Israeli television confrontation is ‘a metaphor of the moral crisis in which Zionism is found today’

on 171 Comments

The above interview has been making the rounds online, and has been garnering much attention in Israel. The confrontation features Dan Margalit, a well known mainstream Israeli journalist, and MK Jamal Zahalka, a Palestinian member of the Knesset.

There have been several responses to the episode in the Israeli press. Below is an illuminating article by Israeli professor Yehuda Shenhav, which appears on the Hebrew version of YNET. Interestingly enough, there is a translated article on YNET’s English site attacking Zahalka called "History lesson for Arab MKs." Luckily, a Mondoweiss reader, Avi Gillon, translated the Shenhav article. From YNET:

At the moment of truth of the TV drama that unfolded during “Erev Hadash” [New Evening], the Israeli liberal became racist and domineering – a clear product of the nationalistic model called “Jewish and Democratic State” which denies the events of 1948.

Published January 5, 2010

It is very important to watch the “discussion” between MK Zahalka and Dan Margalit on “Erev Hadash”, during which the televised interview between a Jewish journalist and a Palestinian member of the Knesset became a dialog of war. In the blink of an eye, the interviewer became a “fighter” as if by dictates of a state of emergency. This is a [metaphor] of the “Israeli Democracy” situation.

At minute 5:05, MK Zahalka says that Ehud Barak listens to classical music and kills children in Gaza. Margalit admonishes him “That’s Chutzpa” [better translated as “impudence”]. He repeats the word “Chutzpa” in a sequence of more than ten times. The expression “You are impudent” is utilized in general in language within hierarchical relationships and is directed toward a person who does not obey authority. For example: A teacher toward a student, a judge toward an accused, a master toward a servant, a father toward his son. In the history of colonialism, the imperial clerk always viewed the native as a boy. In Israel, too, the Jewish elite always viewed [or treated] the Arabs as lower. But, the real drama in that same conversation starts at minute 6:55 when Zahalka is thrown out of the studio as he laughs: “This is Sheikh Mwanis here”. Margalit hurls “There, the truth [finally] comes out”.

This drama reveals the sting of the conflict and which demonstrates how the gap between liberalism and racism is hair thin. At the moment of truth, the liberal Israeli becomes domineering and racist. This is a glaring product of the nationalistic model called a “Jewish and Democratic state” and one that keeps the skeleton of 1948 hidden in closet.

Especially, since for the majority of Palestinians inside and outside the Green Line, the war of 1948 is not over yet. The “Jewish Democratic” model is based on the denial of history.

In the new anthology of Hebrew poetry about the Nakba, the periodical “Sedek” [crack] published by the editor Professor Chanan Chaver one can find solid testimony of what happened in 1948 from the mouths of Jewish poets. That is the skeleton in the closet, if it is discovered it will threaten the morality and justness of the State of Israel.

The meeting between MK Zahalka and Margalit is a metaphor of the moral crisis in which Zionism is found today. Zahalka dared in his “impudence” to point out the skeleton in the closet, the same one that Margalit is trying to hide. As in totalitarian regimes, Margalit wants to aid the regime in hiding the secret and employs symbolic violence. Margalit’s position is dangerous to the future of the Jews because it seeks to ensure the rights and security through the perpetual use of tanks, instead of opening the conflict up [and getting to the bottom of it].

Unfortunately, this is also Israel’s strategy to ending the conflict. It is based on the illusion that the conflict started in 1967. Just like Ehud Barak already learned in Camp David, he came to solve the ’67 question, but Arafat came to solve the question of ’48. Therefore, the return of Jews to [acknowledging and discussing] 1948 is inevitable.

Actually, in contrast to Dan Margalit, elements on the right recognize the relevance of the war of 1948 to bringing about an end to the conflict. It is important to note that among the settlers decent and democratic positions can be found. For example, Uri Alitzor wrote in “Makor Rishon” [“First Source”, meaning first hand account], that the High Court for Justice’s decision regarding route 443 is justified. Eli’az Cohen, declared the same, a poet and a resident of the Kfar Etzion settlement that his return to Kfar Etzion is the actualization of the right of return and the strengthening of the rights of the Palestinians to return to Yaffo [Jaffa] and Acre.

These positions are similar to those heard among the radical left. There is no doubt that the time has come to think out of the box and to identify new coalitions that will change the manner by which Israeli politics are shaped. This is truly, the big bang, not the dissolution of one party or another. This is a coalition of Jews and Arabs who see the opening of the trauma [wounds] of 1948 a necessary condition for ending the conflict. New perception needs to be formed that will recognize that within the opening of this trauma lies hope to the dead end that Israeli political thinking has gotten into. Dan Margalit, does not participate in this discussion.

Professor Yehuda Shenhav’s forthcoming book “In the Trap of the Green Line: Jewish Political Mass” that deals with the return to 1948 will be published by “Am Oved”.

171 Responses

  1. annie
    January 6, 2010, 11:17 am

    stunning. this brought tears to my eyes, simply stunning.

  2. Shafiq
    January 6, 2010, 11:22 am

    Holy Crap!

    For someone who lives in a country where there are impartiality rules in regard to news broadcasts, this is shocking.

  3. potsherd
    January 6, 2010, 11:24 am

    Wohl’s article in Ynet is must-reading for Jewish supremacists, a breathtaking disregard for historical fact.

    • gmeyers
      January 6, 2010, 12:26 pm

      Forget the ‘breathtaking disregard for historical fact’. Anyone who, like the author of the Ynet piece of drivel, still wants to base the argument on ‘we were here first’ just doesn’t get it.

      The right of return of Palestinians isn’t predicated on them being ‘an old and extant People’ (as Zionists are so fond of pointing out about the Jews) but merely on the fact that they were driven from where they lived at that time by means of Zionist ethnic cleansing

      Ynet news is gefundenes fressen for the imbecilic racists that subscribe to FrontPage mag.

  4. Citizen
    January 6, 2010, 11:43 am

    Gee, which other past regimes (ending in WW2) disregarded historical fact for a myth enforced by military and economic power?

    WW3; anybody really think it’s not coming? This time around it will be a real world war, encompassing every continent significantly. The trigger? Israeli air attack on Iran. It’s just a question of in which year it will come. Likely, before Obama ‘s present term ends.
    He’s gonna grow more gray hairs. And Americans will see our long foreign policy come home to roost in a more definable way than 9/11. The end-timers like Palin will be energetic; the end result will be something she never imagined. The tiny sliver of the world represented by the USA middle class impacts the whole world; this time around,
    that middle class will actually recognize what their elected leaders have done. The combo of fighting a half dozen wars against impoverished Muslim countries and being bled by our very own elite monetary class–will at last come home to roost. There’s a call for a military draft arising on the horizon. Everything depends on just how stupid and ignorant the American middle class chooses to be. I’d guess, real stupid. I have all of world history backing me up.

    • Mooser
      January 6, 2010, 12:14 pm

      “Gee, which other past regimes (ending in WW2) disregarded historical fact for a myth enforced by military and economic power?”

      For extra fun, get a hold of Herbert P. Bix’s book “Hirohito” on the Japanese Emperor and WW2. It works the same, all over the world.

      • Citizen
        January 6, 2010, 2:08 pm

        Oh yeah; I certainly did not mean to imply that Imperial Japan was off the hook

      • Mooser
        January 6, 2010, 6:16 pm

        Well, I was mostly talking about how the emperor worship, which was a new doctrine, created at the time, was put over as the eternal tradition of Japan, and about how all those created-for-the-purpose “cultures” bear the same hallmarks, one of which is evasion of responsibility by the elites.

      • Citizen
        January 7, 2010, 12:44 pm

        OK, I certainly accept that piece of it all. I’m reminded of George Washington’s warning against foreign entanglements and Ike’s warning about the military-industrial complex. Us Americans are as creepy as the any people in the way they think and act as revealed by their impact on the world, especially for the last half century and a bit more. As it is said, the test of virtue is power. Arendt would know about American character as it has revealed itself since the Nuremberg Trials.

  5. sammy
    January 6, 2010, 12:27 pm

    This reminded me of Alan Shore and Denny’s paintball fight in Boston Legal. Same level of maturity, with poorer end results

    • Chaos4700
      January 6, 2010, 1:29 pm

      Yeah, but at least the paintball scene was funny and, after a fact, was professionally quite good (in the context of two actors playing lawyers who are best friends).

      Can you imagine a news reporter, or even a news talk show commentator, treating a Senator or a Congressional Representative this way in an interview? I don’t think even Bill O’Reilly at his worst has been that bad (and as far as I know, no one credible will go anywhere near Glenn Beck’s show).

      Every example I see of Israeli culture drives home the notion of just how racist and hateful it is.

      • wondering jew
        January 6, 2010, 4:36 pm

        You may be more aware of the political scene than I am, but which congressman or senator would call the secretary of defense a baby killer?

      • VR
        January 6, 2010, 5:26 pm

        “At minute 5:05, MK Zahalka says that Ehud Barak listens to classical music and kills children in Gaza.”

        It is more like this –


      • VR
        January 6, 2010, 5:41 pm

        Of course there are differences between what is happening and the above, i won’t mention them all. The first is that the one committing the crimes is not in a prison, but feigns leadership of a state. It is not just one here and that killed, but thousands over a period of years and the ruination of many others lives. It is not questioned in a court of law, what is taking place, but shouted from the rooftops as some divine right. There is much more one could say, but i trust this gives you the correct idea.

      • potsherd
        January 6, 2010, 7:12 pm

        Are you aware of any TV show in the US, even Glenn Beck, where goons would come to drag a Congressman off the set?

