The inimitable Morton Klein, in a piece published by the Jewish Telegraphic Agency:
It is a racist notion that Jews cannot live in the West Bank but Palestinians can. How is it that Arabs make up 15 percent of Israel's population, but the Arabs won't permit even less than 10 percent of the population in the West Bank to be Jews?…
[E]ven worse, Mitchell explains away Palestinian terrorism by stating that "a cessation of Palestinian-Israeli violence will be particularly hard to sustain unless Israel freezes all settlement activity." Still worse, he accepts explicitly the idea that Palestinian Authority action in fighting terrorism is largely conditional on further negotiations and the relaxing of Israeli security measures rather than being binding on international obligations under the Oslo Accords….Mitchell apparently refuses to focus objectively on the evidence and distinguish between the real aggressor and the real victim.
It is amazing that this neoconservative argument was at the heart of last November's election and was never openly debated. Klein and I both wanted it debated. I thought I would win, especially when people like Klein began accusing fairminded people of being "racist". It wasn't debated. And yes, I did win. But because they weren't debated, the issues remained latent in our politics. If they had been discussed, Americans would have gotten to explicitly apply the Iraq lesson to Israel/Palestine: dispossession/political disagreements/occupation lead to terrorism. Klein's righteous posture masks his refusal to let Palestinians have even one fifth of historical Palestine. Despotism, from a man enjoying the greatest minority rights in the world.
(Phil Weiss)
Please, Phil, the time has come: a special tag for Zionist psychological projection is in order. It should be a registered phenomenon. If three instances make a trend, then several hundred, I think, make a phenomenon. The time is now. And you could even buff your Jewish cultural credentials by calling the tag, simply, Freud.
"It is a racist notion that Jews cannot live in the West Bank but Palestinians can."
What madness. In what sense are Palestinians allowed "to live" imprisoned on Reservations in the West Bank; barred from using Jews-only roads; fenced away from their own land, work, family; having their water stolen and fruit-trees bull-dozed?
What about the growing Purges of Israeli Arabs from East Jerusalem, as well as the o myriad other discrimination they face?
You're right, Phil. And we weren't allowed to have that debate precisely because you would have won.
Great idea, MM.
classic phil weiss remark…
"Despotism, from a man enjoying the greatest minority rights in the world."
hubris on the part of the minority ….things are changing and they continnue to stand in the face of the headwind.
I find this Morton Klein statement astonishing–and, yes, a case of projection. It can only be interpreted as grounded in victimology. You are just never gonna convince these guys that the whole world is not out to get them. To reiterate, Zionists need therapy.
It may be misdirection. George Mitchell is right in line with the Israeli desire to obliterate Iran. According to James Petras, "George Mitchell, Obama’s envoy to the Palestine-Israel conflict, is one of the four co-chairs of the Zionist front group, Bipartisan Policy Center, which propose a step by step approach, from sanctions to embargo to naval blockade to a military strike on Iran."
"Obama appointed Ross to the post of ‘Special Envoy to Iran’. He will act as Czar of Middle East policy. George Mitchell is his envoy on Israel-Palestine negotiations, a typical ‘good cop’ (Mitchell) strategy to counter the ‘bad cop’ (Ross)."
Petras goes on to argue that the invasion of Gaza was essentially a dress rehearsal for a full-scale military assault on Iran.
Israel Asserting Middle East Supremacy:
From Gaza to Tehran
While I generally regard labeling Zionists as "Nazis" historically baseless and needlessly inflammatory, there is nevertheless a chilling echo here of Fuhrer-speak about, say, the rights of ethnic Germans in the Czech Sudetenland.
If "Zionazi" is an unhelpful term — as Nazism was a particular historic phenomenon, and one which targeted the Jews in particular — then "Fascist" is certainly not an exaggeration. It is no coincidence that the precursors of the modern Likud and ZOA extremists were admirers of Mussolini's Italy and sought to model their movement on Italian Fascism. The Italian project of rebuilding the glory of the ancient Roman empire in North Africa and the Mediterranean — with its attendant genocidal racism — is not far from the Biblical-inspired mission to "redeem" the "Land of Israel" and dispossess "the natives."
