From Arrigoni to Bernadotte to RFK to 9/11– how much global damage has this conflict produced?

Whoever the fanatics are that killed Vittorio Arrigoni and Juliano Mer-Khamis in Palestine in the last two weeks, it can be safely said that the occupation killed these good men: that they died because the denial of freedom for Palestinians over 44 years of military occupation has produced despair and radicalism and brutalization, and called on great souls to act. If the occupation were happening in New Jersey, we would be far more violent than the Palestinians have been. 

Arrigoni was drawn to the conflict from Italy. Because world governments had so failed to enforce the Geneva Conventions and secure the rights of fishermen and mothers and farmers and children under collective punishment, he left his country to become a human shield. He was a brave, handsome, lionhearted man, and he knew for three years that his life was in danger. I have met other volunteers for the International Solidarity Movement who are as idealistic and courageous as Arrigoni. And I have read enough by and about Rachel Corrie, the ISM volunteer who was killed by the Israelis in 2003, to know that hers was the finest moral spirit that America produces. Gone. 

And I just want to pause tonight to reflect on how many people outside the actual parties to this conflict have been affected by it now, and how many of them have been killed. From the time that Jacob de Haan was killed in Holland in 1924 for being an anti-Zionist to England’s Lord Moyne killed in Palestine in 1944 for his opposition to Zionism, to the Stern gang’s killing of the Swede Folke Bernadotte in 1948 for his plan to internationalize Jerusalem and restore the UN Partition line, the violence inside the conflict has radiated out and destroyed others. Just last year Israel killed nine unarmed Turkish men who were moved by Gaza’s suffering to risk their lives on the high seas. The youngest of them was also an American, Furkan Dogan, and the same day young Emily Henochowicz, an American artist, was blinded in her left eye by the Israelis during a protest at a checkpoint. And yes another Israeli teargas canister maimed American Tristan Anderson a couple of years ago. 

Most of these people were called to the conflict by the injustice. But if you expand the category to include collateral damage, well then you begin to comprise the thousands of Americans killed on 9/11– for even the 9/11 commission has acknowledged that a root cause of the hijackers’ action was anger over Palestine, and bin Laden has said so too. And any fair audit would have to include Bobby Kennedy, the charismatic American leader whose support of Israel cost him his life in ’68.

Take it further and you can say that the Iraq war, with its destruction of an entire society and tens of thousands of people, had a source in this conflict and the neoconservatives’ idea of how to end it. And the oppression of 84 million Egyptians for 30 years under a tyrant at the behest of the United States– this also was rationalized as the cost of containing this intractable problem next door.

I like to think of myself as a realist; well this body count is hardly realistic. And no wonder realists have been among the most vocal opponents of the occupation. Because they know this list– a list that our media never tallies, let alone asks us to consider, Is that enough? 

I am not even talking about the parties themselves. I’m not talking about the Israelis killed by suicide bombers or by rockets in Sderot, nor the hundreds of thousands of Palestinian refugees created in ’48, nor all the dead of Cast Lead. I’m not talking about Chaim Arlosoroff murdered by Zionist thugs on the beach in Tel Aviv in ’33, nor Yitzhak Rabin murdered a few miles away in ’95. Nor Jawaher Abu Rahmah killed by Israeli tear gas last year or her brother Bassem killed by tear gas the year before that.

No I am talking about the price that this conflict has demanded of the world. And in the name of beautiful Vittorio Arrigoni, I ask, How many seas must the white dove sail before she can sleep in the sand?

About Philip Weiss

Philip Weiss is Founder and Co-Editor of Mondoweiss.net.
Posted in Israel/Palestine

{ 0 comments... read them below or add one }

  1. Avi says:

    You forgot to mention Jews from Arab countries who were forced by Zionist agencies and their actions to leave homelands, to leave their own villas and move to Israel where they were treated with racist patronizing condescension as were my own parents, where they were forced to ‘assimilate’ by forgetting their language, their culture, and their own names as many were Hebrewized. And let us not forget the alienation they felt when they were sprayed with de-licers upon arrival in Israel as they were considered to be ‘unclean’, or the squalid conditions in which they were housed in Ma’barot to serve as the labor force for the ‘civilized’ racist Zionist Europeans.

    And some wonder why I am an anti-Zionist. Zionism is a cancer that infects anyone who comes near it. And it has killed many, as it killed Vittorio Arrigoni.

    • Danaa says:

      Avi, I think I am beginning to understand wherefrom your rage. I did not realize you were from Mizrahi background (was, for some reason, convinced you were Canadian or something; don’t ask me how I came up with that). You’ve certainly acquired some fine English over the years.

      Your post is true – those romantic tales of the “in-gathering’ of the exiles I grew up with, was in truth tinged with more tragedy than romance. A tragedy seemingly without end, because it had such compromised – some would say, twisted – beginnings.

      • Avi says:

        Danaa April 17, 2011 at 1:53 am

        You’ve certainly acquired some fine English over the years.

        Yessum, thaat they negro boy sho’ is eloquent

        • Danaa says:

          Avi, you know I meant for someone who grew up in Israel, because you know the English spoken by the native there. I am in the same boat – learnt most of my English – written and spoken – the hard way, as an adult.

          PS you seem hard on Shmuel lately (and he really is originally Canadian). He would never say anything remotely close to what this Samuel poster did (who is a zio-troll, probably paid – not handsomely, to judge by the quality). I haves seen posts from Shmuel recounting – and decrying – some of the same events (cf the welcome mat spread for the Sephardi) that you have.

        • Samuel says:

          Danaa
          Just for the record:
          I’m not a “zio-troll”
          Don’t get paid
          Don’t give grades to other writers as per their quality.
          I just have an opinion different to yours and to others as per the facts and the possible solutions to the I/P conflict.
          If anyone does get paid it’s those who seem to have the time to write on all and every comment on-line and never seeming to leave the blog – don’t they have jobs?

        • Mooser says:

          He shall be known henceforth as “Avi the Articulate”.

        • Mooser says:

          Any Avi, don’t try any of your Mizrahi one-upmanship on me! I’ll have you know I may be descended from the great Joseph Silver, the man whose life was detailed in Charles Van Onselen’s “The Fox and the Flies”.

        • Shmuel says:

          Danaa,

          Hell hath no fury like an orthodox radical who thinks he’s spotted a crypto-whatever. He’s even confusing his ays and his aitches.

        • Danaa says:

          Shmuel, Avi
          I wish you guys would find a way to make up. There are altogether too few of us, and the furies arrayed against us are all too powerful.

          I am sure that on this, I speak on behalf of all the posters on this blog.

        • Avi says:

          Danaa,

          I was merely joking with you. With the sentence that preceded the one I quoted, it was clear to me what you meant.

        • James North says:

          I agree with Danaa 10,000 percent. You two have taught me a tremendous amount over the years. You are both men of vast knowledge and tremendous principle, and although I’m not going to disrespect you by mimimizing your differences, you obviously have much more in common.

        • Shmuel says:

          Don’t worry about it Danaa. It’ll blow over before you know it, and MW will go back to being just one big happy family :-)

        • LeaNder says:

          Joseph Silver: there is no end to the Jack the Ripper suspects it seems. Lately I heard another tale about a German sailor (his ships were present in London at the time, that already was a suspicion by the Queen at the time, a sailor) who went on to New York to work as a gardener and continued with his business there, till he was arrested.

        • annie says:

          danaa speaks on behalf of me!

        • LeoBraun says:

          “I’m not a ‘zio-troll’. Don’t get paid. Don’t give grades to other writers as per their quality. I just have an opinion different to yours and to others as per the facts and the possible solutions to the I/P conflict”. [Samuel]

          The best hasbara: Israeli govt step up front groups in social media sites!

          Haaretz: The Foreign Ministry use front groups to transmit hasbara (public relations ) messages in order to influence senior politicians, opinion shapers and journalists, ministry sources said. The goal is to create a public diplomacy track parallel to the one used by the Foreign Ministry, whose message does not bear the “fingerprints” of the Israeli govt, the source said.

          Dozens of Israeli embassies received an urgent telegram from Jerusalem, entitled, “Mapping of personalities with influence”. The correspondence was signed by a number of senior ministry officials, including Alon Ushpiz, the coordination chief in the director general’s office. The document asked all embassies and consulates to submit a list of people who are considered to be influential in their countries.

          The diplomats were surprised at the request for the individuals’ telephone numbers, mailing addresses and e-mail addresses. “Please fill in the list of the names of the most influential people in the following fields”, the document read. “State leaders – president and/or prime minister and staff, parliament speaker, 10-15 prominent members of parliament, up to five heads of important nongovt organizations, and up to 10 key journalists”.

          Initially, some ambassadors were concerned that the foreign minister’s bureau and the director general intended to “bypass” the embassies and forge direct contacts with important figures in the various countries. “There was a sense that [the ministry] was trying to go over our heads”, said one ambassador stationed in a European capital. Other envoys were fearful that Jerusalem planned to enlist the services of private European lobbying firms that would shoulder some of the public relations responsibilities normally reserved for the embassies.

          “For a while now there has been a feeling that [Foreign Minister Avigdor] Lieberman is dissatisfied with the diplomats, and there was speculation that he wants to privatize Israel’s hasbara [public relations efforts]“, said one ambassador. A few of the diplomats actually felt that entrusting the work to private firms could improve Israel’s ability to explain its positions in Europe.

          Haaretz has learned, however, that the ministry’s intent is to create a semi-official PR organ whose work will be directed by Jerusalem, but will be represented by front groups so that their messages do not bear the imprimatur of the govt.

          “When an Israeli ambassador speaks of Palestinian incitement or weapons smuggling from Syria to Hezbollah – the Europeans immediately cast doubt on it”, said a senior Israeli diplomat. “But if those same messages are delivered by someone who supposedly has no official ties to Israel, it is likely to be more effective”. In addition, ministry sources say such a system will enable Israel to convey messages that it cannot issue officially for political and security reasons.

        • annie says:

          But if those same messages are delivered by someone who supposedly has no official ties to Israel, it is likely to be more effective”.

          oh please. what kind of idiots do they take us for. count on your fingers and toes how many times a poster on one of these threads has informed us he is from the foreign ministry? ok just your fingers? how about thumbs only? how about never. when will they understand it’s not the identity of the poster it’s the message.

          we know

    • Daniel Rich says:

      Hi Avi,

      Q: And let us not forget the alienation they felt when they were sprayed with de-licers upon arrival in Israel

      R: I cannot think of a more degrading and, in historical perspective, cynical ‘welcome.’ I’m really sorry to hear this.

      As to the killing – I can only speculate [not privy to the facts], but I tend to think along the line of [if or when an accident can be ruled out], who benefits? If this was some fringe group opposed against Hamas’ rule, would it be possible that they received some Israeli [military] help? There’s one more option, but that too would be pure speculation.

    • Samuel says:

      Avi
      You really twisted the argument.
      When Israelis claim that Palestinians were “encouraged” to leave their villages in 48 by the Arab leadership all hell breaks loose here, as it is claimed that the Israelis “expelled” the Palestinians.
      Now you do the exact same invention of “hasbara” that the Jews of Sepharadi origin were “encouraged” to leave their homes by the Zionists instaed of the truth that they were expelled brutally without their possessions by nearly every Arab country in the late 4os and 50s.

      Sometimes lies are so big that people come to actually believe them!

      I’m sorry that your parents suffered by the hands of ashkenazim on their arrival, but your chip on your shoulder has seemingly grown too big to bear and hence your rage blinds your vision of the facts.
      For instance, if the Zionists “forced” your parents to leave, why did they need to leave without their possessions and live in a maabara? Didn’t their enlightened country of origin let them sell their property first, or rather give them financial encouragement to stay?

      • Avi says:

        Shmuel, one of your major problems is your Ashkenazi superiority complex where you pretend to be this enlightened, fair, even-handed sage, a fountain of wisdom.

        But, your sickness is that you speak out of your ass and expect to be worshiped, especially when you don’t know what you are talking about.

        And your balderdash comment is disgusting on several levels, so much so that to dignify it with a detailed response would be an insult. Give me a statement to read out-loud why don’t you, one that agrees with your revisionism, lest I stray from the hunky-dory narrative that you peddle. Write an op-ed like Goldstone’s. It might work for you.

        Still, to get a clue, I suggest you read this book:

        link to amazon.com

        Notice that I didn’t write it. So my “twisted” argument is not mine alone, you shmuck.

        • ddi says:

          Umm, this is a different poster, S-a-m-u-e-l.

        • Citizen says:

          Let’s see, given the historical reach of Phil’s article here, and Avi’s supplement to it (which parallels the Transfer Agreement regarding ruthless Zionism, as distinguished from Torah Judiasm), I take the liberty of another voice, from another oh-so-key-time and place: 1947, Palestine–this message was ignored then by the US-led PTB, as it is now, though so still highly relevant:

          “As the Arabs see the Jews”
          His Majesty King Abdullah,
          The American Magazine
          November, 1947

          Summary

          This fascinating essay, written by King Hussein’s grandfather King Abdullah, appeared in the United States six months before the 1948 Arab-Israeli War. In the article, King Abdullah disputes the mistaken view that Arab opposition to Zionism (and later the state of Israel) is because of longstanding religious or ethnic hatred. He notes that Jews and Muslims enjoyed a long history of peaceful coexistence in the Middle East, and that Jews have historically suffered far more at the hands of Christian Europe. Pointing to the tragedy of the holocaust that Jews suffered during World War II, the monarch asks why America and Europe are refusing to accept more than a token handful of Jewish immigrants and refugees. It is unfair, he argues, to make Palestine, which is innocent of anti-Semitism, pay for the crimes of Europe. King Abdullah also asks how Jews can claim a historic right to Palestine, when Arabs have been the overwhelming majority there for nearly 1300 uninterrupted years? The essay ends on an ominous note, warning of dire consequences if a peaceful solution cannot be found to protect the rights of the indigenous Arabs of Palestine.

          “As the Arabs see the Jews”
          His Majesty King Abdullah,
          The American Magazine
          November, 1947

          I am especially delighted to address an American audience, for the tragic problem of Palestine will never be solved without American understanding, American sympathy, American support.

          So many billions of words have been written about Palestine—perhaps more than on any other subject in history—that I hesitate to add to them. Yet I am compelled to do so, for I am reluctantly convinced that the world in general, and America in particular, knows almost nothing of the true case for the Arabs.

          We Arabs follow, perhaps far more than you think, the press of America. We are frankly disturbed to find that for every word printed on the Arab side, a thousand are printed on the Zionist side.

          There are many reasons for this. You have many millions of Jewish citizens interested in this question. They are highly vocal and wise in the ways of publicity. There are few Arab citizens in America, and we are as yet unskilled in the technique of modern propaganda.

          The results have been alarming for us. In your press we see a horrible caricature and are told it is our true portrait. In all justice, we cannot let this pass by default.

          Our case is quite simple: For nearly 2,000 years Palestine has been almost 100 per cent Arab. It is still preponderantly Arab today, in spite of enormous Jewish immigration. But if this immigration continues we shall soon be outnumbered—a minority in our home.

          Palestine is a small and very poor country, about the size of your state of Vermont. Its Arab population is only about 1,200,000. Already we have had forced on us, against our will, some 600,000 Zionist Jews. We are threatened with many hundreds of thousands more.

          Our position is so simple and natural that we are amazed it should even be questioned. It is exactly the same position you in America take in regard to the unhappy European Jews. You are sorry for them, but you do not want them in your country.

          We do not want them in ours, either. Not because they are Jews, but because they are foreigners. We would not want hundreds of thousands of foreigners in our country, be they Englishmen or Norwegians or Brazilians or whatever.

          Think for a moment: In the last 25 years we have had one third of our entire population forced upon us. In America that would be the equivalent of 45,000,000 complete strangers admitted to your country, over your violent protest, since 1921. How would you have reacted to that?

          Because of our perfectly natural dislike of being overwhelmed in our own homeland, we are called blind nationalists and heartless anti-Semites. This charge would be ludicrous were it not so dangerous.

          No people on earth have been less “anti-Semitic” than the Arabs. The persecution of the Jews has been confined almost entirely to the Christian nations of the West. Jews, themselves, will admit that never since the Great Dispersion did Jews develop so freely and reach such importance as in Spain when it was an Arab possession. With very minor exceptions, Jews have lived for many centuries in the Middle East, in complete peace and friendliness with their Arab neighbours.