      • wondering jew
        January 6, 2010, 7:32 pm

        In 1968 Gore Vidal and William Buckley got into an argument where Vidal called Buckley a Nazi and Buckley offered to punch Vidal in the nose. This was as heated as that, which is strange with an interviewer and an MK.

        Potsherd, how do you know they were goons who came to drag him off. Have you been on that show and seen their ushers? They are supposedly very courteous with the best of manners. Just joking, I don’t know how well mannered they are, but you saw nothing of the ushers who showed the MK out and you pretend as if you did.

      • Saleema
        January 6, 2010, 7:43 pm

        i can see you share the same kind of political (non) sense with our congress and senate.

        a baby killer is a baby killer, even if (gasp) it be the damn president himself. and should be called just that.

      • Chaos4700
        January 6, 2010, 7:44 pm

        I think the part where the other newscaster is asking the stage hand not to manhandle the guest, while they conspicuously refuse to switch to the reverse angle camera for a long period, is maybe strong circumstantial evidence.

        I, for one, would rather like to see the reverse angle footage. That would answer it one way or another, wouldn’t it?

      • Citizen
        January 7, 2010, 12:52 pm

        What interests me most about Glen Beck is how he zeroes in on a lot of US regime taboos and official culprits, and he blackboards a lot of hypocrisy very well–but he never raises a single thought about certain key PC templates and
        racist narratives. In the way he picks and chooses his demons he is less cookie-cutter than Fox News or its nemesis MSNBC (the others, including mainline tv broadcasting don’t even quality as useful water fountain office talk). But haven’t you noticed the subjects he never delves into? That Beck has such taboos says a lot about who controls this USA.

  6. Cliff
    January 6, 2010, 12:52 pm

    Wow, great article. The ‘impudence’ thing is so true. I couldn’t find the words to describe the relationship between the interviewer and the MK vis a vis that insult, but the author perfectly summed it up.

  7. potsherd
    January 6, 2010, 1:22 pm

    The part where they are laughing in scorn and contempt at the idea of murdered children is good, too.

  8. Mooser
    January 6, 2010, 1:40 pm

    ziocaine’s for Gentiles,
    not Jewish men.
    They tell me it’ll kill me,
    But they won’t say when!
    runnin’ all ’round
    my brain.

    With today’s advanced diagnostic techniques, it should be no problem to corroborate my theory (theory? hell, it’s a discovery!); just hook a sensor up to Margilit’s vagus nerve and watch the pointer dip, and watch the heartbeat rate soar! Now watch the brainscan, see the two blue stripes appearing in the brain-stem areas? There is some kind of physiological change taking place, no doubt about it!

    • Chaos4700
      January 6, 2010, 1:47 pm

      Incidentally, that little ditty almost sounds like it could be the jingle to a pharmaceutical commercial. I can almost hear the hurried blurb by the narrator at the end of it: “If you experience an occupation lasting more than four decades, call your doctor immediately.”

      All levity aside, I’m more concerned with the psychological/behavioral side, but what you say makes me wonder about the extent of a physiological component too. It’s kind of scary to think about, isn’t it? That there’s possibly a “hate reflex” embedded somewhere in human neurology?

  9. Citizen
    January 6, 2010, 2:15 pm

    Hate reflex? How about a cash reflex? Just peeps in macro spots trying to tend their own tiny, luxurious gardens?

    December 31, 2009

    In 2008, the total revenues for the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC)-the leading organization in the United States supporting Israeli occupation and apartheid-amounted to $70,676,421.

    In that same year, the total revenues for the US Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation-the leading coalition in the United States working to change U.S. policy toward Palestine/Israel to support human rights, international law, and equality-amounted to $276,747, or just 0.39% of AIPAC’s revenues.

    In some ways, this is a depressing statistic. In other ways though, it is inspiring as it shows how much we’ve been able to accomplish with less than 1/200th of AIPAC’s budget.

    Even Howard Kohr, AIPAC’s Executive Director (whose salary alone, by the way, is nearly double our annual operating budget) agrees that the movement we are helping to lead is having a profound impact. Consider our accomplishments and his concerns about them delivered in remarks at AIPAC’s last annual conference:

    * Our public education campaigns against Israeli occupation and apartheid have helped to dramatically shift the discourse on Israel/Palestine in a much more favorable direction over the past few years
    Kohr: “I’m not saying that these allegations have become accepted. But they have become acceptable. More and more they are invading the mainstream discourse, becoming part of the constant and unrelenting drumbeat against Israel.”

    • Citizen
      January 6, 2010, 2:24 pm

      As a bonus in re Kohr’s salary; on the larger implicating issue–a CEO’s first priority is his or her own salary and fringe benefits–this priority is by nature short term–no difference between US elected reps and any big corporations executives. End result,
      the US taxpayers and their “volunteer” 1% soldiers are forced to bail the out; so what’s the difference between our most core domestic problems and our most core foreign affairs problems? I submit: Zippo. As evidence, I submit former Prez Carter’s recent ass-kissing to aid his young relative; he must have looked back on what he had to do to originally attain high office. No wonder the arrogant guy with the array metal detector, owner of a scrap metal business, barely able to speak English properly, totally ignorant of larger world history, knows he is the cock of the walk. And you and I will pay, and our children will pay, and so, what’s new?

  10. Richard Witty
    January 6, 2010, 2:17 pm

    “Barak desires to kill children” is chutzpa.

    The interviewer could have asked “how do you know this?”

    • Citizen
      January 6, 2010, 2:29 pm

      Do you think the events of 1947-1948 must be addressed in a solution? Or do you think starting the peace resolution clock in 1967 is not chutzpa?

      • yonira
        January 6, 2010, 2:32 pm

        I’d start @ 1967, then there is no need to worry about the 750,000 Jews who were forced from Arab lands.

      • Chaos4700
        January 6, 2010, 2:35 pm

        Were the Palestinians responsible for that, yonira, even if it is as you lay it out to be? (Which it isn’t, but anyway.)

      • James Bradley
        January 6, 2010, 2:59 pm

        Oh great the whole Arab Jew refugee arguement. Lets debunk this one real quick.

        1) The Palestinians played ZERO role in the uprooting of Jews in Arab countries. ZERO. So why do they have to pay for that crime?

        2) Arab Jews did not leave their respective countries until AFTER Israel had ethnically cleansed close to a million Palestinians and murdered thousands more.

        3) Zionist agencies in various Arab countries played a large role in drumming up fear amongst the Jewish communities of Arab counties in an attempt to make them feel that their future should be in Israel and not in any Arab country.

        4) Many Arab Jews immigrated to Israel because they were Zionists and believed in the state of Israel. In fact many of the early Zionists were in fact Arab Jews. This is contrast to the Palestinians NONE of whom had any desire to leave Palestine and live as refugee’s in a foreign country.

        So enough trying to downplay the Palestinian nakba by bringing up the immigration of Arab Jews to Israel. Its not even close to being the same thing, and for you to even dare try to belittle the nakba in this way is disgusting.

      • tree
        January 6, 2010, 3:29 pm

        I’d add a number 5. Zionist agencies also urged Arab Jews to come to Israel by appealing to their sense of community with Israeli Jews, whom the Zionists insisted were in dire need of help from Jews everywhere.

        I wouldn’t be at all surprised if at some point some hasbarist insists that American Jews who came to Israel (many of whom came thinking they were helping other Jews) must have been forced to leave the US, and should be compensated. The arguments get that bizarre.

      • yonira
        January 6, 2010, 4:14 pm

        James, prove it. I am done playing this game where you give me all these facts, but they are all bullshit. Just like the MEMRI video, someone actually LISTENED to it and confirmed what it said. So instead of giving me bullshit left and right give me something that is actually verifiable.

        If I felt like stooping to your pathetic level, I’d bring up the argument about how Arab countries invaded Israel and asked the Palestinians to leave because they were so confident about defeated the new Jewish state.

        You can spew your nonsense on here because no one is critical of what you say. Try to spew it somewhere where someone actually CARES about history, it will be a different story all together.

      • Cliff
        January 6, 2010, 4:26 pm

        yonira, the ethnic cleansing of Palestine began months before the declaration of Israeli Statehood.

        The radio-calls accusation has been debunked.

        How about you list specific issues you have with what you’d (I’m just assuming) call the Palestinian version of events?

        Then let’s go through them (without insulting each other).

        Let me list what I see from this exchange:

        (Main point of contention = “-” )
        (My questions = “*” )

        – The Jewish exodus from the Arab countries following the 48′ War
        *What happened?
        *Is it of the same nature as the ethnic cleansing of Palestine?
        *Who is responsible for the Jewish exodus, if it was forceful (either in total or in individual cases)?

        -If the Jewish exodus from the Arab countries was both forceful and of the same nature as the ethnic cleansing of Palestine – are the Palestinians who to blame?
        *If so, how? Did the Palestinians have a voice? Were they represented in Iraq for example, by the Iraqi government?

        I know very little about the Jewish exodus but I’m almost certain based on information that has existed in the periphery of other important topics (mainly the 48′ ethnic cleansing of Historic Palestine) that the Jews of the Arab world were not forcefully kicked out or terrorized out.

        Furthermore, let’s say it’s true, why do the Palestinians have to pay for that?

        Personally, maybe we both don’t know enough about the Jewish exodus from the Arab world, but I think my questions are fair. I really don’t see how the Palestinians have to answer for w/e happened. And I don’t think the Jews were driven out like the Palestinians were.

