And here is an AP report on the protest:
Dana Milbank, for one, wasn't too impressed with Netanyahu's response. From the Washington Post website:
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu needs a mulligan after his speech to the Jewish Federation in New Orleans on Monday. He was interrupted by the heckling of Jewish peace activists. But the problem was his response: Instead of brushing it off, he said the accusers believed that "Israel is guilty until proven guilty," adding: "The greatest success of our detractors is when Jews start believing that themselves. We've seen that today."
On the positive side, one audience member distinguished himself by picking up a protest banner left behind by the demonstrators and ripping it with his teeth.
The JTA also reports:
After the final protestor stood up and opened a banner reading, “Young Jews say the loyalty oath delegitimizes Israel,” Jeff Shapira from San Antonio grabbed her from behind and put her in a choke hold, dragging her backwards towards the floor.
When asked later if he had ever put a woman in a choke hold, he replied, “Not really. No. I really did not know what was going to happen, I wanted to keep her in check. I was trying to help.”
For more on the reasons behind the protest see www.youngjewishproud.org/.
Was the banner kosher?
Yeah, a full, really full-grown adult with a long beard. How’d you like him at your dinner table, raging on about sanctified and innocent little Israel and how she’s the eternal victim?
Saw a guy like this outside of a conference at Ohio State University some years back. The man was a Rabbi and stood outside the Palestinian solidarity conference with a loud speaker screaming “murderer, murderer” at everyone going into the conference. Around him stood a young group of Jewish students who attended Ohio State. I asked them to come in. That I would walk out with them if there were any anti Jewish remarks. If in any way the conference was not focused on Israel’s illegal policies and subsequent crimes. They refused and screamed. I asked them to come in again very politely. The rabid Rabbi picked up the megaphone and screamed right in my face “murderer, murderer” Had no idea that cameras were on us and when I turned around I said “I think I have just experienced just a tiny fraction of the humiliation directed towards the Palestinians every day”
I turned around and asked the rabid Rabbi once again to come in and discuss the issues, share his perspective. He picked up the megaphone again and screamed “murderer, murderer” My dear friend Art Gish (lived with Palestinians in the winters for 15 years) was standing off to the side (he was one of the speakers at the conference) I walked over to him and he said “you did just experience a tiny fraction of what Palestinians experience every day”
The rabid Rabbi and the Jewish students at Ohio State continued to scream “murderer, murderer ” to every person going into the conference.
That’s awesome Kathleen, well done.
PS how many jews did y’all kill that (or any other) day? None? Oh well I’m sure the rabbi offered you his sincere apologies..
Kosher? Fake Jews (Zionists) don’t really care. They flaunt the external trappings of Judaism, but lack the morality, humanitarianism, and obedience to Torah of real Jews, who would never treat their neighbors in ways that would be hateful if done to them.
Nothing delegitimized Israel more than the death threats against the elderly Israeli Jewish Holocaust survivor who rented to Arab students. If Zionists are going to kill Jewish Holocaust survivors, Zionists are not Jews, they are Nazis plain and simple.
“Fake Jews (Zionists) “
Oh my! Oh my, oh my! Gee whillikers! Are you trying to say that Zionism uses the external trappings og Judaism, but lacks the morality, humanitarianism, and obedience to Torah of real Jews? Is that what you are trying to say?
sounds like that to me. Nothing enrages Zionists more than being face to face with those who know that the truth is the opposite of what Zionists claim it is. After a while, though, one gets used to the Zionist’s either refusing to make eye contact or turning around and changing course, rather than pass the “demon” anti-Zionist. Not only get used to this, but wear it like a badge.
Great, great, great freaking video. I know things seem hopeless to all, doing my news list certainly makes me feel that way. But, I am fairly certain that we will win. Richard, and the rest of the Zionists, when I say that we will win, I am talking about Palestinians and Jews like the ones in that video that had the courage to stand up one by one in what can only be described as a hostile, aggressive group of people, because they believe in justice. Netanyahu and his ilk can’t even speak “among friends” without getting heckled and humiliated for being the criminals that they are. That’s great. I’m going to go watch it again.
whoops ~ 1st para = Seham, 2nd & 3rd = mine.
“Nothing delegitimized Israel more than the death threats against the elderly Israeli Jewish Holocaust survivor who rented to Arab students.”
Works for me. But who knows about this? Or doesn’t simply ascribe it to some lunatic fringe?
While there are some dissenters, the large majority are undying supporters of Israel, be it a racist, corrupt, occupying force that it is. I don’t see this changing in the next century. And, they’re not going to change because their leaders make statements like ‘the greatest success of our detractors is when Jews start believing that themselves. ‘, reinforcing the message,
‘It’s Us Against the World’.
Is that not the most self-serving message that is reinforced by their leadership since its founding? Palestinians can make this claim also, as they have been left out for trash in the world’s view, but somehow we continue to listen and absorb the Israeli propaganda on a daily diet from the media that indefinitely corrupts a nation. Say it enough and people will get the message, ‘Hands off our Middle East Project’.
I’m not sure what the right tact is to create a significant change with respect to this Israel phenomenon. It’s support largely comes from another nation that the population is largely unaware of the actual nature of Israel and it’s occupation. Debunking the legend of the right of return sounds seems first and foremost. But who knows where to start? ROR is such a faulty premise for a nation-state, it’s what Israeli leaders are afraid of discussing.
seems to me “where to start” is with a Truth and Reconciliation project: zionists/Israel has GOT to confront TRUTH, facts, reality, not the hasbara it believes and with which it is infecting so many other people.
