Gehry… Santana… chain reaction?

Israel/Palestine
on 250 Comments

Last year architect Frank Gehry withdrew from the Museum of Tolerance project in Jerusalem, under pressure because the site was an ancient Muslim cemetery. Now Carlos Santana has canceled a June show in Israel under pressure not to perform in the society that produced Gaza. Ynet:

Guitarist Carlos Santana reportedly received messages that "it’s better" that he not perform in Israel, according to what a senior official in the Israeli music production market involved in producing Santana’s show told Yedioth Ahronoth… Sources in Israel’s music industry hope that Santana’s cancellation does not create a chain reaction.

About Philip Weiss

Philip Weiss is Founder and Co-Editor of Mondoweiss.net.

Other posts by .


Posted In:

250 Responses

  1. UNIX
    February 2, 2010, 11:42 pm

    As long as it doesn’t cross the line to personal threats.

    • Mooser
      February 3, 2010, 10:29 am

      Because if there is one thing Zionists/Israelis never, ever stoop to, it’s personal threats.

      Tell me, BSD, if it does cross the line to personal threats, what authority will you appeal to? God? Or the almighty kvetch?

  2. Taxi
    February 2, 2010, 11:46 pm

    In the summer of ’06 in California, I went to a Santana gig and was blown away when half-way into the show he asked everyone to take a moment and remember the people of Lebanon who were that night under intense Israeli bombardment. It was unexpected and very moving.

    The dude knows what is.

  3. Avi
    February 2, 2010, 11:47 pm

    I am all for criticism and introspection when both are fair and fitting. But, tonight’s Jon Stewart disappointing much in the same way Obama did a few days ago in Florida.

    Having ignored the Gaza slaughter last year, tonight, Jon Stewart saw it fitting to dedicate the second segment of his show to a “Hamas cartoon show” in which audiences are shown Israeli figures (general, teacher, father) teaching the younger Israeli generation hatred and animosity.

    Now, out of context, I can certainly understand how the cartoon in question can be viewed as both anti-Semitic and promoting hate speech, but reality and the grand scheme of this issue, paints a different picture.

    Didn’t the Chief Rabbi of the IDF issue handbooks to Israeli forces prior to the Gaza attack, in which he sanctioned the killing of civilians and children?

    Didn’t the reality on the ground as experienced by Gaza’s children include graphic scenes, bloodshed, pain and misery?

    Wasn’t there wholesale destruction of Gaza’s infrastructure and population?

    So, why pray tell, is this “Hamas cartoon show” made out to be something that it isn’t?

    While the vast majority of Gaza’s children are still experiencing PTSD, nightmares, depression and low performance in school, doesn’t the subject matter seem fitting?

    • Avi
      February 2, 2010, 11:48 pm

      Correction:

      I am all for criticism and introspection when both are fair and fitting. But, tonight’s Jon Stewart disappointed much in the same way Obama did a few days ago in Florida.

      • Taxi
        February 3, 2010, 12:03 am

        All the talking heads on mainstream media, Jon being one of them, disgraced themselves during the Gaza assault. Jon was more critical of our attacks on Fallujah than he was of Israel’s wanton destruction of the Gaza strip.

        I know he’s fun and all that, but he is a Zionist with a small ‘z’.

        Lately, he’s like a watered down version of himself, a pastiche.

      • Cliff
        February 3, 2010, 4:25 am

        This is an anti-colonial struggle. Remember what Mark Twain said about the Indians?

        Jon can be as progressive as they come on any other issue. Not this though.

      • Donald
        February 3, 2010, 11:45 am

        I rarely see Stewart, but I happened to see him last night and saw the cartoons. I was a little confused. The first one was definitely vicious anti-semitism and deserves criticism. I agree it’s way too easy in this country to attack Palestinian anti-semitism and say nothing about Israeli racism, but all the same, that first cartoon was disgusting.

        The second one, though–maybe I missed something, but it seemed more low key, with an Israeli teaching racist things about Arabs. Frankly, I don’t find that implausible at all. Somebody has to be teaching it. S0 maybe I need to see the clip again, but I thought Jon was being an asshole on that point.

      • Avi
        February 3, 2010, 4:02 pm

        The first one was definitely vicious anti-semitism and deserves criticism.

        I have just read what one of the commenters on the Daily Show’s board wrote. He claims that the first cartoon depicted an Israeli with a gun inside a mosque, that being a reference to Baruch Goldstein’s massacre in Hebron where he shot and killed 30 Muslim worshipers.

        I’ll have to watch the video again. It should be up on Comedy Central’s website soon.

      • Donald
        February 4, 2010, 4:37 pm

        Well, I think there was also some stuff about drinking blood and the guy with the gun had a ridiculously long nose, so I found it pretty bad. There are plenty of murderers on both sides–no need to resort to racist stereotyping to condemn them.

        I’ll have to visit the Comedy Central website myself and rewatch the second one–I was quite confused about what was supposedly objectionable about it. It seemed to depict an Israeli teaching racist nonsense about Arabs. Now if it was an Israeli educational film it would have been shocking, but I had the impression it was a Hamas film depicting Israelis as being racist and we were supposed to be shocked by this. Maybe I misunderstood.

    • UNIX
      February 3, 2010, 12:02 am

      I don’t think children should be taught to hate.

      • Avi
        February 3, 2010, 12:05 am

        I don’t think children should be taught to hate.

        I don’t think you need to TEACH it in Gaza. It simply overtakes you when your family is butchered in front of your eyes and you’re imprisoned for years on end for being born a Palestinian.

      • Taxi
        February 3, 2010, 12:21 am

        I don’t think children should live under occupation.

      • MRW
        February 3, 2010, 2:32 am

        I don’t think children should be taught to hate.

        Tell that to the Yisrael Beitenu party and the Likud.

      • Shmuel
        February 3, 2010, 3:40 am

        BSD: I don’t think children should be taught to hate.

        Thanks for another platitude.

        If you think children shouldn’t be taught to hate, you should certainly watch Yoav Shamir’s Defamation. I guess Stewart hasn’t heard of it.

      • Citizen
        February 3, 2010, 8:16 am

        You beat me to it, Shmuel. Better they should be taught to be paranoid, the earlier, the better.

      • Cliff
        February 3, 2010, 4:45 am

        BSD, what do you think of these Israeli T-Shirts?

        link to mondoweiss.net

        Or this?

        link to palestinechronicle.com

      • Brewer
        February 3, 2010, 10:07 pm

        I don’t think children should be taught to hate.

        The Onion nails it:

        Israel Bombs Anti-Semitism Out Of Lebanon

        After decades of periodic conflict with Lebanon that cost thousands of lives, Israel successfully eradicated all traces of anti-Semitism from its northern neighbor with a series of heavy bombing attacks in July.

        “Israel really turned us around on the whole Jew-hating thing,” said Hezbollah leader Sheikh Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, shortly after a U.N.–brokered ceasefire was declared on Aug. 14. “After destroying much of our infrastructure and displacing nearly 1 million civilians, we’ve come to respect Israel as a legitimate power and a beacon of democracy, and not a pack of lying, usurping, hook-nosed dogs.”

        The last-ever Israel–Lebanon conflict began on July 12, when Hezbollah militants launched Katyusha missiles into Northern Israel, killed three Israeli soldiers, and kidnapped two others. Despite this initial success, Israel eventually prevailed in ridding the majority-Arab nation of a pervasive prejudice, the roots of which extend to Phoenician times.

        Many in the international community were greatly surprised by the development. “We assumed this was just another regional war of attrition, a short-term, semi-effective defensive measure at best, a conflict-feeding ‘eye for an eye’ tactic at worst,” French Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy said. “But we see that we were being far too cynical. It’s basically resolved now.”

        Strobe Talbott, president of the Brookings Institution, a Washington–based think tank, said that there was “very strong” evidence that not only was a virulent anti-Jewish sentiment completely wiped out in Israel’s bombing campaign against Lebanon, but so was any hard-line political opposition to Israel’s existence or its annexing of the West Bank, Gaza Strip, and Golan Heights following the Six-Day War in 1967, and general anger over Israel’s treatment of Palestinians.

        “It’s remarkable to think that, had Hezbollah been capable of making surgical pre-emptive strikes against Israeli military installations and densely populated urban centers, Israel would most likely be renouncing Zionism and abandoning the region at this very moment,” Talbott said in August.

        The bombings have had the most significant impact on Lebanon’s youth. Many who saw parents and friends killed in the attacks said they will now spend the rest of their lives supporting Israel.

        “I was upset at first when a bomb destroyed my school and killed many of my schoolmates and left me without legs,” said Tyre bombing victim Sherifa Ayoub, 14, as she wheeled down her rubble-strewn street. “But as the days went on, and the bombs continued to fall, I began to realize that I had spent my whole young life arbitrarily lashing out at a people I thought I hated, when, all along, what I really hated was myself.”

        Israel’s crushing victory has led Talbott and other Mideast experts to speculate that the nation may go on to bomb the anti-Semitism out of such hostile neighbors as Syria, Saudi Arabia, and Yemen.

        link to theonion.com

    • potsherd
      February 3, 2010, 4:18 am

      Maybe for an encore he can show the video of the settler kids throwing stones on Palestinian houses. It’s not a cartoon, it’s daily reality.

    • unverified__519ch9bb
      February 3, 2010, 9:04 am

      As an Israeli-American living in Israel (for the past 13 years) it is obvious to me that most of the posters on this anti-Zionist site are FAR from informed. In my mind it is Santana who is the coward – afraid that uninformed, misled, “trendy” anti-Zionists (who lets face it, usually but not always means anti-Semitic) will no longer see him as a peace-loving ex-hippie. I know there is a strong chance that my post will not be displayed but still – I have to call you guys out on a number of issues if no one else will.
      Let me start by saying that I am and have always been left-wing on almost every issue. I support Obama, I am 100% against the settlements and I am definitely for a 2 state solution as soon as possible. That being said, I believe it is totally false to portray the IDF as a brutal, heartless organization. Having personally served, I can testify to the fact that upon recieving a rifle (or any weapon for that matter), all soldiers must participate in educational activities (on a regular basis) whose purpose is to clarify what is called “purity of arms”. These types of activities are usually a discussion by the soldiers about the morality of what they are doing and the possible scenarios which they might find themselves in. I challenge anyone to show me any other army in the world that educates its soldiers to that extent on the issue of morality. There are always incedents of soldiers abandoning their morality and officers as well, but I know that these are isolated incidents and they are almost always brought to a military tribunal (for example the case of the officer who unloaded his magazine on a 12 year old girl to make sure she was dead – he was later put in jail).
      I could go on here, but I just want to clarify my point and see whether or not the administrators will post it – I know I am not the kind of poster who is welcome on these sites.
      The point is, Israel is not perfect-far from it, but it definitely has a right to exist and Zionism is NOT a scam, NOT racism and NOT immoral. All it is is the belief that jews have a right to live in freedom and (relative)security as they once did 2000 years ago. To deny our historical connection is to deny history – you may as well deny the holocaust (in fact most of those who deny one also deny the other). We cannot deny the great tragedy that has befallen the Palestinians (who of course did not refer to themselves as such until the earliest Zionists came – in that respect Palestinian nationality is actually indebted to Zionism but that is another story), but we are not responsible for it. To quote Benny Morris, “You can’t make an omelet without breaking the eggs” – meaning yes bad things happened but this was the price to be paid. The Arab Palestinians were given an outstretched hand in the Israeli declaration of Independence but instead chose to fight. The refugees are a consequence of arab rejectionism.
      But lets put aside the past and focus on now. Now most Israelis, even most of the right-wing, are willing to accept a two state solution. Many, like myself, even call for a complete withdrawal from the West Bank. But how many Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza are willing to compromise? I have met many Israeli-Arabs who are very moderate and reasonable people who favor an end to the conflict in the form of two states. I have yet to meet , or even HEAR OF a Palestinian in Gaza or the West Bank who does not want a single state named Palestine. In a perfect world jews and arabs would live together as equals in a binational Isra-stine. But the world is not perfect and maybe that may happen one day but first we need to learn to live as neighbors before we become brothers. Please people – don’t let your noble ideas about humanity and morality to get in the way of common sense and reality.

      • Taxi
        February 3, 2010, 10:09 am

        You’re so right buddy, the IDF IS THE MOST MORAL ARMY IN THE WORLD.

        To make sure this remains the case, just keep taking your medication.

        If you don’t take your hasbara medication, you might just start to realize that zionism is inheritly a racist ideology. Doesn’t matter if you’re on the right or left of the zionist spectrum, geddit?

      • edan
        February 3, 2010, 11:18 am

        Hey Einstein, how exactly can it be racist if Judaism is not a race?

      • potsherd
        February 3, 2010, 2:48 pm

        Ah, another Zionist displays his nasty side. That didn’t take long.

      • edan
        February 3, 2010, 2:52 pm

        the nastiest thing I said in all of my posts was “einstein”. Should I quote for you all the nasty remarks that were directed at me?

      • Taxi
        February 3, 2010, 3:07 pm

        You’re absolutely right edan, Judaism is not a race, it’s a cult.

      • Cliff
        February 3, 2010, 3:12 pm

        Judaism is a religion. Zionism is a nationalistic ideology that is based on a racialist/racist notion of ‘entitlement’ to a piece of territory.

        Jews live all over the world. As RoHa has said here, if self-determination and Statehood require territory, then Jews have no right to self-determination.

        The people who live in a territory have that right.

        Judaism is not Zionism. God is not a real estate agent.

      • Taxi
        February 3, 2010, 3:39 pm

        Cliff,

        After personally looking closely at Judaism, I found it to be all about ‘us and them’. ‘Us’ being favored by god (whatever that means) over ‘them’ savage lowlier than us gentiles.

        This is not universal all-embracing selfless spiritual love.

        Judaism is downright divisive and yes, racist… semitic-racism is what it’s based on you could say.

        Zionism uses this religious ideological divisiveness as foundation.

        This attachment to ‘exclusivity’ is what connects Judaism to Zionism.

        Judaism is not an innocent in the equation of horror we see in the mid east. Nor was it ever a victim.

        How can a lie and a swindle be called a victim?

        Likewise I view Christianity, Islam, Hindu etc. etc. etc.

        Fucking billions of fools going around thinking you can explain the whole of creation, past, present and future – that you can net the worth and reasons of the mysterious creator within the (editable) pages of a book.

        Fact is, nobody, not even Jesus, Moses, Mohammad, Buddha etc. know shit about why we’re here.

        None of them ever answered that question for us.

        True they did talk about ‘how’ we can best live and be. But they never told us why we’re here.

      • edan
        February 3, 2010, 8:04 pm

        “As RoHa has said here, if self-determination and Statehood require territory, then Jews have no right to self-determination.”
        And I suppose you worship RoHa? Jews do have a right to self determination and everybody who knows an ounce of history understands why. One reason is that no one but jews can defend the jews from assholes like Cliff.

      • edan
        February 3, 2010, 8:10 pm

        And what exactly did you look at when examining Judaism, I am curious? Did you actually talk to any jews about judaism?
        This is not the time for a religion vs. science debate, but you might be surprised to knoe that most jews I know have no problem reconciling between the two. And I still don’t understand how Judaism is racist if it is not a race, and in fact includes different races.

      • Donald
        February 3, 2010, 8:20 pm

        Edan, on this one point I’m on your side. Sweeping condemnations of an entire religion because someone “looked into it” just seem intrinsically ridiculous to me. I don’t doubt a person could spend multiple lifetimes “looking into” Judaism. If I ever become deeply interested in the subject myself I wouldn’t waste a whole lot of time trying to learn about it from the comment section of this blog.

        As for racism, racism is inherently illogical and people who are racists can try to justify it with almost any set of beliefs. Christianity is not intrinsically racist, but there’s a long history of people using Christianity to justify racism, and also a long history of people fighting racism on the basis of Christianity. I suspect the same is true of Judaism.

      • Taxi
        February 3, 2010, 11:50 pm

        Hey edan,

        I don’t have a problem with either Jew or Gentile deserving self-determination.

        But I do have a mega problem with Jews/Israelis who deny this same right to the Palestinians.

      • Taxi
        February 4, 2010, 12:10 am

        Judaism is desert mythology.

        To me everyone who ‘believes’ in it is certifiable. Same applies to other religions.

        I am a seeker. I sought everywhere and everywhere I sough and I found rubbish. I still seek, but not in the old heaps of rubbish anymore.

        It’s not a science v religion for me, it goddamn common sense smarts and bone-dry self-honesty.

        You can’t deny that religion continues to be the most popular weapon of mass destruction of the human race. It’s killed more people than the combined total of people killed by the black plague, aids, cancer, heart-disease etc. All wars have proudly worn their religious badge on the battle-field. Do you want me to go on?… cause it’s a little off topic.

        Point being, if you are confused about the definition of ‘racism’, look it up in the dictionary mate. I think the verb ‘to discriminate’ has something to do with it.

