Do I single out Israel's human rights abuses in a sea of man's inhumanity to man, as Dershowitz charges? You betcha. Steve Walt offers this realist justification for the focus on Israel/Palestine:
Ali Abunimah says he singles out Israel/Palestine because it's a last remnant of colonialist attitude in the Third World.
James North says he singles out Israel/Palestine because unlike the 5000 miners who die every year in China, the human-rights abuses of the West Bank are something he can actually affect, as an American.
Myself I do because the Israeli army is shooting
Tristan Anderson in my name, and all my life my community pushed me to
sing in the Black-Is-White chorus and suddenly at 50 the self-hatred
thing didn't scare me anymore.
P.S. I started this post meaning to pick up Walt's link to this piece by Gary Kamiya saying that Obama has run out of all options except to put heavy pressure on Netanyahu to return to the '67 borders.
*FROM: Friends Committee on National Legislation (FCNL)
*Please take Action: Urge Your Rep. to Work for Middle East Peace
A resolution recently introduced by Rep. William Delahunt (MA) advances a constructive U.S. approach to Israeli-Palestinian peace. It supports the mission of Middle East peace envoy George Mitchell, affirms that Israeli-Palestinian peace is an essential national security interest of the United States, and supports the creation of a viable Palestinian state living in peace with Israel. Already 89 representatives have cosponsored H. Res.130, more than any previous congressional statement on Israeli-Palestinian peace. Please take a moment to send a pre-written e-mail to your member of Congress and encourage them to sign on as a cosponsor.
*TO SEND AN E-MAIL – link to capwiz.com
*TO CHECK THE COSPONSORS – link to capwiz.com
Israeli human rights organization B'Tselem concluded:
"Israel has created in the Occupied Territories a regime of separation based on discrimination, applying two separate systems of law in the same area and basing the rights of individuals on their nationality. This regime is the only one of its kind in the world, and is reminiscent of distasteful regimes from the past, such as the apartheid regime in South Africa."
But don't single out Israel!
We're God's Chosen People
But don't single out israel
We're the largest recipient of US foreign aid, the bulk of it used to oppress and massacre out neighbors
But don't single out Israel.
Israel is constantly brought up in the media without much being said. It's an issue that is hiding in plain view. It's present in politics and entertainment for no good reason, and support for Israel wastes money, lives and credibility–and may even expose rifts with America itself. Unfortunately, I don't believe that the issue can be solved in an honest or timely manner. Whatever the happens, I don't accept that anything is being done in my name. I reject that completely! Yes, money is taken from me to fund Israel, but I'd be jailed for refusing to donate.
There's a good reason to single out Israel. Because US has supported, funded, apologized for and protected Israel for the last 40 years, every time Israel does something stupid, like bomb Lebanon or level Gaza, it's the US that gets blamed. Those white phosphorous rounds that Israel fires at schools caused thens of thousands of young Arabs to vow death to "The Great Satan," which is not Israel but us.
There's one other reason we single out Israel. All Israel has to do to get the US involved in a major Med-East war is bomb Iran. Iran will attack Israel in return. The US will come in on Israel's side. Oil will go to $200 or $300 a barrel. Our economy (as well as that of the world) will be wrecked for the next decade. That's why we single out Israel–she is the only allegedly friendly country in the world who can get us involved in a war against our will any day she chooses.
Because our movies aren't produced by Chinese? Because guys on MSNBC like Nachman and Dan Abrams aren't omitting Chinese crimes while accusing us of bigotry? Because our news producers aren't Chinese? Because Chinese guys aren't all over our media calling us bigots while syphoning our taxes for their racist project?
I'm sure I have said this here before, but there's not gonna be any action until Obama has secured his second term. On the other hand, if he persists in this obfuscating passivity, he just might not get a second term. Then again, maybe he's waiting for Bibi-Lieberman to make the first move–such as attacking Iran.
Don't insult female gender by calling Israel a "she", please.
