I've been very interested lately in how Avigdor Lieberman's success in the recent Israeli elections is changing how Americans view and understand the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Richard Cohen's column in today's Washington Post is another sign Lieberman is helping people cut to the chase. In his article "Whose Israel Shall It Be?" Cohen compares Lieberman to Israel's founders in light of his proposal to force Palestinian citizens out of the country:
[Israel's first President Chaim] Weizmann was no dreamer. His century — the 20th — was fast becoming the bloodiest in history. The world was just completing an orgy of genocide, ethnic cleansing and population transfers — Greeks for Turks and Turks for Greeks, Germans for Poles and Poles for Germans, a decades-long brawl culminating in the Holocaust and followed by the expulsion of millions of ethnic Germans from all over Eastern Europe. Pakistan and India were created in a similar manner — a population swap of many millions of people. This was the way things were once done.
Israel, too, engaged some in ethnic cleansing — or why else all those Palestinian refugees? But the attempt was both chaotic and, as we can see, not wholly successful. More important, the concept was anathema to important members of the Zionist establishment such as Weizmann. The way of the world — eliminating ethnic minorities — would not be practiced by the very ethnic minority that had suffered the most.
Well, if that's not a conversation starter I don't know what is. The Palestinian refugee problem is the result of Israeli ethnic cleansing. While Cohen's assertion that "important members" of the Zionist establishment didn't support ethnic cleansing is debatable, it's a debate well worth having and Lieberman has made it possible.
Cohen believes Lieberman's proposal is not consistent with Israeli values, which he implies are consistent with US values. The more Lieberman, and Danny Ayalon, talk, the more questions will be raised. Writers like Cohen should feel empowered to speak more truths about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, but they should also be forced to reevaluate assumptions that are no longer valid.
The times they are a-changing! at WaPo
[even THE 'Times' is changing a little]
"…consistent with US values…"
Median, average, ideal, traditional, or as expressed in the founding documents, or as expressed by current leaders, or as exemplified by official behavior?
There isn't a conscious mind on the planet that could set out clearly and unequivocally what "US values" are, without fabulating.
Freedom? Oh yah yah yah. Freedom.
Democracy?
Equality?
Cheers to Cohen just the same, especially for that Iran bit.
Richard Cohen denounced Walt and Mearsheimer as antisemites and now he is opening up this discussion. Maybe the dialog is starting to change. Let us hope.
"Cohen believes Lieberman's proposal is not consistent with Israeli values, which he implies are consistent with US values."
That ANY Zionist values are consistent with Western values is one those so-often repeated canards, at this point I've concluded that it must be another hasbara-issued talking point — kind of like the supposed "Judeo-Christian" continuity that has been propagated by Zionists and their allies as a means of folding Israel into the Western side in the clash of civilizations formulation.
Let's get this straight once and for all: although Christianity came out of Judaism, Judaism is nonetheless an ancient, primitive belief system that assigns human beings to permanent slots of cosmic significance based on their birth status of Jew or gentile. Unlike Christianity, in Judaism, once you are born, your slot is assigned.
Judaism is actually far closer to Hinduism (with its various cosmically-assigned castes) than it is Christianity. This is where the notorious Jewish sense of entitlement comes from — they believe their “choseness” is cosmically ordained — basically, that they are of the highest caste, and should be honored by the lower gentile castes as such. And that belief is their right. But let's stop this silly nonsense that the values of a Jewish state are or could ever be consistent with the values of Western (Christian) civilization.
Maybe the Zionists should start looking towards India for succor. They have far more in common with the Hindu mind and mentality.
Roy Belmont, do you mean Roger Cohen wrt Iran bit?
Colonel Sanders himself coming around. The world's gone topsy-turvy.
But – did anyone notice the little side-swap at Bill Moyers in Cohen's article? out of all the possible citations for "state terrorism", he picked Moyers. Now, why is that, can anyone tell?
Hint: could talking pointers been possibly making the rounds for the past few weeks to "get Moyers"?
Poor Richard Cohen (and others in the same MSM boat). Must be really hard to thread that needle. not like he doesn't know that nothing like a little pander to detract from the article.
Reading Edwin Black's The Transfer Agreement: The Dramatic Story of the Pact Between the Third Reich and Jewish Palestine, I discover on page 143 that Jabotinsky's Revisionists (the ancestor of Likud) "were heavily Fascist and profoundly influenced by Mussolini", and that they wore brown shirts very much like those of the Nazis.
And Lieberman's Yisrael Beiteinu makes Likud look moderate.
Suzanne should be thrilled to know that, lysia. She declares herself the expert, so let's see what she has to say about this aspect of fascism on the part of not arabs or Islamists, but jews. Should be fun; she might tell us more about the totalitarian model and mentality.
Aiiee. PeterD, I did indeed.
Uncheers to Richard then at all.
And a stern look in the mirror for me.
Author Edwin Black, son of Polish Holocaust survivors, has written the compelling, painful story of The Transfer Agreement. His book, The Transfer Agreement, the Dramatic Story of the Pact Between the Third Reich and Jewish Palestine (Macmillan 1984 and Dialog Press 2000) took him five years heading a team of researchers and translators, digging through archives in the US, England, Germany, and Israel. Many of the 35,000 documents he uncovered were previously sealed.
The Transfer Agreement, written in a tense, dramatic style, became an immediate and controversial bestseller when it first appeared in 1984. Quickly, it became the subject of massive TV, radio, and print coverage. Macmillan nominated the book for a Pulitzer, and in 1984 the book received the Carl Sandburg Award for the best nonfiction of the year. The Transfer Agreement was controversial and shattering to its readers precisely because the book's topic was ahead of its time. The world was not ready to comprehend complicated asset transfer discussions between the Zionists and Nazis, two groups whose relations were not widely known. But with a gun to the head of the Jewish people, Zionists did undertake the Transfer Agreement.
Now that the world has confronted the issue of Holocaust-era assets in Nazi pilfered gold, Nazi stolen art, Nazi insurance, and Nazi slave labor, The Transfer Agreement stands out as the sole example of a Jewish asset rescue that occurred before the genocidal period. The terrible choices its negotiators undertook can now be viewed in a new light.
Carroll & Graf has released a special updated edition of The Transfer Agreement, with a new author's introduction and a new afterword by Abraham Foxman, national director of the Anti-Defamation League.
Chris, your writeup shows that you have impressive marketing skills. You should show it to the publisher, maybe they will give you a job. They can be reached via the "Contact" button at
http://www.transferagreement.com/transfer/html/synopsis.php
There's ample evidence, additional to what chris berel suggests regarding The Transfer Agreement motivations, that some key players on the Zionist side simply saw the potential NAZI threat as an opportunity
not to throw away in pursuit of populating the land without people, for a people without land. As Obama's new gate keeper said, you need to take advantage of every opportunity that presents itself,
something Shrub and his neo-con brains utilized very effectively to attack Iraq ASAP after the Twin Towers fell.
Another such opportunist was, of course, Hitler watching the Reichstag burn.
Norm, merely a cut and paste from the marketing material. Sorry if that wasn't clear.
As for Citizen, only an antisemite would see your bullshit drivel in the attempt to save Jewish lives.