          Damascus, Baghdad, Beirut and other Arab centres have always contained large and prosperous Jewish colonies. Until the Zionist invasion of Palestine began, these Jews received the most generous treatment—far, far better than in Christian Europe. Now, unhappily, for the first time in history, these Jews are beginning to feel the effects of Arab resistance to the Zionist assault. Most of them are as anxious as Arabs to stop it. Most of these Jews who have found happy homes among us resent, as we do, the coming of these strangers.

          I was puzzled for a long time about the odd belief which apparently persists in America that Palestine has somehow “always been a Jewish land.” Recently an American I talked to cleared up this mystery. He pointed out that the only things most Americans know about Palestine are what they read in the Bible. It was a Jewish land in those days, they reason, and they assume it has always remained so.

          Nothing could be farther from the truth. It is absurd to reach so far back into the mists of history to argue about who should have Palestine today, and I apologise for it. Yet the Jews do this, and I must reply to their “historic claim.” I wonder if the world has ever seen a stranger sight than a group of people seriously pretending to claim a land because their ancestors lived there some 2,000 years ago!

          If you suggest that I am biased, I invite you to read any sound history of the period and verify the facts.

          Such fragmentary records as we have indicate that the Jews were wandering nomads from Iraq who moved to southern Turkey, came south to Palestine, stayed there a short time, and then passed to Egypt, where they remained about 400 years. About 1300 BC (according to your calendar) they left Egypt and gradually conquered most—but not all—of the inhabitants of Palestine.

          It is significant that the Philistines—not the Jews—gave their name to the country: “Palestine” is merely the Greek form of “Philistia.”

          Only once, during the empire of David and Solomon, did the Jews ever control nearly—but not all—the land which is today Palestine. This empire lasted only 70 years, ending in 926 BC. Only 250 years later the Kingdom of Judah had shrunk to a small province around Jerusalem, barely a quarter of modern Palestine.

          In 63 BC the Jews were conquered by Roman Pompey, and never again had even the vestige of independence. The Roman Emperor Hadrian finally wiped them out about 135 AD. He utterly destroyed Jerusalem, rebuilt under another name, and for hundreds of years no Jew was permitted to enter it. A handful of Jews remained in Palestine but the vast majority were killed or scattered to other countries, in the Diaspora, or the Great Dispersion. From that time Palestine ceased to be a Jewish country, in any conceivable sense.

          This was 1,815 years ago, and yet the Jews solemnly pretend they still own Palestine! If such fantasy were allowed, how the map of the world would dance about!

          Italians might claim England, which the Romans held so long. England might claim France, “homeland” of the conquering Normans. And the French Normans might claim Norway, where their ancestors originated. And incidentally, we Arabs might claim Spain, which we held for 700 years.

          Many Mexicans might claim Spain, “homeland” of their forefathers. They might even claim Texas, which was Mexican until 100 years ago. And suppose the American Indians claimed the “homeland” of which they were the sole, native, and ancient occupants until only some 450 years ago!

          I am not being facetious. All these claims are just as valid—or just as fantastic—as the Jewish “historic connection” with Palestine. Most are more valid.

          In any event, the great Moslem expansion about 650 AD finally settled things. It dominated Palestine completely. From that day on, Palestine was solidly Arabic in population, language, and religion. When British armies entered the country during the last war, they found 500,000 Arabs and only 65,000 Jews.

          If solid, uninterrupted Arab occupation for nearly 1,300 years does not make a country “Arab”, what does?

          The Jews say, and rightly, that Palestine is the home of their religion. It is likewise the birthplace of Christianity, but would any Christian nation claim it on that account? In passing, let me say that the Christian Arabs—and there are many hundreds of thousands of them in the Arab World—are in absolute agreement with all other Arabs in opposing the Zionist invasion of Palestine.

          May I also point out that Jerusalem is, after Mecca and Medina, the holiest place in Islam. In fact, in the early days of our religion, Moslems prayed toward Jerusalem instead of Mecca.

          The Jewish “religious claim” to Palestine is as absurd as the “historic claim.” The Holy Places, sacred to three great religions, must be open to all, the monopoly of none. Let us not confuse religion and politics.

          We are told that we are inhumane and heartless because do not accept with open arms the perhaps 200,000 Jews in Europe who suffered so frightfully under Nazi cruelty, and who even now—almost three years after war’s end—still languish in cold, depressing camps.

          Let me underline several facts. The unimaginable persecution of the Jews was not done by the Arabs: it was done by a Christian nation in the West. The war which ruined Europe and made it almost impossible for these Jews to rehabilitate themselves was fought by the Christian nations of the West. The rich and empty portions of the earth belong, not to the Arabs, but to the Christian nations of the West.

          And yet, to ease their consciences, these Christian nations of the West are asking Palestine—a poor and tiny Moslem country of the East—to accept the entire burden. “We have hurt these people terribly,” cries the West to the East. “Won’t you please take care of them for us?”

          We find neither logic nor justice in this. Are we therefore “cruel and heartless nationalists”?

          We are a generous people: we are proud that “Arab hospitality” is a phrase famous throughout the world. We are a humane people: no one was shocked more than we by the Hitlerite terror. No one pities the present plight of the desperate European Jews more than we.

          But we say that Palestine has already sheltered 600,000 refugees. We believe that is enough to expect of us—even too much. We believe it is now the turn of the rest of the world to accept some of them.

          I will be entirely frank with you. There is one thing the Arab world simply cannot understand. Of all the nations of the earth, America is most insistent that something be done for these suffering Jews of Europe. This feeling does credit to the humanity for which America is famous, and to that glorious inscription on your Statue of Liberty.

          And yet this same America—the richest, greatest, most powerful nation the world has ever known—refuses to accept more than a token handful of these same Jews herself!

          I hope you will not think I am being bitter about this. I have tried hard to understand that mysterious paradox, and I confess I cannot. Nor can any other Arab.

          Perhaps you have been informed that “the Jews in Europe want to go to no other place except Palestine.”

          This myth is one of the greatest propaganda triumphs of the Jewish Agency for Palestine, the organisation which promotes with fanatic zeal the emigration to Palestine. It is a subtle half-truth, thus doubly dangerous.

          The astounding truth is that nobody on earth really knows where these unfortunate Jews really want to go!

          You would think that in so grave a problem, the American, British, and other authorities responsible for the European Jews would have made a very careful survey, probably by vote, to find out where each Jew actually wants to go. Amazingly enough this has never been done! The Jewish Agency has prevented it.

          Some time ago the American Military Governor in Germany was asked at a press conference how he was so certain that all Jews there wanted to go to Palestine. His answer was simple: “My Jewish advisors tell me so.” He admitted no poll had ever been made. Preparations were indeed begun for one, but the Jewish Agency stepped in to stop it.

          The truth is that the Jews in German camps are now subjected to a Zionist pressure campaign which learned much from the Nazi terror. It is dangerous for a Jew to say that he would rather go to some other country, not Palestine. Such dissenters have been severely beaten, and worse.

          Not long ago, in Palestine, nearly 1,000 Austrian Jews informed the international refugee organisation that they would like to go back to Austria, and plans were made to repatriate them.

          The Jewish Agency heard of this, and exerted enough political pressure to stop it. It would be bad propaganda for Zionism if Jews began leaving Palestine. The nearly 1,000 Austrian are still there, against their will.

          The fact is that most of the European Jews are Western in culture and outlook, entirely urban in experience and habits. They cannot really have their hearts set on becoming pioneers in the barren, arid, cramped land which is Palestine.

          One thing, however, is undoubtedly true. As matters stand now, most refugee Jews in Europe would, indeed, vote for Palestine, simply because they know no other country will have them.

          If you or I were given a choice between a near-prison camp for the rest of our lives—or Palestine—we would both choose Palestine, too.

          But open up any other alternative to them—give them any other choice, and see what happens!

          No poll, however, will be worth anything unless the nations of the earth are willing to open their doors—just a little—to the Jews. In other words, if in such a poll a Jew says he wants to go to Sweden, Sweden must be willing to accept him. If he votes for America, you must let him come in.

          Any other kind of poll would be a farce. For the desperate Jew, this is no idle testing of opinion: this is a grave matter of life or death. Unless he is absolutely sure that his vote means something, he will always vote for Palestine, so as not to risk his bird in the hand for one in the bush.

          In any event, Palestine can accept no more. The 65,000 Jews in Palestine in 1918 have jumped to 600,000 today. We Arabs have increased, too, but not by immigration. The Jews were then a mere 11 per cent of our population. Today they are one third of it.

          The rate of increase has been terrifying. In a few more years—unless stopped now—it will overwhelm us, and we shall be an important minority in our own home.

          Surely the rest of the wide world is rich enough and generous enough to find a place for 200,000 Jews—about one third the number that tiny, poor Palestine has already sheltered. For the rest of the world, it is hardly a drop in the bucket. For us it means national suicide.

          We are sometimes told that since the Jews came to Palestine, the Arab standard of living has improved. This is a most complicated question. But let us even assume, for the argument, that it is true. We would rather be a bit poorer, and masters of our own home. Is this unnatural?

          The sorry story of the so-called “Balfour Declaration,” which started Zionist immigration into Palestine, is too complicated to repeat here in detail. It is grounded in broken promises to the Arabs—promises made in cold print which admit no denying.

          We utterly deny its validity. We utterly deny the right of Great Britain to give away Arab land for a “national home” for an entirely foreign people.

          Even the League of Nations sanction does not alter this. At the time, not a single Arab state was a member of the League. We were not allowed to say a word in our own defense.

          I must point out, again in friendly frankness, that America was nearly as responsible as Britain for this Balfour Declaration. President Wilson approved it before it was issued, and the American Congress adopted it word for word in a joint resolution on 30th June, 1922.

          In the 1920s, Arabs were annoyed and insulted by Zionist immigration, but not alarmed by it. It was steady, but fairly small, as even the Zionist founders thought it would remain. Indeed for some years, more Jews left Palestine than entered it—in 1927 almost twice as many.

          But two new factors, entirely unforeseen by Britain or the League or America or the most fervent Zionist, arose in the early thirties to raise the immigration to undreamed heights. One was the World Depression; the second the rise of Hitler.

          In 1932, the year before Hitler came to power, only 9,500 Jews came to Palestine. We did not welcome them, but we were not afraid that, at that rate, our solid Arab majority would ever be in danger.

          But the next year—the year of Hitler—it jumped to 30,000! In 1934 it was 42,000! In 1935 it reached 61,000!

          It was no longer the orderly arrival of idealist Zionists. Rather, all Europe was pouring its frightened Jews upon us. Then, at last, we, too, became frightened. We knew that unless this enormous influx stopped, we were, as Arabs, doomed in our Palestine homeland. And we have not changed our minds.

          I have the impression that many Americans believe the trouble in Palestine is very remote from them, that America had little to do with it, and that your only interest now is that of a humane bystander.

          I believe that you do not realise how directly you are, as a nation, responsible in general for the whole Zionist move and specifically for the present terrorism. I call this to your attention because I am certain that if you realise your responsibility you will act fairly to admit it and assume it.

          Quite aside from official American support for the “National Home” of the Balfour Declaration, the Zionist settlements in Palestine would have been almost impossible, on anything like the current scale, without American money. This was contributed by American Jewry in an idealistic effort to help their fellows.

          The motive was worthy: the result were disastrous. The contributions were by private individuals, but they were almost entirely Americans, and, as a nation, only America can answer for it.

          The present catastrophe may be laid almost entirely at your door. Your government, almost alone in the world, is insisting on the immediate admission of 100,000 more Jews into Palestine—to be followed by countless additional ones. This will have the most frightful consequences in bloody chaos beyond anything ever hinted at in Palestine before.

          It is your press and political leadership, almost alone in the world, who press this demand. It is almost entirely American money which hires or buys the “refugee ships” that steam illegally toward Palestine: American money which pays their crews. The illegal immigration from Europe is arranged by the Jewish Agency, supported almost entirely by American funds. It is American dollars which support the terrorists, which buy the bullets and pistols that kill British soldiers—your allies—and Arab citizens—your friends.

          We in the Arab world were stunned to hear that you permit open advertisements in newspapers asking for money to finance these terrorists, to arm them openly and deliberately for murder. We could not believe this could really happen in the modern world. Now we must believe it: we have seen the advertisements with our own eyes.

          I point out these things because nothing less than complete frankness will be of use. The crisis is too stark for mere polite vagueness which means nothing.

          I have the most complete confidence in the fair-mindedness and generosity of the American public. We Arabs ask no favours. We ask only that you know the full truth, not half of it. We ask only that when you judge the Palestine question, you put yourselves in our place.

          What would your answer be if some outside agency told you that you must accept in America many millions of utter strangers in your midst—enough to dominate your country—merely because they insisted on going to America, and because their forefathers had once lived there some 2,000 years ago?

          Our answer is the same.

          And what would be your action if, in spite of your refusal, this outside agency began forcing them on you?

          Ours will be the same.

        • eljay says:

          >> Shmuel, one of your major problems is your Ashkenazi superiority complex … But, your sickness is that you speak out of your ass and expect to be worshiped … you shmuck.

          ?!?!

        • patm says:

          Thanks for posting this 1947 piece, Citizen. As you say, it is still very very timely. It’s going into my Keepers file.

          ***
          eljay, ddi,

          A quick google tells me Shmuel is the Hebrew equivalent of Samuel.

        • ChrisB says:

          Avi,

          So you read a book as twisted as you are. That’s your argument?

        • Samuel says:

          Avi

          I fail to see how refering to me as the male sexual organ furthers your argument. (for the ignorant, even a sefaradi Jew such as me knows that “shmuck” in yiddish is the penis)

          Moreover, like most human beings I talk through my buccal cavity and not per anum. Your strange assumption of the origin of my verbal capability (“you speak out of your ass”), together with my above mentioned statement leads me to believe that you have certain fixations which Zigmond Freud may have dealt with in his works.

        • DBG says:

          A quick google tells me Shmuel is the Hebrew equivalent of Samuel.

          what on earth does that even mean? So the poster Shmuel and Samuel are the same person because Google says their names are equivalent in Hebrew?

          Avi has it out for Shmuel because he dared question his intellectual superiority. His rage caused for a temporary moment of dyslexia.

        • Potsherd2 says:

          patm – that doesn’t mean these two posters are the same person

        • Walid says:

          Citizen, King Abdullah’s November ’47 letter to the Americans was perhaps not kosher. According to Avi Shlaim, on November 17, 1947, the king met with Golda Meir of the Jewish Agency to collude with her his acceptance of the forthcoming UN partition plan (that came 2 weeks later) and the Zionists’ acceptance of his intended plan of taking over the West Bank when the partition would be taking place. The Palestinians were getting shafted by both.

          Shlaim’s details of this hanky-panky were posted today on the Emir of Qatar/Obama thread, 7th comment. Something wrong here either with what Avi Shlaim wrote or with the Abdullah letter:

          link to mondoweiss.net

          P.S. the post on the other thread was in answer to a statement by Guilty Feat about Arabs never really caring about the Palestinians.

        • MRW says:

          God, nothing’s changed since 1947.

        • patm says:

          I never thought they were, Potsherd2.

          I simply wondered if Avi was using Samuel’s Hebrew name and googled it up. It turned out he was.

  2. eee says:

    Thank you for not blaming slavery on Zionism, I appreciate that.

    • Chaos4700 says:

      Thank you for the straw man.

    • Citizen says:

      Why bother, eee? When we have the diaries of the head of the Jewish Agency during Israel’s making? Try this for a quick factual reference to Zionism’s sacred terrorism, everybody:
      link to chss.montclair.edu

    • MRW says:

      US slavery predated Zionism by 250 years, but it was brought to this country by Jews from Amsterdam, where the Dutch controlled the trade. Touro was one of the big merchants, and is generally credited as the main guy. He landed in Curacao, and set up his slave business throughout the Caribbean, Brazil, and up to America via Louisiana.

      • Citizen says:

        Yep, MRW–I like the exchange rate: a tub of chocolate molasses for each black slave in turn converted to a slew of jugs of rum to get the next bunch of natives into the ankle irons. Sorta reminds me of how the Czar’s serfs were used as told to us by Doiestovieski in his 200 Years, no thanks to American publishers.