I am active against Palestinian Occupation because my family and nuns in my convent school have all actively helped Jews before and during the second world war and we can see scary parallels between the Third Reich in the thirties and Israel today.
Israel/Palestine is the biggest problem. The most in need of attention. And the most neglected.
Because our movies aren't produced by Chinese? Because guys on MSNBC like Nachman and Dan Abrams aren't omitting Chinese crimes while accusing us of bigotry? Because our news producers aren't Chinese? Because Chinese guys aren't all over our media calling us bigots while syphoning our taxes for their racist project?
Posted by: Mountaingoat
This is what I was trying to say.
Here's part of a comment that I left on another blog in the hope that it be approved. I believe it is relevant to this post as well.
I like how [these guys] are trying to minimize the level of political toxicity of the Israel Lobby by surreptitiously suggesting a parallel with other types of lobbies: "We try to avoid sloppy, loaded phrases like abortion lobby, gun lobby, Christian lobby or China lobby." Even with the China lobby, there IS no similarities. This lobby is like none other!
As Professor Walid Khalidi wrote in the 'Introduction' of From Haven to Conquest with regard to the historical transfer of the power centre of the Lobby from London to Washington:
See also In the shadow of "god's sun-dial"
End of quote
And that is why this struggle is occurring not only in the US, but all over the Western world: in France, in the UK, in Canada (see here as well). I'm sure the same struggle is going on in Italy, Spain, Portugal, Denmark, …
And, there's good reason to support Israel, relative to the area of the world that its in, with continuity and stability in a region noted for instability.
Democracy, free markets with a social safety net, cosmopolitan relations with Europe.
Strong economic, academic, business relations with Americans and American companies.
It deserves reform.
Most of that stated reasons in your post are embellishments, self-advertising.
Ali Abununimeh for example is all over the place with his agenda. He can't tell if he advocating for a democratic single-state, a Palestinian-dominated single-state, anti-Israel agitation, or what.
Jack Ross's post is probably the most accurate, but he also needs to do some mature thinking on what is his goal.
Your ranting about what you finally saw, also goes nowhere. You wouldn't believe the gamut of things that I've come to see over my life.
AGAIN and AGAIN, what is your goal?
It is immature for your political discussion to have ended at what you object to. That is so damn easy, and so damn selective.
You repeat and repeat about how courageous you are for taking this "risk" to your credibility for "speaking the truth".
NOBODY intelligent disputes observations that there are wrongs, even severe ones, even in lot of the ways that you present.
ANYONE intelligent disputes your vanity and political end-point.
For example, if Ali Abunimeh determined that he was PRIMARILY committed to a democratic and accepting single-state, he would then have to renounce his agitation that is focused to anti-Israel. (Sure, he would say, "why do I have to do that?"). Otherwise, his advocacy for a single-state would end up either prejudicial (false) or ineffective.
A much more mature approach gets to PURSUING something of merit, a political solution in fact, a reconciliation in fact.
The fixation approach hinders reconciliation, just as Hamas rockets elected Netanyahu. And you KNOW that they did.
Apologists for South Africa also continually said that they were being unfairly picked on. Everyone else recognised such arguments could only come from bigots.
The only purpose for the question "Why single out Israel?" is to find a permission slip for jewish colonial chauvinism.
For what its worth, I helped produce a video production yesterday by a close friend, Jewish story teller/actor, who wrote a single-person performance of a Warsaw ghetto rabbi describing the transitions in his prayer-life at five phases of the persecution.
German bombing, occupation, ghetto, resistance and counter-resistance, camp.
I imagined the experience of Gazans as similar in experience in many ways. I don't want to analyze the similarities and differences, but just to say that it was not lost on me, or on him, the universality of being a victim to relatively overwhelming military assault on individuals/communities.
It enhances my motivation for identifying and realizing peace.
