Noted expert on Israel/Palestine, David Horowitz has never been there

Israel/Palestine
on 91 Comments

This is hard to watch, David Horowitz spewing venom at Palestinians at Brooklyn College two nights back (which Zoe Zenowich reported on yesterday). Right at the start is his quote: “I actually have never been to Israel, the state of Israel.” Then he starts describing the Palestinians as “Nazis,” and “morally sick,” and “Jew haters.”

91 Responses

  1. Richard Witty
    March 12, 2011, 9:46 am

    I didn’t like the editing early.

    But, his speech is unquestionably reactionary.

    I think his views are representative of a rationally defensive Jewish community relative to historically exagerated and malevolent expressions of contempt towards Israel and those that sympathize. (As the vast majority of my and older generations sympathized with Israel, that is a large number that feel verbally assaulted.)

    His comments though are offensive, verbally offending others, abusing American civil rights, making wars more than preventing them.

    • Citizen
      March 12, 2011, 10:01 am

      Why is it that this guy Horowitz is front and center while David Duke is banished to the fringe? Is this hate speech what American soldiers die for?

      • annie
        March 12, 2011, 11:34 am

        that’s a good question citizen. i’m surprised colleges would allow such racist hatemongering on their campuses.

        i hope this video is sent to every college who has an inkling to invite him to speak. he’s atrocious.

      • Potsherd2
        March 12, 2011, 11:49 am

        Because calling a Jew racist is antisemitic.

      • Donald
        March 12, 2011, 12:01 pm

        Exactly. That’s the thing that hit me when I first started reading seriously about the conflict–in the US denunciation of Arab anti-semitism is taken for granted, but you have to walk on eggshells to even suggest that maybe some of Israel’s behavior is nakedly racist towards Arabs.

      • Miura
        March 12, 2011, 1:20 pm

        Not to mention anti-Racism==anti-Semitism. As the French philosopher Alain Finkielkraut puts it:

        ..traditional French anti-Semitism is bloodless, tired, moribund…the new anti-Semitism is, by contrast, vigorous, lively and continuously expanding. The old anti-Semitism of French pedigree is in its death throes, the new developing anti-Semitism expresses itself in the name of the religion of humanity. Not, in name of the nation, against the belief in the equality of people and the equality of human rights, but in name of the religion of humanity. The Jews are reproached for betraying these rights. It is an anti-Semitism one cannot accuse by referring to the past because it has nothing to do with the past. It is not an anti-Semitism of a racial type, against which people generally mobilize. It is an anti-racist anti-Semitism….We are not dealing here with racial hatred against which Jews could protest by dragging their detractors before tribunals. How can one combat anti-racist hatred? That is very difficult.

      • RoHa
        March 12, 2011, 11:24 pm

        “French philosopher”

        [Snort!]

  2. James North
    March 12, 2011, 9:51 am

    Horowitz’s lack of first-hand knowledge of Israel/Palestine is not that unusual. I know of many others, some of whom comment on this site, who talk endlessly about “Jewish self-governing” but have not gotten around to actually visiting Israel since, say, 1986.
    If I felt I were somehow entitled to “self-govern” somewhere else in the world, I would certainly regard it as my responsibility to see how my “other country” was doing. Israel is only a 10-12 hour nonstop plane trip from America’s east coast.
    In fact, I think many of the non-visitors are actually afraid of what they will see in Israel/Palestine. Staying away helps to maintain the illusion created in the film Exodus.

    • Sumud
      March 12, 2011, 9:58 am

      I hear you James North.

    • Richard Witty
      March 12, 2011, 9:58 am

      Interesting equation of me to Horowitz. How wierd a parallel. How reactionary a parallel.

      Have you read my blog? You think Horowitz thinks similarly?

      I expect that I would learn a lot by visiting Israel again. I want to.

      The opinion on self-governance is about civil rights, advocacy for a democracy. You should endorse the concept. It serves many many more than just Israelis.

      • Cliff
        March 12, 2011, 2:56 pm

        Witty, you’re Horowitz if he was wearing deodorant. Take it as a compliment.

      • Richard Witty
        March 12, 2011, 5:37 pm

        Thats just wierd Cliff.

      • Shingo
        March 12, 2011, 4:16 pm

        Have you read my blog?

        Stop using Mondoweiss to drum up traffic on your own failed blog. None reads your blog Witty. I don’t even think you do.

      • Richard Witty
        March 12, 2011, 5:38 pm

        Its the source of my independant thinking, not in reaction to what occurs here.