      • Citizen
        January 6, 2010, 4:36 pm

        The invasion of “Israel” by Arab countries in 1948 involved the invasion of
        that small, less proportionate part of the UN partition left to the Palestinians.
        And the Palestinians had no more to do with picking on Jews than than they
        did in Nazi Europe–actually, it was the Jews who were picking on the Palestinians. Yonira, your version of history is clear BS. The clear innocence of the Palestinians since day one of the Jewish land grab in the Middle East is there for anyone to see. Americans, wake up! Do you want to be part of this copycat lebensraum movement–is that why your greatest generation died in WW2? Can you continue to afford it these days? What is your “Johnnie” fighting for over there, in the middle east? What are your tax dollars paying for? And, do you think the average Israeli is grateful for your constant donations of blood, sweat, and tears? Is Rachel Corrie your daughter, or not? Get a grip. Anne Frank would not allow your ignorance.

      • potsherd
        January 6, 2010, 4:44 pm

        James should prove WHAT, yonira? What is questionable in what he said?

        The problem with your remark is that most people here care a great deal about history and are very well acquainted with the facts that Zionist apologists try to cover up with their sabbath-school stories.

      • yonira
        January 6, 2010, 4:54 pm

        Prove that it isn’t, prove to me Chaos that there was no ethnic cleansing of Jews from Arab countries. Just like your proved to me the MEMRI video was not a correct translation.

        There is an honesty problem on this site and i am sick of it.

        (No the Palestinians were not responsible for the ethnic cleansing of Jews from Arab countries, nor were they responsible for the failure of enacting Res 181, the occupation invasion of the newly formed Jewish country in 1948 or for the occupation of Gaza and the WB by Egypt and Jordan.)

      • James Bradley
        January 6, 2010, 5:02 pm

        like the MEMRI video, someone actually LISTENED to it and confirmed what it said.

        Who listened to it? The video NEVER ever says that Hamas had a policy of deliberately using human shields to protect its fighters. The video is completely taken out of its context, and partially mistranslated. Which makes complete sense given that it was translated by a well reknown propaganda group known as MEMRI.

        The only people that still take ANYTHING MEMRI says seriously are propagandists and apologists for crimes against humanity like yourself Yonira:

        link to

        Furthermore, for you to try to downplay the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians by bringing up the immigration of Arab Jews to Israel is still incredibly disgusting. Regardless of what happened, the Palestinians had NOTHING to do with with the Jewish exodus to Israel, therefore they should not be punished for it. Its that simple.

      • James Bradley
        January 6, 2010, 5:09 pm

        There is an honesty problem on this site and i am sick of it.

        No, the real problem is that you can’t handle the truth Yonira.

        We cite from real respectable academics and news sources.

        While you cite from propaganda sites like MEMRI.

      • yonira
        January 6, 2010, 5:09 pm

        Chaos posted that same link, big fucking deal, it proves nothing.

        The only people that take anything seriously from the Guardian anymore are propagandists and apologists for crimes against humanity like yourself James Bradley.

        One of the readers here who actually knows Arabic said it was an honest translation. We all admitted it was taken out of context. But you and Chaos lied and said the translation was wrong and it was ‘proven’ on here many times. Forgive me if I don’t believe an ounce of anything that comes out of your mouths anymore.

      • James Bradley
        January 6, 2010, 5:12 pm

        I never said the translation was WRONG Yonira, I said that it was partially mis-translated and taken COMPLETELY out of context.

        Seriously, get over yourself.

        And the link proves everything. MEMRI is a propaganda site whose stated aim is to demonize Arabs, Muslims, and Palestinians.

        If you insist on getting your information from propaganda sites go for it but understand that no one is going to take you seriously.

      • Shafiq
        January 6, 2010, 5:14 pm

        Guardian? Propagandists? Why? They have nothing to gain and no point to prove.

        MEMRI on the other hand..

      • Tuyzentfloot
        January 6, 2010, 5:14 pm

        The only people that take anything seriously from the Guardian anymore are propagandists and apologists for crimes against humanity like yourself James Bradley. And me!

      • yonira
        January 6, 2010, 5:16 pm

        Can you say the same for the Palestinian apologists Potsherd? Of course you can’t that is the problem w/ the majority of the commentors. The zionist posters on here can admit and freely admit that Israel is far from perfect, the creation of Israel and their current tactics are far from perfect. But its impossible to say the same for those on the other side of the spectrum. Its been proven countless times that many on here will go out of their way to lie and change reality to make sure the Palestinian struggle is painted in only the brightest of lights, this is why I believe there is a credibility issue.

      • wondering jew
        January 6, 2010, 5:21 pm

        I think the Arab countries should pay compensation to the Jewish refugees from those lands. I think violence and coercion were a large factor in the Jewish exodus from various Arab countries (and I think to compare it to the aliya of Americans to Israel is to belittle those who suffered loss and displacement by certain Arab leaders and countries). Obviously it was not a war situation in those other countries , whereas the situation in Palestine/Israel was in flux from British mandate- to war, the situation in the Arab countries was not in a state of flux and the level of coercion was much less than a war situation. Israeli Jews’ desire to consider the exchange of population a fair exchange has never appealed to the Palestinians and never will. But the rights of those Jews should be recognized and not ignored. (If compensation is part of the package, then there is no reason that a comprehensive Arab Israeli pact could include compensation from the Arab countries to the Palestinians as a type of: A owes B and B owes C, so A pays C.)

        Those who were supportive of the Rabin peace effort and were optimistic in those early years envisioned a peace similar to the one worked out in the aftermath of Taba in the Beilin- Yasser Abed Rabbo “Geneva Accord”, which includes compensation to the Palestinian refugees of 48, but repatriation to Palestine rather than Israel.

        The desire/wish to solve the issue of 48 in a different way than Beilin Rabbo is a desire/wish for a revolution in thought on the Israeli Jewish side. The YNET writer, Shenhav, feels that the Israeli far right is closer (or contains seeds that are closer) to that revolution in thought than the Israeli centrist.

        My own feeling is that the Beilin Rabbo bridge to the future is more real than the imagined revolution in Israeli Jewish thought. But as time goes on the Beilin Rabbo vision may recede and a revolution in Jewish thought may materialize.

      • aparisian
        January 6, 2010, 5:22 pm

        yonira, if Arabs were that racist against Jews, how come Jews lived in the Arab world in peace before the creation of Zionist state? How come many of them stayed till the 90s? How come people like André Azoulay who was a senior adviser to King Mohammed VI of Morocco?
        Did you read Sasson somekh, i advise you to read one of his books. Yonira many of the Arab Jews think that Zionists are the ones responsible for what happened, many of them would prefer staying in their homelands. Many of those who left the Arab world recently, were looking for better economic emigration.
        Yonira, Zionism caus/ed enormous sufferance.

      • James Bradley
        January 6, 2010, 5:25 pm

        Its been proven countless times that many on here will go out of their way to lie and change reality to make sure the Palestinian struggle is painted in only the brightest of lights, this is why I believe there is a credibility issue.

        Name 5 instances of this happening Yonira.

      • aparisian
        January 6, 2010, 5:27 pm

        Ok, what why Pals should pay the price, why Israel doesnt ask the Arab countries to take back its Jews?

      • wondering jew
        January 6, 2010, 5:34 pm

        Why doesn’t Israel ask the Arab countries to take back its Jews?

        This is callous and cold. Most of those Jews have been living in Israel for 60 years or so and to say, you don’t deserve compensation of some sort for the way you were summarily asked to leave and unable to take your possessions or to sell your possessions in an orderly manner and just say they must return to the countries from which they came. This is callous and uncaring. Given a choice of compensation or return most would choose compensation, I believe. (They should be given a choice.)

      • James Bradley
        January 6, 2010, 5:34 pm

        I think the Arab countries should pay compensation to the Jewish refugees from those lands.

        Agreed, in any situation in which an Arab government forced or coerced its Jewish population to flee, that government should be made to re-compensate those that were made refugees. This however, does not mean that the Palestinians lose their right of return because other people were turned into refugees.

        Obviously it was not a war situation in those other countries , whereas the situation in Palestine/Israel was in flux from British mandate- to war, the situation in the Arab countries was not in a state of flux and the level of coercion was much less than a war situation.

        I hope your not trying to imply that it was the confusion of war that led to the ethnic cleansing of hundreds of thousands of Palestinians.

        It has been proven without a doubt that the Israelis had a systematic policy (Plan Dalet) of ethnically cleansing the native Palestinian population from what was known as mandate Palestine. It was so successful that only 10% of the original Palestinian population remained in what came to be known as the 1948 borders.

        Furthermore, close to 300,000 Palestinians had already been ethnically cleansed before the 1948 war even began.

      • tree
        January 6, 2010, 5:39 pm

        Interestingly enough, there are articles from Yehuda Shenhav, the Israeli professor who’s article is quoted above, about this very subject.

        From Haaretz in 2002:

        Hitching a ride on the magic carpet
        By Yehouda Shenhav
        Any analogy between Palestinian refugees and Jewish immigrants from Arab lands is folly in historical and political terms

      • potsherd
        January 6, 2010, 5:41 pm

        Yonira, your problem is thinking in absolutes. No, no one can prove there was NO ethnic cleansing of Jews from Arab countries. First, you’d have to agree on what ethnic cleansing would mean in that context. Because there wasn’t a war going on in the Arab countries, there weren’t armies who came into Jewish towns and mowed down the residents like at Deir Yassin, or fired on them with tanks until the people ran from their homes. This is what happened in Palestine – to many people.

        So what did happen? There were riots and mobs who attacked and threatened the Arab Jews. These may have been encouraged by the governments. And there were Israeli agents agitating and encouraging the Jews to leave and go to Israel. Many of these were later very bitter at the reception they received in Israel and sorry they had listened.

        So you can not say there was NO ethnic cleansing, and you can not say there was NO Israeli agitation behind the mass migration.