Zionists have got to stop the propaganda war — stop both the lies Israelis tell themselves and the lies and distortions that so many zionist sources are spreading against Islam, Palestinians, Iran, American Christians.
A couple years ago Jeff Feltman, then ambassador to Lebanon, was a witness at a hearing before the US State Dept Commission on International Religious Liberty (or some such title). The target was Iran. The meme was rolled out that Muslims teach their children to hate Jews, and Feltman was asked if the textbooks used by Iran’s children had been examined and if they passed muster. Feltman said he would look into it.
Who is looking into the hatred that American Jews have been taught for over a generation? (sidebar: a few days ago in the Gordis thread, I think, there was discussion of the resentment Jews felt when they attended Episcopal schools where they were expected to recite Christian prayers. Someone asked if Christians were ever welcomed into Jewish schools. Should append to that: if Christians WERE/ARE accepted into Jewish schools, would they be expected to recite Jewish prayers? but I digress . . .)
Listen to Mark Braverman discuss his book, “Fatal Embrace: Christians and Jews in the Holy Land.” Braverman’s one of the ‘good guys,’ he started an organization to stop home demolitions in Palestine, etc.
But his description of how a Jew of his generation was raised was an eye-opener, and his judgment of Christians was outrageous and evoked in me a well of resentment. Is Braverman representative of many/most middle-aged American Jews? Do his attitudes arise from the nature of Jewish education in the US?
It’s a compelling video. I really appreciate his perspective and hope that others are catching on to this point of view.
“but somehow we continue to listen and absorb the Israeli propaganda on a daily diet from the media that indefinitely corrupts a nation.”
I think this has changed. Often hear callers calling into CSpans Washington Journal who bring this up and are not as in the dark as they used to be on the facts on the ground. A shift has taken place and that is what the everyone is “deligitimizing Israel” crowd (ADL, Aipac, Jinsa etc) are trying to counter. They do not want the facts to keep getting out. Trying their best to shut it down. The cat is out of the bag
god damn it.
Black security guards.
Using black people again to do their dirty work.
He wore his hair in dreadlocks and looked like he was an easy-going kinda guy, not a thuggish security brute. He also smiled yeah smiled while doing his job, amused and a touch surprised by the first outbreak. And you know something, Psychopathic god, I reckon only an ‘innocent’ to the details of the IP conflict can flash an involuntary surprised and sweet smile like that at a down and dirty Aipac pow-wow.
I bet the security guard’s been getting himself a fast education, reading up on israel and Palestine on the net all night long.
Who knows how he felt.
Many African Americans I have talked with are far more savvy to what is going on in that conflict than most white folks
It wouldn’t seem so, given the way their elected representatives line up to cheer the occupation.
taxi, this from the accounts written by those wonderful young protesters:
It’s striking to compare the video coverage; in the top one, the protest is communicated well, the basis for it–while simultaneously Nettie is allowed his say very clearly also, while the AP clip focuses clearly on Nettie’s POV, and allows only a shadowy glimpse of the protestors, and it muffles what they are saying, ending with Nettie telling the audience that what the protestors are saying is a marginal issue and not relevant to the peace process. Too, a “pro-Israel” commercial for 6 month trips to Israel runs along the bottom periodically.
PS, for the last couple of hours CSPAN2 has had a series of panel discussions on the I-P issue and Iran and American foreign policy in The Middle East; the highly credentialed speakers are saying stuff and giving details never said on American TV. It’s 8:20 AM EST here, and the panel on Iran & American strategic policy is still on….
thanks citizen
thanks for the tip, Citizen. I caught the last few minutes, then looked over the Atlantic Council website.
re the Iran Task Force: ugh. Why not just put Netanyahu in charge of US policy on Iran? Oh, wait, he is.
Slavin used to be a semi-fair interlocutor on Iran; since her installation at Washinton Times, she’s gone full-Monty zionist, even perpetuating the “wipe Israel off the map” at evey opportunity.
Euzenstat is a close colleague of Dennis Ross and one of the charter members and framers of the JPPPI — Jewish People Policy Planning Institute. JPPPI’s vision is to prepare Israel for the moment, sooner rather than later, when US will cease to be the world’s major power, and Israel will have established relationships with the next country — China and India are in JPPPI’s special focus.
Hagel appears to be the front man, the willing dupe.
Don’t know anything about Kempe.
same crap different day
Thanks, Pg, it really helps to get your kind of information, so quickly. Nevertheless, I heard the Palestinian POV presented quite well from that panel, and I don’t recall it being debunked; it didn’t hear like a set-up….same for Iran’s POV.
thanks
awesome! i just received this in my inbox from rae, they’ve been up all night editing the flip cam footage. it’s mindblowing. mindblowing, plus it’s flipping this ‘deligitimization’ message on it’s head. millions of americans who had no idea netanyahu was even in the country will know it now. it’s all over the news. excellent. i’m bursting..overflowing w/greatfullness for these proud young jews. it makes me so excited. they can take their 6 million dollars and shove it, nothing pays for this kind of advertising.
“plus it’s flipping this ‘deligitimization’ message on it’s head. millions of americans who had no idea netanyahu was even in the country will know it now. it’s all over the news.”
Their message was strong, clear, truthful. “Israel’s actions deligtimize Israel”
“The Settlements Delegitimize Israel
The Occupation Delegitimizes Israel
The Siege of Gaza Delegitimizes Israel
The Loyalty Oath Delegitimizes Israel
Silencing Dissent Delegitimizes Israel”
Brave, honest and clear. They nailed the message. Just wish they had had a way to use equipment to project their voices.
