History and Hebron

Israel/Palestine
on 286 Comments
hebronandhistory
History and Hebron (Hebron photo credit: Michael Ratner)

Of course in Germany the stars were placed to discourage if not end commerce to a Jewish shop; in Hebron they are placed to assert the closing of a Palestinian store and its “ownership” by the Jews of Hebron. In both cases the stars are painted by the oppressors.

286 Responses

  1. potsherd
    January 9, 2010, 12:35 pm

    I believe that in Nazi Germany there were also swastikas painted on Jewish shops, which makes the comparison a perfect one.

  2. yonira
    January 9, 2010, 12:54 pm

    its tough to tell where the photo-shopping begins and ends in this picture.

    Another classless post by Michael Ratner…

    • VR
      January 9, 2010, 1:28 pm

      Boy you have quite a file building yonira, so the next time you give the retort “what did I support,” people will need lots of storage to warehouse your ceaseless bullshit.

      • yonira
        January 9, 2010, 1:42 pm

        I don’t support shit like that picture above, put that #1 on your list VR

      • yonira
        January 9, 2010, 1:45 pm

        VR, do you support misleading pictures which are not factual and misleading the public at large?

        thats a silly question, I looked at your blog, that seems to be your MO.

      • VR
        January 9, 2010, 1:57 pm

        I know, you would rather support the murderous colonials in Hebron, with their racist agenda. You need to get out more yonira, I have seen these with my own eyes and have witnessed the activity of these asses with full government support.

      • sammy
        January 9, 2010, 2:14 pm

        @ yonira: what is your point of contention? Hebron is famous for such grafitti. If you search flickr for Hebron+”star of david”, you will find many such examples. Jews for justice for Palestinians have even done a photo essay on it here:
        link to jfjfp.com
        That picture of Hebron could be Shuhada street which has been almost abandoned due to harassment by Jewish settlers

        The German picture is available here:
        link to einsatzgruppenarchives.com

      • yonira
        January 9, 2010, 2:21 pm

        My point of contention is the super-imposed picture of a Nazi soldier along w/ a German sign.

        Equating Naziism with Israel in my opinion(and also the opinion of many in the Jewish community) is antisemitism.

        I didn’t notice the gray stripe down the middle in the original post picture, is that new or are my emotions getting the best of me again? It wouldn’t be the first time that a post has changed w/ out it being noted by the author, it also wouldn’t be the first time that I missed something as obvious as that.

      • sammy
        January 9, 2010, 2:27 pm

        This is not a superimposed picture. The left one is that of the German boycott of Jewish stores in 1933. The right one is of a street in Hebron, which is occupied by a few hundred Jewish settlers who along with the IDF harass the resident Palestinians. There is also grafitti which says “Gas the Arabs” and “Mavet La`Aravim” which I understand means “death to arabs”.

      • Cliff
        January 9, 2010, 2:41 pm

        Why is it antisemitism?

        What is antisemitism to you?

        Zionists (or at least, right-wing Zionists) often use the term Islamo-Nazi. Phil himself has said ‘Jihadi’ – plenty of these terms are Neocon/Zionist lingo.

        So is the latter antisemitic too? Islamo-Nazi?

      • potsherd
        January 9, 2010, 2:44 pm

        yonira, if the Israelis don’t want their activities compared to Nazis, they should stop acting like Nazis. Using the “antisemitism” line is only denial, refusal to see the truth.

      • yonira
        January 9, 2010, 2:45 pm

        yes Mavet La Aravim is death to Arabs,

        I find these settler’s actions, and settlers as a whole, for the most part, as disgusting as you find them.

        There are some settlers who are settlers for the sake of convenience and for that I can not blame them, but they will need to be dealt with in the future. I hope they are ready to move their family and their livelihood for the sake of peace. Many will be willing, but many more will not.

      • yonira
        January 9, 2010, 2:47 pm

        Yeah, it makes me cringe when I hear it. The Nazis hold a special place in history which nothing should be compared to.

        The comparison is used too much and too freely on here and within neocon/zionist (not the same at all by the way, I consider myself a zionist but in no way a neocon) circles.

      • sammy
        January 9, 2010, 2:58 pm

        Then you’d best avoid Israel. There the Haredim call the women who want to pray at the wall “Nazis”
        link to haaretz.com

      • VR
        January 9, 2010, 3:06 pm

        “Equating Naziism with Israel in my opinion(and also the opinion of many in the Jewish community) is antisemitism. ”

        That is par for the course for you yonira, and is the attempt to extract Israel from committing the same atrocities as the Nazis. It does not matter to me if it is attached to some bogus assessment which a group of murderous Zionists try to employ – the parallels go way beyond merely this. Denial is not a form of argument nor a defense for these activities in Hebron and quite frankly employed by this state as a matter of course –

        IDENTIFYING

      • potsherd
        January 9, 2010, 3:28 pm

        The photos tell the truth, yonira. The shoe fits.

      • yonira
        January 9, 2010, 3:35 pm

        The Haredim are one(small) step below the settlers in my book.

      • yonira
        January 9, 2010, 3:36 pm

        what did I deny exactly VR?

      • potsherd
        January 9, 2010, 4:09 pm

        Were you not denying the authenticity of the photos, yonira?

      • Oscar
        January 9, 2010, 4:39 pm

        “Equating Naziism with Israel in my opinion(and also the opinion of many in the Jewish community) is antisemitism.”

        Norm Finkelstein says: THE GRANDCHILDREN OF HOLOCAUST SURVIVORS FROM WORLD WAR II ARE DOING TO THE PALESTINIANS EXACTLY WHAT WAS DONE TO THEM BY NAZI GERMANY…

        link to normanfinkelstein.com

        Sometimes, yonira, hard-core Zionists have to be shocked into understanding that the IDF conduct in Palestine represents a great crime against humanity, and as an enlightened generation, when the word “never again” are uttered, it means “never again to anyone.”

      • yonira
        January 9, 2010, 4:52 pm

        Norman Finkelstein has been ostracized by much of the Jewish community for saying things exactly like that.

        I agree the IDF has done and continues to do horrible things, but to say they are doing the EXACT same thing as Nazi Germany is irresponsible.

      • Cliff
        January 9, 2010, 5:02 pm

        I don’t understand.

        The IDF doesn’t have to kill 6 million people.

        There are plenty of Israeli soldiers who behave like Nazis. Settlers too. You don’t even need the analogy. You can just say they are psychotic.

        The Goldstone Report is full of horror stories documenting this behavior.

        I agree, it’s insulting – but to the Palestinians. I’ve used the analogy though, because it’s just a way to vent and express your angst against an entity you regard – basically – as being ‘evil’.

        Even though, if I’m in a more sober state of mind, I’d say they aren’t ‘evil’ but they have done ‘evil’ things. And that individuals are certainly that way.

        I’d probably sound like Witty in this specific context, but it’s important to be accurate because how the IDF is, as simply the IDF is bad enough.

        We don’t need the Nazi analogy – the IDF and the Palestinians have their own relationship of Oppressor-Oppressed.

        And there is plenty of documentation of IDF crimes, etc. We should focus on illustrating their crimes I suppose – rather than frame it through lens of the Holocaust (Nazi/Hitler/etc.).

        But in the end I do see the parallel, because it’s basically saying both groups are fascists/racists/etc.

      • potsherd
        January 9, 2010, 5:05 pm

        The treatment of Finkelstein is a mark of shame. It is another example of the way so many members of the “Jewish community” will turn on their own rather than face the truth about Israel.

      • yonira
        January 9, 2010, 5:14 pm

        Being critical of Israel is one thing, but saying Nazism and Zionism are the EXACT same is what gets him in to trouble with ‘his own.’

      • Julian
        January 9, 2010, 6:30 pm

        Hebron is famous for the ethnic cleansiing of the Jewish community by Arab racists in 1929. I’m sure the good people living there now only want to prevent it from happening again.

      • potsherd
        January 9, 2010, 7:12 pm

        I’m sure no one believes such bullshit.

      • Donald
        January 9, 2010, 8:11 pm

        B”eing critical of Israel is one thing, but saying Nazism and Zionism are the EXACT same is what gets him in to trouble with ‘his own.’”

        I don’t like some of Finkelstein’s rhetoric and wish people wouldn’t use the Nazi comparison –there are innumerable examples of racists in history one could use and I think the South African one is accurate enough, but genocide on the scale the Nazis used is a pretty rare event and the Israelis aren’t close to being in that league.

        That said, I don’t think that’s the main reason Finkelstein is ostracized. The inappropriate use of Nazi comparisons isn’t exactly unknown in Jewish circles—people link Palestinian terrorism to them all the time and the antisemitism rhetorical bombshell is used even more often. And others misuse Nazi comparisons–Bush = Hitler, Obama = Hitler, etc…. It’s over-the-top, but it’s just part of post WWII culture in the West–if you think someone is bad you call him a Nazi and if the person really does engage in Nazi-like practices (on a much smaller scale), people even feel justified doing it.

        I think Finkelstein is ostracized mainly because he tells the truth about Israeli crimes, without pulling any punches as people commonly do in the US and the truth is pretty ugly. The inappropriate Nazi comparison is just icing on the cake.

      • Shingo
        January 9, 2010, 9:45 pm

        “Hebron is famous for the ethnic cleansiing of the Jewish community by Arab racists in 1929. ”

        False.

        The jewsish popualtino was removed by the British, not the Palestinians, but I’m happy to see that you accept that ethnic cleansing is rascist.

      • Mooser
        January 10, 2010, 1:22 pm

        The Nazis hold a special place in history “which nothing should be compared to…

        Yonira, if you think you can control what people compare things to, you really need to cut down on the ziocaine. How do you propose to stop them from making these comparisons? Make a law? Yeah, that’ll be good for the Jews.
        But it certainly must be acknowledged that the euphoric feeling that you can control what people think is one that no other drug can give you. Oh, sometimes you get it as a by-product of psychopathy or schizophrenia.

        Sorta like you constantly commenting, when your every comment is the best testimony against you; none of them originate in Israel!

        Besides, Yoni, ziocaine will ruin your complexion.

        But I can’t help but notice that as soon as someone calls themself a Zionist supporter, they assume they can tell others how to think. Good luck with that Yoni.

      • Citizen
        January 10, 2010, 3:32 pm

        To never compare (even if not fully analogous) any regime’s activities to those
        made famous by the Nazi regime, to make it unique forever, is to assume
        there is no slippery slope to any state activity. Those that do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it–any one with a decent dose of world history right up to the present realizes that history never repeats itself exactly in the same manner. Time and place change, and smart tyrants adapt to their present. They push the envelope according to the humidity they are dealing with–
        If, yonira, you think the Nazi analogy is used to liberally on this blog, do you simultaneously concede that it is NEVER used by USA government officials, either elected or appointed, nor by the MSM in the USA?

      • Citizen
        January 10, 2010, 3:39 pm

        Correx: If, yonira, you think the Nazi analogy is used TOO liberally on this blog…”

        PS: The Nazi boycott of Jewish shops was reactive to “World Jewry’s” prior call for international boycott of Germany–proclaimed in giant banners in mainline newspapers around the world. Food for thought. BDS has a history
        of influencing change. It’s a non-violent tool; whether you agree with any particular application of it now or in the past, or not, seems a question of
        political bias, no?

      • Citizen
        January 11, 2010, 5:16 pm

        SO, yonira, you believe that Nazis were and are not human?And so no activity of any any other human group should be compared with the abnormal Nazi humans activity? I guess you think Nazis were born on Mars? You need to get off your sci-fi mentality.

  3. Richard Witty
    January 9, 2010, 1:06 pm

    I think this one makes a point actually.

    Not a parallel, but a contrast.

    But, the nazi picture is one of formal and compulsory institutionalization of bigotry. The Hebron picture is one of the result of hooliganism. You could call it fascist, but the parellel is childish and insulting.

    • AM
      January 9, 2010, 1:24 pm

      What dimension do you live in Richard? Do you not think that the settlers in Hebron are honestly NOT there due to formal procedures taken by the government? I suppose there are no institutions (*cough* NY Mets hosting Hebron Fund *cough*) supporting these people and they are simply hooligans – unruly, cruel, and acting out of the norms of others who do not want to cause violence or trouble. Do you like that term because it quietly implies that the ‘other’ part of settlers are not hooligans either?

      Are you purposely trying to twist information, or are you so warped that you can’t help but truly see is that way?

      • VR
        January 9, 2010, 1:31 pm

        AM, witty is our resident Eichmann. A family man with a heart of gold who likes killing off Palestinians, and ostensibly brain dead.

    • lyn117
      January 9, 2010, 4:31 pm

      If Israel didn’t have formalized and institutionalized bigotry, it would allow the Palestinian refugees to return and be compensated, per UN resolution 194. Nor would it have confiscated so much of the West Bank, both privately owned and public land, for the purpose of Jewish-only settlements and Jewish-only roads. Not to mention most of “green-line” Israel. Nor would it have institutionalized discrimination against Palestinian residence in East Jerusalem.

    • Shingo
      January 9, 2010, 9:46 pm

      “‘But, the nazi picture is one of formal and compulsory institutionalization of bigotry”‘

      The right of return for Jews and not Paelstinians proves that Israel does have formal and compulsory institutionalization of bigotry.

    • Psychopathic god
      January 10, 2010, 11:56 am

      so — this same Israel police state that is held up to Americans as an exemplar of how to keep air travel absolutely, squeaky-clean secure, THAT Israel is incapable of policing its own “hooligans”?

    • Citizen
      January 10, 2010, 3:51 pm

      I don’t think the parallel is childish or insulting. I do agree that the state-sponsorship
      of boycott (again a reaction to “World Jewry’s” call for boycott of the new German fascist regime) is a tad more than the indirect Israeli regime support of “hooliganism.”
      Again, every new tyrannical regime must adapt to current circumstances. The Shrub regime did that, and so Obama is doing. One small example, the debate over what is “torture”? Witty raises form over substance–the substance is the reality of living
      in Nazi Germany or modern day Israel. There’s no gas ovens in Israel, or even in its occupied lands–times have changed; PR is important post Nuremberg. OTH, the year or so old GAZA turkey shoot is an event you can see–I wonder how many Americans even know that US (National Guard yet) troops helped Israel to shoot the turkeys easily by closing off the tunnels? How many Americans even know that right now, for example Kansas National Guard troops are patrolling the Egyptian border at Israel’s request? I’d say it’s pretty childish and insulting not to recognize
      what is being done to the Palestinians by the USA and Israel.

  4. wondering jew
    January 9, 2010, 2:58 pm

    The Zionist Nazi analogy for the nth time. There are rare occasions when real discovery is accomplished by those investigating the analogy. But most of the time it is merely an occasion for getting the Amen chorus to say, “Amen.”

    • tree
      January 9, 2010, 3:29 pm

      More attempts at gatekeeping. If you have a sound argument why the analogy is not valid then bring it. Simply attempting to shut down an analogy that makes you uncomfortable is not adding anything to the discussion at all, but merely an attempt at inhibiting it. Your point has also been heard for the nth time.

    • VR
      January 9, 2010, 3:29 pm

      So WJ when does it become invalid to display the truth? When the parallels are so striking? It is not an empty exercise.

      When I was a young child I swore to the Never Again, and I swore to it in a universal sense, for everyone. When does it merely become an invalid exercise to display the truth about the Holocaust? Never.

      All you are doing is extending, in another setting what many are told – “do not compare.” What will happen when we compare? That the same atrocities are occurring.

      It does not matter to me if you and the Zionist contingency put an extended office in the executive branch of the US government which declares it is antisemitic to compare what the Israelis are doing to the Palestinians with what the Nazis did to us. I do not care if it is codified into law, bring on the trial and we will see what happens.

      Your post is spurious and self-serving nonsense WJ, just like all of your other equally motivated posts.

      • Richard Witty
        January 9, 2010, 3:47 pm

        Good commitment “Never Again. To Anyone. And Not by My Hand”.

        I state it in the few demonstrations that I attend. Join me VR.

        Watch out for pendulum swinging (oppressing in the name of fighting oppression).

      • Chaos4700
        January 9, 2010, 3:49 pm

        Says the guy who endorses the siege of Gaza.

      • Richard Witty
        January 9, 2010, 5:48 pm

        I endorse the ending of the siege of Gaza, but criticize the manner that “direct action” dissenters think that that will occur.

      • Donald
        January 9, 2010, 8:14 pm

        Richard, unless you’ve changed your position in the past few weeks you support what you think of as the right of Israel to impose the siege and claim it is legitimate in war and you only want the siege lifted if an international body ensures that no weapons make it in. (Not a condition you would dream of imposing on Israel, of course). So you support the siege and want it lifted only if your conditions are met. And you get all upset at the mere mention of anything resembling a boycott, no matter how trivial, on Israel.

      • Shingo
        January 9, 2010, 9:48 pm

        “‘Watch out for pendulum swinging (oppressing in the name of fighting oppression). “‘

        It’s already happened, when Jewish immogrants wen’t to Palestine. You must have missed it.

      • Richard Witty
        January 9, 2010, 10:13 pm

        I think it is rational for Israel to control its borders, and that it is legal for Israel to maintain a blockade against a power that declares itself at war with Israel short and long-term, and actively attacks Israeli civilians.

        I think the condition of siege can be changed by some voluntary relaxation of border crossings by Israel and Egypt, and by some international management of the Gaza port.

        The steps to resolution in both the short and long term are clear. For Hamas, reconciliation and political submission to the rule of the Palestinian Authority and Palestinian Constitution, including cessation of arresting Fatah representatives undertaking lawful political activities.

        I have not heard a boycott proposal here yet that wasn’t an expression of collective punishment against Israelis in general, in the name of opposing collective punishment.

      • Shingo
        January 9, 2010, 10:30 pm

        Yes it would be rational for Israel to control its borders if Israel would ever agree to any such borders, but it refuses to.

        No blockade is legal, unless it is sanctioned by the UNSC. If it was legal to maintain a blockade, then Israel had no right yo complain about Egypt’s blockade in 1967. A blockade also happens to be an act of war, and no act of war is legal.

        Hamas does not declare itself at war with Israel short and long-term. In fact, Hamas has withdrawn the statement form it’s charter and endorsed a 2 state solution.

        But as we know Witty, a 2 state solution is a threat to Israel.

        The relaxation of border crossings by Israel and Egypt whoud be mandaory. No state has the right to voluntarily abide by international law.