      • James North
        March 12, 2011, 5:55 pm

        Richard: What is the ratio of your writing on your own blog to your commenting on Mondoweiss? Somewhere around 1:10,000, no? (You let 1 to 2 weeks elapse between posts on your blog, something you certainly don’t do here.) If you truly want to think “independently,” instead of “reacting to what occurs here,” shouldn’t you start changing that lopsided ratio?

      • Richard Witty
        March 12, 2011, 6:16 pm

        I write weekly on my own blogs.

        AND, I write here on issues that I am particularly concerned about.

        Have you read my blog? What do you think? You can post there.

      • LeaNder
        March 13, 2011, 8:37 am

        Basic Witty rule: Every Jewish expression can ultimately be justified and must be embraced, to not do this would weaken the “the body of the Jewish people”.

        I think his views are representative of a rationally defensive Jewish community relative to historically exagerated and malevolent expressions of contempt towards Israel and those that sympathize. (As the vast majority of my and older generations sympathized with Israel, that is a large number that feel verbally assaulted.)

        It’s not Horowitz fault, his views including his views about African Americans, I suppose, can be explained on the basis of centuries of antisemitism. If a Jew embraces racist views they are ultimately self-defense, and if not completely legitimate then at least justified rationalizations.

    • LeaNder
      March 12, 2011, 10:01 am

      “Jewish self-governing”

      that’s why I have started to take a look at the concept–self-governance–and it’s history, development, application, legal context. Interesting recent studies over here too. ;)

    • Citizen
      March 12, 2011, 10:09 am

      Beck, the American poor man’s history teacher-philosopher, just had Horowitz on his show so together they could give their audience another hour of Beck’s 101 course. They worked seamlessly to enlighten those who thirst for knowledge but could never afford college–like Glen Beck himself.

  3. munro
    March 12, 2011, 10:38 am

    Horowitz, Geller, Spencer… undoing the cultural, academic and social achievements of Jews that provided the prestige that permitted creation of Israel.

    • Arnon Shwantzinger Too
      March 12, 2011, 11:00 am

      That’s how those other guys did it too… undoing the cultural, academic and social achievements of the Germans that provided the prestige that permitted creation of their nationalist-empire.

  4. David Samel
    March 12, 2011, 11:02 am

    I’m very surprised, shocked even, that Horowitz has never been to Israel, but I’m quite reluctant to criticize him for it. I think he and his opinions are despicable, but not because he hasn’t been there. Very few of us visited apartheid South Africa, and none of us visited Nazi Germany, but that does not stop us from voicing opinions about those situations.

    If Horowitz had been a regular visitor to Israel, surely his odious opinions would remain unchanged. He would shed tears at Sderot, experience virtual orgasms upon hearing personal stories of IDF troops, rave about diversity and openness and democracy, etc. Does Dershowitz deserve any more credit for his opinions because he has been a frequent visitor?

    My feelings are perhaps a little defensive, having visited Israel only once, years before Richard Witty did. I have heard several times that my opinions would change if I visited Israel, to which I usually reply that my critic’s opinions would change if he/she visited Gaza. But in any event, “I’ve been there, have you?” is a superficially appealing line that can be employed by those justifying very nasty things as well as those opposing them.

    • jon s
      March 12, 2011, 11:44 am

      People have a natural psychological tendency to see what they’re looking for, to reinforce their predetermined opinions. In other words, someone who is anti -Israel can spend his or her visit seeking out and finding only the negative aspects, and someone coming from the opposite side can find only the positive aspects.
      So visiting, and seeing things for yourself , is important, but it’s also important to be willing to see and hear multiple aspects of the situation.

      • Potsherd2
        March 12, 2011, 11:52 am

        Sometimes people are surprised. Their eyes are opened by experiences supposed to have the opposite effect.

      • Citizen
        March 12, 2011, 3:08 pm

        Many of the PTB believe this utterly, which is precisely why all those fresh and naive goy American congress people are given a staged tour of Israel for free nearly as soon as they take orifice. They don’t go to Gaza, for example. Nor do they get to speak with unfiltered Palestinians.

      • pjdude
        March 12, 2011, 1:37 pm

        there is nothing positive about Israel. nothing is ever good about the rape and theft of another people’s property and rights

      • annie
        March 12, 2011, 1:52 pm

        there are some really good people there pjdude. if one regards israel as its inhabitants and not the government or it’s policies than one comes to a different conclusion (assuming one finds even one person there they like, which is not hard to do in the left circles). that’s a big if tho. if one views israel as the goi or political construct like zionism my response doesn’t apply.