        Take as an example the Jews of Yemen. This is an old, old community, and the people consider themselves Yemenites as well as Jews. They have had every opportunity to go to Israel and never taken it. And the government of Yemen has encouraged them to remain and offered them protection.

        But there are extremists in Yemen, and some of these have attacked and threatened the Jewish community. The government has opposed these extremists and arrested them. Still, some of the Jews have felt sufficiently threatened that they did recently leave.

        Ethnic cleansing? If so, who is responsible? Who should pay compensation?
        There is, I believe, one Jew remaining in Afghanistan. He refuses to leave, but everyone else took an airplane to Israel years ago, or to the US. This was long before the Taliban. Ethnic cleansing?

        Then there are the Palestinians in Iraq, who were attacked and threatened by mobs after the US overthrew Saddam, many of whom were murdered, and almost all of whom fled to the border to save their lives. Ethnic cleansing? Who is responsible? Who should pay?

      • yonira
        January 6, 2010, 5:49 pm

        Good points Potsherd, I do agree with you wholeheartedly, its a different situation than what happened to the Palestinians. But it still happened and it still needs to be addressed or at least taken into account when there is final solution to I/P.

        My biggest beef is that people try to claim that it was Zionist agents who caused this to happen, or it was a plan by the Zionists to get these Jews to Israel by terrorizing their own people. My main beef is trying to blame EVERYTHING on the Zionists and if its not clearly their fault, or someone else could be to blame, its some sort of false flag operation or clandestine operation.

        Thank you for your explanation above it did help me come to a better conclusion than what I thought previous. There are a few of you on here, when you are reasonable can really help me(can’t talk for anyone else) come to better conclusions and rationales.

      • aparisian
        January 6, 2010, 5:53 pm

        hey guys i bet Yonira is playing his/her dirty game, and i m sure she or he will come back on this subject again and again. Yes, Zionists are to be blamed to the sufferance of Millions of people in this world. Yonira you are a Zionist snake.

      • wondering jew
        January 6, 2010, 5:54 pm

        The 1948 war began on the last day of November 1947 on the day after the approval of the partition plan by the General Assembly in New York. Before the implementation of Plan Dalet, the roads were impassable for Jewish Palestinians and this is a state of war.

        I’ve only read Benny Morris on the issue of the flight of the Palestinians, so maybe I have incomplete information. I would not attempt to summarize his point of view. The elite seemed to have left Palestine on their own because the country was turning into a mass of violence and the elite could afford to move themselves and their families out of harm’s way. The other classes felt and were in fact abandoned by the flight of the ruling upper class. So a key element in the demoralization of the Palestinian population was an act by a class of Palestinians.

        The exodus from Haifa (which was the largest Palestinian city, but not necessarily emblematic of the rest of the population) was one case when the Palestinian community might have chosen to stay, but made a conscious decision to leave.

        Most of the communities fled at the first whiff of grapeshot, I think was the way that Benny Morris put it.

        But there’s no question that in the aftermath of the war, Israel did not let them back in, so whatever degree of intentionality was displayed in various months of 1948, the Palestinian Arabs left and were not allowed back in.

      • Citizen
        January 6, 2010, 5:58 pm

        Yonira, this is a blog coming from the USA. Do you admit that the USA MSM is
        an hasbara outlet? Tell the people here if you think the USA MSM gives the American people an objective view of the I-P situation, and as to where their taxpayers dollars go there, and for what, in the realm of foreign aid. You argue here, on a blog that is nothing in the face of AIPAC vision and power–why? You are like somebody arguing within the Warsaw Ghetto of old for the Nazi

      • MRW
        January 6, 2010, 6:03 pm

        To yonira, “James, prove it. I am done playing this game where you give me all these facts, but they are all bullshit. Just like the MEMRI video, someone actually LISTENED to it and confirmed what it said. So instead of giving me bullshit left and right give me something that is actually verifiable.”

        Start by reading Benny Morris. If you’re too intellectually chanllenged to read a book, start with Ari Shavit’s interview of Benny Morris here:
        link to

        And I would also suggest Khirbet Khizeh by S. Yizhar, the pen name of Yizhar Smilansky, born in Rehovot, Palestine in 1916, and a long-time member, subsequently, of the Knesset. He wrote his book months after the 1948 war ended. It was only translated into English and published last year.

        You dont have a leg to stand on with your criticisms of James Bradley, who is a consistent truth-teller on this site, until you have done your damn reading homework.

      • wondering jew
        January 6, 2010, 6:07 pm

        Hey Citizen- now not only the people of Gaza are in the Warsaw Ghetto, but you too are a prisoner in a Warsaw Ghetto! That’s some over the top rhetoric, bro.

      • tree
        January 6, 2010, 6:08 pm

        Also, point of interest about Shenhav. He is an Israeli Jew of Iraqi descent, his parents having moved to Israel from Iraq during the mass exodus in 1950.

        A contemporaneous source of information would be Rabbi Elmer Berger, the American anti-Zionist, who writes of the massive pressure from the US, Britain and Israel for Iraq to allow immigration to Israel, and the external pressures on the Iraqi community there, whom the Zionists insisted were all “hungering for Zion”. See Berger’s ” Who Knows Better Should Say So”.

        Also a good account of the situation in Iraq, where Jews did face limited economic opportunites due to Iraqi laws in the aftermath of the 1948 War, would be Shiblak’s “The Lure of Zion”.

        And a good general overview of the situation for Jews in various Arab countries after the 1948 War would be Marion Woolfson’s ” Prophets in Babylon: Jews in the Arab World”.

        Tom Segev, Israeli historian and journalist, goes into some detail about Zionist efforts to encourage Jewish emigration in a chapter from his book “1949: The First Million”

      • yonira
        January 6, 2010, 6:12 pm

        we’ve been over this yes? I am not going to call it a Hasbara outlet, but I will admit much of the US MSM shows bias

      • tree
        January 6, 2010, 6:45 pm

        An interview in Haaretz with Yehuda Shenhav, which might shed some light on Arab Jews and Israel.

        link to

      • potsherd
        January 6, 2010, 7:16 pm

        No, yonira, I don’t think any such thing has been proven. There have been some misstatements of fact, on relatively unimportant points, but I see no proof at all that this is a deliberate tactic.

      • potsherd
        January 6, 2010, 7:28 pm

        WJ – that is indeed the definitive point. The expulsion of the Palestinians is obscured in part by the fog of war, but nothing is more clear than the fact that Israel refused to repatriate them.

      • Saleema
        January 6, 2010, 7:49 pm

        We aren’t looking for perfection from Israel.

        Israel is WRONG. It was wrongly created and it is WRONG now to continue the occupation. WRONG to continue the siege of Gaza. WRONG to kill kids and WRONG for your soldiers to deny passage to pregnant women and sick children and students we just want an education. Israel is WRONG on so many levels….

      • Chaos4700
        January 6, 2010, 7:53 pm

        I’m so glad we have you back, Saleema. Seriously.

        Sometimes, it really is that simple — and eloquent.

      • annie
        January 6, 2010, 7:58 pm

        Naeim Giladi was part of the zionist underground in baghdad.

        “About 125,000 Jews left Iraq for Israel in the late 1940s and into 1952, most because they had been lied to and put into a panic by what I came to learn were Zionist bombs. “

      • annie
        January 6, 2010, 8:03 pm

        either way it is irrelevant to this post, just a diversion which is the specialty of hasbara artists when the facts are too ugly, all the better to divert the subject to jewish suffering, a topic (victimhood) that is more comfortable than facing the current crisis.

      • James Bradley
        January 6, 2010, 8:18 pm

        Before the implementation of Plan Dalet, the roads were impassable for Jewish Palestinians and this is a state of war.

        The act of war was trying to partition a country unfairly and give a group of people (Zionists) 55% of the land when they owned less than 5-8% of it. The Palestinians would have been retarded not to resist this state sponsored theft of their native homeland.

        The exodus from Haifa (which was the largest Palestinian city, but not necessarily emblematic of the rest of the population) was one case when the Palestinian community might have chosen to stay, but made a conscious decision to leave.

        And what prompted them to leave Haifa? Was it perhaps the massive amount of violence that the Haganah was using against defenseless Palestinian population centers? You know as well as I do that the Palestinians did not leave Haifa as part of some sort of vacation trip to the refugee camps of Lebanon.

        Furthermore, do you think its fair that Israel did not allow this same population to return to their homes after the war had ended? Is it also fair that Israel repopulated their homes with non-indigenous immigrants from Europe?

        So a key element in the demoralization of the Palestinian population was an act by a class of Palestinians.

        No doubt Palestinians with a means to escape the violence did so. But only a handful of Palestinians left thinking they would NEVER return to what is their homeland.

        Most of the communities fled at the first whiff of grapeshot, I think was the way that Benny Morris put it.

        Not a completely true statement WJ. Most Palestinian cities, towns, and villages withstood brutal Haganah sieges for weeks even months before evacuating. Furthermore, the Israels had committed numerous massacres to prove a point to the Palestinians, that they would be ruthless and brutal if they did not flee. That was the whole point of Plan Dalet.

        The fact remains that the Zionist project for Palestine insisted from day 1 that the Palestinians were not welcome in Palestine.

        To put it in perspective, imagine a group of people came to your country and said we are going to turn it into an “ethnic enclave” in which our people would have superior rights over everyone else and then went on to ethnically cleanse 90% of your population. They then justified their reasoning by citing stories from a religious text that you did not recognize. Imagine that when you resisted this outright colonization of your land, you were demonized for it and even bombed in the refugee camps that the colonizers forced you to live in.

        Welcome to Palestine.

      • olive
        January 6, 2010, 9:39 pm

        To my knowldge, MEMRI was started up by a retired Mossad agent. This, for me at least, is enough to descredit that orginization.