        Hamas are under no obligtion to submit to the rule of the Palestinian Authority. The PA has no credibility. Fatah enganged in a cop in 2007 to overthrow Hamas, so Hamas are entiotled to arrest Fatah representatives that endorsed or took part in that coup.

        “‘I have not heard a boycott proposal here yet that wasn’t an expression of collective punishment against Israelis in general, in the name of opposing collective punishment. ‘”

        In other words, your solution is to ‘tolerate the collective punishment of Palestinians, because the cessatrion of that collectiove punichment would mean the collective punishment of Israel.

        Or more to the point, Israeli lives are more valuable that Palestinian lives. Do you even realize what racist filth you are Witty?

      • Richard Witty
        January 9, 2010, 11:01 pm

        The borders with Israel and Gaza are quite clear. The post that you raged about was about Gaza, or did you bother to look?

        Can you show me documentation to prove (not just suggest) that Hamas is not at a state of declared war with Israel? I’ve never seen it. I’ve been reading on this for a very long time, and I’ve only seen statements of acceptance of Palestine at 67 borders, and temporarily, never a statement of acceptance of Israel at 67 borders. (They don’t mean the same thing.)

        Test your assertion of Fatah’s credibility. Urge Hamas to reconcile, so as to participate in an election in which it commits to submit to the authority of the Palestinian constitution, inlcuding features that it likes AND features that it doesn’t.

        So long as Hamas arrests Fatah representatives for legal political activities, the election will not occur legally. There will be no repeat of certification.

        It depends on what you want. (I don’t know if you are Palestinian or “solidarity”).

        There are threats to Israel in a two-state solution. Thats why it takes sincere reconciliation and cooperation to occur. Your description of Fatah as collaborationist, stops the two-state. And your demonization of Israel stops the single state.

        There are situations that are structured as no lose. This game in the way you endorse is no win.

        Peace is no lose, or rather everyone lose a little, gain a lot. Militancy is everyone lose a lot, gain a fantasy.

      • Shingo
        January 9, 2010, 11:20 pm

        “The borders with Israel and Gaza are quite clear. The post that you raged about was about Gaza, or did you bother to look?”‘

        They are clear but Israel doesn’t respect or observe them. It has snipers shooting at anyone in Gaza who get’s within a hundred meters of the wall and rotinely invades Gaza, setting fire to farms and houses.

        “Can you show me documentation to prove (not just suggest) that Hamas is not at a state of declared war with Israel? ”

        Hamas drops call for destruction of Israel from manifesto
        link to guardian.co.uk

        “I’ve been reading on this for a very long time, and I’ve only seen statements of acceptance of Palestine at 67 borders, and temporarily, never a statement of acceptance of Israel at 67 borders. (They don’t mean the same thing.)”

        Is Hamas Looking For a Two-State Solution? Should We Listen?
        “. In the final paragraph of the excerpt below, the interviewer is essentially asking Meshaal if he isn’t still committed to the Hamas Charter of 1988, which leaves no room for Israel. Meshaal’s answer is: In my heart, of course I believe all of Palestine belongs to the Palestinians. But practically speaking, our political position is a de facto two-state solution.”
        link to southjerusalem.com

        ‘Urge Hamas to reconcile, so as to participate in an election in which it commits to submit to the authority of the Palestinian constitution, inlcuding features that it likes AND features that it doesn’t.’

        Hamas did participate in an election and Fatah refused to accept teh outcome. It is up to Fatah to reconcile, not Hamas. Hamas have tried it and Fatah stabbed them in the back.
        link to vanityfair.com

        There are threats to Israel in a two-state solution. Thats why it takes sincere reconciliation and cooperation to occur. Your description of Fatah as collaborationist, stops the two-state. And your demonization of Israel stops the single state.

        Rubbish. The only threat to Israel in a two-state solution is that it woudl have to return stolen land and even worse, declare it’s borders and put an end to it’s startegic intgerests of expanding those borders further.

        “‘There are situations that are structured as no lose. This game in the way you endorse is no win.”

        More of you’re the verbal diaharrea you resort to ehen you can’t come up with a cogent argument that isn’t hypocritical or exposes your fanaticism.

        We are not talking about militancy, we are talking abtou the fact that Israel has given lip sercvice to a 2 state solution but always rejects it when it becomes a possibility.

      • Chaos4700
        January 10, 2010, 4:45 am

        You don’t get to separate Gaza and the West Bank like that, Witty — as much as you’d love to see the Palestinians divided and conquered. Israel is violating its borders with PALESTINE.

        And even putting that aside? The KILL ZONE the IDF maintains withing Gaza’s border? The intrusion of Israeli warships on Gazan waters? The routine air strikes and incursions by tanks and bulldozers? Hello?

      • Donald
        January 10, 2010, 9:41 am

        “I have not heard a boycott proposal here yet that wasn’t an expression of collective punishment against Israelis in general, in the name of opposing collective punishment.”

        Since you support a cruel and sadistic boycott by Israel and only wanted it lifted on your terms, your moral position here is hypocritical. You don’t oppose collective punishment of people–you oppose any action taken against Israel that is critical. We’re supposed to smother them with love and kisses to get them to change–Gaza is supposed to be under a blockade until Hamas changes.

        It’s not namecalling to call you a racist hypocrite–it’s an observation.

      • Citizen
        January 10, 2010, 4:00 pm

        Witty says he endorses the ending of the seige of Gaza, but he does not agree that BDS is the way to move ending of it along in a non-violent way. I ask the logical question to ask Witty is, “Don’t you think it’s time for the Obama regime to realize that the seige will not end without USA intervention that has more teeth than Obama’s Cairo speech? And, Witty, don’t you think it’s time the Obama regime starts using sticks (threatening to cut off annual blank checks to Israel, and revisiting all the USA government’s matrix of memorandums
        giving Israel so many advantages, even at the expense of the USA)?

      • Citizen
        January 10, 2010, 4:18 pm

        Israel has never defined all its borders.
        Israel maintains a blockade against a non-power, the collective Palestinian people who do not all declare themselves at war with Israel, but most just want to live a humble life. If Witty thinks all the Palestinians are complicit in the
        tossing of a few rockets at Israel by a few Palestinians, then, conversely, is it not more cogent to view what the Israeli state does to Palestinians, or allows under it’s IDF power, an attack on Palestinians simply because they were born so?

        While Witty et fans labels the boycott proposal as an expression of collective punishment, the reality on the ground is that the Palestinians
        are suffering actual collective punishment (with enabling by the USA, both through its blank check to Israel, its UN vetoes, and its actual troops on the ground along the Egyptian border with Gaza and its US sponsored engineering right now to cut off all basic needs to those living in Gaza).

        Witty is all theoretical about possible things (what evil might happen to Israel); those trying to help Palestinians simply survive day to day are equated the same in Witty’s mind. Witty is living in a dream world, and Americans are to blame for allowing Witty to do so.

      • wondering jew
        January 9, 2010, 3:57 pm

        tree- It’s not an attempt at gatekeeping; it’s my reaction. You are gatekeeping by telling me that I have to keep my reaction to myself.

      • tree
        January 9, 2010, 4:09 pm

        I am pointing out that you make the same “point” over and over again, so its hypocritical of you to complain about others doing exactly what you do. But if you want to keep on doing it you certainly have a right to do so, just as I have a right to point out the flaws in your “argument”, which seems to be that people here shouldn’t say certain things that offend your sensibilities.

      • Mooser
        January 10, 2010, 4:58 pm

        “You are gatekeeping by telling me that I have to keep my reaction to myself”

        Man, you are some kind of fool, WJ. Please, WJ, by all means don’t let anybody make you keep your reaction to yourself. No sir! You just yell it out for all to hear. Your reactions are the best weapon anyone can hand anti-Zionists. Listen stupid, why do you think Phil Weiss and David Horowitz opened up a comments section? Do you think it was to help Israel and Zionism out? They knew they could depend on Witty and guys like you, WJ.
        Are you so blinded by ziocaine fumes you can’t see beyond your nose? I don’t even know why I’m telling you this, I should just sit back as you almost singlehandedly destroy any support for Zionism in the US.
        Of course WJ, you’re an old hand at publicity campaigns and audience research and polling, so you know what you are doing. Just keep it up!

        Idiot, he opened, and leaves almost entirely untouched, the comment section, just so you would COME HERE AND MAKE YOUR REACTIONS KNOWN!!

        Wow! what a brain on that one! It boggles the mind!

      • MRW
        January 10, 2010, 5:01 pm

        uh, I think you mean Adam Horowitz, Moose.

    • Citizen
      January 11, 2010, 5:29 pm

      WJ, what USA amen chorus are you talking about? There is the AIPAC chorus; please explain to us if their is another with any power. Thanks.

      • wondering jew
        January 11, 2010, 5:43 pm

        Citizen, that’s a comment from two days ago. My mind is elsewhere.

        I realize that the term amen chorus or amen corner introduced by pat buchanan in the months before iraq war number one, by the realists george bush the first and brent scowcroft would elicit some attention when referring to the relatively unpowerful people in this blog’s comment section.

        by now i feel that putting up nazi pictures next to hebron is not just fine, but not something that deserves my comment. i don’t think it helps communicating, i think it helps in rallying the troops. i realize that you’re not about communicating, so make the analogy as many times as you want, i’ll try to keep quiet.

      • Chaos4700
        January 11, 2010, 5:47 pm

        While you’re trying something, would you mind maybe using proper capitalization? You’re hard enough to take seriously as it is, WJ, with all the bitching and moaning, but honestly having to wade through sloppy typing is the proverbial straw that breaks the camel’s back.

        Or you know, you can try to keep quiet, as it were, like you said. Either works for me.

      • wondering jew
        January 11, 2010, 5:48 pm

        Citizen- if you truly feel like communicating vis a vis Israel/Palestine, I’m ready to talk but this thread and the amen corner or chorus is not a good place to start.

      • wondering jew
        January 11, 2010, 5:49 pm

        Chaos- I’ll try to capitalize. For communication sake.

  5. Richard Witty
    January 9, 2010, 3:30 pm

    500 Jews reside in Hebron. 165,000 Arabs/Palestinians.

    The Palestinians want the Jews to leave.

    In 1928, the population of Hebron was 10,000, 50% Jews.

    Its not so simple asd portrayed.

    • Chaos4700
      January 9, 2010, 3:48 pm

      Hey, if you had a couple hundred neighbors who were throwing rocks at you, kicking your friends and family out of homes, and spray painting Stars of David and anti-Arab hate speech all over the traditional architecture of the town, and then to boot they are protected by platoons of IDF goons?

      Witty, by 1948 half the non-Jewish population was displaced. Half of it. In order to “match” that and even make a phony moral equivalence, you have to add up the Jewish migration of almost a dozen countries — and that migration wasn’t, overall, done at gunpoint or with land mines and davidkas and bulldozers. And some of it was caused by Zionist Jewish terrorism — like in Baghdad — to trick Mizrahi Jews into coming to Israel to serve as second class citizens (while the Palestinians are treated like animals).

      How dare you trivialize what the Palestinians live through daily by comparing it to high-rise dwelling, night-clubbing, bar-hopping “secular” Jewish Israelis in Tel Aviv.

      • Richard Witty
        January 9, 2010, 3:55 pm

        Saying the story in Hebron is not a simplistic as you or others portray, is not “trivializing Palestinian experience”.

        In fact, NOT seeing clearly, not studying sufficiently, is a way to trivialize Palestinian experience by over-simplification.

        500 Jews among 166,000. Thankfully the vast majority of the 166,000 just leave things be, stay away from the Jewish area, like I stay out of some neighborhoods in my town. Among the 166,000, how many do you suspect actively seek to remove the 500, the minority population? (2000, or more or less? which do you think?)

        And, among the 500, how many do you think are hooligans (40 maybe? That would be a very high percentage, close to 10%, probably much less in reality).

        To my mind, working for mutual acceptance is a more noble enterprise stimulated by the knowledge of what is going on there.

      • tree
        January 9, 2010, 4:26 pm

        Thankfully the vast majority of the 166,000 just leave things be, stay away from the Jewish area, like I stay out of some neighborhoods in my town.

        Truly amazingly ignorant. From Gideon Levy in 2006.

        The current fashion is to express shock over the actions of the Hebron settlers. Even Acting Prime Minister Ehud Olmert is threatening to get tough on the lawbreakers there. Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz quickly changed his spots, as he customarily does, adapting himself to the new tone and calling for the expulsion of all of the “criminals” from Hebron. To whom exactly is he referring? Only those who raised their hands against Israel Defense Forces soldiers. And where was he until now? The silence of the past sheds a hypocritical light upon the shock of the ministers and the public at large: For years, the settlers in Hebron rioted against their Palestinian neighbors until thousands of the latter were forced to abandon their homes and stores, and flee. Anyone visiting Hebron discovered a ghost town, but few in Israel wanted to know about this and even fewer were shocked and took action. Only when the settlers dared to attack soldiers and policemen did a hue and cry arise. But this cry should be targeted against those who allowed the crime to flourish over the years.

        link to israelblog.com

        Of course, Richard, this is just like your experience staying away from certain neighborhoods in your town. Those areas that the Hebron Palestinians have to avoid are places where they lived and ran businesses before they were bullied into abandoning them. A pathetic analogy, Richard.

        From Levy again:

        Those who have not visited the city in recent years would not believe their eyes. In the territory under Israeli control – H2, or Israeli territory, according to the Hebron accord – they will discover a ghost town. Hundreds of abandoned homes, like after a war, dozens of destroyed stores, burned or shuttered, their gates welded closed by the settlers, and an all-pervasive, deadly silence. According to unofficial assessments, no more than 10,000 residents remain in this place. The rest have left their homes and property after no longer being able to bear the harassment from the settlers and their children. This is the largest disengagement in recent years; this is the real expulsion.

        Every day the settlers torment their neighbors here. Every walk to school for a Palestinian child has become a journey of harassment and fear. Every shopping outing by a housewife is a journey of humiliation. Settler children kicking old women carrying baskets, settlers siccing their dogs on the elderly, garbage and feces thrown from the settlers’ balconies into the courtyards of Palestinian homes, junk metal blocking the entrances of their houses, rocks thrown at any Palestinian passerby – this is the routine of life in the city. Hundreds of soldiers, border policemen and cops witness these actions and stand by idly. They occasionally exchange jokes with the rioters, and almost never stand in their way. Residents’ attempts to file complaints with the police are rejected outright under various and sundry pretexts. Even when there are mass pogroms with hundreds of settlers participating – as was the case about four months ago when hundreds of settlers entered the home of Dr. Tayser Zahadi in Tel Rumeida and destroyed everything they could lay their hands on – the security forces stood on the sidelines without intervening. The rioting was documented on videotape, but no one thought to broadcast it on Israeli television.

        In the Tel Rumeida neighborhood, where only about a 10th of the Palestinian residents remain – 50 out of 500 families – this reality takes on monstrous proportions: The residents walk hunched over in their back yards, keeping close to the walls, whispering for fear of being heard. Children sprint home in a mad dash and neighbors move from house to house on rickety ladders. It is a haunted ghetto life – all because of a handful of rioters who live above them at the top of the neighborhood.

        Ultimately, they have succeeded: The settlers’ violence has proved itself, and Hebron is becoming more Judaized. To be more precise, Hebron is becoming emptier. Five-hundred violent residents have demonstrated that they have the power to expel tens of thousands of their neighbors thanks to the sponsorship the state has extended to them. None of the Yesha Council leaders has ever spoken against this phenomenon, and Yesha has thus become a partner in crime. The awful mistake of prime minister Yitzhak Rabin, who lacked the courage to uproot this settlement immediately after the slaughter in the Cave of the Patriarchs, continues to bear its rotten fruits. Ever since then, each day that the wild settlement in Hebron continues to exist is another day of shame for the State of Israel.

        link to israelblog.com

      • yonira
        January 9, 2010, 5:22 pm

        Here is a history of Jews in Iraq from 1918:

        link to en.wikipedia.org

        Stop this lie about how they were tricked to leave Chaos, there were pogroms taking place well before a creation of the state of Israel.

        link to en.wikipedia.org

      • Shingo
        January 9, 2010, 9:50 pm

        There was no progom in Hebron. The Jews were removed by the British.

      • Donald
        January 9, 2010, 9:58 pm

        There was a pogrom in Hebron–dozens of Jews were killed by Arabs. (The remaining hundreds were saved by their Arab neighbors.) I assume you meant to say the ethnic cleansing was done by the Brits.

        The wikipedia entry is unclear about removal. It says that some Jewish families moved back and then were removed by the British, which makes it sound like the surviving Jews fled after the violence and then some moved back and then the British removed them.

      • yonira
        January 10, 2010, 5:01 am

        Guys, I was replying to this gem by Chaos:

        And some of it was caused by Zionist Jewish terrorism — like in Baghdad — to trick Mizrahi Jews into coming to Israel to serve as second class citizens

        I was proving the point that this whole “The Zionist trick us to leave our peace loving Arab country” is bullshit, both before and after the creation of Israel…

      • Cliff
        January 10, 2010, 2:24 pm

        Chaos gave some context though, and you’re missing it on purpose – then conflating ‘Baghdad’ with ‘Arab country’ (and cynically adding in ‘peace loving’).

        I’d say you’re mostly reacting emotionally – which is fair, since this conflict facilitates that.

        BTW – in this thread, I think you said MRW shouldn’t bash Wiki since people here according to you, post stuff they get off of conspiracy sites or random blogs – right?

        Can you point out when this has happened if your recall? Details?

    • tree
      January 9, 2010, 4:02 pm

      Geez, Richard, where the heck do you get your “facts”? Please provide a link for your 5000 Jews in Hebron because I have NEVER seen that figure. Every figure I have seen puts the number of Jews in Hebron at that time at 400 to 500.

      Here, from a source I assume you will consider reliable, Encyclopedia Judaica, by way of hebron.com , on the number of Jews in Hebron in 1922.

      The number of inhabitants was smaller than before the war (430 out of a total population of 16,000 in 1922) but their economic situation was stable.

      link to hebron.com

      The Palestinians want the Jews who act like hooligans and bullies to leave. Not all Jews, just those who refuse to treat the Palestinians as equal human beings. Back in the 1990’s, Hebron’s Palestinian mayor invited the descendants of the original Jews of Hebron to return and reclaim their property. Those Jews politely declined, worried that their acceptance of the offer would undercut Israeli insistence that there is no right of return. Most of the Jews who came to Hebron after Israel occupied ut are usurpers and racist Jewish supremacists who do in fact act like Nazis.