      • pjdude
        March 13, 2011, 3:06 am

        nothing good can come out of evil. no matter how many people have benefitted from some of Israel’s acts they are tainted by the evils that Israel has committed. perhaps it would help if I told I view Israelis as people who should be jewish palestinians

    • Avi
      March 12, 2011, 1:10 pm

      I have heard several times that my opinions would change if I visited Israel, to which I usually reply that my critic’s opinions would change if he/she visited Gaza. But in any event, “I’ve been there, have you?” is a superficially appealing line that can be employed by those justifying very nasty things as well as those opposing them.

      David, I don’t think a visit to the region would change your opinions.

      What I do think it would do is provide you with a dimension of understanding that is sure to ignite in you some inner rage and passion given the breathtaking scale of oppression.

      For example, it’s one thing to read about a Nazi concentration camp, and quite another to smell the stench and squalor forced on the prisoners by their oppressors, or the sound of deafening gunfire piercing one’s ears as a body falls lifeless to the ground with a thud.

      These things tend to leave one with a knowledge, feelings, images, smells and sounds that alter one’s understanding of the magnitude of it all.

      In other words, it’s one thing to imagine what it is like by reading about it, and quite another to actually be there on the ground and experience it.

      • David Samel
        March 12, 2011, 1:28 pm

        Avi, I completely agree with you that I would benefit from another visit to the region. My point is not that there is no advantage to seeing it firsthand, but that Horowitz’s failure to do so is a very minor reason to criticize him. It’s his disgraceful brazen racism that is infinitely worse.

      • Citizen
        March 12, 2011, 3:15 pm

        Yes, Horowitz’s brazen racism is accentuated by the fact he’s never visited Israel, let alone the Israeli occupied lands. He’s a spiritual partner with Glen Beck, which is why Beck has him on his show to preach to the American masses. You decide who is being tribal and who is being stupid.

  5. annie
    March 12, 2011, 11:30 am

    after watching this video one of the options that appeared @ the end was max’s interview w/RT. Zionist interest groups finance the hatemongering against Muslims is EXCELLENT.

  6. yourstruly
    March 12, 2011, 11:44 am

    While in Palestine a couple decades ago I met exactly one Palestinian who was anything other than pleased to come upon a Jewish-American supporter of justice for Palestine. This particular encounter was outside the Dome of the Rock. There were only a handful of people there, as it was during the First Intifada, and the IDF was restricting Palestinian access to the Dome. While washing my feet, prior to entering this third most sacred Islamic sife, I exchanged a few words with a young Palestinian who expressed disbelief upon hearing that I was a Jewish-American who supported the Palestinian people in their struggle for justice. I also gathered that he wasn’t pleased at my presence at the place from which Mohammed is said to have made his ascent to heaven. But that was it, one negative exchange out of the hundred or so that took place during a one week visit to Palestine, with all the other exchanges (in & around Old Jerusalem, Bethlehem, Ramallah and Gaza) characterized by overt expressions of surprise and happiness on the part of the Palestinians, at meeting someone from America who was on their side. Likewise in West Beirut during the ’82 U.S.-backed israeli siege, not one even remotely antisemitic comment during conversations with hundreds of Palestinians & Lebanese, most of whom knew I was Jewish (yourstruly informed them). And back in the good ol U.S. of A., upon meeting Palestinians and other Arabs, speaking at various rallies, not a hint of Jew-hating. Contrariwise, expressions such as “if only there were more Jews like you?” And of course, there are, with those who have had the opportunity to become involved in the Palestinian struggle invariably recalling how well received they were by Palestinians.

    From where then, these claims that Palestinians are Jew-haters? Out of the blue, that’s where – to rationalize the Zionist’s (whether Jewish or non-Jewish) hatred of the Palestinian.

    • Pamela Olson
      March 12, 2011, 12:33 pm

      Amen to that. I tour-guided several Israeli and Jewish people around the West Bank. We didn’t have a single problem. Quite the contrary. People were friendly, curious, and grateful that they were checking out the situation on the ‘other side.’

      It was frankly one of the most astonishing and humbling things this cynical American (raised with the admonition, “Never talk to strangers!”) had ever seen. And I saw it over and over and over. (As some of you know, several Israeli Jews, e.g. Amira Hass, have lived in Palestinian cities.) It gives me great hope in humanity’s better angels, that they can be expressed so regularly even in that situation.

      What’s our excuse?

      • Citizen
        March 12, 2011, 3:31 pm

        There’s no excuse, Pam. But there is the continual ignorance of the 98% goy population of the USA. Most of them just want to get a job, or keep one. And they don’t see any link between US domestic policy and US foreign Policy. They simply do not realize that for a US elected rep to get a trade for local jobs, that rep must pass the AIPAC litmus test.