        The following passages are from Dr. Raphael’s book Jews and Judaism in the United States a Documentary History (New York: Behrman House, Inc., Pub, 1983), pp. 14, 23-25.

        “Jews also took an active part in the Dutch colonial slave trade; indeed, the bylaws of the Recife and Mauricia congregations (1648) included an imposta (Jewish tax) of five soldos for each Negro slave a Brazilian Jew purchased from the West Indies Company. Slave auctions were postponed if they fell on a Jewish holiday. In Curacao in the seventeenth century, as well as in the British colonies of Barbados and Jamaica in the eighteenth century, Jewish merchants played a major role in the slave trade. In fact, in all the American colonies, whether French (Martinique), British, or Dutch, Jewish merchants frequently dominated.

        “This was no less true on the North American mainland, where during the eighteenth century Jews participated in the ‘triangular trade’ that brought slaves from Africa to the West Indies and there exchanged them for molasses, which in turn was taken to New England and converted into rum for sale in Africa. Isaac Da Costa of Charleston in the 1750′s, David Franks of Philadelphia in the 1760′s, and Aaron Lopez of Newport in the late 1760′s and early 1770′s dominated Jewish slave trading on the American continent.”

  3. “Whoever the fanatics are that killed Vittorio Arrigoni and Juliano Mer-Khamis in Palestine in the last two weeks, it can be safely said that the occupation killed these good men”

    “But if you expand the category to include collateral damage, well then you begin to comprise the thousands of Americans killed on 9/11– for even the 9/11 commission has acknowledged that a root cause of the hijackers’ action was anger over Palestine, and bin Laden has said so too. And any fair audit would have to include Bobby Kennedy, the charismatic American leader whose support of Israel cost him his life in ’68.”

    Are you serious? In your facts, and in your interpretations.

    ‘Zionism caused these deaths’.

    There are other ways to express appreciation or remembrance.

    • Danaa says:

      Witty “There are other ways to express appreciation or remembrance”

      But these are the best ways. All the more so for being true.

      Zionism, for the most part, has been a disaster on so many levels, in so many ways, for so many.

      And unfortunately, this tale of woe is far from ended. The real misfortune of it all is still about to unfold. You Witty will yet feel it most acutely; so it has been decreed.

      • Tal says:

        “Zionism, for the most part, has been a disaster on so many levels, in so many ways, for so many.”

        I can say the same about your country. America has been a disaster for Black Africans, Native Americans, Vietnamese, etc. Hey, maybe we should equate Americanism to Racism? Hmm.. No, we shouldn’t, right? Because the ideology on which America was founded has nothing to do with racism. Hmmm… I guess that makes you a hypocrite, right?

        • annie says:

          danaa is not stating or implying our country has not been fraught w/racism. there’s no grounds for charges of hypocrisy. you’re just diverting.

        • Chaos4700 says:

          What’s “Americanism?” I’ve never heard of it before and I’ve lived in the United States all my life.

        • Donald says:

          “I can say the same about your country. America has been a disaster for Black Africans, Native Americans, Vietnamese, etc.”

          Yes. Added to that is our support for Israeli apartheid.

          ” Hey, maybe we should equate Americanism to Racism? Hmm”

          The history of our country is stained with racism from the very beginning and it still goes on. That’s a big part of why we support Israel.

        • Danaa says:

          Tal, over here we are all too familiar with the “they do it too” and/or “but they are so much worse” retort lines. Which # is that exactly on the list of 4 hasbara standard-issue “counter-arguments”?

          annie, am I wrong or are we seeing an influx of ziobots lately? just on this thread, I am counting 4 newbies using oldie tunes. That hard recruitment work by the Israeli hasbara machine, must have been churning them out.

          The pay can’t possibly be any good, to judge by the quality.

        • Mooser says:

          “the ideology on which America was founded has nothing to do with….”

          what America became, and how it reconsidered itself after the Civil War (the War of Northern Agression, Citizen) and what it may become in the future, with luck, good will and God’s help.

        • annie says:

          you’re not wrong danaa. they are out in full force today on this thread. phil seems to have hit a nerve. my guess is they’ve ordered an entire squadron of their hasbarists to infiltrate this comment section. whatever. i can understand their fear. truth and exposure are dangerous.

        • Citizen says:

          Yes, pls do equate Americanism with racism, Tal–I’m sure President Bro Obama will nod his head in agreement. Sister Rice too, the Rice that gave us the US veto on settlements at the UN, not the one chosen by Shrub, who helped all she could to get us to attack Iraq because she could see mushroom clouds in the sky. BTW, America was founded before the Nuremberg Trials and Geneva. Israel was not.

        • LeoBraun says:

          “Annie, am I wrong or are we seeing an influx of ziobots lately? Just on this thread, I am counting 4 newbies using oldie tunes. That hard recruitment work by the Israeli hasbara machine, must have been churning them out”! [Danaa].

          Freedom of the press is guaranteed only to those who own one!

          The govt is considering the establishment of a news channel to add Israel’s perspective to the international news arena, Public Diplomacy and Diaspora Affairs Minister Yuli Edelstein told The Jerusalem Post. “We could have our own channel, which would at least broadcast on the Internet. The channel would require a combination of state and private funding”, he said.

          In a reference to Al-Jazeera, Edelstein said, “Would it be an Al-Judea satellite TV broadcaster? Or would it broadcast online? Would it have a.gov or.com Web address? We still don’t have the answers”. The channel could be a 24- hour-a-day live news station with a team of reporters and camera crews, or a more limited channel that provides press services, he said. “We are looking for partners [in the private sector]“, Edelstein added. “I know it sounds like a cliche, but I hope the truth will win in the end”, he said.

          Talking heads appeared on screens!

          Edelstein was aware of “the feeling that something is wrong, and there is an urge to point a finger at Israeli hasbara [public diplomacy]. In most cases, in this type of criticism, people don’t define what they mean by hasbara. I would have to say that hasbara is a combination of many fields – diplomatic, mass media, newspaper, new media, the Internet, social media, and working with Jewish communities and friends of Israel all around the world”.

          “I think we were successful in terms of changing the tone”!

          In Europe, too, Edelstein said, Foreign Ministry staff, Jewish community representatives and others rallied to give media interviews to defend Israel. Still, Edelstein said he agreed with critics who said there was room for improvement in Israel’s PR efforts. Steps were under way to prepare for the next round of media battles, and during daily meetings, discussions were being held on a potential media crisis that could develop …”We’ve been working on creating an infrastructure of our friends and allies around the world, in the Jewish and Christian communities, which is not fully ready yet. It’s based on volunteers and professionals [who will coordinate the transmission of accurate information]“, the minister said.

          Edelstein conceded that the Public Diplomacy and Diaspora Ministry suffered from restrictive budget problems. Nevertheless, he was seeking to implement ambitious initiatives based on volunteers. “This is the 21st century, and that means things that are not officially called hasbara are the best hasbara. The moment things come from the govt, the state, or ministries, they are perceived as being less reliable and as propaganda”, Edelstein said.

          “There are many things only volunteers can do. Writing on Facebook, Twitter blogs, and sending e-mails to friends is second to none. The best things people can do are not about money, but about doing things in the right way”. Edelstein cited an operations center housed in his ministry and staffed by volunteers, as well as a ministry secretary, both aimed at maintaining continuous contact with Diaspora communities.

        • LeoBraun says:

          “They are out in full force today on this thread. Phil seems to have hit a nerve. My guess is they’ve ordered an entire squadron of their hasbarists to infiltrate this comment section. Whatever. I can understand their fear. Truth and exposure are dangerous”! [Annie]

          Twitterers Paid To Spread Israeli Propaganda“!

          “Israel’s foreign ministry is reported to be establishing a special undercover team of paid workers whose job it will be to surf the internet 24 hours a day spreading positive news about Israel. Internet-savvy Israeli youngsters, mainly recent graduates and demobilised soldiers with language skills, are being recruited to pose as ordinary surfers while they provide the govt’s line on the Middle East conflict”! [Crone]

        • annie says:

          oh wow, i wonder if we will be able to recognize them.

          check this out Proof: Israeli Effort to Destabilize Iran Via Twitter #IranElection

          Anyone using Twitter over the past few days knows that the topic of the Iranian election has been the most popular. Thousands of tweets and retweets alleging that the election was a fraud, calling for protests in Iran, and even urging followers hack various Iranian news websites (which they did successfully). The Twitter popularity caught the eye of various blogs such as Mashable and TechCrunch and even made its way to mainstream news media sites.

          Were these legitimate Iranian people or the works of a propaganda machine? I became curious and decided to investigate the origins of the information. In doing so, I narrowed it down to a handful of people who have accounted for 30,000 Iran related tweets in the past few days. Each of them had some striking similarities -

          1. They each created their twitter accounts on Saturday June 13th.
          2. Each had extremely high number of Tweets since creating their profiles.
          3. “IranElection” was each of their most popular keyword
          4. With some very small exceptions, each were posting in ENGLISH.
          5. Half of them had the exact same profile photo
          6. Each had thousands of followers, with only a few friends. Most of their friends were EACH OTHER.

          Why were these tweets in English? Why were all of these profiles OBSESSED with Iran? It became obvious that this was the work of a team of people with an interest in destabilizing Iran. The profiles are phonies and were created with the sole intention of destabilizing Iran and effecting public opinion as to the legitimacy of Iran’s election.

          I narrowed the spammers down to three of the most persistent – @StopAhmadi @IranRiggedElect @Change_For_Iran

          I decided to do a google search for 2 of the 3 – @StopAhmadi and @IranRiggedElect. The first page to come up was JPost (Jerusalem Post) which is a right wing newspaper pro-Israeli newspaper.

          JPost actually ran a story about 3 people “who joined the social network mere hours ago have already amassed thousands of followers.” Why would a news organization post a story about 3 people who JUST JOINED TWITTER hours earlier? Is that newsworthy? JPost was the first (and only to my knowledge) major news source that mentioned these 3 spammers.

          JPost, a major news organization, promoted these three Twitterers who went on the be the source of the IranElection Twitter bombardment. Why is JPost so concerned about Iranian students all of a sudden (which these spammers claim to be)? I must admit that I had my suspicions. After all, Que Bono? (who benefits).

          more at the link

        • LeoBraun says:

          “Oh wow, I wonder if we will be able to recognize them”? [Annie]

          • As a matter of fact, the New York University physician and physical anthropologist Maurice Fishberg attested (what has been crystal-clear to the observant Jewish born individuals such as myself), that: One can pick out a Jew from among a thousand non-Jews without difficulty“!

        • annie says:

          yeah because gwyneth paltrow and natalie portman and eric cantor and michel oren look so jewish. and rae abileah looks so jewish too. and emily schaefer. half the palestinians i know look jewish. have you looked at a pic of rashid khalidi lately? what a mensch.

          here’s a nice looking guy surprise.

        • LeoBraun says:

          If not for the fact that the reluctant link opens a book on the second click sometimes! Hence on a keen researcher was to persist, or to seek manually Page 90 (Chapter V) Jews, Race & Environment by Maurice Fishberg.

          What has been obvious to the observant Jews, such as myself. Ironically, we are born with our eyes closed and mouths wide open. Then some to spent their whole lives, inept to reverse such a blunder of nature! In the meantime relentlessly browbeaten Jews (wedged between a rock and the hard place) faced always catch 22 dilemma. Since the distinctive characteristics endowed Jews couldn’t avoid detection.

          Otherwise any of the targeted Jews could have had simply mingled in the crowd. Particularly during bloody calamities, when one’s survival necessity prevails over religious devotion. If not for our distinct physiognomies give-a-way. No wonder Haganah commander Feivel Polkes dispatched to Berlin in 1937 his proficient head-hunters on the mission to spot a Jew in exchange for Nazi resources release towards the Palestine colonisation!

  4. Debonnaire says:

    Well, according to Dershowitz, David Solway, Jonathan Morse, and Sean Hannity just to name four dimwitted scrofula – “anti-Semitism” is the cause of it all. If only the “Fakestinians”, the “filthy shvatz goyim” (whatever they call them) and their supporters would love the Jews (each and everyone of them) and Israel with all the schmaltz and overflowing bounty that can exist inside the cardiovascular desiderata of our wavering humanness – all would be one long endless harmony. Of course, we should burn all the churches as an act of good faith.

  5. Oscar says:

    Phil, this is your most poignant and important post yet. It sums up everything that Mondoweiss has aspired to be, and ultimately its raison d’être. Don’t give up the faith, the deaths of these beautiful people must push us forward to find the solution.

  6. annie says:

    amen, once again you speak for me phil weiss. you are a courageous honest man, a leader.

  7. jon s says:

    Some fact-checking:
    -de Haan was murdered in Jerusalem, not Holland.
    -Lord Moyne was murdered in Egypt, not Palestine.
    -the flotilla activists were not “unarmed”.
    - the Arlosoroff murder was never officially solved, although it’s true that the killers may well have been Revisionists.
    -Jawaher Abu Rahma: doubtful.

    Phil seems to be saying that though Juliano Mer-Khamis and Vik Arrigoni (and RFK!) were murdered by Palestinians, we should blame the Israelis.

    • pjdude says:

      um yes the flotilla activists were unarmed and no one has any proof other wise.

      • Citizen says:

        Why yes, pjdude, it was a simple matter to break off a deck rail post and start swinging at those IDF balloonists sliding down with flowers in the bright of day over the deep blue sea.

    • Morgan says:

      so you’re one of those nut-jobs who think the abu rahmas are the kind of family that would exploit their own daughter’s death. that really didn’t help your case!

    • RoHa says:

      “Juliano Mer-Khamis and Vik Arrigoni (and RFK!) were murdered by Palestinians,”

      It is not know who murdered any of them.

      Sirhan Sirhan was convicted of killing RFK, but he was standing in front of RFK, and RFK was shot from behind.

      • jon s says:

        There are always crackpot conspiracy theories, but in the RFK case it’s even more far-fetched than usual, considering that Sirhan was apprehended with the murder weapon in his hand, and freely confessed the deed.

        • Citizen says:

          Too bad Sirhan didn’t know RFK’s brother was leading the charge to keep nukes out of the hands of the Zionists when he was killed, and RFK himself was leading the charge to make the zionist entity register as agent of a foreign government (before it morphed into AIPAC, and switched its source funding to the indirect method).

        • annie says:

          jon, sirhan confessed to the crime and declared he had committed it “with 20 years of malice aforethought.”

          are you insinuating sirhan’s malice had nothing to do with the israel palestinian conflict? phil asked ‘how much global damage has this conflict produced?’ explain what you mean by ‘crackpot conspiracy theory’.

        • jon s says:

          Annie, I was responding to Roha, who apparently believes that Sirhan didn’t do it.

        • annie says:

          well, that’s not completely unreasonable given the fact Thomas Noguchi Chief Medical Examiner-Coroner for the County of Los Angeles at the time who examined kennedy stated that the fatal shot was behind Kennedy’s right ear and had been fired at a distance of approximately one inch.

        • Chaos4700 says:

          I find it amusing, jon, that you insist we MUST blame “the Palestinians” for those murders when we don’t have a clear suspect or train of evidence yet… and when we do know exactly WHO dropped each bomb and WHO fired each bullet in Gaza on 2008 and 2009, Israelis are supposed to be blameless.

          That you label us as conspiracy theorists for pointing out that plenty of Israelis had means and motive — more so than Palestinians, even — is insulting considering the obscene contortions you undertake to exonerate the IDF of crimes against humanity.

        • Mooser says:

          “considering that Sirhan was apprehended with the murder weapon in his hand, and freely confessed the deed.”

          Yes sir, Zionists have one hell of a sophisticated concept of justice!
          So basically, if I can find a nut or compulsive confesser (there are such things, Virginia) and make sure the evidence is dumped on him, I can get away with anything?

        • MRW says:

          Awwww sweeeet, you screech crackpot conspiracy theories and we’re supposed to fold like cheap suits and slink away with our facts.

          Give it a rest, and start educating yourself.

        • kylebisme says:

          Heh, Mooser, I get the impression you don’t even know the half of it. I recommend listening to Dr. Seymour Pollack and Dr. Bernard Diamond attempt to hypnotically implant Sirhan with motive and memory of the murder in his jail cell, which can be found starting around 37:40 in the documentary Evidence of Revision part 5, which can be found here:

          link to archive.org

          Notably, “that’s the picture I’ve gotten from you, the feelings about you; this intense Arab nationalist who feels the American polical figures are letting the Arab world down”, “if you really want the world to see the Arab suffering and to see that American policy has helped that suffering, why I say don’t you remember all this”, and “to you, at that time, Kennedy was the biggest bastard the biggest in the world, he was the biggest son of a bitch.” There’s some Zionist justice in action.