      • edan
        February 4, 2010, 7:47 am

        “In the last half of the 20th century many conflicts around the world were interpreted in racial terms even though their origins were in the ethnic hostilities that have long characterized many human societies (e.g., Arabs and Jews, English and Irish). ” – Taken from encyclopedia Britannica.
        In fact scientifically there is no such thing as a “race”. It is true that many jews hold a “jewish supremacy” world view which I despise, but show me one ethnic group that doesn’t have a sense of pride. Also, given the remarkable and unique history of the jews, it is easy to understand how this comes about. It is also true that fundamentalist muslims (such as the entire Hamas organization) aspire to enforce Islamic law on the entire world. This is why when they say that they are willing to accept the ’67 borders, one has to take it with a grain of salt. Notice that you will always without exception hear them using the term “hudna” and not “salaam” – the former meaning (temporary) cease-fire, the latter meaning peace.

      • edan
        February 4, 2010, 8:10 am

        “But I do have a mega problem with Jews/Israelis who deny this same right to the Palestinians”.
        So do I!
        (you see, Zionists are not all that bad!)

      • edan
        February 4, 2010, 8:19 am

        Actually if you look at all the wars throughout human history most(the great majority) were not caused by religion. Rome wanted wealth and land, same as Alexander the great, same as Ghengis Khan, same as Mussolini…etc. Religion has been used as an excuse for many wars, true, but in my opinion to blame religion is a bit naive. It is after all HUMANS who kill each other. It may be that humans often misinterpret religions to fit in with their own greed but to blame religion is too easy… After all “the purpose of religion is to teach people compassion” – Dalai Lama

      • Chaos4700
        February 4, 2010, 8:31 am

        So… bascially, edan, you’re implying that the 1948 war and the subsequent aftershocks were about acquiring wealth from others, huh?

      • Shmuel
        February 3, 2010, 10:26 am

        Unverified,

        You write about being informed, but it is your post that is full of myths and spins. I also served in the IDF, in a capacity that gave me access to copious amounts of raw operations data from the field in the WB and to a lesser extent Gaza. You do not know what you are talking about.

      • edan
        February 3, 2010, 10:51 am

        and did you ever encounter anything that would lead you to believe that the IDF intentionally targets civilians? Because I never encountered anything remotely close to that. And I know personally IDF air force pilots who dropped flyers in Hezbollah neighborhoods warning them that they were about to get bombed! Have you ever heard of any other air force doing that? Of course that stuff is all left out of the mainstream media reports….

      • Shmuel
        February 3, 2010, 2:31 pm

        edan: and did you ever encounter anything that would lead you to believe that the IDF intentionally targets civilians?

        There is a great deal of evidence that the IDF has intentionally targeted civilians in Lebanon and in Gaza – including statements by Israeli politicians and army officers.

        If you are asking about my personal experience in the Army, it was during the first Intifada and unarmed protesters were routinely targeted (firing in the air – “of somebody’s lungs” – went one of the jokes), collective punishment was widespread, and there were general orders to “break arms and legs”. That is not counting mass arrests and administrative detentions, torture, and “rogue” incidents.

      • edan
        February 3, 2010, 3:01 pm

        Can you show me some of these statements? You do know that sometimes Hamas terrorists (or “freedom fighters” as you probably refer to them) use schools, houses, and even ambulances and hospitals…
        I have also come across Palestinians being mistreated I have to admit/… It is a problem (mostly perpetrated by the border police as you probably know). I am not proud of certain things I have seen and participated in. But according to the Israel bashers on sites such as these you would think that all the Israeli soldiers are bloodthirsty savages with no regard for human life whatsoever. Sorry but thats just totally WRONG.

      • Shmuel
        February 3, 2010, 3:12 pm

        You can do your own homework edan. Just focus on the recent massacre in Gaza and you’ll find a bunch. They were all over the Israeli media at the time – Mabat, Ha’aretz, Ynet, etc.

        Your comment about the Border Police is both inaccurate (hate to shatter your illusions about the “purity of arms”) and racist (we both know the demographics of the Border Police).

        You came in with both guns blazing and an army of straw men. I’ve been hanging around this site for a few months now, and can’t recall anyone saying that “Israeli soldiers are bloodthirsty savages with no regard for human life whatsoever“. Of course it’s wrong (in lower as well as upper case). As for “Israel bashing”, there are a lot of different posters here with broad knowledge and a far more objective perspective than you imagine.

      • edan
        February 3, 2010, 7:48 pm

        I know that there is actual footage of Hamasniks firing rockets from schools and hospitals and other densely populated areas.
        How is my comment innacurate? I could see why you would think its racist but is it racist to say that Armenians don’t like the Turks?
        “there are a lot of different posters here with broad knowledge and a far more objective perspective than you imagine. ”
        so far I’ve seen more of the same “Zionists are scum” lies and distortion.

      • James Bradley
        February 3, 2010, 11:07 pm

        Actually, much of the evidence purporting that Hamas fired from schools, hospitals, and residential areas proved to be false.

        Here are just a few examples:

        link to news.bbc.co.uk

        You really need to stop buying into Israeli propaganda, and look into whats really going on and address the issues in this conflict for what they really are.

      • edan
        February 4, 2010, 7:58 am

        Actually I have seen these things with my own eyes. I have friends who served in Lebanon 2 in ’07 who can say the same of the Hezbollah. In Dershowitz’s movie you can see it as clear as day. If you would like, I can describe for you 3 different instances from when I served where I saw firsthand how terrorists use the civilian population. Of course we get it wrong sometimes, but thats what happens in an unconventional war. Stop the blockade in Gaza you say? OK, stop hoarding the money that is sent there (much of it comes from Israel!!) and instead of using it for weapons, why not use it for infrastrucure or education?
        I think you need to stop buying in to palestinian propaganda…

      • Chaos4700
        February 4, 2010, 8:22 am

        I have friends who served in Lebanon 2 in ‘07 who can say the same of the Hezbollah.

        Out of sheer curiosity, edan, do you know anyone personally who was responsible for shelling that UN observation outpost?

      • edan
        February 4, 2010, 2:09 pm

        No but I did actually serve in the same company as the two soldiers who were kidnapped/murdered on that dreaded day in the summer of ’07… I love it how Nasrallah always talks about “Israeli aggression” as if all we want is to go to war and gain more territory from Lebanon. Sad thing is most of you fools actually believe it…
        go talk to some Israelis dude…

      • Taxi
        February 4, 2010, 3:26 pm

        edan,

        You’re either a liar or an ignoramus. You keep making personal references to the Lebanon war in ’07 – for Pete’s sakes IT WAS IN 2006!

      • edan
        February 4, 2010, 3:50 pm

        My bad! got me there! you can look me up on facebook if you want to check my authenticity. Aint got nothing to hide…
        edan z. hollombe
        (Im the only one in the world)

      • Cliff
        February 3, 2010, 10:31 am

        2000 years? Really? You can trace your ties back that far?

        And what right did you have to kick out the people living there already? What about the Palestinians?

        You’re the direct descendant of WHOEVER was living there 2000 years ago, so that gives you a ‘right’ to colonize land people are already living on?

        Yea, ok. Keep telling yourself that psycho.

      • potsherd
        February 3, 2010, 10:32 am

        There are a number of Zionists on this site, some of whom Zionism a black eye with their hate-filled rants.

        I must say that you appear to be the one who is uninformed. Your claim for example the case of the officer who unloaded his magazine on a 12 year old girl to make sure she was dead – he was later put in jail). neglects to mention that the officer was acquitted of all charges in the murder, as generally happens in such cases.

        But I hope you do stay, because you may become more informed if you do, and you will find Palestinians here who express the views that you claim you have never encountered.

        Where you will find opposition here is to your claim that Israel is “not responsible” for the “bad things” that happened to the Palestinians, that for some distorted reason they were meant to be the ones whose eggs were broken.

      • edan
        February 3, 2010, 11:17 am

        He was acquitted of murder because his initial reaction was the correct one. The girl crossed the barrier of the fort and thus was percieved as a threat and he was justified in shooting her. After being initially acquitted, the army opened a second investigation. link to washingtonpost.com

        And please, PLEASE introduce me to ONE SINGLE Palestinian who lives in the WB or Gaza that favors a 2 state solution. Maybe I am uninformed about that because I am unaware that they exist.
        Regarding your last statement – please explain to me what the jews should have done in 1948 when we were attacked.

      • potsherd
        February 3, 2010, 2:53 pm

        Let’s see, if a Jewish settler girl, age 12, should approach a Palestinian with a rock in her hand and was thus perceived as a threat, the Palestinian would be justified in shooting her. Good to know this, I’ll pass it on.

      • Donald
        February 3, 2010, 3:02 pm

        “And please, PLEASE introduce me to ONE SINGLE Palestinian who lives in the WB or Gaza that favors a 2 state solution.”

        My impression is that many would settle for a 2 state solution, but I don’t know why they would “favor” it, unless they don’t want to live in the same state with Jews. But why is it such a terrible thing if Palestinians would prefer a one state solution with a right of return? It’s perfectly natural for victims of ethnic cleansing to want this.

      • edan
        February 3, 2010, 3:03 pm

        Actually YES. One thing that you learn early on in the IDF is that a rock can KILL. If its me or him, well…you know…
        BTW when was the last time that that scenario actually happened???

      • Donald
        February 3, 2010, 3:04 pm

        “unless they don’t want to live in the same state with Jews”

        That, of course, is the problem with the one state solution–there might be many people on both sides who don’t like the Other and don’t want to live with the Other.

      • potsherd
        February 3, 2010, 3:11 pm

        Every day in the WB settlers throw stones at Palestinians, as the IDF looks on and protects them, preventing the victims from defending themselves.

        And if, as you declare justifiable, a Palestinian should attempt to protect himself by shooting the stone-thrower, he would be shot himself as a “terrorist.”

      • edan
        February 3, 2010, 7:51 pm

        “That, of course, is the problem with the one state solution–there might be many people on both sides who don’t like the Other and don’t want to live with the Other.”
        That may be the only accurate sentence you have ever typed on the subject. This means there can only be a two state solution – we are not leaving and neither are they.

      • edan
        February 3, 2010, 7:53 pm

        “Every day in the WB settlers throw stones at Palestinians, as the IDF looks on and protects them, preventing the victims from defending themselves.”
        That is just complete propaganda, bullshit,lies, etc…

      • potsherd
        February 3, 2010, 10:29 pm

        You keep telling yourself that.

      • Chaos4700
        February 3, 2010, 11:21 pm

        Hey, that sort of denial makes David Duke happy, why wouldn’t it satisfy edan as well?

      • Cliff
        February 4, 2010, 7:53 am

        It’s not. Activists in the West Bank posts first-hand accounts of this stuff.

        You’re just another deluded Zionist.

      • edan
        February 4, 2010, 8:01 am

        Any attempt to equate Zionism and Nazism is truly despicable. May as well spit on the graves of those who died in the holocaust…

      • edan
        February 4, 2010, 8:07 am

        Settlers get away with murder (not literally) all the time. I’m not denying that, I’m just saying that that particular scenario is completely imagined. Settlers (who again I do not agree with ideologically on any level) do not just throw stones at the palestinians for the heck of it with IDF soldiers looking on. There is a lot more to each individual incident than meets the eye. Of course the activists who report these things are usually not aware of the circumstances and of course they starting point is an extreme anti-Israel bias, so I would advise you to take those reports with a grain of salt. We all see what we want to see sometimes.

      • Shmuel
        February 4, 2010, 8:19 am

        edan,

        Do you know any settlers? Have you ever been to a settlement? Do you follow the Israeli media? Your bias is clear, but your ignorance is astounding. Settlers do get away with literal murder (I know one personally, and of a number from the press), and there are an infinite number of cases in which settlers throw stones at Palestinians and their property (and do worse), with absolutely no relevant background other than thuggery and theft. Eifo atah hai – What planet do you live on?

      • edan
        February 4, 2010, 8:28 am

        Of course I know settlers personally. Most of them are really good people on an individual level. And I can remember at least one incident in recent memory where a settler who murdered palestinians was tried and convicted. And if those incidents do occur as frequently as you claim, can you show me footage of these things?
        You see I have a big problem. I am skeptic by nature and do not accept what people tell me if it sounds wrong to me unless I am shown irrefutable proof.
        (btw Hai beTel Aviv!)

      • Cliff
        February 4, 2010, 8:38 am

        link to peacenow.org

        Short-partial list of settler crimes. Check out the sentences. They often get out in 5 years.

        Yesh Din Studies

        Investigation of criminal offenses by IDF soldiers
        against Palestinians and their property
        ” –
        link to yesh-din.org

        Exceptions
        Prosecution of IDF soldiers
        during and after the Second Intifada, 2000-2007
        ” –
        link to yesh-din.org

        I have read Exceptions but not the first document.

        Summary of Exceptions:

        Summary

        The report “Exceptions” reveals for the first time full data on how the Israeli military law enforcement agencies (the Military Police Criminal Investigation Division (MPCID), the Military Prosecution and the Courts-Martial) process cases in which IDF soldiers commit offenses against Palestinians and their property. The report offers the first opportunity to examine the quality of the military criminal system’s operations in relation to offenses by soldiers against Palestinian civilians, and it includes the details of each case heard by the Courts-Martial on offenses committed from the outbreak of the second Intifada on September 29, 2000 through the end of 2007.

        When criminal offenses committed by IDF soldiers against Palestinians are exposed to the public and draw a public response, the IDF leadership and heads of the Israeli political system are quick to label such actions as “exceptional incidents,” and to promise to hold the perpetrators fully accountable. Israel’s official spokespeople go to great lengths to persuade the Israeli public and international community that such incidents are rare and that they are treated aggressively. But this report shows that the “exceptions” are actually those cases in which soldiers and officers who commit crimes against Palestinian civilians are investigated and prosecuted. Even more exceptional are the cases in which heavy sentences are imposed on the perpetrators for their crimes.

        The figures presented in the report were derived, among other sources, from the indictments and judgments of the Courts-Martial during the seven years of the second Intifada. These materials were provided to Yesh Din by the IDF at the end of a prolonged process lasting a year and a half. A review of these documents allows us for the first time to present the magnitude of the IDF’s failure to fulfill its duty to protect the population of the Occupied Territories (OT) from the crimes of its soldiers, a duty set forth in the provisions of international law regarding the management of occupied territories.

        The first part of the report focuses on the criminal investigations conducted by the MPCID into offenses by IDF soldiers and officers against civilians in the OT. The report reveals that only in rare cases do Palestinian civilians file complaints directly to the MPCID, due greatly to the fact that the MPCID has no investigation base in the OT.

        In even fewer cases do commanders fulfill their duty to inform the MPCID of a
        suspicion that their soldiers have committed criminal offenses against Palestinians.

        The figures show that only in 40% of the complaints and notices that ultimately reached the MPCID in the last two years (usually through human rights organizations, the Military Prosecution or directly from the plaintiffs) were criminal investigations opened.

        In the seven years between the outbreak of the second Intifada and the end of 2007, only 1,246 MPCID investigations were opened into suspected offenses by soldiers against Palestinian civilians, slightly less than the number of investigations opened in only three years of the first Intifada. Only 78 investigations – six percent of all investigations opened in the period covered by the report – led to the filing of indictments.

        Figures collected by human rights organizations operating in the OT show that more than 2000 Palestinian civilians not involved in combat were killed during that period.

        However, from the beginning of the second Intifada to the end of 2007 only 13
        investigation files led to indictments charging soldiers with responsibility for the killing of civilians. Until the publication of this report the Courts-Martial had convicted five soldiers for the deaths of only four civilians: three Palestinians and one British citizen. The first part of the report presents, among other things, one reason for the small number of investigations opened into shootings of Palestinian civilians: the use of the “operational debriefing” as a tool to evade criminal investigation.

        The report also presents figures about the realization of the Palestinians’ right to compensation for damage to body and property during recent years, and it shows an inherent conflict of interests in MPCID investigations, whose intention – as stated explicitly by the Chief Military Police Officer himself – is not only to uncover criminal offenses and bring those responsible to justice, but also to spare the State of Israel the payment of compensation to Palestinian civilians harmed by the actions of its soldiers.

        The second part of the report presents for the first time the results of the legal
        proceedings in each of the 78 investigation files that produced indictments.

        Those indictments were served against 135 soldiers and officers, and the percentage of convictions of defendants in those cases is high: of 135 defendants thus far 113 have been convicted, mostly by means of plea bargains. Only four defendants were acquitted at the end of the legal proceedings from all of the offenses for which they were charged, and the indictments against eight defendants were canceled (some of which were replaced by disciplinary – rather than criminal – proceedings).

        Proceedings against ten other defendants are still pending. This part of the report details the results of the second Intifada trials, categorized by type of offense: illegal use of firearms (including shooting that led to the death or injury of Palestinians as well as shooting that did not cause bodily harm), offenses of abuse and violence, property and looting offenses, and other offenses. The figures presented in this report demonstrate the sizeable gap between the level of maximum punishment set forth by Israeli law for the offenses of which the soldiers were convicted and the sentences they were actually granted in these cases.