Since you have a direct line to Rae. Have you asked or do you know if they were kicked, hit etc by participants? At one point it looked like they took Taylor down(not sure whether that is his first or last name, The young man from Berekley)
The participants screaming, clapping, booing, drowning out the message was a perfect example of the way right wing Israeli’s , Netanyahu, the I lobby, our MSM drown out any dissent to Israel’s destructive and very dangerous policies. But not this time.
Congress members, MSM talking heads just keep repeating “Israel is our closest ally” “The American people totally support Israel” Just not true.
Still nothing up over at Firedoglake. Jane Hamsher and Marcy Wheeler seldom get near this issue. Ed Teller/CTuttle may pick it up. But not Jane, Marcy or the editor of My FDL Rayne. Will not get near it.
Nothing up at Crooks and Liars. That place is really shut down (blog clog) on covering anything about the I/P issue or criticizing the I lobby.
Made it up at Daily Kos today
link to dailykos.com
Odd when you google now put in the same words that I put in last night. Less papers that put up the AP story about the protesters popping up
Last night had filled up 14 pages at google
Has filled up 14 pages of google
link to seattletimes.nwsource.com
link to chron.com
link to npr.org
link to kansascity.com
link to salon.com
link to daytondailynews.com
Minneapolis/ St Paul
link to startribune.com
Who wants to place a bet that Jon Stewart or his writers and producers will not go near this. Would have to be about demonizing Iran for them to touch it
Well done those young people. Interesting the instinctive reaction is to fall back on the ‘self-hating’ schtick coupled with violent suppression of free speech – true to the tenets of Israel and its lapdogs.
Yeah the rabbi dude who ripped the fallen banner with ‘his teeth’ was a little too hands-on for a civilian : he sure looked like he was getting more and more power-drunk happy handling each consecutive protester.
But really, I wept and palpitated to see these young jewish soulhearts, outnumbered and unflinching, acting so courageously in that heady zio-mosh-pit.
I wanna shake their hands and kiss at their undoubtedly bruised bodies and throats, today, which is their glorious morning after.
Yes I think they succeeded in ‘delivering’ their message – and how loud and clear and brave and sweet it was.
While it is exciting to see young Jewish individuals getting deeply involved. And congratulating, encouraging their ongoing efforts. The danger can be that some newly involved folks will often try to pretend that public actions began and end with them. I have seen this happen any numerous movements. Arrogance and egos can get carried away. Instead of staying focused on the message, the facts, and honoring all of the Palestinian Gandhi’s that are in prison, Edward Said, Arch Bishop Tutu, Jimmy Carter, Art and Peggy Gish and all of those who have been trying to knock down the wall of silence on these critical issues for decades.
I am not saying these young people are doing that. Just something to stay very aware of as the participation increases
Please do not censor this valid comment.
I don’t agree with disruptions of this nature. This is a disgraceful outburst by fringe radical elements.
There simply is no justification for delegitimizing Israel, which is the same as removing Israel’s legitimate right to exist.
The Jewish nation lives, we do exist.
The reason why websites such as this, as well as “peace (piece)” activists such as those, are very dangerous is it is not external enemies that cause destruction among the Jewish people, simply it is only our own people that can bring us down.
Israel is legitimate, Israel exists, we will continue to build and grow, and one day, the children, and the children’s children (if by a miracle they are still Jewish) of these activists will come to Israel, to learn, and to massively build.
Max
Israel exists based on the 67 border. The international community, the UN, the International Court of Justice have all determined the settlements are illegal, the continued expansion of Israeli housing is illegal, parts of the wall are illegal. Period.
I believe Israel should get back to the original division…But.
Israel exists /67 border.
This disruption was important. These protesters nailed the message
Their message was strong, clear, truthful. “Israel’s actions deligtimize Israel”
“The Settlements Delegitimize Israel
The Occupation Delegitimizes Israel
The Siege of Gaza Delegitimizes Israel
The Loyalty Oath Delegitimizes Israel
Silencing Dissent Delegitimizes Israel”
maxN
And we all know that you believe in the Occupation, Settlements, the Gaza Siege, etc. You don’t believe the Palestinians have any right to lands in which their forefathers (& mothers) have lived for millennia, and that the Jewish settlers have every right to dispossess and exile them any way they wish or can. All because a handful of your own forebears lived there for a few decades in the bronze age, and believe their favorite sky-fairy bequeathed it to them in perpetuity – “Look, look, it says so in our holy book! It says so in this [long superseded] agreement! It says so here, it says so there! So there!”
Nobody is ‘delegitimizing’ Israel (which is a stupid and invented term anyway). The point the protesters are making is that it is the racist policies of a right wing Israeli government which contribute to the image of Israel as a bullying, apartheid state (if that is what you want to call ‘delegitimising’). Nobody is saying Israel doesn’t exist – it is typical that you raise a lot of claims which no-one is making. If anyone is being ‘delegitimised’ it is obviously the poor Palestinians who just happen to have been there for centuries and have committed no crime except not belong to the right religious group, and are being denied ‘the right to exist’ in the most thuggish, cruel way.
I’m going to respond, if the censors will allow, making sure not to violate the comments policy in any way.
Clearly these fringe elemetns are perceived as deligitimizers by mainstream Jewish organizations, and a larger porportion of the Jewish population.
In fact, the perception is so strong that this entire act was staged in such as way as to transmit the message
“we are not deligitimizing you, oh Israel”
“you, Israel, in fact are deligitimizing yourself by your actions”
However one must really break down what deligitimization is.
It means different things to different people.