        • RoHa says:

          And here, from a crackpot conspiracy website, is a short summary of some reasons for doubting the Sirhan did the actual killing.

          link to guardian.co.uk

          “Sirhan was apprehended with the murder weapon in his hand,”

          With a gun in his hand, yes. How did he get the bullets to go round behind RFK?

          “and freely confessed the deed.”

          The description of the process given here

          link to sikharchives.com

          casts a bit of doubt on the “freely”.

          “He was interrogated by the police for about 2 4 hours, detectives telling him he murdered JFK. “They yelled at me. They kept shoving papers at me demanding that I sign…They were documents saying I killed Kennedy. Confession. They insisted I had murdered Robert F. Kennedy and they demanded I confess and sign the papers….At first I resisted, but later I confessed and signed the papers. They broke me down and I told them I would do anything they wanted me to do. I just wanted it to stop.” After he confessed, he was taken to a cell and allowed to sleep.”

          I have no doubt that Sirhan was there, and that he was shooting, and that he might, from time to time, have believed that he actually did kill RFK.

          But it is not far fetched to doubt it. What is far-fetched is to believe he made the bullets go round behind Kennedy and that he fired 8 shots and left 14 bullets around the place.

    • Chaos4700 says:

      the flotilla activists were not “unarmed”.

      Bullshit, jon. They had kitchen knives. You had machine guns.

      • ChrisB says:

        Unequal weaponry is a moral defense? You ask the enemy how they are armed and then only bring that?

        Chaos, Thanks for the laugh!

        • annie says:

          moral defense? ordinary cutlery is not evidence intentional armed ‘ weaponry’. it is evidence one intends to prepare food.

        • Bumblebye says:

          The flotilla activists were not on an attacking mission to Israel, were not its “enemies”. They were intent on delivering aid to Gaza. Israel was determined to treat them as a hostile armed invasion force, despite all evidence to the contrary before and after,

        • Chaos4700 says:

          I’m not going to say a homeowner was “armed” if they wield a kitchen knife against a gun-toting burglar. Which is exactly what this situation was.

        • Chaos4700 says:

          Also, it’s not a question of moral defense, or defense at all. The IDF committed piracy in international waters. When a squad of machine-gun toting goons strafes the deck of a civilian vessel and then rapels down to the deck to commit execution-style murders, it’s pretty clear who the defenders in the situation were.

        • jon s says:

          The IDF soldiers were clubbed, stabbed, shot and thrown from the deck. The IHH men were not non-violent peace activists, they were trying to kill the soldiers. And the soldiers didn’t “strafe the deck”. They didn’t open fire until they were in a life-threatening situation.

        • Bumblebye says:

          The hasbara fairy tale, as told by jon s.

        • Citizen says:

          Yeah, the dirty rotten Turks had it all planned. That’s why they scrambled to try to rip out deck rail posts to protect themselves and ran into the boat kitchen to grab butter knives. Their original plan was to toss pebbles up at the IDF but the IDF foiled it by dropping down at night.

        • Yes, Jon, “life threatening.” Just like robbers are in a life-threatening situation when they break into a homeowner’s livingroom.

          Why don’t you people fucking read?

          Furkan Dogan: All of the entry wounds were on the back of his body, except for the face wound which entered to the right of his nose. According to forensic analysis, tattooing around the wound in his face indicates that the shot was delivered at point blank range. Furthermore, the trajectory of the wound, from bottom to top, together with a vital abrasion to the left shoulder that could be consistent with the bullet exit point, is compatible with the shot being received while he was lying on the ground on his back.

          İbrahim Bilgen: a 60 year old Turkish citizen, from Siirt in Turkey, was on the top deck and was one of the first passengers to be shot. He received a bullet wound to the chest, the trajectory of which was from above and not at close range….The wounds are consistent with the deceased initially being shot from soldiers on board the helicopter above and receiving a further wound to the head while lying on the ground, already wounded.

          Ali Heyder Bengi: There are several witness accounts which suggest that Israeli soldiers shot the deceased in the back and chest at close range while he was lying on the deck as a consequence of initial bullet wounds.

          Cevdet Kiliçlar: At the moment he was shot he was standing on the bridge deck on the port side of the ship near to the door leading to the main stairwell and was attempting to photograph Israeli soldiers on the top deck. According to the pathology reports, he received a single bullet to his forehead between the eyes.

          Cengiz Akyüz and Cengiz Songür: They had been sheltering and were shot as they attempted to move inside the door leading to the stairwell. Cengiz Akyüz received a shot to the head and it is probable that he died instantly.

          Çetin Topçuoğlu: There are indications that the victim may have been in a crouching or bending position when this wound was sustained.

          link to resistingoccupation.com

          The IDF: pirates, cowards and criminals.

        • Woody Tanaka says:

          “The IHH men were not non-violent peace activists, they were trying to kill the soldiers.”

          Yes, in self-defense against pirates. And it is a shame they did not succeed in freeing their vessel from those pirates.

        • Woody Tanaka says:

          “The IDF: pirates, cowards and criminals.”

          Amen to that.

  8. ToivoS says:

    Excellent summary of the damages caused by the whole Zionist colonization project. In terms of costs to the US I would add the Liberty, the 243 marines killed in Beirut in 1982 and the 4000 US soldiers killed in Iraq. Add these to 911 victims and the cost to the US is high. Someday the American people will learn and when they do there will be changes in our ME policies.

    • GuiltyFeat says:

      “Someday the American people will learn and when they do there will be changes in our ME policies.”

      This is backwards thinking. The American people backed their lunatic redneck president when he took them into an illegal war based on no connection between the perpetrators of 9/11 and the people he chose to wage war against.

      The cost to Americans has been high precisely because that’s how America likes it. War-mongering, bloodthirsty dimwits who mistook the boom years of the 50s as a reward for going to war in the 40s and have been trying to replicate that economic model ever since. Fools.

      If America ever decides to stop funding Israel (doubtful in my opinion) it will just spend the same money thinking up new ways to murder its young in other regions of the planet.

      • annie says:

        if the US just spends the same money thinking up new ways to murder its young in other regions of the planet how does that refute the notion there will be changes in our ME policies?

        and how is the idea ‘the American people will learn and when they do there will be changes in our ME policies’ backward thinking?

        • GuiltyFeat says:

          I don’t believe the american people are as in the dark as you would like to think. I think they are dumb, racist and bloodthirsty, but I don’t believe they are as ill-informed as you believe.

          I think the American people knows what’s going on and still supports Israel. I’m not saying that’s a good thing, but I think it’s the truth.

          In my opinion, it would be far more effective to encourage the American people to support the Palestinans IN ADDITION TO supporting Israel rather than trying to persuade them to “switch allegiance”. Again, I’m not talking about justice or fairness or anything like that, I’m giving you my opinion on the best way to leverage the enormous financial clout of the American public to resolve the issue of a Palestinian homeland.

          I’m not looking to brush Israeli crimes under the carpet. I’m not looking to create Bantustans or an unworkable homeland for Palestinians. I’m suggesting a change in direction for concerned and righteous activists to one that focuses on providing a future for Palestine more than denying one for Israel.

          And, one more time, even if you think Israel deserves nothing, is the cause of everything and should be erased from history, it is of no consequence, in my opinion. Israel will continue to exist because too many people for you to reach are happy for that to be so. My hope is that there will be a strong Palestine alongside it.

        • Daniel Rich says:

          Hi annie,

          Could it be that, now we’re losing our dear ‘friends’ in the ME, the change might well come from within the ME itself, forcing a re-think both in the US as well as the EU? We defend the people of Libya…, but how many other countries are out there with similar or even worse regimes in place? How about defending the Palestinians for a change. Oh, wait, I forgot we provide the weapons to kill them [and occasionally their neighbors].

        • Walid says:

          “… but I don’t believe they are as ill-informed as you believe.

          I think the American people knows what’s going on and still supports Israel…”

          I’m with Guilty Feat on that one and with almost everything else in his post with exception to the “bloodthirsty” part, I also agree that Americans should be swayed to support the Palestinians in addition to supporting Israel.

          Whatever Israel did to the Palestinians, it was with the full knowledge, consent and support of the Americans because it somehow suited American interests in the same way it had suported people like Saddam and Mubarak and is still supporting the Gulf oil dictators. Israel is being used as a tool by the US; Americans aren’t stupid to be throwing billions at Israel because they too believe in the Zionist dream, it’s because Israel doing a good part of the messy work in the ME on its behalf.

          Continuing to point the finger at Israel without bringing the US into the equation is in the same vein of hypocrisy as Israelis that point a finger at the settlers to deflect attention away from the actual guilty party. Things would change only when the US will have decided that the time has come for change and maybe only when the oil dries up; Israel doesn’t really have a big say in this. Think back to the drones, bunker busters, cluster and white phosphorus bombs that Israel tested for the US on the civilians of Lebanon and Gaza.

        • Tal says:

          A Humanist, even handed response, for a change.

        • Citizen says:

          Guilty Feat, so given your expressed POV and philosophy here, do you think the US veto of the UN SC resolution for accountability reagarding the Israeli settlements helps your goal, or hinder it? How about Obama’s statement in Cairo? How about the Goldstone Report, and Goldstone’s WaPo article, and the US congressional dissing of the original report, and the proposal in the US congress now to outright dismiss the original report based on what Goldstone said so briefly? And can we, the American people support both groups by giving them equal foreign aid? Or by reducing aid to Israel down to what we give the Palestinians? And should we change American policy from supporting only the PA, and dissing HAMAS, the last democratically Palestinian entity, and instead work towards uniting the Palestinian people so there is only one voice for them? Please tell us. Thanks.

        • ChrisB says:

          Americans, for the most part, can not be “swayed to support the Palestinians” because of the methods used by the Palestinians. It is the same reason why most Americans can not support the Serbs, the Chechens, the Basques, or the Tamil Tigers. Their tactics are atrocious and mostly inhumane. Most Americans believe that those minorities deserve the conditions they live in.

        • Donald says:

          “I don’t believe the american people are as in the dark as you would like to think. I think they are dumb, racist and bloodthirsty, but I don’t believe they are as ill-informed as you believe.

          I think the American people knows what’s going on and still supports Israel. ”

          A little overstated, but tone it down a bit and it’s not far from the truth, IMO.

          I think Israelis and Americans are very similar in some rather unpleasant ways. Not all Israelis and not all Americans, just the majority.

        • Chaos4700 says:

          Most Americans believe that those minorities deserve the conditions they live in.

          I think more accurately:

          Most white Americans believe that those minorities deserve the conditions they live in.

        • Danaa says:

          Walid, the relationship is much more complicated than that. America, a anyone who live here knows, on the basic day-today level really is rife with ignorance so deep, the likes of which can be found in only some of the remotest places on earth. There is, as many noted and wrote books about – a deep streak of anti-intellectualism in America, a suspicion of knowledge, right along with an admiration of it. The support for Israel among American people is, actually, quite shallow; most of it is wrapped up with fundamentalist protestant Christianity, which propagates its own biblical myths for its own reasons. ome of it is media spread – Americans always need a “bad guy”. With the Commie gone, there be the Arabs. Which makes the Israelis automatically “good guys”. If you watch our information-starved
          News Entertainment channels, you’ll know what I mean.

          As for American geopolitical interests, yes, there’s truth in the thesis that Israel was regarded as a useful too in the battle against the spread of Soviet. I’ll even hand you the supposition that nowadays, an armed-to-the-teeth Israel is there as a sentry for a diminishing, but all-important resource. Saudis are the first line of defense, but right behind them is a nuclear armed entity that can be deployed, if and when is ever needed. Of course, this sentry is not entirely rational or controllable, so true American realists have and will likely be looking for some insurance in the coming years.

          Still, what makes it all so much more complicated is the out-of-proportion Jewish influence on all things political in the US. That part, like the evangelist aspect, has no parallel in America’s relation with any other power in the world, large or small. And that is where the commitment to ignorance by the American population come in real handy. But I don’t think I need to tell you all that, do I?

        • Citizen says:

          Many de facto and de jure American Gentiles believe the state of Israel is the Israel in the bible, that the bible is in effect a land deed, and that to cross the Jews (by which they mean, most of them never even having met one, the AIPAC squeaky wheel echoed by our political leadsers) is to doom them because God said so. Others still believe in the film Exodus, and many younger ones love Adam Sandler. There are no Arabs in their entertainment view that represent Arabs generally or Palestinians particularly.

        • Danaa says:

          Hey Walid, you have now been designated a “humanist” by one, Tal. You like?

        • Mooser says:

          Has “Guilty Feat actually spent any time in America, or does he just get omniscience from his digital yarmulke through his USB “girl’s hair clips?

        • Potsherd2 says:

          I disagree, Guilty. Americans are profoundly ignorant, even of the truth about their own country. All they know about Israel comes from the relentless propaganda.

        • libra says:

          GuiltyFeat: “I don’t believe the american people are as in the dark as you would like to think. I think they are dumb, racist and bloodthirsty, but I don’t believe they are as ill-informed as you believe.”

          I always think such sweeping statements about an entire people are far more revealing about the person making them. You’re not Israeli by any chance?

        • Walid says:

          “…It is the same reason why most Americans can not support the Serbs, the Chechens, the Basques, or the Tamil Tigers. Their tactics are atrocious and mostly inhumane.. ”

          Chris, Hiroshima and Nagasaki were a tough act to follow. If this was way before you were born, you can use Fallujah as an example and if you’re even younger than that, you can use Cast Lead as another where American equipment and munitions were used on helpless civilians. Tactics atrocious and mostly inhumane, eh?

        • MRW says:

          Walid, I think Danaa is far more accurate about the situation here than GuiltyFeat claims from afar, especially her description in the first paragraph, this in particular, rife with ignorance so deep, the likes of which can be found in only some of the remotest places on earth..

        • MRW says:

          His digital yarmulke, Mooser. He’s a Brit who made aliyah to Israel. [Why do people say that? Where else are you going to make aliyah to?]

        • Walid says:

          Danaa, I got used to being called all kinds of names; I thought this term was the exclusive domaine of Witty. Was it intended as compliment or as a jab?

        • Bumblebye says:

          ChrisB
          Strange then, that Americans “swayed to support” the IRA despite its deliberate bombings of civilians in shopping centers. However although the proportion of Irish Americans is much higher, they didn’t exercise such immense influence on the US govt in this regard as Zionists and Israel seem to wield.

        • Citizen says:

          Yeah, you’re right, ChrisB, why can’t they all learn to use clean methods, such as drones, F-16s, Apache copters, white phosophorus, and the Israeli Merkvah tank with the big diaper in the back?

        • Walid says:

          “But I don’t think I need to tell you all that, do I?”

          Danaa, I have been all ears to whatever you tell me ever since your “have them accept total dominance by Israel and then proceed to ask for equal rights” of what seems eons ago. It was a masterpiece that shook the heck out of the Zionists. That concept still does.

        • Danaa says:

          Walid, I couldn’t resist – you got the “humanist” label, right along with the honorific “”even handed” from a new ziobot just descended upon us from Hasbara cloud 9. By assigning some responsibility to America, and with a name like Walid he (I’m sure it’s a “he”) must believe he got himself a home-boy.

          You may want to play along (hey – a title is a title – can never have too many of those), or you may prefer to watch the clouds drifting slowly off into the unset and enjoy the oh-so-very-bearable lightness of the breeze, wherever you may be.

          Me – I am just looking to avoid some work that badly need doing…

        • pjdude says:

          bullshit. we support Israel which was founded on terrorism and has terrorism as a national value.

  9. Daniel Rich says:

    L.S.,

    I made a mistake. Philip mentions that American citizen later on in that paragraph. I thought he made a mistake and wanted to help him. But jumping to conclusions is not an Olympic game, so please delete this comment.

    Thank you.

    Most cordially,

    Daniel

    Hi Phil,

    Q: Just last year Israel killed nine unarmed Turkish men

    R: One of them was an American citizen [a Turkish American], but MSM consistently refers to 9 Turkish victims.