      • Shmuel
        February 4, 2010, 8:56 am

        Murder does not happen frequently but it happens. The sentences, are often light to non-existent, with the exception of a couple of “examples”. As the “Jewish Underground” proved, even tough sentences can’t be set aside by a presidential pardon. Again, I will not do your homework for you. As for stone-throwing, tree-slashing and burning, and general harrassment and intimidation, these are daily occurrences. Read a paper (Makor Rishon doesn’t count).

        You are not a skeptic, edan. You are biased and keep your head firmly in the sand. The fact that you live in TA doesn’t surprise me. It’s the heart of Israel’s fantasyland (lots of sand in which to stick one’s head). I grew up in a settler environment in Jerusalem, my sister is a hardcore settler and a couple of my cousins are even more harddcore. Open your eyes. It’s not about Israel-bashing or context or generalising. There’s some really bad stuff going on, and if you live in Israel, you owe it to yourself and others to open your mind and study. You don’t do that by coming here and telling off all those nasty, ignorant anti-Semites. If this site is too rough for you, try Richard Silverstein’s Tikkun Olam, Jerry Haber’s Magnes Zionist or Syd Nestel’s blog.

      • edan
        February 4, 2010, 2:16 pm

        “There’s some really bad stuff going on, and if you live in Israel, you owe it to yourself and others to open your mind and study.”
        I agree 100% and I even saw some of it firsthand when I was on duty in the WB. That still doesn’t mean that the blame falls upon Israel. What I’ve been trying to say here from the get go is that BOTH sides bear equal responsibility for the current situation. Blaming one side only adds fire to the flame of the other side and THAT is bias. Not to mention inaccurate.

      • edan
        February 4, 2010, 2:24 pm

        i meant fuel to the fire…

      • Cliff
        February 4, 2010, 2:39 pm

        edan, you’ve already stated that one must accept your premise of Israel’s legitimacy (which implies the ethnic cleansing was justified, and that Jewish self-determination is inherently justified).

        You have to prove those things. No one, especially the Palestinians, has to accept that premise.

        In fact, you’re just like the Israeli leadership, telling the Palestinians to accept Jewish history as a pretext for Palestinian exodus and suffering and thus the final status conditions for a Two-State ‘solution’.

        That still doesn’t mean that the blame falls upon Israel. What I’ve been trying to say here from the get go is that BOTH sides bear equal responsibility for the current situation.

        Yes, here you issue apologetics:

        It’s either not the fault of the State OR it was necessary (if one accepts the arbitrary and inherent ‘right to exist’ of a Jewish State on top of the ruins of the indigenous Palestinian people/society).

        Then you equate both sides.

        This is not an equal conflict. Not logistically and certainly not in blame.

        The very first comment you made here was propaganda. You said the Palestinians attacked as soon as Israel declared Statehood – as if for no reason and out of blind rage.

        As I said back then, you’re like every other ignorant Zionist who’s used these tired arguments.

        Don’t pass yourself off as some kind of historian.

        We either agree on history or we don’t. Something happened or it didn’t. The end.

        However, the conclusions we draw from history demonstrate our subjective world-view. Our kinds of morals and ethics.

        Personally, I think you’re ignorant of the history of the conflict as well. Israel is to be blamed for the occupation and all the actions that are facilitated by the it. It is to be blamed for the Nakba. Etc. etc.

      • Shmuel
        February 4, 2010, 3:04 pm

        edan: BOTH sides bear equal responsibility for the current situation

        You have got to be kidding. The Palestinians certainly have their own responsibilities, and no one here has ever implied otherwise (despite your straw man). To claim “equal responsibility” however is just plain false. There is one side that has ethnically cleansed the other, one side that is occupying the other, one side that is slowly killing the other with a strangling siege, and one side that recently killed 1400 men women and children. You want to talk about Hamas’ responsibility, fine, but it is in no way shape or form “equal” to that of Israel. As my fellow commenters have been trying to explain (some patiently, some less so). It is you who seeks “context” and divides responsibility in a prejudicial fashion.

        By the way, glad to see you came off justifying settler violence, although you really should give up on the “all” “100%” “everyone” arguments, because no one here has said anything of the sort.

      • Shmuel
        February 4, 2010, 3:15 pm

        glad to see you came off justifying settler violence

        I didn’t mean justifying the violence itself, but rather trying to dismiss, downplay and contextualise to the point of making it far less significant than it really is.

      • edan
        February 4, 2010, 4:02 pm

        “There is one side that has ethnically cleansed the other, one side that is occupying the other, one side that is slowly killing the other with a strangling siege, and one side that recently killed 1400 men women and children”
        How can Israel be blamed more than the Palestinians if we are willing to compromise and they are not? One side educates its children on the sacredness of being a shaheed and the other side unilaterally withdraws from Gaza. One side fires rockets at schoolchildren and the other side tries to defend itself. One side demands 900 prisoners in exchange for 1!

      • Cliff
        February 4, 2010, 4:21 pm

        One side demands 900 prisoners in exchange for 1!

        One side holds thousands of prisoners. One side holds 1.

        One side educates its children on the sacredness of being a shaheed and the other side unilaterally withdraws from Gaza.

        Israel controls Gaza. It controls the borders. The land and the sea. There was a withdrawal of settlers, but the control never went over to the Palestinians in any meaningful sense. The withdrawal of Gaza also coincided with an increasing settlement into the W. Bank.

        Gaza’s economy was purposefully de-developed by Israel. See: Sara Roy’s book, ‘The Gaza Strip, The Political Economy of De-Development’.

        How can Israel be blamed more than the Palestinians if we are willing to compromise and they are not?

        Israel is not willing to compromise. It has continued to expand settlements and has juked Obama’s attempt at initiating solution.

        Israel is colonizing Palestinian land and stealing Palestinian resources. Many facets of the criminality have been studied.

        We can talk about water. Accountability for IDF soldiers. Human rights abuses which occur daily. Etc. Etc.

        Virtually everything you’ve said here is bullshit, edan. Educate yourself about your country’s history.

        One side fires rockets at schoolchildren and the other side tries to defend itself.

        Israel has killed 5 times as many Palestinian civilians. 10 times as many Palestinian children. Most of the people killed in the Gaza massacre, perpetrated by Israel, were civilians.

        Israel regularly kills civilians, and commits a wide array of abuses against the Palestinian population. Israel is the occupier and the colonizer. Not the Palestinians. They are the occupied and colonized.

        As to ‘rockets’.

        The IDF has fired more than 7,700 shells at northern Gaza since the Israeli withdrawal in September 2005, creating a problem of unexploded ordnance in heavily populated areas.

        link to hrw.org

        Israeli society backed the Gaza massacre. Israeli society backs another one as well.

        link to youtube.com

        This is in spite of the mountains of evidence of war crimes and atrocities committed by Israeli troops.

      • Shmuel
        February 4, 2010, 4:25 pm

        edan: Even the new settlements ( which are wrong) are built on land which 99% of the time was previously uninhabited.

        Israel is responsible for what it has done and the Palestinians for what they have done. The things I mentioned are some of Israel’s responsibilities.

        Your characterisations of who is willing to compromise and who is not, who educates its children to what and who fires at schoolchildren are so skewed as to be laughable (in a very sad kind of way). Palestinians demand 900 prisoners for 1 because Hamas holds 1 Israeli prisoner and Israel holds close to 10,000 Palestinian prisoners (again, B’tselem is a good resource). You do the math. Your propaganda is showing.

      • Cliff
        February 4, 2010, 4:27 pm

        From Sara Roy’s book, The Gaza Strip, The Political Economy of De-Development:

        Government policy toward the development of Palestinian industry, perhaps more than any other sector, demonstrates official disregard for and outright hostility toward Palestinian economic development in the Gaza Strip. In industry, as in agriculture, economic policy was a product of the state’s larger national-political and ideological imperatives. Given the imperatives of insuring Israeli control over the Gaza Strip and protecting Jewish industry from competition of any sort, the government’s goals were: (1) to prevent the development of an independent economic base; an (2) to protect and serve Israeli economic interests by subordinating Palestinian industry and insuring control over areas essential to industrial development: water and land, the registration of companies, trademarks, commerce, tradenames, patents, licenses, taxes, finance, planning, property rights, and trade. This policy has done much to dwarf Gazan industry.

        Yet another book you should read.

      • edan
        February 5, 2010, 3:26 am

        “Virtually everything you’ve said here is bullshit, edan. Educate yourself about your country’s history.”…
        I would offer the same advice to you. You should go and meet an actual Israeli and talk to them. You might find out that they’re not as evil as you like to believe.
        You see as jews (I know this is hard for you to swallow) we try and hold ourselves to a higher moral standard. Palestinians take advantage of this every day, every hour in countless incidents with soldiers which are not shown in the media. That is why when we still didn’t have a state, we NEVER bombed buses or cafe’s or anything other than military targets. The various so-called “atrocities” commited by Stern, Irgun and Hagana (yes I had heard about them because like I said I have read Morris and wanted to see if here knew anything that I didn’t know – turns out no) were not at all comparable to the random acts of violence against innocent people which is advocated by Hamas and which they will probably never condemn…But we’ll never hear a cross word from you about Hamas now will we?
        Oh you are so pathetic, believing in a lost cause because it is “trendy”. You claim to have all the facts when actually you pick and chose to support your claims. You continually use terms that are completely irrelevant propaganda such as “colonizer” without facing the plain reality that Hamas and the Hezbollah are being used by the Iranians who want to “wipe Israel off the map”. As long as people want to wipe us out we will be forced to continually fight for our survival. As long as there are people like you out there (and people like your buddies the Hamasnikim and Hasan Nasrallah) we will fight you. Hopefully a new generation of Palestinians will arise who like my generation are sick of fighting.
        Oh and here’s some names and stuff for you to check out:
        link to meforum.org ,
        link to jcpa.org

        Raphael Israeli, Michael Oren, Yehoshua Porat, Kenneth Levin and Bernard Lewis

        Once you read other academics point of view you might actually broaden your own.

      • Shmuel
        February 5, 2010, 3:44 am

        edan: That is why when we still didn’t have a state, we NEVER bombed buses or cafe’s or anything other than military targets.

        Edan,

        We’ve been through all this so many times before (and I haven’t even been here that long). Your above statement is simply false propaganda, revealing once again how limited and twisted your knowledge of history and reality in I/P really is. You could at least show a little more humility.

        I will leave the debunking to HasbaraBuster, who does it so well: link to thehasbarabuster.blogspot.com

      • edan
        February 5, 2010, 3:59 am

        Hey Shmulik – neither of the articles even mention anything about who is responsible for the explosions! So naturally, blame the jews…typical. Extrapolation is useful in math, not politics.

      • Shmuel
        February 5, 2010, 4:11 am

        Always context and benefit of the “doubt” when it comes to Jewish terrorists, ay edan? This is all well-documented in British and UN sources. Shlomo Ben Yosef – bombing of Arab bus in Safed, Meir Feinstein – bombing at Jerusalem train station, etc., etc. More homework, my boy. More homework.

      • edan
        February 5, 2010, 4:17 am

        “Israel controls Gaza. It controls the borders. The land and the sea”
        What choice do we have if they continually smuggle in weapons meant to kill innocent people? If I’m in a war should I wait until my enemy reloads his weapon before I continue to fight?

      • Shmuel
        February 5, 2010, 4:19 am

        By the way, edan, what is your view of Palestinian attacks on Israeli military targets, say soldiers waiting at a trempiyada, or Israeli police? The Irgun attacks against the British were all of that sort, because there were no actual combat situtations. What about abduction? Are we talking terrorism or legitimate attacks against an occupation? Do you care what the Geneva Conventions have to say about soldiers not actuvely participating in combat, or is that only applicable when Israeli soldiers are the target?

      • edan
        February 5, 2010, 4:27 am

        Ok even if these two events were carried out by jews, they both pale in comparison to the attacks carried out by arabs. Should I list them for you?
        By the way, I’m curious – do you believe (like Finkelstein does) that Israel was planning the second Lebanon war all along since the withdrawal? Do you (as Finkelstein undoubtably does) hate yourself for being born a jew?

      • Shmuel
        February 5, 2010, 4:31 am

        edan: Ok even if these two events were carried out by jews, they both pale in comparison to the attacks carried out by arabs.

        Now how did I know you would say something like that. Very trollish.

        I’m not sure when planning of the second Lebanon war began, but it was certainly planned well in advance of the specific casus belli.

        Your final question is beneath contempt.

      • edan
        February 5, 2010, 4:51 am

        “I’m not sure when planning of the second Lebanon war began, but it was certainly planned well in advance of the specific casus belli.”
        Do you live in Israel? Because it is a well known fact that the IDF was caught completely off guard by the whole thing and that the entire army was in dissaray for most of the fighting. Many army personnel were discharged because of their failures in that war and yet you CHOOSE to believe that we planned the whole thing. So we are all supposed to believe that all the mistakes and shortcomings of the IDF during that war were intentional in order to make it look like none of it was planned? You can’t actually be THAT stupid….

      • Shmuel
        February 5, 2010, 5:02 am

        Planning is not the same as successful or detailed planning, or successful anticipation of your enemy’s moves. No matter how you look at it, Israel initiated a full-blown conflict, which it then proceeded to escalate at various stages. There is also of course the dicrepancy between political will and military capability.

        Take it from someone who lived in Israel much longer than you. The focus on the “military failure” is typical, and a good distraction from the real failures both of the “kontzeptzyah” and the grave violations of international law and human rights. The Winograd Commission had a lot of things to say, but it was both politically and publicly expedient to focus on the “unpreparedness” of the Army.

        Gratuitous insult duly noted.

      • Taxi
        February 5, 2010, 5:56 am

        Hey! Leave the ‘Norm’ alone!

        His parents lived through the holocaust – have some fucking respect!

        Norman Finklestein is not a self-hating Jew (boy do I hate this phrase!). He’s a Jew who hates what Zionism is doing to the memory of his parent’s life and struggle – not to mention the Palestinians and the region.

        If you were to go up against Norman in an I/P debate, you wouldn’t even survive the first round of his knowledge.

      • edan
        February 5, 2010, 6:48 am

        “No matter how you look at it, Israel initiated a full-blown conflict”
        Oh my lord that is hilarious…. Any way you look at it the Hezbos kidnapped and murdered two soldiers and immediately began bombarding northern Israel (military as well as civilian targets) before we even knew what hit us. There’s about a million residents of Northern Israel that can attest to the fact that rockets were falling before they even knew that soldiers had been kidnapped. The Israeli response was initially a single convoy sent in to track the kidnappers and when they realized that it was a trap we decided enough is enough. Hezbollah continued to fire rockets even after the Israeli withdrawal with the tiny strip of land that actually used to be Syria (sheba farms) as their pitiful excuse for the attacks. You really have the nerve to defend the Hezbollah? This is why I ask about your clear personal identity problems…

      • edan
        February 5, 2010, 6:59 am

        “His parents lived through the holocaust”
        Which is exactly why HE should have some respect. Dershowitz kills him in the debate I saw, and Benny Morris also lays him to waste in the video I posted previously. If he supports the destruction of Israel (by supporting the Hezbollah among other things) than he supports the death of millions of jews. This seems to me like a jew that hates jews , another words self-hate. He may not ever admit to it but the fact that he is jewish eats away at his soul and he cannot come to terms with it. Just like Shmuel

      • Shmuel
        February 5, 2010, 7:01 am

        Even a cursory look at the chronolgy will tell you that the massive shelling of Israel began only after Israel had launched a full-scale attack on Lebanon. Hezbollah attcked the patrol and at the same time fired a couple of rockets at one of the kibbutzim in the north – an act of violence similar to other sporadic incidents along the border, to which Israel could have responded in any number of ways. The Israeli government decided however, to turn it into a “full-blown conflict”, with dire consequences for the residents of all of northern Israel. Read the Winograd Report for God’s sake. It has nothing to do with defending Hezbollah.

        You are peddling lies, my friend.

      • Cliff
        February 5, 2010, 7:12 am

        edan, prove any of those statements. just try. your psychoanalysis is bullshit, without evidence.

        Dershowitz kills him in the debate I saw, and Benny Morris also lays him to waste in the video I posted previously.

        Really? Explain. Tell us how Dershowitz ‘kills him’ in the debate. I’d really love to know, but I think you’re just cheer-leading. You’re so steeped in your ideology.

        You already told us that we either accept your premise of the ‘right to exist’ of a Jewish State in Palestine or not – meaning, you’re not objective and you’re not moralistic. You’re a partisan hack.

        And quite ignorant as well.

      • Cliff
        February 5, 2010, 7:14 am

        Israel holds thousands of Palestinians captive. And hold Lebanese prisoners as well.

        Israel regularly kidnaps Palestinian and Lebanese civilians.

        Israel, nor you, have a moral high ground.

        Once again, you’re full of shit.

      • edan
        February 5, 2010, 7:59 am

        Again you are so wrong. I know you would like to believe that your analysis is accurate but in fact the shelling started at the same time as the kidnapping and escalated exponentially when the convoy sent in crossed the border (used as the excuse “the Israelis have invaded!”) meaning that the Hezbos were one step ahead of us the whole time…and none of that is contradicted in the Winograd report. You are clueless and hopeless my “friend”.