    • lyn117
      January 9, 2010, 4:33 pm

      Factual correction. In 1928, the Jewish population of Hebron was well under 1000. No where near 50%.

      • Richard Witty
        January 9, 2010, 5:39 pm

        You are right, I misread a Wikipedia article.

        Still, the reality in Hebron is of 500 Jewish residents, in a city of 165,000 that bear them ill will. It is a city of conflict, not of mutual acceptance.

        The settler residents are not all expansionists, the majority just want to live there. Nearly all of them are assertive that they will not be kicked out as in recent past.

      • AM
        January 9, 2010, 8:29 pm

        ARE YOU THAT DENSE?

        THERE IS CONFLICT AND ILL WILL BECAUSE THE HEBRON SETTLERS CAUSE, CREATE, AND PERPETUATE THAT CONFLICT. THEY HAVE GONE AND RIOTED WITH THE PROTECTION OF THE ISRAELI STATE TO EJECT HUGE NEIGHBORHOODS OF PALESTINIANS. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE FACT THAT THEY ARE JEWS OR A MINORITY AND EVERYTHING TO DO WITH THEIR ACTIONS.

        Gah, you do this on purpose! Luckily, The caps just makes it look like I am much more angry thatn I actually am.

      • Richard Witty
        January 9, 2010, 10:04 pm

        They did that, and that was partially from their religious entitlement, partially from misguided overzealous youthfulness, and partially from responses to harrassment from Palestinians.

        Oversimplifying is innaccurate. Not all of the settlers apply the same logic, or behave the same.

        It is prejudicial to think so.

      • Shmuel
        January 10, 2010, 5:46 am

        Richard,

        Your wilful ignorance is truly astounding. There are mountains of evidence documenting the violent reign of supremacist terror imposed by the Hebron settlers on the entire city – actively supported by successive Israeli governments. Other settlers may be complex, nuanced, but not the Hebron settlers. Ask virtually any Israeli to the left of Avigdor Lieberman, and this is the answer you will get. I have been to Hebron a number of times, and have seen settler violence there, first hand. I even know some of the settlers. You don’t know what you are talking about. You should be a little more careful with the word “prejudicial”. In this case, it can only apply to those who would defend the Hebron settlers (as opposed to the different and somewhat debatable issue of whether Jews have a “right” to live in Hebron) in any way, shape or form.

      • Richard Witty
        January 10, 2010, 7:19 am

        What would be your summary of the history?

        Including factors from both sides, so a reader can be confident that they are not receiving only propaganda?

        When I visited Hebron in 1986, it was one of the few places in the West Bank that I was genuinely scared to travel alone. Sure, that is subjective, but it contrasted with Ramallah.

        It makes me wonder about singular statements of cause/effect.

      • Shingo
        January 10, 2010, 7:23 am

        There is no such thing as history from both sides Richard. That’s called propaganda, not history.

        “It makes me wonder about singular statements of cause/effect. ”

        Yes, we are more han familiar with your imaginative take on cause and effect. It’s also interesting that you reject the first hand accounts of someone who lives in Israel, preferring to refer to your limite experience 14 years ago.

      • Richard Witty
        January 10, 2010, 7:36 am

        “There is no such thing as history from both sides Richard. That’s called propaganda, not history.”

        Now we are in the realm of “Witticisms”. Propaganda includes the failure to incorporate multiple perspectives into the research and description of history.

        I was in Israel in 1986, that is 24 years ago, a longer time past. It seems like yesterday to me, but you know, I have an aging brain (sees patterns and conclusions, but doesn’t remember well short-term). Phil is approximately the same age as me. He probably has similar, though he doesn’t talk about it.

      • Shingo
        January 10, 2010, 7:42 am

        No Richard,

        History incorporates what happened and the context. Propaganda has 2 sides.

        “Phil is approximately the same age as me. He probably has similar, though he doesn’t talk about it.”‘

        The fact that he’s been to Israle much more recently and on more occasions makes his accounts far more credible.

      • Richard Witty
        January 10, 2010, 7:52 am

        This is his first trip to Israel. The others were leftist guided tours.

        “Propaganda has two sides”. That is an odd definition of propaganda.

        Your description of history is one-dimensional. It excludes relevant data, so as to distort, to demonize.

        That stands in stark contrast to study and criticism.

        For example, in this context, in describing 1948, your statement is “Zionists ethnically cleansed Palestine”, whereas the Israeli former official description is “Zionists settled Palestine and prevailed in a war initiated by Arabs, in which the majority of former residents left of their own accord”.

        Both stories are accurate, and innaccurate. To understand the reality, the history, it requires thorough understanding of each community’s experience, not “one authoritative description”.

        If the stories were similar, and not significantly collectively subjective, then maybe your definition of a single “what really happened” might be accurate, but that is not the case here.

        It takes a Morris analysis of two narratives, both containing plausible and accurate story, to understand accurately, to know the history.

      • Shingo
        January 10, 2010, 8:00 am

        “‘Your description of history is one-dimensional. It excludes relevant data, so as to distort, to demonize.”‘

        Oh we’re back to that are we? Anything that makes Israel look bad is an attempt to demonize Israel. Israel is never at fault.

        History is based on schoalrship, it is not political or maleable as you woudl liek to suggest.

        For example, your in 1948, there is no question that the Zionists ethnically cleansed Palestine, as they had planned for over 50 years. The Zionists settled Palestine by stealing land and deliberately driving the popualtino off their land. We can take countless quotres from Zionists to support this.

        The Arab states attacked and Israel won.

        The two sides you presented are not history, they are selective and therefore propaganda.

      • Richard Witty
        January 10, 2010, 8:08 am

        Exactly,
        History is based on scholarship, not malleable.

        “For example, your in 1948, there is no question that the Zionists ethnically cleansed Palestine, as they had planned for over 50 years. The Zionists settled Palestine by stealing land and deliberately driving the popualtino off their land. We can take countless quotres from Zionists to support this.”

        “Quotes to support” are examples of propaganda if they do not describe context and chain of events fully.

        Present ONE that is genuinely completely reliable, and contains no possibilty of qualification or mitigating context.

      • Cliff
        January 10, 2010, 8:12 am

        As usual, you are nothing more than a propagandist and racist, Witty.

      • Cliff
        January 10, 2010, 8:14 am

        How about you speak plainly for once instead of resorting to rhetorical acrobatics to hide the fact that you’re a fucking LIAR.

      • Richard Witty
        January 10, 2010, 8:15 am

        Brilliant analysis Cliff.

        Describing complexity as complex IS speaking plainly.

        Oversimplifying is distorting in this case.

      • Shingo
        January 10, 2010, 8:33 am

        “‘Present ONE that is genuinely completely reliable, and contains no possibilty of qualification or mitigating context. “‘

        I’ll give you all the quotes you want Witty,

        Aardent Zionists, Israel Zangwill, stated as early as 1905:

        “Palestine proper has already its inhabitants. The pashalik of Jerusalem is already twice as thickly populated as the United States, having fifty-two souls to the square mile, and not 25% of them Jews ….. [We] must be prepared either to drive out by the sword the [Arab] tribes in possession as our forefathers did or to grapple with the problem of a large alien population, mostly Mohammedan and accustomed for centuries to despise us.” (Righteous Victims, p. 140 & Expulsion Of The Palestinians, p. 7-10)

        In other words, Palestinians were recognized by the Zionist leadership as “humans” who populated Palestine, however, that was not good enough of a reason to “grant” them the same political rights as Jews, who mostly lived outside of Palestine. Consequently, this ideology was the prelude to the wholesale DISPOSSESSION and ETHNIC CLEANSING of the Palestinian people during the 1948 war.

        Soon after the first Zionist Congress in Basel (Switzerland) in 1897, a Zionist delegation was sent to Palestine for a fact finding mission, and to explore the viability of settling Palestine with persecuted European Jews. The delegation replied back from Palestine with a cable that stated:

        “The bride is beautiful, but she is married to another man.” (Iron Wall, p. 3)

        Despite that many Zionists were aware of this happy marriage as early as 1897, they have deliberately chosen to terminate this relationship since they think that Jewish rights are more important than Palestinian rights. The forcible divorce of Palestine from its indigenous people was eloquently articulated by Ze’ev Jabotinsky, the founder of the Israeli political Right, in 1926 who explained that:

        ” … the tragedy lies in the fact the there is a collision here between two truths …. but our justice is greater. The Arab is culturally backward, but his instinctive patriotism is just as pure and noble as our own; it cannot be bought, it can only be curbed … force majeure.” (Righteous Victims, p. 108)
        “In the course of time we shall expand to the whole country …this is only an arrangement for the next 15-30 years.”
        Weizmann commented in 1937

        “After we become a strong force, as a result of the creation of a state, we shall abolish partition and expand to the whole of Palestine.”
        Ben-Gurion 1938

        How many more do you want Witty?

      • Shingo
        January 10, 2010, 8:35 am

        “Oversimplifying is distorting in this case. “”

        That’s Witty arging that you shouldn’t believbe your ling eyes, and that if it walks like a duck, talks like a duck and looks like one, it’s probably a camel.

      • Richard Witty
        January 10, 2010, 9:18 am

        It means that from different vantage points the duck is a camel.

        500 among 165,000 is a small minority, and if my experience is any guide, likely harrassed, from the Hebron settlers perspective.

        Not complete truth by any rationalization, but also not illusion.

      • Richard Witty
        January 10, 2010, 9:21 am

        What was the context of each of the quotes?

      • Eva Smagacz
        January 10, 2010, 9:29 am

        Poor, misunderstood and harassed Hebron settlers from the vantage point of Richard’s experience in those matters.
        Black is white. Q.E.D

      • Richard Witty
        January 10, 2010, 9:31 am

        You proved my point, in that you only presented the offending quotes, but not the history.

        In 1932, my conflict would have been whether it is right that Jews be subject to quotas and “mild” harrassment everywhere on the planet (slightly more mild in long-standing Jewish Arab communities), or Zionist. Both are difficult.

        In 1938, my conflict would have been more towards the Jewish self-defense orientation.

        In 1941, there would have been no conflict and thankful that the US entered the “European War”, and not yet knowing that Zionism was necessary.

        In 1945, Zionist. Homeland, not expansionist, enough, same as today.

        In 1948, proudly Zionist, homeland, not expansionist, enough.

        In 1967, relieved Zionist, homeland, restoration of dignity to Jewish sites, negotiation to make the dignity permanent, but restore/establish Palestinian nation.

        In 2010, the same.

        Other Zionist leaders spoke differently than your opportunist characterization (opportunist in the generalization of “what is Zionism”, towards a simplistic definition of enemy).

      • Richard Witty
        January 10, 2010, 9:32 am

        Yes, definitely misunderstood and harrassed settlers.

        But, the points of brutality are not lost on me.

        Its just not simplistic.

      • Donald
        January 10, 2010, 9:51 am

        Notice what Richard is doing. Other people present evidence and quotes–Richard sits back, refutes nothing, and demands more evidence. It’s a shallow man claiming to be deep. And we know what would happen if this kept up. People could post paragraph after paragraph, they could start copying chapters from books, and all Richard would do is mouth platitudes about “context”, pat himself on the back, condemn “demonization” of Israelis while demonizing Palestinians.

        There’s no real discussion with Richard on the subject of Israeli crimes–he closes his mind and spouts his usual cliches, but evidence just bounces off of him. Respond in order to influence lurkers and write your responses with them in mind, but don’t bother with Richard himself. Unless he chooses to be an honest man, he’s a waste of time on the subject of Israeli war crimes. Being honest on this subject goes against his deepest beliefs and mere logic and evidence are powerless to change him.

      • Shmuel
        January 10, 2010, 9:56 am

        No, Richard. It’s not simplistic, but in this particular case it is mind-blowingly simple. Don’t believe the “propaganda”. Read reams of Israeli newspaper reports, watch kilometres of film, and read just about any book on the subject. The only sources that portray the settlers in Hebron as “misunderstood” or “harrassed” are extremely biased, right-wing sources. The Zionist mainstream sees them for the violent hooligans that they are – allowed by Israeli governments, and with the political and military resources of the State of Israel, to make the lives of tens of thousands of Palestinians a living hell. Even a good part of the Israeli right sees them for the dangerous, arrogant thugs they are, and soldiers will do anything not to be sent to defend them. Israeli Police commanders have resigned in despair, because of them. Speak to some moderate Israeli settlers. They’ll tell you the Hebron crowd are nuts. I’m not even suggesting that you look at the TIPH reports, which have carefully documented life in Hebron since the Goldstein massacre, because those are too easily dismissed by Israel- supporters as “anti-Semitic”.

        If your “balanced” approach to everything had a shred of credibility left, you’ve just shot it to hell. I have never met a reasonable person, with a shred of decency – right, left or centre – who has characterised the situation in Hebron as you have.

      • LeaNder
        January 10, 2010, 10:24 am

        It means that from different vantage points the duck is a camel.

        So you learned from experience that minorities that feel “harrassed” are simply paranoid and act on the perception that a duck is a camel?

        Interesting.

        But more to the point. Your minority experiences do not really help you to judge a scenario in which the minority acts in a legal vacuum backed by a military who basically can humiliate, arrest, kill randomly.

      • Mooser
        January 10, 2010, 1:36 pm

        “Now we are in the realm of “Witticisms”. “

        Couldn’t have said it better my own self! Yes then, from now on henceforth and in all perpetuity let them be known as “Witticisms”!
        My sympathy to the man who has to compile them. Use a pitchfork, and wear coveralls.

      • Mooser
        January 10, 2010, 1:51 pm

        “But, the points of brutality are not lost on me”

        Jesus Christ on an articulated pogo-stick eating pancakes and eggs, every thread in this goddam blog is now about Witty’s relation to Israel.
        We have an entire blog devoted to arguing with an old man’s senile conflation of himself and Israel and Zionism.
        Would anyone like to do a distributed word-count. I bet he writes more than Phil! This is getting ridiculous.
        Like if we could impress enough “points of brutality” on Witty he will go over there and change things? This is getting patently absurd.

        And you know, it was just when this blog was getting a wonderful bunch of good-writing, experienced in the area, with decent humanist principles, commenters able to add to the posts, or post on the main page, so Witty re-doubles his efforts! Absurd.

      • Donald
        January 10, 2010, 1:53 pm

        “Wittyisms ” would be a more neutral term and there’s another term one could use if one wants to be nasty (a mistake, since Richard then gets sympathy) , but “Witticisms” is too complimentary–I think I saw Richard using the term, probably for that reason.

      • Richard Witty
        January 10, 2010, 2:28 pm

        How have I “characterized” the Hebron situation?

        I stated that the simplistic presentation is insufficient.

        Have the settlers been allowed to reside there peaceably?

        I don’t conclude that. That does not excuse reported abuses.

      • Richard Witty
        January 10, 2010, 2:36 pm

        Hebron and Gaza, the two divergent stories, and the two examples of Pavlovian response.

        Donald,
        You see five quotes that Shingo sites without any historical context, just the quotes, and conclude conspiracy.

        Its shabby, unconclusive. If you want to convince others of your theme (“Israel is demon”), you have to PROVE your thesis, not just “support” it.

        There is support for the defensive and offensive Zionist themes, that they live in a dangerous and antagonistic neighborhood, and that no Palestinian entity will recognize Israel as Israel in fact, only in theory. Support, but no proof.

        Both conclusions derived from self-talk that becomes its own confirmation.

        What is the whole story, not just the embellishing part? I haven’t yet heard it in language or breadth that I trust.

      • Cliff
        January 10, 2010, 2:39 pm

        You are a dishonest person and troll, as well as a documented liar, Witty.

        You never support your ideas w/ proof – only superficial rhetoric. You’re simple-minded and racist.

        I believe at one point you emphasized the disparity in population between the Jewish fundamentalists/colonists and the Palestinians.

        What is your point? What is simplistic?

        You are incapable of providing a substantiated opinion because you are intellectually lazy and ignorant.

      • Richard Witty
        January 10, 2010, 2:45 pm

        Shmuel,

        Why didn’t you take the opportunity to answer this question?

        “What would be your summary of the history?”

        That is of Hebron.

      • Richard Witty
        January 10, 2010, 2:49 pm

        Brilliant post Cliff.

        Rather than argue your understanding of the history of Hebron in a confidently persuasive manner, you rant at one who doesn’t buy your theme, yet.

        Maybe I will. But, you haven’t argued it yet.

        It takes history to do so, accurate and complete history to convince, not quotes that like in an LSD revelation “make sense”.

        The thesis has to pass bullshit detection.

        In this case, there is no thesis that does that conclusively, no Zionist thesis and no solidarity thesis. The reality of the situation is more complex than black/white.

      • Richard Witty
        January 10, 2010, 2:57 pm

        Even if the ethnic cleansing thesis bore out, there is then the next real question which is of rational choice.

        All social movements, especially fanatic ones, the ones that people feel justified in any way in killing or removing, rely on exagerated emotional themes.

        It applies to Islamic terrorism, to communism, to anti-apartheid armed struggle, to Palestinian “resistance”, to American Civil War (south), to American Revolutionary War, to Indian partition.

        It doesn’t apply to genuinely non-violent social movements, that love their neighbor as they assert themselves.

        In the case of Zionism, even ethnic cleansing Zionism, there is the next question of whether it was necessary or desirable in spite of moral shoftcomings.

        It obviously was not necessary to your Mondary morning quarterbacking.

        If necessary and wrong, or even containing significant wrongs (if not over-arching wrong), then the appropriate present position is to reconcile, to mutually acknowledge wrongs.

        I would hope that you would conclude that artificially restricting immigration of persecuted European Jews in the 30’s, instead responded to by attempted ethnic cleansing, would also be a grievous wrong.

      • Richard Witty
        January 10, 2010, 2:59 pm

        It seems amazingly odd to me that you would insist that Palestinians should live together in a single state with those that they have reasonable basis to hate with a passion (by the simplistic logic of 1948 = ethnic cleansing, rather than 1948 = war with difficult consequences).

      • Donald
        January 10, 2010, 3:07 pm

        “In the case of Zionism, even ethnic cleansing Zionism, there is the next question of whether it was necessary or desirable in spite of moral shoftcomings.”

        Was what necessary? A crime against humanity? Or was that a moral shortcoming?

        Where does suicide bombing come in? If the Palestinians have a just cause, are we supposed to have deep discussions about whether it’s okay to blow up children? Or are we only supposed to rationalize Zionist atrocities?