    “By MARC CHAMPION And JOSHUA MITNICK An American of Turkish origin was one of the nine activists killed during Israel’s raid on a Gaza-bound flotilla, a U.S. official said Thursday. Furkan Dogan, a U.S. citizen, and eight Turks died of gunshot wounds, some at close range, according to initial reports.” — Wall Street Journal

    Link to article @ link to online.wsj.com

    Hope this helps.

    Keep up the good work.

  10. radii says:

    it would be interesting if some realistic calculation could be made in terms of how many human lives have been killed, maimed, ruined by zionism’s ongoing crimes and, further, if there were some way to quantify it in terms of money … so much invested for so few to create such a nasty poison that sickens all ultimately … even after all the horrors and crimes visited upon them by zionism, most Palestinians are willing to share their land with jews who want to live there as good neighbors and not exact revenge nor drive them out … you have to be a good neighbor to have good neighbors and until the terrorist settlers are completely dis-empowered and put firmly in check there can be no good neighbors

    • GuiltyFeat says:

      “some realistic calculation could be made in terms of how many human lives have been killed, maimed, ruined by zionism”

      Ooh fun! But if we’re going to do the “Death and Damage by Ism” list then I’m pretty sure we should start with the major ones first – Capitalism and Catholicism, you know just to get the crimes of Zionism in perspective.

      Or we could just abandon the whole project as being simultaneously useless and absurd. It’s your call.

      • Tal says:

        My sentiments exactly. BTW, You forgot “Americanism”.

      • Citizen says:

        GF, neither Capitalism nor Communism were, or are, movements/ideologies based on ethnic or religious division in any way. OTH, yes, Catholicism was, is based on religious division (although the Pope no longer has an army). However, Nazism was an ethnic movement based on both ethnic and (some Nazis claimed) religious division–and it had an army. So it seems Nazism is the more logical comparison to Zionism, which is also an ethnic movement and some Zionists claim, a religious movement as well. A better analogy, less absurd or useless? It’s your call.

      • Chaos4700 says:

        Yeah, the difference is Zionism is (really) a subset of Capitalism (or at the very least, the two belong to the broader historical set of Colonialism) and Catholicism has drastically restructured itself so it doesn’t indulge in ethnic cleansing and witch hunts where hundreds of young and old women are rounded up. Can’t really say the latter for Zionism, can you?

        • Danaa says:

          To use mathematics, zionism and capitalism are intersecting sets. The only questions are: how large is the overlap, and what other intersecting sets are there that can distort the results of the calculation of mutual impact.

          What makes it all really complicated are the non-linearities of the interaction. Very small influence can have a very large, out-sized effects. Just look at the number of Jewish people in Economics – the field has its appeal for a reason.

        • GuiltyFeat says:

          Citizen if you genuinely believe that neither Capitalism nor Communism have divided societies along ethnic grounds, you are either naive or silly.

          I also reject the comparison of Zionism and Nazism (I bet that surprised ya didn’t it!). Nazism was all about excluding everyone who wasn’t part of the master race, who wasn’t racially pure. Zionism welcomes anyone who believes that the concept of Zion means a homeland for the Jews. It doesn’t matter what race or religion you are, everyone is welcome to be a Zionist. What can I say, we’re just friendly like that.

          Joking aside, I know that terrible things have been done in the name of Zionism, just as they have been done in the name of other isms that had noble aims, but the underlying principle is not soaked in blood and evil in the way that Nazism always was.

          The pope no longer has an army? link to en.wikipedia.org

          Chaos, sweetie, I was only poking fun, but I think you’d be on the wrong end of things if you claimed that Catholicism hasn’t and isn’t still doing more harm to more people than the most rabid settler nutters could ever dream of. Have you ever tried to have an abortion in Ireland? Have you ever tried to accuse a priest of unspeakable things? However much Catholicism drastically restructures itself, it can never undo the evil that has been done and is still being done in its name.

          And seeing as you made the claim, can you please provide evidence of Zionists rounding up hundreds of young and old women in a witch hunt because I think you’re telling porkies again.

        • Citizen says:

          GF, please explain to us all how Capitalism and Communism concepts in their respective ideologies discriminate on the basis of one’s ethnic makeup. Please name any ethnic group barred ipso facto from the ideas of the benefits of free market enterprise and those of “from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.” Adam Smith. Robin Hood. Were they anti-semites? Was Marx? How about Freud? How about Bernays? And, yes, I see what you mean regarding the Catholics. I think those Swiss Guards built Auschwitz, and we all know about those sneaky priests preying on the kids. Way too much ethnic chauvinism in the Holy Trinity and worship of the man-god, the Jew, Jesus, because he kicked the money changers out of the temple–as a form of Jewish rebellion against the establishment Jews of his time.

        • RoHa says:

          “the underlying principle is not soaked in blood and evil” but “Zionism welcomes anyone who believes that the concept of Zion means a homeland for the Jews.”

          The concept of “a homeland for the Jews” immediately sets up the idea of Jews as separate from the rest of humanity, and their “homeland” as a place where Jews get special treatment.

          But this sort of discrimination is evil.

        • Woody Tanaka says:

          “but the underlying principle is not soaked in blood and evil in the way that Nazism always was.”

          It is not the same as Nazism, that is for sure. But anyone who suggests that Zionism has not been soaked in blood and evil really has some explaining to do, because inherent in the idea of Zionism is the idea that one people will go into the land owned and occupied by another and take it. That is both evil in conception and inevitably bloody in practice, because Peters’ fantasy aside, there was never a land without a people and the Zionists always knew it and never cared.

        • annie says:

          hey guilty, let’s discuss the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant.

          GF: the underlying principle? “Understanding Nuclear Power Correctly Will Lead to an Abundant Life.”

      • Woody Tanaka says:

        “Ooh fun! But if we’re going to do the ‘Death and Damage by Ism’ list then I’m pretty sure we should start with the major ones first”

        But we’re not doing the “Death and Damage by Ism” list, we’re examining the death and damage caused by Zionism. There is no necessity to examine anything else. The idea that opposition to Zionism is only supportable if it is the worst thing imaginable and that it is somehow a defense to point to something, anything, that can be counted as worse, is intellectually stunted and emotionally nonsensical. Zionism need not be the worst thing in the world in order to count its problems and prepare and indictment, it need merely be bad.

  11. link to haaretz.com

    Here’s some more fuel for depression this week.

    “The Arab spring has turned into a gloomy autumn. The revolution in Egypt, which at first seemed to be a spontaneous uprising of the Facebook and Twitter generation, is gradually beginning to resemble the revolutions we are familiar with from other places. “

    • Citizen says:

      In Egypt, as in many Arab countries, it’s hard to find a job unless you work for the government–in Egypt now, the only key intact institutions are the military (dependent on US) and the university; it’s even more so in the Arab lands with lots of oil. If , Witty, you think the Arab Spring has little future, I guess you think the US Tea Party has none either. I may just agree with you. In the longer run the zealots in either area will have their way. I really don’t know given this reality, whether you should stay where you are at, or move to Israel. You will be dead before long, before all the chickens come home to roost, before the can can no longer be kicked down the road–but your son will be alive. As will my son. Mine will take his chances here. Yours, there, I imagine.

    • Chaos4700 says:

      God, how desperate are you for Arab democracy to fail, anyway?

      • Walid says:

        Chaos, it isn’t about wanting Arab democracy to succeed or fail. Citizen has a point, we’re all on a joy ride now and when the dust settles, there will be lots of disappointed people in Tunisia, Egypt, Yemen and Libya. All 4 movements were driven by a well-intentioned but disorganized wave of freedom-craving flag-waving groupies but none had any unifying ideology to carry them to the next level. It reminds me of when Hamas surprisingly won the elections and just stood there in a daze wondering what to do next. These movements succeeded in removing the heads of the corrupt machines but the machines themselves remained more or less intact, as Citizen mentioned about the Egyptian Army and easy pickings for the next set of abusers. Fundamentalists are jockeying for positions to eventually take over in all of them, so if and when this happens, what would all these demonstrations have accomplished and what would be democracy’s role then? Remember that America brought democracy to Iraq, and a million Iraqis died because of it.

        • Citizen says:

          Yeah, and also remember that fundamentalists have taken over Israel publically, as distinguished from privately, except for a whole bunch of Zionist leaders and Israeli leaders over time blurting out their true motives (Israeli hegemony in the ME & lebensraum) if you’re willing to do the research. While the now free Arabs are jockeying for position, Israelis has already chosen theirs–they actually chose it in 1947, and commenced moving forward ever after–although Ike stopped their goal for awhile. Johnson gave them free rein–the whole USA is now the USS Liberty, so to speak.

  12. patm says:

    You need a course in critical thinking, guilty.

    • MRW says:

      Patm,

      The hasbarists are getting stupider by the week. Logic and analogy is not their strong suit, so they think finance, religion, and a political movement are equivalents. Which is why they couldn’t make it on their own as a society without American handouts (which are now viewed as taking the Americans for freiers).

      • Citizen says:

        I’d say the Israelis are doing better than an awful lot of Americans, many US military veterans included. Which country has national health care? In which country does an army grunt have more opportunity to get ahead in the civilian system?

    • Mooser says:

      “You need a course in critical thinking, guilty.”

      He’s just a kid who joined a cult because it irritated his father, and he got to wear a new hat.
      And he has no military service obligations, so he hjasn’t a care in the world. He is essentially trivial.

  13. Samuel says:

    Actually Phil and many commentators are saying the same thing as many Zionists.

    Phil claims (paraphrasing) that all the world’s troubles could have been averted but for the I/P conflict, and at the blame of the Zionists.

    Zionists claim that all the world’s troubles could have been averted but for anti-semitism, at the blame of the anti-semites

    Same conclusion, different blame.
    But I prefer the Zionist version since the Jews seemed to suffer long before and without connection to zionism (crusades, inquisition, muslim conquests) and more recently the holocaust – all of them heavily connected with the Jewish people, and no way they could be blamed for them.

    • Citizen says:

      Samuel, you really need a lesson in the economy of the feudal age in Europe, right down to the domain of the Czars, and the debate within the first Zionist congress about whether to send Jews to Africa or Palestine while pogroms were erupting. Do you think the Jews had no role except purely as victims during the crusades, inquisition, muslim conquests? During the feudal ages? How about starting in the 17th Century in Europe right down to the age of Hitler? Have you ever compared a study in world history on a given time frame, with a study of the same time frame by a Jewish historian, a list of world events in a world calendar, with the same on a Jewish calendar?

      • jon s says:

        Citizen, I happen to have studied those topics.
        What is the connection between the feudal economy and the debate in the Zionist Congress? Incidentally, the debate you’re referring to, over the Uganda plan, took place in the 6th Zionist Congress (1903), not the 1st (1897) .
        Certainly Jews were the victims during the crusades , when Jewish communities along the Rhine were massacred. The inquisition in Spain
        was initially not directed at Jews as such but at Marannos, crypto-Jews. But then came the expulsion, and any practising Jews remaining in Spain became targets of the inquisition. Being expelled and persecuted certainly qualify for victim status.
        I’m not what you’re referring to in regard to the Muslim conquests. In general the Jews were better off under Islam than under Christianity.

        Yes, I’ve studied those time frames and chronologies. Have you? What are your insights and conclusions?

    • annie says:

      Phil claims (paraphrasing) that all the world’s troubles could have been averted but for the I/P conflict

      perhaps you could do us the favor of copy/pasting the portion of phil’s text you are ‘paraphrasing’. in the meantime ..excellent strawman!

    • Chaos4700 says:

      One shoah is never an excuse to commit another shoah.

      • GuiltyFeat says:

        “One shoah is never an excuse to commit another shoah.” Er… Chaos, dude, isn’t that one of those straw men thingies where you refute an argument that no one has ever made.

        Geez, and I thought you hated those kinds of things!

        According to wikipedia, “This sort of “reasoning” is fallacious, because attacking a distorted version of a position fails to constitute an attack on the actual position.” You’ve taught me so much. Thanks.

    • LeoBraun says:

      “I prefer the zionist version since the Jews seemed to suffer long before and ‘without connection’ to zionism (crusades, inquisition, muslim conquests) and more recently the holocaust — all of them heavily connected with the Jewish people, and no way they could be blamed for them”! [Samuel]

      Wait a minute Samuel, what sort of Jews we’re talking about?

      Since the casteless Jews, marginalised lot in the 18th century Europe, were obliged to wear yellow bonnet and star-of-david arm-band (unlike the highly revered Rothschilds) as a warning sign “for the community sake”! Until Napoleon Bonaparte campaign in 1797 as Rome, Venice, Verona and Padua ghettos were abolished and liberated Jews allowed to live wherever they wanted and practice any religion in open.

      Followed a couple of years latter by the siege of Acre (Acco, north-western Israel) in 1799 as Napoleon prepared to unveil his astounding proclamation, first ever to declare the homeland in Palestine for the destitute Jews. If not for the connived evildoers foul-play consequences. Hell-bent to retain their collateral human shield of the Jew lesser brethren. As a result Acre siege was lost to Brits at the time, along with the casteless Jews emancipation prospect.

      Once it became apparent that Napoleon couldn’t establish national home in Palestine for the persecuted Jews, France was declared as their homeland. Where granted full citizenship Jews got involved in business and political life to the disgust of the Jew peers of the realm. Metternich-Winneburg, Austrian consul in Paris in a letter to Austria’s foreign minister Count Standion lamented in Sept 1806: “Jews look upon Napoleon as their Messiah”!

      Clearly, Napoleon Bonaparte was the only govt leader ever to give casteless Jews equality (at the time when other nations born-to-rule Jew tyrants kept them in bondage). He abolished targeted taxes on Jews in Germany and gave them for the very first time civic and political equality. When strong opposition in France manifested itself, Napoleon stood firm in his support of the Jewish equality, thus ending up to pay an ultimate price!

  14. seafoid says:

    I don’t think 9/11 belongs. Instead I would nominate the Egyptians who died in 4 wars with Israel and the people of Lebanon who have been invaded 7 times by Israel in the name of Jewish self determination.

    Why stop at human dead ? How many lives were mangled by the economic crisis that followed the 1973 war ?

    • Tal says:

      “How many lives were mangled by the economic crisis that followed the 1973 war ?”

      Your’e right. Egypt and the Egyptian people are responsible for so many crimes and the immoral invasion of Israel during the holy day of Yom Kippur is the least of them.

      • Chaos4700 says:

        But of course Israel was COMPLETELY faultless for its 1967 land grab which IN NO WAY provoked its neighbors.

      • Woody Tanaka says:

        “the immoral invasion of Israel during the holy day of Yom Kippur”

        Why would this be immoral? If the enemy is distracted by social events, it seems a perfect time to attack.

        And Israel should be thanking its good fortune that the war came on a day when most Israeli civilians weren’t clogging up the public roadways… But I guess it makes for better PR to rage theatrically about a “holy” day than to face military realities that if the war had begun on any other day, it would have been much harder for Israel.

    • Citizen says:

      The American people, little do they know, are still paying for the Arab Oil Embargo of 1973, which resulted from Nixon’s decision to save Israel.

      • ChrisB says:

        So, every now and again, Nixon proved to be a moral man.

      • DBG says:

        The embargo ended in March of 1974. Right now we are paying for insecurity in the ME.

        • MRW says:

          DBG,

          “The embargo ended in March of 1974.” The consequences didn’t. That’s when they started.

        • Samuel says:

          MRW
          ““The embargo ended in March of 1974.” The consequences didn’t. That’s when they started.”

          This thread seems to imply that America should never do what it thinks is in its best interest if in the long run it costs taxpayer’s money. Many times I’ve seen here that if the American people knew how much aid it gives Israel they would change their point of view and lobby their congressmen, etc.

          Foreign aid is given for two reasons:
          1. Charity to help struggling economies of poor countries
          2. Military aid to protect countries that uphold the long and short-term interest of the US

          Israel comes under the second category – not just because of Aipac, but because of the interest of having a stable ally in the Middle East who can be relied upon, at least relatively to the other neighbouring regimes. It doesn’t want Israel to become a Syria/Iran/Lybia who act against American interests.

          It’s not the ignorance of the American people that “allows” this to happen. They know and still decide that it’s better for America to support Israel financially than not to support her.
          You can argue that this is not fair or just, but it is a genuine factor in American strategy.