        I wish there was a pro-Palestinian version of MEMRI that recorded and translated ( honest translations, of course) shocking things that Jews say.

      • Aref
        January 6, 2010, 9:50 pm

        I suggest reading the book by Iraqi Jew–a Zionist who was put in jail in Iraq in 1947, escaped from jail and went to Israel and later realized what Zionism was all about. The book is called Ben-Gurion’s Scandals and the author is Naeim Giladi.
        Read it you might learn something.

      • yonira
        January 7, 2010, 1:38 am

        Why do you continue to call me a women? it offends the woman on this blog. how many times do I have to say that before you stop?

      • Shmuel
        January 7, 2010, 3:13 am

        WJ: The exodus from Haifa (which was the largest Palestinian city, but not necessarily emblematic of the rest of the population) was one case when the Palestinian community might have chosen to stay, but made a conscious decision to leave.

        “By April, 1948, the Haganah had completed its takeover of most areas of Arab Haifa. The British army announced over loudspeakers that all who wanted to save themselves should immediately leave their homes and come to the port. Jewish snipers continued to shoot, and the Arab masses flooded down to the sea. Maryam [Abu Shamla] quickly packed her family’s birth certificates, took one change of clothes for each child, a blanket and a little money, carefully locked the door, and walked with her children to the port … Maryam and her children arrived at the docks. Her husband, Aref, was not with her; he joined the crowd on the docks later. The British pushed them onto a zahafeh, a raft tied to the dock that seemed to be a part of it. Suddenly, the raft detached from the dock and began to float away, perhaps towed by another craft. Everyone was taken by surprise. Most of the people on the raft had never been out to sea before. Many did not understand that the British army was about to move them – without their knowledge or consent – away from the city of their birth … Although they wished to remain in Haifa and protect their property, Maryam’s four brothers and her sister were forced to leave everything and walk with the crowd, down to the port. By the end of the day, Mariam’s entire extended family had become refugees.”

        Khawla Abu Baker, The Stand Tall Generation: The Palestinian Citizens of Israel Today (Heb.)

        The raft was towed to Acre. Everyone on it became a refugee, forbidden from returning to Haifa or claiming their property – although they remained within Israel. The Abu Shamla’s (Mariam and Aref) eldest son fled with his wife’s family to Syria, and they never saw him again.

      • tree
        January 7, 2010, 3:14 am

        Yonira, it only offends me when someone uses a derogatory term for women when trading insults. I suspect that in most cases your identity problem here mostly stems from the fact that, for Americans, the name “yonira” sounds like a female name because it ends in “a”. I’m aware that many Hebrew boys names end in “a” but its not common in the US. I tried to look up “yonira” as a name and even google lists only “yanira” which it calls a girl’s name. I’m not trying to imply that you are not a man, as you say, but merely to explain why so many here tend to think that you are a female. Mistakenly identity is not derogatory.

      • yonira
        January 7, 2010, 3:21 am


        I understand where you are coming from, but aparisian does it to try and get a rise out of me as if it offends me or something. I could careless, I only made an issue of it after you brought it up. I think its offensive to woman as a whole that someone would continue to call ME a woman :)

        As for the name:

        ra is hebrew for bad, so a loose interpretation in English would be Bad Jon (lame i know and also stolen from the movie Lucky # Sleven)

      • sammy
        January 7, 2010, 3:57 am
      • tree
        January 7, 2010, 4:26 am

        More on Haifa, from Ilan Pappe’s “The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine”:

        The new policy was also aimed at the urban spaces of Palestine, and Haifa was chosen as the first target….From the morning after the UN Partition Resolution was adopted, the 75.000 Palestinians in the city were subjected to a campaign of terror jointly instigated by the Irgun and the Hagana. As they had only arrived in recent decades, the Jewish settlers had built their houses higher up the mountain. Thus, they lived topographically above the Arab neighborhoods and could easily shell and snipe at them. They had started doing this frequently since early December. They used other methods of intimidation as well: the Jewish troops rolled barrels full of explosives, and huge steel balls, down into the Arab residential areas, and poured oil mixed with fuel down the roads, which they then ignited. The moment panic-stricken Palestinian residents came running out of their homes to try to extinguish these rivers of fire, they were sprayed by machine-gun fire. In areas where the two communities still interacted, the Hagana brought cars to Palestinian garages to be repaired, loaded with explosives and detonating devices, and so wreaked death and chaos. A special unit of the Hagana, Hashahar (“Dawn”), made up of mistarvim -literally Hebrew for “becoming Arab”, that is Jews who disguised themselves as Palestinians- was behind this kind of assault. The mastermind of these operations was someone called Dani Agmon, who headed the “Dawn” units. On its website, the official historian of the Palmach puts it as folows: “The Palestinians [in Haifa] were from December onwards under siege and intimidation”. But worse was to come.

        Quoted from page 58, for anyone who wants to look it up. The book goes on to describe the constant attacks and intimidation that the Haifa Palestinians were under for months until April 21 when the Hagana launched a full scale attack, herding the Palestinian civilians into the port with mortar attacks and sniping and literally driving them into the sea.

      • Shingo
        January 7, 2010, 4:53 am

        “. The zionist posters on here can admit and freely admit that Israel is far from perfect, the creation of Israel and their current tactics are far from perfect.’

        That’s like arguing that a rapist it far from perfect, and then demanding that becasue the victim is also far from perfect, they are equally responsible for the attack.

        This is not about who is perfect Yonira, it’s about what either side is guilty of.

      • Citizen
        January 7, 2010, 1:09 pm

        Hey, yonira, you have said you were an American, living in America, I mean the USA. Do you think our governmental representatives and our MSM give Americans the truth about the I-P scenario and history? You are like Witty, arguing on this blog for what is in fact the US official hasbara POV; this is costing the US dearly, and it will cost even more, with no net benefits to USA citizens. You may claim to be an outsider on this tiny blog but you are in the mainstream of thoughts allowed in the USA. You will never need to fear loss of your career, just as you need not rear a military draft to add you to the cannon fodder for PNAC-inspired USA aggression or prozy Israeli aggression–you know, preemptive war? This is something the USA regimes have turned into a distorted Shoah excuse for USA greed.

      • Citizen
        January 8, 2010, 1:02 pm

        The November 29, 1947 UN partition plan gave the Jews 56.47% of Mandatory Palestine and at that time the Jews owned less than 7% of the land with a population of 498,000 Jews and 325,000 Arabs, and the Palestinians were to get 43.53% of Palestine, with 807,000 Arab inhabitants and 10,000 Jewish inhabitants. ( Jerusalem, with a population of 100,000 Jews and 105,000 Arabs, was to be an international trusteeship with equal access.) According to the revisionist historians with later access to Israeli government archives, Plan Dalet (launched by a myriad of Zionist military sub-OPs in April of 1948, the goal was
        to capture as much Palestinian/Arab territory as possible before the end of the British Mandate. War broke out between the Zionists and the Arabs after Israel declared itself a state on May 14, 1948.
        By the end of the ’48 War Zionist forces had captured 54% of the territory assigned to the Arab state by the UN partition plan and Israel controlled 77.4% of the land. Palestinians were fragmented and rendered a nation of displaced refugees (UN estimates: 726,000 Palestinian refugees located outside the armistice lines and some 32,000 inside). 418 Palestinian villages had been depopulated and erased from the map as a result of Jewish military activities, massacres and expulsion orders.

      • Citizen
        January 8, 2010, 1:09 pm

        So, WJ, you think American citizens are given an objective view by their government and MSM regarding the I-P situation and our government’s enabling of it? There a lot of ways to skin the cat of ghettoization. Read some old Bernays like Goebbels and Carl Rove did.

    • Chaos4700
      January 6, 2010, 2:32 pm

      So you’re telling me the IDF bombed schools — like this one: link to — and didn’t expect to kill children? How about the apartment buildings that were attacked? The hospitals? Mosques, during prayer time?

      You can rationally make the case that somebody bombed a school and wasn’t trying to murder children, can you? And in the same breath, Hamas fires an unguided rocket and that’s supposed to be a definitive attack on children?

    • tree
      January 6, 2010, 2:35 pm

      Listen to the interview again, Richard. Zahalka didn’t say those words. Margalit put them in Zahalka’s mouth. Listen.

      • tree
        January 6, 2010, 2:37 pm

        Putting words in other people’s mouths is chutzpah. Especially for a “reporter”.

      • Richard Witty
        January 6, 2010, 2:56 pm

        “At minute 5:05, MK Zahalka says that Ehud Barak listens to classical music and kills children in Gaza. ”

        Is this another “wipe Israel from the map” discussion?

      • tree
        January 6, 2010, 3:22 pm

        No, we are not arguing over a translation. The subtitles clearly do not have Zahalka saying “Barak desires to kill children”.(Your misquote) It does have Margalit putting the words “You are saying the defense minister wants to kill kids” in Zahalka’s mouth. We are talking about reading comprehension here, and you are failing it.

      • Citizen
        January 6, 2010, 4:45 pm

        The Zionist regime will vanish from the pages of history (in context: as the USSR did)–that’s the actual verbiage in translation.

        Wonder how average Americans would take it if Chinese Americans or Arab Americans took over all the elected and appointed governmental slots now held by American Jews? No need to worry or count the backgrounds of said
        peeps? Can dual citizen Arabs own companies controlling and managing our ports? How about if we populate the top MSM slots with Arab American or Chinese Americans? That OK? Nobody should point a finger? Connect those dots in public? Witty?

      • Richard Witty
        January 6, 2010, 4:50 pm

        Actually, I’m quoting Adam. Did you see the quote marks on the previous post?