  7. LeaNder
    March 12, 2011, 12:27 pm

    In memoriam Undercover Black Man, who helped me understand the deeper layers of my instinctive/intuitive disgust about David Horowitz–one of the players I was watching with heightened alarm. I was still startled and confused about what is going on at the time.

    Thank you David, requiescat in pace, what I love about religion is the tiny bit of hope we may meet again.

  8. Oscar
    March 12, 2011, 1:17 pm

    I can’t imagine what it must be like to be David Horowitz. He’s seething with an irrational hatred, a racism that is deep in his bones. His very presence projects bitterness and anger toward an entire class of people he’s devoted his life to demonizing, and his every waking moment is driven by an irrational paranoia where he believes people want to kill him because he’s Jewish. It’s a very weird and sad existence.

    • Citizen
      March 12, 2011, 3:35 pm

      Oscar, he LOVES being the little David v Goliath. You think he’s sane?

      • Oscar
        March 13, 2011, 9:55 pm

        Ha, Citizen, not sure about his sanity — my comment was about his anger. It’s the kind that chews you up. He’s a hater — do you see how his tone and volume rises when he characterizes the 4 million trapped Palestinians as “morally sick?”

        At least Pamela Geller has fun with her own special brand of hatred. She makes videos of herself frolicking in the surf at Miami Beach, with her kids in the background, as she coos and spews about “the Palis,” Hezbollah, Hamas, Eye-ran . . . link to youtube.com

        Girls just wanna have fun!

  9. talknic
    March 12, 2011, 1:18 pm

    Poor guy. Carrying that around inside him. His Hasbarrrow overfloweth

    • lareineblanche
      March 13, 2011, 11:54 am

      Indeed. This needs a laugh track, with some Benny Hill-type treatment. He’s out-clowned everybody as far as I’m concerned, and that’s quite an accomplishment considering the competition.

  10. ish
    March 12, 2011, 2:42 pm

    What creeps me out more than Horowitz is the majority of the audience that licks his words right up. Vile.

  11. Citizen
    March 12, 2011, 3:37 pm

    Horowitz is as creepy as any cult icon.

  12. Philip Munger
    March 13, 2011, 1:32 am

    Phil W is right – it was hard to watch.

    So is this – Bill Maher disappointing Keith Ellison.

  13. joelsk
    March 13, 2011, 9:41 am

    This heavily edited out-take ignores the most salient points Mr. Horowitz made during his talk at Brooklyn College, as well as the history involved with the prelude to the event. You should be ashamed at the derisive comments made in your postings without having any real knowledge of the event.

    • Sumud
      March 13, 2011, 9:57 am

      You should be ashamed at the derisive comments made in your postings without having any real knowledge of the event.

      Oh you mean Horowitz is really a sweet guy, not a small-time Goebbels? Yeah right. You should be ashamed for defending such people.

      • joelsk
        March 13, 2011, 7:37 pm

        Instead of name-calling, why don’t you read Horowitz’ version of what happened on his web site, and view the full video found there. On the contrary, he’s no Goebbels, but many who support the Palestinian cause are not only propagandists, but big time liars, as well.

      • Sumud
        March 13, 2011, 10:20 pm

        joelsk ~ I’ve seen and read enough of Horowitz (and those on his payroll such as Robert Spencer) that I can confidently say I’ve got his number and don’t need to see and read any more – until such time as I hear he’s issued a mea culpa for trying to do to muslims what Goebbels did for jews.

        …big time liars, as well.

        Well, you’re welcome to hang around and point out these ‘big time lies’ when and where you see them.

      • fuster
        March 13, 2011, 11:01 pm

        joel, as Sumud said, Horowitz offers little more than what any urban dweller might find on the bottom of a shoe.
        Robert Spencer offers less.

    • talknic
      March 13, 2011, 8:39 pm

      joelsk March 13, 2011 at 9:41 am

      What is not edited out negates anything he could have said that has been edited out.

      Fact: The majority of Palestinians have not been suicide bombers, have not fired a rocket, home made or otherwise, have not committed any terrorist act towards anyone, have not strapped their children up and sent them to kill Jews or anyone else.

      According to http://www.child-soldiers.org statistics, there has never actually been a suicide attack on Israel by a Palestinian child. According to Israeli military order, a Palestinian of 16 yrs and over is an adult. There has only been ONE Palestinian child arrested with explosives. (An unsuccessful suicide bombing is not a suicide bombing)

      Fact: A tiny, minority of extremists have been suicide bombers, have fired wonky home made rockets, have committed acts of terrorism. They have not controlled any Israeli territory, have not prevented Israel from trading with whoever it wishes. Have not bulldozed any Israeli homes, orchards, farms.Have not controlled any Israeli territory, have not prevented Israel from trading with whoever it wishes. Have not occupied any Israeli territory, have not bulldozed any Israeli homes, orchards, farms.