The strategy implied (if the thinking ever gets there) is that external agitation will somehow motivate Israel to change in some fundamental ways (hoping that that doesn't result in a pendulum swing of abuse on Jews, which seems safe currently, but may in fact be a large and trivial gamble). The ways suggested here by Phil, Adam, Jack are unspecified, and therefore also partially ineffective.
They take the position "I'm close to the community. I know it. I have an obviously Jewish name. I'm not particularly invested in the community, so I have the credibility to the dissenting community as NOT tribal. I can expose the frailties, the inconsistencies of my own former community, my parents and siblings' current community, to those that ARE willing to harrass and condemn harshly. And, maybe I can make a brand out of it. Maybe something good will come out of it. Its a gamble, but it worked in South Africa. Maybe this is parallel."
I know that's negative.
Anti-tribal is NOT an intellectual freedom. Its still a fixation. Tribal AND loving others would be a more free approach, as it makes a life without devaluing what is close enough to know (appreciate and reject).
I'm sure that you've thought about the consequences on your attitude of the choice to not have children. For me, it was the one very large influence, that shifted the balance of appreciation/criticism of my parents strongly to the attitude of appreciation. It was the difference between my "tribal" attitude and "universal". (I now firmly and confidently regard the more apt terminology to be a contrast between "involved/invested" and "abstracted".)
Why single out Israel/Palestine? Because it poisons U.S. foreign policy comprehensively. According to a NY Times article today, 'President Obama and his national security advisers are considering expanding the American covert war in Pakistan far beyond the unruly tribal areas to strike at a different center of Taliban power in Baluchistan, where top Taliban leaders are orchestrating attacks into southern Afghanistan.'
And why is the U.S. bogged down in this hopeless Asian guerrilla war? Because the unstated aim of U.S. military strategy seems to be surrounding Iran — Israel's worst enemy — via occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan, military bases in the Soviet 'stans to the north, and in the Arabian sheikdoms to the south.
Obama is Lyndon Johnson reincarnated, but slightly better looking and more deeply pigmented. He's following Johnson's politically suicidal trajectory to a tee, surrounding himself with bright Harvard technocrats like himself (or like Robert McNamara in Johnson's day), who are leading him deeper and deeper into a debacle with no exit other than bloody defeat. Chas Freeman might have asked the right questions to prompt a rethink of this disastrous strategy, but his advice has been jettisoned.
Coupled with his reckless continuation of the Bush/Paulson model of wholesale corporate looting — which has now blown up in his face with the outrage over AIG bonuses — Obama is decisively setting himself up to be a one-term president. You read it here first.
Between killing U.S. soldiers in useless foreign wars, and handing trillions to plutocratic looters, Obama is going to be thoroughly despised before leaving office. Hell, I'll be surprised if he even makes it through the summer without riots breaking out.
Michael Neumann on "What's so bad about Israel?"
"Israel stands out among other unpleasant nations in the depth of its commitment to gratuitous violence and nastiness: this you expect to find among skinheads rather than nations. But wait! there's more! It is not just that times have changed. It also has to do with the position Israel occupies in these new times.
Though we might wish otherwise, the political or historical 'location' of a crime can be a big contributor to its moral status. It is terrible that there are vestiges of slavery in Abidjan and Mauritania. We often reproach ourselves for not getting more upset about such goings-on, as if the lives of these far-off non-white people were unimportant. And maybe we should indeed be ashamed of ourselves, but this is not the whole story. There is a difference between the survival of evil in the world's backwaters and its emergence in the world's spotlight."
http://www.counterpunch.org/neumann0706.html
I posted this on another thread and I'm going to repost here as it seems relevant:
I keep asking in different venues about how capable the Palestinians are of sustaining an economic infrastructure to support their population.
You can't have a viable state without a solid economy.
No one has answered this question. They avoid it like the plague.
That tells me that Israel, as nasty as it can be at times to Paletinians, is a red herring.
The Palestinians have a deeper, more innate problem…and that is lack of resources and organization to create a self-sustaining state.
This question needs to be asked and asked and asked until someone finally answers.