      • edan
        February 5, 2010, 8:03 am

        “Tell us how Dershowitz ‘kills him’ in the debate.”
        By systematically refuting every single allegation thrown out him.
        “You already told us that we either accept your premise of the ‘right to exist’ of a Jewish State in Palestine or not”
        Thats right. You either accept that I exist (reality) or try to erase me (not gonna happen).

      • edan
        February 5, 2010, 8:08 am

        “Israel regularly kidnaps Palestinian and Lebanese civilians”
        I suppose that would depend on your definition of civilian. Apparently yours is a bit skewed.

      • Cliff
        February 5, 2010, 8:36 am

        You are an idiot, edan.

        I asked you how Dershowitz beat Finkelstein. You basically said he beat Finkelstein in the debate, by beating him in the debate.

        Paraphrase the discussion between the two. Explain in detail, since you’re so confident in Dershowitz’s victory, what was said how Dershowitz ‘beat’ Finkelstein.

        Thats right. You either accept that I exist (reality) or try to erase me (not gonna happen).

        Now you are a liar, and an idiot. I didn’t say that Israel doesn’t exist. I said it has no right to exist in Palestine. Two very different things.

        Israel is a State. States are political entities. States can change in character and the people who live in a State, do not get exterminated.

        No State has an inherent and arbitrary ‘right’ to exist. We rejected outright the ‘right to exist’ of the Soviet Union. Hence, why we had a ‘Captive Nations Week’ program. We reject Islamic Iran’s right to exist, and many of the neoconservatives are talking regime change.

        We rejected Iraq under Saddam Hussein.

        States change. It doesn’t by definition mean, people living in a State, vanish.

        That also doesn’t mean it will be a smooth transition.

        ‘right to exist’ is subjective. You have to present a compelling argument. It can be challenged, because it’s subjective. We draw upon history, and come to conclusions on our own.

        The argument you presented here was both historically inaccurate and morally repugnant.

        The Palestinians did not have to leave so that you – a European convert – could have a ‘homeland’. People were living on that land already. A Jewish State had no right to impose itself on the indigenous population.

        That doesn’t mean, I’m blind to the fact that Israel exists today.

      • Cliff
        February 5, 2010, 8:41 am

        What the hell do you know about it, edan? You don’t even know basic facts about this conflict. You responded to me reflexively. You can’t even cite sources to anything you say here. You just spout more and more bullshit.

        link to dci-pal.org

        Since the beginning of the second Intifada in 2000, the Israeli authorities have arrested approximately 6,700 Palestinian children. There are currently 423 Palestinian children being held in detention and interrogation centers and prisons both in the Occupied Territory and inside of Israel in contravention of international law. These children range in age from 12 to 18 years old. Six of them are girls and an additional six are being held in administrative detention without charge or trial.

        Palestinian child prisoners are exposed to different types of torture, abuse and degrading treatment at the hands of Israeli authorities during their arrest and interrogation. These tactics aim to break the children psychologically and extract quick confessions to indict them before the Israeli Military Courts where due process and the right to a fair trial are not respected.

        The Israeli Military Courts aim to place a veneer of legality on a wholly illegal and arbitrary system. Once Palestinian children are sentenced, in the absence of a fair trial, children are sent to prisons where they are deprived of their rights guaranteed in the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child and the Fourth Geneva Convention.

        Palestinians child prisoners are deprived of proper medical care, and are often blackmailed if they seek medical treatment. They are also deprived of regular visits with family. Children who spend less than 6 months in prison may be released before they are ever granted a visit with family members.

        Children are also deprived of their right to education and are subjected to cruel penalties for simple behaviors.

      • edan
        February 5, 2010, 9:10 am

        Oh so you accept my right to live? Gee thanks, how charitable of you!
        I don’t have the time to keep this up… I actually have a life. And Im not gonna bring you the transcripst of the debate, I’m sure you can find it yourself. I will say that Finkelstein was very frustrated the whole time, raising his voice and acting like an imbecile the whole debate while Dershowitz was calm and composed. Usually the guy with the calmer demeanor at the end of the debate has won the debate. Watch it for yourself.
        And the fact that you just assume to know more about my roots (calling me a european convert) than me (who has studied genetics at Uni level but that is beside the point) speaks way more of you than it does of me. Your arguments simply have no legs to stand on.
        I will leave you losers with a couple thoughts and then you won’t have to worry about hearing from me again…I think I’ve wasted enough time trying to get through to your thick skulls. First and foremost the character of the state of Israel as a jewish state and a state for jews will NOT change. Like it or not. You can argue about your revisionist history all you want – for every historian and academic that says one thing, there is another that says the opposite. Instead of whining and bitching like teenagers who don’t get permission to take dads car, why don’t you do something productive with your time? Why don’t you chose a battle that actually has relevance to your lives instead of picking on the Israelis. Stop being such little whiny bitches

      • Cliff
        February 5, 2010, 9:24 am

        Thanks for coming to this blog, edan. You’ve revealed yourself to be a typical, ignorant, European-style colonial, racist.

        I don’t have the time to keep this up… I actually have a life. And Im not gonna bring you the transcripst of the debate, I’m sure you can find it yourself. I will say that Finkelstein was very frustrated the whole time, raising his voice and acting like an imbecile the whole debate while Dershowitz was calm and composed. Usually the guy with the calmer demeanor at the end of the debate has won the debate. Watch it for yourself.

        I have seen the debate. I have also read Beyond Chutzpah in which Finkelstein elaborates on Dershowitz’s intellectual fraud and plagiarism. There is also a lawyer (I forget his name, but he is featured on Finkelstein’s website as third-party observer of the dispute between Fink/Dersh. This lawyer did not know Fink beforehand, and offered his observations after becoming interested in the ‘case’.) who can vouch for Fink in detail.

        I was calling your bluff, edan. I knew you wouldn’t be able to explain why Dershowitz won. Finkelstein was exasperated mainly because Dershowitz kept interrupting and blatantly lying on-air. If you’re debating with anyone, it’s still a two-way street unless your opponent is absolutely shameless, and insincere.

        If you had any shame, you would explain to everyone here why Dershowitz was right and Fink was wrong. Instead you talk about how they ‘sound’. You’re an ignorant fool, plain and simple.

        We can debate 2+2=4, but since you’re insincere and shameless you will keep saying 2+2=5.

        Good riddance.

      • Taxi
        February 5, 2010, 12:27 pm

        edan don’t be a wretch and a meanie.

        Finky is speaking on BEHALF of his dead parents as well as millions of other freedom-loving, occupation-hating Jews.

        I know he doesn’t speak for YOU. Because you are not a truth seeker, but a minion enslaved by small-minded tribal dogma.

      • annie
        February 5, 2010, 1:49 pm

        Why don’t you chose a battle that actually has relevance to your lives instead of picking on the Israelis. Stop being such little whiny bitches

        lol, who’s sounding like a whiney little bitchy teenager edan. fyi israel is not my daddy and i don’t have to ask israels permission for anything although i do appreciate the society is so immersed in the apartheid reality you like to think you can bitchslap anyone who falls outta line. we are well aware israel can ‘say the opposite’, we’ve been listening to the narrative long enough. problem is, like you those assertions aren’t backed up anything but more assertions and lies.

        we won, we’re moral, we will always win, we represent reality because we do..bla bla . and you call this argument?

        go away edan, just piss the fuck off. do you think we invite trolls here? hell no. do not lecture us on wasting our time when it is you here battling for israels image. israel is loosing the war of public opinion, it is the least liked country in the world right now with the worst reputation, and that is why you are here, the only reason you are here. and what do you bring to the table? no facts, assertions of being right, ad hominem attacks, claims we are children.

        for what? don’t you have better things to do little zionist disinfo warrior? we chew up kids like you and spit them out like pistachio shells and israel keeps pumping out their little warriors day after day. so don’t go telling us we’re wasting out time. this war, the one between info warriors..we’re winning. you’re just a cover for war crimes and the emporer has no clothes. you’ll be back to waste your time here spewing your attitude and your 7 rules of propaganda from the hasbara handbook and if it isn’t you it will be some other zioist info warrior .

        phff

      • Mooser
        February 3, 2010, 10:33 am

        Please people – don’t let your noble ideas about humanity and morality to get in the way of common sense and reality”

        Whoops, one ziocaine toke over the line, sweet Jesus, one toke over the line.

        How stupid do you think we are?

      • Mooser
        February 3, 2010, 10:34 am

        And, oh yeah, “you better change your evil ways”!

      • Cliff
        February 3, 2010, 10:34 am

        The refugees are a consequence of arab rejectionism.

        No the refugees are the consequence of massacres, rape, torture, and general TERRORISM carried out by Zionist thugs and goons who stole Palestine.

        The ethnic cleansing began before the declaration of Statehood.

        And the fighting began before the ethnic cleansing.

        Your argument is uninformed, unverified. Maybe you should educate yourself about your own country instead of worshiping yourself as having a ‘right’ to ethnically cleanse, colonize and murder.

      • edan
        February 3, 2010, 11:40 am

        OK so who started the fighting? Did the early Zionists commit any attrocities? Actually they did not because it is a pretty well-known fact that until WW1 the early Zionists and the Palestinians (at that time they were still refered to as arabs living in the British mandate) got along rather well. It is only until two things happened that the relations went sour – 1) Haj-Amin Hussein was “appointed” grand mufti of Jerusalem, and 2) the Balfour declaration. When more settlers came in the 30’s and 40’s , arab xenophobia of jews started to reach peak levels.
        Lets take as an example the massacre at Deir Yassin. Yes it is true that the Stern gang (not the Hagana which would go on to become the IDF) commited atrocities in the village but if you look a little closer you will find that it was not just out of blood lust (contrary to what you obviously believe, we jews do not enjoy murder). You see the jewish community in Jerusalem was under siege and Deir Yassin overlooked the one road which could be used to bring in supplies. The bombardment of the jewish envoys by that village is what prompted the massacre. Again, I am not justifying it, but at least, unlike yourself I look at the bigger picture.
        It is obvious to me that you have an axe to grind against Zionism and jews as well – don’t kid yourself.

      • Donald
        February 3, 2010, 2:57 pm

        I don’t know about atrocities that early on, but Ahad Ha’am writes about Zionist violence and racist contempt for Arabs back in the early 1890’s. Palestinians became more hostile affter WWI once it was clear that the Zionists had persuaded the British overlords that they had more rights to form a state than the Arabs who already lived there.

        And Deir Yassin wasn’t committed by Hagana, but Hagana committed other atrocities and Palestinians who crossed the border after the war were often killed (several thousand, according to Benny Morris, most of them unarmed).

        I don’t think the conflict is black and white, but it’s clear from what you’ve typed here that you don’t know very much about the crimes committed by your side.

      • James Bradley
        February 3, 2010, 3:06 pm

        So your justifying massacres now?

        You need to take a look at what you are writing and see what you’ve become.

        This is aside from the Zionist mythology your promoting.

        Also lets not forget the real issue, which is that the Zionists came to Palestine with the sole intention of creating a Jewish state in a densely populated land. They ethnically cleansed 90% of the inhabitants of Palestine intentionally and when the “war” ended they didn’t allow any of them to return.

        They then subjected the remainder to martial law and 2nd class citizenship, and when they conquered the rest of Palestine they subjected their new subjects to a brutal military occupation and apartheid that continues til this day.

        Israel continues to deny the right of return to Palestinian refugees living in camps just over the border, but will give the right of return to a kid in Brooklyn who claims he has a divine right to Palestine because the Torah told him so.

        This is why there is a conflict, and it has nothing to do with “Irrational” brown people anger. It has all to do with colonization, ethnic cleansing, apartheid, occupation, and the denial of human rights to the Palestinian people.

      • edan
        February 3, 2010, 3:11 pm

        And yet you haven’t refuted a single argument of mine. I totally agree that its not black and white, and I actually know more than most of the posters here, in my opinion. Can you provide evidence for these attrocities commited by the Hagana? WHat did Ahad Ha’am write about that – I am curious….
        And I bet you don’t know enough about the crimes comitted by their side. By the way , unlike their side I ADMIT that I have committed crimes and mistakes.

      • jimby
        February 3, 2010, 3:16 pm

        edan, you are so fcking wrong. deir yassin had proclaimed it’s neutrality and had lived up to it. i suggest you read the red cross report of the utter barbarity of Menachem Begin and crew which included the Irgun as well. Red cross says babies were torn out of pregnant living mothers and smashed on rocks. fuckhead

      • Shmuel
        February 3, 2010, 3:19 pm

        Excellent summary, James.

      • Cliff
        February 3, 2010, 3:23 pm

        What do you mean edan? In your original post, you made a lot of abstract arguments. Some statements were concrete, but I disagree with them.

        Some of your history is just wrong. The trouble is, that you’re assuming you’re the first Zionist to show up here, all shocked and angry, trying to ‘refute’ the anti-Zionists.

        Sure, let’s talk about the history. I’m going to assume other people will comment on what you’ve said, because they are more patient than I.

        I do present a ‘black and white’ tone to my arguments. I don’t ‘hate’ Jews, because first of all – YOU are not Judaism or Jewishness, to me. I think I’ve known 1 Jew in my entire life. I’ve known 1 Muslim as well. So it’s not personal.

        I am definitely sick of Israel getting away with murder and colonialism. I don’t ‘like’ Israel. And I don’t have to either!

        I care about the Palestinians and their history. If you can accuse me of one thing, it is accurate to say I know more about the Palestinian suffering than the Israeli suffering. That’s fair. Although, I’m 100% confident about the fundamental historical facts of the conflict.

        You make it seem like the Arab armies attacked Israel RANDOMLY for NO REASON.

        In fact, some other Zionist posted roughly the same argument you’re making last week (or maybe earlier).

        I’ll wait to see if someone else debates you because I don’t feel like typing out the same thing over and over.

      • Donald
        February 3, 2010, 3:33 pm

        Ahad Ha’am wrote about how Zionist colonists in 1891 treated Arabs like dirt–the quotes are in Tom Segev’s book “One Palestine, Complete”. As for massacres by Haganah forces, try reading some of Benny Morris’s work. You sound like someone from a timewarp a few decades ago, when the only massacre known on the Israeli side was Deir Yassin.

      • Donald
        February 3, 2010, 3:38 pm

        Here’s a link discussing Morris’ work and atrocities by Haganah forces, if you go down far enough–

        link

        And again, this has been known for quite a few years–I bought a collection of essays in 2002 edited by Benny Morris where he was talking about the Zionist massacres from 1948 that he had uncovered in the archives.

      • Shmuel
        February 3, 2010, 3:44 pm

        If edan comes down off his high horse and decides he actually wants to learn something, I’ll bother to look up the original quote. I think it’s from Lo zo haderekh. Segev gets the context and spirit exactly right.

      • edan
        February 3, 2010, 7:35 pm

        Lets assume you are factually correct. Did you ever ask yourself why they carried out these massacres. Was not the context a war for survival when most of the jews fighting had had their families wiped out in Europe?
        And I have read much different accounts of what the relations were between the early Zionists and the arabs. I have also spoke with arabs who speak of the relative harmony before WW1 and the Balfour declaration.

      • edan
        February 3, 2010, 7:43 pm

        Obviously you are not actually reading my posts because I very clearly stated that I cannot and do not justify massacres. And I know that massacres took place because I have read Benny Morris (and heard him lecture) and I also know that their was no systematic ethnic cleansing. The arab atrocities against jews before 1948 were also used as scare tactics.
        And I also know that the palestinians will never accept a jewish state or even a state for jews (which is actually the same thing but because of your ignorance I will humor you) on even one inch of what is now Israel.

      • Donald
        February 3, 2010, 7:54 pm

        ” Did you ever ask yourself why they carried out these massacres.”

        Gosh,no, edan, I never gave one split second of thought to the subject of why the massacres occurred, events you apparently didn’t even know about and it seems you still aren’t sure they even took place.

        Anyway, people generally have some set of reasons they consider “good” for slaughtering unarmed civilians (including children). Happens all the time. The factors you mention are part of it, probably, but a bigger part was the desire to clear out all those pesky Arabs and change the demographic balance permanently.

        Arab murderers of Israeli children also have “reasons” for their actions, historical factors in the background. Yet somehow or other we usually find it quite easy to spot the flaw in their “reasoning”–that is, no matter what they have suffered, there’s no excuse for mass murder. It doesn’t matter what someone has done to you, you do not have the right to slaughter others. Is there something about this point that’s difficult for you to understand when the same reasoning is applied to Zionist murderers, or does it all suddenly become cloudy? I’ve often noticed with one of our resident liberal Zionists that moral issues invariably are crystal clear when some Arab is murdering an Israeli Jew, but it all becomes very gray and murky when an Israeli Jew murders an Arab. It’s strange. It’s almost like bad faith. I hope we don’t see the same thing happen with you.

