Give the devil his due, the true star of the Philadelphia synagogue event I went to a week ago was Daniel Pipes. Pipes was the most physically impressive of the speakers, at
about 6-6 it would seem, and true to his name, lean as a rail. He was the most logical, cold, and presentable.
The shock is in his ideas. Pipes is an extremist, and a foreign policy adviser to Giuliani.
that we are pussyfooting in the Middle East. There are “those who want to
appease and those who want to win… those who seek resolution, and those who
seek victory." Peeps Pipes: "The word victory has disappeared from our discourse.” Israel is pussyfooting with the Arabs. He says that there is not one leader in Israeli
politics who does not think that the Israelis will have to make a deal with
their neighbors, and Pipes says that a deal would be foolish and postpone war. Are these ideas in the American interest?
"All the talk of reaching a resolution. It doesn’t work. If you reach some kind of resolution, you postpone the ending of the war," pipes up Pipes. Rabin was wrong to say that Israel must make peace with its enemies. You make peace with "former enemies." Enemies must be
defeated and broken and made to understand that they have lost, not negotiated
with. “They must give up… We must not appease, we must win.”
Wild applause from the old, scared crowd. Appeasement is a Holocaust term. And the Third Reich looms over everything. Pipes said that we could no more make peace with Saddam or Ahmadinejad than we could have with the Nazis. Islamofascism is "Islamo-Nazi-fascism." Holocaust-consciousness is emblematic of the American neocons. They utterly blur the Nazis-in-Germany and Islamic-radicals-in-the-Muslim-world. They play on Eastern-European Jewish memory/paranoia.
Pipes says that it will be easy to "physically" defeat our enemies. The real battle, he says, is on the political battlefield–in an American argument over how far we should go. Clearly, he is losing. Pipes is completely out of the American mainstream. An armchair intellectual, he is prescribing militarism to societies
beleaguered by militarism. In Israel the young people have to take off a year after
their military service and smoke weed in Argentina with other Israeli vets,
just to decompensate for the years as occupiers and checkpoint guards.
It would be unfair not to cite Pipes’s brilliance. He had two wonderful riffs. In Europe, he said,
for neo-Nazis and antisemites; that they are so focused on Muslim immigration
that “they are losing interest in Jewish issues…. And Jews in
Republican here. (Were those enemies humiliated, or did they just come around?)
The other great point he made was about Muslim history. “Through
fourteen centuries of Islamic history” Jews have preferred to live in Muslim
societies than Christian ones. Over and over again, Jews fled Christian societies
for Muslim ones. But 1945 was the turning point. “You see a switch. When for
1300 years it was the other way.” Jewish life in Muslim societies was better: we were understood and integrated. Jewish figures were part of Muslim
society. Maimonides in the Egyptian court, compared to Rashi, excluded from French
life. “The situation is new. It could very well be a temporary one. It is very
much a reality.”
What is Pipes leaving out of the picture? Israel’s birth, in which the crimes of
European antisemitism were–as Ahmadinejad said on our national television the other night!–made the problem of the Arab world, through Jewish
emigration and political nationalism. Americans have to cool this region down by acknowledging the grievances on both sides. That means: marginalize Pipes!
"Some Arabs say the same thing: For centuries we got along. What is Pipes leaving out of the picture? Israel's birth"
Tell that to the Jewish community in Hebron circa 1929. There was no state of Israel then. Is that a good example of Arabs "getting along"?
Think better, Philip.
Ralph, the Jews who were living in Palestine were fine. You are counting on people's ignorance here, but you miscalculated. The problems didn't start until the Zionist Colonization Organizations of Europe started sending too many European Jews to Palestine with the stated objective being to steal the land from the natives (including Jews), to the detriment of both the Arab and existing Jewish populations.
The Neturei Karta represent those native Jews of Palestine who were living in peace with Arabs in Palestine for centuries.
"For the most part, the members of Neturei Karta are descended from Hungarian Jews who settled in Jerusalem's Old City in the early nineteenth century, and from Lithuanian Jews who were students of the Gaon of Vilna, who had settled earlier. In the late nineteenth century, their ancestors participated in the creation of new neighborhoods outside the city walls to alleviate overcrowding in the Old City, and most are now concentrated in the neighborhood of Batei Ungarin and the larger Meah Shearim neighborhood.
At the time, they were vocal opponents to the new political ideology of Zionism that was attempting to assert Jewish sovereignty in Ottoman-controlled Palestine. They resented the new arrivals, who were predominantly secular, and claimed that Jewish redemption could only be brought about by the Jewish messiah."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neturei_Karta
See also:
http://www.nkusa.org/
I would suggest you do some research before recycling the usual Zionist mythology and propaganda.
Please don't minimize the significance of the holocaust, in geo-political terms nor in psychological.
For example, the variably forced migration of Jews to Israel following WW2, is common whenever there is war or worse (genocide is worse). The reality of Jewish immigration to Israel was compounded by the FAILURE of the US and Western Europe to materially increase immigration allotments.
Jews that survived the camps were allowed in or not based on the creepy definition of quotas by country. (There were already the alotted 8,000 Polish immigrants this year. The number is arbitrary but in the same scale.)
Further to return to post-war Poland, Hungary, Germany, was no picnic (less of a picnic than even for non-Jewish refugee residents). Following the war, there still was genocide being committed by reactionary fascists that blamed the Jews for the rise of naziism.
Jews suffered the conflicts between third parties for centuries. Consider the thousand times that a Russian czar needed to distract attention from some conflict or scandal, and the Jews were "likely suspects".
Shit happens.
That the Palestinians experienced the consequences of the actions of third parties, is not abnormal. Its not new in Palestine (subject to millenia of conflicts and displacement at its crossroads), and its not new in the world at large.
The failure is in assimilating the refugees. Palestine and the US and Europe refused to assimilate the Jewish refugees. The Arab states failed to assimilate the Palestinian refugees.
Certainly the 1952 law permanently prohibiting return even of then identifiable lawful land claims, is a travesty.
Its not a humane solution parade victims, to intentionally keep them as victims. Its xenophobic, clothing as progressivism.
When shit happens, a humane person, a humans society helps.
Its a good thing to acknowledge grievances. The little I know about Pipes is very interesting. For one, he speaks and writes Arabic fluently. Ambiguity that feeds the gullibility of the left, is not possible with him.
That tells me to regard his observations as important, if not his political conclusions.
I have third cousins that used to live in Arad. The kids in the family all spoke Arabic, and sought to towards understanding what their neighbors concerns were.
They each got a surprise. While there were MANY Arabic speaking neighbors, and friends that treated Jews as peers, human beings, they also discovered a degree of hatred that they never imagined.
Sure, some of that is naivete. They should have imagined angers. The hate though was of a different scale, steam rather than water.
And, even starting from where they are, there probably are prospective paths to reconcile with a large minority if not a large minority by initiated kindness and recognitions.
And, then there is hatred that has its own momentum, that seeks every possible stimulus to feed on, and is not reconciliable.
No single state, no two-state. Just war.
What do we BUY into? What do we conclude from what we see?
The Neturai Karta are a small sect.