It may be time for Egypt and Jordan to absorb the territories & give these people a chance at normalization.
Sorry, but I don't think Israel is their main problem. The silence I get to my question just confirms it for me.
"Israel stands out among other unpleasant nations in the depth of its commitment to gratuitous violence and nastiness: this you expect to find among skinheads rather than nations."
When will the Jewish extremist assume his rightful place in the public imagination? Seriously, how much trouble do skinheads cause in comparison? The American settlers in Palestine are far more organized, brutish and hateful than the average skinhead, and the skinhead isn't backed by money and support networks provided by the respectable people on television asking Christians for donations every Sunday. How I long for the relatively innocent and rambunctious skinhead!
"I keep asking in different venues about how capable the Palestinians are of sustaining an economic infrastructure to support their population.
You can't have a viable state without a solid economy."
Suzanne, I can't believe that you made those statements! Israel has been dependent on outside money, materials, political cover and everything else it needed from the very beginning. Are Palestinians Israel's red herring? And let's not forget that Israel continuously destroys the Palestinian economic infrastructure (or anything else that may help Palsetinians manage on their own) with weapons provided by outsiders.
I assume you have some planned comeback for the obvious objections. I can't wait for this!
One of the commenters on Steven Walt's blog sounds like a cornered tough with his back to the wall.
He is suggesting that the West will pay dearly if it adopts a more evenhanded approach in the Middle East.
He goes on to detail the sort of spiteful havoc that Israel would cause if the West does not continue its enthusiastic support of the regime with its thoughts, words and deeds.
"The results will be immediate – intensification of conflict. Once Israeli society hardens, it will fight harder, and fight more frantically. It will pursue more aggressive regional strategies – dumb things, destabilizing things like Kurdish independence, Hashemite reconquista of the Hejaz (rightfully so, but dumb), more aggressive military alliances with SOBs in the region, or vice versa, supporting every insurgency in sight. And the punching match with Palestinians will get nasty. Then if a transfer doesn't save the Palestinians, nothing will save the Israelis. "
link to walt.foreignpolicy.com
He also suggests that Israelis have no real commitment to democracy, saying they will abandon it when the time is ripe!
He is implying that the world would be subjected to another round of, ahem, "terrorist" attacks.
Why worry about hearts and minds when blackmail will do, if we don't play their silly game we will pay.
Pragmatophiles will love it, :-), but I urge caution, as I sense an air of soulessness in the plan. :-)
I think there is such a thing as obsessively singling out Israel for attention and criticism, and this can seem to parallel that weird feature of some types of anti-semitism that sees nefarious jewry behind every bad thing that happens in the world.
However, to a significant degree Israel itself singles itself out for American attention and examination by claiming that its continued existence and safety and prosperity are really in America's vital interest too. After all you can't on the one hand say "it is in your particular national interest to help us survive and prosper!" but then on the other say "it's anti-semitism when you look at us in particular!"
If Israel wanted to be looked at less by America at least it would stop asking for all the billions we give it every year and for all the other benefits it gets from us otherwise too. You don't see too much criticism in America of Burkina Faso, but you'd sure start to see a helluva lot if Burkina Faso suddenly started asking for and getting 1/20 of what we give Israel.
Moon, I like how your Israeli uses words like reconquista, destabilization and insurgency as threats. That all sounds familiar, doesn't it?
Or more correctly, soullessness.
Todd–you have a fringe mindset, so I consider you fargone and not reliable for meaningful dialogue.
I'm going to say this for the benefit of anyone reading this, who is unfamiliar with the situation.
For one thing, Jews started building their infrastructure, as small self-sustaining farming collectives back in the 1800s. They weren't getting American money back then–but the point is, they had the organization and focus to create something out of nothing.
(now I know the usual bores are going to get stuck right there and go into red herring mode because they want to avoid the question of Palestinians in 2009. Stay on topic or don't respond)
Secondly, the Palestinians have been given lots of money for decades and have nothing to show for it.
