Backer of NY ads exposing Palestinian land-loss says response has been ‘astounding’ and news ‘coverage is pouring in’

ActivismIsrael/PalestineUS Politics
on 151 Comments
bilde
Henry Clifford’s advertisement at the Chappaqua Metro-North train station July 10, 2012.
(Photo: Seth Harrison / The Journal News )

Last night I talked to Henry Clifford, the 83-year-old Connecticut man who paid for the smashing ads on New York commuter train platforms that describe the dispossession of Palestinian lands over the last century.

“I’ve been plowing this field for many years and I am absolutely astounded by the response I’ve received, and the news coverage,” the former financier said. “We’ve been begging for coverage for years. Now it’s pouring in.”

He said he had been interviewed by CBS, Fox News, NBC and many radio stations, and the questions were fair ones.

“I have received nothing but positive responses with two exceptions [by email],” said Clifford, whose email address [email protected], is on the ads. “This has produced an overwhelming response.”

Over the years Clifford and his group Committee for Peace and Palestine have run ads and written countless letters to newspapers with nothing like this impact, he said. It never got covered. Last year he put up billboards in New Haven and Old Saybrook, CT, asking Americans about the $30 billion in aid pledged to Israel over ten years, “Can we afford this?”

“The response was really pitiful,” he said.

The commuter platform ads seem to have struck a nerve, he said, because they are in the heart of New York’s media zone, viewed by movers and shakers, the affluent and the educated.

There have already been threats to take the ads down, he said. A Brooklyn religious Jewish group went to the MTA to demand that the ads be pulled. “To their everlasting credit, they said, These ads were brought to us by CBS Outdoor, a reputable company. They screened them, they approved them. It is not our job to censor them.”

But CBS Outdoor folded on less-provocative billboards put up around Los Angeles a month back, and tore them down. What’s to stop these ads from being ripped down?

“They can’t. I have a contract. The ads are there and have been paid for. I can take legal action if they fail to abide by the contract.”

I said the success of the ads indicates a shift in public opinion. Clifford said he wasn’t sure about that. “I really don’t see that the American people are any better informed than they were a year ago about this matter. There is a great amount of lack of knowledge, misinformation and even lack of interest. They think, ‘Oh it’s a mess over there,’ and then they yawn. We are trying to spread the word.”

Clifford’s Committee for Peace and Palestine has tried to stir a change in US policy for over ten years.

I asked him about the charge that the ads are anti-Semitic.

“My response is that maps are historically and geographically the truth. You cannot make a map anti-Semitic. Either it’s accurate or inaccurate. Those who disapprove of these ads, if they want to show they’re inaccurate, they should bring that proof forward.”

About Philip Weiss

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

Other posts by .


Posted In:

151 Responses

  1. Sin Nombre
    July 13, 2012, 10:19 am

    You know, given my belief that Israel is already consciously into its own One-State solution and will now just be increasing its ethnic cleansing techniques, and given that this will only continue to be recognized more and more and the sort of maps that we’ve now seen here create such an understanding and resonance with people, I wonder if the ultimate effect is going to be quite unlike what lots of people think.

    For instance Walt and J-Street and etc. all talk about a One-State solution being a disaster for Israel because of the opprobrium it will bring down on its head materially. But I don’t think Israel cares about that and believes—with good reason—that it will weather same just fine just as it has weathered having no peace but having all that Palestinian land for all these years, and that it will be easily able to keep the money flowing from Uncle Sucker U.S.A. to handle the outrage that stems from such ethnic cleansing.

    In light of the resonance such maps will have then, I wonder, when that ethnic cleansing has progressed far enough, if there isn’t going to be a fundamental and radical readjustment of the world’s image of jews and jewry in general instead. (Unfortunately, but not exactly helped by Israel’s constant demand that it be viewed as “the state of the jewish people.”)

    That is, a readjustment from the present instinctive image of jews as being innocent victims—especially of the Holocaust—to a view of jews and jewry instead being ethno-racial *aggressors.* Indeed, perhaps even as to the Holocaust, aggressors who were just in a state of war with the ethnic Germans and so were just simply losers in that war rather than innocent non-combatants.