Much of their theology was shared by many orthodox in Israel/Palestine, Europe, and the US.
They reasoned that the messianic period could not be forced by political means, or even by organized immigration.
They declared that the prerequisite to the messianic period was "keeping the commandments". And, that forcing a political solution onto what is primarily a spiritual one, detered the spiritual one.
Many of their reasonings have born out, that Israel is falling apart in ways.
The Satmar share their view that the state of Israel is an external imposition, an attempt to force God.
The Lubavitch initially shared the view that the forming of the State of Israel was not equivalent to the messianic age, but changed their attitude towards Israel because of the tangible security that the state offered, that was endangered without the healthy and confident Jewish state.
In using the positions and arguments of the Netarai Karta to justify a different argument regarding Israel, an opportunism occurs, not an insight.
The Netarai Karta are MORE separate in orientation, even more elitist to some (in the trivial explanation of the term), than the predominately secular Israeli.
Richard, I'm tired of your BS. You keep recycling the same propaganda because you either have no clue or have a mission here assigned to you. Either way, I have posted too many times info that should have given pause to you, but to no avail. It feels like addressing a creationist with science.
I have explained already why you are completely incapable of rational discussion, but like Arie, I will repost some info for the benefit of others who are not lacking in reading comprehension.
1) Bizarro Zionist Witty: "The reality of Jewish immigration to Israel was compounded by the FAILURE of the US and Western Europe to materially increase immigration allotments."
What he fails to mention is that Zionist Organizations and Zionist leaders like Rabbi Stephen Wise were the principal obstacles to Jewish immigration to the USA and England before and during WWII. With this very embarrassing fact, it is rather incredible chutzpah to keep repeating the old canard that the US and British governments contributed to the holocaust, when it was the Zionist leaders who blocked the efforts of these governments to do something!
Too many sources for this generally unknown fact, but here is a good summary:
**********
"Why then did the Israeli state not remind any one the role of the US government during Bush's visit but rather presented it as a real homage to the victims of the Nazis? The answer is very simple: The Zionist movement was a partner to this crime. Its policy was to settle Palestine with Jews and those Jews they could not use were as good as dead.
If anyone has any doubts about this it is sufficient to quote Ben Gurion when he informed a meeting of Labor Zionists in Great Britain in 1938: "If I knew that it would be possible to save all the children in Germany by bringing them over to England and only half of them by transporting them to Eretz Israel, then I opt for the second alternative."[1]
This obsession with colonizing Palestine and overwhelming the Arabs led the Zionist movement to oppose any idea of rescuing the Jews who were facing extermination, because this would have impeded the ability to select and divert manpower to Palestine. From 1933 to 1935, the World Zionist Organization (WZO) turned down two thirds of all the German Jews who applied for immigration certificates.
The WZO did not only fail to seek any alternative for the Jews facing the Holocaust, but it also opposed all efforts aimed at finding refuge for the fleeing Jews.
As late as 1943, while the Jews of Europe were being exterminated in their millions, the US Congress proposed to set up a commission to merely "study" the problem. Rabbi Stephen Wise, who was the principle American spokesperson for Zionism, came to Washington to testify against the rescue bill because it would divert attention from the colonization of Palestine.
This is the same Rabbi Wise who, in 1938, in his capacity as leader of the American Jewish Congress, wrote a letter in which he opposed any change in US immigration laws which would enable Jews to find refuge in the USA. He stated: "It may interest you to know that some weeks ago the representatives of all the leading Jewish organizations met in conference. (…) It was decided that no Jewish organization would, at this time, sponsor a bill which would in any way alter the immigration laws."[2]
The entire Zionist establishment made its position absolutely clear in its response to a motion by 227 British Members of Parliament calling on the government to provide asylum in British territories for persecuted Jews. The meager undertaking which was prepared was as follows: "His Majesty's Government issued some hundreds of Mauritius and other immigration permits in favor of threatened Jewish families."[3]
But even this token measure was opposed by the Zionist leaders. At a Parliamentary meeting on January 27, 1943, when the next steps were being pursued by over one hundred Members of Parliament, a spokesperson for the Zionists announced that they opposed this motion because it did not contain preparations for the colonization of Palestine. This was a consistent stance.
Chaim Weizmann, the Zionist leader who had arranged the Balfour Declaration and was to become the first president of Israel, made this Zionist policy very explicit: "The hopes of Europe's six million Jews are centered on emigration. I was asked: 'Can you bring six million Jews to Palestine?' I replied, 'No.'… From the depths of the tragedy I want to save… young people [for Palestine]. The old ones will pass. They will bear their fate or they will not. They are dust, economic and moral dust in a cruel world… Only the branch of the young shall survive. They have to accept it."[4]
Yitzhak Gruenbaum, the chairperson of the committee set up by the Zionists, nominally to investigate the condition of European Jews, said: "When they come to us with two plans – the rescue of the masses of Jews in Europe or the redemption of the land – I vote, without a second thought, for the redemption of the land. The more said about the slaughter of our people, the greater the minimization of our efforts to strengthen and promote the Hebraisation of the land. If there would be a possibility today of buying packages of food with the money of the Karen Hayesod [United Jewish Appeal] to send it through Lisbon, would we do such a thing? No. And once again no!"[5]"
Yossi Schwarz
http://www.marxist.com/israel-zionists-holocaust130603-7.htm
**********
On Rabbi Stephen Wise, see also:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Wise#Criticism_of_Wise
On the role of Zionist Organizations in the holocaust, see also:
http://www.jewsagainstzionism.com/
- Lenni Brenner's '51 Documents' or 'Zionism in the Age of Dictators':
http://www.marxists.de/middleast/brenner/
link to counterpunch.org
- Satmar Grand Rebbe Joel Teitelbaum:
link to jewsagainstzionism.com
- Satmar Grand Rebbe Joel Teitelbaum on "why the Zionists resemble an arsonist who sets a fire and then scrambles to assist the victims, who imagine the arsonist to be the savior." (From Vaoyel Moshe):
http://www.jewsagainstzionism.com/rabbi_quotes/vayoelmoshe1.cfm
- The case of Rudolf Kastner and his trial:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rudolf_Kastner
- Holocaust hero Rabbi Chaim Weissmandl:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaim_Michael_Dov_Weissmandl
link to weissmandl.org
/>
link to weissmandl.org
- Another holocaust hero nobody knows anything about, Rudolph Vrba:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rudolf_Vrba#Vrba.27s_allegations
———————————————————-
2) Bizarro Zionist Witty: "Jews that survived the camps were allowed in or not based on the creepy definition of quotas by country."
Again, it was consistent efforts by Zionist Organizations and leaders who kept Jewish refugees in camps unless they were willing to go to Israel. This is another VERY embarrassing fact that Mr. Witty would rather forget but there are too many holocaust survivors who have testified that arrogant Zionist representatives were visiting those camps and telling them they couldn't go anywhere else but Israel.
———————————————–
3) Bizarro Zionist Witty: "That the Palestinians experienced the consequences of the actions of third parties, is not abnormal. Its not new in Palestine (subject to millenia of conflicts and displacement at its crossroads), and its not new in the world at large."