        As for mutual acknowledgment of wrongs, I think the Palestinians should have made common cause with people like Judah Magnes, but were right to be mistrustful of a movement that relied on the racist Balfour Declaration. And Palestinian terrorism was always wrong. It’s unfortunate that you cannot bring yourself to denounce Zionist terrorism (except when it’s done by the Israeli right) or the ethnic cleansing of 1948 or the brutality and sadism of the Gaza blockade or the war crimes of the Gaza “War” –instead you say there was “excessive targeting”.

        Mutual acknowledgment of wrongs would be a very good thing and I think the Palestinians have much to acknowledge. You, however, are in no position to lecture anyone on this and that’s regrettable.

      • aparisian
        January 10, 2010, 3:07 pm

        hey guys i know i m off topic but i just found the Jewish shit list, the NaZionists wrote lists of what they call self-hating jews, enjoy the Hasbara of Nazis link to masada2000.org

        and who said Israel was a democracy? Its a Nazi theocracy, nothing else.

      • Shmuel
        January 10, 2010, 3:08 pm

        Because the history is well-known and your “questions” disingenuous. If you really want to know the history of the Jewish settlement in Hebron, there are at least 80 pages on it in Eldar & Zertal, Lord’s of the Land. It’s all there. I’d give you more specific references, but my copy’s in Hebrew.

      • Shmuel
        January 10, 2010, 3:13 pm

        The above is my reply to RW’s: Shmuel, Why didn’t you take the opportunity to answer this question? “What would be your summary of the history?”

      • Richard Witty
        January 10, 2010, 3:30 pm

        So, why not bother to summarize what you understand?

        I genuinely do not know enough to judge, only know enough to suspect that propaganda strikes me as overly simplistic.

        Quoting Pavlovian invocations does not convince me, and wouldn’t convince most intelligent skeptical humanists.

        You’ve done this before, refused to describe your understanding.

      • Shingo
        January 10, 2010, 3:56 pm

        “‘”You see five quotes that Shingo sites without any historical context, just the quotes, and conclude conspiracy.”‘

        I guess it woudl never occur to you to provide tha context Witty? Of course, not. You don’t know that context would undermine what those quotes state, but like Donals observed, you won’t eeven bother. You’ll just sit back and argue that it’s “shabby, unconclusive” simply becasue it doesn’t accord with your notion of Zionism and that you need more evidence.

      • Shingo
        January 10, 2010, 3:59 pm

        “Mutual acknowledgment of wrongs would be a very good thing and I think the Palestinians have much to acknowledge. You, however, are in no position to lecture anyone on this and that’s regrettable. ‘

        For Richard, mutual acknowledgment of wrongs woudl be demonizing Israel, much like how the Goldstpone Report, which accused both sides of war crimes was biased and inssuficintly researched.

      • Shingo
        January 10, 2010, 4:02 pm

        “‘I genuinely do not know enough to judge, only know enough to suspect that propaganda strikes me as overly simplistic.”‘

        Then how do you know what is porpaganda, because it doesn’t sound right, even though you admit you are ignorant of the topic?

      • Richard Witty
        January 10, 2010, 4:08 pm

        I ask further, as I did.

        You responded by calling me a racist for not buying your approach.

      • Richard Witty
        January 10, 2010, 4:10 pm

        It conflicts with my knowledge of history, context, and of Ben Gurion’s positions over time.

        Your quotes present a caricature, not a representation.

      • Shmuel
        January 10, 2010, 4:13 pm

        Why don’t you give me your version, Richard? You thought you knew enough to have an opinion on the subject, and to criticise others’ “prejudices”, so you must have an idea of a less “simplistic” version of events. You may cite only Israeli sources if you like, but none overtly pro-settler (hint: Arutz 7 is out).

        (h/t to Danaa for the methodology)

      • Shingo
        January 10, 2010, 4:26 pm

        “‘Your quotes present a caricature, not a representation. “‘

        A cariacature would be a false statement, so please, explain how my quote is false.

        Secondly, if you’d followed Ben Gurion, you’d know that this wasn’t the only statement he made to that affect.

        So Witty, ratehr than follow your own admice and read, your postion is to admit you are ignroant and argue that it doesn’t feel like somethign Ben Gurion woudl say.

      • Citizen
        January 10, 2010, 4:30 pm

        Yes, Witty, who doesn’t want to live in a home and place they could not otherwise afford? The whole settler movement is filled with American Jews who know a good real estate buy when they see it. Problem is that their homes are dependent on USA and Israeli politics. Now they are there. They thank G-D every day that
        that the enforcers of their home legal rights is the IDF. That doesn’t mean the USA should continue to give them their cake and let them eat it too.

      • Mooser
        January 10, 2010, 5:02 pm

        You are right, of course, it should be “Wittyism”, which has the proper relation to the word “witticism”.

      • Richard Witty
        January 10, 2010, 7:00 pm

        I’m still waiting for Shmuel’s summary, so we can actually talk about something that isn’t Pavlovian.

      • aparisian
        January 10, 2010, 7:03 pm

        Witty you better talk about my posts, huh! Everyone here knows how big liar and racist you are, we dont pay attention to your hasbara anymore. The conclusion today is that Nazionism is evil .

      • MRW
        January 10, 2010, 7:25 pm

        Shmuel,

        Eldar & Zertal, Lord’s of the Land. I ordered this book when you recommended it to me last Dec or Nov. Amazon says it can’t get its mitts on it until Feb. Awaiting.

      • MRW
        January 10, 2010, 7:30 pm

        BTW, Shmuel, Witty does not read any corroborating docs or books if his opinion, as expressed in the media orgs he subscribes to, oppose it. Eg: Goldstone Report.

      • Richard Witty
        January 10, 2010, 7:39 pm

        Thats actually a falsehood.

        I am selective in what I read, but it includes, actually emphasizes, dissenting materials.

        If you respectfully make recommendation, I’ll consider it, as I hope you will respectfully consider my reading recommendations.

      • aparisian
        January 10, 2010, 7:43 pm

        Watch minute 34 of this video link to video.google.com

        Use of chemical weapons on children, babies and innocent civilians, are these lies as well Dick Witty? The use of Gaz on children and women…. Where is the world to watch the new nazis!!!!!!!

      • Richard Witty
        January 10, 2010, 8:01 pm

        link to youtube.com

        Shmuel,
        Should we discuss this?

        Months ago, I proposed that commenters jointly read some text and offer their informed and less informed perspectives.

        At least we would then be talking about the same reference.

        Are you interested Shmuel?

      • MRW
        January 10, 2010, 8:01 pm

        Witty, I respectfully recommend you read the Goldstone Report.

      • aparisian
        January 10, 2010, 8:05 pm

        he knows Gold Stone report very well, he even approves the NazIsrael massacres, he even sad the NazIsraeli army didnt kill enough.

      • aparisian
        January 10, 2010, 8:15 pm

        A fucking Jewssh Nazi spitting on the face of Palestinian woman and her children yesterday in Hebron link to youtube.com I would hit him i would beat this coward if i was there i swear !!!!!!!!!!!!!

      • Ael
        January 10, 2010, 8:21 pm

        One man, One vote.

        It worked in the USA. It worked in South Africa.
        It can work in Israel.

      • Richard Witty
        January 10, 2010, 8:26 pm

        Did anyone look at the video.

        I was a lecture by Akiva Eldar shortly after “Lords of the Land” was published, with Rashid Khalidi hosting.

        Don’t get knee-jerky.

        My sense is that people will get angry at Eldar for his views though, for speaking in any terms from Israel’s interests. He, like I, regard the settlements as an idiotic and largely illegal state exercise.

        Its irritating to get harrangued by Shmuel and others, for agreeing with him largely.

      • aparisian
        January 10, 2010, 8:29 pm

        why do you ignore my posts Witty?

      • Chaos4700
        January 10, 2010, 10:21 pm

        Because he has no answer for them. You’ll see he can’t really respond to my posts, generally, either. When his argument falls apart, he just spams out a new thread starter and pretends like what was talked about before never happened.

        Take it as a good sign, aparisian. You’ve bested him.

      • Shmuel
        January 11, 2010, 4:47 am

        RW: I’m still waiting for Shmuel’s summary, so we can actually talk about something that isn’t Pavlovian.

        Please read something, anything, serious on the history of the Jewish settlement in Hebron, and then we’ll talk. Other than indulging you, I see no point in rehashing things that are well-known to anyone who has followed I/P even superficially in recent years. You like Eldar’s point of view? Good! Read some of his articles on the subject or, better yet, get a hold of his book. If you then have questions or opinions you would like to discuss, based on real knowledge, bevakashah.

  6. Les
    January 9, 2010, 3:46 pm

    If ethnic cleansing and occupation were bad for Judaism, the rabbis would say so. Right?

  7. VR
    January 9, 2010, 4:11 pm
  8. wondering jew
    January 9, 2010, 4:19 pm

    The Nazi who drew the star of David on the store was saying, “Don’t buy here and thus we will force the Jews out of Germany.”

    The hooligan Zionist drew the star of David saying, “I am right now powerless to throw you out, but only to harass you and write on your door in the middle of the night like a thief, but eventually we will convince the rest of the Israeli body politic to throw you out.”

    The Nazi stood in front of the doorway three months after Hitler’s accession to power and was an expression of the hooliganism in broad daylight that German Jews could expect from the Nazi regime of a country that was just taken over by a new political leader.

    The star of David was drawn in a piece of land that the world has abandoned into the realm of occupied territory. The essence of 242 allowed for such a development of an extended occupation. Such a development produced a land oriented Jewish movement with little care for international thoughts and scorn for Palestinian sensibilities. As such I agree that it is horrible to draw a threatening symbol onto somebody’s door.

    • tree
      January 9, 2010, 4:39 pm

      WJ, they have already thrown the Palestinian shopkeepers out. The doors are shuttered. They are not powerless. The Star of David on the shuttered shops is a sign of their power. From my link elsewhere on this thread.:

      Hundreds of abandoned homes, like after a war, dozens of destroyed stores, burned or shuttered, their gates welded closed by the settlers, and an all-pervasive, deadly silence. According to unofficial assessments, no more than 10,000 residents remain in this place. The rest have left their homes and property after no longer being able to bear the harassment from the settlers and their children. This is the largest disengagement in recent years; this is the real expulsion.

      Twenty five thousand Palestinians in the H1 area of Hebron have already been forced to leave. That is an example of the supremacist power of those who placed the graffiti in the picture. Read up on Hebron today. The IDF supports and protects these “hooligans”.

      This does not just involve the soldiers, policemen and Shin Bet agents who knew about it, kept silent and even supported it. As in all organized crime, much broader institutions of government were involved. The Housing Ministry, the IDF and the Civil Administration, which provided all of the “illegal outposts” with infrastructure, accompanied the construction work and provided protection and assistance, paved roads and equipped them with water and electricity – they all are involved in the crime. The executive branch facilitated the expansion of control by the crime families in the West Bank, and – like in organized crime – the judicial branch has been a partner in the corruption.

      link to israelblog.com

      • tree
        January 9, 2010, 5:08 pm

        The hooligan Zionist drew the star of David saying, “I am right now powerless to throw you out, but only to harass you and write on your door in the middle of the night like a thief, but eventually we will convince the rest of the Israeli body politic to throw you out.”

        I’m beginning to understand. You are not well informed on what is actually going on in Hebron. This is apparent from your post. Because you do not know, you think the analogies are false, but that only shows your lack of knowledge.

        This story about Yehuda Shaul might be inspiring for you as well as educational.

        link to independent.co.uk

    • VR
      January 9, 2010, 5:03 pm

      Nice dance around the periphery WJ but it wins no prize.

      “The Nazi who drew the star of David on the store was saying, “Don’t buy here and thus we will force the Jews out of Germany.””

      The fact of the matter is by Zionist edit the property is closed down, it is part of the process of Eretz Yisreal applied by the state to so destroy any possibility of a life of normalcy that this occurred. So you say the one photo in Germany is the threat which says if you do not buy from Jews they will be forced out, and the other is those already vacated because of the same racist schema.

      “The hooligan Zionist drew the star of David saying, “I am right now powerless to throw you out, but only to harass you and write on your door in the middle of the night like a thief, but eventually we will convince the rest of the Israeli body politic to throw you out.” ”

      Bullshit, “powerless to throw you out,” the entire apparatus of the state of Israel is employed to cleanse the Palestinians – the body politic has already made its intentions clear, it does so at a fevered pace daily with impunity throughout the occupied territory where there has been little to no address. The only reason for the pace of the process in Hebron is the appearance to the world community, the only reason for the incremental movement of the colonial process anywhere is to keep the coveted prize of “statehood” and equally the cover of “democracy” like a stolen fig leaf for other purposes. Quite frankly your arguments are laughable.

      “The star of David was drawn in a piece of land that the world has abandoned into the realm of occupied territory. The essence of 242 allowed for such a development of an extended occupation. Such a development produced a land oriented Jewish movement with little care for international thoughts and scorn for Palestinian sensibilities. As such I agree that it is horrible to draw a threatening symbol onto somebody’s door. ”

      The UN gave Israel no license through 242 to do any of this, it yearly almost unanimously condemns the activity. This process was hatched as I said previously because it ALWAYS was the intention of Zionists to own from sea to sea. Granted, there was aid and abetting for the colonial establishment of Israel, but this continued process today does not deflect the fact that it arose within Zionisms own bosom, and it carries the responsibility equally and more so for its own atrocities.

      • VR
        January 9, 2010, 5:08 pm

        Apparently WJ’s process of “wondering” is a sign of mental deficiency to access plain facts. or just plain disingenuous activity – I choose the latter. See, I complimented you kucker.

      • LeaNder
        January 10, 2010, 7:40 am

        “Don’t buy here and thus we will force the Jews out of Germany.””

        Not that it matters much but the original slogan, you also see in the photograph above, means:

        It says: Germans! Defend yourself! Don’t buy from Jews.

      • LeaNder
        January 10, 2010, 7:44 am

        Which of course needs another exclamation mark at the end.

      • Mooser
        January 10, 2010, 1:43 pm

        But one thing remains constant: the demand by Zionist supporters that we only think in certain channels, and they have the right to determine these channels, from atop their mounds of Jewish corpses, or something.
        But what is so breathtaking is their assurance that this will be a successful strategy? Does it ever occur to them that people, say, talk about Zionism when they are not around to control the conversation? And they seem completely divorced from the possibility that their actions will determine how people talk and think about them?
        It’s gotta be a form of intoxication.

      • Citizen
        January 10, 2010, 4:39 pm

        Yeah, it is mind-boggling, Mooser, and I think it shows how low the non-Jewish IQ is decided to be by the way they act and what they say.

      • Mooser
        January 10, 2010, 5:06 pm

        Citizen, that is a very,very troubling aspect of the matter. There’s no denying that.

  9. Colin Murray
    January 9, 2010, 4:54 pm

    from US preparing military for possible Iran conflict:

    “We’ve looked to do all we can to ensure that conflict doesn’t break out there, while at the same time preparing forces, as we do for many contingencies that we understand might occur,” Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said during an appearance at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.

    Why is the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff taking time out of his busy day (two wars, neither going well, not enough to keep him occupied?) to give a speech at a notorious home for spies and traitors? Are Key Obama Advisors in Tune with Neocon Hawks Who Want to Attack Iran ? Granted, CJCS is a political billet and jawboning is (properly) part of the job description, but why this particular venue? Was Admiral Mullen’s speech part of a coordinated Obama Administration policy, and if so what was its objective?

  10. Colin Murray
    January 9, 2010, 4:57 pm
    • yonira
      January 9, 2010, 5:05 pm

      Its so laughable when you guys make such a huge deal about the preparations the IDF and US Army make for war. This is what they do, they prepare for contingencies. Why is this so horrible? Do you think the Egyptian Army and Jordanian Army aren’t planning right now for some sort of military option against Israel or vise-versa if the need arose?

      I am sure there are contingencies in place for an all out cold-war scenario between Nato and Russia, its not that big of a deal. I don’t even know why JPOST thought that it was was news worthy, its not…..

      Iran is doing a fine job of crumbling from within right now, I don’t see a need for the US, Israel, or any other Western power to unite the Iranian people under a regime which so many of them despise.

      • VR
        January 9, 2010, 5:13 pm

        WJ once again displays these ridiculous arguments. Since when do you go abroad and sell “contingencies?” Just like the attack on Lebanon was a “contingency” sold in the war rooms of the USA, and than suddenly implemented? Get lost

      • Shingo
        January 9, 2010, 9:57 pm

        “‘Do you think the Egyptian Army and Jordanian Army aren’t planning right now for some sort of military option against Israel or vise-versa if the need arose?”‘

        No they are not, because the leaders of both counties are on the US payroll and kept in power by the US.

        “Just like the attack on Lebanon was a “contingency” sold in the war rooms of the USA, and than suddenly implemented?”‘

        Yes, I do love how Israel told Blair and Bush about the contignecy that was about to be implemented.

        If planning for the Lebanon war was a ‘”contignecy “” then why did Olmert admit in his testimony to the Wonigrad Commision that the war had been planned 1 year earlier?
        If planning for the Lebanon war was a ‘”contignecy ”, then why did Olmert even mention it in his testimony to the Wonigrad Commision? He ties his shoelaces every day to prevtn falling over, but he didnt see fit to mention that.
        If planning for the Lebanon war was a ‘”contignecy “, then why were plans only a year old? Are you suggesting that if the war had started in 2005, Israel would not have been prepared for it?

      • potsherd
        January 9, 2010, 10:10 pm

        Egypt and Jordan would be foolish if they were not making some contingency plans for an Israeli attack.

    • Colin Murray
      January 10, 2010, 4:44 pm

      @ yonira January 9, 2010 at 5:05 pm

      This is what they do, they prepare for contingencies.

      You completely misread my comment. My point wasn’t to bring up the obvious notion that contingency planning was taking place, but to question the choice of venue in which Admiral Mullens gave his speech. WINEP is, not to put too fine a point on it, a nest of treason, and my purpose in bringing the article to Mondoweiss readers’ attention was to highlight that the Obama Administration feels the need to reassure and/or bootlick Zionist neoconservatives who lied us into one disastrous war and are doing their damnedest to lie us into another. Also I don’t the the JP article properly relayed the tone and content of Admiral Mullens speech.

      I don’t even know why JPOST thought that it was was news worthy, its not…..