Can someone like Klein actually believe those ravings? Totally deranged if so, and totally fascist in any case.
Kid games in a hall full of mirrors. It's really odd to read this stuff.
I am assuming this is read widely. A kingdom for being in the target audience average state of mind while reading these repetitive tirades. Will there be the occasional hesitant "but" behind all the yeses?
MM, I wouldn't use Freud, or Psychology but simply mirrors. But this has multiple tags already. I wonder about McCain. But maybe I missed something essential. I better check.
Actually most Palestinian demographic shifts that can be traced are FROM the West Bank into Jerusalem, as Jerusalem ID card holders "pull in" family from the WB, afraid of losing contact with them. It would be hard to get exact numbers, but although Jerusalem's population is dropping from a flight of secular Jews, the Palestinian population seems remarkably constant. Double-counting of Jerusalem ID holders by the Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics–in which Jerusalem ID card-holders are counted as Palestinians in Israel by Israel and West Bankers by the PCBS to show incipient demographic reconquest of all Falastin–prevents an accurate count anyway, and if anything undermines your contention that Jerusalem is losing Palestinians.
The ICBS count is probably most accurate, since West Bankers arriving in Jerusalem become "Palestinians in Israel" in the Israeli count, and are double-counted by the PCBS, which notches the Jerusalem count up by one ("we will have al-Quds, never mind the Jewish majority over the last centuries") and forgets to take the WB count down by one ("al-Quds is Falastin, we will have all Falastin, we outnumber you already.")
Klein's righteous posture masks his refusal to let Palestinians have even one fifth of historical Palestine. Despotism, from a man enjoying the greatest minority rights in the world.
(Phil Weiss)
And your righteous posture won't allow you acknowledge that the Palestinains have 75% of historic Palestine and renamed it Jordan. 70% of the population is Palestinain. In fact, the next King of Jordan will be Palestinian.
What the palestinians now want, is 22% of the remaining 25%, giving them over 80% of historic Palestine.
It is a racist notion that Frenchmen cannot live in Algeria but Algerians can.
It is a racist notion that Mozabite Jews cannot live in Algeria but Mozabite Muslims can. Yahiya al-Djazair.
Cancerous tumors also grow naturally.
Anybody who cares to can read the old Mitchell official report on I-P situation. If Mitchell is an anti-semite, than so is Jesus Christ. Makes me speculate that if Jesus was born today he'd be branded as a "self-hating jew." This is important, especially if you don't think
Judaism and Islam is pacifist in respective scriptures as compared to
Christianity (excluding goy Zionists, basically white trailer trash).
Based on the literature in christian scripture, it may very well be that the early founders were antisemitic. What about it?
Jesus, born today, would have the Palestinians wither as the tree that bore bad fruit.
'How is it that Arabs make up 15 percent of Israel's population, but the Arabs won't permit even less than 10 percent of the population in the West Bank to be Jews?…'
Here is the hoary old I-P 'balance' formula, pounded into a reductio ad absurdum. Israel, of course, effectively controls both the 15 percent of Arabs in its population, AND the 90-plus percent Arab population in the West Bank. The Palestianians have no state of their own.
Morton Klein reminds us why the Hebrew word 'chutzpah' has no equivalent in English. Even the combination of 'effrontery' and 'Big Lie,' as applied to Hitler's demented rantings, cannot capture the ethnically distinctive connotations of 'chutzpah.' I'm talkin' about the unbridled glee with which Klein misleads the credulous, coupled with the gloating contempt toward those who are not deceived, but can and will do nothing. It's all delivered with a wink and a leer and a stagey, up-yours insouciance.
Morton Klein deserves an award for promoting the global adoption of Hebrew. Mazel tov,you meretricious muthuh …
Mort Klein supports the West Bank being annexed into Israel. What he cannot do is openly advocate for such annexation. Thus he engages in dissimulation and diversion. In short he lies.