According to this line of argument, if someone shoots me and I go and shoot Mr. Witty who had nothing to do with this, it wouldn't be abnormal. This is Mr. Witty's 'humanism'. Someone else paying the price is no big deal.
———————————————-
4) Bizarro Zionist Witty: "The failure is in assimilating the refugees. Palestine and the US and Europe refused to assimilate the Jewish refugees. The Arab states failed to assimilate the Palestinian refugees."
First of all, the European Jewish immigrants who went to Palestine before and after WWII did not go there to get assimilated but to colonize the land and 'self-govern' as Mr. Witty puts it. As far as the US and Europe goes, it is a sure sign of a demented mind to castigate the failure of host countries to 'assimilate' Jews while insisting on the need for Jews to NOT assimilate but stand apart. Unless he meant that they refused to take them in, but this was mostly due to Zionist Organizations' efforts who were insisting on Palestine.
———————————————–
5) Bizarro Zionist Witty: "The little I know about Pipes is very interesting. For one, he speaks and writes Arabic fluently. Ambiguity that feeds the gullibility of the left, is not possible with him.
That tells me to regard his observations as important, if not his political conclusions."
So a fascist like Pipes is interesting because he speaks and writes Arabic. I wouldn't comment on this because it is too ridiculous but I have to point out that Eichmann spoke Hebrew!
————————————–
6) Bizarro Zionist Witty: "The Neturai Karta are a small sect.
Much of their theology was shared by many orthodox in Israel/Palestine, Europe, and the US."
Again, this shows that Mr. Witty knows nothing but what Zionist propaganda and mythology indoctrinated him with. The truth is that in the beginning of Zionism EVERY Jewish Rabbi and sage of every sect was against Zionism, and this is an understatement. They all considered Zionism as being diametrically opposed to the ideology and religious teachings of Judaism. The truth is that Zionism was a radical break with traditional religious Jewish teachings going back millennia. For a reality check, see:
http://www.jewsagainstzionism.com/rabbi_quotes/index.cfm
———————————————
If the Bizarro Zionist dares after all this to continue accusing the US of not doing anything for the Jewish souls losing their lives in concentration camps, I will immediately be posting Rabbi Weissmandl's '10 question to the Zionists' which illustrate very well how Zionist Organizations were blocking such efforts from their luxury hotels in Switzerland and their American mansions:
http://www.jewsagainstzionism.com/rabbi_quotes/weissmandl.cfm
.
Daniel Pipes is not just an "extremist", he is wild eyed fascist, and to think that Rudy Giuliani who, if he runs against Hillary, will probably be the next president of the USA, is taking "advice" from someone as sinister as Pipes confirms my belief that things can get much worse in the future than they are with Bush today, much, much worse… much, much, much.
It can be said in Pipes' favor, however that rarely do evil people ever look as evil as they are, but if Pipes were cast as the villain in old silent, melodrama as Simon Legree, tying the farmers daughter to the railroad track, Victorians would probably have thought the casting over the top or the makeup rather too crude.
Since Joachim has forsaken our forum of late…
The Origins of the Zionist Lobby – It's not the Talmud!
by Joachim Martillo
http://eaazi.blogspot.com/2007/09/origins-of-zionist-lobby.html
"From the historical sociological standpoint the abusive and manipulative undertakings of AIPAC, the ADL, the International Hillel Society, CAMERA, The David Project, and other ethnic Ashkenazi "fraternal organizations" shows the evolution of the Kehillah among Ethnic Ashkenazim from a local religious community into an organized system for internal ethnic control and external ethnic advancement (as discussed by Zipperstein) and finally into a highly organized ethnic conspiracy against American Arabs, American Muslims and any group or individual that has problems with the State of Israel or with the actions of racist ethnic Ashkenazim in America. The kehillah functioned somewhat differently among German Jews and remained an innocuous purely religious organization among Jewish Arabs and Persians. Eastern European Karaite Jewish Tatars had an entirely different communal organization."
David Seaton wrote: "It can be said in Pipes' favor, however that rarely do evil people ever look as evil as they are"
You are absolutely right.
Hannah Arendt wrote "Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil" where she elaborates on this.
http://www.amazon.com/Eichmann-Jerusalem-Report-Banality-Evil/dp/0140187650
More on the banality of evil:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eichmann_in_Jerusalem
Here is a cropping of Pipes's "official" photograph:
link to bp3.blogger.com
/>
Look at the expression in his eyes. Lordy, lordy… I mean Osama bin Laden himself looks like a rather distinguished, well balanced, "regular" sort of guy alongside Pipes. This is not some shot that somebody took of him in a off moment. No sir, this how he wants to look!
"What he fails to mention is that Zionist Organizations and Zionist leaders like Rabbi Stephen Wise were the principal obstacles to Jewish immigration to the USA and England before and during WWII. "
Utter bullshit. Both the US and England had geographic quotas that xenophobes in each state urged and the states enforced.
Following WW2 the REALITY was of widespread persecution of Jews.
It is a ridiculous assumption to conclude that Zionists cared more about their political ambitions than they did for the millions of lives lost.
The quotes that Alan proposed are all entirely out of context. I don't have a clue if they are accurate or not, or what setting the quotes were made.
Your dismissal of the core argument of Zionism, that it is the term for the self-determination movement of the Jewish people, is more telling.
If Jews are a people, they are, then they/we have the right to self-govern, to self-determine.
The only subsequent question is how that is conducted. A good question, but very distinct from the prejudice of denial.
The significance of knowing Arabic, is that one hears what is actually said, rather than what is rationalized.
As I said, it is a valid process to question the conclusions that one derives from x, y, z observation.
Dismissal isn't sufficient.
richard, are you saying that you speak Arabic?
"Utter bullshit."
Really? And "out of context"? How is this for "out of context:
**********
"On the basis of research done at the Institute of Contemporary Jewry at the Hebrew University, I would say … the mood of some of the leaders – especially of Yitzhak Gruenbaum … turned to utter despondency. He and some of his close associates thought that nothing could be done to save Europe’s Jews, and that money sent to Europe for escape, resistance, or rescue would be wasted. But they felt that the effort was worthwhile in order to be able to say after the war that everything possible had been done. It should be stressed they did not say the effort should not be made; but they felt it would inevitably fail."
Yehuda Bauer, Yehuda Bauer, From Diplomacy to Resistance, pp.viii-ix.
Yehuda Bauer is a famous Israeli establishment historian, the recipient of the Israel Prize, the highest civilian award in Israel! He is no revisionist historian. His is as official a historical narrative as it gets.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yehuda_Bauer
**********
"The inadequacy of the Jewish establishment’s response was so glaring that it brought forth a furious denunciation by the veteran Labour Zionist, Chaim Greenberg, in the February 1943 issue of the Yiddishe Kemfer:
" the few Jewish communities remaining in the world which are still free to make their voices heard and to pray in public should proclaim a day of fasting and prayer for American Jews … this American Jewish community has fallen lower than perhaps any other in recent times … We did not even display sufficient ability to set up (temporarily, for the duration of the emergency only) some kind of a general staff that should meet every day and think and consult and consider ways to engage the help of people who may, perhaps, be in a position to help us … One clique tries to outmanoeuvre the other – Zionists and anti-Zionists … What has such rescue work to do with political differences and with the entire ideological clap-trap which we have produced during the past couple of generations?" [27]
Greenberg’s powerful attack on American Jewry’s leaders spared no one, least of all his fellow Zionists, who were becoming the strongest force in the community. Without naming names, he denounced the defeatism and obsession with Palestine to be seen in many of the leading Zionist circles.