      There is a lot of consternation both in Israel and in Israel-first circles in the US over the degree and nature of Obama administration compliance with Israeli Lobby demands for maintenance of pro-colonization policies harmful to American interests. I think JP editors thought it was newsworthy because it is a reassuring visible and public example of the Obama administration’s continued kowtowing to the Israeli Lobby. If WINEP’rs didn’t think it was any big deal it wouldn’t be front and center on their website.

      I read nothing shocking or untowards in Admiral Mullens’ statements as quoted in the article. I am not saying that he licked any boot. He was the guy who warned the Israelis off another false flag operation like their attack on the USS Liberty that killed 34 Americans. (The Ray McGovern article USS Liberty Vet who Foiled Israeli Attack Awarded the Silver Star is IMO required reading.) My take is that he meant to convey, emphases mine, with his verbiage in quotes:

      (1) “…stability and securit are as vital [in the Middle East] as anywhere on the globe right now.”

      (2) We won’t abandon Israel’s concerns. America will remain engaged in the Middle East “for the forseeable future.”

      (3) However, our Iraq committment is not open-ended, except for a cooperative fight with the Iraqi government against Al Quaeda. We want to be out “by the end of 2011.”

      (4) Notwithstanding the lack of credible evidence that Iran currently has a nuclear weapons development program, “I believe [Iran has a] strategic intent to have nuclear weapons, and I think that would be incredibly destabilizing, not least of all because of the potential for an arms race in that world, which is exactly what we don’t need,…”

      (5) However, “… striking Iran … has a very, very destabilizing outcome.”

      (5) Therefore, “[We will] aggressively address the potential [Iranian] nuclear weapons issue internationally … and to continue where possible to engage and have a dialogue.

      (6)”And we have [Muslim] allies [in the Middle East] who’ve supported us and who are very anxious to continue to support us and to see stability there, particularly in the Gulf area, and not see it break out into any kind conflict.”

      (7) Don’t you dare forget that “we owe [American veterans] a great debt [for fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan], not just of gratitude; we need to ensure that their American dream still has a future. … [Their families] have paid a huge price …”

      (9) America can’t focus entirely on Israel’s concerns. We have our own outside the ME, and they are “not going away and we need to, I think, continue to be engaged and involved .. in our own hemisphere, [especially Mexico and Latin America] … and Africa.”

      (10) “But we’re also living in a time where [not all the challenges the United States faces have a military solution]. The military would like to be the supporting entity and to lead in our policy to be a supporting part of our overall policy globally, and certainly not engaged, from the standpoint of conflict, but engaged from the standpoint of being preventative so that, in fact, these kinds of conflicts don’t break out.

      (11) “I’m very focused on the non-kinetic (CPM: non-violent) side of this, which gets to, in ways, the overall economy in various countries throughout the world, governments which provide for their people, that will raise young Muslims — in particular, male Muslims — with a future, as opposed to put them in a position to make [a] decision to become an extremist or a suicide bomber.”

      (12) “…we need to support Muslims and [their] great religion, which has been corrupted by … a very potent, very powerful, in terms of its impact, and at the same time, relatively small number of individuals — and I think we’ve got to stay at that — who focus very much on us, Americans, those in the West. And I think that’s the long-term battle, quite frankly. And it’s not all that kinetic.

      • Colin Murray
        January 10, 2010, 5:52 pm

        … forgot the end quotes on 10 & 12; they are his words, not mine

  11. VR
    January 9, 2010, 5:16 pm

    Can we get a better, more proficient apologists in here for Zionist atrocities? These current trolls are not worth the wasted time.

  12. Richard Witty
    January 9, 2010, 5:57 pm

    From Wikipedia

    In 1979, a group of settlers headed by Levinger’s wife Miriam led 40 Jewish women and children to move back and take over the former Hadassah Hospital, now Beit Hadassah in central Hebron, to found the Committee of The Jewish Community of Hebron near the Abraham Avinu Synagogue. The take-over created severe conflict with Arab shopkeepers in the same area, who appealed twice to the Israeli Supreme Court, without success.[105] This was later extended to other Hebron neighborhoods including Tel Rumeida, and settlers are currently reported to be trying to purchase more homes in the city.[106][107]

    Six Jews were killed and sixteen were injured in Hebron on May 2, 1980 at 7:30 P. M. They were returning from Friday evening services on foot, following Jewish religious law on the Sabbath, and were fired upon and attacked with grenades from the rooftops.[108]

    A total of 86 Jewish families now live in Hebron.[109] Many reports, foreign and Israeli are sharply critical of the settlers.[110][111] Supporters of Jewish resettlement within Hebron see their program as the reclamation of an important heritage, dating back to Biblical times, which was dispersed after the massacre of 1929. Survivors and descendants of that prior community are mixed. Some support the project of Jewish redevelopment, others commend living in peace with Hebronite Arabs, while a third group recommend a full pullout.[112] Descendants supporting the latter views have met with Palestinian leaders in Hebron.[113] In 1997 one group of descendants dissociated themselves from the settlers by calling them an obstacle to peace.[113] Recently, on May 15, 2006, another group, one of whom is a direct descendant of the 1929 refugees,[114] urged the government to continue its support of Jewish settlement, and allow the return of eight families evacuated the previous January from homes they set up in emptied shops near the Avraham Avinu neighborhood.[112] Beit HaShalom, established in 2007 under disputed circumstances, was under court orders permitting its forced evacuation.[115][116][117][118][119] All the Jews were expelled on December 3, 2008.[120]

    Since early 1997, following the Hebron Agreement, the city has been divided into two sectors: H1 and H2. The H1 sector, home to around 120,000 Palestinians, came under the control of the Palestinian Authority.[121] H2, which was inhabited by around 30,000 Palestinians,[122] remained under Israeli military control to protect several hundred Jewish residents in the old Jewish quarter. A large drop has since taken place in the Palestinian population in H2, identified with the impact of extended curfews, strict restrictions on movement with 16 check-points in place,[123] the closure of Palestinian commercial activities near settler areas, and settler harassment.

    What are Levy’s references?

    10,000 remaining in the Israeli controlled area is a horror. But, the Palestinian controlled area is still the vast majority of the population. Yes, they stay away is accurate.

    Its just not simple is my comment, and to over-simplify a conflict is to misrepresent it.

    Its very irritating when making a statement “its not that simple” is taken as support for the actions.

    • tree
      January 9, 2010, 7:12 pm

      Richard, you repeatedly and falsely simplify and misstate. You’ve done it in your posts above. Palestinian families have been harassed and bullied out of H2, had their businesses locked shut and/or vandalized, had their houses invaded, their movements restricted, been beaten and mistreated in full view of IDF soldiers who do nothing to stop the mistreatment, and you compare it to you voluntarily avoiding certain parts of town in the US. You simply and lie, and then when others point out your callous disregard for the truth, you act as if you are the aggrieved party. Why should we care that you are irritated when your hypocrisy is yet again pointed out to you?

      For anyone interested in an informative read on Hebron, I would suggest the booklet put out by the Israeli NGO Alternative Information Center. You can download it by going to this page and clicking on the “AIC Hebron booklett”. Their other booklets are likewise informative.

      link to alternativenews.org

      • Richard Witty
        January 9, 2010, 10:07 pm

        You don’t read my posts, just what irritates you.

        “10,000 remaining in the Israeli controlled area is a horror. ” from 30,000.

        Its still not that simple.

        And, the question is how to get to a status that is fair, that enables a safe Jewish minority there, that is accountable to law.

      • Colin Murray
        January 10, 2010, 6:53 pm

        @ Richard Witty January 9, 2010 at 10:07 pm
        … the question is how to get to a status that is fair, that enables a safe Jewish minority there …

        Why is this so important? The amount of land involved pales before the amount stolen from Palestinians in 1948 and later. Why can’t Zionists just call it a day with the ethnic cleansing and colonization? Because they don’t want to and don’t have to. It’s not going to happen voluntarily. The remedy is BDS for all Israeli companies and institutions, AND their pro-colonization or enabling counterparts in the US.

        Ashkenazi European and American colonists have carved a state out of land that was almost completely inhabited and owned by Palestinian Arabs. If you want to redress every little wrong, and apply that standard equally, Israel would vanish. What was lost by Jews in Hebron is nothing compared to what was lost, and is continuing to be lost, by Palestinians in the rest of Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories.

        The Zionist obsession with the minutiae of every wrong ever done to Jews whilst ignoring every little wrong every done by Zionists gives the unseemly impression of an emotionless accountant of human suffering. I know the list of wrongs suffered by Jews is very long indeed, and you (plural) have a right to be angry and suspicious of other people’s motives. However, The Holocaust Is Over; We Must Rise From its Ashes.

        You Zionists aren’t doing a damn thing to help normalize Jewish life. Maybe that is why increasing numbers of young American Jews are becoming disenchanted with American Jewish political and social institutions that dwell on the traditional (and mythical) Israeli narrative.

    • MRW
      January 10, 2010, 3:43 am

      Witty, you quote Wikipedia, and you expect any of us to take you seriously?

      • yonira
        January 10, 2010, 4:34 am

        MRW, are you serious? Do I need to call you guys out ever time you quote some blog or some conspiracy website? If so I’ll readily do it, but it will get old, really really quick.

      • Chaos4700
        January 10, 2010, 4:48 am

        How many times did you trash Wikipedia — and then start quoting it yourself? Yonira, your default mode of discourse is “shoot the messenger.” Always has been.

      • Citizen
        January 10, 2010, 4:44 pm

        Yeah, I’ve noticed that yonira likes to attack the messenger,rather than the message.

  13. johd
    January 9, 2010, 6:35 pm

    The Nazi treatment of Germany’s Jewish Population was a horrific crime against humanity. The loathsome nature of the targeted harassment of the Jewish population in episodes such as Kristillnacht is almost unimaginable. The terror, the fear, and the stupefying helplessness.

    To get an idea of what it was like; look to the current treatment of the Palestinian population in Hebron by the Jewish Settlers, with the complicity of the occupying Israeli Government.

  14. pabelmont
    January 9, 2010, 11:37 pm

    I’d love to abandon the use of the term “Nazi” in comparisons if by doing so I could end the use of the term ‘Holocaust’ altogether. It appears that discussions are “allowed” (by Zionists) to mention the perpetrators (Nazis) and the crime (Holocaust) — there were other crimes too, of course, such as the voluntary death-dealing invasion of most of Europe and USSR — but not to make any COMPARISONS with either Nazis or Holocaust.

    Even to say “Never Again” is a quagmire, because it leads to “Never Again What”, and this invites COMPARISONS because, transparently, there will never again be a mass killing of Jews in 1938-1945, details will be different and if there is to be an “Again”, it will be a COMPARATIVE “Again”. “Never Again” is useless in terms of meaning (tho not useless as a tool of manipulation) because it MUST mean “never again something sufficiently similar” and “sufficiently similar” implies comparisons.

    I don’t usually use swear words, but when I do I use them to express or to convey an emotional meaning. People who use “Nazi” in a comparative way — for example in a sentence like “Israel is not exactly like the Nazis” — are probably trying to express or convey an emotion such as extreme fear, loathing, or hatred, and there should be a linguistic way to do that. furthermore there needs to be a SHORT-HAND way to make lengthy descriptions, and saying that you despise Israel because it does “these things: LIST OF 1000 WORDS” is not as easy as saying “because they act like Nazis.”

    And don’t forget “apartheid”.

      • LeaNder
        January 10, 2010, 8:15 am

        I wanted to stop this, since I noticed there was something wrong with the tags.
        I’ve just listened to an interview with our dear Hendryk M. Broder, the son of survivors. He told us, that Iran is far worse than the Nazis. Imagine.

      • VR
        January 10, 2010, 11:31 am

        The Iranians are ALWAYS worse than the Nazis when you want to attack them and eventually destroy their country, and also trying to justify making the Palestinians pay for what happened in other countries LeaNder. Everyone who opposes them is worse then the Nazis because they want to see a murderous genocide cease.

      • Tuyzentfloot
        January 10, 2010, 12:15 pm

        The Iranians are ALWAYS worse than the Nazis In a way they are. The nazis are a key element in the national religion, namely all the world hates Jews and the tough state of Israel will protect them. Iran on the other hand challenges the regional hegemony of Israel, and with that, western support.
        But of course, that’s not what you mean…

      • Citizen
        January 10, 2010, 4:50 pm

        I agree with what you say, Tuyzentfloot; I have no clue where LeaNder is coming from in her mind; seems to me she has learned nothing from her own country’s history for that dazzling mere 12 years of it.

      • Donald
        January 10, 2010, 11:12 pm

        I think Leander was being sarcastic there, Citizen. It’s highly unlikely she thinks the Iranians are worse than the Nazis.

      • Tuyzentfloot
        January 11, 2010, 3:38 am

        I don’t understand Citizen’s comment but from how I’ve understood Leander’s writings the Nazis were an evil that can’t be compared to anything, and he has done extensive research to back it up. I don’t disagree though I believe it’s a bad starting point if you want to spot early warnings.

  15. MRW
    January 10, 2010, 3:25 am

    yonira January 9, 2010 at 2:21 pm
    My point of contention is the super-imposed picture of a Nazi soldier along w/ a German sign.

    Yonira, this is an iconic photo; it’s historic. Your remarks are the equivalent of saying some dumb schmuck photoshopped John-John’s little hand saluting his father’s casket.

    The history:
    January 1933: Hitler appointed German Chancellor
    March 12, 1933: American Jewish Congress in US calls for boycott of German goods in US.
    March 23, 1933: 20G Jews in NYC announce boycott against German goods at City Hall. Boycott organized universally.
    March 24, 1933 Zionists declare war against Germany, reported in famous London Daily Express headline. Declare “Holy War” against the Germans
    March 27, 1933: Massive demonstration Madison Square Gardens, 40,000 strong
    March 29, 1933: Hitler announces retaliation for American action in Germany
    April 1, 1933: One-day boycott in Germany against Jewish shopkeepers to denounce American action — Subject of the photo above.

    These events are recorded, photographed, and described in Edwin Brown’s original edition of The Transfer Agreement — MacMillan 1984. Brown as the ‘Jewish’ writer for the Chicago Trib; he is the only son of Holocaust survivors, real ones: real numbers tattooed on their forearms.

    • MRW
      January 10, 2010, 3:34 am

      Yonira,

      Edwin Brown makes the well-maid argument that had Israel not broken the universal Boycott, Hitler would never have had the dough to fight WWII. Had Israel, or let’s say the forces that wanted to create Israel, not given Hitler $6 million for 60,000 Jews, Hitler would never have had the money to fund WWII.

      • MRW
        January 10, 2010, 3:35 am

        oh jesus.: well-made, not well-maid.

      • yonira
        January 10, 2010, 3:43 am

        not an argument you want to make MRW. Could i not make the same argument that the Palestinians will never get a state because of repeated suicide bombings, plane hijackings, etc….. Of course I could, but I will NEVER stoop that low, NEVER its irresponsible….

        spout your racist bullshit, let everyone on here lap it up like its fucking honey, but deep down you know that is a fucking ugly argument…..

        Myself and my people have gotten over the Holocaust and moved on, maybe its time for your cause to do the same, with pieces of shit like you supporting the Palestinians, there will never be a state, there will be an unending occupation.

      • Shingo
        January 10, 2010, 3:52 am

        “‘with pieces of shit like you supporting the Palestinians, there will never be a state, there will be an unending occupation. “‘

        That’s the way Yonira,

        First you argue that peace might not be a good idea, becasue Muslism are animals that can’t help but want to fight, and now you want to blame MRW for the fact that Israel has stood in the way of a Palestinian state for 60 years.

      • yonira
        January 10, 2010, 4:32 am

        I went over the line, I’ll readily admit it, i apologize to MRW.

        But seriously, how is it productive to take shit from hate websites and try to make an argument that the Jews were responsible for the Holocaust? Is this not over the line at all?

        That is the some of the most racist anti-Semitic stuff I have ever read. But like I said before its honey to you people.

      • Chaos4700
        January 10, 2010, 4:51 am

        I went over the line, I’ll readily admit it, i apologize to MRW.

        And again, you only apologize once you’re backed into a corner. Do you really think anyone takes you seriously at this point, yonira? You’re little more than a foul mouthed bully.

      • Eva Smagacz
        January 10, 2010, 5:46 am

        Yonira,

        You said:
        “is the some of the most racist anti-Semitic stuff I have ever read.”

        MRW quoted the timeline of the deteriorating relationship between Germans and German Jews. Facts and dates are not racist and they are not anti-Semitic.

        Horrible truth is that the chain of events that resulted in Shoah started somewhere and continued uninterrupted all the way to its horrible conclusion.

        Those Nazi comparisons that are so unpleasant to you are a direct result of the fact that right now, Israel is on the road to and repeating a chain of events that in the past resulted in Shoah.

        It does not mean that Israel will commit Shoah against Palestinians. It means that unless the direction it is taking is changed, it might commit genocide because steps towards getting there are predictable.

        Examining history is essential to preventing it happening.

      • LeaNder
        January 10, 2010, 8:52 am

        Horrible truth is that the chain of events that resulted in Shoah started somewhere and continued uninterrupted all the way to its horrible conclusion.

        The chain of events started with the Nazis mindset especially the Dolchstoß Legende/Stab -in -the-back Legend, their urgent need of scapegoats, and NOT with the Jewish boycott.

      • potsherd
        January 10, 2010, 9:55 am

        You miss MRW’s point. It isn’t that the Nazi hatred of Jews began with the Jewish boycott. That would make no sense as the boycott was instituted because of the Nazi treatment of German Jews.

        MRW’s point is that the boycott was effective in harming the German economy, in curtailing the funds available to the German state, to the war machine. That if the boycott had continued, Hitler would not have been able to build up his military forces. Thus, ending the boycott on behalf of emmigration to Israel served Hitler’s war effort and may have contributed to the extermination of the German Jews who weren’t allowed out of Germany (not being rich enough to buy their way out).

        Now this argument may not be valid. The effect of the boycott may not have been that great. But knee-jerk reactions against the word “Nazi” don’t advance understanding of the history, they only advance the cause of hate.

      • Eva Smagacz
        January 10, 2010, 10:00 am

        Nobody claimed that Jewish boycott started chain of events that that resulted in Shoah.

        History of boycott was used to give background to Michael Ratner’s article.

        Facts were called racist and anti-Semitic. When you try to exclude facts out of the discussion, you do not learn from the history.

      • LeaNder
        January 10, 2010, 12:21 pm

        Look, I am able of this kind of speculation too, but I can also understand the feeling of the German Jews at the time who worried it would make things worse for them.