        As for early relations, I’ve read mixed things–some good, some bad. So I would guess these varying accounts reflect a complicated reality. Anyway, your point that relations grew worse after WWI and the Balfour declaration is one that supports the anti-Zionist position–Arabs became frightened and resentful when they realized the Zionists had teamed up with their British colonial overlords.

      • edan
        February 3, 2010, 7:59 pm

        “deir yassin had proclaimed it’s neutrality and had lived up to it”
        yeah right, you keep believing that…

      • edan
        February 3, 2010, 8:21 pm

        Oh come on, do you even know that Tom Segev is a Zionist? I actually agree with most of what Segev says. Its not me on the high horse – I’m open to new points of view. But most of what I’m reading here is absolute horseshit.

      • Donald
        February 3, 2010, 8:25 pm

        “Oh come on, do you even know that Tom Segev is a Zionist? I actually agree with most of what Segev says. Its not me on the high horse – I’m open to new points of view. But most of what I’m reading here is absolute horseshit.”

        Your judgement of fecal matter is curiously tied in with production of same.

        I’ll go you one better on Tom Segev–Benny Morris, who I’ve also been citing, is not just a Zionist, but a grotesquely bigoted racist who defends the ethnic cleansing he has documented, and only regrets it wasn’t more thorough. One can learn things from people one may not even like very much.

        I like Tom Segev more, though I haven’t read his latest article slamming Avi Shlaim (yet another Zionist, one I deeply respect) in the New York Review of Books. I might like him less if I get around to reading it.

      • edan
        February 3, 2010, 8:30 pm

        “You make it seem like the Arab armies attacked Israel RANDOMLY for NO REASON”
        Of course there was a reason! The thought of a jewish state in what they considered arab (muslim) territory was inconceivable!
        The problem with people like you is that you have nothing to fight for in your life so you choose a battle which you have no connection with and you choose the underdog because it is much cooler to root for the underdog (Actually given the greater historical context I believe that the jews are the underdog). You surround yourself with information which you could not possibly have double-checked (even you yourself admitted that you don’t know very many jews, so obviously you have never been to Israel, never looked at the IDF archives, never read a newspaper in hebrew, never talked to an army officer, etc..) which serves as your pathetic ammunition in your battle. Its a waste of time to even try and debate people like you

      • Donald
        February 3, 2010, 8:37 pm

        There might be more than one reason, edan. Part of why they invaded was the production of hundreds of thousands of Arab refugees by Plan Dalet. Deir Yassin had also happened by that time. You can also see why some opposed the formation of Israel from a Pakistani representative to the UN at the time–

        link

        Try reading with an open mind, please.

      • potsherd
        February 3, 2010, 9:20 pm

        Most of the people here are Jews, many of them are Israelis or ex-Israelis, and do not have their minds stuffed full of the same ignorant propaganda that we see from drive-by Zionists like you every day.

        Really, what we need is an open thread: NEW ZIONISTS CHECK IN HERE, where such people can display the level of their ignorance and be issued a grade on it. Instead of having the threads jacked day after day and wasting people’s time with this.

      • Shmuel
        February 4, 2010, 2:04 am

        A favourite troll game on this site is to “catch” us agreeing with someone or expressing respect for them or merely citing them, and then expose our “hyposcrisy” or “inconsistency” by noting that said person is a Zionist.

        Logical fallacies aside, there are Zionists and there are Zionists. Goldstone has said that he is a Zionist, but would appear to reject the exceptionalism and mendacity that generally go with it. I don’t know whether Segev is a Zionist or not, but has expressed many ideas incompatible with that designation. Jerry Haber (Magnes Zionist) calls himself a Zionist, but his Zionism bears little resemblance to the garden variety. I’m pretty sure Shlaim is not a Zionist, but if he were – judging by his ideas and analyses – his Zionism would undoubtedly also be anomalous. Hey, I’ve even been called a Zionist, by a friend who knows and appreciates my views – because I “truly care about Jews and Judaism”. Go figure.

      • Cliff
        February 4, 2010, 7:55 am

        A State for Jews? What does this even mean?

        Palestinians wouldn’t give a shit about a Jewish State if it wasn’t in Palestine, moron.

        Stop thinking the world revolves around you.

      • Cliff
        February 4, 2010, 8:09 am

        ANY STATE is a political entity. The Palestinians were the majority. The Partition was unfair and the Europeans nor the UN had the right to chop up Palestine.

        Self-determination is defined by territory, if we’re talking about Statehood.

        So ‘Jews’ have no inherent right to self-determination.

        The only people who have a right to self-determination are the people of a territory.

        Palestinians saw an influx of Jewish immigration and were rightly concerned and angry. Look what happened.

        It’s obvious that a Jewish State would have to be MOSTLY JEWISH.

        David Hirst, The Gun and the Olive Branch: The Roots of Violence in the Middle East, London: Faber and Faber, 1977, pp. 123-143. An excerpt (pp. 136, 138-139, 142):

        The rise of the State of Israel — in frontiers larger than those assigned to it under the Partition Plan — and the flight of the native population was a cataclysm so deeply distressing to the Arabs that to this day they call it, quite simply, al-nakba, the Catastrophe.

        [...]Deir Yassin was, as Begin rightly claims, the most spectacular single contribution to the Catastrophe. [Interjection: Deir Yassin, an Arab town that had in fact refused to be used as a base for operations against the Jewish Agency by the foreign Arab volunteer force, was the site of a massacre of 250 innocent Arabs by the Jewish terrorist groups Irgun and the Stern Gang in April 1948.]

        In time, place and method it demonstrates the absurdity of the subsequently constructed myth [Interjection: that Arab leaders had called on the Palestinian refugees to flee]. The British insisted on retaining juridical control of the country until the termination of their Mandate on 15 May; it was not until they left that the regular Arab armies contemplated coming in. But not only did Deir Yassin take place more than five weeks before that critical date, it also took place outside the area assigned to the Jewish State. It was in no sense a retaliatory action.

        [...]In reality, Deir Yassin was an integral part of Plan Dalet, the master-plan for the seizure of most or all of Palestine. [...]Nothing was officially disclosed about Plan Dalet [...] although Ben-Gurion was certainly alluding to it in an address [on April 7, 1948] to the Zionist Executive:

        Let us resolve not to be content with merely defensive tactics, but at the right moment to attack all along the line and not just within the confines of the Jewish State and the borders of Palestine, but to seek out and crush the enemy where-ever he may be.

        According to Qurvot (Battles) of 1948, a detailed history of the Haganah and the Palmach [the Zionist fighting forces], the aim of Plan Dalet was “control of the area given to us by the U.N. in addition to areas occupied by us which were outside these borders and the setting up of forces to counter the possible invasion of Arab armies.” It was also designed to “cleanse” such areas of their Arab inhabitants.

        [...]When the war ended, in early 1949, the Zionists, allotted 57 per cent of Palestine under the Partition Plan, had occupied 77 per cent of the country. Of the 1,300,000 Arab inhabitants, they had displaced nearly 900,000.

        Benny Morris, The Causes and Character of the Arab Exodus from Palestine: the Israel Defense Forces Intelligence Branch Analysis of June 1948, Middle Eastern Studies (London), January 1986, pp. 5-19. An excerpt (pp. 5, 6-7, 9-10, 14, 18 ):

        A great deal of fresh light is shed on the multiple and variegated causation of the Arab exodus in a document which has recently surfaced, entitled “The Emigration of the Arabs of Palestine in the Period 1/12/1947-1/6/1948.”

        [...]Dated 30 June 1948, it was produced by the Israel Defence Forces Intelligence Branch during the first weeks of the First Truce (11 June-9 July) of the 1948 war. [...]Rather than suggesting Israeli blamelessness in the creation of the refugee problem, the Intelligence Branch assessment is written in blunt factual and analytical terms and, if anything, contains more than a hint of “advice” as to how to precipitate further Palestinian flight by indirect methods, without having recourse to direct politically and morally embarrassing expulsion orders.

        On the eve of the U.N. Partition Plan Resolution of 29 November 1947, according to the report, there were 219 Arab villages and four Arab, or partly Arab, towns in the areas earmarked for Jewish statehood — with a total Arab population of 342,000. By 1 June, 180 of these villages and towns had been evacuated, with 239,000 Arabs fleeing the areas of the Jewish state. A further 152,000 Arabs, from 70 villages and three towns (Jaffa, Jenin and Acre), had fled their homes in the areas earmarked for Palestinian Arab statehood in the Partition Resolution, and from the Jerusalem area.

        By 1 June, therefore, according to the report, the refugee total was 391,000, give or take about 10-15 per cent.

        Another 103,000 Arabs (60,000 of them Negev beduin and 5,000 Haifa residents) had remained in their homes in the areas originally earmarked for Jewish statehood. (This figure excludes the Arabs who stayed on in Jaffa and Acre, towns occupied by Jewish forces but lying outside the 1947 partition boundaries of the Jewish state.)

        [The report] stress[es] that “without doubt, hostile [Haganah/Israel Defense Force] operations were the main cause of the movement of population[...]”

        Altogether, the report states, Jewish – meaning Haganah/I.D.F., I.Z.L. and L.H.I. – military operations[...] accounted for 70 % of the Arab exodus from Palestine. [...][T]here is no reason to cast doubt on the integrity of I.D.F. Intelligence Branch in the production of this analysis. The analysis was produced almost certainly only for internal, I.D.F. top brass consumption. [...]One must again emphasize that the report and its significance pertain only up to 1 June 1948, by which time some 300,000-400,000 Palestinians had left their homes.

        A similar number was to leave the Jewish-held areas in the remaining months of the war.

        The article [written by Morris] also explains how this Israel Defense Forces Intelligence Branch report “thoroughly undermines the traditional official Israeli ‘explanation’ [hasbara] of a mass flight ordered or ‘invited’ by the Arab leadership for political-strategic reasons”(p. 17). See also, Benny Morris, The Birth of the Palestinian Refugee Problem, 1947-1949, Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press, 1987; Benny Morris, 1948 And After: Israel and the Palestinians, New York: Oxford University Press, 1990.

        Since Morris’s early publications, he has noted that later declassified documents have strengthened his conclusions. See Benny Morris, Revisiting the Palestinian exodus of 1948, in Eugene L. Rogan and Avi Shlaim, eds., The War for Palestine: Rewriting the History of 1948, Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press, 2001, pp. 37-59. An excerpt (pp. 49, 38 ):

        [T]he documentation that has come to light or been declassified during the past ten years offers a great deal of additional information about the expulsions of 1948. The departure of Arab communities from some sites, departures that were described in The Birth as due to fear or I.D.F. [Israel Defense Force] military attack or were simply unexplained, now appear to have been tinged if not characterized by Haganah or I.D.F. expulsion orders and actions.

        [...]This means that the proportion of the 700,000 Arabs who took to the roads as a result of expulsions rather than as a result of straightforward military attack or fear of attack, etc. is greater than indicated in The Birth. Similarly, the new documentation has revealed atrocities that I had not been aware of while writing The Birth. [...]These atrocities are important in understanding the precipitation of various phases of the Arab exodus.

        Above all, let me reiterate, the refugee problem was caused by attacks by Jewish forces on Arab villages and towns and by the inhabitants’ fear of such attacks, compounded by expulsions, atrocities, and rumors of atrocities — and by the crucial Israeli Cabinet decision in June 1948 to bar a refugee return.

        See also, Avi Shlaim’s The Iron Wall: Israel and the Arab World, New York: Norton, 2000. An excerpt (p. 31):

        Plan Dalet, prepared by the Haganah chiefs in early March, was a major landmark in the development of this offensive strategy. During the preceding month the Palestinian irregulars, under the inspired leadership of Abdel Qader al-Husseini, cut the main road between Tel Aviv and Jerusalem and started to gain the upper hand in the fighting with the Haganah. After suffering several defeats at the hands of Palestinian irregulars, the Haganah chiefs decided to seize the initiative and go on the offensive.

        The aim of Plan D was to secure all the areas allocated to the Jewish state under the U.N. partition resolution as well as Jewish settlements outside these areas and corridors leading to them, so as to provide a solid and continuous basis for Jewish sovereignty.

        The novelty and audacity of the plan lay in the orders to capture Arab villages and cities, something the Haganah had never attempted before. Although the wording of Plan D was vague, its objective was to clear the interior of the country of hostile and potentially hostile Arab elements, and in this sense it provided a warrant for expelling civilians. By implementing Plan D in April and May, the Haganah thus directly and decisively contributed to the birth of the Palestinian refugee problem.

        Plan D was not a political blueprint for the expulsion of Palestinian Arabs: it was a military plan with military and territorial objectives. However, by ordering the capture of Arab cities and the destruction of villages, it both permitted and justified the forcible expulsion of Arab civilians. By the end of 1948 the number of Palestinian refugees had swollen to around 700,000. But the first and largest wave of refugees occurred before the official outbreak of hostilities on 15 May.

        Simha Flapan, The Birth of Israel: Myths and Realities, New York: Pantheon, 1987, pp. 81-118. An excerpt (pp. 42, 83-84, 132):

        In April 1948, forces of the Irgun penetrated deep into Jaffa, which was outside the borders of the proposed Jewish state. [...]Ben-Gurion, despite harsh pronouncements against the dissidents [i.e. the Irgun and other terrorist squads], waited until after the establishment of the state to force them to disband. He could have done this earlier had it suited his purposes, but clearly it did not. The terrorists were very successful in extending the war into areas not officially allocated to the Jews.

        Between 600,000 and 700,000 Palestinian Arabs were evicted or fled from areas that were allocated to the Jewish state or occupied by Jewish forces during the fighting and later integrated de facto into Israel. During and after the exodus, every effort was made — from the razing of villages to the promulgation of laws — to prevent their return.

        According to the partition plan, the Jewish state would have had well over 300,000 Arabs, including 90,000 Bedouin. With the Jewish conquest of areas designated for the Arab state (western Galilee, Nazareth, Jaffa, Lydda, Ramleh, villages south of Jerusalem, and villages in the Arab Triangle of central Palestine), the Arab population would have risen by another 300,000 or more. Zionist leaders feared such numbers of non-Jews would threaten the stability of the new state both militarily – should they become a fifth column for Arab armies, and socially, insofar as a substantial Muslim and Christian minority would challenge the new state’s Jewish character. Thus the flight of up to 700,000 Arabs from Palestinian villages and towns during 1948 came to many as a relief.

        It wasn’t until April 30, 1948, two weeks before the end of the [British] Mandate, that Arab chiefs of staff met for the first time to work out a plan for military intervention. Under the pressure of mounting public criticism, fueled by the increasingly desperate situation in Palestine – the massacre of Deir Yassin, the fall of Tiberias, the evacuation of Haifa, the collapse of the Palestinian forces, the failure of the A.L.A. [Arab Liberation Army], and the mass flight of refugees – the army chiefs of the Arab states were finally compelled to discuss the deployment of their regular armies.

      • Cliff
        February 4, 2010, 8:18 am

        So basically, unless we’ve seen an Israeli kill a Palestinian, it never happened?

        You’re imposing on us the most ridiculous standards.

        We cite sources, the authors did the primary research. We have access to Israeli media. We’re aware of the Israeli political zeitgeist.

        You’re just making one post after another saying how ‘wrong’ we are without providing a compelling counterargument.

        Right off the bad, you began this discussion with the Exodus narrative of a poor helpless Jewish State (emotional blackmail) being attacked for no reason, randomly, by an Arab barbarian horde.

      • edan
        February 4, 2010, 8:50 am

        ” your point that relations grew worse after WWI and the Balfour declaration is one that supports the anti-Zionist position–Arabs became frightened and resentful when they realized the Zionists had teamed up with their British colonial overlords. ”
        How exactly did they “team up”? Given the white paper, and the well documented lack of cooperation between the british and the jews. If they were such a team, why would jewish terrorists target british military sites?
        Another example of trying to justify the actions of the arab states and the palestinians based on faulty reasoning. You actually fall prey to the very same kind of thing that you wrote about in the preceding paragraph. Zionist actions justify atrocities against the jews?

      • edan
        February 4, 2010, 9:13 am

        And yet you still haven’t said anything I haven’t heard before. As for Morris, check out what he says about Shlaim
        link to tnr.com
        And plan dalet (taken from your own sources) was drawn up in early March 1948. Well AFTER the arab seige of Jerusalem had already begun. To paraphrase Morris, Ben-Gurion understood that the war for independence would not be won if there was a sizable arab population within the borders of what was partitioned to the jews. He also understood that without territorial continuity the war could not be won. In that sense he was right, and if it wasn’t for plan dalet, there would be no state of Israel and all of the jews would have been expelled or much much worse.
        BTW you should check out Moriss’ latest.
        And Deir Yassin may not have been used as a base for the arab legion but it sure as hell killed a lot of jews who were on their way to Jerusalem with supplies.
        “Right off the bad, you began this discussion with the Exodus narrative of a poor helpless Jewish State (emotional blackmail) being attacked for no reason, randomly, by an Arab barbarian horde. ”
        When did I write something even close to that? I really start to question your reading comprehension skills when you write stuff like that.