"There have even appeared some Zionists in our midst who have become reconciled to the thought that it is impossible to stay the hand of the murderer and therefore, they say, it is necessary “to utilise this opportunity” to emphasise to the world the tragedy of Jewish homelessness and to strengthen the demand for a Jewish National Home in Palestine. (A Home for whom? For the millions of dead in their temporary cemeteries in Europe?)"
He attacked Wise’s American Jewish Congress:
"at a time when the Angel of Death uses airplanes, the AJ Congress employs an oxcart-express … [it] delegated rescue work in Europe to a special committee … this committee permits itself the luxury of not meeting for weeks on end … It displayed a lack of the courage of despair, of that “aggressiveness of spirit” which characterises the hour of doom, of the ability to act on its own on a suitable scope or to attract people from other circles and activate them for such a generally self-evident cause as the attempt to rescue those who can still be rescued."
http://www.marxists.de/middleast/brenner/ch24.htm
**********
For anyone interested in a comprehensive study, Lenni Brenner's work is a very good start:
http://www.marxists.de/middleast/brenner/
Specifically on the 'Failure to rescue":
http://www.marxists.de/middleast/brenner/ch24.htm
.
What's your point?
.
Bizarro Zionist Witty: "It is a ridiculous assumption to conclude that Zionists cared more about their political ambitions than they did for the millions of lives lost."
Right. Read this and weep:
"We are writing to remind you of the one factor of which you must never lose sight: that ultimately, the Allies will win the war. After their victory, territorial boundaries will be reshaped as they were after the First World War.
Then, the way will be clear for our purpose at this time, with the war drawing to a close, we must do everything in our power to change Eretz Yisroel to Medinat Yisrael and many steps have already been taken in this regard. Therefore, we must turn a deaf ear to the pleas and cries emanating from Eastern Europe. Remember this: all the allies have suffered many losses, and if we also do not offer human sacrifices, how can we gain the right to sit at the conference table when the territorial boundaries are reshaped?
Accordingly, it is foolhardy and brazen for us to negotiate in terms of money or supplies in exchange for Jewish lives. How dare we ask of the allied powers to barter money for lives while they are sustaining heavy casualties daily? So, insofar as the masses are concerned: RAK B'DAM TIHJE LANU HAAREZ, (Eretz Yisroel will be ours only by paying with blood), but as far as our immediate circle is concerned, ATEM TAJLU. The messenger bearing this letter will supply you with funds for this purpose."
Reply to the Jewish Rescue Committee in Czechoslovakia received from the Zionist Jewish Agency Executive Offices in Switzerland.
MIN HAMETZAR (p. 92) by Rabbi Michael Dov Weissmandl ZT"L
.
You are quoting the few, and attributing the significance to the many.
I applaud the efforts of those people that worked to assist the emigration of Jewish refugees to Israel.
The effort was a good and necessary effort.
The many experienced refugee status, following genocide and continued severe persecution.
It deserves sympathy, not contempt.
Zionism was bold. That is a certainty. Pioneer.
The Palestinians similarly are attempting something new, and deserve sympathy.
Can you sustain sympathy for both peoples? Or, do you require cops and robbers?
Jerusalem – Israel said on Sunday it would shut its doors to refugees from Sudan's war-torn Darfur region, touching off hot debate over whether the Jewish state, founded after the Nazi genocide, has a duty to take in people fleeing persecution.
Israel has been grappling for months with how to deal with a swelling flow of Africans, including some from Darfur, who have infiltrated through its porous southern border with Egypt's Sinai desert. Overnight, Israel returned 48 African infiltrators to Egypt.
…
Eytan Schwartz, an advocate for Darfur refugees in Israel, said about 400 have entered Israel in recent years. Baker said they would be allowed to live in Israel, and that the ban applied to new arrivals.
Schwartz objected to any such ban. "The state of Israel has to show compassion for refugees after the Jewish people was subject to persecution throughout its history," he said.
But Ephraim Zuroff of the Nazi-hunting Simon Wiesenthal Center said the Jewish people could not be expected to right every wrong just because of its past."
So tell me again why it was the US' fault for not letting in more Jews?
http://www.news24.com/News24/World/News/0,,2-10-1462_2167348,00.html
Certainly the US was at fault for not letting in more Jews, it is rich and has plenty of room, plus a tradition of assimilating (you should pardon the expression) wave after wave of immigrants.
In fact, that is my solution to the whole Middle East problem.
Instead of spending billions of dollars every year propping up Zionism, I would give every Israeli Jew: man, woman and child, a plane ticket to the USA, a green card, plus a million dollars a head as stake money with a "Cuban" fast track to citizenship to boot. Cheap at the price! (Only one small condition: they leave their guns and atom bombs at the door.)
And if anybody thinks that inviting six million people to live in my country and become citizens, with a million bucks to open a bank account, is antisemitic, they can osculate my fundament.
.
Alan,
Thanks for the dynamite links on Zionism and the Holocaust. Others, take a look at
link to jewsagainstzionism.com
Maybe you should quit the debate with Witty. If we ignore him maybe he will go away.
"Instead of spending billions of dollars every year propping up Zionism, I would give every Israeli Jew: man, woman and child, a plane ticket to the USA, a green card, plus a million dollars a head as stake money with a "Cuban" fast track to citizenship to boot. "
Most would prefer to come to the US rather than Israel.
Who wants to go to a crowded country under the threat of attack, in which most in neighboring states hate you?
Most adults that have an attraction to being there, are already there.
I like the prospect of aliyah. My son is considering it.
Just for a little irony, for those liberal zionists that read here.
I corresponded with Michael Lerner a little last year. He told me that his son had migrated to Israel, and volunteered for one of the elite paratrooper groups.
Its sometimes confusing to be a liberal Jew that simultaneously loves and criticizes Israel.
I suggested to him that it was more honest for him and Tikkun to express more appreciation for Israel, so that their criticisms were more clear contrasts, and specifically criticisms of policy or performance, as distinct from demonization.
His response was very unsatisfying to me. He said that he thought that this was the appropriate time for "tough love", rather than candid mixtures of appreciation and criticism.
Ah, so if you have a tradition of assimilating immigrants (which is not really true) you MUST let in more immigrants and to do otherwise is to be at fault for all sorts of bad things.
But if you are a sectarian nation from the get-go, you are justified excluding all sorts of refugees, even though you have demanded other take you in as refugees in the past over and over again.
Makes sense to me!
It is telling that the possibility Alan raises–that Richard has been assigned a mission here–is almost as plausible as the probability that he is compelled by the kind of collective mental pathology on display to the world on the streets of New York at the beginning of this week.