        I am not responding to MRW, but to Eva’s underlying juvenile line of thought: Look, US Jews started it first! Coined as: timeline of the deteriorating relationship between Germans and German Jews. That’s absolutely ridiculous.

        But yes, they surely were right at the time, but beyond that everything is pure speculation. If you are interested in a fictional account of the Nazis (or the true Germans) long rise to power read Lion Feuchtwanger’s Success. It is written between 1927-30, in spite of the fictional hindsight. They didn’t come out of nowhere, they were around longer and whoever wanted to know, knew what they were all about …

      • Eva Smagacz
        January 10, 2010, 3:22 pm

        LeaNder, in your anger you are imputing motivation where there are none. Nowhere did I written that point A or B were a single trigger point of course of events that resulted in Shoah. For the record, this would be juvenile point of view indeed.

        The point that I am making is that similarities between Weimar Republic and Israel today are striking. The time-line shows constant redefining, and crossing, of moral red lines.

        If somebody told you 10 years ago that Israel will drop 3 MILLION tons of explosives, most of it from the air, on a locked down concentration camp where half of inmates are children, would you believe it?

        What happened in 1943 was unimaginable in Germany in 1933 to. (or so we thought).

      • Donald
        January 10, 2010, 3:33 pm

        “If somebody told you 10 years ago that Israel will drop 3 MILLION tons of explosives, most of it from the air, on a locked down concentration camp where half of inmates are children, would you believe it?”

        3 million tons is wrong. I don’t know what the correct figure is. The US dropped 2 million tons of bombs in all of WWII. We dropped about 7 million tons of bombs in the years of the Vietnam War. There’s no frigging way Israel dropped 3 megatons on Gaza and if they had, the entire strip would be a moonscape.

        On your main point, the Gaza War was no different from many of Israel’s earlier actions. They behaved similarly in Lebanon in 2006 and if anything, they were worse in 1982, and probably killed more than 10,000 civilians.

        Could they become much worse? Possibly so.

      • Citizen
        January 10, 2010, 4:57 pm

        And who was that Israeli leader who said fairly recently that Israel would give the Palestinians their own Shoah?

      • LeaNder
        January 10, 2010, 5:01 pm

        Look Eva, we have been here before.

        This is your response to MRW’s tiny chain of events in a much larger chain of events in Nazi Germany, claiming it is essential for things to follow:

        MRW quoted the timeline of the deteriorating relationship between Germans and German Jews. Facts and dates are not racist and they are not anti-Semitic.

        From what I know about the Nazis I can assure you, they were probably pleased the US Jewish boycott. The centralization of the press was in place early, remember. It provided them with the best kind of propaganda weapon, which always must contain a grain of truth.

        The point that I am making is that similarities between Weimar Republic and Israel today are striking.

        Maybe you aren’t quite aware of it, but the Nazi reign marks the end of the Weimar Republic. So I have no clue what you are trying to tell me.

        I still read two essential points out of your statements above:

        1) the US Jewish boycott is essential in the timeline of Jewish/Jewish German – non-Jewish German relations, an essential date leading up to the Shoa.

        2) The Israelis are the new Nazis, if they don’t change their ways, we will soon witness concentration and extinction camps all over the Middle East.

      • Eva Smagacz
        January 10, 2010, 5:39 pm

        3 million kilograms of explosives, not tons of explosives – my mistake.

        I cannot find my the source for this figure, but I dug up something that confirms that 3 million kilograms of explosives is hardly off the mark:

        From Reuters –

        LONDON, Jan 9 (Reuters) – The U.S. is seeking to hire a merchant ship to deliver hundreds of tonnes of arms to Israel from Greece later this month, tender documents seen by Reuters show. The U.S. Navy’s Military Sealift Command (MSC) said the ship was to carry 325 standard 20-foot containers of what is listed as “ammunition” on two separate journeys from the Greek port of Astakos to the Israeli port of Ashdod in mid-to-late January.

        The tender for the vessel follows the hiring of a commercial ship to carry a much larger consignment of ordnance in December from the United States to Israel ahead of air strikes in the Gaza Strip. A German shipping firm which won that tender confirmed the order when contacted by Reuters but declined to comment further.

        The ship hired by the MSC in December was for a much larger cargo of arms, tender documents showed. That stipulated a ship to be chartered for 42 days capable of carrying 989 standard 20-foot containers from Sunny Point, North Carolina to Ashdod.

        The tender document said the vessel had to be capable of “carrying 5.8 million pounds (2.6 million kg) of net explosive weight”, which specialist brokers said was a very large quantity. The ship was requested early last month to load on December 15.

        In September, the U.S. Congress aproved the sale of 1,000 bunker-buster missiles to Israel. The GPS-guided GBU-39 is said to be one of the most accurate bombs in the world. The Jerusalem Post, citing defence officials, reported last week that a first shipment of the missiles had arrived in early December and they were used in pentetrating Hamas’s underground rocket launcher sites.

        link to alertnet.org

      • MRW
        January 10, 2010, 5:42 pm

        Yonira,

        take shit from hate websites and try to make an argument that the Jews were responsible for the Holocaust?

        (1) I took this from The Transfer Agreement, a copy of which is always at the side of my desk. The original version only, not the one rewritten by Abe Foxman’s hack editor.

        (2) Where do you get off saying I make an argument that the Jews were responsible for the Holocaust from my detailing dates from The Transfer Agreement?

        Although the current version of this book has had critical historical info excised from it, and all the photos, like the rally at Madison Square Gardens and Rabbi Wise and all the participants in the Boycott, I’d suggest you look the book up on Amazon and see what you are accusing of being anti-semitic or conspiratorial or whatever the shit you’re doing.

      • MRW
        January 10, 2010, 5:56 pm

        BTW, Yonira, Edwin Black’s parents — Holocaust survivors with tattoos on their forearms — vowed that they would publish an obituary in the paper that their only son was dead. Eventually, his mother relented.

        After the book was published, the JDL put a death contract out on Black’s life and he had to hide for two years.

        Black was the first guy to make use of the then recently enacted FOIA to get original documents related to the Holocaust. His study took five years. He did it because his parents refused to talk about the Holocaust and he just had to know. He was the ‘Jewish’ writer of Jewish issues at the Chicago Trib.

      • MRW
        January 10, 2010, 6:03 pm

        LeaNder,

        From what I know about the Nazis I can assure you, they were probably pleased the US Jewish boycott.

        Oh no they weren’t! Germany survived off its exports and it was killing them. The Germans had the memory of wheelbarrows of cash to buy a loaf of bread fresh in their memories. And it wasn’t a ”US Jewish Boycott,“ either. It involved many governments of the world, and it would have succeeded had the pre-Israel Zionists not broken it.

        Look the book up, but I warn you: Abe Foxman had critical historical data removed from the original. If you can find a used copy of the 1984 MacMillan edition with the photos, only read that one. And the sole author was Edwin Black.

      • MRW
        January 10, 2010, 7:52 pm

        The pre-Israel Zionists may have paid $6 million to get 60,000 Jews out of Germany to work the orange groves in Palestine, but their action sentenced 6 million Jews to death, because that $6 million allowed Hitler to create an army…something he could not have done without that money….(1) because Germany didn’t have that kind of dough then, and (2) Hitler wasn’t that popular with the Germany people that they were willing to make the kind of sacrifice necessary to produce it. Black documents all of this with government docs and never before seen memos.

        Talk about a classic definition of Tragedy.

      • Tuyzentfloot
        January 11, 2010, 3:09 am

        Hm, I don’t doubt the numbers and the censoring but for the moment I’ll stick to my prejudice that there has been little mutual influence between events in Europe and in Palestine. I prefer to minimalize the impact of Zionist acts on the course of events in Europe, as I want to minimalize the impact Nazism had on the actions of the Zionists.

      • Eva Smagacz
        January 10, 2010, 11:23 am

        In 1935 German Gross National Product (estimated) was 92.8 billion RM or 21.9 billion dollars (conversion 4.21). 6 million dollars in today’s money is 94 million. Significant, but not pivotal amount.

    • MRW
      January 10, 2010, 5:44 pm

      WHOOPS, it’s Edwin Black’s book not Edwin Brown.

  16. Cliff
    January 10, 2010, 7:06 am

    yonira, define antisemitism as expressed by MRW.

    Should be an easy task, since as of late, you’ve been throwing that label around frequently.

  17. Einstein says
    January 10, 2010, 7:35 am

    link to upload.wikimedia.org

    Don’t forget this star of david that was put on the wall over a 100 years ago and now hangs above a house occupied by palestinians…

    Big win for you there Ratner…way to go!

  18. Einstein says
    January 10, 2010, 8:12 am

    when 70 innocent Jewish Hebron residents were massacred in 1929….several years prior to your holocaust photo…and several more years before the dispicable “Occupation”….what was it then? pre-emptive?!?

    • potsherd
      January 10, 2010, 6:47 pm

      It was a riot incited by Palestinian nationalists who were alarmed at the drive for unlimited Jewish immigration into Palestine with the intention of creating a Jewish state. Correctly, as it turned out.

      • Einstein says
        January 11, 2010, 4:16 am

        So that excuses the massacre? well in that case it’s a good thing Israel won’t need to apologize for a riot incited by Israeli nationals who are alarmed at the arms shipments successfully being smuggled into Gaza and if they were to murder civilians then its not such a big deal. because correctly as it turns out there were rockets fired.

        or better yet, i guess, in Springfield Illinois in 1908 the whites who were alarmed at the inclusion of colored people in the workforce and, heaven forbid, in interpersonal relationships with the white population, with the intention of integrating blacks into the normal human population. And well, they too were correct as it turned out.

        potsherd fly your racist banner high!

      • Shmuel
        January 11, 2010, 4:34 am

        There’s that straw man (and logical fallacy) again, ES. Attempting to explain a phenomenon does not imply justifying it. The blanket Zionist explanation for all violence against Jews – anti-Semitism – doesn’t always work, and what is worse, has been used not only to explain, but to justfy violence against non-Jews.

        You’ll also want to watch those inappropriate analogies and absurd use of the word “racist”.

      • Einstein says
        January 11, 2010, 5:27 am

        ok, shmuel knows a term “straw man”…wow.

        if anytyhing your post supports my argument against potherd’s stupid comment. potsherd attempted to explain the phenomenon of the 1929 Arab riots, but it can be inferred that his explanation was a justification.

        and it was a horrible justification at that. he is in essence affirming my sarcastic characterization of the ’29 massacre as a “pre-emptive strike”

        “Palestinian nationalists who were alarmed at the drive for unlimited Jewish immigration into Palestine with the intention of creating a Jewish state. Correctly, as it turned out” potsherd

        Considering that the State of Israel didn’t exist and that there was no Jewish military “occupation” of Hebron, your so-called “blanket” Zionist explanation (anti-semitism or more appropriately anti-jewish) seems like the most appropriate.

        what did you find inappropriate about my springfield riot analogy? you need to provide a counter if you want to dismiss a point. unless of course you are OK with your arguments (similar to arguing with a klans member, you can bring him all the proof you like that blacks and whites are the same but the klans man will stand by his hatred)

        potsherd found a way to justify the arab riots by arguing that the arabs feared Jewish immigration (not oppression, as the Jews were a minority, right? the arabs like the whites in springfield illinois were the majority). the whites in springfield also feared black immigration and black workers taking their jobs…if potsherd can defend arabs for these riots, then logically he would defend the whites in 1908 Springfield Illinois…QED potsherd is a racist

        you are also shmuel…as you call yourself a “Jew” based on some Khazar european invention. and you use your “assumed” identity to persecute jews without limitation

      • Shmuel
        January 11, 2010, 5:44 am

        Just curious, Einstein (another Jew by “Khazar European invention”), what are your Jewish credentials? Unlike you, I am not concerned with the purity of Jewish “blood”, but would be interested in hearing your racial theory of Judaism. Comparisons to other such racial theories – of Judaism or any other “race” – would be most welcome.

      • Shingo
        January 11, 2010, 6:01 am

        “‘potsherd found a way to justify the arab riots by arguing that the arabs feared Jewish immigration (not oppression, as the Jews were a minority, right? the arabs like the whites in springfield illinois were the majority). the whites in springfield also feared black immigration and black workers taking their jobs…if potsherd can defend arabs for these riots, then logically he would defend the whites in 1908 Springfield Illinois…QED potsherd is a racist”

        Lazy argument, Einstein.

        You see, unlike the black Zionist brainiacs that were licking their lips over the land of Palestine, the blakc popupation of Springfield hadn’t annouced to the world that they wanted to create a state in Palestine and drive out the whites.

        But hey, let’s not allow facts to get in the way of you conflation.

        Carry on..

      • Einstein says
        January 11, 2010, 6:14 am

        I am not the one putting race into this, you are.

        I am claiming you are not Jewish. and you claim you are by virtue of your “so-called” birthright. well if that’s why you are Jewish surely you are the racist.

        I was born in America, if you must know.

      • Shmuel
        January 11, 2010, 6:35 am

        No, actually. I said that I am simply a Jew (just as you did). It is you who questioned my identity (about which you of course know nothing), assuming that I call myself a Jew simply because I am descendent from “Ashke-Nazi” “Khazars” – a matter of bloodline. One thing is clear from all of this: Einstein you’re not.

      • Einstein says
        January 11, 2010, 6:43 am

        lazy rebuttal Shingo…

        you are excusing the actions of the arabs in these riots cause, in your opinion, the subjects were some monstrous evil “maniacal Zionists” conspiring to conquer the arab and subjugate him. (again, you are essentially justifying the massacre as a pre-emptive attack on the “occupation” that would come 40 years after)

        i can almost see the horns on the 70 Jewish victims that you have so completely demonized.

        thanks again, your racism is in full force

      • Einstein says
        January 11, 2010, 6:49 am

        i am not what, shmuel? what am i not? a jew?

        Shmuel, you are a “so-called” Jew. you call yourself a Jew in order to promote hate against real Jews. You feel you are entitled to the title Jew by virtue of your white european heritage. this gives you no right

        you have been on these forums for a while, i have read several of your posts. i know that the identity which you have built by virtue of these posts is not a Jewish one.

        so I ask again, why do you insist on calling yourself a “Jew”? and what do you have against Jews?

      • Shingo
        January 11, 2010, 6:57 am

        That’s not what I’m saying at all.

        You drew parallel’s between Hebron and springfield, and then asked someone to challenge you on why it was not an apt comparison. I just gave you a crucial factor at play that did not occur in Illinois.

        You can spray divbersionary excrement all you like about horns on the 70 Jewish victims, but the suspicions of the Palestinians population were proved to be well founded. That does not justify anyone’s murder.

      • Shingo
        January 11, 2010, 7:03 am

        “‘Shmuel, you are a “so-called” Jew. you call yourself a Jew in order to promote hate against real Jews. You feel you are entitled to the title Jew by virtue of your white european heritage. this gives you no right”‘

        Why the obsession with Shmuel’s Jewishness? Is it because being a jew makes him a more difficult propsition for you to attack? Did the armory of attack points you came prepared with only cover anti Semitism? Shucks!!

        Because let’s face it Einstein, tehre is no such thing as legitmate criticism of Israel is there? And if according to you, all Jews are Zionists, which is a demonstrable lie, then your little crrolary could be that Shmuel and the rest of us are atatckikng all Jews when we criticise Israel.

        I’m begining to realise that your choice of Einstein was an attempto at irony.

      • Cliff
        January 11, 2010, 7:07 am

        He is not excusing the riots and subsequent killings.

        He is providing context. Just as one would provide context for the substantial amount of emigration of Jews to Historic Palestine (as seeking refuge). In this example, it would mitigate the emotional knee-jerk reaction of saying that this emigration was colonial in character 100% and from day 1.

        I’d say it changed over time. And that not all the Jews were Zionists.

        You’re point-scoring, Einstein (you degrade the great man). Go away, troll. Or AT LEAST, try some new hasbara. You’re BORING.

      • Cliff
        January 11, 2010, 7:09 am

        Let me also add, that in trying to understand the motivations/context behind and for the riots, one does not by-definition find the killings of the Jewish residents, acceptable.

        That is a slippery slope.

      • Shmuel
        January 11, 2010, 7:13 am

        ES: You feel you are entitled to the title Jew by virtue of your white european heritage.

        There’s that race thing again. That is your characterisation, not mine. I’m glad to hear that you’ve been reading my posts, but I have constructed nothing. “I yam what I yam”, to quote Popeye and paraphrase Y.L. Peretz. I do not “insist” on calling myself anything – unless I accept your premise that I am not myself (yes, it’s that absurd). If you have read my posts here, as you say, you will have noted that I have nothing against Jews per se (once again, your premise), but that I have no problem criticising individuals or groups, for their ideas and their actions – even if we happen to belong to the same tradition, people or “civilisation”.

      • Einstein says
        January 11, 2010, 7:26 am

        the fears of the whites of Springfield were also well founded, and later proved true (civil rights amendment would pass 60 years after). it doesn’t make their violence, or their reasoning behind the attack, any less of an atrocity.

        who is the one spraying divbersionary excrement?!? man you are transparent, and so clearly racist.

      • Shmuel
        January 11, 2010, 7:29 am

        Es: i am not what, shmuel? what am i not? a jew?

        You are not Einstein, Einstein. That much is clear from the twisted logic and lack of humanism in your posts. As to whether you are a Jew or not, I really don’t give a damn.

      • Chaos4700
        January 11, 2010, 7:58 am

        the fears of the whites of Springfield were also well founded, and later proved true

        ….Excuse me? What the hell is that supposed to mean?

      • Einstein says
        January 11, 2010, 8:26 am

        it means the Arabs of Hebron in 1929 feared the Jews taking over Hebron forty years later (sarcasm), they didn’t want Jews to live next to them, they didn’t want Jews to own property there, etc….

        Likewise, the whites of Springfield in 1908 feared the Blacks would take over their town, they didn’t want Blacks to live next to them, they didn’t want Blacks to own property there, etc….

      • Citizen
        January 11, 2010, 8:59 am

        Anybody have a clue why Einstein claims Shmuel is not a Jew? Or why ES thinks that’s important? I don’t get it. Shmuel said he was a Jew, and Shmuel’s
        comments on this blog are always helpful and very often very wise. So now why is he under personal attack by this newbie commenter here, ES? Again, I don’t get it.

      • Shmuel
        January 11, 2010, 9:14 am

        Ok, let’s try this one last time.