    Nothing imminent obviously, but what’s going to be the story after the ethnic cleansings become more and more open and apparent and brutal, and the last map in any series effectively shows only a sprinkling of Palestinians left?

    And thus, the damage coming from all this falling not on Israelis really, but instead on Diaspora jews really?

    • Winnica
      July 13, 2012, 10:38 am

      Sin Nombre –

      There’s nothing new in regarding the Jews as being unusually evil in one way or another. That’s the point of the story of Jew hatred, and it’s been going on since people started blaming Jews for killing God.

      • seafoid
        July 13, 2012, 11:40 am

        I think up to now, Winnica, it was baseless. Jews got crapped on because they were Jews and powerless. It went on before Jesus came to be so famous too.

        Some of the people who run Israel now are evil. And people are going to figure that out.
        The occupation is morally wrong on so many levels. And Jews have to take responsibility for that.

      • Winnica
        July 13, 2012, 11:51 am

        You’ll be surprised to know, Seafoid, that I agree that the occupation is morally wrong, and should have ended long ago. Yet even as we agree on that, we disagree on about 92% of what gets said on this site. Or 98%.

        Food for thought.

      • seafoid
        July 13, 2012, 1:40 pm

        Winnica

        Zionist Jews are responsible for Gaza. And that is far more than 2%. Gaza is a Jewish abomination. Even if Jews need a state it can’t mean that Gaza has to be brutalised back to the 13th century.

        Judaism is going to be torn apart by Zionism. It is so ugly now and it is only intensifying .

        It’s not my religion but if it was I wouldn’t want to have anything to do with it.

      • ColinWright
        July 13, 2012, 2:54 pm

        “You’ll be surprised to know, Seafoid, that I agree that the occupation is morally wrong, and should have ended long ago….

        I think the occupation is great.

        It’s like watching somebody you hate take up crack. You know it’ll ruin him.

        Ironically, absent the occupation (and a long list of other actions), it’s doubtful I ever would have started hating Israel in the first place.

      • ColinWright
        July 14, 2012, 4:27 am

        “…I think up to now, Winnica, it was baseless. Jews got crapped on because they were Jews and powerless…”

        I should know when to shut up…

        I wouldn’t say it was baseless exactly. That falls into this oversimplification where Jews become the morally immaculate victims of a brutish goyim.

        In the beginning…

        Jews and Christians were two ferociously competing sects — rather closely related sects I might point out. There were pogroms — both ways. The vitriol and taunts of the Christians are matched by passages in the Talmud. As late as the tenth century, you have Christian clergy complaining about Jews converting servants and slaves to Judaism. The two faiths were fighting it out, and there were no rules. Christianity had certain inherent advantages (no circumcision, no greater status for ‘real’ Christians, Christians managed to get the backing of the Roman emperor) and Christianity won. But it wasn’t a fierce bad Christians/helpless Jewish victims scenario — not by a long shot. Once upon a time, there were Jewish mobs running through the streets of the Levant, hunting down Christians…

        Subsequent instances of victimization may well be indefensible — but they didn’t come out of nowhere. Jews were the agents of oppressive Polish landlords in the Ukraine — and it tends to be overlooked that when the Ukrainians rose up, they slaughtered Poles just as enthusiastically as they slaughtered Jews.

        Jews were prominent in the Socialist revolutionary movements of the nineteenth and early twentieth century. An extreme case was the brief Hungarian Soviet Republic of 1920 or so: nineteen out of twenty of the members of the ruling politburo or whatever were Jews: the joke was that the gentile was there so that executions could be carried out on the Sabbath. That was an extreme — but as a rule, Jews were represented disproportionately to their numbers in the population. If Jews made up 1% of the population, you could figure on them comprising about 10% of the Communists, as a rule. Go ahead and run a list of prominent Socialist revolutionaries — a lot of them will be Jews.