Saying Israel must be flooded massively with a foreign population negates the ability of the Jewish state to retain a Jewish majority, this naturally removes legitimacy from the Jewish state, and is considered delegitimization.
Asserting that Jews cannot build massively and grow in our ancestral homeland, is delelitimization because the claim is that Jews have no right to our aboriginal lands in Hebron, Jerusalem, Beit Lechem and other parts of Judea.
I applaud the mention of Kathleen promoting the 1967 borders for the Jewish state and I think it is a move in the right direction.
How many commenters believe that? I hear a lot about One state on this website which runs counter to Kathleens assertions, also the flooding of pre 1967 Israel with millions of Arabs would also negate Kathleens comments.
This is a “War of Ideas” Check the tagline of this website. In this war, the concept of legitimization is used extensively. So let’s call it what it is. I don’t believe an Arab state in the Land of Israel is legitimate, and you don’t believe a Jewish state in the whole (or even parts) of the Land of Israel is legitimate.
Let’s be honest and clear. I do not confer legitimacy to a “Palestinian State” and you don’t confer legitimacy to a Jewish one.
I’m willing to be honest. Are you?
“I applaud the mention of Kathleen promoting the 1967 borders for the Jewish state and I think it is a move in the right direction.”
But atg the same time, you are endording the theft of land and expasion of settlements.
So which is it Max? Do you support the 1967 borders or don’t you? You can’t have it both ways.
“I don’t believe an Arab state in the Land of Israel is legitimate”
There is no Land of Israe. There is a state called Israel, who’s legitmate borders resid within the territor of Palestine.
You are not being honest when you insist on the existence of some Biblical fantasy.
With all due respect. And I hope the moderators will allow me to respond to your statement with some selected statements of my own which I will stress do not violate the comments policy, and are pertinent and on topic to the current thread. (Not trolling or hijacking in any way)
Shingo,
In direct response to your question, I do not believe that the borders of the State of Israel should be limited to the 1949 armistice lines.
With all due respect. And I hope the moderators will allow I would flip your comment around in the following manner.
You made the statement:
There is no Land of Israel. There is a state called Israel, who’s legitimate borders reside within the territory of Palestine.
I understand that is a popular sentiment, or perspective, of the commenters here.
I would modify it in such a way to say this, and again I am hoping the moderators will allow me to make an inverse statement.
“There is no Territory of Palestine, There is only the Land of Israel, in which reside, Jews, Arabs and other residents”
From a historical perspective, it must be remembered that the Term Syria Palestina was applied by the Romans in order to erase the Jewish character of the Land of Israel a couple hundred years into the Common Era, conjoining two names which were despised by Jews, our ancient enemies, Philistia and Assyria. This was done to erase particularly the term Yehuda (Judea AKA lower West Bank) in which we, as Jews derive our identifying name(Yehuda = Jew)
The Romans also renamed Jerusalem Aeola Capitolina, although this did not stick. The same way today’s elements seek to rename Yerushaliym to Al Quds.
“Asserting that Jews cannot build massively and grow in our ancestral homeland,” total hooey. This claim is based on a story book called the Bible written by a bunch of Jewish guys. The land in that region was conquered over and over again. Both Palestinians and Jews have their history there.
“So let’s call it what it is. I don’t believe an Arab state in the Land of Israel is legitimate, and you don’t believe a Jewish state in the whole (or even parts) of the Land of Israel is legitimate.
Let’s be honest and clear. I do not confer legitimacy to a “Palestinian State” and you don’t confer legitimacy to a Jewish one.
I’m willing to be honest. Are you?”
Who is this “You”? Glad you admitted that you do not believe in a Palestinian state. Which goes against international law, the UN which you must remember created Israel. Israel exists based on the 67 border. The right to exist is another discussion.
maxN
“Israel must be flooded massively with a foreign population”
D’you mean European Jews, Russian Jews, American Jews?
Or do you mean the people who were turfed out of their homes, their towns, THEIR country to make way for the foreign invasion?
Maybe you mean those who still live within the extended borders you claim, those being dispossessed of their homes, farms, livelihoods as we write, who already have no rights within or on their own lands? Leibensraum for maxi and his kin?
Moderators: If you will please allow me to respond in a professional, clear, manner, I would appreciate the chance to reply:
Kathleen,
The UN did not confer legitimacy or existence upon the Jewish state.
In terms of international law this was recognized by the San Remo conference in the whole of what was termed “Palestine”
I say recognized because international groupings, individual states, and other groups can only recognize our historical rights, they can neither re-confer nor remove that which already exists.
I strongly believe that bible bashing is offensive to many Jews, however our claims are multiple, they are based on the aggregate of:
Religious Law,
Historical Sovereignty over our ancestral homeland
Moral right of Jews to return to our Land and Justice
International Law as codified in the San Remo Agreements
The Doctrine of Estoppel
The fact that there never was a state called Palestine and the only nation ever to claim the Land of Israel as our homeland has been us, the people of Israel.
Again, 1949 armistice lines are based on where we stood after the Arab war of aggression, no more, no less. The Land of Israel, however has clearly defined borders, and as you can see, we massively build and settle within them for that reason.
I respect Arabs and I hope we can live in peace and harmony with our neighbors, I don’t say any of this to denigrate, or hurt anybody else, any other human being, simply to assert our rights as a starting point for healthy peace talks without imperial influence from the United States, Russia, Iran, or China.
Max
Moderators: If you will please allow me to correct teh lies of maximalistNarrative.
The UN conferred legitimacy to Israel in 1948.
There is no mention of a Jewish State fron the San Remo conference. In fact, the conclusion if San Remo conference is identitcal tot he Balfour Decalration, which stipualtes that a Jewish homeland be created within part of Palestine.