There is only so much you can blame Israel for that. In fact, it's a cop out and does the Palestinians no favors to shift responsibility for their demise on others.
At most, Israel has taken advantage of the Pals inherent inability to self sustain themselves.
But the deeper problem that NO ONE wants to talk about (especially extremists like Todd who contribute NOTHING to the solution) is that the Pals have a huge population and no viable infrastructure to support it.
The surrounding states don't seem to have a lot of faith that a stable state can be born out of the territories.
In all likelihood, they are going to have to be absorbed one of these days. Hopefully soon.
Sin Nombre…your comments have some truthful aspects to them. But you're still denying that the haters here would still be screaming about Jews whether Israel (like many other nations) got US dollars (which it apparently pays back in good faith)
Also, you still are NOT recognizing Israel's legitimate concerns.
The reality diminishes your argument somewhat.
Suzanne, you're a ludicrous Zionist tool. How much of an economy did France have under the Nazi occupation? Likewise, how much of an economy can the Palestinians have under the Nazi Zionist occupation?
Face it, Zionism is a pathological racist ideology of Jewish Supremacism. The United States has unfortunately supported this psychopathy with money and weapons for over forty years.
Fundamentally, Israel is completely illegitimate. It has no more right to exist than Hitler had a "right" to carry out the Holocaust.
It would be best if the Zionist invaders simply went home. Since that's unlikely to happen, it's time to treat Israel like a normal country, and impose a South African style one-state solution.
Why? See:
http://www.counterpunch.org/roberts03182009.html
Paul Craig Roberts says "Conservatives" where I would say "Neo-Conservatives," because I do agree with Phil that the political poles are realigning in the U.S.–if only the "news" conglomerates and "our" "representatives would realize it.
You disappoint me, Suzanne! Israelis claiming that Palestinians should not have a state of their own because the Palestinians are supposedly incapable of governing their political or economic affairs, while under constant attack or forced supervision by Israel, is almost funny! Israel is soooo not self-reliant, and it isn't being managed or bullied by anyone.
And Israel does not pay back "loans" or anything else in good faith or otherwise!
Suzanne, my views may not be typical, but they aren't complete bullshit, either!
Actually, that "fringe mindset" who Suzanne consider "unreliable for meaningful dialogue"(oh my god – what a complete ass) Todd – answered all of the rhetorical questions and silly comments posed in her reply in his post.
Which diminished your argument somewhat, Suzanne.
I'd just add that none of what you consider the 'smarter' group seem to not want to bother because you don't seem particularly clever yourself honey.
"I keep asking in different venues about how capable the Palestinians are of sustaining an economic infrastructure to support their population."
And nobody answers your stupid question because it is based on the second great Zionist fraud. The first one was the "peopless land". Remember that? Peopless?:
http://lawrenceofcyberia.blogs.com/news/2009/01/a-land-without-a-people.html
The second great Zionist canard is the equivalency hoax. That is, positing that Israel and the state of its economy (for instance) is equivalent to the Occupied territories. And on that basis, we declare the Palestinians a failure, economic, moral, political.
But Suzanne, honey, the Occupied Territories, Gaza, Left Bank, Sanai, have been under an illegal military occupation by Israel for over forty years! And did we mention theencroachment by Israeli settlers (and I'm using "Israeli" to be kind. "Jewish" would, in this case actually be more accurate)?
Or are you going to tell us frumah Suzanne, that the Israelis have done all this, the sealed borders, the checkpoints, the roads, you name it, for the benefit of the Palestinians? Sure, that makes a whole lot of sense.
Nobody answers your question, Suzanne, because it's dishonest and stupid.
But wasn't there a time when Germans and other Europeans looked at the Jews they had confined in ghettoes, and condemned them for an inferior people, based on the results of living in ghettoes?
But don't let that bother you, Suzanne. Jewish history really just started in 1967, and everything in Jewish history not ratified, made up or propounded by Israel is false, we know.