        Etc. It’s noticeable that the states in which the local population cooperated most enthusiastically with the Nazi extermination squads were those which had just been subjected to Stalin’s special variety of socialism, in which both Russian and local Jews participated — again disproportionately to their numbers in the population. I have noticed that the instances of Polish cooperation with the German murder squads happened in precisely those parts of Poland that had fallen into the Soviet zone. However unfairly, Jews were identified with Communism — and indeed, as I recall, the pre-war Polish Communist party was about a quarter Jewish.

        Of course most Jews did not participate in the Stalinist regimes. But at the same time, it was extremely easy for the local population to see ‘the Jews’ as their erstwhile oppressors, upon whom it was now possible to take revenge. One historian of this has noted that while there had been no history of pogroms in Lithuania at all, the reaction — after a year of Soviet rule — when the Germans arrived was ferocious. Jews were the one identifiable, present party that could be held responsible for the terror and dispossession the Lithuanians had just been subjected to.

        All this sounds like I am justifying anti-semitism. Indeed, it could be argued that I am justifying anti-semitism. But really: I’m not. I’m just pointing out that anti-semitism isn’t some brute, inexplicable trait inherent in the goyim. It arose and mounted to gory excess for clearly discernible reasons. Absent those reasons, we see it subsiding to the rather tame levels in which it exists in America and elsewhere in the West. It’s very difficult to demonstrate that anti-semitism is any more pronounced than any other form of bigotry in the United States.

        Nothing just happens. There’s always a cause. Homosexual rape in prison may well be deplorable, but it’s fairly clear why it happens. Similarly with anti-semitism.

      • Citizen
        July 14, 2012, 9:47 am

        ColinWright, your comment is accurate–and that’s the reason, for example, an American will find the world-class writer S0lzhenitsyn’s 200 Years Together on Amazon, but only in Russian: link to amazon.com

        In America one need not burn books to keep inconvenient factual content from the eyes of the masses, not to mention from the eyes of the intellectual class. The irony is that the book was translated and published in Germany–where there are draconian laws against anything Nazi–yes, in Germany, and in France.

      • Citizen
        July 14, 2012, 10:40 am

        2003 interview of Solzhenitsyn just after he finished book two of 200 Years Together and a bunch of reviews had come out: link to orthodoxytoday.org

      • Misterioso
        July 14, 2012, 2:40 pm

        Prophetic comments by two eminent Jews:

        Lessing J. Rosenwald, president of the American Council for Judaism, 1944: “The concept of a racial state – the Hitlerian concept- is repugnant to the civilized world, as witness the fearful global war in which we are involved. . . , I urge that we do nothing to set us back on the road to the past. To project at this time the creation of a Jewish state or commonwealth is to launch a singular innovation in world affairs which might well have incalculable consequences.”

        Albert Einstein, 1939: “There could be no greater calamity than a permanent discord between us and the Arab people. Despite the great wrong that has been done us, we must strive for a just and lasting compromise with the Arab people…. Let us recall that in former times no people lived in greater friendship with us than the ancestors of these Arabs.”

      • lyn117
        July 14, 2012, 5:41 pm

        Only the Jews who are responsible should be blamed for the evils Israel has done. Well a lot of Jews, & many leftists of earlier years, I guess were unknowingly responsible & can only be blamed to a much lesser extent. Today anyone cognizant and supportive of Israel should be blamed, like “good Germans” they can only support Israel’s policies by deliberate refusal to see. I know a lot of Jews who are in fact taking responsibility, not as Jews but as human beings, for ending the evil – but that’s the anti-zionist crowd & their like.

        Just to clarify, taking responsibility vs taking blame

      • American
        July 14, 2012, 6:54 pm

        There was a site on the net with the English translation of S0lzhenitsyn’s 200 Years Together, about 3/4 of the book’s chapters and I read it there. It was being done mostly by volunteers and a few under paid translators. Unfortunately it was taken down. The site said it was because they were trying to get it published in book form and also because there was some talk that Solzhenitsyn’s family was also trying to get published in the US.
        It was fascinating….it one could download the German or Russian version it and then translate it would be well worth while.