      • Cliff
        February 4, 2010, 9:39 am

        To quote Benny Morris, “You can’t make an omelet without breaking the eggs” – meaning yes bad things happened but this was the price to be paid. The Arab Palestinians were given an outstretched hand in the Israeli declaration of Independence but instead chose to fight. The refugees are a consequence of arab rejectionism.

        There. So considering you just wrote:

        To paraphrase Morris, Ben-Gurion understood that the war for independence would not be won if there was a sizable arab population within the borders of what was partitioned to the jews. He also understood that without territorial continuity the war could not be won. In that sense he was right, and if it wasn’t for plan dalet, there would be no state of Israel and all of the jews would have been expelled or much much worse.

        I don’t know what would have happened, but if you’re trying to fear-monger then go to hell.

        First you say that the Palestinians were basically war-mongers for attacking a newly formed Israel (bullshit) and then you say that Ben-Gurion always thought that a sizable Arab population inside a ‘Jewish State’ would be a dangerous fifth column.

        So basically, if we follow you’re ridiculous narrative, then the Arab armies were certainly right to attack. Considering Ben-Gurion and the Zionist leadership would have ethnically cleansed the Arab population anyway.

        What I’m understanding from your perspective is that the ends justified the means.

        However, since a Jewish State could not even exist, as Ben-Gurion alluded (and as you agree), with a sizable Arab population – the ethnic cleansing was a necessity anyway.

        So either way – you’re a crook.

        The Partition was unfair. A Jewish State in a region that wasn’t predominantly Jewish was the problem. The Palestinians don’t have to pay for Jewish suffering and persecution or the Holocaust.

        Just as with your other apologetics, tell me why a Palestinian had to make way for your Jewish homeland? There would be no Jewish State with all those Palestinians. Why did they have to get out for you?

      • edan
        February 4, 2010, 9:41 am

        Its actually a lot simpler. Either you believe in the right of the state of Israel to exist as a homeland and safe-haven for jews in the ancient land of the hebrews – or you don’t. (I purposefully do not refer to it as “the ancient land of Palestine” because the Romans were the first to give it that name, in order to mock the jews after their victory. Before it was Palestine – and this I hope you will at least admit to – it was Judea).
        Goldstone does (despite his mediocre report), Segev does, Morris does, and Shlaim and Pappe most certainly do not.

      • Cliff
        February 4, 2010, 9:45 am

        edan, I don’t doubt you’ve read these historical accounts before.

        That doesn’t make your case any more convincing and people can deny things all they want.

        You’re justifying the massacre of civilians and ethnic cleansing for partisan (not moralistic) reasons.

        So there is no discussion. It’s essentially, what is best for your side vs. crimes committed by your side and the injustice of Zionism, the injustice of creating a Jewish State on top of the indigenous population.

        You came to this blog presenting yourself as some kind expert; an Israeli w/ first-hand experience. But you’re no different from the other deniers.

        The same argument over and over – which is just that we (your opposition) should accept the premise that a Jewish State has a right to exist on top of the indigenous people of Historic Palestine. If we accept this premise, then we can accept your justifications for ethnic cleansing and terrorism.

        Too bad. This discussion will always go back to Zionism. Zionism is colonialism. And no State has an inherent right to exist, especially one that ONLY exists because of the destruction of another society. The continued subjugation of another people.

      • Cliff
        February 4, 2010, 9:51 am

        Its actually a lot simpler. Either you believe in the right of the state of Israel to exist as a homeland and safe-haven for jews in the ancient land of the hebrews – or you don’t.

        Wow, well – I was right about you.

        After I read your first reply to me, I got the impression that all of your so-called ‘truth-telling’ was based on the premise that a Jewish State (sans all your melodramatic historical mythology) has a ‘right’ to exist, both inherently and arbitrarily (in spite of the indigenous population in Historic Palestine).

        I don’t. I don’t think STATES (political entities) have an inherent ‘right to exist’.

        In fact this concept is ridiculous. We do not accept the right to exist of plenty of States whose interests conflicts with ours.

        It’s just a method of emotional blackmail to talk about a uniquely Jewish State’s ‘right to exist’.

        You wonder why Palestinians fight back? Imagine you’re a Palestinian and some mass of immigrants, try to tell you that the land you’ve been living on for hundreds (if not thousands) of years is suddenly not yours.

        You going to explain to us why Palestinians don’t have a right to return but a Jew from Brooklyn does? Or a Indian Jew – part of the so-called ‘lost tribes’ – has a right of return?

        Your ideology is bullshit.

      • potsherd
        February 4, 2010, 10:03 am

        It’s very simple, yes.

        Either you believe in the right of a bunch of European Jews to take over a country and expel the inhabitants from their homes and land – or you don’t.

      • Taxi
        February 4, 2010, 10:20 am

        “Before it was Palestine – and this I hope you will at least admit to – it was Judea).”

        edan,

        It was CANAAN before it was Judea, right? Admitting this moots the intent of your above statement, and denying it makes you look like a total plonker. Which are you: are you wrong or just stupid?

        It’s so irksome how you zio-peeps always try and make it sound like Israel was created straight out of the big bang with Israeli fire-proof flag planted and all.

        The whole fucking universe isn’t about the Hebrews you know. It’s about others things too. Nice things.

      • edan
        February 4, 2010, 2:00 pm

        I guess you’re right – we israelis and jews are all despicable war mongers who only care about ourselves, with no regard for human life or dignity. Wait a minute what was that thing called the ten commandments…is that also Zionist fabrication?
        “The whole fucking universe isn’t about the Hebrews you know” – do I detect a bit of jealousy? Its true that many jews have a strong connection with their heritage and often define themselves as jews first and foremost. To someone on the outside it probably feels like you are left out, but let me assure you that I’m sure you can find lots of things to be proud of in your own heritage. Ours is just well documented because we tend to have a high literacy rate among other things (sorry again for the jewish supremacy but its true…)
        “It was CANAAN before it was Judea, right?” – Im SO glad you made that point! Do you know that archeologists now believe that the ancient Canaanites WERE the Hebrews! It is also a known fact that jews all over the world, including from Europe have common genetic markers with certain arab populations in the Middle East (from my Uni studies I can elaborate on that…) Don’t take my word for it – see for yourself! Of course you will probably dismiss it as more Zionist propaganda because obviously you’ve already made up your mind on the subject…
        Besides, the Canaanites do not exist anymore, Hebrews do.
        Look we can argue history forever…the point is we are living in now. And right now the vast majority of the palestinians do not accept our right to live in our homes. We accept (by and large) their right to a state. We recognize that they are not going anywhere, and many of us also recognize that our handling of the situation was not best… I’m not so sure that they recognize the same. What I’m saying is – if you want the jews out of “palestine” you’ll have to literally kill us all. If you’re OK with that , thats your problem buddy…

      • Cliff
        February 4, 2010, 2:15 pm

        2 Issues:

        You first said this:

        Its actually a lot simpler. Either you believe in the right of the state of Israel to exist as a homeland and safe-haven for jews in the ancient land of the hebrews – or you don’t.

        Then Taxi said this:

        It’s so irksome how you zio-peeps always try and make it sound like Israel was created straight out of the big bang with Israeli fire-proof flag planted and all.

        Meaning, your 2000 year old claim on a piece of land (I don’t accept your bullshit historical mythology anyways) is meaningless. People were living there. The universe does not revolve around you and your ‘people’. Or your comic-book history of ‘returning’ to a ‘land without a people for a people without a land’.

        That’s Tax’s reason (and mine). Not jealously. I mean, seriously? You think we’re jealous? I’m an American. I don’t have any problems in life. I live very comfortably.

        Before I got interested in politics, I never use to stress out over ‘the state of the world’. Sometimes I wish I was blissfully ignorant of what’s going on in Palestine.

        You are not living now in Israel, formerly Palestine, because of your ‘strong connection with [your] heritage’ (although that factors in as well).

        You’re there today because:

        if you want the jews out of “palestine” you’ll have to literally kill us all.

        Except, ethnic cleansing will do. Genocide not required. And in reality you ethnic cleansed 800K Palestinians. Demolished hundreds of villages – erased them from the map.

        I don’t give a damn about your deeply narcissistic, self-serving world-view. You’re just another example of colonialism. Justify it anyway you want. I don’t care.

      • potsherd
        February 4, 2010, 2:33 pm

        Yes, the Hebrews were Canaanites, and more to the point, their descendants were still there when the Zionists showed up to drive them out of the homeland they had occupied for millennia.

        And, let’s be truthful about “living in now”, “we” don’t recognize that they are not going anywhere, if by “we” you mean the Israeli government, which is still doing everything it can to continue forcing them out of their homes so Jews can take them over.

        There is a fundamental blindness to the 2-state people, which is their inability to recognize that Israel is forcing the Palestinians to surrender their rights to a sovereign state and to most of the land in the West Bank, to accept being herded into open-air prisons behind walls and razor wire, like Gaza. For the crime of being where Jews decided they wanted to live.

      • edan
        February 4, 2010, 3:02 pm

        “Ben-Gurion always thought that a sizable Arab population inside a ‘Jewish State’ would be a dangerous fifth column.”
        Wrong again. I said that the war could not be won with a fifth column in our midst. The sentence that I refer to in the declaration of Independence was totally true. The arabs of Haifa for example were urged by many jewish leaders including Ben Gurion to stay. And I should correct myself – most arabs chose to fight, most Palestinians had been fighting the jewish presence since way earlier.
        “What I’m understanding from your perspective is that the ends justified the means.”
        In certain situations – absolutely! Palestinians blowing up buses or firing rockets are a means with no end. That is not how statehood will be achieved, if ever.
        “The Partition was unfair”..
        Seeing as how the area designated for jews had a jewish majority – I don’t think so. Do you dispute this well known fact?
        “Why did they have to get out for you?”
        They didn’t . All they had to do was accept me as a new neighbor. And let me live in the areas that the UN decided to give me.
        You really are a piece of work…. If you could only convert your hatred of Israel into something worthwhile…

      • edan
        February 4, 2010, 3:12 pm

        Regarding your claims of who attacked who –
        According to one Hebrew University scholar who is in the doctorate program there (named Seth Frantzman)
        Thirty-nine Jews were killed by Arab rioters at Haifa’s oil refinery on December 30, 1947. On January 16, 1948, 35 Jews were killed trying to reach Gush Etzion. On February 22, 44 Jews were murdered in a bombing on Jerusalem’s Rehov Ben-Yehuda. And on February 29, 23 Jews were killed all across Palestine, eight of them at the Hayotzek iron foundry.

        – Thirty-five Jews were murdered during the Mount Scopus convoy massacre on April 13. And 127 Jews were massacred at Kfar Etzion on May 15, 1948, after 30 others had died defending the Etzion Bloc.

        – In Arab countries more than 100 Jews were also massacred and synagogues were burned in Aleppo and Aden, driving thousands of Jews from their homes.

        there is more but I’ll keep it at that for right now

      • Taxi
        February 4, 2010, 3:14 pm

        edan, edan,

        i know you have a nice heart and it’s very sweet how you stand up in defense of your tribe and such as and such like :-)

        the problem is, you really have been propagandized. And if you actually think EVERY SINGLE ISRAELI DNA is directly connected to the ancient Hebrews, well there’s no hope for you now is there?

        “… if you want the jews out of “palestine” you’ll have to literally kill us all. If you’re OK with that , thats your problem buddy… ”

        Israel, your side, was born out of massacring Palestinian natives, a crime against humanity that Israel refuses to admit to or compensate for. But this will NEVER be forgotten by people in the region, you really need to understand this. So long as Israel exists, Israelis will have mounting and insurmountable security issues. They will never be allowed to live in peace – never gonna happen. They can steal all the Arab land they want in the meantime – it won’t make the slightest of difference. Israel’s ‘legitimate existence’ is in doubt -the prognosis is not looking good. It can’t fight everyone forever. It will get smashed. Law of the universe: what goes up must come down.

        What is important to mark out here, edan, is that Israel will be destroyed not because it’s Jewish, but because of it’s original sin, if you like – the injustice of it’s birth and it’s continuing crimes against not just the Palestinians, but also against the Lebanese, Syrians, Egyptians, Jordanias, Sinia Bedoins – pretty much everyone around them (now they’ve stretched their fist out a little further north-west to shake it at Turkey – how friendly of them). Well what the fuck, edan? You think Israel can just keep fighting till eternity with impunity without the war being brought right to the heart of it’s temporary cities?

        Wake up before it’s too late. Israel’s fucked and your leaders are lying to you about it. It’s so over rover – just a question of time.

        Some of us want to talk about it not because we’re “jelous” (ah such purile analysis of motive, so catty of you!), we just want to make sure Israel/Zionism doesn’t take down the rest of the world with it. Nakhon?

      • Cliff
        February 4, 2010, 3:20 pm

        edan, the land was not the Europeans or the UN’s to give. Yes, it was unfair. It must have been fantastic for the Jews who had showed up and received a hand-out from the imperial powers of that period.

        In certain situations – absolutely! Palestinians blowing up buses or firing rockets are a means with no end. That is not how statehood will be achieved, if ever.

        That’s how YOUR State was achieved. Is your historical amnesia that bad? We’ve been talking about the ethnic cleansing just now, and you’ve forgotten already?

        Why do you keep accusing people of arbitrarily ‘hating’ Israel?

        Israel is not a person. Israel is a STATE. A political entity. Israel only exists because the previous pre-existing society was destroyed and scattered.

        Get your head out of the sand, ignoramus.

      • edan
        February 4, 2010, 3:29 pm

        “Except, ethnic cleansing will do. Genocide not required”
        Thats just it. We will not allow ourselves to be ethnically cleansed or murdered! We’re here to stay so I suggest you learn to live with it.
        And once again your use of the word “colonialism”. On behalf of whom were we colonizing? The British colonized because they had a place to bring back all of the raw materials and other things from the colonies to – Britain! Who did the Zionists bring their goods to? Obviously you fall into the trap of using words that have a negative connotation but little or no relevance. It does sound cool though, to call someone an evil colonialist…

      • edan
        February 4, 2010, 3:35 pm

        “Yes, the Hebrews were Canaanites, and more to the point, their descendants were still there when the Zionists showed up to drive them out of the homeland they had occupied for millennia.”
        So now you’re saying that the Palestinians are the true descendants of the Hebrews? Thats just funny…
        Where are these Palestinians who are being forced out of their homes as we speak…? Even the new settlements ( which are wrong) are built on land which 99% of the time was previously uninhabited.

      • Cliff
        February 4, 2010, 3:35 pm

        You are a colonist. After the ethnic cleansing, Israel erased the society that had already existed in that territory and Jews moved in.

        No one here is advocating genocide or ethnic cleansing.

        However, you sanctimoniously talk about how ‘you’ won’t be killed/expelled when the architects of your State did those things to the Palestinians.

        My point is not to imply that any of these results should be achieved in Israel/Palestine. I’m just pointing out your hypocrisy.

        As I said, get your head of the sand, ignoramus.

      • Cliff
        February 4, 2010, 3:39 pm

        Can YOU justify that you and your ‘Jewish nation’ are direct descendants of whoever? And how is that a justification for the theft of Palestine?

        And the Palestinians are being ethnic cleansed as we speak, in Jerusalem. In the West Bank.

        Their land is being further fragmented. Are you THAT ignorant?

        If I decide to colonize territory inside Israel that is vacant, it’s alright?

        That’s your logic. Since Palestinians do not have a State, they have no rights.

        Well, all of the West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem is Palestinian territory. The Wall is ILLEGAL according to the World Court decision.

        You’re so full of shit.

      • Shmuel
        February 4, 2010, 3:53 pm

        Even the new settlements ( which are wrong) are built on land which 99% of the time was previously uninhabited.

        Do you have to take everything so literally? One need not physically throw someone out of the structure in which he resides (although there’s plenty of that going on too) to force him out of his home. It is enough to take away his livelihood by actually taking his farmland, or destroying his crops, or poisoning his sheep, or denying him access to pasture, or restricting his movements in a thousand other ways. So yes, there is a hell of a lot of disposession going on even though 99% of settlemnts are built on “previously uninhabited land”.

        Something else to add to your reading list, which I have mentioned here a number of times, before your blessed arrival: Akiva Eldar and Idit Zertal, Lords of the Land (Adonei ha-Aretz in Hebrew) on the grand theft and displacement that is the settlement movement supported by all Israel governments. After your finished that, I have a whole list of books for you to read, written by Israelis – mostly Zionists – who do not share your perspective, to say the least. By the way, if you read Segev’s Yemei ha-Kalaniyot, you don’t seem to have gotten very much out of it.

      • edan
        February 4, 2010, 4:11 pm

        “. Israel’s fucked and your leaders are lying to you about it. It’s so over rover – just a question of time.”
        Maybe, but I assure you if we’re going down we’re taking the whole world with us

      • James Bradley
        February 4, 2010, 4:17 pm

        Maybe, but I assure you if we’re going down we’re taking the whole world with us

        Wow…

        This is aside from the selfishness in your statement.

      • Taxi
        February 4, 2010, 4:19 pm

        I don’t think so buddy. The whole world will wipe you out first. Billions of people have children they will want to protect from arrogant nihilists like you.