      Fact: The tiny minority of Palestinian terrorists have not dispossessed and Israeli’s. Have not controlled any Israeli territory, have not prevented Israel from trading with whoever it wishes. Have not bulldozed any Israeli homes, orchards, farms.

      Fact: Pre-Declaration Jewish terrorists, dispossessed non-Jews, razed homes, farms, entire villages, became the Israeli military and continued to dispossess non-Jews, raze homes, farms, entire villages. They are still doing it.

      Mr. Horowitz is an ignorant, bigoted, racist, bullsh*te artist for Israel. He is exactly the type of person who will NOT help resolve the situation

      • joelsk
        March 13, 2011, 9:04 pm

        So, a “tiny band of extremists” have managed to fire some 10,000+ rockets into Israel from Gaza and perhaps thousands more from the West Bank. Just a “tiny band of extremists” have committed suicide bombings, knifings, shootings and other acts of violence.

        This is one very busy “tiny band of extremists,” wouldn’t you say??

      • tree
        March 13, 2011, 10:45 pm

        So, a “tiny band of extremists” have managed to fire some 10,000+ rockets into Israel from Gaza…..This is one very busy “tiny band of extremists,” wouldn’t you say??

        Look at the math. Even if we assume that every rocket launch is perpetrated by a unique individual, who has never launched a rocket prior to that (a highly unlikely assumption) and that each rocket requires 2 people to fire it (another unlikely assumption) that means that the absolute number of people involved would be 20,000. Gaza has a population of 1.4 million people, so that 20,000 would be only 1.4% of the population. Even that inflated number of 20,000 is a very small part of the population of Gaza.

        Of course those original assumptions are highly unlikely and so the number of rocket firers is probably much smaller than that, probably on at least an order of ten, if not an order of 100, which would put the number of people involved at 200, each having launched 100 rockets over an eight year period, or 12 rockets on average per year, or once a month. Doesn’t sound very busy, does it?

        From Wikipedia, not my favorite source, but it does illustrate the point I want to make:

        Between 2005 and 2007, Palestinian groups in Gaza fired about 2,700 locally-made Qassam rockets into Israel, killing four Israeli civilians and injuring 75 others. During the same period, Israel fired more than 14,600 155mm artillery shells into the Gaza Strip, killing 59 Palestinians and injuring 270.

        link to en.wikipedia.org

        So, the IDF fired 5 times as many much more lethal artillery shells into Gaza during this time period, then the Qassam launchers fired into Israel, and killed 15 times as many civilians.

      • fuster
        March 13, 2011, 11:17 pm

        do the math. Israel has 7 million people. those 14,600 artillery shells could have been fired by a couple of hundred people.
        it might just be a small band of Libyans mercenaries hiding out in Israel hired by a private organization run by ex-generals from the People’s Liberation Army.

      • joelsk
        March 13, 2011, 11:29 pm

        I tend to believe those living in Sderot, who have witnessed over 10,000 Qassem rocket launches into their general neighborhood. It’s not the number of those killed by either side. It’s the nature of the conflict, which on the one side is meant to terrorize civilian populations and on the other side is to stop the incessant firing of projectiles into civilian areas.

        Hamas hides behind civilians as do the other terror gangs of Gaza. Where’s the cry of “war crimes?” “Palestinian” Arabs maintain arms caches in Mosques and schools. Where’s the cry of “war crimes?” In fact, there is none, because any reporter who would publish such truths would either be murdered by the Palestinians or summarily thrown out of Gaza (…but only if they were very, very lucky…)

      • fuster
        March 13, 2011, 11:45 pm

        Eyewitness testimony is notoriously unreliable and I wholeheartedly believe Hamas’ statement that those rockets where fired from a suburb of Minsk by groups over whom Hamas has little control and probably in the pay of those no-goodnik collaborationist lackey running dogs from the entity formerly known as the PLO.

      • tree
        March 13, 2011, 11:50 pm

        Fuster, sweetie, I’m glad to see your math is improving, but joelsk
        is the one making claims about how busy the qassam launchers are, not me. And unfortunately for your little knee-jerk snark, the IDF has already taken credit for all the firing into Gaza.

      • annie
        March 13, 2011, 11:55 pm

        one side is meant to terrorize civilian populations and on the other side is to stop the incessant firing of projectiles into civilian areas.

        so what about this? between 9/07 and 7/08.

        your argument is basically all conjecture on intent. one side intends to terrorize and the other intends to prevent being terrorized. a tad simplistic don’t you think? the ‘israel only responds’ narrative is a little stale and worn. especially after the gaza massacre when israel justified their slaughter on the rockets even though israel’s intelligence reported hamas wasn’t firing rockets during the ceasefire.

        hmm

      • fuster
        March 13, 2011, 11:58 pm

        annie, I’m not sure that I understand “conjuncture on intent” . possiibly I’m not the only confused person. would you explain that a bit?
        thank you.