        The fear of Zionists taking over Palestine was real in 1929. Jewish privilege in Palestine was the essence of political Zionism (opposed by the Old Yishuv and most of world Jewry), freely and openly declared by Zionism’s secular assimilated leaders, and backed by the might of the British Empire. Jews had lived next to Arabs in Hebron for centuries. Arabs did not fear Jewish neighbours. They feared Jewish privilege and European imperialism. Their fear was legitimate. The massacre was not. Legitimate aspirations, illegitimate actions.

        White fear in Springfield was also real, but it was not legitimate. It was not about expected black privilege or control, but about white privilege and control – its preservation, to be exact. Illegitimate aspirations, illegitimate actions.

      • Einstein says
        January 11, 2010, 9:22 am

        Shmuel is an ethnocentric racist. He calls himself a Jew only by virtue of the fact that his parents were Jewish. While that criteria certainly allows one to be considered a Jew, it doen’t mean that he is one.

        this blog is devoted to the discussion of Israel/Palestine. Israel claims to be a homeland for the Jewish people. Therefore if one claims to be a Jew and speaks for or against Israel it carries a different weight than an outsider’s opinion of the issue. my aim is to expose that Shmuel and the majority of commentators and contributors to this blog falsely claim they are “Jews” when their beliefs run antithical to that of Jews.

        They espouse their ethnic identity as a means of justifing their severely anti-Jewish propaganda. Many people come from Jewish parents but if they do not hold Jewish beliefs then that should be presented to the outside world instead of speaking in the name of Jews.

        I understand that Shmuel’s comments help you feel better about coping with your anti-Jewish beliefs as in this politically correct age you would hate to think that you are a racist, but you are. Just cause Shmuel and other so-called “Jews” are willing to deliver Jews to the slaughter doesn’t negate the fact that their slaughter is immoral.

        Free Palestine, Free Iran, Free Iraq, Free Afghanistan, Free Israel

      • Chaos4700
        January 11, 2010, 9:30 am

        Oh, I get it. You’re an Israeli who was sent to do a smear job on Shmuel, then.

      • Einstein says
        January 11, 2010, 9:31 am

        “The fear of Zionists taking over Palestine was real in 1929. Jewish privilege in Palestine was the essence of political Zionism (opposed by the Old Yishuv and most of world Jewry), freely and openly declared by Zionism’s secular assimilated leaders, and backed by the might of the British Empire. Jews had lived next to Arabs in Hebron for centuries. Arabs did not fear Jewish neighbours. They feared Jewish privilege and European imperialism. Their fear was legitimate. The massacre was not. Legitimate aspirations, illegitimate actions.”

        so your beef should not be with the Zionists but rather the British Empire and Western colonialism. The Arabs living there were fine with Ottoman imperialism, i guess you are fine with that too.

        However, it is strange that these Arabs did not massacre the British occupiers, wouldn’t you say? After all the Zionist of the time were weak, as you say, it was the might of the British that kept the arab in Hebron down in 1929… yet the attack was strangely carried out against the Jews there

      • Shmuel
        January 11, 2010, 9:37 am

        Citizen: Anybody have a clue why Einstein claims Shmuel is not a Jew?

        Because I piss him off, Citizen. I make the claims of anti-Semtism a little harder to flog. One solution is to resort to cheap psychology, and label me a “self-hater”. Another way is to say I’m not Jewish, and just an ordinary, run of the mill Jew-hating gentile.

        Another thing to keep in mind is the “Jews persecuted by gentiles” paradigm. If Jews are perennial victims and non-Jews perennial oppressors, presenting Jews as real oppressors (eg. Gaza) or imagined oppressors (criticising Israel), and non-Jews as victims of Jews and/or non-oppressors of Jews, fucks up the whole existential narrative. Better to define who’s who in advance, in such a way as to always conform to the paradigm. It makes for a tidier universe, less need to re-examine ad re-evaluate, and handy pre-emptive justification for any atrocities one may happen to commit.

      • Chaos4700
        January 11, 2010, 9:39 am

        Sounds like you very adroitly point out, inadvertently, ES, that the problem in Palestine were EUROPEAN Jews — Zionist colonials, in point of fact. And often, terrorists and militants.

        Like you said — Arabs and Jews got along just fine before the Europeans came along. And Israel was a European invention.

      • aparisian
        January 11, 2010, 9:47 am

        Dear Einstein, first of all welcome to Dick Witty, Ziocon Yonira club.
        I went through your posts and i can see the Zionist propaganda on you.
        Zionists used the effects of the holocaust and the Jewish sufferance to get the support of Jews and those who oppressed them. The problem that this unconditional support went so far, it gave them the right to commit Nazi like atrocities. Zionists use this emotional part of history till today to fuel the war machine in Israel. I hear so often Israelis saying Arabs, Europeans want to slaughter etc… and i wonder how can any rational man on earth believe in this shit? Zionists also use Islamophobia after 9/11 to reinforce these feelings of fear and hatred towards Pals, the consequence of such policy is the dehumanisation of Pals. Slaughtering Arab children and innocent civilians became so banal so accepted, for Israelis it doesn’t matter they are terrorists for them.

        Einstein, again welcome to the racists NaZinoists club.

      • Einstein says
        January 11, 2010, 9:55 am

        i agree the modern state of Israel is wholly a European invention.

        other modern European inventions are Jordan, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Iran, and a ton of other countries outside the middle east.

        that is indeed the problem. you want your UN to enact international justice, when the UN and the IMF, NATO and the US military (and its mercenary contractors) are tools of Western colonialism.

        The biggest mistake of the Zionists is that they relied on this mockery of a court, of this so called international law, the Jewish immigrants of European descent desperately sought the approval of the Western powers to give them the legal right to return to their homeland. Quite a “civilized” ambition

        The right to this land is not one for anyone to give. it is the promise of the God of Abraham that the children of Israel will inherit the land. that is what we see happening.

        just take a look in the mirror, to see the absurdity in who accuses Jews of being colonists…where you from Chaos?

      • Einstein says
        January 11, 2010, 10:14 am

        aparisian
        “Zionists used the effects of the holocaust and the Jewish sufferance to get the support of Jews and those who oppressed them. The problem that this unconditional support went so far, it gave them the right to commit Nazi like atrocities. Zionists use this emotional part of history till today to fuel the war machine in Israel. ”

        actually, without the help of the German Jews and Jewish collaborators, the Nazis would have hardly been so successful at killing so many Jews.

        Therefore, I can give a damn about the Holocaust, if anything all the Holocaust Industry does is promote euro ethnocentrism and the globalist agenda. Why is it that there are Holocaust memorials in almost every major American and Western city?!? I don’t recall any Nazi concentration camps in Washington DC or Seattle, Washington.

        Also, it seems the Holocaust is used to attack Jews by “so called” Jews of today. Finklestein, Hass, Baltzar etc all are cashing in on the Holocaust bandwagon.

        No, I don’t remember the Holocaust on a Holocaust rememberance day. I remember that the Holocaust against my faith is on-going and the enemy is always trying to trick and pick off those of weak mind, to strip them of the knowledge of the true God.

      • aparisian
        January 11, 2010, 10:25 am

        “I remember that the Holocaust against my faith is on-going and the enemy is always trying to trick and pick off those of weak mind, to strip them of the knowledge of the true God. ”

        Your enemy? Who is your enemy? The innocent Pals children your army sprayed them with White Phosphorus? Or unarmed Palestinians?

        I went through your youtube profile and i saw that you are a religious Zionist, just a question how can you justify the crimes committed towards Pals in the name of Judaism? I know little about your religion but at least i learnt that Talmud said if you kill an innocent live it is like killing the whole world? How can you accept to make innocent Pals homeless with their children in order to fulfil some religious ambitions? And how can religion push people to be immoral? Can we also compare Israeli settlers to conventional terrorists?

      • potsherd
        January 11, 2010, 10:29 am

        I see that the worthy Shmuel has already replied. It is clear that Einstein is here to spread propaganda, not to achieve or promote understanding. Understanding the events of 1929, the events that led up to them, the events that followed from them, is important for understanding the tensions that exist today. Einstein regards this as “excusing” or “justifying” events that he doesn’t want to take the time to understand.

      • Shmuel
        January 11, 2010, 10:46 am

        As I said, I ruin his main line of defence and mess up his paradigm, so he puts his conclusions in his premises (A. a Jew is someone who agrees with him; B. I don’t agree with him; C. I am not a Jew), and calls it logic. Albert would have been horrified.

        I must say that his ambitious project of “exposing” all of us “false Jews” isn’t going very well, since he has done nothing but repeat his rather ludicrous premise about kingdoms and such.

        I will tell Einstein what I told Zamaaz. If you can argue on the basis of universally valid principles there is a point to discussion. If your entire argument is based on a premise only you accept, you are simply a troll.

      • potsherd
        January 11, 2010, 10:57 am

        That’s right, the whites of Springfield were motivated by fear. Like the Arabs in 1920s Hebron, they observed a phenomenon as a threat, and their fears were played on and whipped up by fear mongers, who fanned up their fears to the point of violence.

        Today’s Jewish Zionists are likewise motivated by fear. This was a point made by the speakers yesterday in Oak Park. The Jewish Zionists see a phenomenon, the growing awareness among the US Jewish community that the legitimacy of the Israeli occupation is unsupportable. They fear the erosion of Zionism, to which they are as emotionally attached as the Arabs of Hebron to their land and the whites of Springfield to their whiteness, whatever that meant to them.

        Fear, after all, is irrational. Fears can have a rational basis, but the germ of fear burrows into the emotional complex and festers there into hate, growing out of control.

        So we have the case of the poster who calls himself Einstein, consumed with fear for the future of Zionism, consumed with hate for those he sees as threatening Zionism (as indeed this site does and will continue to do until Zionism fades away), and he lashes out against them with all the poor force at his disposal – namecalling, innuendo.

        This is a sign of weakness. The rise in fear among Zionists is a sign that they feel threatened, and I hope their fears are correct. They sense that they are now on the losing side, that people are no longer going to accept the Zionist narrative, that they are going to be looking directly at the history, at the facts on the ground, at the truth, and reject what they see, reject what they have been told and what they have been brought up to blindly believe.

        Einstein is showing us how people react when consumed with fear. This is how we can understand the events in both Hebron and Springfield.

      • potsherd
        January 11, 2010, 11:18 am

        it is the promise of the God of Abraham that the children of Israel will inherit the land.

        OK, religious nutcase here, case closed, we can move on.

        Yesterday, I heard Rabbi Brant Rosen, who is obviously not a Jew by “Einstein’s” criteria, say that Zionism has become an idolotry. “Einstein” is here to kill him a sacrificial victim to throw on the altar of his golden calf.

      • Shingo
        January 11, 2010, 3:09 pm

        “‘Likewise, the whites of Springfield in 1908 feared the Blacks would take over their town…”‘

        Based on what evicence? What black leaders were talking about creting an African American state in Illinois and driving white people from their land?

        So you are claiming the fears of the whotes were well founded? What does mean? Where their fears that the black men would rape their women well founded? That blakc men would kill them?

        Haven’t you just admitted to being a vile racist, and very poorly educated one?

      • Shingo
        January 11, 2010, 3:14 pm

        Yes Einstain, our beef is very much with British Empire and Western colonialism, as well as Zionism.

        Your arguments are patetic and juveile to say the least. The palestinains were not cfire with teh Ottoman empire, which is why they assited the British in driving the Ottoman empire out of Palestine.

        The Palestinians did not atatck teh British, becasue they trusted that the British would allow them independence as they’d been promised. It was teh Zionists who atatcked and murdered teh British, the British BTW. who were giving them the land. Is that what it means to be a Zinist Einstein?

      • Shingo
        January 11, 2010, 3:24 pm

        Your argument is ful of sontradictions.

        How can Israel be a wholly a European invention and a Jewish homeland at the same time?

        Your attitude deminstartes the never ending ungratefullness of Israelis. Jews had no chance of creating a Jewish state without the British and the UN, those tools of Western colonialism, yet you begrudge them anyway.

        Without these institunions , Israel would never have become a state and instituted the racist “‘right of return”‘, which is anything but a “civilized” ambition. It is a segegationist and colonialist ambition, and the majority of Jews in Israel colonized the place, so yes, after looking in teh mirror, this is all too obvious.

        God is not a real estate agent. The Jews broke ghe covenant with God and tpook Israel back from them. I though you were religious, or you would know this?

        The myth that Moses conveyed God’s covenant to the Israelites and the Roman Diaspora, are based on no historical reality, the stuff of legend and possibly even lies that crumble under any serious scrutiny.

      • Einstein says
        January 13, 2010, 7:32 am

        Shingo your world is falling a part and you are beginning to see your hatred and fear of the “Zionist” as the same hatred and fear the Springfield Whites held for the “blacks”. I can tell by your hastened typing.

        You are beginning to arrive at the right questions and conclusions the “holes” in the mondoweiss armor of propaganda and lies…
        “How can Israel be a wholly a European invention and a Jewish homeland at the same time?”
        “The Palestinians did not atatck teh British, becasue they trusted that the British would allow them independence as they’d been promised. It was teh Zionists who atatcked and murdered teh British, the British BTW. who were giving them the land.”

        If the British were helping and arming the “Zionists” and giving them the land, as you say, why would the “zionists” want to attack them? doesn’t make much sense.

        Here you show your poor knowledge of history. obviously there are some holes to your knowledge and understanding of what was going on here in Palestine on the ground at the time.
        yet you have no problem finding a rationalization of the brutal murder of 70 Jews in Hebron in 1929.
        you seem to brush off violence against Israelis/Jews as justified and violence against “palestinians” as crimes of war
        (Palestinian being a very loaded term in and of itself, i mean, go down to the local library and check the microfiche of some newspapers from the turn of the 20th century up until 1960, the term “palestinian” refers to the Jewish immigrants and not to the Arab population)

        but this is the age of marketing, “journalist”s are merely ad men selling you the latest “story”

        so let’s see if your view of the history of the state of israel makes sense:

        a weak minority of jewish immigrants were placed here by the British who supported their evil Zionist plan with guns and military force, to steal arab lands
        the British promised the arabs their own land in exchange for their help expelling the ottomans.
        the Arabs of Hebron in response to the threats of the minority Jewish population took arms against the Jewish occupiers in a pre-emptive attempt to stop the evil zionist plan.
        Out-numbered and faced with arab violence, the Jews in Palestine decide it would be best to attack the brittish, who give the Jews weapons and whose military occupies and seizes the arab lands on their behalf.

        Maybe this view of history makes sense this way the Jews could help the Arabs by destroying the British and gain their favor to establish their homeland in Palestine

        Shmuel thinks he is something new, that his being Jewish throws a monkey wrench in my line of reasoning, it only supports it. There have been plenty of Shmuels and Phils throughout Jewish history. Herzl himself was a Phil Weiss. Hertzl was an avid assimilationist. Most of those you support in Israel come from backgrounds of this “racial” superiority.

        However, for those that truly understand what it is to be a Jew, and who want to protect and provide for freedom to practice as a Jew, there are many who were sacrificed by these Mondoweiss Jews.
        The fighters who tried to liberate Jerusalem in 1948, who were stranded by the founders of Israel the “elite” racially Jewish spiritually empty. Many instances of this betrayal occurred.

      • Chaos4700
        January 13, 2010, 7:55 am

        Crap, man, no wonder there’s so much pressure to boycott Israeli scholars across the world. It isn’t just about BDS — Israeli culture is so full of pretentious nonsense that they apparently can’t help seeking to destroy any rational discussion they make themselves part of. It’s like the academic equivalent of white phosphorous — throws up a smoke screen, burns you if you dare to touch it and smolders for days. (And of course, Israelis are found of launching both into schools.)

      • Einstein says
        January 13, 2010, 8:20 am

        excellent comeback, chaos, now your position makes sense.

        you know if you take a random post by you or any of the cronies here, you are likely to come across the same empty rhetoric as above….

        you deny and insult and shift focus, project your inaccuracies on your opponent, etc…the same tactics which you attribute to the Hasbara Zionist machine, you seem to employ yourself…what did you go to Zionist propaganda school and this is your way of lashing out against them?!?

      • Chaos4700
        January 13, 2010, 8:29 am

        So now Shmuel is not Jewish enough for you, but when I delve into insults suddenly I must be Jewish? That’s… pretty twisted, actually.

      • Einstein says
        January 13, 2010, 9:04 am

        i dint intentionally call you a jew just said that you use the same tactics of argument that you decry Zionist propagandists of using…with out the hint of irony….

        no, just cause i was kidding about you using the same tactics you complain zionist use, i wasn’t calling you Jewish, just hypocritical.

        but i bet for a second, you were insulted by the thought of being a Jew, huh?
        imagine if you really were like Shmuel, you also would be begging the world to help you kill off that ugly reflection you have staring back at you in the mirror…

      • Cliff
        January 13, 2010, 9:17 am

        Let me get this straight, Einstein.

        You imply a negative connotation to the term, ‘Jew’, then assume Chaos accepts YOUR premise and then is insulted by ‘it’?

        Looks like you’re producing a movie, Einstein. Written, directed, starring – you. But it’s about Mondowiess commentators.

        I think that’s called, projection.

      • Shingo
        January 13, 2010, 4:10 pm

        Einstein,

        Don’t take comfort in my typos, I make them all then time.

        Secondly, my world is not fallnig apart, becasue if it were based simply on the I/P conflict, it would have fallen apart long ago.

        Like Witty, you impy that other’s grasp of history is flawed, but never see fit to elaborate, becasue like Witty, you’re probaby much to afraid to give us the Hasbra version of history that has been shot down in flamed repeatedly.

        Trust me Einstein, I know this stuff better than you ever will.

        Yes, there was a rationalization of the brutal murder of 70 Jews in Hebron in 1929, not a justification for what they did. I challenegd you repetaedly to come up with statements from prominent black leaders in Illinois that would have given the white population the impression that the blakc population wanted to steal their land and drive them out, but clearly, you are unable.

        Not all vilence is a war crime, but much of Israel’s actions are most certianly war crimes, including the building of settlements on occupied territory, which even Israel’s highest political authority in 1967 delcared was a violaton of the 4th Geneva Conventions. It was a pro Israeli Jew who recenty determined that Israel had commied war crimes in Gaza.

        The Jewish immigrants that arrived in Palestine were anythng but weak. Firstly, the Zionists were talking about taking the land and driving out the Palestinian population from teh time of Hertzl, and Ben Gurioin spoke uin 1938 of the need to create a powerful military to take on the surrounding Arab states.

        Did I just make that up?

        Yes, the British had promised the Palestinians independence in exchange for criving out the Ottoman empire.