        Now please just go away and take your apocalypse with you.

        p.s. people like you, people with euro fucking names should just get out of the middle east. They don’t belong there, unless by invitation.

      • edan
        February 4, 2010, 4:24 pm

        OK I’ll try to make it very simple for you – America was a British colony. Brazil was a Portuguese colony. South Africa was a Dutch colony….do you get it?
        I suppose you would claim that Israel is an American colony? Were the settlers sent by America….
        Jeez I thought it would be a bit easier explaining to you your simple misuse of the word.
        So what is your solution genius?

      • Taxi
        February 4, 2010, 4:30 pm

        … and the rapist said to the judge:

        “But your honor, don’t just MEEEE – others have raped too!

        Now is this the argument of a responsible adult?

        Nuuuuuh!

      • potsherd
        February 4, 2010, 4:31 pm

        The only rational response to such a statement is a preemptive nuclear strike. If those are Israel’s terms, the world has no other choice.

      • edan
        February 4, 2010, 4:33 pm

        Oh I KNOW so… Israel might have many enemies but thank god our evil jewish minds know physics!
        What the hell is a “euro fucking name” ? My name is hebrew, you know that language which was spoken by the ancient Hebrews and Canaanites…

      • Shmuel
        February 4, 2010, 4:38 pm

        More studying to do, edan. Your definition of colonialism is (willfully) simplistic in the extreme. Europeans come to land they claim is “empty” or “underdeveloped” or “desert” that they have a God-given right to help themselves to (and please don’t give us the tired canard that they only wanted to purchase a little land), because the “natives” need not be taken into account (see eg. Ahad Ha’am’s description of his trip to Palestine in 1891). These particular Europeans did not have a country or military force of their own, so – at first – they relied on those of others – with equally colonialist designs (see Tom Segev, Yemei ha-Kalaniyot), and equally little right to dispose of that land as they saw fit. Colonialism is also a mindset that continues to this day in direct and indirect control exerted over indigenous populations (read a little Edward Said – even though he too was a “native”, albeit a highly educated and intelligent one). There are moderately reasonable (albeit untenable) arguments against calling Israel colonialist, but the fact that the Jewish-European colonists did not represent a state is not one of them.

      • Taxi
        February 4, 2010, 4:41 pm

        You kidding right?! Hollombe, your name, is NOT middle eastern.

        It sounds like a yiddish drawl and a twist on the word ‘Hollandi” ie, man from Holland.

        Sorry I just don’t believe you. I’ve come across so many pretender wanna-be middle easterners, I’ve gotten rather good at spotting them even by name.

      • potsherd
        February 4, 2010, 4:46 pm

        Of course the Palestinians are the descendants of the Hebrews. For a person who comes here declaring everyone else ignorant, you sure don’t know shit and squat. But then, everyone knows how crappy the Israeli school system is, so no wonder.

      • edan
        February 4, 2010, 5:02 pm

        No actually I was talking about my first name. Taken from that old book that everyone either loves to love or loves to hate…(instead of really seeing it for what it is)
        My last name actually is an Americanization (an attempt at least) of a Russian/Lithuanian name. If you must know…
        But yes, I truly believe that I am semitic. Crazy, huh…And even if my direct ancestry was not from the hebrews, my culture and my identity are directly linked to that piece of land. And no self-respecting jew will apologize for that!

      • Taxi
        February 4, 2010, 5:22 pm

        edan,

        my friend, you don’t trace your ancestry through your first name – but your surname.

        By your own rules then, Palestinians, who too are Semitic, belong in the holy lands. Heck all Arabs, Assyrians, Chaldeans, Phoenicians and Canaanites are Semites. Can’t they too have a chunka a holy cheese?!

        Seriously though – you are indeed a euro who should just go the heck back to your motherland – Israel is just an expensive and temporary fantasy land.

      • potsherd
        February 4, 2010, 5:41 pm

        So, another damned American of dubious ancestry comes to Palestine to claim the homelands inhabited by the descendants of Jews, then threatens to blow up the world if he can’t keep what he stole.

      • potsherd
        February 4, 2010, 6:16 pm

        Anyone planning to destroy the entire world is evil, yes. This is not subject to question.

      • edan
        February 5, 2010, 4:08 am

        “my friend, you don’t trace your ancestry through your first name – but your surname.”
        Obviously, but if someone is trying to learn something about someones name (as you were trying to do) it would be just as natural to look at a first name as it would a last name.
        And yes of course the Palestinians are semitic! So am I! If you would actually try and listen to what I’m saying you would see that I don’t deny their right to live here. All I’m saying is you can’t have a reasonable knowledge of history and deny the Jeiwish people’s link to this land.
        And I hate to break it too you but we are here for good, no matter how much you hate us and try and make us go away. The only way we’re going away is WW3 and trust me I have a great life so I don’t want that…

      • edan
        February 5, 2010, 4:43 am

        “Your definition of colonialism is (willfully) simplistic in the extreme”
        Oh so the entire worlds definition is wrong but yours is right? And then you say that the jews were to the british what the Portuguese colonists in Brazil were to the Portuguese? Are you serious?
        You guys are what muslims call “the lesser jihad”. How does it feel to be part of “the lesser jihad”?

      • Shmuel
        February 5, 2010, 4:51 am

        edan: Oh so the entire worlds definition is wrong but yours is right?

        No need to take so much pride in your ignorance. Please read something decent on colonialism – Locke, Marx, Sartre, Said, anything.

        The jihad remark is, again, beneath contempt.

      • Taxi
        February 5, 2010, 5:36 am

        Arab Jews have a legitimate right to the middle east, but not the euro convert Jews.

        In any case, edan, Good luck in your WW3, you’re really gonna need big balls for your martyrdom.

      • syvanen
        February 3, 2010, 3:04 pm

        Let me start by saying that I am and have always been left-wing on almost every issue. I support Obama, I am 100% against the settlements and I am definitely for a 2 state solution as soon as possible.

        If you want to be taken seriously here why lead off with a whopping lie?

      • edan
        February 3, 2010, 8:17 pm

        Everything in that statement is 100% true. If you don’t believe me than maybe its because what I’m saying doesn’t neatly fit in with your world view.

      • Chaos4700
        February 3, 2010, 11:26 pm

        Obama’s left-wing now? Because last time I checked, he took the public option off the table for health care reform, hasn’t gotten around to closing Gitmo and stop relying on military tribunal kangaroo courts, hasn’t lifted a finger for gay rights and increased the overseas war machine — most conspicuously, with his reliance on Predator drones and their abhorrent rates of so-called “collateral damage” — that is, they kill more civilians than they do legitimate targets.

        As a favorite fictional character of mine once said, “You have the right move, but the wrong pawn. Check.”

      • James Bradley
        February 3, 2010, 11:44 pm

        Thank you Chaos.

        Saying you support Obama does not make you left wing, progressive, or even liberal.

        The only thing that I can honestly say (and I honestly haven’t really looked beyond the headlines on this issue) is his position on “Dont Ask, Don’t Tell” for Gays in the military.

        But other than that, what has he done that is even liberal?

        HealthCare – Nope
        Ending the War – Nope
        Guantanamo – Nope

        Corporate Bail outs – Yup
        War Mongering – Yup
        Making Corporations Individuals – Yup

        Is there something I’m missing here?

      • Taxi
        February 4, 2010, 12:15 am

        chaos,

        “As a favorite fictional character of mine once said, “You have the right move, but the wrong pawn. Check.”

        Ooooh I love that! Please tell me who said it.

      • Chaos4700
        February 4, 2010, 8:20 am

        The Doctor, as in from Doctor Who :) Specifically, from the episode “Silver Nemesis.” I tried to find the actual scene on YouTube with no avail, sadly.

      • Taxi
        February 4, 2010, 9:17 am

        Ooooh Dr. Whooooo!

        A wink and a nudge – thank you very much sir!

  4. Avi
    February 3, 2010, 12:51 am

    If Jon Stewart’s real motive was actually virtuous, he could have discussed a million things that are far more pressing concerning the “conflict”. But, instead he resorted to petty propaganda (MEMRI style), further enforcing the notion that Israel is a victim, yet again.

    Instead of using his own show for effecting change for the better, he used his show to further place more blame on the Palestinians and their “leadership”, as well as give the current Israeli government a pass for its actions in Gaza, both past and present, and in general concerning the so-called peace process and freezing of colonial construction.

  5. wondering jew
    February 3, 2010, 1:27 am

    Jon Stewart is a comedian and nothing beats the kid shows from Hamas for comedy. They’re visual and ridiculous and hateful. They can’t be beat.

    • Avi
      February 3, 2010, 1:53 am

      That’s it?

      I guess we can all thank you now for that deep insight.

    • Shmuel
      February 3, 2010, 3:45 am

      You’re right, WJ, but the state of US media being what it is, a lot of people actually get their information from the Daily Show. Stewart understands this, and sometimes does some decidedly unfunny stuff just to get the news out.

      • Citizen
        February 3, 2010, 8:18 am

        Again, exactly right.

    • Taxi
      February 3, 2010, 8:48 am

      Palestinian kids don’t need kiddie shows to learn how to hate the Israelis.

      They watch the IDF theatre of murder day in and day out and their little hearts get infected with hate.

  6. Pamela Olson
    February 3, 2010, 2:03 am

    Hooray for Santana! A man with a heart.

    • MRW
      February 3, 2010, 2:25 am

      Too bad Leonard Cohen didn’t show the same balls. And I do hope there is a chain reaction. Maybe if we shame and shun the Israelis they’ll understand we dont like being played for freiers either. After all, they were the ones who held happy tailgate gate parties on a hill to celebrate the white phosphorous and 1-ton bombs falling on schools, hospitals, and homes, so they know how to entertain themselves without American imports.

      • wondering jew
        February 3, 2010, 10:33 am

        Even assuming that Leonard Cohen shares Santana’s politics, Leonard Cohen’s concert in Israel did not show a lack of balls, but a desire to communicate directly to a specific audience. He addressed the crowd in Hebrew and blessed them with the priestly blessing. (The word cohen means priest and Leonard is a cohen.) Unlike the doctrinaire attitude that the only appropriate means to change Israel is by boycotting them Cohen chose to keep the lines of communication open.

        Bradley Burston lives in Israel and is quoted in another post. Should Burston leave Israel and boycott it? I’m not negating Santana’s choice of boycott, but there are other means of expressing oneself politically.

      • Cliff
        February 3, 2010, 10:58 am

        Unlike the doctrinaire attitude that the only appropriate means to change Israel is by boycotting them Cohen chose to keep the lines of communication open.

        Doctrinate? You just don’t want any kind of opposition that makes Israelis look in the mirror.

        You live in a country club. Israel is a colonial-settler State. It didn’t drop out of the sky randomly and was immediately attacked by a horde of barbarians.

        BDS is what everyday people can do.

        You make it seem like this is just a silly misunderstanding. That there is no occupation or colonization of another people.

        This conflict is heavily studied and you don’t incorporate things like the de-development of Gaza’s economy BY ISRAEL into your ‘analysis’.

        Sure, WJ. If Palestinians don’t exist and are being subjugated, brutalized, butchered – then I suppose BDS is a tad bit excessive.

        You just don’t like seeing your side ‘look’ bad. More identity politics.

        And fuck Leonard Cohen.

      • Taxi
        February 3, 2010, 11:24 am

        According to wikipedia, Leonard Cohen was in full vocal support of Israel during the Yom Kippur war.

        At the time it was reported that he even enjoyed a cognac with Ariel Sharon to celebrate Israel’s victory.

        So, yeah Cliff, fuck Leonard Cohen.

      • Mooser
        February 3, 2010, 11:28 am

        “He addressed the crowd in Hebrew and blessed them with the priestly blessing.”

        Gosh, wondering Jew, don’t you know about what happened between God and the Jewish “priests”? As I remember, didn’t God say He would NOT be accepting sacrifices, and pretty much demoted the priests back to clerks, or Rabbis?
        I know, it’s hard to take, especially when surronded by Gentiles who claim their religion gives them a “victory” over sin and death. But that’s the way it is, and there’s no use kicking about it.

        Or were, say, the Romans, or even the Nazis, more powerful than God and able to carry out their expulsions or mass murder in the teeth of His wishes?

        You really need to find out who you are, if you are a Jew, or just go ahead and convert, it’ll be much more in line with your feelings about this best of all possible worlds.

        To be a Zionist means rejecting the most basic facts about the Jewish religion and tradition. But then again, the Nazis got pretty far with their reliance on human will and a constructed “nationalism”, and who knows, the Zionists may end up doing just as well.

      • wondering jew
        February 3, 2010, 11:29 am

        Of course those who wish to dance on Israel’s grave will say that. But those who desire peace will join me in saying, “Long live Leonard Cohen!”

      • wondering jew
        February 3, 2010, 11:34 am

        Hey Mooser,

        Despite God’s rejection of sacrifices the priestly benediction still exists despite the destruction of the temple. I will check my sources to see if it is only a rabbinical commandment or a Torah commandment without the existence of the destroyed temple. (I assume you accept Torah commandments but reject rabbinical commandments. Or is it visa versa. Or you only accept certain verses in Isaiah and reject all else. Or you only accept Mooser’s Torah and reject all else? It’s unclear.)

      • Shmuel
        February 3, 2010, 11:41 am

        WJ:those who desire peace will join me in saying, “Long live Leonard Cohen!”

        You started off by saying that there’s more than one way to skin the peace cat, but then you come up with this false dichotomy. Many who truly desire peace believe that Cohen’s decision was immoral and counterproductive. Personally, I think this “engaging” and “understanding” Israelis has gone quite far enough. It has not changed Israeli behaviour (assuming that is what we are talking about, since you compared it to BDS) one iota. Wouldn’t you say it’s time for a few non-violent sticks to go with those mountains of carrots?

      • potsherd
        February 3, 2010, 11:43 am

        A lot of people were supporting Israel back then. Opinions have changed, perhaps Cohen’s have. I’d rather have more current evidence.

      • Cliff
        February 3, 2010, 11:46 am

        You mean people like you, who redefine the word and apply to it conditions that essentially require dissenters to treat Israel with kid-gloves.

        So basically, other Zionists.

        Israel’s grave? Israel killed 1300 people in 22 days.

        How many people did those rockets kill? Don’t people like you always bring them up as an excuse for the massacre? You reference the number because it has a cheap rhetorical effect of implying serious damage.

        The IDF has fired more than 7,700 shells at northern Gaza since the Israeli withdrawal in September 2005, creating a problem of unexploded ordnance in heavily populated areas.

        link to hrw.org

        Israel exists because of the ethnic cleansing of Palestine, which was carried out by Jewish terrorists and the newly-formed ‘Israeli’ army.

        The colonialism did not stop in 48′. It continues to this day.

        If the colonizer was not JEWISH, then no one would think twice about employing the harsh language of BDS.

        Don’t act like you’re taking a principle stand, WJ. You’re a partisan hack, just like Witty. You want people to forget or ignore the occupation and colonization of Palestine. You don’t want any kind of accountability.

        Palestinians aren’t going to convert to Zionism anytime soon.

      • Taxi
        February 3, 2010, 11:47 am

        I bet anything that privately, Israel is a deeply tormenting subject for him.

        That’s why he doesn’t draw a line in the sand in public.

      • edan
        February 4, 2010, 9:32 am

        “To be a Zionist means rejecting the most basic facts about the Jewish religion and tradition”.
        So I guess now we should call you “the great Rabbi Mooser”? Because apparrently you know more about Judaism than 99.99% of all REAL rabbis….lololol

  7. Richard Parker
    February 3, 2010, 4:23 am

    Sources in Israel’s music industry hope that Santana’s cancellation does not create a chain reaction.

    Well, I sincerely hope it does.
    It probably means that Israel, in a fit of pique, will break off diplomatic relations with Mexico. Who cares?

    • Mooser
      February 3, 2010, 10:36 am

      Wasn’t Santana “born in East L.A.”?

      • Mooser
        February 3, 2010, 10:41 am

        Or was that Bruce Springsteen, another famous anti-Zionist? (He gives me a pain in the ass, and always has. He’s not worthy of that E-Street band! Have you heard them play with Gary “U.S.” Bonds, on the album “Daddy’s Home”?

      • MRW
        February 3, 2010, 7:54 pm

        Mooser: He gives me a pain in the ass, and always has. Thank you. Thank yew. Springsteen always struck me as having severe constipation when he sings. As if he could never get the shit out.

      • Shmuel
        February 3, 2010, 10:43 am

        For good measure, I think the US ambassador should also be humiliated (more than he is already, that is).

      • Chaos4700
        February 3, 2010, 11:31 pm

        Is that even possible? I mean, I suppose I can think of a few ways, but the only things that come to mind that top the current level of indignity would earn millions in FCC violations if they were shown on TV.

      • jimby
        February 3, 2010, 3:18 pm

        No Man. that was Cheech and Chong

      • MRW
        February 3, 2010, 7:57 pm

        Santana’s Puerto Rican.