Israel’s legitimacy and creation was not based on non existent historical rights
The Bible is fiction and bashing it is allowed under free speech.
There is no such thing as Religious Law.
There is no such thing as historical sovereignty.
There is no such thing as moral right of Jews or any other religion.
The San Remo Agreements did not codify any International Law, but merely codified the administrative of Mandate Palestine to Britain.
There never was a state called Israel until 1948.
The 1949 borders are based on the UN partition, which Israel accepted.
There is no such thing as the Land of Israel, only the satet of Israel as per the 1967 borders.
The building and settlements are illegal for that reason.
“I respect Arabs and I hope we can live in peace and harmony with our neighbors, I don’t say any of this to denigrate, or hurt anybody else, any other human being, simply to assert our rights as a starting point for healthy peace talks without imperial influence from the United States, Russia, Iran, or China.”
Israels’ rights exist within the sovereign state of Israel as per the 1967 borders.
You demonstrate once again your vile racist ideology.
Your post shoudl have been banned.
One more thing Max,
I challenge you to quote the passage from the San Remo Conference that grants all of Palestine to Israel.
Here is the text of the Resolution to save you looking it up.
link to en.wikipedia.org
‘the Jewish state … was recognized by the San Remo conference in the whole of what was termed “Palestine”’
Please quote, or at least give a reference to, the sections of the San Remo agreement that (a) recognizes the legitimacy of a Jewish State, and (b) gives that state the whole of Palestine. I’ve looked, and I can’t find anything there.
“the only nation ever to claim the Land of Israel as our homeland has been us, the people of Israel.”
The Arabs of Palestine claim Palestine as their homeland, since it is the land they were born in, brought up in, and have their homes in. Jews born and brought up in Poland, Australia, Belgium, or Argentina cannot make that claim.
When you say “the people of Israel”, do you include the Israeli Arabs?
There is no such thing as Religious Law.
So will you denounce Sharia law here Shingo and the Islamic Republic of Iran’s use of Sharia law?
Moderators,
I have been asked twice by Shingo and RoHa to expand upon the clear rights of the Jewish people to exercise sovereignty over our entire Land of Israel.
Thank you for this opportunity.
Pursuant to the adoption of the San Remo Resolution on April 24-25, 1920, which declared that the boundaries of Palestine shall be determined by the Principal Allied Powers of Britain, France, Italy, and Japan, an assertion reiterated twice more in the Treaty of Sevres and the Draft Mandate of Dec. 6, 1920, Britain and France proceeded to negotiate a treaty for that explicit purpose called the Franco British Boundary Convention of December 23, 1920, AKA the Convention of Paris. As a direct result of this Convention, Jewish legal rights and the title of Sovereignty over most of what had constituted the historical Land of Israel were formally recognized under international law. This recognition covered what is today wrongly called “the occupied territories” of Judea Samaria and Gaza as well as the whole of Transjordan south of the Yarmuk, whose eastern boundary with Mesopotamia still awaited final determination.
Some specific points
1) The San Remo Resolution codified the Balfour Declaration officially by the Allied powers, a binding act of international law, rather than the previous policy statement from Britain.
2)The San Remo Resolution, at that point, for the first time ever, officially established the country of Palestine as one of the new mandated states in the Middle East that emerged after the breakup of the Ottomon empire.
3)
The San Remo Resolution designated Palestine as a whole to be the Jewish National Home and Jewish State. It is obvious to anyone reading the minutes in the English and French versions of the San Remo Peace Conference for April 24, 1920 that the country of Palestine was carved out of the Ottomon areas only for the purpose of creating the Jewish state and homeland and for no other reason.
4) The san Remo Resolution on Palestine named the Jewish people as the national beneficiary of the principle of self-determination in the Mandate Charter, for the purpose of applying the general provisions of article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations. This means reserved for the Jewish people as a whole and not the approximate 60,000 Jews living in the Land of Israel at the time.
5) This granted the Jewish people de jure sovereignty or legal title over the entire Land of Israel (Palestine) which was implicitly transferred to the Jewish people by the Supreme Council of the Principal Allied Powers who acted as the disposing agent under international law.
Max,
Once again you’re demonstrated what a poor liar and propagandist you are. You’ve been corrected countless times of this very argument. The San Remo resolution ended when the League of Nations was disbanded and replaced by the UN, which in turn produce the partition plan that Israel formally accepted.
I asked you to quote, not provide your own interpretation, of the passages from the San Remo Resolution that supported your claims about Israel or Jewish people being given sovereignty to all of Palestine.
You have failed to do so, and tellingly, failed top produce a link to your sources.
The text of the agreement makes no mention whatsoever of any entity called the “Land of Israel”, nor does it make any mention of “sovereignty”.
Hence, there is no declaration, formal or otherwise pertaining to international law.
As to your false points, here are the corrections:
1)The San Remo Resolution proceeded the Balfour Declaration, which in turn became the internationally accepted interpretation of the San Remo Resolution by the Allied powers. As with the San Remo Resolution, the Balfour Declaration makes no mention of the “Land of Israel”, nor does it make any mention of “sovereignty”.
2)The San Remo Resolution established the states of Syria and Mesopotamia, not Palestine. As for Palestine, the Resolution simply established the administrative rights of the Mandate to Great Britain.
3)The San Remo Resolution designated that Palestine was to accommodate a national home for the Jewish people, not become a Jewish state, and stipulated that that this would not involve the surrender of the rights hitherto enjoyed by the non-Jewish communities in Palestine.
4) The San Remo Resolution makes no mention of a Jewish State.