        • Citizen says:

          Non-stop and stringless, interest-added foreign aid to Israel, our largest chunk of such aid for decades now, enabling Israel to expand its illegal settlements non-stop, and vetoing at the UN any attempt in the world to stop it, is NOT upholding the long and short term interest of the US people. Samuel, how could you possibly think so, if you are an American? Even Obama, Hillary, Beiden, Petraeus have said it’s not in our interest or the world’s in moments of relative spontaneity. Of course they quickly clammed up, and since then have mouthed the usual kisses to Israel.

  15. bijou says:

    Thank you Phil, for pointing to this fundamental truth; I hope you continue to sound this theme. There is far, far more damage that can be tallied under this conflict’s name — under the “need to maintain Israel as an exclusively Jewish state against the will of the entire region within which it implanted itself.”

    For example:

    The long-term effects of PTSD on US troops who fought in Iraq and brought their traumas home, with untold harms rippling out to their families, colleagues, and society at large

    The long-term effects of depleted uranium used in Iraq and Gaza on future generations – the stunning and stunting of whole generations, and the genetic impact transferred to the next generation

    The long-term effects of depleted uranium on US soldiers who fought in Iraq (see above)

    The long-term effects of PTSD on all who witness the extreme violence of this conflict from any vantage point, let alone on those who actually engage in outright violence on other human beings (or even just humiliation of another human being) – this includes people in all regions where Israel has waged wars, most especially Lebanon

    The enormous, absolutely unknowably cost in “human potential lost” from caging and/or dispossessing entire populations and restricting or eliminating their access to decent education, development, and full self-potentiation…

    I know your post was about “collateral” costs other than those derived from the direct conflict itself, but I think these types of less obvious costs are rarely considered when people think about conflict’s impact. We must begin fully facing the inestimable toll that this generations-long chain of extraordinary violence has had on our world. I think that with each passing generation, there is a kind of mutation or metastasizing of harm — you can see it in the escalation of the willingness of ordinary people to engage in the most heinous types of violence and humiliation against others….

  16. Elliot says:

    Phil -
    Thank you for remembering the Arlosorov and Rabin assassinations. The right-wing seized on the Mer Khamis and Arrigoni murders as confirmation of Palestinian depravity. Like Arrigoni, Count Bernadotte was a European who was killed in Palestine.
    Israeli Jews are in no position to crow over these deaths.

  17. Jim Haygood says:

    Just last year Israel killed nine unarmed Turkish men who were moved by Gaza’s suffering to risk their lives on the high seas. — Philip Weiss

    At last, the leaders of the Free World have responded:

    Barack Obama, David Cameron and Nicolas Sarkozy last week described the government attack … as a “medieval siege … to strangle its population into submission.”

    OOPS! They were talking about Misrata in Libya, not long-suffering Gaza. My bad!

    link to guardian.co.uk

    The awful price of Zionism is official silence in the face of wrongful death.

    • Citizen says:

      Hey, we all know a young man of Turkish descent is not a real American. He’s just a Turk. Despite being way more multicultural, we Americans are very modern Germanic in our thinking, eh?

      • DBG says:

        He moved from America when he was two years old and never returned.

        • Woody Tanaka says:

          “He moved from America when he was two years old and never returned.”

          So? He was still an American. Hell, he qualified to be elected President of the United States had he not been murdered in cold blood by thugs and pirates.

  18. MRW says:

    Phil,

    This post really hit me for some reason. And I read Naeim Giladi’s book eight years ago, so Avi’s initial response added to it.

    I never hear Rwandans or the Congolese come up with the justifications for raw murder that the Israeli Zionists do.

    • GuiltyFeat says:

      Is “raw murder” a legal term? I’m sorry but I’m not familiar with it.

      Are you suggesting that the Rwandans or Congolese are more honorable that Israelis because they make no attempt to defend their murders?

      I understand the case for proportionality and the abuse of overwhelming force, but every independent investigation into Israel’s behaviour including the Goldstone Report references the multiplicity of war crimes committed against Israel from within Gaza. In contrast to those independent investigations you come up with original terms like “raw murder”. I’m keen to know what possible good you think such a term can do.

  19. pabelmont says:

    Phil, a brilliant essay.

    For some perspective, notice that FAILURE TO ROCK THE POWER BOAT is a recurring problem in America (and I suppose elsewhere).

    The whole housing-bubble / mortgage-finance-securitization was a scam well understood by the practitioners at every level, hidden from some of the dupes, but the big bankers prevented anyone from stopping them early (that would have cost THEM big money) until the thing crashed (and that was contrived by bailouts to cost really, really big money, but NOT to the biggest bankers). Everyone saw the problem and no-one acted.

    Same with global warming: big-energy is staying and continuing to get rich by playing the ruinous old game and no-one is doing anything to stave it off. FAR OTHERWISE. Everyone sees the problem and no-one acts.

    Israel/Zionism/Palestine/Occupation/Violations-of-international-law is the same: everyone knows what’s going on, the very rich who support the calamity refuse to relax their strangle-hold on the whole world. International law is stymied, even though its requirements are well understood. Cowardice and cupidity and corruption rule.

    • Citizen says:

      Always look at who writes any law that gets passed, whether local or more. Look very closely. Even “the” versus “some” is important in a thousand page document. Or “may” versus “shall.” Etc. And look especially at any definitions, and relate one to the other. Good luck.

  20. Tal says:

    Guys, it suddenly hit me. Do you know how you sound like? You sound just like the right wings fanatics when they talk about how Islam has caused humanity nothing more than misery and bloodsheds all over the globe.

    Bottom line – Zionism in its essence is a national movement which emerged in the 19th century together will all other national movements. Nationalism has caused many wrong doings but nation-states are alive and kicking. We should concentrate on delegitimation of the occupation and not on delegitimizing the state of Israel or else you are not just being hypocrite and immoral but also harmful to your own cause.

    • annie says:

      We should concentrate on delegitimation of the occupation and not on delegitimizing the state of Israel

      the occupation and the state of israel are one entity.

    • Bumblebye says:

      Tal, it is criticism of the occupation, condemnation of its brutal tactics that provokes squawks from Israel and from Zionists about delegitimization!
      If they’ve plopped a few exclusively Jewish settlements on a parcel of land that makes it part of Israel, administered by Israel, without any quasi-official extension of sovereignty. They’ve “internalised” the West Bank as “Judea and Samaria”, indivisibly part of Eretz Israel – except for its Palestinian population.

      • Tal says:

        You’re right about the Israeli govt and its supporters misusing the delegitimization argument. However, this post and most of its replies prove that anti occupation moral sentiments may sometimes lure you in the slippery slope of racism and blind hate

        • annie says:

          actually it is not a slippery slope and this ‘lured’ into racism thing is just more concerned trolling.

          aside from your advice all your post does is insult people with no specifics. if you want to criticize people and accuse them of ‘racism and blind hate’ ‘hypocrite and immoral’ you need to come armed with examples. also, if we were harming our own cause the zionists wouldn’t bother with us. it is precisely because we are not harming ourselves but israel you are here.

        • Tal says:

          You want examples? Thats easy.
          Accusing Israeli Jews of being greedy (Danaa) and is racism. Actually its one of the classic forms of antisemitism. MRW insinuates that the Jews are responsible for slavery in the US. Zionism is accused in the replies for this post, for every evil which is going on in this world including the 9/11 events.
          When people like me who are not anti-Zionists try to engage in conversation and exchange of ideas they are ridiculed and slurred in a childish way (“Zio-bots”, Getting paid for writing here). I tend to believe that if we approached you in a face to face conversation you would have communicated in a more decent way.
          I am writing here not because I am worried about the effect of anti-Israeli hasbara. Strange as it may sound to you, I think that BDS is a good choice to fight the occupation because it is non-violent and effective. The problem is that it’s a slippery slope because you are no longer fighting only against injustices against the Palestinians but also promoting injustices against the Israeli Jews by delegitimizing their right for a nation-state in the land of Israel.

        • chrisrushlau says:

          The thing is to have the conversation.
          Would you, Annie, or anybody, like to give me your response to my reaction to the article, which is the last-added main comment, which you probably haven’t noticed since it’s down at the bottom? It’s an attempt to state the premises of the ideological conflict, to ask what the crisis is about, via a brief allegory.
          In the meantime, having scanned some of the comments here, the issue as you all have engaged it from your various sides seems to have this resolution. Israel came too late. Look at Katanga, thirteen years later, a Belgian grab for a corner of Congo, summarily swept aside by the UN.
          What makes law legitimate? It has to bring peace. It is the thing that marks an economic transaction as opposed to a smash and grab. It proposes personal autonomy. “The common law created the common man.”
          To locate the latter end of the window of opportunity within which a European Jewish state might have been successfully set up in Palestine, consider Hong Kong. Let me haphazardly date it from the Boxer Rebellion/Opium Wars period, mid-1800′s. It was reabsorbed by the local population in 1997.
          But does this mean that these Zionist Jews must leave Palestine? It would surely depend (what do you think, Annie?) on how they handle the transition to majority rule, counting all the people under their jurisdiction. The more they resist this transition, the more they require the majority to resort to martial law structures which guarantee the rights of neither they nor its own citizens.
          The issue is properly set out by the 1947 article included above, by the Jordanian person, my quick scan suggests. What gives Israel a right to exist–what act of what competent authority brought it into existence? Where does its claim of legitimacy come from? How, in particular, does it justify ignoring separation of church and state and equal treatment of the laws?
          There is a tenet from English equity (the parallel to law in the traditional legal order–so you would speak of “law and equity”, administered in separate organs of the judiciary), that one must have “clean hands” to seek injunctive relief, the standard remedy of equity courts.
          This is what is lacking in protests of anti-Semitism by Israel. It sits on stolen land and represses the non-Jewish majority under its jurisdiction precisely because they are non-Jewish. The land is stolen in that the trustees converted that land to their own benefit rather than returning it to the local population.
          All property, all legitimacy, all sovereignty stems from the local population. Would you contest that premise? So the question is, next, who is properly there, who is local?
          Well, I like to say, here in Maine with its own local/new-comer problem, if you want to be a Mainer, you’re a Mainer. That means, act like one. Take responsibility for the place and that includes everybody who is already here.

        • chrisrushlau says:

          And I meant “Tal” where I wrote “Annie”. The more I read in this comment stream, the more I wish I’d read it all before speaking. But that, too, speaks to the legitimacy of the process. Local sovereignty means diction and etiquette are not final arbiters. We can manage to make ourselves understood, one to another. Ultimately as well as practically, process and substance are one: we reach peaceful accommodation with each other by airing grievances, which means knowing they’re heard, without having to wait to see if our tires have been slashed over night.

        • annie says:

          Accusing Israeli Jews of being greedy (Danaa) and is racism.

          i agree accusing jews of greed is racism but i would have to examine the text specifically to respond further to this allegation. i don’t recall danaa ever saying ‘jews are greedy’ nor the context and i’m not in the mood to research your argument. so bring me some text (and preferably the link so i can read the context, links are available at the timestamp of each comment).

          MRW insinuates that the Jews are responsible for slavery in the US.

          he said this:

          US slavery predated Zionism by 250 years, but it was brought to this country by Jews from Amsterdam, where the Dutch controlled the trade. Touro was one of the big merchants, and is generally credited as the main guy. He landed in Curacao, and set up his slave business throughout the Caribbean, Brazil, and up to America via Louisiana.

          i do not know enough about the history of slavery in this country to know how much truth there is in this statement but suffice to say i think we can all agreed it is highly doubtful he was referencing all the jews from amsterdam. jews were involved in the slave trade tho but obviously it requires a public to support any trade. there’s no way one could blame slavery solely on ‘jews’ whether they were involved in the trade or not, that’s obvious nor did mwr “insinuate” any such thing. this reeks of a little trapping. eee comes in and drops a snark about slavery into the thread, mrw responds to it w/a historical reference and all of a sudden he’s accused of ‘insinuating’ something? if you’d like to discuss slavery and his comment simply refute what he said with evidence to the contrary but don’t extract meaning from it that isn’t there. we fought a war over slavery, what happened in the south wasn’t the fault of ‘jews’ it was the fault of an immoral public.

          When people like me who are not anti-Zionists try to engage in conversation and exchange of ideas they are ridiculed and slurred in a childish way (“Zio-bots”, Getting paid for writing here).

          the ‘getting paid’ thing is boring. let’s all just agree most ziobots work for free, like all the megaphone types or just people at home working with listserves and such( no different than supporters of human rights on our side).. and then there are others who are at the end of the millions spent on infowarfare. it’s really irrelevant to me which end of it you are on. and hey, ‘engaging in conversation’ is not slipping in baldface unsupported lies (i can back that up if you like) and launching yourself off w/concerned troll comments like “Do you know how you sound like? You sound just like the right wings fanatics when they talk about how Islam. this is not engaging, it’s merely ad hominem insults, and then you squeal about it when you’re responded to in kind.

          The problem is that it’s a slippery slope because you are no longer fighting only against injustices against the Palestinians but also promoting injustices against the Israeli Jews by delegitimizing their right for a nation-state in the land of Israel.

          there is no protected “rights” for ethnicities to have their own nation state. israelis are using that alleged ‘right’ as a justification to violate the international human rights of individuals protected under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

          that pretty much covers your comment. as an aside this is a place to have conversations. if you come here and are respectful people will probably treat you in kind even while disagreeing with you.

        • annie says:

          chris , you’re all over the map in this comment. if you want to start a conversation i’d suggest you condense it into comprehensible segments and nix 90% of the questions.

        • chrisrushlau says:

          “…the ‘getting paid’ thing is boring. let’s all just agree most ziobots work for free,…”
          Thanks, Annie, for your suggestions. This copy and paste feature is an equal-opportunity offender. If you want Tal to reply, you’ll stop calling Tal a ziobot.
          If we want a peaceful transition to majority rule in Palestine, Jews there and here have to be convinced that it is doable. They need someone to surrender to who looks capable of managing the job. The first requirement in the job description is that this champion insists on their either surrendering or otherwise giving up the struggle for the Zionist state. The second is that this champion manifest some sense of proportionality, for instance in preferring a peaceful transition, which includes redistribution and restitution of land and assets. The third is administrative competence to make that preference effective.
          The style of leadership will be what it always is, encouraging constructive deliberation while discouraging “sharp-shooting”, etc. “Free speech” has its constraints. The leader is marked by her capacity to elicit constructive suggestions from the led and to put them into effect. That is the service she provides to the led–as an entrepreneur of new institutions, which is probably ever only a matter of making existing institutions work–such as comment functions on blogs.
          What are your plans for the future in Palestine?

        • annie says:

          If you want Tal to reply, you’ll stop calling Tal a ziobot.

          gee chris, i never meant to suggest ziobots was a name exclusively for paid agents. ever. the fact there are ziobots like you and tal around and i refute your arguments is not meant to imply i want a response to them. by all means don’t respond. if all i had to do was call a ziobot ‘a ziobot’ to get them to cease w/their propaganda we’d all be in infowarfare heaven!

          ;)

          Thanks, Annie, for your suggestions. This copy and paste feature is an equal-opportunity offender.

          i am not offended by my own comments, in fact i stand by them. it was you who claimed i alleged ziobots were all paid. i didn’t and don’t. a ziobot is someone who spews zionist propaganda generally in a repetitive fashion. (tasks that are both simple and structurally repetitive). usually easily refuted. it’s as if they all work off the same lists of points. one of the reasons they do this is israel doesn’t change their policies, they just change the narrative and think we won’t notice.

          The leader is marked by her capacity to elicit constructive suggestions from the led and to put them into effect. That is the service she provides to the led–as an entrepreneur of new institutions, which is probably ever only a matter of making existing institutions work–such as comment functions on blogs.
          What are your plans for the future in Palestine?

          how original.

          my plans for the future? watch and find out chris.

        • Cliff says:

          Chris and Tal, pls go thru the archives or use the search function.

          The people you see posting here are regulars and have no doubt had to put up with your tired hasbara for years (some decades).

        • Danaa says:

          annie, Tal uses probably a reference I made somewhere (who knows where? I made it many times over…) to the fact that israelis have a greed for land. By which it is obvious I meant israeli [so-called] jews (many of whom who so consider themselves are anything but).

          Is that even remotely deniable in view of the facts before us stretching into decades?