As Thom very accurately pointed out in another thread, I am a miserably failed comic. You know why, Suzanne? I could never change my schtick. Don't let that happen to you, Suzanne.
"just as Hamas rockets elected Netanyahu."
At any rate, we know one guy who has launched into outer space! Richard, Quassams can't be aimed. There is no way you can get one to fly into Israel and come down on the Netanyahoo lever. It would take a very,very sophisticated guidance system the Palestinians do not possess.
And you Know it's true! So there!
For one thing, Jews started building their infrastructure, as small self-sustaining farming collectives back in the 1800s. They weren't getting American money back then–but the point is, they had the organization and focus to create something out of nothing.
No, they stole the land through terror tactics:
And the area was a British Protectorate. Without the help and cooperation of the colonial masters of the area (Who the ZIonists turned on, naturally enough, it's a rough business, this colonial settlment gig. Remember the Stern Gang and the King David Hotel?)
And please prove, or substantiate in any way, your contention that the early Zionists came there to "nothing". Or do you expect bigotry against Arabs to do that for you?
Forgot a link, sorry
They stole the land through terror tactics:
http://lawrenceofcyberia.blogs.com/news/2009/01/a-land-without-a-people.html
Do you claim the British Colonial Administration report in this posting is forged, Suzanne?
Suzanne: I keep asking in different venues about how capable the Palestinians are of sustaining an economic infrastructure to support their population.
From what I can tell, it seems that Palestine was doing just fine without any outside help, thank you, before Israel came into the picture.
Israel likes to single itself out. The World's Only Jewish State. The Middle East's Only Democracy. The Special Relationship.
"I'd just add that none of what you consider the 'smarter' group seem to not want to bother because you don't seem particularly clever yourself honey."
I'm new enough around here, and stupid enough, I guess, to still be shocked at what Zionist supporters ("supporters" only. "Yes, but you don't go!) will say in print.
If ignoring them, leaving their statements alone to testify to their beliefs, is the preferred method, please let me know.
"If ignoring them, leaving their statements alone to testify to their beliefs, is the preferred method, please let me know."
You seemed to be enjoying yourself, so have at it.
Suzanne, meet Mooser. Mooser, meet Suzanne.
Mooser,
The British assumed power in 1918, when the Austria/Germany/Turkey alliance was defeated (abandoned) in WW1. The land was divided per the Sykes/Picot agreementa assigning a sphere of influence over Lebanon/Syria to France, and Palestine/Jordan/Egypt to Great Britain.
In the late 1890's, Turkey was in power. Get it?
I think both sides would make more progress if they acknowledged that the extremists of both factions should not define the debate. Though one has to take into account how much that 'extreme' view is part of the mainstream mindset, it should still be those willing to compromise who should lead the negotiations.
That being said, so-called 'moderates' cannot also trade away someone else's rights.
See, that's what I mean. You bring up a perfectly reasonable question–like whether the Palestinians are in any position to run a state (as opposed to an orange grove enterprise in the Ottoman Palestine region)
–and you get met with hysterics and rants about 1918, 1948, 1967–nothing to do with NOW.
People are avoiding this issue because they do not know for sure, just as I don't–whether Palestinians have the means to sustain their own state.
I'm asking an objective question–so get out of your nasty militant mindset for 5 minutes. Thank you.
And PS…it is conceivable that this warring continues precisely because the Palestinians are not prepared to produce a working economic infrastructure.
It's a question that needs to be explored objectively once and for all.
Yes Richard, the Turks were in power in the 1890s in Palestine. So what? Yes, that's about when organised Zionism got started, but the significant events took place later, culminating in 1948.
Or am I supposed to be happy because the ZIonists stole a march on the Ottoman empire? That'll show 'em. The main point, as it was to the Zionists, was that the political situation was out of the hands of the locals, and there was enough room for them to minipulate.
But I congratulate the eaqrly Zionists for daring the wrath of the sick man of Europe. Or something, okay?