      • Sumud
        March 14, 2011, 12:02 am

        do the math. Israel has 7 million people.

        In the first days of the 2nd intifadah Israel fired over a million projectiles (bullets, tear gas, shells, rockets, missiles).

      • Sumud
        March 14, 2011, 12:06 am

        the ‘israel only responds’ narrative is a little stale and worn.

        More than that annie, it’s been totally debunked. Israel is consistently the first to kill when a cease fire breaks down:

        Reigniting Violence: How Do Ceasefires End?

      • Cliff
        March 14, 2011, 12:14 am

        Yes, and everyone is required to serve in the military, frog.

      • tree
        March 14, 2011, 12:17 am

        It’s not the number of those killed by either side.

        Easily said by the side with much fewer casualties, and no military siege against it. I’m totally convinced by your arguments so far, that if the casualties had been tipped so far towards Israelis as they are now towards the Palestinians, that you would not make such an argument as the one above.

        Hamas hides behind civilians as do the other terror gangs of Gaza.

        As does the IDF, or do not most of the eligible citizens of Sderot serve in the IDF or the reserves? If you are going to call what Hamas members do, which is live in Gaza with their families, “hiding behind civilians”, then the same would apply to Israeli IDF members.

        “Palestinian” Arabs maintain arms caches in Mosques and schools.

        The IDF claims so, but then the IDF has been caught lying many a time and they are not a creditable source. Regardless, Israel has done the same thing in the past, maintaining arms caches in synagogues and schools, and even firing from them, as they did in 1948 from the Hurva Synagogue.

        It’s the nature of the conflict, which on the one side is meant to terrorize civilian populations and on the other side is to stop the incessant firing of projectiles into civilian areas.

        So which side is which?Really. We know from what the Israeli government has said that their intended purpose in enforcing the siege of Gaza was to collectively punish the Palestinians there in the hopes that they would revolt against Hamas. And the 14,600 155mm shells into Gaza didn’t stop the rockets, but the ceasefire with Hamas did. So what makes you so gullible as to believe that Israel was really interested in stopping the rockets when it fired all those lethal shells in 2006 and 2007, or when Israel broke the ceasefire in November 2008, or when it refused to lift the siege as agreed as part of the ceasefire agreement? Much of Israel’s actions were counterproductive to stopping rocket fire.

        The damage to Israel from the rockets has always been small and the PR opportunities with gullible folk like you have always been so useful that Israel doesn’t mind suffering the pinpricks, and repeatedly does things that increase the likelihood of their firings. In case you don’t know it, rocket fire from Gaza is fired in retaliation to Israeli shells just as much as the other way around. And the most successful strategy for stopping the rocket fire was agreeing to a ceasefire with Hamas. But Israel didn’t live up to all the terms, and then it broke the ceasefire.

      • annie
        March 14, 2011, 1:09 am

        i know sumud, stale and worn hardly does the old whore justice. they just keep humping that narrative as if she’s a spring chicken but she doesn’t look alive anymore does she?

        o well, necrophiliacs in hasbaraville. pardon my french.

      • annie
        March 14, 2011, 2:51 am

        annie, I’m not sure that I understand “conjuncture on intent”

        i meant conjecture of intent. meaning his theory is grounded in what he (allegedly) presumes intentions are, and israels are accordingly purely reactionary (iow boring redundant stupid and already debunked).

      • fuster
        March 14, 2011, 3:16 am

        thank you, annie, for the clarification

      • Sumud
        March 14, 2011, 6:06 am

        All ~ joelsk appears to be grossly overstating the number of Gaza rockets and just plain makin’ stuff about West Bank rockets:

        So, a “tiny band of extremists” have managed to fire some 10,000+ rockets into Israel from Gaza and perhaps thousands more from the West Bank.

        I tend to believe those living in Sderot, who have witnessed over 10,000 Qassem rocket launches into their general neighborhood.

        1. West Bank rockets: There have been several attempts by Palestinian groups to fire rockets at Israel from the West Bank, though none of these have been successful.

        2. Gaza rockets: according to a table on the same wiki page of numbers of casualties and rockets fired, which is populated with Israel MFA information, the number of rockets is nowhere near 10,000. The updated version of the table (footnoted as the source of the wiki table), current to January 2011, is here at the Jewish Policy Center.