      • American
        July 14, 2012, 7:06 pm

        Here is the site btw….you can see how much had been translated.
        I wish I had copied and saved the translated chapters while it was available.

        link to ethnopoliticsonline.com

      • ColinWright
        July 15, 2012, 2:11 am

        Solzhenitsyn’s book is interesting. You can find most of it in English, but problematically translated by what are obviously anti-semites, and translated from the German at that, I believe.

        I found it at some place called ‘Jewise’ (get it?). The book itself does contain a lot of valid points — but at the same time, definitely drifts into what would be fair to call antisemitism at times. Largely, while Solzhenitsyn accuses Jews of clannishness, etc, he fails to give more than token consideration to the obvious counter that such behavior might have been a pretty reasonable response to Russian anti-semitism. He does quite effectively devastate the notion that Jews have been somehow especially victimized by Russian Communism.

        It should be properly translated and published. We’re adults.

      • ColinWright
        July 15, 2012, 2:17 am

        “I know a lot of Jews who are in fact taking responsibility, not as Jews but as human beings, for ending the evil – but that’s the anti-zionist crowd & their like.

        Just to clarify, taking responsibility vs taking blame..”

        To be fair, it should be possible to do neither. I doubt if Eisenhower ever felt he was responsible for the Holocaust. If a Jew has never had anything to do with Israel, how is he responsible for its actions more than any other citizen of whatever country he happens to live in?

        It can be very hard to disentangle the concept of ‘Jews’ from that of Israel — not so much logically, but viscerally. However, they really are entirely distinct.

      • lobewyper
        July 22, 2012, 10:09 am

        There is a big difference between honest inquiry into the causes of historical trends and events, on one hand, and anti-Semitism, on the other. I agree with you, Colin. There are a number of matters still in serious need of illumination. As you note, things happen for reasons.

      • lobewyper
        July 22, 2012, 1:44 pm

        American,

        I’ve read parts of it and am quite impressed with Solzhenitsyn’s book. While it may not be the last word on the subject, I totally agree that it should be available in English. No group has the right to prevent open and honest debate about anything, and efforts to suppress discussion should be strongly called out by all members of any society.

      • stevieb
        July 23, 2012, 10:18 am

        Kevin Macdonald’s “Culture of Critique”, is available online – and was a real eye- opener for me. Highly recommended…

      • Mooser
        July 23, 2012, 3:37 pm

        “Food for thought.”

        Food? Nah, it’s more PEP pills. And you know, PEP pills are the gateway drug for a full on Ziocaine syndrome.

      • Les
        July 13, 2012, 11:43 am

        Jews who worship the state of Israel rather than God are called Zionists.

      • nancee
        July 13, 2012, 5:16 pm

        Les,
        Jews and Christians who worship the state of Israel rather than God are called Zionists.

      • Klaus Bloemker
        July 13, 2012, 1:45 pm

        No Winnica – “Jew hatred” (your term) predates Christianity.
        David Harris of the American Jewish Committee called anti-Semitism “the world’s oldest social pathology”. (Though it may be the case that Jews have a very old ‘social pathology’.)

      • Light
        July 13, 2012, 11:33 pm

        The sign says nothing about Jews. It is about the Palestinians and what happened to them. You really live in a paranoid delusional world.

      • eGuard
        July 14, 2012, 9:53 am

        Winnica: There’s nothing new [...] since people started blaming Jews for killing God.

        Jews killed God they say? When did that rumour start? That is new!

      • Citizen
        July 14, 2012, 10:50 am

        Chapters translated into English can be found here: link to 200yearstogether.wordpress.com
        And here, with comments: link to sunray22b.net

        Very interesting reading–don’t know how long they will be available online.

      • JuliaNoel
        July 15, 2012, 4:51 am

        OMG, what the heck has condemning a nation that is committing war crimes got to do with “Jew hatred”??? What a cowardly, racist view of Israel’s crimes. If the roles were reversed and a militarily strong Palestine were occupying, stealing land and water, imprisoning without trial and killing Israelis daily would you be saying that it was “Arab hatred to condemn the actions? I think not; you seem more interested in the religion of the perpetrators, Israelis, than the crimes they are committing.