      • Chaos4700
        February 3, 2010, 11:33 pm

        Considering how I’ve heard Israelis talk about Palestinians and even Ethiopian Jews? I’m guessing the distinction would be lost upon them.

  8. Shmuel
    February 3, 2010, 4:27 am

    It’s definitely time to summon the Mexican ambassador to the Foreign Ministry for a good dressing down!

  9. Richard Witty
    February 3, 2010, 4:54 am

    I love Santana, but he used to be a man of courage. He should not bow to pressure to ignore his relationship to a unique audience.

    He should also go to the territories, or Lebanon, or Egypt, first, instead of boycotting.

    You think someone threatened him?

    • Cliff
      February 3, 2010, 5:16 am

      Threatened? Could you elaborate Witty?

      He probably took notice of Gaza. He has expressed solidarity w/ the Lebanese victims of Israel’s 2006 War – as another commentator mentioned.

    • Taxi
      February 3, 2010, 8:51 am

      Yeah his conscience threatened him.

      • Cliff
        February 3, 2010, 9:24 am

        He should not bow to pressure to ignore his relationship to a unique audience.

        A unique audience?

        Do tell, Witty.

    • Mooser
      February 3, 2010, 11:30 am

      Gosh Witty, how are Israelis “unique”? I thought they were just people like you and me?

      • Chaos4700
        February 3, 2010, 11:17 pm

        Heh. His Freudian slip is showing.

      • edan
        February 4, 2010, 2:03 pm

        “Gosh Witty, how are Israelis “unique”? I thought they were just people like you and me? ”
        I know it makes you guys SO angry when we say stuff like that. Thing is its true. Can you name another nation/people/religion/whatever with a similar history?

      • Cliff
        February 4, 2010, 2:48 pm

        I know it makes you guys SO angry when we say stuff like that. Thing is its true. Can you name another nation/people/religion/whatever with a similar history?

        Nope, enlighten us. Tell us why you’re unique.

      • Taxi
        February 4, 2010, 3:19 pm

        Everything and everyone is ‘unique’ you moron.

    • Chaos4700
      February 3, 2010, 11:15 pm

      An ad hominem? From a Zionist? Gee, how totally out of character for you. I’m shocked, I tell you, shocked.

  10. Richard Parker
    February 3, 2010, 5:12 am

    You asshole, Witty. Carlos Santana is, unlike Leonard Cohen, a man of courage.

    He’s made up his own mind, and has cancelled an Israel gig, where he might have made a lot of money (Young Israeli soldiers love his music, because most of it doesn’t say anything in Hebrew or English that could upset them).

    Had he booked to appear in Ramallah, Gaza, Beirut, or Cairo he would have had huge audiences, but perhaps not so much money

    • Cliff
      February 3, 2010, 5:18 am

      Witty thinks he and Zionism ‘own’ these artists/celebrities, hence he uses the word ‘threatened’.

      It’s a very racist thing to say, not surprising coming from the denier.

      He says ‘threatened’ because it’s inconceivable that any famous person could express solidarity w/ the Palestinians or be disgusted by Israeli policies and actions.

      His believe in ethnic ‘entitlement’ to these popular personalities is transparent. Thos Arabs don’t have any friends or admirers, according to Dick.

      • Cliff
        February 3, 2010, 5:19 am

        believe = belief*

  11. Richard Parker
    February 3, 2010, 6:08 am

    Wondering Jew

    nothing beats the kid shows from Hamas for comedy. They’re visual and ridiculous and hateful. They can’t be beat.

    Their comedy sense is not very subtle (I can’t speak for Americans, because their comedy sense is fairly dire, with obvious signalling, rented audience applause, etc long before the punchlines).
    Take a look at Glenn Beck addressing this issue at: link to youtube.com
    and listen to the asshole; Zhoudi Jasser, the American Muslim, give his spiel.
    Although he does mention the TV and information crackdowns put in place by America’s close allies.

  12. edan
    February 3, 2010, 11:48 am

    There is no official statement from the man himself (santana) and as of right now the show is delayed and will be rescheduled for a later date, according to the shows producer Shuki Weis.

  13. Danaa
    February 4, 2010, 12:51 am

    edan – here’s a present for you – check out the two pictures on this link (OK, you are welcome to read the story too, but maybe you read already the original?):

    link to richardsilverstein.com

    The young kicking sweety child is especially impressive. Maybe the cartoons don’t do justice to the reality. or maybe you don’t recognize these people as the ones returning to “their land’ after 2000 years?

    But do check out the brave IDF soldiers too. For sure, the purity of arms lesson has sunk in deep.

    Happy pure returns.

    • Danaa
      February 4, 2010, 12:54 am

      Anyone know how I can embed a picture in the post? I so wanted to share the joy of return with edan…..and I have a few more of these pictures which I’ve been saving for a rainy day.

      • MRW
        February 4, 2010, 1:36 am

        I think Phil and Adam have to allow in in their blog and I dont think they have. Wish they would though.

    • edan
      February 4, 2010, 9:25 am

      As far as the settler woman and the kid, that is just sick. But again, that doesn’t reflect most jews in Israel. As far as the first picture (encaptioned “IDF soldiers beat Palestinian”), this is precisely what I am talking about- thank you! A perfect example of a picture taken without any previous knowledge of what happened previously. How do you know that the soldiers were not attacked by the guy? How do you know the context? How do you know the guy didn’t try to stab the soldier? Because you are ignorant.

  14. Donald
    February 4, 2010, 9:40 am

    You said the relationship between Zionists and Arabs declined after WWI and the Balfour Declaration. I pointed out why–the British had promised a Jewish state to the Zionists. There were also racist declarations by Churchill and Balfour about the relative merits of the two peoples. This is why Arabs perceived the Zionists as in league with the British–because they were in league with some of the British. The fact that the British government later backtracked and ended up trying to placate both sides and satisfied neither and the fact that some Zionists started attacking British targets is not a contradiction to what I said.

    As for how nothing said here is new to you, you didn’t seem to know about massacres committed by Haganah, so I find it difficult to reconcile your ignorance about that with your claims of omniscience here. As for Morris, you ask us to read what he says about Shlaim–I did. Some of it is fair commentary, some of it is Morris’s own political bias and towards the end there is some of Morris’s racist apologetics for Israeli crimes. The claim that “most of the savagery” in the Second Intifada was Palestinian and that only one third of the Palestinian victims were civilian contradicts what human rights organizations have found–I suspect Morris is just accepting IDF claims. He’s also dismissive of Israeli brutality in Gaza. What I’ve noticed about Morris is that the closer you come to the present, the more he tends to be utterly credulous about what the Israeli government says.

    None of this is surprising– Morris has revealed himself to be a racist defender of ethnic cleansing, both of the Palestinians and of the Native Americans. I think that’s why he is honest about what happened in 1948–for the most part, he agrees with it and while expressing some perfunctory regret over innocents being killed, he doesn’t think it was any big deal.

    To Shmuel–Shlaim is a Zionist of some sort. There’s a quote from his latest book in the Morris piece that edan linked that shows this. I’ve seen the quote myself and it’s not out of context. I think Shlaim is conflicted, believing both in the right of Israel to be a Jewish state and also recognizing all the crimes that were committed to make it so.

    • Donald
      February 4, 2010, 10:46 am

      The above was a reply to edan–I accidentally stuck it in the wrong part of the thread.

    • edan
      February 4, 2010, 2:43 pm

      “Morris has revealed himself to be a racist defender of ethnic cleansing, both of the Palestinians…”
      That is wrong on so many levels. Recognizing the immense cultural differences between jews and arabs is not racism. And he does not defend any ethnic cleansing because “ethnic cleansing” implies a systematic effort but there was no systematic effort – the orders from Ben Gurion were simply to use any means necessary. And he said that if the jews would have expelled the Palestinians completely BOTH nations would be better off today. How does he rationalize this ? Simple – the situation would have been completely different at the end of the war…Congrats , you get an A for quoting out of context.
      I suggest you check out what he says here :

      • Donald
        February 4, 2010, 3:07 pm

        I suspected it would come to this–you’d defend Morris’s remarks. Bonus points for your fatuous defense of Ben Gurion’s role. So you never heard of Haganah atrocities, but you are familiar with Morris and come to think of it, what he says isn’t so bad in your view. So much for universal standards on human rights. There was the slight possibility that you were honestly ignorant, but most of the time ignorance about atrocities so close to home isn’t honest, but cultivated. Iknow there are honest liberal Zionists who don’t stoop to these low forms of apologetics, but I’m beginning to suspect they are pretty rare specimens.

        I read the original Benny Morris remarks in Haaretz. The complete interview no longer seems to be up over there, but I found it at Counterpunch–

        Link

        He’s clear enough there, and an obvious bigot with double standards on human rights. I don’t really care whether one calls the basis of his bigotry “racism” or something else–“racism” isn’t logical anyway and neither are the other forms of bigotry.

      • Cliff
        February 4, 2010, 3:13 pm

        Are you trying to argue that Palestinian terrorism derives from some sort of deep cultural problem?

        “There is a deep problem in Islam. It’s a world whose values are different. A world in which human life doesn’t have the same value as it does in the West, in which freedom, democracy, openness and creativity are alien. A world that makes those who are not part of the camp of Islam fair game. Revenge is also important here. Revenge plays a central part in the Arab tribal culture. Therefore, the people we are fighting and the society that sends them have no moral inhibitions. If it obtains chemical or biological or atomic weapons, it will use them. If it is able, it will also commit genocide.”

        [...]Are you a neo-conservative? Do you read the current historical reality in the terms of Samuel Huntington?

        “I think there is a clash between civilizations here [as Huntington argues]. I think the West today resembles the Roman Empire of the fourth, fifth and sixth centuries: The barbarians are attacking it and they may also destroy it.”

        The Muslims are barbarians, then?

        “I think the values I mentioned earlier are values of barbarians – the attitude toward democracy, freedom, openness; the attitude toward human life. In that sense they are barbarians. The Arab world as it is today is barbarian.”

        And in your view these new barbarians are truly threatening the Rome of our time?

        “Yes. The West is stronger but it’s not clear whether it knows how to repulse this wave of hatred. The phenomenon of the mass Muslim penetration into the West and their settlement there is creating a dangerous internal threat. A similar process took place in Rome. They let the barbarians in and they toppled the empire from within.”

        Is it really all that dramatic? Is the West truly in danger?

        “Yes. I think that the war between the civilizations is the main characteristic of the 21st century. I think President Bush is wrong when he denies the very existence of that war. It’s not only a matter of bin Laden. This is a struggle against a whole world that espouses different values. And we are on the front line. Exactly like the Crusaders, we are the vulnerable branch of Europe in this place.”

        link to haaretz.com

  15. Oscar
    February 4, 2010, 2:12 pm

    Nominating Edan for Mooser’s troll of the week.

    • potsherd
      February 4, 2010, 2:17 pm

      Nah – Dorkie tops him.

    • edan
      February 4, 2010, 2:35 pm

      i guess that means I got through to you on a certain level?

      • Cliff
        February 4, 2010, 2:51 pm

        With what? Your inane insistence that ‘Jewish’ self-determination is inherently legitimate? That ethnic cleansing is acceptable because of the aforementioned premise?

    • Shmuel
      February 4, 2010, 3:07 pm

      The committee has duly noted your nomination Oscar, but believes that critical mass has not yet been reached.

    • Tuyzentfloot
      February 6, 2010, 10:43 am

      I disagree with calling Edan a troll. WideEyed Hasbaratchik maybe, which is much more sincere. WEH is german for pain, which I’m sure can be made to fit if you put your mind to it. Troll is an overused word.

      • Donald
        February 6, 2010, 10:49 am

        Sincerity is often overrated. I’m not going to link to Orwell’s “Notes on Nationalism” again, but it’s very common for ideologues to be quite sincere in their ignorance about the atrocities committed in the name of their sacred cause. At some level, perhaps subconscious, they work very hard to avoid knowing about things that would make them uncomfortable. If they can’t avoid knowing it they start rationalizing.

        Sincerity and insincerity blur together in such cases–whether they fit the internet definition of “troll” doesn’t matter so much.

      • Tuyzentfloot
        February 6, 2010, 11:14 am

        It matters a lot and Shmuel’s replies were exemplary. A troll on the other hand should just be shunned.

      • Shmuel
        February 6, 2010, 11:29 am

        TF (is that a reasonable abbreviation?),

        I agree that trolls should generally be ignored, but it sometimes take a while to figure out what they’re up to. There is no reason not to give everyone (even hasbara hacks) the benefit of the doubt at first.

        I also agree about sincerity, which has nothing to do with self-deception. One can be both dishonest and sincere at the same time.

      • Tuyzentfloot
        February 7, 2010, 7:28 am

        Sorry about the delay here. Well I don’t have much to add to Shmuel’s comments :)
        One item maybe: the part of the lurkers/onlookers: it’s not only annoying to those in the discussion if their honest opinion, however wrongheaded, is dismissed as a lie. the lurkers who identify with the opinion can also feel dismissed. Take the topic with edan on how the Lebanon war started by Hezbollah attacking with missiles, I even encountered that version in my own newspaper. Many people believe it, probably including edan. There’s value in offering an alternative version of what happened – whether it’s worth the effort or not.

      • Tuyzentfloot
        February 7, 2010, 7:31 am

        new word: Seagull Hasbaratchik(thanks to Scott Adams): flies in, craps on everything and leaves. The SH comes in, thinking they’re going to score a few debating points, starting off in a partisan manner and turning to any dirty trick they can think of when they get into trouble. Smugly state your conclusions and leave.

      • Chaos4700
        February 7, 2010, 9:07 am

        Of course, we’re lucky to have the rare off-shoot species here: Wittius Hypocrita Maximus. Known for its repetitive, warbling call, this one migrates back and away and back again as often as new entries come up, with the primary intent of nesting at the very top of them as they bud.

        Additionally, like certain other species of fowl, it often lies its eggs in the nests of others, taking advantage of pretense to shelter its arguments long enough until those other arguments can be kicked out of the their own nests by an eruption of faulty and falsified arguments that literally seeks to drown out any competing argument in a torrent of spam posts and thread starters.

      • Shmuel
        February 6, 2010, 11:10 am

        Tuyzentfloot,

        That is what I thought, when Oscar’s nomination was made (I like the sound of that: “Oscar’s nomination”), which is why I wrote that critical mass had not yet been reached. Things started to deteriorate after that however, showing that claims E. had made about himself were probably false (leftist, against settlements, critical of Israel, for two states), that he was not interested in discussion but rather in parachuting in simply to tell us all off – a feeling reinforced by the “self-hating” card he eventually pulled. There were also significant changes in subject, straw men, etc. And finally, as expected, a quick getaway. If the litmus test of trollhood (trolldom? trolliness?) is sincerity, I think our boy E. demonstrated it in a number of exchanges – beyond his initial misrepresentation, shall we say, of his own views.

        Have I mentioned that all of the Committee’s decisions are final?

      • Taxi
        February 6, 2010, 11:20 am

        Shmuel,

        Zionist trolls who try to ‘disguise’ themselves as pro-palestinian can easily be exposed: all you have to do is utter two words to them:

        NORMAN FINKLESTIEN!

        That should do it. As indeed was the case with BDSNOW earlier in the post.

        Boy does Normy make them uncontrollably nasty-angry.

      • Shmuel
        February 6, 2010, 11:41 am

        Taxi,

        Not that I’m comparing myself to the Norm, and the Finkelstein Test is certainly more efficient time-wise, but people like me seem to get the hissy juices flowing too ;-)

      • Taxi
        February 6, 2010, 11:48 am

        Shmuel,

        You are as good as Norm. And your temperament is so even and ambient!

        Yes you do get a lot of hissy-fits from hasbara banshees – we know why, don’t we?! As the old saying goes: it’s all in the name!

  16. Cliff
    February 4, 2010, 2:43 pm

    link to peacenow.org

    Short-partial list of settler crimes. Check out the sentences.

    • James Bradley
      February 4, 2010, 4:14 pm

      If you think these sentences are far to lenient given the crimes (murder, kidnapping, etc).

      You should check out the sentences IDF soldiers get while on duty committing the same exact crimes.

  17. Shmuel
    February 5, 2010, 7:11 am

    After much deliberation, the Troll of the Week Committe (TOWC) has come to a decision. The winner of this week’s second Trolly is edan. It is a special, three-part Trolly, in recognition of the winner’s stamina and determination – without the help of cut ‘n paste hasbarah resources: Part 1; Part 2; Part 3

    • Donald
      February 5, 2010, 9:44 am

      “After much deliberation, the Troll of the Week Committe (TOWC) has come to a decision.”

      A worthy recipient of this great honor. We won’t see his like again–not for a another week anyway.

    • potsherd
      February 5, 2010, 9:54 am

      Dorkie wuz robbed!

      • jimby
        February 6, 2010, 11:34 am

        the dorkster lacked stamina, a critical ingredient

  18. andrewfelluss
    February 5, 2010, 11:57 pm

    On topic: here’s to chain reaction: link to artistsagainstapartheid.org

Leave a Reply