        When I total up the numbers I get a total of 4,968 rockets fired. Not 10,000+ fired at Sderot’s “general neighbourhood”, but 4,968 in total – all of Israel. Recall, this is Israel MFA information.

        What is your source for claiming 10,000+ rockets have been fired at Sderot joelsk?

        The lead paragraph of the Palestinian rocket attacks on Israel wiki article states:

        Between 2001 and January 2009, over 8,600 rockets had been launched, leading to 28 deaths and several hundred injuries…

        The footnoted source is a BBC article from the end of the Gaza Massacre two years ago, and I can find no prior mention of that number, but plenty of later quoting of it, even in a November 2009 letter by the Israeli delegation to the UN whinging about how unfair the Goldstone Report was.

        So where have the other 3,600 rockets come from? How does the BBC get from Israel MFA’s under 5,000 to 8,600 rockets and joelsk to 10,000+?

        – – – – –

        At first I thought the discrepancy was to do with Qassam vs other rockets. Hamas uses Qassam, other groups make and use their own rockets, which have different specifications and names such as Quds, Nasser and even Sumud. (There has also been sporadic reports of imported Katushya and Grad rockets, but the number that appear to have been fired of those is in the tens, not thousands, that I can find.)

        The Jerusalem Policy Centre table, which I totalled to 4,968 above, claims to represent “Qassam Rockets Fired Per Year”. The other footnoted source of the wiki table on rockets fired is a May 2008 Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center report (it’s a PDF, link available on the wiki page). It uses the same numbers as the Jerusalem Policy Centre but labels them only as “Rocket Shell Fire”. I’m more incline to trust the Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center
        than the Jerusalem Policy Centre on ‘knowing their stuff’, and I presume the JC are using the name Qassam in a generic sense to describe all Gaza rockers.

        So that still leaves a deficit of thousands of rockets. Anyone? Is this just another great big Israeli lie, or have I missed something? After the incredibly PR fabrications that came out after the flotilla I believe Israelis have no problem whatsoever just making things up.

  14. Citizen
    March 13, 2011, 6:30 pm

    On the upside, fellow Americans, new happenings in Minnesota, the new economic bellweather state–the government there is actually going to look into all that state money foolishly invested in Israel bonds–let’s hope the current copycat states take notice: link to mn.breakthebonds.org

    • joelsk
      March 13, 2011, 7:38 pm

      Israel has fully paid its bond holders for the past 60 years. What have the Palestinians done with all the money the U.S. has “invested” in their so-called “government?”

      • fuster
        March 13, 2011, 9:30 pm

        Arafat’s widow might have a buck of two of it.

        But it’s kinda creepy to say that the money came from the US when they got gobs from Europe as well.

      • Cliff
        March 14, 2011, 12:15 am

        how often do the Palestinians get to VOTE for a government in the past 60 years? The US hasn’t done the Palestinians any favors, Zionist.

  15. Oscar
    March 13, 2011, 9:43 pm

    Joelsk noted that Horowitz had posted about the Mondo piece, and he was pissed. link to frontpagemag.com

    “No sooner was the video of my speech posted on the Internet than Philip Weiss who runs a blog for the Nation put up a version of the video, which had been edited with a hatchet. It is called “Horowitz Spews Hatred at Brooklyn College.” Weiss’s employer, the Nation magazine, has a long history of supporting America’s enemies and their genocidal activities — from the Communists in Russia to the Communists in Cambodia and Vietnam. It came as no surprise to me, therefore, that the Nation’s leftists would be enablers of the Islamic jihad against the democracies of the West and of the war against the Jews. But even I was taken aback by the ham-fisted dishonesty of the cut that Philip Weiss had tossed off without even a note to the unsuspecting that the video had been doctored.

    “In Weiss’s video I am seen accusing Palestinian terrorists of being Nazis and Palestinians of having sunk to a moral low unequalled in history. But the reasons for these judgments were consigned to the cutting room floor, so they appear to be merely the kind of bilious venom that the left itself is so adept at.”

    Note that when Horowitz complains that “I am seen accusing Palestinian terrorists of being Nazis and Palestinians of having sunk to a moral low unequalled in history,” it’s not that he denies it — it’s that his reasoning was edited out of the video. Horowitz is in freak-out mode now that he’s being called an anti-Muslim bigot for his spewage, and he’s as clueless as Marty Peretz, who didn’t understand why his brand of racism was no longer tolerable. It’s amazing how Helen Thomas can make a single, spontaneous career-ending comment about Palestine, while David Horowitz gets paid an honorarium to spew for a full hour about his irrational hatred for Muslims. Brooklyn College should have had David Duke there to even out the neo-con hasbara-ssing extremism.