Odd. Only a uniquely paranoid mindset would conclude that I'm "assigned" here.
Alan – you call my simple statement of fact "Zionist propaganda" then post reams of propaganda of your own, and fail to address my simple point:
In 1929, there was no Israel, there was no Holocaust, yet Jews were massacred in Hebron anyway. Philip has no basis for claiming that everything was just fine before "Israel's birth".
I take it that Witty (and Kramden) heartily approves the ongoing ethnic cleansing of non-Jews in Palestine.
But it's all just taking so damned long to clear out the vermin. Shit happens but not fast enough.
Can I suggest the Final Solution?
As for Witty's 'If Jews are a people, they are, then they/we have the right to self-govern, to self-determine.'
Presumably Witty is in the process of seceding from the United States and declaring, with his cohorts, self-government and self-determination. What a brilliant idea.
I take it that Witty (and Kramden) heartily approves the ongoing ethnic cleansing of non-Jews in Palestine.
But it's all just taking so damned long to clear out the vermin. Shit happens but not fast enough.
Can I suggest the Final Solution?
As for Witty's 'If Jews are a people, they are, then they/we have the right to self-govern, to self-determine.'
Presumably Witty is in the process of seceding from the United States and declaring, with his cohorts, self-government and self-determination. What a brilliant idea. Then he can declare war on Iran and let the US administration return to pressing domestic issues.
Ralph Kramden, Alan didn't say before "Israel's birth". This is what he said:
"Ralph, the Jews who were living in Palestine were fine. You are counting on people's ignorance here, but you miscalculated. The problems didn't start until the Zionist Colonization Organizations of Europe started sending too many European Jews to Palestine with the stated objective being to steal the land from the natives (including Jews), to the detriment of both the Arab and existing Jewish populations."
The problems started with the Zionist colonisation, that is in the 1890's – and for two reasons: the Palestinians were, very early in the piece, aware of the fact that the Zionist interlopers, unlike the established Jewish population of Jerusalem, had the aim to take over the land and establish their sovereignty over them.
The second reason was that the colonists started to treat the indigenous population with a mixture of scorn and arrogance with plenty of racist abuse into the mix.
There is reliable early testimony on that.
The Dutch poet Jacob Israel de Haan, originally a committed Zionist, got, after his arrival in the promised land in 1919, so disgusted with what he saw that he joined one of the orthodox anti-Zionist organisations and became an activist for a binational state (he was shot down and killed in 1924, in broad daylight, by a Haganah-operative, Avraham Tevoni, who declared afterwards that it had been done on the strict orders of the Haganah luminary, Itzhak Ben-Zvi, later the second president of Israel).
However, in a way it is immaterial whether the Zionist colonists behaved badly (as they did) or not. There is a good passage on this in Michael Neumann's book 'The Case Against Israel':
" … since the Zionist project never was legitimate, much that is said in its defense, and in Israel's defense, whether sound or unsound, is irrelevant. It does not matter if the Zionists wanted peace: of course they did! Who wouldn't want to rob someone's land and dominate their very existence without having to fight for that objective? It does not matter if some of the land was obtained by purchase; it would not matter if every square inch of it had been so obtained. The Israel/Palestine conflict is not about mere land ownership but about its use to establish the sovereignty of one ethnic group over another… And it does not matter if the Palestinians ever made genuine attempts to achieve peace, because peace was never a live option except by submission to Jewish sovereignty."
(Witty I am tired of your inanities and won't react to these any more).
Zionism was contreversial.
The holocaust made it obvious.
It changed from a possible imposition to a need.
A former wrong was righted (the persecution of the Jewish community).
And in righting that former wrong, new current wrongs occurred. (The isolation of the Palestinian community).
The work we have is heal, to repair, not to ask a nation to suicide (becoming not a nation).
You want to do that work, or do you want to whine?
There is an interesting difference between the English and the Dutch Wikipedia-entry on De Haan. In the English language version one finds, inter alia, a propos of De Haan's job as a correspondent for the Daily Express, this sentence:
"Already in Dutch circles he was the reputed volksverrader, traitor of his own people, and now his views spread throughout Great Britain and its Global Empire"
This sentence doesn't occur in the Dutch version at all, most likely because it is BS. The unknown editor of the English version has given an air of authenticity to the passage in which this sentence occurs by providing a footnote number. The footnote, however, is lacking.
The English language version also makes a lot of De Haan's alleged homosexuality though it mentions demurely that there never was any concrete evidence for that. In Zionist circles though the attempt has been made to blame this for the murder though the murderer himself, Tevoni, has claimed that this had absolutely nothing to do with it.
Richard twitty and the other APAIC reject, Ralphie have got their proverbial ass handed to them on plate..
Hey, Ralph – the man did an excellent job of explaining why things were fine before 1929.
It's just that you can't read and/or you simply are a stupid, stupid man.
A shame, to be sure. But that's that way it is I'm afraid.
Richard twitty and the other APAIC reject, Ralphie have got their proverbial ass handed to them on plate..
Hey, Ralph – the man did an excellent job of explaining why things were fine before 1929.
It's just that you can't read and/or you simply are a stupid, stupid man.
A shame, to be sure. But that's that way it is I'm afraid.
Richard twitty and the other APAIC reject, Ralphie have got their proverbial ass handed to them on plate..
Hey, Ralph – the man did an excellent job of explaining why things were fine before 1929.
It's just that you can't read and/or you simply are a stupid, stupid man.
A shame, to be sure. But that's that way it is I'm afraid.
Ralph, I think Phil was referring to the PROCESS of Israel's birth, not a specific date. You know, the emigration of Jews from Europe down to Palestine in order to take over. It's called Zionism.
The Dutch journal 'Acta Academica' published an article about Jacob Israel de Haan that included some of his notes on Palestine.
I have translated some of them. These all date from the period between 1921 and 1924:
"Sokolov has given a speech in which he said that we not only want to live in peace with the Arabs but also in friendship. Perhaps it is necessary to say these things. But they don't impress the Arabs very much; because they know very well that it is not true, especially as far as the new immigrants are concerned. These regard it as national treason to buy something from an Arab, to use an Arab cabbie or to let an Arab shoeshine boy make a piaster."
Haaretz "reminds us, that the Zionists have said time and again that they want peace and friendship with the Arabs. That is indeed correct. But the Arabs believe that this is just a form of politics. They remember Dr. Weizmann's formulation of our final goal at the Peace Conference in Paris: "A Palestine as Jewish as England is English" "
"Cunning. People believed to be able to catch the Arabs with cunning. (But) in Europe the propaganda was 'Palestine as Jewish as England is English'. Here they said that they wanted to live with the Arabs in peace and frienship. And develop Palestine to everybody's advantage … there is a certain insincerity in this … When a Jew in Jerusalem wants to sell a house to an Arab people make a great hubbub about it … in the press."
"We also heard, that there are posters in the city that state that anyone who gives work to an Arab will be instantly eliminated."
"An Arab is as badly received in a hotel in Tel Aviv as a Jew is in many American and German hotels. That is the remarkable thing: the extreme Jews act here against anyone they don't fancy in exactly the same manner from which they themselves have suffered so much in exile."