"It's a question that needs to be explored objectively once and for all."
Okay, Frumah Suzanne, let's do that. Why don't you start by giving us examples of economies which have thrived under forty years of military occupation, moreover a military occupation which includes collective punishment and so many other violations of the regulations for even that reduced status? Got a bunch for us?
And please, Suzanne, if it's not first, the nakba and second the occupation, what exactly is wrong with those awful Palestinians? Are you telling us that Israel is occupying them for their own good.
That tells me that Israel, as nasty as it can be at times to Paletinians, is a red herring.
Suzanne, I'm sorry for hassling you aboyut the moronic question you keep bringing up about the Palestinian's abilities as human beings. I see you have already answered the question, last night after I left.
"The Palestinians have a deeper, more innate problem…and that is lack of resources and organization to create a self-sustaining state.
This question needs to be asked and asked and asked until someone finally answers.
It may be time for Egypt and Jordan to absorb the territories & give these people a chance at normalization."
So basically, you are a "transfer" enthusiast. And no doubt, you will be moving to Israel to assist in the logistics of the transfer, maybe loading the boxcars or something. Cause if there is one thing we know about Zionist supporters, they have the courage of their convictions. So long Suzanna, ship me a bottle of Sanai Sand.
Same thing here as at Salon! Literally hundreds of comments patiently, lovingly, carefully explaining the facts to the Hasbara addicts, and come back the next morning, and they [pick up right where they left off, having listened to nothing, conceded nothing, admitted nothing and learned nothing.
And they descend into accusations of anti-Semitism and "false consciousness" at the drop of a yamulke.
And then the next morning, here they are fresh and dewy, with breathless plans for new atrocities!
But don't you like my plan about transferring the territories to Jordan? Why not? Listen, just say it over to yourself, and grasp that feeling of omnipotence and omniscience as you dispose of hundreds of thousands of people on the other side of the world. Oh, go ahead, don't feel bad, it's your due! Take this, you lousy Poles, for all those pogroms!
Just completely freaks me out! What is going through their heads? Gosh, I hope they aren't near any tattoo shops!
You bring up a perfectly reasonable question–like whether the Palestinians are in any position to run a state (as opposed to an orange grove enterprise in the Ottoman Palestine region)
Remember how up until just a relatively few years ago, in many European countries there were certain permissible and impermissible trades or occupations for Jews. And I used to get upset about stuff like that! Silly me! Of course, they were only doing it for our own good! They had an "objective discussion" and decided which trades and occupations Jews should be in.
It's only natch'erl we should extend the same courtesy to the Palestinians! And really, folks, have you ever seen the Palestinian who is capable of "objectivity" Ha! It is to laugh!
In the set of pictures I (and Mooser) linked to above, you gotta love the last picture, after the massacres and destruction are over. Two smiling Israeli women with their children, dressed up in their Sabbath best, walk past bombed out buildings towards their new homes and new lives in freshly ethnically-cleansed Jaffa. So heartwarming and inspiring. I can almost smell the ethnic cleanliness.
Gosh, I was so expecting Suzanne to come back with a reference to a book called "Twenty Sucessful, Fast-growing Economies Established Under Long, Illegal Occupations" or Maybe "Collective Punishment, Your Key to Economic Growth" or even maybe "The Nazi Economic Miracle in Eastern Europe During WW2, A Model For the Palestinians?"
Not to mention all the wonderful personal qualities Suzanne manifests in her reasoning.
My all pupose Hasbara post:
"First of all, let me say that Israel Rocks! And if you don't think so, anti-semitism! And yopu're not a good Jew! And you must admit, Arabs Suck, suck suck suck, maybe they can grow and orange, but not much more. You don't agree? oh and ANTI-SEMITISM!!! You're no Jew at all! Well, let me tell you something, You Suck! You have faults, You're not perfect! (And admit, aren't you a little bit anti-semitic?) And what have you done for the Jews, lately! Hah! Okay, okay sure, but you have to admit, there's no denying The Whole World Sucks, and Israel has the right to Suck just as much, except that really Israel Rocks, and you better watch that anti-semitism…."