          Trying to hold onto land acquired by conquest is, indeed, “greed for land”. Were such a contention anti-semitic, then being against the occupation, the theft of jerusalem (the “unification”), as well as criticizing the concept of zionism-as-colonialism (which is self-evident), are anti-semitic.

          But, wait, that is what they are saying, no?

          What is interesting i that the Tal-bot did not obviously read my comment to him (why would he? that probably goes beyond the scope of the terms of service for a low-level bot; I mean, they are all volunteers, right?). Instead, he scanned and found the word “greed’, and said aha!! man of lightening bolts that he is. Which word, as everyone knows, if uttered in any context where israel and/or jewish people are mentioned (such as referring to, eg, Madoff or occupied golan heights) is proof-positive of anti-semitism.

          This is a tiresome bunch and not a very learned one we got ourselves.

          You think MW could put in a request for A team bots?

          Note to Tal (who’s by now probably long gone): you have the old edition of the hasbara manual. Please consult the new one – it does advise against over-hurling of the anti-semitic trope.

        • annie says:

          danaa, i knew what he was aiming at and i said it too. paraphrasing myself: ‘a murder? let’s steal some more land!’. practically speaking zionism is synonymous w/expansion. colonialism is theft. this is not ‘jewish’ per se and i’ve read enough of your comments to know you would not say jews are greedy.

          You think MW could put in a request for A team bots?

          i’ve stated this before. i’m sure they hear us out there. i think the problem for them is the info they’re working with. there doesn’t seem to be any willingness coming from israel to actually change any policy (i guess when you’ve been yanking on a noose for decades it’s hard to learn new tricks). they just keep justifying their actions as if the complaints to them will miraculously disappear. meanwhile more and more people are becoming aware of their intransigence and all this new info comes out whereas their stuff is old and stale and reeks of BS.

          rather than ‘new material’ (narrative) the goi should focus on ‘new agenda’ (positive policy change). that will will definitely brighten the prospects for the future. nothing like some positive truths to change the perceptions of israel. when was the last time we had any of those? and i’m not talking cherry tomatoes either.

        • LeaNder says:

          MRW insinuates that the Jews are responsible for slavery in the US.

          I think while Britain, France the Netherlands all were on the European side of the fateful triangle*, Britian dominated the trade, especially Liverpool up to the abolition. That’s why they have a Slavery Museum

          * Goods from Europe to Africa, Slaves to America, goods back to Europe

          While they were Sephardi Jews neither Isaac or Judah Touro were active in the slave trade. Maybe he is mixing things up. I was actually a bit puzzled too.

          The Slave Trade, Matthew Kachur, Philip Schwarz, 2006

          A few merchants in colonial Rhode Island mad up the largest group of Jewish traders in the British Empire. Aaron Lopez and his father-in-law, Jacob Rivera, were both wealthy Jewish Rhode Island merchants involved in slave trade. Lopez was born in Portugal and arrived with his family in Newport about 1750. Within 20 years, Lopez owned or invested in more than 80 sailing vessels. Lopez was also one of the founders of the Touro Synagoge in Newport, the oldest synagogue in America. However, the Jewish merchants of Rhode Island controlled less than 10 percent of the voyages and slaves dilivered by Rhode Island traders in the 1700s

          In those years, Jews supplied less than 2 percent of the money invested in the slave trade. When British slave trade became the largest in the world, Jews represented less than 1 percent of ship owners and traders in the African slave trade. (page 71)

          This took me about 10 minutes. There are many, many very good databases on the net.

        • LeaNder says:

          You think MW could put in a request for A team bots?

          We applied for that, we really did, already years ago. And if you ask me, they have slightly improved.

          Before it was much more simplistic, like only a looser cannot admire Israel. But admittedly I do not have enough time to pay close attention.

        • MRW says:

          LeaNder,

          The Touros arrived on the Dutch Island of Curacao in the mid 1600s. I am referring to that family. And yes, although I can’t find the scholarly link right now, it was Touro of that original family who brought the slave trade to Curacao from Amsterdam (and I think there were a couple of other families involved as well), whereupon it spread throughout the Caribbean, up to Lousiana eventually, and went down to Recife, Brazil. [Amsterdam and not England was the financial center of the world at that time (1650).] These were Sephardic Jews who had left Spain for Portugal in 1492, stayed there for nearly a year before they left Portugal for Amsterdam.

          The timeframe you are referring to is 150 years later, and appears to cover the northern colonies and states.

          Messrs. Matthew Kachur, Philip Schwarz don’t seem to know about the earlier history, or chose not to do the research. Someone is writing it at this time, however, using genealogical data.

        • LeaNder says:

          MRW, there is even an entry on Wikipedia on the topic: Jews and the Slave Trade

          Curaçao

          Jews imported slightly under one thousand slaves to Curaçao between 1686 and 1710. After that time slave trade diminished.[38][42] Between 1630 and 1770, Jewish merchants settled or handled a “considerable portion” of the eighty-five thousand slaves who landed in Curaçao, about one-sixth of the total Dutch slave trade.[43]

          Compare to the Liverpool Database for roughly the same time frame:

          The number of voyages to Africa made between 1695 and 1807 from each of the main European ports that were involved in the slave trade were:

          Liverpool: 5,300
          London: 3,100
          Bristol: 2,200
          Other European ports: 450 (Amsterdam, Barcelona, Bordeaux, Cadiz, Lisbon and Nantes)

          Total: 11050

          Liverpool: 48%
          London: 28%
          Bristol: 20%
          Amsterdam, Barcelona, Bordeaux, Cadiz, Lisbon, Nantes: 4%

          Even if the Curacao trade was to one-sixth in Jewish hands, in part of that time frame. It does not seem a too important part.

          But yes, the slave trade has a longer master-servant history than the trade with Africans, but they surely may rank high among the victims. Later it seems the obvious by-product of colonialism, once the masters conquered the world.

          I simply don’t think the topic is important in our context.

        • Citizen says:

          chrisrushlau, your long comment ending with “So the question is, next, who is properly there, who is local?” shows you have now arrived arguably at step one in the 4 year old conversation still going on Mondoweiss. The time-line responsive to your question ranges from biblical times right down to today. Does not “being a Mainer” imply/include awareness of Maine’s history, distinguishing it from that of other states? Perhaps you should tell us a bit about Maine’s current local/newcomer problem so we can all see what basic conflicting principles are involved? It might shed some new light here. Yes, equity’s key principle is that you need clean hands to ask for equity’s.

        • RoHa says:

          Tal:
          “promoting injustices against the Israeli Jews by delegitimizing their right for a nation-state in the land of Israel.”

          If by “nation-state” you mean an ethnically based state, then there is no such right. Ethnically based states are, by their very nature, disciminatory against minorities and thus immoral. There can be no right to such a state.

          If you do not mean an ethnically based state, then the right to a state* belongs to all Israeli, and not just Israeli Jews.

          (*Insofar as there is a right to a state. I have doubts about this alleged right.)

        • RoHa says:

          “But yes, the slave trade has a longer master-servant history than the trade with Africans, but they surely may rank high among the victims. ”

          There has been so much slavery in human history that there can be very few people who do not have both ancestors who were slaves and ancestors who were slave owners.

        • chrisrushlau says:

          You missed my last paragraph in that comment.
          Cliches don’t get the work done.

        • chrisrushlau says:

          Israel is a monument to human inefficiency. Human efficiency stems from cooperation. That stems from negotiation. Negotiation depends on “coming to terms” (Mortimer Adler, “How to Read a Book”: the structure of an argument: thesis, evidence, relevance, and the first step in listening is to figure out what the words mean (to quote Holmes on “hard cases”)).
          The terms of Israel, “Jewish and democratic state”, amount to a proclamation that we shall fail because we will not talk with each other because the premise of our group is that we already know exactly what to do, and philosophy is a complete waste of time.
          When all is said and done, what gets done depends a whole lot on what gets said. Israel is a teetering pile of cliches.
          Let me define Judaism. It is saying to everybody at the seder table, “Elijah is here, he is you–what can you tell us?”
          That is also my definition of democracy.
          Someone who comes to Maine, or even is born and grows up in Maine, with the idea that they don’t want to know their neighbors, is a bump in the road.

        • Tal says:

          Hey RoHa,
          I mean a state in which the jewish/hebrew culture will be dominant. Just 1 state in the whole world where you get a holiday from work on Pessach and not on Christmas or Eid el Fitter. A state which its symbols will be jewish: the Menorah, the star of David. A state in which in its schools my children will study hebrew and jewish literature.
          I do NOT mean a state where non jews will be class B citizens de facto or/and de jure. I know it is the situation today but i think it can be changed, just like the USA pretty much got rid of its discrimination against blacks.

    • Danaa says:

      Tal, we’ve gone cover this ground of zionisms’s origins god know how many times. Please consult the archives of this site, before you share these lightening bolts with us.

      Here’s just one common refrain to your argument of “zionism is merely nationalism”: unlike other nationalist movements, zionism was not organic to the place it chose to put down roots, but was rather totally external to it. Therefore, it was more akin to colonialist expeditions than to any indigenous nationalism. As such, zionism as a movement, does have does have a few things in common with eg, the Boers in South Africa, the French in Algier, and the British in Kenya, to use more recent examples. All these more recent expansionist/colonialist movements beget a system of apartheid and came to their sorry end, each in its own way. Sometimes it took 50 years, sometimes a century or more.

      But it will end BECAUSE colonialism by western Europeans foisted upon indigenous inhabitants cannot thrive in a modern world where human rights are upheld as the paramount value. Sooner or later, the natives discover their own value as a human beings, on par, with the rest of humanity on the planet. They also find themselves as PEOPLE – of the place where they lived for centuries and millenia. And whenever that happens , the conquerors and their colonizing settler parties become more extreme, more repressive, more fascist, thus losing the world’s sympathy, no matter how violent the natives’ uprising is.

      But you are right on another level – unintended of course: Zionist colonialism had much to do with the rise of nationalism among Palestinians – as a movement entirely distinct from other Arabic movements and people in the ME. And that nationalism is definitely of the more classic kind.

      In due course, Palestinian nationalism as a movement for and by the indigenous people of israel the greater shall prevail. If the so-called Jewish (ie, Judean) residents of the Israeli state are smart, they’ll learn to live and let live as the Africaans have. If they are not, which is likely, then Algeria and the fate of the pieds noirs beckons. Hopefully with less violence….

    • MRW says:

      Zionism in its essence is a national movement which emerged in the 19th century together will all other national movements.

      It was a medieval political movement based on religion that proposed nationhood under its medieval political movement to procure exclusivity and foster exceptionalism under religious precepts.

      It had nothing to do with nationalism or nation states, which requires (1) a body of people already in situ as a majority in the land and (2) whose citizens reside in the actual nation exclusively.

      Israel is the country club and clubhouse for Jews with global membership rights.

      • LeaNder says:

        MRW, it is clearly a child of 19th century nationalism, as it is the Janus-face of 19th century European antisemitism. It’s shaped by both. If late “nations” (19th) like Germany suddenly tried to define who belonged and who not, why not offer them a solution to the “Jewish problem” and found ones own nation, instead of fighting antisemitism? That’s why Zionists weren’t interested in fighting antisemitism. Zionism was the solution to it from their point of view.

        • MRW says:

          LeaNder,

          Did you ever read these? You might find them interesting although I am not offering them as a response to you. They are simply peripheral. Historian (and Jewish) Gabriel Kolko has a different take on the nationalism bit. Incidentally, he was working in Israel when it was created, and I believe speaks and read Hebrew. He is generally credited with writing the best book on the Vietnam War, one even the Vietnamese like. His specialty is wars and the creation of nations in the 20th C.

          link to is.gd
          link to is.gd

        • MHughes976 says:

          Kolko’s article is indeed interesting. I think you have to put the mid-17th century Sabatian movement, the early pogroms and the contemporary rise within the Church of England of the first form of Christian Zionism – Restorationism – into the mix. Not to mention the disaster unleashed 150 years earlier by King Ferdinand’s nationalist/dynastic ambitions, with whose effects we are still living.
          I’m sure Romantic or Wagnerian nationalism was also to play its part. I’ve read somewhere that Herzl cherished an admiration for the very anti-Jewish Wagner. Romantic nationalism was not a particularly beautiful thing and Zionism is not much justified by being to some extent a version of it.

        • MRW says:

          MHughes976,

          Actually, I found out it was Queen Isabella who had the ambitions. She wanted the Pope to move to Spain, so she kicked the Muslims out first (1480s), then the Jews (1492). They could stay if they converted. She wanted to present Spain as a Catholic state to cement her power. (Sound familiar?) The Pope at that time was not actually living in Rome (Vatican?). He lived in a villa in Tuscany somewhere. Not sure exactly where but it is north of Rome; you can rent the place today.

          Spain had become the seat of knowledge because of the great arc of Islamic culture — Jews were part of that, BTW — that had spread from Cordoba to Baghdad and beyond (Persia). When Isabella came to power with Ferdinand, she wanted to snag her part for the Pope.

        • patm says:

          MRW,

          Are you sure Izzy wore the pants on that throne?

          Could this not be a history re-write by some grumpy old msyogenist?

          ;)

    • Citizen says:

      How does the “Jewish and democratic” state of Israel fit into the emergent, evolving concept of “proposition nation,” which refers to the USA’s founding document stating the country is “dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal?” The USA fought a bloody civil war to make this proposition real, and the Civil Rights Era, most reflected by MLK, has continued this most contemporary notion of a nation, one now reflected, at least on constitutional paper, in many old and new countries around the world. I think the French got this ball rolling; as we know, France (as well as, e.g., Germany) is now struggling
      over the limits of such a notion–too, the illegal immigration issue in the USA is testing the outer limits of the notion. Will the concept of the nation-state survive, as in “united we stand,” or succumb to a new world order, or an old one (diversity, multiculturalism, ethnic tribes)?
      What will the dinosaur look like in 2111 AD? Will it all ultimately be determined by lack of jobs?

  21. Hu Bris says:

    From Arrigoni to Bernadotte to RFK to 9/11– how much global damage . . .

  22. bijou says:

    Another thing to tally under the “cost” column would be the folks in the US who lost out because of the inconceivably high sums of foreign aid the US has provided to Israel over the years.

    One such estimate (from 2008, and deemed by its author as a ‘conservative’ one): $114 billion.

    For fun, here’s a little slide show: What can $700 billion buy?

    Let’s not kid ourselves — money that went to Israel is money that DID NOT go to American citizens. Sure, maybe some of it came back in defense contracts, but that is NOT the same as funding basic health, education, and welfare. In my view this is a direct collateral cost of this neverending conflict.

    Another way to think about this is, how much American political, economic, intellectual energy — raw, human creativity and will — has been DIVERTED away from US growth and development and toward Israeli growth and development? Maybe that is a silly question, but imagine if all that effort had been directed instead at helping the US improve, grow, achieve its national interests, become a better place, whatever, who knows what we would have been able to do? It’s a national asset that has been lost to the US, and it’s hard to calculate it.

    • MRW says:

      Bijou,

      About five years ago, a DC lawyer familiar with US foreign aid said to me that had we put all the Israeli donations in the bank here at 6% interest (and interest rates were exorbitant during the 70%) we would have 6 trillion in the bank.

      • Citizen says:

        I notice the way the US politicians are handling any budget debate focus on foreign aid is to dismiss any such focus as not relevant because the total spending for US foreign Aid is but a drop in the bucket compared to what we spend on domestic entitlements or the total budget expense. They like to point out if we eliminated all foreign aid it wouldn’t cut down our debt virtually at all. Nobody yet has told the American public what the % breakdown on our foreign aid is for each foreign state or other entity recipient, nor illustrated what could be done here at home with those funds. And nobody has added up the totals over the years.

        Obama just told us what not reinstating the income taxes on the rich ($200, 000 individual, $250,000 couple) would cost a specified handful of senior citizens just to pay for retaining his tax break alone, but nothing so granular on that chunk of change we give Israel each year–with interest on it we pay all year. There’s actually a web site that shows just how much that money would help in various needy parts of the USA. You click on a map in each state to see.

        • Citizen says:

          PS: Obama said the tax rate on the rich during Ike’s days was 90%; now it’s 20 or 25%; the lowest of any Western country. Yet somehow, Ike didn’t crush the advantages of capitalism, free enterprise, or crimp the job market.

    • MRW says:

      Another thing — and far more important — is the first US free-trade agreement in 1985. It was with Israel.