De Haan himself was not spared. He was threatened, spat upon in the streets and ultimately murdered.
I think it is pretty shameful the manner in which the so called intellectuals in this forum respond to Mr. Witty, who has been nothing but respectful and courteous in his posts. I'm curious if people like Arie Brand and Alan are Jewish. I don't put much stock into the self-hating Jewish argument, but perhaps I've been sheltered. For the record I would define self-hating as someone who uses different standards for their own group than they consistently apply to others and takes some sort of pleasure in cherry picking data to show their own group in a bad light. Is the vile which you generate in your posts to Mr. Witty consistent with that which you generate towards others with whom you disagree? One can make all the points you're making without succumbing to personal insults.
I think that Mr. Witty's point about the need for cops and robbers is rather profound. Indeed, one can be sympathetic to both the Palestinians and the Jews and wish to see both people flourish without demonizing the other. It's wrong when people demonize Arabs and it's wrong when they demonize Jews. I see a whole lot of the latter in the comments here. The real work that needs to be done for people who actually care about the people in the region is reviving the Taba peace talks and bringing about a negotiated settlement that will provide the Palestinians with a viable homeland, a home for the long suffering refugees to return to and rebuild their lives. I respectfully disagree with Dr. Pipes in this, but I also know that he is quite smart and informed on related matters dealing with extremist Islamic Fundamentalism. I therefore decline to label him as evil and to disparage his physical appearance. I don't know what Mr. Seaton looks like, but I think I have an idea about what he looks like on the inside.
I have not forsaken the forum. I have just been extremely busy with some engineering and writing projects.
The comment that Jews got a long with Arabs or Muslims for 14 centuries must be qualified.
The Jews who got along with Arabs were for the most part ethnic Arabs.
When Spanish Ibero-Berber Jews left Spain, most went if I am not mistaken to Morocco, whose population is Ibero-Berber while lesser numbers emigrated to the Netherlands and the Ottoman Empire.
Ethnic Ashkenazim constitute an ethnic group that differs in major ways from the Arab and Ibero-Berber groups to which Jews usually belonged in the Arab-Islamic region.
Eastern European ethnic Ashkenazim for about 7-800 years got along very well in the territory of Commonwealth Poland with the various coresident ethnic groups including the Catholic and Muslim gentry (szlachta) as well as the various peasant and urban populations. As a result Polish Ashkenazim generally had higher incomes, better education and better health than practically all groups in Poland except for the uppermost level of the Szlachta.
But ethnic Ashkenazim developed a lot of mechanisms to assure non-hostile to friendly co-existence. The higher ethnic Ashkenazi merchant class would give their youngest daughters to the more important members of the szlachta as mistresses.
Ethnic Ashkenazim that dealt with the szlachta developed an interpersonal style that said "We are harmless" and that was generally perceived as effeminate.
Among ethnic Poles it is considered extremely effeminate to kvetch (possibly originally a Judeo-Slavic word related to Polish kweczec or German quengeln). It is somewhat sexist but Poles generally believe that women live by the principle: Narzekam dlatego jestem — I complain/kvetsh therefore I am.
Since the 8th century at least Judeo-Slavic Knaan or Yiddish Eastern Ashkenaz (in the late Geonic or Rabbinic nomenclature) has been an exporter of people throughout the Arab Islamic Mediterranean region, but those immigrants assimilated into the local culture.
Not only did Zionists explicitly reject all the evolved methods of coexistence (slilat hagalut) and intended to remove the native population of Palestine in order to take over, but ethnic Ashkenazi culture had also changed tremendously between 1830 and 1890. By the end of this time period there is a lot of social political cultural conflict between German Jews and Eastern European ethnic Ashkenazim in the German Empire and between ethnic Ashkenazim and Jews of other ethnic groups in the Russian Empire.
Just consider how different the history of Eastern European immigrants in Palestine might have been if they had used the traditional mechanism of coexistence as they did in Egypt, where the ethnic Ashkenazi immigrant population was gradually assimilating into Egyptian culture up until the moment that Zionist Ashkenazim put into effect the plan to ethnically cleanse the native population and murder Arab Palestine.
.
Great posts Arie (responses to ralph kramden). Thank you.
—————————————————
Taerq wrote: "It's wrong when people demonize Arabs and it's wrong when they demonize Jews. I see a whole lot of the latter in the comments here."
Here we go again. When exposing criminal Zionist leaders and Likudnik (general term used for right-wing Zionist fanatics, including most of the neo-cons) extremists, some people reflexively equate this with the 'demonization' of all Jews.
This is baloney and a grotesque tactic. Let me repost Greenwald on this:
**********
"[...] It is a smear that is achieved only by the depressingly common attempt to equate hostility towards the political agenda of Likud with hostility towards Jews generally, a tactic that is nothing short of disgusting.
This false equivalence is intended to stifle all debate on any matters relating to the Middle East by positing an equivalence between anti-Semitism and a criticism of a specific, minority strain of political ideology."
**********
I should add that this knee-jerk reaction only serves the Likudniks. It makes opposing them impossible, thus making too many people who have nothing to do with their ideology or agenda their useful idiots.
Secondly, as far as Richard Witty goes, Mr. Taerg should probably do his homework and see why too many commenters here have been tired of him. First of all, he has been caught lying shamelessly at least twice. Secondly, he has the mentality of a fanatic, even if his manner is civil. Reasonable arguments, undisputable facts, historical context, they don't matter to him if they contradict his Zionist mythology. He is not interested in genuine debate. One might as well argue with a plant.
He is useful though in a different way. As Arie pointed out, demolishing his everyday Zionist-mythology-nonsense certainly benefits the discussions here for all others. We have given up on him, but we certainly all learn a lot here from each other because of him.
"I respectfully disagree with Dr. Pipes in this, but I also know that he is quite smart and informed on related matters dealing with extremist Islamic Fundamentalism."
You've got to be kidding. He has been spewing Arabophobia since he was a student at Harvard until 9/11 when he had the insight that he could get more traction from Islamophobia.
He is one of the prime movers of the Stop-the-Madrassa organization, which until recently included the psychopathic occult Jewish white supremacist racist, David Yerushalmi.
Don't tell me this "quite smart and informed" guy didn't know.
Mr. Martillo, your historical perspective is very appreciated. Thanks.
And Pipes has advocated precisely the type of collective punishment against Palestinians that the UN Secretary General warned would be considered war crimes if Israel implemented them in Gaza (among them razing entire villages in retaliation for terror attacks).
Eyal Press in The Nation a few yrs ago noted that Pipes embraced Saddam in a 1987 New Republic as an anti-Iranian bulwark. How's that for judgment?
You also don't note that Pipes is known for misquoting, taking out of context & generally engaging in intellectual fraud when debating his opponents.
He & Campus Watch were recently responsible for the campaign that forced the resignation of Debbie Almontaser fr. her job as principal of the Khalil Gibran Academy. And further both are leading the charge against Nadia Abu El Haj getting tenture at Barnard.
Ken Silverstein at Harper's & I have been covering this story for a few wks. now. My last post is linked to this comment.
