiti to killing civilians – on the moral flaws of individual soldiers themselves. From the testimonies emerging now, it is becoming clear that the soldiers on the ground were actually a force of restraint in this operation; the open-fire orders and communications about the value of Palestinian civilians’ lives that descended through the chain of military command are responsible for the moral degradation of the Israeli armed forces in this operation.'


    http://www.shovrimshtika.org/index_e.asp

    Complain about this comment

  • 154. At 10:04pm on 20 Mar 2009, Electric-Badger wrote:

    I have wanted to do this post for some time but have been reluctant. When the IDF went into Gaza and the number of civilian casualties mounted, I had grave concerns as to how a professional army could conduct a campaign in a civilian area which resulted in over 400 children dead?

    400 children killed changes everything. How they died changes nothing.

    Could it be that certain sections of the IDF were influenced/instructed/enticed to ignore basic human principles and do the bidding of their masters? The latest news from the Oranim Academic would seem to support that statement.

    Why?

    Zionist have known for the longest time that the birth rate amongst Palestinians was far higher than that of the Israelis. It is not rocket-science to do the math and arrive at the conclusion that at some stage there would be more Palestinians than Israelis.

    Is that why they killed the mothers and children?

    Complain about this comment

  • 155. At 10:49pm on 20 Mar 2009, ilbeback wrote:

    Electric-Badger

    The IDF have a fascination with killing mothers and children at present. Particularly pregnant and grieving mothers:

    http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/World-News/Israeli-Army-T-Shirts-Mock-Killing-Palestinian-Women-And-Children-During-Gaza-Offensive/Article/200903315245946?f=rss

    While I don't believe that this sickness is a serious attempt to reduce the Arab population, I do believe that it reflects a deep frustration and resentment among the the Ziofascists about the relatively higher birth rates among the Arabs.

    Complain about this comment

  • 156. At 1:25pm on 21 Mar 2009, fsuth09 wrote:

    @155:

    I think it's TT wearing that t-shirt.

    Complain about this comment

  • 157. At 10:29pm on 21 Mar 2009, ilbeback wrote:

    A question to TT - Why did IDF soldiers go to the considerable trouble of designing, printing and freely distributing T-shirts with pregnant Palestinian women in the cross hairs of a snipers sights?


    Likely answers from TT:

    1.This is just the usual anti-Semitic bile from the Israeli bashers.

    2.This is just what I would expect from a pro-Palestinian news channel like Sky. (intentional irony).

    3.Hamas is entirely to blame. If they did not fire rockets at Israel then Israeli soldiers would not fantasize about shooting pregnant Palestinian females.

    4.We spotted a Hamas terrorist on the back of the T-shirt, using the pregnant mother (on the front) as a human shield.

    5.If Hamas could get the raw materials to make clothes through the Israeli blockade, then they would print far worse T-shirts about the Israelis.


    How did I do TT? Do I get the job then? I'll cover for you at weekends.

    Complain about this comment

View these comments in RSS

BBC iD

Sign in

BBC navigation

BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.