4)The San Remo Resolution makes no mention of the Jewish people being the national beneficiary of the Mandate Charter.
5)Palestine was NOT reserved for the Jewish people as a whole, nor the Jewish people living in the Land of Israel at the time.
6) Therefore it is conclusive the there is no sovereignty or legal title over Palestine granted to anyone.
Your lies Max can be verified by the conclusions of the San Remo Resolution, which follow:
San Remo Resolution – April 25, 1920
It was agreed –
(a) To accept the terms of the Mandates Article as given below with reference to Palestine, on the understanding that there was inserted in the process-verbal an undertaking by the Mandatory Power that this would not involve the surrender of the rights hitherto enjoyed by the non-Jewish communities in Palestine; this undertaking not to refer to the question of the religious protectorate of France, which had been settled earlier in the previous afternoon by the undertaking given by the French Government that they recognized this protectorate as being at an end.
(b) that the terms of the Mandates Article should be as follows:
The High Contracting Parties agree that Syria and Mesopotamia shall, in accordance with the fourth paragraph of Article 22, Part I (Covenant of the League of Nations), be provisionally recognized as independent States, subject to the rendering of administrative advice and assistance by a mandatory until such time as they are able to stand alone. The boundaries of the said States will be determined, and the selection of the Mandatories made, by the Principal Allied Powers.
The High Contracting Parties agree to entrust, by application of the provisions of Article 22, the administration of Palestine, within such boundaries as may be determined by the Principal Allied Powers, to a Mandatory, to be selected by the said Powers. The Mandatory will be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 8, 1917, by the British Government, and adopted by the other Allied Powers, in favour of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.
La Puissance mandataire s’engage a nommer dans le plus bref delai une Commission speciale pour etudier toute question et toute reclamation concernant les differentes communautes religieuses et en etablir le reglement. Il sera tenu compte dans la composition de cette Commission des interets religieux en jeu. Le President de la Commission sera nomme par le Conseil de la Societe des Nations.
The terms of the mandates in respect of the above territories will be formulated by the Principal Allied Powers and submitted to the Council of the League of Nations for approval.
Turkey hereby undertakes, in accordance with the provisions of Article [132 of the Treaty of Sèvres] to accept any decisions which may be taken in this connection.
(c) Les mandataires choisis par les principales Puissances allies sont: la France pour la Syrie, et la Grande Bretagne pour la Mesopotamie, et la Palestine.
In reference to the above decision the Supreme Council took note of the following reservation of the Italian Delegation:
La Delegation Italienne en consideration des grands interets economiques que l’Italie en tant que puissance exclusivement mediterraneenne possede en Asie Mineure, reserve son approbation a la presente resolution, jusqu’au reglement des interets italiens en Turquie d’Asie.
Now for another history lesson for Max’s benefit:
Israel is the only State admitted to UN membership on condition that it would be obedient to the world body and be bound, more specifically, by two General Assembly resolutions – of November 1947 for partition of Palestine and of December 1948 enshrining the right of the Palestinian refugees to return to their homes or be satisfied with compensation. A document on UN record, dated 29 November 1948, reads: “On behalf of the State of Israel, I, Moshe Shertok, Minister for Foreign Affairs, being duly authorised by the State Council of Israel, declare that the State of Israel hereby unreservedly accepts the obligation of the UN Charter and undertakes to honour them from the day when it becomes a Member of the United Nations.”
“So will you denounce Sharia law here Shingo and the Islamic Republic of Iran’s use of Sharia law?”
Since when have you, or the state you reside in, been required to abide by Sharia law Yonira?
The San Remo resolution ended when the League of Nations was disbanded and replaced by the UN, which in turn produce the partition plan that Israel formally accepted.
it takes two to tango Shingo.
It should also be mentioned that no reference has been made to the San Remo resolutions by any Israeli leader since Menachem Begin, which underscores the fact that it is no longer regarded as having any validity/
The San Remo agreement refers to “ the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people”, not to a Jewish state.
Since Syria and Mesopotamia are explicitly referred to as states (“Syria and Mesopotamia shall, … be provisionally recognized as independent States) it is clear that the “national home” was not to be a state.
Nor does “in Palestine” mean “the whole of Palestine”.
Furthermore,
“nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine,”
explicitly excludes sole Jewish sovereignty, since such sovereignty would prejudice the sovereignty rights of the non-Jews.
“It should also be mentioned that no reference has been made to the San Remo resolutions by any Israeli leader since Menachem Begin, which underscores the fact that it is no longer regarded as having any validity”
They are getting desperate, Shingo, so they are dragging up anything they think they can use to confuse the issue.
I’ll have to correct Shingo on many points if the moderators will allow, as I am an expert on International law.
1) The demarcation of the Borders of Palestine Occurred within the framework of the treaties of Sevres and the Convention of Paris. In international intruments relating to the Mandate of Palestine, the Term Palestine is synonymous with Eretz Yisrael (Land of Israel) Simply “Palestine” was the English Rendition and the Hebrew Rendition was always an Aleph and Yud denoting the Land of Israel. The San Remo resolution codified the Balfour declaration into international law which conferred sovereignty to the National Home for the Jewish people in Palestine, the wording directly derived from the 1897 Zionist Congress intent to create a Jewish home in Palestine secured by public law and outlined in four separate means to achieve that aim.
2) Despite the fact that unlike Syria and Mesopotamia the boundaries of Palestine were not established the San Remo work did in fact create the country of Palestine as one of the new Mandated states on April 24th 1920 to be exact.
3) National home is the same as State. National AKA Nation AKA State.