        The Jews in Palestine were out-numbered, but the weren’t outgunned. The Jews in Palestine attacked the Brittish, who stood in teh way of allowing them to create a Jewish state. Perhaps you never heard fo teh bombing of the King David Hotel or the murder of British soldiers?

        Is youe knowledge of history that weak Einstein?

        So where is your view of history Einstein? Please provide us with your water tight account, of you’re not too scared…

    • VR
      January 11, 2010, 2:00 am

      Stop using Einsteins name in vain, he did not stand for what you do – a damnable ethnic cleansing and the current occupation to preserve a “majority.” True democracies do not need a majority, which is merely a plot for murderous theft and domination. Here is what Einstein really thought thief of his name –

      “Arguing that a Jewish Majority in Palestine was not important, Einstein dismissed the goal of a Jewish state: “The state idea is not according to my heart. I cannot understand why it is needed. It is connected with many difficulties and narrow-mindedness. I believe it is bad.”” EINSTEIN ON POLITICS

      His view eventually proved to be correct. He believed in a co-existence, something which is apparently distasteful to the racist Zionist agenda, as can amply be seen in the current course of Israel.

  19. wondering jew
    January 10, 2010, 9:40 am

    off topic. phil has often extolled the book by shlomo sand. here is a link to hillel halkin’s attack on shlomo sand’s book “the invention of the jewish people”.
    link to tnr.com

    • Chaos4700
      January 10, 2010, 12:13 pm

      Yeah, attack is the right word for it. The article is full of hollow Wittypocrisies and little else. “Arab” propaganda? And I suppose if we ask Mizrahi Jews what they think of the “Jewish state” and how they are treated, that will suddenly become “Arab” propaganda too, huh?

    • MRW
      January 10, 2010, 6:09 pm

      Of course, Halkin would attack it, but, luckily for us, Halkin is also the guy who revealed that Ataturk, the first head of modern Turkey, was a crypto-Jew. Juicy stuff. First published in the The Forward in January 1994, but all copies excised from Lexis-Nexis and the web except for Highbeam Research (fee) and a couple of sites that copied it. The NY Sun (July 2007) has Halkin’s follow-up.

    • MRW
      January 10, 2010, 6:11 pm

      Of course, yonira would call any site that copied Hillal Halkin’s original The Forward article “hate sites.” ;-)

  20. Kathleen
    January 10, 2010, 10:11 am

    Must Read article by former CIA analyst Ray McGovern (how many times do we have to hear this?)

    link to consortiumnews.com

    Answering Helen Thomas on Why

    By Ray McGovern
    January 8, 2010

    Thank God for Helen Thomas, the only person to show any courage at the White House press briefing after President Barack Obama gave a flaccid account of the intelligence screw-up that almost downed an airliner on Christmas Day.
    Share this article

    ShareThis

    emailEmail
    printPrinter friendly

    After Obama briefly addressed L’Affaire Abdulmutallab and wrote “must do better” on the report cards of the national security schoolboys responsible for the near catastrophe, the President turned the stage over to counter-terrorism guru John Brennan and Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano.

    It took 89-year old veteran correspondent Helen Thomas to break through the vapid remarks about rechanneling “intelligence streams,” fixing “no-fly” lists, deploying “behavior detection officers,” and buying more body-imaging scanners.

    “Media Squelching

    As for media squelching, I continue to be amazed at how otherwise informed folks express total surprise when I refer them to Khalid Sheikh Mohammed’s statement about his motivation for attacking the United States, as cited on page 147 of the 9/11 Commission Report:

    “By his own account, KSM’s animus toward the United States stemmed not from his experience there as a student, but rather from his violent disagreement with U.S. foreign policy favoring Israel.”

    And one can understand how even those following such things closely can get confused. Five years after the 9/11 Commission Report, on Aug. 30, 2009, readers of the neoconservative Washington Post were given a diametrically different view, based on what the Post called “an intelligence summary:”

    “KSM’s limited and negative experience in the United States — which included a brief jail stay because of unpaid bills — almost certainly helped propel him on his path to becoming a terrorist … He stated that his contact with Americans, while minimal, confirmed his view that the United States was a debauched and racist country.”

    Apparently, the Post found this revisionist version politically more convenient, in that it obscured Mohammed’s other explanation implicating “U.S. foreign policy favoring Israel.” It’s much more comforting to view KSM as a disgruntled visitor who nursed his personal grievances into justification for mass murder.

    An unusually candid view of the dangers accruing from the U.S. identification with Israel’s policies appeared five years ago in an unclassified study published by the Pentagon-appointed U.S. Defense Science Board on Sept. 23, 2004. Contradicting President George W. Bush, the board stated:

    “Muslims do not ‘hate our freedom,’ but rather, they hate our policies. The overwhelming majority voice their objections to what they see as one-sided support in favor of Israel and against Palestinian rights, and the longstanding, even increasing support for what Muslims collectively see as tyrannies, most notably Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Pakistan, and the Gulf States.

    “Thus, when American public diplomacy talks about bringing democracy to Islamic societies, this is seen as no more than self-serving hypocrisy.”

    Abdulmutallab’s Attack

    Getting back to Abdulmutallab and his motive in trying to blow up the airliner, how was this individual without prior terrorist affiliations suddenly transformed into an international terrorist ready to die while killing innocents?

    If, as John Brennan seems to suggest, al Qaeda terrorists are hard-wired for terrorism at birth for the “wanton slaughter of innocents,” how are they able to jump-start a privileged 23-year old Nigerian, inculcate in him with the acquired characteristics of a terrorist, and persuade him to do the bidding of al Qaeda/Persian Gulf?

    As indicated above, the young Nigerian seems to have had particular trouble with Israel’s wanton slaughter of more than a thousand civilians in Gaza a year ago, a brutal campaign that was defended in Washington as justifiable self-defense.

    Moreover, it appears that Abdulmuttallab is not the only anti-American “terrorist” so motivated. When the Saudi and Yemeni branches of al Qaeda announced that they were uniting into “al Qaeda of the Arabian Peninsula,” their combined rhetoric railed against the Israeli attack on Gaza.

    And on Dec. 30, Humam Khalil Abu Mulal al-Balawi, a 32-year-old Palestinian-born Jordanian physician, killed seven American CIA operatives and one Jordanian intelligence officer near Khost, Afghanistan, when he detonated a suicide bomb.

    Though most U.S. media stories treated al-Balawi as a fanatical double-agent driven by irrational hatreds, other motivations could be gleaned by carefully reading articles about his personal history.

    Al-Balawi’s mother told Agence France-Presse that her son had never been an “extremist.” Al-Balawi’s widow, Defne Bayrak, made a similar statement to Newsweek. In a New York Times article, al-Balawi’s brother was quoted as describing him as a “very good brother” and a “brilliant doctor.”

    So what led al-Balawi to take his own life in order to kill U.S. and Jordanian intelligence operatives?

    Al-Balawi’s widow said her husband “started to change” after the American-led invasion of Iraq in 2003. His brother said al-Balawi “changed” during last year’s three-week-long Israeli offensive in Gaza, which killed about 1,300 Palestinians.

    When al-Balawi volunteered with a medical organization to treat injured Palestinians in Gaza, he was arrested by Jordanian authorities, his brother said.

    It was after that arrest that the Jordanian intelligence service apparently coerced or “recruited” al-Balawi to become a spy who would penetrate al Qaeda’s hierarchy and provide actionable intelligence to the CIA.

  21. VR
    January 10, 2010, 11:51 am

    “That is the some of the most racist anti-Semitic stuff I have ever read. But like I said before its honey to you people.”

    This is the “what did I support?” – yonira bullshit, it is like the birds chirping in the morning, a constant refrain. Now he is left with the “antisemitic” refrain, just move to Israel and kill a few Palestinians idiot, get it over with.

  22. MHughes976
    January 10, 2010, 12:10 pm

    But don’t you think that Halkin’s reply to Sand seems to follow the familiar pattern of heated denunciation whilst not really pinning Sand down at any significant point?
    What H calls ‘the Biblical chronology’ does not imply that Judaism has existed for 4,000 years, ie since Abraham. The Abraham stories speak of an existing worship of God Most High in which Abraham shared, not of a new religion. The supposedly rival 2,500 year span, ie since Ezra the Scribe, is not unorthodox within Judaism. (Oxford History of the Biblical World, 2001 paperback, p.307: ‘Rabbinic tradition attributed to Ezra the creation of Judaism’.)
    On questions of heredity and conversion, Sand himself refers to the rejection of mixed marriage that came in around Ezra’s time but notes that this rejection was not incompatible with mass conversion under government pressure or even with genuine individual conversion on principle. Halkin seems not to dispute the Hasmonean conversion programme and other points but to use the rhetoric of ‘we always knew this’ to cover the extent of his agreement with Sand.
    He even manages to say that the genetic studies ‘ironically’ give Sand some support, but again they turn out to support propositions that we always knew anyway.
    On eighteenth/nineteenth century ideology H makes much use of the unfamiliar term ‘peoplehood’ but does not analyse it enough to make it clear to what extent the disagreement with Sand opens up, nor does he supply theological analysis of the biblical ‘am’.

  23. pabelmont
    January 10, 2010, 3:12 pm

    Witty asks if ethnic cleansing (1948) was necessary.

    Well, state building itself was not necessary; it was a choice. The Mandate was intended to produce one independent self-governing state, not two or more. Jews could have stayed with one state.

    If a new state was to be made, it did not have tio be majority Jewish, Apartheid was another choice. (as we see today). so, again, ethnic cleasnsing was not necessary, it was, again, a choice.

    • yonira
      January 12, 2010, 12:01 pm

      One independent state including all of Palestine and Transjordan, once Transjordan was created, your argument became moot.

      • Chaos4700
        January 12, 2010, 12:08 pm

        Who cares? “Transjordan” was a British invention. There are definite cultural differences between Palestine and Jordan. Different cultures, different nations.

        I’m getting really sick of this default, racist “There is no such thing as Palestinians” argument. Especially when it comes from dilettante colonial European Jews.

      • yonira
        January 12, 2010, 12:29 pm

        You are something else Chaos,

        History escapes you…. Is there a class on Modern Israel/Palestine you can take at college? It would help you immensely. You would better understand what I was talking about and probably understand my response to pablemont better also.

        All of the ME is a European invention, but Israel is the only State who you have an issue with.

        I have coined a new term which I will use frequently on here: JOIP

        Justice, Only In Palestine.

      • Chaos4700
        January 12, 2010, 12:55 pm

        Wow, an ad hominem is your only reply. That wasn’t predictable.

      • Shingo
        January 12, 2010, 3:32 pm

        “‘All of the ME is a European invention, but Israel is the only State who you have an issue with. “‘

        Name another state in the Middle East has been under occupation for 40 years, has practices enthnic cleasing f0r 60 years, openly practices racial segregation as part of it’s rainson détre, has 200 nukes but demands no one else them, receives the biggest aid pacakde from the US in the world and stands in violation of nearly 100 UN Resolutions.

  24. aparisian
    January 10, 2010, 5:05 pm

    watch the killing zone broadcast in channel 4 in the UK in 2003 link to ifamericansknew.org how can we call something other than NaziIsrael Baby killers

  25. Mooser
    January 10, 2010, 5:15 pm

    Gosh darn it all, people will make those Nazi-Israeli comparisons! How can we stop them? Yonira, any ideas? Richard, you got a plan? What about you WJ?
    Maybe we should tell them they’re terrible people for saying that? Oh what’s that, you have to have some kind of moral or ethical standing before you can ask something like that of people?

  26. aparisian
    January 10, 2010, 5:59 pm

    watch guys more documentaries made by westerns about the people of Gaza, link to video.google.com

    Who are the really terrorists? When NazIsrael will pay the price for its crimes against humanity? Sorry guys i m just angry so angry at these criminals and their supporters.

  27. MRW
    January 11, 2010, 10:08 am

    Hey Einstein, do everyone a favor. Take a week and read the last two years of comments on this blog. Please dont subject us to lectures on the state of Israel that we’ve heard before.

    • aparisian
      January 11, 2010, 10:12 am

      Excellent proposition. Einstein back to Mondoweiss school first!

      • potsherd
        January 11, 2010, 11:22 am

        No, “Einstein” is a lost cause, he worships the golden calf with a star branded on its butt, and it’s eaten away his brain. There is no hope for him.

  28. Einstein says
    January 11, 2010, 10:18 am

    MRW and aparisian, I apologize, I will now cow to the will of mine fuhrer…

    Zeig Heil!! NazIsraelis to the GAS!!!

    • Chaos4700
      January 11, 2010, 2:07 pm

      You really are a total nutjob, aren’t you?

      • aparisian
        January 11, 2010, 2:09 pm

        hehe i love NazIsraelis term. Who invented it?

      • Chaos4700
        January 11, 2010, 2:29 pm

        I don’t know. I prefer the term Zionazi, myself. It is a bit more phonetically sonorous in English, at any rate.

        It wasn’t going to be long before Einschwein (I refuse to let him steal the namesake of an honored man of learning) and his pathetic rantings degraded to “noun, verb, anti-Semite” was it?

      • Einstein says
        January 12, 2010, 11:14 am

        you are the one calling israelis nazis…
        israelis are semites. nazis is a term to decribe the epitomy of evil, a very negative term indeed.
        unless those terms have changed, i would say that there is a good case for making you guys out to be anti-semitic

        you guys don’t see it, though, huh?

        i mean why accept and tolerate my religious Jewish views, when you can accept the religious views of Rabbi Brant Rosen or Rabbi Lynn Gottlieb. Those two claim to be “Jews”, so if you accept them for what they claim to be you are therefore not anti-semitic or intolerant when you trample on my religious views….hmmmm, nicely played.

        I would love to see more “Muslim” teabaggers. that could be a good move for them.

      • Chaos4700
        January 12, 2010, 11:49 am

        A) One potential definition of “Nazi” could be “an ideology/political entity that endorses ethnic cleansing and mass slaughter of Semites.

        B) The Palestinians are Semites.

        C) Therefore, Israel — with their herding Palestinians into the concentration camp they’ve turned Gaza into, the summary executions, bombing hospitals and schools, bulldozing homes and making room for “reinrassig” Jews — are, in a sense, Nazis.

        Incidentally, you are aware that there were Jews (a small number, granted) who joined and aided the original Nazis, right?

      • yonira
        January 12, 2010, 11:57 am

        Einstein,

        Welcome to MondoLies. I agree that the Nazi comparison is anti-Semitic(and most in the Jewish community would also agree), but they really don’t get it, so don’t take it too personally.

        Its all about comparisons on here, if they aren’t comparing Israel to either Nazi Germany or SA they aren’t doing their job as being good progressives.

      • Chaos4700
        January 12, 2010, 12:01 pm

        I like how it’s supposed to be anti-Semitic to accuse Israelis of acting like Nazis, but other Semites — like, say Palestinians — get compared to Nazis all the time by you guys.

        Keep up the personal attacks and the blatant hypocrisies, yonira. People like you, WJ, Julian and Witty do far more to reveal Zionism for what it is than anything I could say.

      • aparisian
        January 12, 2010, 12:14 pm

        I am not anti-semitic i am just anti-Zionism the ideology, i have nothing against Jews. If you are unable to make difference than its your problem.
        Zionism is very similar to Nazism.

      • Donald
        January 12, 2010, 12:15 pm

        You didn’t notice that Einstein started off this subthread comparing people here to someone who would herd Israelis to the gas chambers? In other words, he used the Nazi comparison. Horrors.

        Nazi comparisons are stupid, in my opinion, and that’s why the term “Godwin’s Law” was coined, but this notion that one side can use them and the other can’t on pain of being compared to Nazis or labeled anti-semites (which is the same insult), is just more stupidity.

        What’s wrong with the South Africa comparison? Desmond Tutu has seen how Israel treats the Palestinians and thinks it is legitimate, and he probably knows more about apartheid than everyone here combined.

      • aparisian
        January 12, 2010, 12:23 pm

        ok Einstein Yonira what if i call Israel the Zionist Apartheid state, does that sound anti-Semitic too for your community?

      • Einstein says
        January 12, 2010, 12:38 pm

        aparisian – “I am not anti-semitic i am just anti-Zionism the ideology, i have nothing against Jews. If you are unable to make difference than its your problem.
        Zionism is very similar to Nazism. ”

        Zionism is not at all like Nazi Ideology, if anything it is way more comparable to Hamas ideology, which you guys here are way cool with…

        WHen you say you have nothing against Jews, you mean rabbi brant and rabbi gotlieb and phil weiss, or the neturei karta. thats how you can say you are not anti semitic but yet you are intolerant of the Jews you don’t like, and all though it makes the issue much easier when you demonize all of Israelis, (except for those that are helping the palestinian cause), the majority of the practicing religious Israelis are not some sort of violent monster, yet you wish to destroy their places of worship and have no problem calling for their extermination

        so hypocritical….you are all a bunch of lame wackos…
        and i love it!!

      • Chaos4700
        January 12, 2010, 1:06 pm

        Right, it’s time for that game again! Because I don’t think ‘Einschwein’ here has played it (BTW, if abusing the names of honored men were a crime, you’d be up for felony charges).

        Fill in the blanks! Are they talking about Israel here?

        In his book [blank], [blank] detailed his belief that the [blank] people needed [blank] – for a [Greater] [blank], land, and raw materials – and that it should be taken in the East. It was the stated policy of the [blank] to kill, deport, [blank] or enslave the [blank], and later also [blank] and other [blank] populations, and to repopulate the land with [blank] peoples.

        Check your answers here.

      • Shingo
        January 12, 2010, 3:34 pm

        Why the obsession with Nazism and neturei karta?

        And who has mentioned anything about destroying anyone’s place of worship?

        Would you even be able to post here, without lying and using straw men Einstein?

      • Shingo
        January 12, 2010, 3:35 pm

        “”Welcome to MondoLies. I agree that the Nazi comparison is anti-Semitic(and most in the Jewish community would also agree), but they really don’t get it, so don’t take it too personally.”‘

        Another brain fart Yonira?

        “”Its all about comparisons on here, if they aren’t comparing Israel to either Nazi Germany or SA they aren’t doing their job as being good progressives. “‘

        So Nelson Mandella and Desmond Tutu don’t know what apartheid is right Yonira. You know best.

  29. aparisian
    January 11, 2010, 10:29 am

    The most recent invention of the Zionist propaganda machine link to allahblessisrael.wordpress.com

Leave a Reply