Richard,
I've only seen Pipes once, and on a partially convincing but clearly propagandistic "documentary".
Do you regard his translations of Arabic texts as accurate, partially informative or entirely misrepresentative?
Why anyone would want to read the translations of Pipes is beyond me. This kind of work is best left to those who are impartial, not those who have an agenda to advance. The recent deliberate mistranslation of Ahmadinejad's statement regarding Israel ("wipe Israel off the map") is a great example of what can happen when you have guys like Pipes translating.
Let's look at MEMRI (Middle East Media Research Institute).
Here is Brian Whitaker on MEMRI, which is, get this, "subsidised by US taxpayers because as an "independent, non-partisan, non-profit" organisation, it has tax-deductible status under American law."
**********
"[...] Evidence from Memri's website also casts doubt on its non-partisan status. Besides supporting liberal democracy, civil society, and the free market, the institute also emphasises "the continuing relevance of Zionism to the Jewish people and to the state of Israel".
That is what its website used to say, but the words about Zionism have now been deleted. The original page, however, can still be found in internet archives.
The reason for Memri's air of secrecy becomes clearer when we look at the people behind it. The co-founder and president of Memri, and the registered owner of its website, is an Israeli called Yigal Carmon.
Mr – or rather, Colonel – Carmon spent 22 years in Israeli military intelligence and later served as counter-terrorism adviser to two Israeli prime ministers, Yitzhak Shamir and Yitzhak Rabin.
Retrieving another now-deleted page from the archives of Memri's website also throws up a list of its staff. Of the six people named, three – including Col Carmon – are described as having worked for Israeli intelligence.
Among the other three, one served in the Israeli army's Northern Command Ordnance Corps, one has an academic background, and the sixth is a former stand-up comedian.
Col Carmon's co-founder at Memri is Meyrav Wurmser, who is also director of the centre for Middle East policy at the Indianapolis-based Hudson Institute, which bills itself as "America's premier source of applied research on enduring policy challenges".
The ubiquitous Richard Perle, chairman of the Pentagon's defence policy board, recently joined Hudson's board of trustees.
Ms Wurmser is the author of an academic paper entitled Can Israel Survive Post-Zionism? in which she argues that leftwing Israeli intellectuals pose "more than a passing threat" to the state of Israel, undermining its soul and reducing its will for self-defence."
Read the rest of the article here:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/elsewhere/journalist/story/0,7792,773258,00.html
**********
This a Mossad operation, not an "independent, non-partisan, non-profit organisation" that deserves tax-deductible status!
Here is sourcewatch on MEMRI:
**********
"MEMRI is operated by a group closely associated with the Israeli intelligence organizations. Now, in an article in Haaretz, we find that the Israeli Army has sought to plant stories about "terrorism" in the press, and
"Psychological warfare officers were in touch with Israeli journalists covering the Arab world, gave them translated articles from Arab papers (which were planted by the IDF) and pressed the Israeli reporters to publish the same news here." –Amos Harel, IDF reviving psychological warfare unit, Haaretz, January 25, 2005.
This should raise a question or two about the reliability and veracity of the stories peddled by MEMRI.
This is what Prof. Juan Cole had to say about this:
"So is MEMRI, which translates articles from the Arabic press into English for thousands of US subscribers, in any way involved in all this? Its director formerly served in… Israeli military intelligence. How much of what we "know" from "Arab sources" about "Hizbullah terrorism" was simply made up by this fantasy factory in Tel Aviv?
As someone who reads the Arabic press quite a lot, this sort of revelation is extremely disturbing.
I also saw an allegation that British military intelligence had planted stories in the US press about Saddam's Iraq.
You begin to wonder how much of what you think you know is just propaganda manufactured by some bored colonel. No wonder post-Baath Iraq looks nothing like what we were led to to expect by the press, including the Arab press!" [3]
Another assessment:
If you rely on MEMRI for your knowledge of Arab discourse, you are really not informed. Arab public opinion, based on MEMRI's releases, is reduced or caricatured to either Bin Laden fans or Bush fans, while Arab public opinion is mosty a fan of neither people. –As'ad AbuKhalil [4]
Although widely used in the mainstream media as a source of information on the Arab world, it is as trustworthy as Julius Streicher's Der Sturmer was on the Jewish world. –Norman Finkelstein [5]"
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Middle_East_Media_Research_Institute
**********
Finkelstein is right. If we are going to rely on this kind of people, then we could as well start reading Julius Streicher's Der Stuermer on the Jewish world!
"The recent deliberate mistranslation of Ahmadinejad's statement regarding Israel ("wipe Israel off the map") is a great example of what can happen when you have guys like Pipes translating."
The translation was supplied by the Iranian Press Service to Al-Jazeera.
'WIPED OFF THE MAP' ?
Arash Norouzi wrote:
"THE ACTUAL QUOTE:
So what did Ahmadinejad actually say? To quote his exact words in farsi:
"Imam ghoft een rezhim-e ishghalgar-e qods bayad az safheh-ye ruzgar mahv shavad."
That passage will mean nothing to most people, but one word might ring a bell: rezhim-e. It is the word "Regime", pronounced just like the English word with an extra "eh" sound at the end. Ahmadinejad did not refer to Israel the country or Israel the land mass, but the Israeli regime. This is a vastly significant distinction, as one cannot wipe a regime off the map. Ahmadinejad does not even refer to Israel by name, he instead uses the specific phrase "rezhim-e ishghalgar-e qods" (regime occupying Jerusalem).
So this raises the question.. what exactly did he want "wiped from the map"? The answer is: nothing. That's because the word "map" was never used. The Persian word for map, "nagsheh", is not contained anywhere in his original farsi quote, or, for that matter, anywhere in his entire speech. Nor was the western phrase "wipe out" ever said. Yet we are led to believe that Iran's President threatened to "wipe Israel off the map", despite never having uttered the words "map", "wipe out" or even "Israel."
THE PROOF:
The full quote translated directly to English:
"The Imam said this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time."
Word by word translation:
Imam (Khomeini) ghoft (said) een (this) rezhim-e (regime) ishghalgar-e (occupying) qods (Jerusalem) bayad (must) az safheh-ye ruzgar (from page of time) mahv shavad (vanish from).
Here is the full transcript of the speech in farsi, archived on Ahmadinejad's web site
www.president.ir/farsi/ahmadinejad/speeches/1384/aban-84/840804sahyonizm.htm
THE SPEECH AND CONTEXT:
While the false "wiped off the map" extract has been repeated infinitely without verification, Ahmadinejad's actual speech itself has been almost entirely ignored. Given the importance placed on the "map" comment, it would be sensible to present his words in their full context to get a fuller understanding of his position. In fact, by looking at the entire speech, there is a clear, logical trajectory leading up to his call for a "world without Zionism". One may disagree with his reasoning, but critical appraisals are infeasible without first knowing what that reasoning is.
In his speech, Ahmadinejad declares that Zionism is the West's apparatus of political oppression against Muslims. He says the "Zionist regime" was imposed on the Islamic world as a strategic bridgehead to ensure domination of the region and its assets. Palestine, he insists, is the frontline of the Islamic world's struggle with American hegemony, and its fate will have repercussions for the entire Middle East.