      You’ll note that it was Rahm Emanuel who now likes to brag that he got NAFTA past the goal posts, and he pushed for China Most Favored Nation status on the editorial pages of the WSJ. The latter was what really unhinged our economy and led directly to Sept 2008; that and the refusal of Greenspan, Rubin, Summers, and Levitt one day in the Oval Office 1996 to regulate derivatives (according to Levitt, who was close to tears over it during an October 2008 radio interview, calling it “the worse day of my life.”)

      When the story of this deception and treachery starting with the 1st Free-Trade Agreement becomes known, things will take a different turn. The benefits were so great to Israel that the attempt to open China was started in 1990 [Israel gets to piggy-back on us into global markets via these free-trade agreements] and resisted by Congress for almost 10 years despite warnings. This is where Danaa’s observation comes into play: “rife with ignorance so deep, the likes of which can be found in only some of the remotest places on earth.” [For the record, Britain destroyed herself as an empire with free trade, and when she pressured America to adopt it during the 1800s, Ulysses Grant told England, Yeah, we'll do it in 200 years when we're as rich as you are, in the meantime, stuff it. Free trade is political. It has nothing to do with economics, really, but I'm not getting into that here.]

      Some sources:
      John Nichols wrote about Emanuel’s hand in the destruction of America in Trade Fights, (The Nation) circa 2002, although I was keenly aware of it as it was happening in the 90s.

      Grant Smith recently gave a talk at a university in Rochester about the free trade agreement with Israel using newly declassified documents (2009). http://www.irmep.org.

      Max Ajl (Jewbonics) railed against Grant Smith’s devastating talk on his website, but is utterly clueless about what he’s talking about. He knows zip about economics, free trade, transnationals, and trade deficits (which he called ‘mostly a statistical artifact’…jesus) and their consequences. The hauteur of assumption was stunning in its basic ignorance.

      • bijou says:

        MRW, this is interesting. If you have special expertise in this area, please consider writing a longer post. It’s something that rarely comes up in the course of discussions on US policy on Israel.

        • Citizen says:

          Yes, MRW, please do as bijou suggests. I’d love to send it around to the Jesus-Israel bible freaks I know who are always complaining about free trade and the “new world order.” You can add what congressman Levin said today on CSPAN as he read into the record for public consumption precisely how Goldman Sachs screwed their own investment customers and the American public, bringing on the bailout our grandchildren will still be burdened with. Levin was reading from the findings of the US Report on the 2008 Financial Crisis. You may recall that GS was right at the top of donors in behalf both Obama and McCain in that election campaign. Or, if you want to know in a different way which way the wind blows, look at the guy Chelsea Clinton married.

        • MRW says:

          Bijou, Citizen, you need background on the concepts first to connect the dots. Bookmark these and watch as you can.

          I would suggest Sir James Goldsmith first to get a feel for 1994, again, and what was running amok. It is entirely prescient. Laura Tyson’s smarmy responses, in hindsight, now show Goldsmith to be 100% correct about where we are now, and how we caused it. You must watch the first 12 minutes, minimum, minimum. 54:46 min. What Goldsmith is railing against became the WTO.
          link to video.google.com

          Watch Grant Smith’s talk on his website. About 1 hr.
          link to irmep.org

          Watch Thom Hartmann interviewing Ian Fletcher (even though Fletcher seems vaguely insufferable, he knows what he is talking about)

          This great series on The Real News. Thank god for a transcript because it’s hard to understand Ha-Joon Chang (professor Economics, Cambridge), but his book is great, a joy. And what a great sense of humor for an economist. 10 minutes each Part.
          link to therealnews.com

        • MRW says:

          Citizen, then all you have to do is get them to watch Smith’s video to see, via official unclassified documents, who introduced the idea of free trade into the US economy.

        • bijou says:

          Thanks MRW! I will watch them as my time allows. Much appreciated.

        • Citizen says:

          Thank you so much for your efforts here, MRW. I will watch them all. Going by my past experience, the bible freaks I know will not likely watch, but I will try to get them to do that.

        • Citizen says:

          Gee, MRW, what surprise to find out that our AIPAC-secured trade agreement with Israel was less a free-trade agreement than a lop-sided net give-away, really a matter of foreign aid to Israel under the guise of a free-trade agreement–and it looks like the US is stuck with those memos of understanding forever. Also nice to see more support for the fact that Israel ignores US patents in areas such as pharmacuticals and weapons to sell. The declassified information from a couple of years ago is just more reason to make AIPAC register as the agent of a foreign state, you know, the one who Obama said may or may not have nuclear bombs–he just won’t go there because we have to focus on the slightest possibility Iran might enough material to make one such a bomb some day in the future. And, meanwhile, we have to make sure Iranian trade is always a net loss for Iran.

  23. Tal says:

    Dear Annie et al, no need to be hateful. I wasn’t sent here by anyone. You should be glad that more people discover this site which is supposed to encourage “an exchange of ideas”, even if they do not subscribe to 100% of your views, maybe just 86.3% of them.

    • jon s says:

      Oh yeah , I was also accused of being a paid agent or whatever, by people whom I could have accused , by the same measure, of being paid Hamas propagandists.
      Some just don’t like hearing different opinions.

      • Citizen says:

        Yeah, jon s, Hamas has so much spare change it hardly knows what to do with it; why it’s just like Goldman Sachs in that respect.

    • annie says:

      Dear Annie et al, no need to be hateful.

      tal, like your comment below (I read Phil’s post again. It doesn’t blame Zionism for all the suffering which this conflict has inflicted. ) you might try rereading my post. i do not hate you in the least although evidence abounds this accusation is a main staple is israeli advocacy. it seems ascribing hate to ones adversaries is very popular amongst the hasbarists.

      and for your edification these are your words, not mine: (“Zio-bots”, Getting paid for writing here). that is not the definition of a ziobot.

      later!

    • LeoBraun says:

      “No need to be hateful, I wasn’t sent here by anyone. You should be glad that more people discover this site which is supposed to encourage ‘an exchange of ideas’”! [Tal]

      Attention Hasbara Job Seeker!

      Yes, you too can volunteer for being a Public Relation Ambassador. We are always interested in hearing from intelligent, motivated, people to help us with the enormous volume of work. We need people with pretty much any skill. What is more, you can help to the cause of hasbara while being a resident anywhere in the world.

      Assist to explain people in your country the middle east reality: Dictators oppress their subjects, sponsor terrorism and imperil Israel, the sole democracy in a neighborhood comprising 23 dictatorships. Your confidential questionnaire will help to evaluate how you could help, please complete and click Submit“.

  24. Tal says:

    I read Phil’s post again. It doesn’t blame Zionism for all the suffering which this conflict has inflicted. One might as well interpret it as a blame of both sides for their stubbornness.

  25. bijou says:

    Adding to this tally (more thoughts):

    1. 4 million Iraqis displaced by our war on Iraq. The trauma to all involved, and the lifelong sequelae.

    2. The cost to Palestinian political, intellectual, and military leadership capabilities of Israel’s policy of targeted assassinations (in addition to the trauma inflicted on bystanders who happen to witness or be killed as a result of these events):

    The history of Israeli assassinations actually predates the declaration of statehood by Israel. Nachman Ben-Yehuda (1997) examines the political assassinations carried out prior to and after the establishment of the State of Israel. According to his findings, up until 1988, 90 percent of the political assassinations occurred between 1939 and 1948 and were conducted by Hagana, Etzel or Lehi. Most of them (73 percent) targeted Jews rather than Brits or Arabs, motivated by revenge or the target’s reputation as “squealers” or “traitors.” The charge of “traitor/squealer” was used 91.2% of the time. Moreover, Ben-Yehuda’s research finds that the assassinations were all deliberate and planned in advance.

    The policy of sanctioning targeted murder did not stop with the establishment of the state of Israel. In the 1970s, there was a wave of killings of pro-Palestinian individuals in Paris, Nicosia, Beirut and Athens; and, in 1978, a member of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine was killed. In 1988, during the first Intifada, the PLO’s Khalil al-Wazir was assassinated.

    In the 1990s, there were three major waves of Israeli assassinations. Two of the prominent political targets were Fathi Shikaki and Yahya Ayyash. There was also the attempted assassination of Khaled Meshaal. Another wave began in 2000, following the second Intifada. Some of the high-ranking individuals targeted include Abu Ali Mustafa (PFLP), Raed al-Karmi (Tanzim Movement), Salah Shehada (a commander of the military wing of Hamas), Sheikh Ahmed Yassin (one of the founders of Hamas) and Abdel Aziz Rantisi (the leader of Hamas in Gaza in 2004). Then, in 2008, Mossad assassinated Imad Mughniyeh. There were many other figures targeted, but these were the most high-profile. All, including those not listed, were killed without any trial or due process. It should also be noted that in the past, Israel’s policy of systematically targeting individuals has been condemned by Arab countries, Europe, the United Nations and even the United States (David, 2003). In 2002, the European Union even threatened sanctions.

    And the cost:

    On May 24, 2006, Israeli Prime Minister, Ehud Olmert, appeared before the U.S. Congress to decry the lack of any “genuine Palestinian partner for peace,” with whom Israel could talk….

    Olmert’s stance should be put in the context of Israel’s long standing policy of targeted assassination of Palestinian leaders. For more than thirty years it has been Israel’s policy to assassinate or otherwise eliminate popular Palestinian leaders who were independent and had wide trust of the people, while seeking to construct a subservient leadership with whom it could negotiate “peace” on Israel’s terms. In the 1970s, after Israel’s occupation of the West Bank and Gaza in the 1967 war, Israel tried to create the “village leagues,” a puppet leadership which Israel could pass off as Palestinian self-government. These pseudo-leaders were resoundingly rejected by the Palestinian people. In 1976 Palestinian municipalities were allowed to elect their own mayors. When pro-PLO candidates swept the elections, Israel sought to assassinate several of them. The mayor of Ramallah lost one leg and the mayor of Nablus both legs in car bombs. In 1982 Israel removed all the elected mayors and replaced them with Israeli military governors.

    From the founding of the PLO in 1964 until 1992 Israel refused to talk to the PLO, claiming they were determined to “destroy the state of Israel,” even though the PLO had accepted a two state solution by mid-1970s. Prominent leaders of Palestinian organizations were killed in rocket attacks and car bombs. In 1973 a group of Israeli commandos, led by Ehud Barak, (later Prime Minister of Israel) arrived by speedboat in Beirut. Disguised in women’s clothes Barak and his men gunned down three top PLO officials in their downtown apartments. Arafat himself escaped assassination only by living constantly on the run, seldom sleeping in the same place on successive nights….

    During the Second Intifada Israel renewed a policy of indiscriminate shooting into Palestinian protest crowds, killing and wounding large numbers. From the beginning of the second Intifada (9/29/2000) until May 15, 2006 some 3394 Palestinians have been killed in the Occupied Territories by Israeli occupation forces. Among these 233 were targeted killings in which Israel either invaded a Palestinian area or targeted a house or car from the air to assassinate someone seen as a “militant.” These targeted assassinations generally result in deaths of bystanders. 353 bystanders have been killed in the course of targeted killings. The targeted persons include such religious and political leaders as Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, founder and spiritual leader of the Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas), and Abdul ‘Aziz al-Rantisi, a senior political leader of Hamas. Tanya Reinhart, in her article, “Sharon’s Legacy in Action,” shows that during Sharon’s four years in office he pursued an all-out war against Hamas, killing all its first rank military and political leaders. ….

    • bijou says:

      I know the targeted assassinations don’t qualify as “people who are outside the conflict,” but perhaps the bystanders do. Also, the huge loss in leadership potential to Palestinians is a cost that is not often considered. You might argue that anyone who was targeted in this way was a “terrorist who deserved to die,” but you’d be wrong.

  26. pookieross says:

    This piece ought to go to major newspapers as an op-ed. The history is so important. I believe that few Americans realize the history of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and, what little they read, has been so biased toward the Israeli point of view.

    • Walid says:

      Pookie, great idea but the problem would come from major papers refusing to carry it.

    • Citizen says:

      Hey, Pookie, we Americans know all we need to know. The Bible is a land deed, if you want a political career, you genuflect to AIPAC, Jews are smarter than us; we’re more like the tin man. God says so. God also says if we mess with the Jews we will go straight to hell, rather than get our reward in heaven. We don’t need to read the Talmud, even in the extremely unlikely event we could read a true translation of the original–like the S Koreans have in the form of a small book the size of a detective paperbook they’ve been instructed to keep and adhere to so they can grow a brain too. And, by the way, we have a wand that may help that kidney stone pain.

  27. chrisrushlau says:

    Not only does the first sentence gravely misrepresent the crisis–44 years of occupation of the West Bank (and Gaza) is a symptom, side-effect almost, of the anomaly that is “the Jewish democratic state” (Basic Laws of 1992) of Israel. The title betrays, brays, the writer’s prejudice. This is a conflict (other than the sense of an ideological conflict, as properly used by Finkelstein in his book title: “Israel-Palestine Conflict”) only in the sense that a lynching is a conflict.
    We are here today in Georgeport, Mississippi, scene of a recent surge in the violence of the long-running conflict between African immigrants and local people, speaking with Jesse Alderson, who speaks to me now as he dangles from a rope under this beautiful old live oak in the courthouse square of this bucolic southern town. Jesse, what do you say to those who call you a terrorist–are you willing to take any responsibility for the fear you have brought to this previously peaceful town with your strange antics and words?

  28. patm says:

    You complained above that no one answered this post, chrisrushlau.

    Is it any wonder? These sentences appear to be the ravings of a madman.

    You say above that you wished you’d read more of the thread before you posted this comment. And that statement sure makes sense!

    Mondo is a terrific resource on a difficult subject that barely gets mentioned in the mainstream media.

    The regular posters are good-hearted highly educated people who go to considerable lengths under trying conditions to inform newbies like you and me. So, please, give them a break for pete’s sake!

  29. LeoBraun says:

    “I prefer the zionist version since the Jews seemed to suffer long before and without connection to zionism (crusades, inquisition, muslim conquests) and more recently the holocaust – all of them heavily connected with the Jewish people, and no way they could be blamed for them”! [Samuel]

    Wait a minute, what sort of Jews we’re talking about?

    Since the casteless Jews, marginalised lot in the 18th century Europe, were obliged to wear yellow bonnet and star-of-david arm-band (unlike the highly revered Rothschilds) as a warning sign “for the community sake”! Until Napoleon Bonaparte campaign in 1797 as Rome, Venice, Verona and Padua ghettos were abolished and liberated Jews allowed to live wherever they wanted and practice any religion in open.

    Followed a couple of years latter by the siege of Acre (Acco, north-western Israel) in 1799 as Napoleon prepared to unveil his astounding proclamation, first ever to declare the homeland in Palestine for the destitute Jews. If not for the connived evildoers foul-play consequences! Hell-bent to retain their collateral human shield of the Jew lesser brethren. As a result Acre siege was lost to Brits at the time, along with the casteless Jews emancipation prospect.

    Once it became apparent that Napoleon couldn’t establish national home in Palestine for the persecuted Jews, France was declared as their homeland. Where granted full citizenship Jews got involved in business and political life to the disgust of the Jew peers of the realm. Metternich-Winneburg, Austrian consul in Paris in a letter to Austria’s foreign minister Count Standion lamented in Sept 1806: “Jews look upon Napoleon as their Messiah”!

    Clearly, Napoleon Bonaparte was the only govt leader ever to give casteless Jews equality at the time when all other nations born-to-rule Jew tyrants kept them in bondage. He abolished targeted taxes on Jews in Germany and gave them for the very first time civic and political equality. When strong opposition in France manifested itself, Napoleon stood firm in his support of the Jewish equality, thus ending up to pay an ultimate price!

  30. chrisrushlau says:

    Christopher Hill in a biography of Oliver Cromwell says that Cromwell intended to bring back to England the Jews whom a previous monarch/despot had expelled and send them down to Palestine, so as to bring on the Second Coming. So this preposterous reading of the New Testament as to the End Times was already current in the 1640′s. And notice how the Jews figure in Christians’ delusions yet again.

    The greater point, however, remains that being the victim of prejudice should teach you to not be prejudicial yourself. In particular, it should teach you how fragile are prejudicial regimes: by definition, they do not respond to events but only enact their prejudices.