      • ColinWright
        July 17, 2012, 1:54 am

        “…If the roles were reversed and a militarily strong Palestine were occupying, stealing land and water, imprisoning without trial and killing Israelis daily would you be saying that it was “Arab hatred” to condemn the actions?”

        That immediately made me laugh — which I believe answers your question.

    • seafoid
      July 13, 2012, 11:15 am

      “I wonder, when that ethnic cleansing has progressed far enough, if there isn’t going to be a fundamental and radical readjustment of the world’s image of jews and jewry in general instead”

      There definitely will be . It is building up into a total car crash.
      A complete absence of basic decency brought Rupert Murdoch’s UK newspaper business down.

      link to guardian.co.uk

      “A reasonable editor could not have thought ‘I must hack into a murdered girl’s phone’ … those things seem to me self-evidently unreasonable.”

      What Israel is doing now is self evidently unreasonable. Even in Hebrew.

    • Kris
      July 13, 2012, 10:44 pm

      “…I wonder, when that ethnic cleansing has progressed far enough, if there isn’t going to be a fundamental and radical readjustment of the world’s image of jews and jewry in general instead.”

      I think that a fundamental readjustment of the world’s image of Jews is happening already, and the pace of the readjustment will accelerate exponentially as people wake up to what Israel has been doing. The blindfolds are falling off, faster and faster. Cries of “anti-semitism” no longer have any power to stop the discussion, and charges of “delegitimization of Israel” just lead to increasing awareness that Israel is not legitimate at all.

      The light that sites like Mondoweiss shine on Israel’s crimes makes it impossible for me to look away. I sweep my kitchen floor, and I remember photos of weeping Palestinian women sitting on the rubble of their homes that the Israelis have bulldozed. I work in my garden, and I remember that Israelis are continuing to bulldoze Palestinian olive trees, fields, and orchards. My children are enjoying the benefits of great educations, and I remember the Palestinian students whom Israel won’t allow to travel to the European universities that have awarded them scholarships. My daughter-in-law takes her baby to the pediatrician for a check-up, and I remember the Palestinian babies and children who die because Israel won’t allow them to get to hospitals in time.

      My parents are elderly and frail, and as I witness their courage and vulnerability, and how they cling to their dignity, I remember how Israeli soldiers deliberately humiliate elderly Palestinians at the apartheid checkpoints. My mother asks anxiously if it’s “really safe” for me to “drive home in the dark?” and I bite my tongue, instead of reminding her that I’m 65, for heaven’s sake! I remember that a mother is a mother no matter how old her children become. And then I remember all the Palestinian mothers whose children have been killed or imprisoned by the Israelis.

      Awareness of Israel’s loathesome and continuing crimes now causes me to look at my Jewish friends in a very different way. Who are these people, so involved in progressive causes, yet so silent on the one issue where their voices would really make a difference? Isn’t it, well, cynical, and an insult to God, to observe Yom Kippur every year while they look away from the evil that is being done in their names? The kind of “Christianity” that endorses war, plunder, apartheid, and casual cruelty, is an abomination, and so is that kind of “Judaism.”

      Everywhere I go, I wear a 3″ button that I made: It is the photo of beautiful little Abir Aramin, who was murdered by an Israeli policeman when Abir and her little sister were walking to the store to buy some candy. The button says, “Just another Palestinian murdered by Israel. Abir Aramin, age 10, shot in the head.” People can not help looking at the button, Abir’s face is so lovely. Non-Jews usually either ask about the issue, and appreciate the opportunity to discuss what is happening, or they already know, and say something to indicate sympathy. A few Jews indicate sympathy, too.

      What is chilling is the number of Jews whom I have known for years whose eyes keep darting to the button as we talk, but they absolutely will not acknowledge the button or engage in discussion on the topic of Israel, though there is absolutely nothing else that they are not eager to discuss. Who are these people, wonderful friends, whom I thought I knew?

      Brilliant strategies for increasing awareness, like these billboards, will inevitably result in more and more people looking at their Jewish friends and wondering.

      • Blake
        July 14, 2012, 4:00 pm

        What a beautiful human being you are. The world could do with a few more people like you “Kris”.