4) See Three
5) Palestine Clearly WAS reserved for the Jewish people as a whole, at the same time securing minority rights and access to holy places within the Jewish state. There is no arguments against this irrefutable fact.
The rights of the Jewish people are those of self determination, that means Jews as a whole, not simply Jews that lived in our homeland at the time.
6) This is simply a personal attack against me that I won’t address.
Thank you again moderators for giving me the chance to spell out the clear rights of the Jewish people under international laws and treatise.
You can’t correct me using lies maximalistNarrative, but I appreciate your comic line about being “an expert on International law.”
That made me laugh.
Needless to say, the Bible is fiction and no basis for intentional law.
1)Eretz Yisrael appears in no international treaty or agreement.
2)Palestine has been the term that has decried the region since before the Romans.
3)The San Remo resolution did not codify anything but the administration of the Mandate.
4)The San Remo did not create the country of Palestine, which is why no reference to the country of Palestine appears anywhere in the conclusions.
3) A national home is NOT the same as State.
5)Palestine clearly was NOT reserved for the Jewish people as a whole, but to accommodate a Jewish home within the territory.
6)Israel has also violated the requirement to secure minority rights and access to holy places within Palestine, which according to your argument, means that Israel ha violated intentional law and the San Remo agreement anyway.
Again, your failure and refusal to provide exact links to support your false argument stand an evidence that you are lying and cannot address the facts.
Thanks to the moderators for allowing me to debunk Max’s lies and insidious propaganda.
Shingo,
You did a great job debunking the hasbara that mn was peddling. Very incisive and thorough. Kudos.
Moderators, thank you for the opportunity to let me have a substantive discussion, a common complaint is that Zionists are only here to troll and I hope this helps to disprove that claim.
Shingo,
Not everything is in links, if you like I can source you with the documents that you can order for yourself if you like. Your over dependance on wikipedia is telling.
Very quick refutations again on your points.
1) Palestine is rendered as Eretz Israel in the official Hebrew documents relating to these matters. They are interchangeable.
2) Clearly your are correct on this point, the Romans compounded the name of the two ancient enemies of the Jews into Syria Palestina in order to shame Jews and attempt to wipe out the name of Judea.
That is why it made perfect sense for those of countries whose language were of latin origins to use the common term Palestine, which is in fact not pronouncible in Arabic, they must say Filistin instead.
The Hebrew, again, Is rendered Aleph Yud for Eretz Yisrael, Land of Israel. This also of course is natural as this term has been used by Jews for our lands far before the Roman imperialists occupied it.
3) A national home is exactly and precisely the same as a state. This is evident for many reasons, in fact the term national was explicitly added to the original Jewish formulation made in the first zionist congress of 1897 which simply said “Jewish Home in Palestine secured by public (international) law” the word national was added explicitly to denote state.
5) The rights of self determination apply to the Jewish nation as a whole. This is clearly spelled out in the League of Nations Covenant Article 22, in the treaty of Versailles. This is also evidenced by the fact that it was explicitly conferred, within the mandate framework, upon the British to enable the massive immigration of worldwide Jewry back to our ancestral homeland, an obligation that the British nefariously did not honor, contrary to international law.
6) Israel has violated no agreements to secure minority rights in the Land of Israel. Those are outlined in separate agreements regarding religious and minority rights that we can delve into deeper if you would like a more formal education on the mechanisms enshrined in international law.
Hope that helps,
Max
If the censors allow me to pose this question, Narr: by what logic or law should people and their descendants be permitted to return to their homeland after 2000 years, but not after 62 years?
“it takes two to tango Shingo.”
Actually it doesn’t because the partition plan was drafted without the consent of either party.
Thanks Avi.
Antidote,
I can answer you on both counts.
The logic behind the Jewish return to our homeland stems from various reasons, ranging from persecution, religious obligations, rights to self determination and others. In some ways the first question is misleading because it’s not about other “permitting” us to return to our land. That is an inalienable right that can never be bestowed, only recognized.
The second question would be, by what law, to that I respond very clearly, by the well defined mechanisms of international law.
I agree with Shingo, the partition plan was illegal in any case because it ran couner to the San Remo resolutions, as well as the Mandate Charter, it was in many ways non-binding, mainly due to the fact that nations were obligated by the Doctrine of Estoppel, to support full Jewish sovereignty over the Land of Israel.
Max
I don’t remember the US financing Iran with a huge blank check every year. I do remember that the CIA kicked out the democratically elected Iranian government and installed the SHAH as puppet to exploit Iran’s oil resource at the expense of the Iranian people, and subsequently secular Iranians with the help of the mullahs overthrew the western proxy puppet regime and set up the current Iranian regime.
Yonira: “So will you denounce Sharia law here Shingo and the Islamic Republic of Iran’s use of Sharia law?”
Maybe if halacha law can also be denounced? after all, the halacha and the Sharia are quite similar in many respects, each – somewhat archaic in origin, holding sway in their respective countries.
Both systems seem to me to represent the unsteady arm of the past trying to reach into the present, reminding people that history never sleeps. Unfortunately, too much history also prevents a rational march into the future, but that’s a story for another day.
“Israel’s legitimate right to exist”
No state has a right to exist. States are a convenience. When they are no longer convenient, they often cease to exist. (East Germany and Yugoslavia are cases in point.)
Phil, Adam, All
Stephen Walt nails Bush’s spin again
Delusion Points
Don’t fall for the nostalgia — George W. Bush’s foreign policy really was that bad.
link to foreignpolicy.com
“Don’t believe a word of it. George W. Bush’s presidency really was that bad — and the fact that Obama has largely followed the same course is less a measure of Bush’s wisdom than a reminder of the depth of the hole he dug his country into, as well as the institutionalized groupthink that dominates the U.S. foreign-policy establishment.