Ahmadinejad acknowledges that the removal of America's powerful grip on the region via the Zionists may seem unimaginable to some, but reminds the audience that, as Khomeini predicted, other seemingly invincible empires have disappeared and now only exist in history books. He then proceeds to list three such regimes that have collapsed, crumbled or vanished, all within the last 30 years:
(1) The Shah of Iran- the U.S. installed monarch
(2) The Soviet Union
(3) Iran's former arch-enemy, Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein
In the first and third examples, Ahmadinejad prefaces their mention with Khomeini's own words foretelling that individual regime's demise. He concludes by referring to Khomeini's unfulfilled wish: "The Imam said this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time. This statement is very wise". This is the passage that has been isolated, twisted and distorted so famously. By measure of comparison, Ahmadinejad would seem to be calling for regime change, not war.
THE ORIGIN:
One may wonder: where did this false interpretation originate? Who is responsible for the translation that has sparked such worldwide controversy? The answer is surprising.
The inflammatory "wiped off the map" quote was first disseminated not by Iran's enemies, but by Iran itself. The Islamic Republic News Agency, Iran's official propaganda arm, used this phrasing in the English version of some of their news releases covering the World Without Zionism conference. International media including the BBC, Al Jazeera, Time magazine and countless others picked up the IRNA quote and made headlines out of it without verifying its accuracy, and rarely referring to the source. Iran's Foreign Minister soon attempted to clarify the statement, but the quote had a life of its own. Though the IRNA wording was inaccurate and misleading, the media assumed it was true, and besides, it made great copy.
Amid heated wrangling over Iran's nuclear program, and months of continuous, unfounded accusations against Iran in an attempt to rally support for preemptive strikes against the country, the imperialists had just been handed the perfect raison d'être to invade. To the war hawks, it was a gift from the skies."
So, you are somehow saying that Iran is not invoking war with Israel, on its own initiation.
Israel and the US similarly say, "we have nothing against the Iranian/Iraqi people. Its the regime that we hate. We want regime change."
The significance of the term "map" is not particularly relevant. The actual content of their view to remove the Jewish nation is accurate.
We assert the right to self-govern, and so long as Iran rejects Israel's right to self-govern (and acts on that assumption by funding, arming, and prospectively ordering proxy armies to attack Israel and most importantly Israeli civilians), the Iran will be in a state of war with Israel.
As the US has treaties with Israel, it is legally required to assist in her defense.
So long as Iran merely spouted rhetoric from 1000 miles away, that dogmatism was ignorable.
The prospect of nuclear capacity (whether started as an "intention" for only civilian purposes) is not ignorable.
The question is what to do about it.
If civil means to contain Iran are unamimously applied, then war will be unnecessary. (Particularly if Iran voluntarily turns down the heat.)
If civil means are not applied, and Iran continues to use its power aggressively and unilaterally towards Israel, then war will be likely.
And, at some shove point, regardless of whether the geo-political strategy of supporting Israel is in America's interest or not, the legal requirement to honor treaty agreements, will be.
This reaction is not for you Witty but for people who are willing and able to recognise an argument.
Witty:
"So, you are somehow saying that Iran is not invoking war with Israel, on its own initiation."
Yes.
Witty:
"Israel and the US similarly say, "we have nothing against the Iranian/Iraqi people. Its the regime that we hate. We want regime change." "
Hey, funny. This is exactly what Ahmadinejad said about Israel: "regime change". But in his case it suddenly means obliterating the locale of that regime, huh?
Witty:
"The significance of the term "map" is not particularly relevant. The actual content of their view to remove the Jewish nation is accurate."
Oh ? I thought that your mates found that word highly significant.
Witty:
"We assert the right to self-govern,… "
Britain recognised that right in 1783. Aren't you an American?
Witty:
"and so long as Iran rejects Israel's right to self-govern …"
Iran wants 'regime change' in Israel. Does that amount to a denial of its right to 'self govern'? So what about the Israeli desire to have 'regime change' in Iran?
Witty:
"As the US has treaties with Israel, it is legally required to assist in her defense."
You have hopes. Have you ever heard of 'raison d'etat'? It has on many occasions in history prevailed over 'treaty obligations'. "legally required" ? It appears to me that the US is not particularly bothered by legal requirements.
But you might be lucky – if the Israel lobby can exert enough pressure.
Witty:
"So long as Iran merely spouted rhetoric from 1000 miles away, that dogmatism was ignorable.
The prospect of nuclear capacity (whether started as an "intention" for only civilian purposes) is not ignorable."
Yes, I fear that Iran might consider that the combined nuclear capacity of the US and Israel can no longer be ignored. The merest common sense would suggest, however, that it has no desire to commit suicide by attacking these nuclear powers.
Here is General John Abizaid, the former Head of Central Command, speaking:
"Iran is not a suicide nation," he said. "I mean, they may have some people in charge that don't appear to be rational, but I doubt that the Iranians intend to attack us with a nuclear weapon."
The Iranians are aware, he said, that the United States has a far superior military capability.
"I believe that we have the power to deter Iran, should it become nuclear," he said, referring to the theory that Iran would not risk a catastrophic retaliatory strike by using a nuclear weapon against the United States.
"There are ways to live with a nuclear Iran," Abizaid said in remarks at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a think tank. "Let's face it, we lived with a nuclear Soviet Union, we've lived with a nuclear China, and we're living with (other) nuclear powers as well."
Abizaid suggested military action to pre-empt Iran's nuclear ambitions might not be the wisest course.
"War, in the state-to-state sense, in that part of the region would be devastating for everybody, and we should avoid it — in my mind — to every extent that we can,"
…
He suggested that many in Iran — perhaps even some in the Tehran government — are open to cooperating with the West. The thrust of his remarks was a call for patience in dealing with Iran, which President Bush early in his first term labeled one of the "axis of evil" nations, along with North Korea and Iraq.
He said there is a basis for hope that Iran, over time, will move away from its current anti-Western stance.
Abizaid's comments appeared to represent a more accommodating and hopeful stance toward Iran than prevails in the White House, which speaks frequently of the threat posed by Iran's nuclear ambitions. "
Witty:
"The question is what to do about it.
If civil means to contain Iran are unamimously applied, then war will be unnecessary. (Particularly if Iran voluntarily turns down the heat.)"
I am glad to hear it.
Witty:
"If civil means are not applied, and Iran continues to use its power aggressively and unilaterally towards Israel, then war will be likely."
Poor Israel. Being at the receiving end of all those 'unilateral' pressures. Come off it. Did you ever hear of Lebanon or the recent strike on Syria?
Witty:
"And, at some shove point, regardless of whether the geo-political strategy of supporting Israel is in America's interest or not, the legal requirement to honor treaty agreements, will be."
See above.
Thank you guys for correcting my mistake. Arie, your contribution was as always very appreciated.
Oops, that was me :)
Pipes is just as bad as that hack M. Thomas Eisenstadt of the Harding Institute for Freedom and Democracy. He was another of the Jewish neocons advising Giuliani. Fat lot of good it did them. Rudy may as well have had Debbie Schlussel.