      • tree
        January 6, 2010, 5:09 pm

        You posted this as a quote at 2:17p:

        “Barak desires to kill children”….

        No one said that. You falsely quoted. Please don’t pretend to be so incredibly clueless that you don’t remember your own post. Adam didn’t say this. Zahalka didn’t say this. You did. Cut the innocent act, please.

      • wondering jew
        January 6, 2010, 5:29 pm

        The statement (not quoting now) from Zahalka was: Barak listens to classical music and kills children. The implication was clear- these are both pastimes to Barak and he kills children needlessly while he listens to classical music and is having a good time. This is saying Barak is a callous baby killer, not quite a blood thirsty baby killer, merely callous to the nth degree.

      • aparisian
        January 6, 2010, 5:32 pm

        and is that different from the reality? bombing schools is equivalent of killing children, the fact is 400 children were killed.

      • James Bradley
        January 6, 2010, 5:37 pm

        He is a baby killer.

        Its he that did in fact order those bombs to be dropped on schools, hospitals, and homes.

        Lots of babies were killed under his orders. I don’t know what else you call that.

      • wondering jew
        January 6, 2010, 5:38 pm

        Sorry, not in a mood to discuss the validity of the comment by Zahalka, only in the mood to discuss the videotape above. My general attitude to the war against Gaza is that it was unwise. The siege was/is unwise and the war was unwise and Israel needs some kind of a strategy to end the siege to at least some degree. (Open the ports of Gaza and have international assurances that shipping is not bringing in arms, is one suggestion.)

      • aparisian
        January 6, 2010, 5:41 pm

        and the settlements? and the occupation? they are all wise? i just want to ask you one question WJ, whats the future of Israel, tell me from Zionist point of view how do you see the future?

      • wondering jew
        January 6, 2010, 6:02 pm

        The settlements? outside of Jerusalem- unwise. An occupation without settlements would be very different than the type of occupation that results with settlements.

        I don’t see the future too well. I’m not an optimist. I see conflict and war.

      • aparisian
        January 6, 2010, 6:06 pm

        WJ what about the International laws? the UN resolutions?

      • wondering jew
        January 6, 2010, 6:17 pm

        The international law and UN resolutions are against Jews living in Jerusalem past the 1948 lines. I disregard them, primarily because of the Western Wall and the Jewish Quarter of the old city.

        The occupation itself is not illegal. Holding prisoners not inside the occupied territory but on Israeli territory is illegal and settlements are illegal but the occupation itself is not illegal. The occupation is supposed to be negotiated to an ending between the combatants of the 67 war, originally and since Jordan gave up custodianship for the West Bank, the PLO was recognized as the sole representative of the Palestinian people in 74, so they have to negotiate a peaceful coexistence with Israel based upon return of territories and recognition and security for all states in the region. That’s resolution 242.

        Unlike the post war situation of 56 that required an immediate withdrawal Resolution 242 implied that withdrawal from territory would occur in the context of recognition, peace treaties and thus negotiation. Certainly the countries that passed it did not envision a 42 plus year occupation, but the resolution did not include any mechanism to prevent such a lengthy occupation.

      • tree
        January 6, 2010, 6:21 pm

        The international law and UN resolutions are against Jews living in Jerusalem past the 1948 lines.

        No, international law and UN resolutions are against ISRAELI living, as citizens of Israel, in the area of Jerusalem that is occupied territory. You are conflating Jews and Israelis.

      • aparisian
        January 6, 2010, 6:24 pm

        The international laws and the UN resolutions are the voice of the majority, are you aware of this WJ? Why Jews and Israelis are above the majority?

      • wondering jew
        January 6, 2010, 6:29 pm

        There were no Jews living in the occupied part of Jerusalem between 1948 and 1967, so I guess you’re suggesting that Jews could have moved into the occupied part of Jerusalem once they had denounced their citizenship?

      • wondering jew
        January 6, 2010, 6:30 pm

        That was my response to tree.

      • wondering jew
        January 6, 2010, 6:33 pm

        To aparisian- If the courts passed a law that I can’t make love to my wife, I wouldn’t abide by the courts’ law. The Jewish connection to the Western Wall is analogous.

      • aparisian
        January 6, 2010, 6:37 pm

        in other words you say i take themm if they are in my favor and ignore them otherwise. The jungle WJ is that what the world looks like without laws? you believe laws come from god, dont you?

      • wondering jew
        January 6, 2010, 6:42 pm

        No, I don’t believe laws come from God. But I believe that the Jewish affinity for certain parts of Jerusalem is much stronger than a law. Sometimes it is unnatural for a person to abide by the law. That is the case for certain parts of Jerusalem. To keep the Jews away from the Western Wall and away from the Jewish Quarter is unnatural.

      • tree
        January 6, 2010, 6:59 pm

        I’m suggesting that you are conflating Israelis with Jews by your statement about international law. International law does not differentiate on the basis of religion or ethnicity, but on the basis of occupier and occupied. I didn’t think that you were that obtuse.

        If all were citizens and treated equally, then there would be no restrictions on where anyone could live, Jew or non-Jew. This has never been the case is Israel since its conception.

      • former coMMenter
        January 6, 2010, 7:43 pm

        I’m sure Richard Witty would be rushing to Ehud Barak’s defense if he wasn’t Jewish and this wasn’t Israel.

      • Saleema
        January 6, 2010, 7:50 pm

        you got the description of Barak quite right.

      • potsherd
        January 6, 2010, 7:52 pm

        How unnatural is it to keep Arabs away from the Arab Quarter and the al-Aqsa Mosque? And what about the Moroccan Quarter?

        Or are we privileging the Jews again?

      • wondering jew
        January 6, 2010, 8:00 pm

        Today there are four quarters: Muslim, Christian, Jewish and Armenian. I understand that the neighborhood where the Western Wall Plaza now is was called the Moroccan Quarter? The Al Aqsa mosque is as a rule available to Muslims except under security restrictions.

      • James Bradley
        January 6, 2010, 8:21 pm

        The Al Aqsa mosque is as a rule available to Muslims except under security restrictions.

        Most Palestinians are HEAVILY restricted in their access to Masjid Al-Aqsa.

      • potsherd
        January 6, 2010, 8:24 pm

        “except under security restrictions” means “not”.

        The Moroccan Quarter was illegally bulldozed by the IDF to create the plaza, with the residents thrown out into the streets. Israel is still throwing Palestinians out into the streets. The thought that they might be attached to their own homes and traditions means nothing where the “Jewish affinity” is concerned, because they are such speshul, speshul people.

      • wondering jew
        January 6, 2010, 8:38 pm

        I assume there are heavy restrictions on travel from the West Bank to Jerusalem these days. Was that true in 1968, 78, and 86? Is it a recent development or something since the beginning of the occupation.

      • James Bradley
        January 6, 2010, 8:51 pm

        Palestinian males must be married and at least 50 years of age and women must be married and at least 45 years of age to enter the mosque, on those occasions when they are allowed to visit Masjid Al Aqsa. These restrictions don’t apply as severely to those Palestinians that have Israeli citizenship.

        link to

      • Aref
        January 6, 2010, 9:58 pm

        That is not true. There were some Jews living in East Jerusalem before 1967–a relative of mine was married to one.
        According to international as stated in the Geneva conventions, an occupying country cannot move its citizens into occupied territories except for security reasons.
        In fact what this says is that police force and military are allowed to be moved into occupied territory but not civilians.
        Also, annexation of occupied territory by an occupying country is illegal under international law. This is the reason why all countries of the world including the US have not recognized the annexation of Jerusalem by Israel and therefore have not moved their embassies to Jerusalem.

      • Tuyzentfloot
        January 7, 2010, 4:33 am

        (WJ) My general attitude to the war against Gaza is that it was unwise. When I click ‘unwise’ I get a dialog asking do you want to uninstall the Zionism application? Ok/Cancel. I clicked Ok and am now waiting for something to happen.

      • Shmuel
        January 7, 2010, 4:46 am

        I get a dialog asking do you want to uninstall the Zionism application? Ok/Cancel. I clicked Ok and am now waiting for something to happen.

        Hey, that’s not fair. I didn’t get the uninstall option – just “Do you want to update to Zionism 2010?”

      • tree
        January 7, 2010, 4:49 am

        That is not true. There were some Jews living in East Jerusalem before 1967–a relative of mine was married to one.

        I’m not surprised. I’ve been told by Israel apologists that absolutely no Jews were allowed to visit East Jerusalem and the Wailing Wall during Jordan’s rule, but I had a great aunt (American by birth, Jewish by religion) who loved to travel and visited there in the early sixties. Its a conflating of “Jew” and “Israeli” that creates the false statements.

        From the other angle, all Israelis, not just Jews but also Muslims and Christians, were prohibited from visiting East Jerusalem when it was held by Jordan. Not a very tolerant policy on Jordan’s part towards those Israelis with religious connections , but I suspect it was a policy meant to avoid conflict and the possibility of incidents. I’ve read an older book recently, written in the 1950’s by an American Naval Commander, Hutchison, who was assigned to command the UN Truce Supervision Team at the time. Typically, before he started his assignment, he was sympathetic to the Zionist cause. After witnessed the provocations, and the ethnic cleansings that Israel committed during that time, his sympathies changed. For anyone interested, the book is called “Violent Truce”

      • Tuyzentfloot
        January 7, 2010, 4:49 am

        That’ll teach you not to upgrade to Vista. I stuck to XP.

      • Citizen
        January 7, 2010, 1:17 pm

        I knew you would not answer my question, Dick Witty.