Based on the literature in christian scripture, it may very well be that the early founders were antisemitic. What about it?
There seems to be a split in the Gospels between the Judeo-Christians and heathen-Christians view. In the process of the canonizations these two rather different outlooks were combined into one. The antisemitic tendency may well mirror a fight between these two groups for dominance, at least that has been suggested. But I am no expert.
Hey, Jim: that "glee," "gloating contempt," "wink," "leer," and "a stagey up-yours insouciance," are exactly the point I was trying to make a few days ago about the resemblance in "Snidely Whiplash" sadism between Lovelace (in "Clarissa,") and Peres, Livni, and the whole Israeli leadership.
You expressed it much more succinctly.
Thanks for all your great points, Jim, MM, Delia, Dan Kelley, LeaNdr, Tommy, Citizen, Otto, Jaffr.
Hang in Susie Kneedler, we need you to work for justice.
Chris, since you were obviously named after a great man, I'm surprised you haven't figured out what his position would have been on the I/P conflict.
"Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the land."
"Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they will be satisfied."
Being a pacifist, he would obviously be opposed to armed struggle, but he would be on the side of justice for the Palestinians.
Thanks, Citizen! You are too.
"Being a pacifist, he would obviously be opposed to armed struggle, but he would be on the side of justice for the Palestinians."
Jesus was Pan-Arab? I didn't know they were doing that back in the day!
Arabs do tend to be racist towards Africans and Asians. Islam is just a vehicle for Arab supremacism. There were elements of Arab supremacism in the spread of Islam, the Arab slave trade, and in Al Qaeda, the racist Arabs force the Pakistanis and Afghans to do their dirty work so they dont have to.
Nothing wrong, as far as I'm concerned with 10% (or whatever number is actually is) of the population of the West bank being Jewish. Just as long as all the inhabitants of the territory have full political rights. So let the settlers live where they want (I'm no racist), but let the either live in a Palestinian Arab state with a Jewish minority–next to a Jewish state with a Palestinian minority–or in a state covering both areas and in which both populations get to vote and etc.
This is not the moral equivalent of rocket science. It's more like learning to play together in the first grade (albeit with guns).
RE: "Being a pacifist, he would obviously be opposed to armed struggle, but he would be on the side of justice for the Palestinians."
Jesus was Pan-Arab? I didn't know they were doing that back in the day!
Posted by: Suzanne "
Jesus was a jew. He didn't like what the jewish establishment was doing. He spoke out against it. The Jewish establishment did not like this. Rome was the ultimate arbiter to this province. As such,
it was only concerned with Roman interests. The Roman interest POC at the time was to placate the local provincial Jewish elite, the jewish sub-power as it were. Pontius Pilate therefore left the decision up to
the local jews, to be carried out by Roman proxy soldiers.
Saul (St Paul) carried Christ's message beyond jews to the rest of the world, that is, to the goys.
That message was universal in meaning. Arabs were included.
What does "Jesus was Pan-Arab? I didn't know they were doing that back in the day!" have to do with this story?
Suzanne, please enlighten us. And if you beg to differ with this story, please tell us why, how so, and direct us to the correct narrative.
Thank you so much, Suzanne.
Sorry. POC=POV
I know many Arabs and I know quite a few Jews.
Both are racist. Muslims have a superiority complex, as do Jews, and Christians.
Citizen–subtle political humor on my part…and I meant Pan-Arabist.
"Both are racist. Muslims have a superiority complex, as do Jews, and Christians."
Are you one of those ethnocentric Hindus? :-)
APT, are you intimating that Arabs have a very undeserved superiority complex? Something about having next to no claim of any intelectual greatness? I mean as compared to Jews and Christians and Hindus and Budhists
Suzanne, you have not answered my question.
Yeah, sure. It’s a racist notion that Jews from Israel can’t freely move into the West Bank, just as it’s a racist notion that Palestinians from the West Bank cannot freely move into Israel proper. Right?
Countering this kind of “argument” is no fun. It’s like shooting fish in a barrel. Dead fish. Floating on the surface. With a shotgun.