Comments on: Mondo Exclusive – Gambling with Conflict: How a neocon casino king from California funds the Israeli settler movement

By: JES49

JES49 — Sat, 06 Jun 2009 09:07:28 +0000

Sarah, you might want to take a look at this: " target="_blank">http://www.rova-yehudi.org.il/en/atar-acharon.asp

By: JES49

JES49 — Sat, 06 Jun 2009 07:33:40 +0000

Well tree, in addition to being a master debater, you appear to be a master redactor. You quote approximately 100 words, out of context, from a 3,500 word document and claim that this is the purpose of the entire plan! Let me qoute to you what the military objective of the the plan is: The objective of this plan is to gain control of the areas of the Hebrew state and defend its borders. It also aims at gaining control of the areas of Jewish settlement and concentration which are located outside the borders [of the Hebrew state] against regular, semi-regular, and small forces operating from bases outside or inside the state. The plan is also not a plan for "ethnic cleansing". Nowhere does it say that those expelled from their homes would be prevented from returning after the hostilities ended. That would have been a political decision and this was a purely military plan. I suggest you read the text of "Plan Dalet" in its entirety. I think it would be interesting if someone would provide the Arab military plan for the same period!

By: JES49

JES49 — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 19:30:42 +0000

I think that it is perfectly clear from the public statements of the Arab leaders that "ethnic cleansing" was their objective. As such, it was perhaps (particularly given the time) a reasonable wartime objective. So, no, I don't have a double standard. It's just that the Arab side doesn't get any extra points for being feckless!

By: JES49

JES49 — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 15:55:53 +0000

My point is, tree, that the children and grandchildren of Jewish refugees are not refugees, and therefore do not have the right to return to Germany under international law. If Germany wants to give them citizenship, then more power to them. But that is an internal, German issue and not a matter of international law! And, tree, you have chosen to ignore completely the case of Russian Jews who are admitted to Germany and given substantial grants simply because they are Jews and without any regard to where there ancestors came from. I would think that this is a case of discriminating on the basis of "religion", as you say, although I prefer the term ethnicity.

By: Jacobwolfen

Jacobwolfen — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 23:27:00 +0000

Which is why Jordan and saudi Arabia do not consider themselves to be democracies. But that has nothing to do with Israel. CALL YOUR REPS AND ASK THEM TO CUT OFF AID TO KATHLEEN.

By: _Sarah_

_Sarah_ — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 20:24:14 +0000

There's two of them in that page. They're near the bottom of the section with photos. It just requires a little patience (and an absence of making assumptions) to find them. There's also some other pictures of Jewish paramilitaries expelling Palestinians from their homes. There is also a chronology of the events of the expulsion of Palestinians by Jewish paramilitaries.

By: tree_

tree_ — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 19:42:44 +0000

I looked at the stated purpose of Plan Dalet. You claimed that it " was designed in response to the sieges and attempts at ethnic cleansing on the part of the Arabs." I pointed out that the stated purpose of Plan Dalet does not match your claim, as it makes no differentiation between those areas that included Jewish residents and those that didn't. If it was merely instigated 'in response" to fears of ethnic cleansing of Jews, then there would be a differentiation in the language and treatment of areas where Jews were at risk and where they were not, but there is none. The stated aim of Plan Dalet sounds reasonable, but the destruction of villages and the refusal to let the villagers return after the hostilities were over is strong proof that the intention was something other than merely a military wartime objective. (and also the fact that the destruction and expulsions continued well AFTER the war was over is yet more proof of bad intention.) Since you believe that the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians from their residences was a reasonable wartime objective then I guess I can assume that you considered what you called "attempts at ethnic cleansing" by Arabs was likewise a reasonable wartime objective. Or do you have a double standard when it comes to the actions of Jews and non-Jewish Arabs? My original point was that for you to claim that someone 'simply fled" when the alternative was likely death was unfeeling, petty and cruel on your part, and that if someone flees for their life AND THEN IS BARRED FROM EVER RETURNING then there really is no difference between that and being expelled. You seem to be belittling the Palestinians for doing the same things that you would defend when Jews did them.

By: tree_

tree_ — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 19:13:12 +0000

So your point is that Jews that can prove that their immediate ancestors were Germans can not and should not be allowed to return to Germany if they wish? And this should ban should apply to all Jews who's ancestors came from Europe? Because that is what you are advocating.

By: tree_

tree_ — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 19:08:53 +0000

You "suggested" that the Palestinians are asking for something that Jews never asked for, i.e. a right of return and compensation. My point was and is that you are totally wrong on this. Jews did ask for a right of return to countries they were forced to leave and they have been granted it. And they did ask for compensation and to some extent some of them, or organizations claiming to represent them, have received compensation. Do you just write things and then forget what you wrote? To remind you: "And yes, I am aware that the overwhelming majorit of German Jews who left pre-WWII Germany simply fled. They also have not demanded a "Right of Return". That's all I'm suggesting." I posted this statement of yours ahead of my response so there could be no confusion about what I was responding to. But still you are "confused"? Maybe you need to pay more attention to what you write, and then you would understand my responses better. "As for Israeli Jews (actually all Jews who can prove that their immediate ancestors were German citizens) German immigration law does this for all ethnic Germans, not just Jews. " A fine example of not discriminating on the basis of religion. In Israel, Jews are allowed to "return" to Israel purely on the basis of Jewish ancestry and not on any prior ancestors from what is now Israel. And Palestinians, who can prove prior ancestry or even in some cases prior residence for themselves as well as their ancestors, are denied any right of return. Again, Jews from Germany have been granted a right of return, Palestinians have not been granted such a right in Israel. That is the difference, not a difference in desires or demands as you incorrectly claimed.

By: RowanBerkeley

RowanBerkeley — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 14:12:44 +0000

Nastasia, I enjoyed that. I must say, I wouldn't have thrived under "Marxism-Leninism." I think it's a great pity Marx didn't stick to economics, because if he was right about the rate of profit necessarily falling with increasing industrialisation (which in a nutshell is what Das Kapital is actually saying), then it would have been much better to have explained that in simple language (as I often try to do) and to have left all the amateur anthropology strictly alone. Engels was even worse in this respect. I'm in favour of enormously talented and good-looking Jewesses, though. I'm even in favour of Rosa Luxemburg, who was certainly talented, and a lot more sensible than Lenin, though it's hard to call her good-looking. Incidentally, she didn't understand the theory of the falling rate of profit either: she thought it was just a matter of demand deficiency, but it isn't.