      • Citizen
        January 8, 2010, 1:20 pm

        It was more than unwise long-term, and bad PR; the Gaza economic seige and latest turkey shoot are against international law as collective punishment and criminal aggression implemented by Israeli state policy. And Israelis policy concerning the Palestinian people will lead to WW3, a nuclear WW3.

  11. radii
    January 6, 2010, 2:27 pm

    Ah, the “impudence” element to zionist arrogance and political control finally finds the light of day – we are making progress

    As I said in response to another post, the zionists are growing ever more desperate:

    the more tightly they grab hold of power, like sand, ever more begins to slip through their fingers

    We are indeed witnessing the beginning of the end of zionism – it is just a question of how much damage to how many people the zionists are willing to inflict upon the rest of us on their way out [disclaimer for yonira: Note I did not say jews are on the way out, nor do I wish them any harm at all – in fact it we here who follow Mondoweiss are the ones who care more about jews than do the zionists, for we understand how the hideous regime in israel and failed zionism represents the greatest threat to jews]

    • Citizen
      January 6, 2010, 2:35 pm

      OH my, please be considerate of Dick Witty’s Zionists dreams, as he slumbers in his comfy American burb home, a nice nest gathered in the land and from its way majority people who in his mind are not worthy of any special loyalty.

  12. Colin Murray
    January 6, 2010, 2:40 pm

    ot from: Israeli officers cancel UK trip for fear of arrest

    An Israeli military delegation has canceled an official visit to Britain, officials said Tuesday [5Jan2010], the latest in a string of politicians and army officials to put off travel to the U.K. because of fears of war crimes prosecution.


    • Colin Murray
      January 6, 2010, 11:09 pm


      from Attorney General Baroness Scotland may block Israeli war crimes warrants

      Baroness Scotland of Asthal, who is in Jerusalem, discussed an amendment to British law that would give her office the power to review arrest warrants in private prosecutions against political figures, according to Foreign Ministry sources.

      Officials have told ministers that a change to the present legal situation will require parliamentary approval. That advice has delayed the change because the Government fears a backlash from its own backbenchers if it tries to push through an amendment which is seen to favour Israel.

      • Chaos4700
        January 6, 2010, 11:21 pm

        Isn’t that a blatantly anti-judicial move? I mean seriously. It’s not like the British are, you know, American voters. They’re going to notice.

      • Citizen
        January 7, 2010, 1:23 pm

        LOL. You’re right, Chaos, American voters don’t mostly notice anything unless it slaps them directly in the face. That’s my observation, having come from a poor American family who has lived nearly 6 decades here, on my own economically since i was age 17, and all around the USA, and among the very poor and the very well off.

  13. Donald
    January 6, 2010, 3:37 pm

    I felt sorry for the young guy–he seemed a little appalled at the shouting match. (Though I couldn’t tell what things he might have said).

    The older Israeli was pretty disgusting, as almost everyone has noted. It was fascinating how after the Arab village was named (apparently located where the studio now is) he started talking about how the truth comes out. That’s been the standard technique used to shut down discussion of 1948-bring up the fact that Israel is built partly on the land of 400 demolished Palestinian villages and this sort of person will start saying “You don’t think Israel has the right to exist.” The person bringing up the ethnic cleansing is thereby made out to be the aggressor. It’s real chutzpah, on the level of the man who killed his parents asking for mercy because he’s an orphan.

    • potsherd
      January 6, 2010, 4:15 pm

      Yelling about the bottle rockets

      • Donald
        January 6, 2010, 8:41 pm

        Ok, if the young guy was yelling about the rockets I withdraw my sympathy. Rockets on the one side vs. siege and massacre on the other? Not hard to pick which side deserves most of the sympathy.

      • potsherd
        January 6, 2010, 9:15 pm

        iirc it was Margalit yelling about the rockets

      • former coMMenter
        January 6, 2010, 9:56 pm

        The young guy also mocked the MK, laughing derisively, because he apparently wasn’t there in person at the Egyptian protests he voiced support for. And he just sat there laughing like a douchebag as his crusty sidekick stenographer attempted to put the uppity Arab in his place. (Fitting metaphor though: media as the real authority, elected official expected to be dancing monkey). And even putting aside the stench of tribalist prejudice and embarrassingly adolescent partiality; the very point being made–that the MK should be criticizing Egypt rather than Israel for the situation in Gaza–is a Zionut refrain that only goes down with massive gulps of the nationalist kool-aid.

  14. Shmuel
    January 6, 2010, 4:20 pm

    Although at an obvious linguistic disadvantage, Zahalka got Margalit’s number perfectly: court journalist. Always has been, always will be.

    A line that was not translated, during the shouting match – when Zahalka told Margalit that he would not be called boy or scolded for his back-talk, Margalit said: I don’t live in your state; I live in a democracy. Zahalka is of course an Israeli citizen, who simply wants to be treated as an equal in the country where he was born.

    Shenhav’s analysis is right on the money, although I think he’s tries a little too hard to be original in the part about breaking sterotypes (maybe trying to break the sterotype of the post-Zionist left-wing intellectual in the process).

    The mindless propaganda about Gaza, spouted by both journalists, is par for the course on Israeli TV.

    • tree
      January 6, 2010, 5:21 pm

      A line that was not translated, during the shouting match – when Zahalka told Margalit that he would not be called boy or scolded for his back-talk, Margalit said: I don’t live in your state; I live in a democracy. Zahalka is of course an Israeli citizen, who simply wants to be treated as an equal in the country where he was born.

      Thanks for sharing that, Shmuel. A shameful and incredibly racist statement, but it seems to sum up the privileged attitudes of many Israelis. Is Margalit considered “left”, “right” or “center” in Israel? Is he one of Witty’s fantasy humanist Zionists?

      • Richard Witty
        January 6, 2010, 6:00 pm

        “At minute 5:05, MK Zahalka says that Ehud Barak listens to classical music and kills children in Gaza. ”

        Adam Horowitz

      • tree
        January 6, 2010, 6:29 pm

        Give it up, Richard .Your original quote. with quotation marks, was said by no one but you. I’ve got no quarrel with Adam’s paraphrase. It was accurate. Yours was not.

        “Barak desires to kill children”…. No one said that or wrote that but you, and you put false quotation marks around it.

      • MRW
        January 6, 2010, 6:43 pm

        No, Richard, Adam Horowitz does not write what you claim at all. Here is Horowitz’ contribution to the above:

        The above interview has been making the rounds online, and has been garnering much attention in Israel. The confrontation features Dan Margalit, a well known mainstream Israeli journalist, and MK Jamal Zahalka, a Palestinian member of the Knesset.

        There have been several responses to the episode in the Israeli press. Below is an illuminating article by Israeli professor Yehuda Shenhav, which appears on the Hebrew version of YNET. Interestingly enough, there is a translated article on YNET’s English site attacking Zahalka called “History lesson for Arab MKs.” Luckily, a Mondoweiss reader translated the Shenhav article. From YNET:

        Period. That is the sum total of Horowitz’ remarks.

        “At minute 5:05, MK Zahalka says that Ehud Barak listens to classical music and kills children in Gaza. ”

        was written by Shenhav via the Mondoweiss translator of the YNET article.

      • Richard Witty
        January 6, 2010, 6:45 pm

        Excuse me. Like I said a repeat of the quote “Israel will be wiped from the map”, the translation provided by the Iranian Press Service.

      • Chaos4700
        January 6, 2010, 6:50 pm

        So you are denying that children were killed in Operation Cast Lead? Oh, do you believe they “just died,” then?

      • Chaos4700
        January 6, 2010, 6:52 pm

        Like it or not, Witty, that quote is demonstrably false, no matter who generated it.

        link to

      • VR
        January 6, 2010, 7:26 pm

        Barak is a war criminal, along with his accomplices, and deserves to be prosecuted in the dock to the fullest extent of the law.

      • MRW
        January 6, 2010, 7:36 pm

        At no time does Ahmadinejad say that Israel will be wiped from the map. At no time.
        Text of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s Speech
        Published: October 30, 2005
        link to (NYT)
        This is a translation, by Nazila Fathi in The New York Times Tehran bureau, of the October 26 speech by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to an Islamic Student Associations conference on “The World Without Zionism.” The conference was held in Tehran, at the Interior Ministry.
        The text of the speech was posted online, in Persian, by the Iranian Student News Agency ( Bracketed explanatory material is from Ms. Fathi.

        Read the fucker, Richard.

      • former coMMenter
        January 6, 2010, 8:09 pm

        Richard wants to play quote-misquote because he’s probably not comfortable arguing the merits of Barak’s “kill one child for every bottle rocket fired” doctrine.

        Richard is pro-peace but he will jump to the defense of certain war criminals.*

        * Depending on their ethnic/tribal/”religious” pedigree.

      • former coMMenter
        January 6, 2010, 8:14 pm

        Of course it was the New York Times translator that opted for the provocative language that could then be sensationally lacquered over every western newscast for the the next several months/years.

        Then again, Richard Witty is wagering with credibility that he lost a long time ago. He is a Jewish nationalist racist who would like to involve the United States in a military conflict with Iran, even though such a conflict would be a disastrous misstep for the people of the U.S. and mean colossal devastation and suffering for the people of Iran.

        But hey if it buys Israel another 3-4 years… small price to pay I guess…

      • Richard Witty
        January 6, 2010, 10:35 pm

        I read the translation that the Iranian Press Service published as the official translation and distributed to Al-Jazeera (which they quoted) and the Washington Post (which was also quoted).

        Maybe Ahemnidijad did not say “wipe them from the map” but some other Persian words. But, his press service did, and there was some confirmation that that was what was meant. (Just as was affirmed here, that Israel will disappear from the map, not necessarily genocide of Jews. I got that.)

        link to

        How many times must I post that, before you take it in that it was what was published?