And around and around we go. And with people who don't even live there, have no intention of sharing the consequences, and every expectation of being able to get out in time, if the knish hits the fan.
http://jewssansfrontieres.blogspot.com/2008/07/how-to-make-case-for-israel-and-win.html
Actually, I really do have to hand some kind of prize to the guy at Salon who kept on calling me, because I did not agree with his Zionist tenets a "Judas"! A "Judas", can you dig that?
Jeez, I'm gonna get that poor guy killed one way or the other, huh. Sorry, Jesus.
Suzy, Suzy, where are you Suzy? I thought we were going to have an objective discussion on the benefits of illegal occupation to the economy of sub-humans? Suzy, you aren't leaving now, are you?
Crap! Suzanne left me flat, gave me the air, handed me the mitten! And I was all set to start working on that declining birth-rate.
Suzanne, Suzanne! Come back to me! Together you and I could de-fuse the Palestinian Demographic Time Bomb and all the while making the most beautiful kinds music of the spheres.
For God's sake, Suzanne, that Demographic TYime Bomb is ticking! Can't you hear it, even over the ardent beating of my heart?
Boom! Too late, Suzzila, too late!
Great post! And to be a little redundant with other posts raised:
"What bewilders me is that so many critics attack viciously the critical singling out of Israel by the divestment campaign, but are actively supportive of singling out Israel as a special ally and worthy recipient of disproportionately high arms, aid, and trade. This is a contradiction because clearly one's biggest ally and paraded model 'light among nations' should be held to an extent of scrutiny commensurate with the favoritism bestowed upon it.
Harvard Law professor Alan Dershowitz is one of the most avid purveyors of this contradiction. In a piece he published in the Harvard Crimson (9/23/2002), he charges divestment supporters with singling out Israel, then goes on to start three paragraphs with sentences that start with 'Israel is the only' to demonstrate its benevolence."
From my 2002 article, 'Israel's Singles Night Out'
http://counterpunch.org/youmans1025.html
Palestinians are not allowed to export anything of value or volume.
Importing is tricky: They are used as a captured market for inferior and second class Israeli goods, but raw materials and equipment and spare parts are subject to kafkaesque permit system and an inevitable surcharge not to mention months of delays.
Inability to transport anything anywhere, inability to rely on labour due to travel restrictions and curfews, loss of endless hours a day in checkpoints and endless hours per day in permit obtaining for each economically active adult may have something to do with economy faltering.
This state of affairs is of course deliberate and part of grand Israeli strategy in the Occupied Territories.
But then you knew that all along, didn't you, Suzanne? You were just voicing hasbara talking point no 2 "they suck".
Fanatic Mooser– first off, I'm not for any kind of transfer. I'm arguing for the absorption of the territories by Egypt and Jordan. Not likely at this minute, but probably the best hope for the Palestinians. A loose autonomous confederacy.
Secondly, I'm not going to get into some bickering match with you about whether Israel stifled the Palestinians economic development. Given that Palestinians have mainly outsourced themselves to Israel and other nearby states in all this time, your argument is pure speculation–and not proveable. Nor does it provide any solution.
People who insist on arguing the past, are doing it I suspect, because they are denying the inevitable…the Pals are not capable enough at this time to run a state.
They've been given all sorts of money over the years and STILL they are politically fractionalized and have no infrastructure to support their population.
And guess what? they are going to opt for the status quo until collectively they decide building an infrastructure is more important than Islamic Jihad or pushing Israel into the sea.
Those are the tangible facts, fanatic Mooser, but you seem more intent on looking at Israel than changing the Palestinians internal situation.
You don't sound like you're into self-responsibility–more into blaming an oppressor. That is weak thinking–and it's never solved anybody's problem.
Next!