Decision Points has 14 chapters, each one pivoting around a key decision that Bush made in his adult life. So, in honor of America’s newly published ex-president, here’s my own list of 14 decisions that Bush made — ones that tell a slightly different history of the 43rd presidency. “
I don’t believe that disruption is anything but unruly.
I take back my praise of the demonstrators, now that I’ve seen the action itself.
How shocking, a bit of heckling and an attempt to make a valid point. Quite right, shouldn’t be allowed. Let the delusional Net carry on making his outright lies and crusading for new wars. Shut up, everybody, disagreement is outlawed.
“Shut up, everybody, disagreement is outlawed.”
And as Witty has warned, could lead to violence, as is the case here.
“I take back my praise of the demonstrators, now that I’ve seen the action itself.”
I’m sure the demonstartors will be demoralized by the withdrawl of your official endoresement Witty.
They should take it seriously that they only have traction among those that are already converted.
This is NOT Vietnam to the United States. There are not US children dying vainly.
The “great generational divide” is not that profound. Its a MIS-representation. The same generational divide occurred around my seder table in 1973, and came to nought as terror actually occurred and cast Israel’s reluctance in an entirely different light for me, and as I became aware of the actual experience of holocaust refugees.
“This is NOT Vietnam to the United States. There are not US children dying vainly.’
True, Richard. It’s only Palestinian children dying vainly, with the help of the US. Nothing to get upset about, surely. Well, that, plus the fact that it also makes the US an object of hatred.
“The same generational divide occurred around my seder table in 1973, and came to nought as terror actually occurred and cast Israel’s reluctance in an entirely different light for me”
“Terror actually occurred” of course refers to Palestinians killing Israelis–Israelis killing Palestinians don’t count and they were doing this all along. “Israel’s reluctance” is probably Richard’s BS term meaning Israel’s reluctance to treat Palestinians as human beings. Richard can’t understand that when you steal people’s land and kill some of them it is apt to make them angry. Or rather, he doesn’t understand it so long as his side is doing the stealing.
“They should take it seriously that they only have traction among those that are already converted.”
Correction Witty, it also has traction among those that are not yet “converted” because they are ignorant.
Those in your camp will always be unreachable, because as you yourself admitted, your devotion to Israel is unshakable in spite of any facts.
“Richard can’t understand that when you steal people’s land and kill some of them it is apt to make them angry. ”
Actually Donald, it’s more specific. Richard can’t understand that when you steal land from Muslims and kill some of them it is apt to make them angry.
On 9/11 3000 American civilians died due to blowback resulting from our imperial outposts on Muslim land and our rubber stamping and funding of Israel’s agression and stealing of land from Palestinians. PNAC’s implementation by the neoconic Bush Jr machine has caused the death of thousands of American soldiers and tens of thousands of innocent Iraquis. The drum roll by neocons and PEPs is setting us up for a war with Iran, a nation surrounded by US military bases, and with a recent history of the CIA-installed tyrant Shah and the US support of Saddam’s Iraq in its 8 year agression against Iran. It is like Vietnam; there’s just no militsry draft because now the US has essentially a Hessian military arm. The cover story was a war against Communism, and now its a war against Islamofascism. “A war on terror.”
Perhaps the veil is being lifted, ever so slightly, and the American people might start wondering why an upstart little bully from a tinpot little country comes over here and starts demanding that the US citizens pony up more dollars and young American lives for his wars of aggression. It is a truly ugly sight, an utterly delusional old man threatening his hosts, any dissenters and the lives of citizens in the Middle East.
“Fires back”? LOL!, the unintended comedy is amazing.
Alas, poor Bibi, without the crucial home field advantage, cannot unleash the IDF on those impertinent hecklers.
““Not really. No. I really did not know what was going to happen, I wanted to keep her in check. I was trying to help.”
Yeah, like Israel did on the Mavi Marmara.
He needs to change that to “defending himself.”
“Israel is guilty until proven guilty,”
Yes Bibbi, Israel was proven guilty in official UN Reports. Of course, that doesn’t stop you accusing Iran and Hamas for every conflict that you decide to initiate.
that sure jumped out at me. Israel is guilty
Opening the eyes of the American people to true nature of the Israel is just the start. Next we must help Americans of all religious and political persuasions to understand that without the U.S. government’s support, the settler-state (not its people) would collapse overnight. And what a blessing this will be, not only for the Palestinians, but for all living beings.
Hopefully the tea party influence in congress will now put our foreign aid on the chopping block and a few courageous congress people will not allow the biggest chunk of our foreign aid, the unconditional dole to Israel given early every year to Israel and put in an interest-bearing account for Israel (the principle, cash borrowed from China at interest).
The second biggest chunk of our foreign aid is conditonally given to Egypt, the condition being that Egypt kisses Israel’s tukus. If will be amusing if the zionists in congress get Israel’s dole disconneted from the foreign aid on the chopping block–Egypt will say, “Me too!” The balance of foreign aid is a pittance, not much help to financially strapped American masses. Ideally, if helping the average American is really the goal, the US will divert foreign aid to that purpose, as well as at least half of our Pentagon budget. Instead the war between the demos and repubs will mostly concentrate on cutting and defending essentially domestic social services and health services. Defense is the golden flag, both here and in Israel. And the ignorant & jobless & foreclosed masses support that military-industrial boondoggle. All you have to do is wave the flag and say how you love our troops.