    • fuster
      March 13, 2011, 10:28 pm

      Helen Thomas only had a problem because she was somebody’s employee and far past her sell-by date anyway.
      She would have no trouble getting paid to give talks about her brand of superannuated prejudices either.
      She certainly would be a damn sight more interesting.
      Hell, she might even do better than Bristol Palin.

      • fuster
        March 14, 2011, 12:07 am

        Sorry Sumud, but I enjoyed her act and it wasn’t really sustainable any longer.
        She should have stuck with being a newspaperwoman instead of trying for being a(n occasional) tv personality as well.
        She traded on an image and you can’t be the curmudgeonly but cute old-time granny once you let your angry demons out in public.

      • tree
        March 14, 2011, 12:24 am

        Oh yes! Wrinkly old person = bad.

        I think its more specific than that with fuster. Its wrinkly old WOMAN=bad. That would explain his nasty swipes at annie. I believe he thinks the worst insult you can call a woman is “old”. Old women are not to be seen nor heard.

      • annie
        March 14, 2011, 1:19 am

        yikes, i’m no spring chicken but i swam a mile today in less than an hr.

        pllllease.

        that said i love helen, old not old..i hope i’m still kickin when i’m her age, she’s the grande tamale.

      • fuster
        March 14, 2011, 1:21 am

        tree. annie is probably younger than I.
        you remain fit for little more than a backdrop for the wondrous

        link to animationarchive.org

        the explanation for the swipes at little annie is simply that she swings more than she’s swung at.

        (the only person that I’ve noted on this blog saying nasty things at people due to their age was that chaotic kid from Wisconsin telling some lady that she needed a touch-up on her hair bluing and some more embalming fluid.)

      • tree
        March 14, 2011, 1:26 am

        Hey, can anyone explain why two of my earlier posts are still in moderation but this one went through. My other posts were much less snarky than this one, so I don’t think they were held up for content.

      • fuster
        March 14, 2011, 1:28 am

        heck, I could run that far in an hour!

      • tree
        March 14, 2011, 1:41 am

        the explanation for the swipes at little annie is simply that she swings more than she’s swung at.

        Your explanation seems a bit self-oblivious. Why the swipe’s at annie as “grandma” in earlier threads?

        OT, but woodpecker’s don’t really harm trees. You need to get out of NYC more and learn a few things about nature. You’re much too sheltered for a frog.

      • annie
        March 14, 2011, 2:05 am

        i said under an hr. people don’t run miles in an hr. an average person can walk 3 miles per hr.

        ;)

      • fuster
        March 14, 2011, 2:20 am

        people don’t run miles in an hr. an average person can walk 3 miles per hr.—

        no spit, annie. but my legs, though extremely well muscled, are really not well-suited to running.
        I could hop a mile in 6 or 7 minutes and swim one in less, but running’s a real ribbiting challenge and you might think people would understand that!

        link to danoverholt.com

      • fuster
        March 14, 2011, 2:25 am

        @ the tree

        good night, sweet sapling. parting is no sorrel at all.

      • annie
        March 14, 2011, 2:39 am

        thank you tree. that is very sweet of you sticking up for me. this is certainly not the first time i’ve realized what an idiot i’ve been responding to a frog. o well, lapses in judgment and all that.

      • Sumud
        March 14, 2011, 2:48 am

        but my legs, though extremely well muscled, are really not well-suited to running

        Frog Legs Dancing With A Little Salt

      • fuster
        March 14, 2011, 3:11 am

        Sumud,

        I was leery but looking forward to seeing it. too bad your link is on the blink.
        but allow me to serve this up this old favorite …

      • Sumud
        March 14, 2011, 4:17 am
      • Sumud
        March 14, 2011, 4:22 am

        PS moderator/webmaster ~ what became of the html tags in the ‘Leave a comment’ windows? >> I found it very handy for longer tags (eg. a href=”” title=””) to copy the code from the list rather than write it out manually each time. Less important for current MW’ers who already know the tags but the list of tags would also be handy for new readers.. Any chance of it returning?

      • Cliff
        March 14, 2011, 12:17 am

        Frog, Helen Thomas isn’t prejudiced at all. She is simply telling colonists to go back to where they came from. Jews from Brooklyn are stealing Palestinian land.

      • fuster
        March 14, 2011, 1:47 am

        Cliff, don’t bother.
        That wasn’t the message and I’m not debating the point. The recordings are available.

    • Potsherd2
      March 13, 2011, 11:47 pm

      Am I the only person who suspects that “joelsk” is perhaps a pseudonym for a more well-known personage? He certainly seems to be dedicated to the defense of the horowitz.

Leave a Reply