      • Richard Witty
        January 6, 2010, 10:37 pm

        You don’t have a clue as to my beliefs. Have you been posting under another name here MM?

        Your language is eerily reminiscent of other posters.

      • Chaos4700
        January 6, 2010, 10:50 pm

        Well, Witty, your beliefs obviously don’t include any respect for the truth, since you don’t care what Ahmedinejad really said and you’re going to slavishishly push a translation that we have informed you several times now is incorrect, but you push it anyway because it fits your agenda.

      • Richard Witty
        January 6, 2010, 10:58 pm

        It was what was communicated to the world.

        Communication is that, not what was meant.

        Ahmenidijad never corrected the translation to mean, “We don’t hope that Israel will not exist. We are excited that Israel exists as Israel. We want and sincerely offer good mutually respectful relations with Israel.”

      • Chaos4700
        January 6, 2010, 11:16 pm

        So it doesn’t matter to you what was actually said? Not even slightly? Facts have nothing to do with your perspective? Just to clarify.

        How come what Ahmedinejad does not actually say, is supposed to be treated as if it somehow represents Ahmedinejad’s official stance — totally in spite of fact — and yet what does come out of the mouths of high ranking Israeli government officials — like, say, Avigdor Lieberman — is conveniently ignored?

        Are you really that shallow? Are you really that transparently racist that factual information will not penetrate your Zionist fanaticism?

      • James Bradley
        January 6, 2010, 11:54 pm

        Unlike some people here, I actually do appreciate your (Chaos) constant attacks on the obscenity that continues to be spewed by Mr. Witty. The lies need to be exposed over and over again, no matter how many times they are said. This is largely because Zionists need to believe in an encyclopedia of myths to morally justify their behavior.

        Here are just a few of them.

        1) Zionists need to believe that they’re are various countries committed to their destruction. This is despite the fact that Israel has been rejecting all of its neighbors peace proposals for the past decade. See Arab Peace Initiatives of 2002, 2007 and 2009 .

        2) Zionists need to believe that Hamas is committed to their destruction despite the fact that their new charter does not call for the destruction of the state of Israel, and despite the fact that Khaled Meshal (Head of Hamas) and Ismael Haniyeh (PM of Hamas) have repeatedly said multiple times that they would agree to a full peace with Israel if Israel were to grant the Palestinians a viable state based on the 1967 borders (a solution that is in line with the Quartet and international community), I mean imagine that… the most extreme mainstream Palestinian group is willing to accept a solution in which they receive only 22% of their historic homeland, when they have every right to morally ask for their whole country back.

        3) Zionists also need to believe that Hamas is responsible for Operation Cast Lead and the massacres that took place in Gaza. Never mind the fact that Israel is the one that broke the ceasefire, has a history of being a ceasefire breaker 94% of the time, and was the party that was dropping the two ton bombs on civilian targets for more than 22 days. Lets also not forget that Operation Cast Lead was planned 6months before it happened (which is ironically when the ceasefire went into effect).

        In any case, these people are not here to debate, they are here to ensure that Zionist myths and half trues are included in the debate of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, thus preventing any form of justice to befall the Palestinian people and in effect shift the blame of Palestinian suffering to the Palestinians themselves. Its a classic “blame the victim” approach to problems.

      • Chaos4700
        January 6, 2010, 11:59 pm

        Too right, Mr. Bradley. And it’s sick and twisted because it’s the same disgusting toolbox of tactics that are utilized by Holocaust deniers and anti-Semites against Jews (Zionist and non-Zionist alike).

        I still can’t get over the fact that Witty is demanding that Ahmedinejad apologize for something he never actually said.

      • yonira
        January 7, 2010, 1:44 am

        can you provide a link to their new charter please?

      • yonira
        January 7, 2010, 1:47 am

        I am fairly confident there is no new charter, another Mondolie.

      • Shingo
        January 7, 2010, 5:04 am

        “Excuse me. Like I said a repeat of the quote “Israel will be wiped from the map”, the translation provided by the Iranian Press Service. “‘

        And it was corrected y Farsi translators like Juan Cole, who pointed out there was no such statement made.

      • aparisian
        January 7, 2010, 5:32 am

        yonira, have you ever seen this link to

        These photos represent the evil of wars that you support.

      • yonira
        January 7, 2010, 8:46 am

        crap aparisian, i clicked the link thinking it was the new Hamas Charter (which doesn’t exist) instead its another picture of a dead person.

        War kills, its horrible and I wish that war could be eliminated all together. I feel finding and posting a good be-heading or a crushed baby skull from the Hezbollah superstar Samir Kuntar, but I am not as sadistic as ya’ll.

      • aparisian
        January 7, 2010, 9:07 am

        yonira, can you tell me why Israel never wrote a constitution? and can you also tell me if Israel ever recognised the right of Palestinians to exit? Can you tell me why settlements are Jews only in theocratic Israel?
        Nope he is not a dead person, he is a dead child like the 400 massacred by the Zionists Army.

        Yonira, was Hezbollah behing the Gaza masacre, was it behind the dropping of white phosphorus and the killing of babies, was it behind the destruction of schools, hospital and water recycling system?

        Yonira, we better start to talk about your future, and the future of the Zionist state. Romans, Nazism, communism, colonialism fall down, when is the Zionism turn?

      • Citizen
        January 7, 2010, 1:32 pm

        I’ve been following Witty’s comments for over two years here on his blog. You are right. He could care less about how many Muslims or any Arabs die in any event; nor does he give one whit about any US goy soldiers who die, for whatever.He is solely interested in maintaining “Jewish continuity.”
        Everything he says, and how he says it, can be traced back to that sole concern.
        He is a great example of Hitler’s described enemy in Hitler’s political testament. Witty’s world, like Hitler’s world, is a zero sum game. Nothing has really changed for this type of human.

      • Citizen
        January 8, 2010, 1:33 pm

        In the late 1990’s; I believe it was 1998 –the Palestinian leaders all renounced in front of Clinton those parts of the original Palestinian charter that declared eternal war against Israel and/or refused to recognize its actual existence as a state.

      • Shmuel
        January 7, 2010, 2:17 am

        tree:Is Margalit considered “left”, “right” or “center” in Israel?

        Margalit is as middle of the road as they come. Sometimes he plays the humanist, and sometimes he represents the “angry man in the street”. He almost always reflects the views of the government and is always smug.

      • tree
        January 7, 2010, 3:25 am

        Thanks, Shmuel. With the obscene comment he made about Zahalka, erasing Zahalka’s Israeli citizenship, I was hoping that he was a right winger, but I shouldn’t really be suprised that such racism as Margalit exhibited is mainstream in Israel. And I did notice the smugness. It seemed to ooze from him.

  15. Citizen
    January 6, 2010, 4:47 pm

    Mmmh, is that worse in practical effect from the total lack of discussion about Gaza on USA TV?

  16. Colin Murray
    January 6, 2010, 6:33 pm

    New Revelations Tear Holes in Nuclear Trigger Story, 6 Jan 2010

    Giraldi: US Intel Found Iran Nuke Document Was Forged 29 Dec 2009

    If agents of any nation other than Israel were making so concerted an effort to lie the United States into war AGAIN, the Congress and the rest of our political establishment might have the cojones to deal with a serious threat to our national security. Our government has killed with UAV-fired missiles individuals who have merely talked (albeit with deadly intent, so we have acted with meet justification) about harming the United States, yet forgers who have demonstrably done such grievous harm to the United States, and continue to do so, walk around free? Surely Pres. Obama could order a few more pens constructed at Gitmo to house these folks?

    • Chaos4700
      January 6, 2010, 6:57 pm

      I do don’t think we need to “gitmo” anyone. Human rights apply to everyone — even liars, traitors and thieves.

      I’d be just fine if we treated them like the common criminals they are. Were that we even did that much in the interests of national security.

      • Colin Murray
        January 6, 2010, 7:11 pm

        I also prefer a fully transparent legal route. However, I doubt evidence that could be presented against them in a court of law (and I don’t doubt that a lot exists or could be collected) would either be admissible legally, in that its collection was authorized by a court of law, or practically, in that it could be revealed in court without revealing sensitive sources or methods.

        I should have been a little less facetious with my reference to pens. I see how that might have mis-flavored my intended tone.

      • Chaos4700
        January 6, 2010, 9:00 pm

        Meh, I understand you were being facetious. I am perhaps over-sensitized to references to Gitmo. For me, that’s where the grave of American integrity was buried. (I understand there are preceding events that might be as bad, but Gitmo is my personal touchstone of disillusionment.)

    • Colin Murray
      January 6, 2010, 6:58 pm

      more on Zionist forgeries:

      20-Year-Old Letterhead points to Israeli Forgery in Francop Affair, Informed Comment, Juan Cole, 17 Nov 2009

    • MRW
      January 6, 2010, 7:08 pm

      Giraldi’s interview on about all this is interesting as well:
      link to

  17. Aref
    January 6, 2010, 10:02 pm

    Here we have a prime and fine example of what a “Democratic Jewish” state means.

  18. Citizen
    January 7, 2010, 1:39 pm

    We all have to keep in mind what a “democratic state” means after Bernays schooled us (and his student Goebbels followed suit). The biggest criminal and treasonous agency in the USA is the USA MSM. The key is corporate USA is the USA. The proof is in the pudding: Obama, and what he has allowed or enhanced since being in orifice.

    • Citizen
      January 7, 2010, 1:44 pm

      And of course, before Obama, there were the Bernays-Goebbels students, Rowe (especially) and Chaney (and all the Jewish American neocon appointees and stink tank Straussian scribblers).

Leave a Reply