      • thankgodimatheist
        July 15, 2012, 5:09 am

        Beautiful post Kris. Made me feel tearful half way through.

      • Nabulsi
        July 15, 2012, 11:25 am

        Lovely post, thank you for this.

      • ColinWright
        July 17, 2012, 2:05 am

        “…I think that a fundamental readjustment of the world’s image of Jews is happening already, and the pace of the readjustment will accelerate exponentially as people wake up to what Israel has been doing…”

        The awful truth is probably that Jews just aren’t that important anymore. Maybe they were important in religiously-oriented societies that had a lot of Jews — all of whom were religiously oriented themselves. After all, the relationship may not have exactly been positive, but Jews were important to Ukrainians, etc.

        But now and in the future? Guys…Jews represent 0.2% of humanity. There are some qualifications to be made to the point, but Jews are going to be important like Basques are important. What is the world’s image of Basques going to be in the future?

        In a secular world, where radical cultural and racial differences are far more striking than religious affiliations — most of which most Jews are dropping — people just aren’t going to care.

        In a way, a half-realized awareness and fear of that may be what feeds Jewish support of Israel — and Israel’s persistently outrageous behavior, which whatever its other motives, does inarguably get attention. Is this all just about seeking the only apparent alternative to cultural oblivion?

      • lobewyper
        July 22, 2012, 1:11 pm

        I generally agree, but in militant Zionism we have a relatively small number of folks who are willing to set the middle east aflame, kill thousands (including Americans), and unleash potentially huge amounts of dangerously radioactive material on hundreds of thousands of innocents for the sake of a preemptive war that no one else on this earth wants. In this sense, they are “dangerously important.”

      • Citizen
        July 22, 2012, 7:39 pm

        Colin Wright, I think you are dead wrong. I’d say the likes of Sheldon Adelson is very important. It does not matter that most people, especially average Americans, don’t care. That’s exactly why things are as they are, and will be.

      • Chu
        July 17, 2012, 11:45 am

        “Who are these people, so involved in progressive causes, yet so silent on the one issue where their voices would really make a difference? ”

        Some of them are the greatest critics of political matters inside the US, but are completely mum on the Jewish state. I can’t tell you how many people I know in NYC, who are like this. It’s strange reality. Sort of a ‘do as we say, not as we do’. A clear example of hypocrisy is liberal Anthony Weiner debating Brian Baird [March 2011]. Weiner wanted to have it boths ways, and thus had a complete meltdown in a public debate performance.

      • Citizen
        July 17, 2012, 4:33 pm

        Chu, I knew lots of them in Chicago for many years; and now I find them in my new residential area. Baird is an authentic principled and sensitive humane American in every way as to his values, while Weiner is a typical PEP peep. in short, Baird is not a “landsman” or MOT, Zionist version.

      • Chu
        July 17, 2012, 8:48 pm

        Citizen, if more people were aware of the ‘facts on the ground’ (as they say) this corrupt land grab wouldn’t be happening. Often when talking about Israel with other colleagues, they flatly have said ‘don’t you talk about Israel’. When it comes down to it the core of it, they can’t accept that it’s just as rotten as the previous centuries of colonial projects, and ultimately they often blame the non-Jew for Israel’s problems, and existence.
        It washes their hands of responsibility and it’s a cipher they can’t seem to decode.

      • Citizen
        July 22, 2012, 7:41 pm

        Chu, I agree. It’s been my experience too. And the political scene in America mirrors it.

    • bilal a
      July 14, 2012, 9:25 am

      Ethnic cleansing in Palestine as a policy has a history priot to the establishment of the Jewish State.

      “In February 1936, some months before the opening of the Olympic Games, the German Zionists officially held their congress in Berlin. As early as that year, Germany already hosted about forty Zionist training centers (Umschulungslager) for the instruction of young Jews in farming or other skills that they would need to use later in Palestine. The Jewish press in Germany at that time experienced a prodigious expansion. There was talk of a reawakening or revival of Jewish consciousness. Assuredly, the anti-Zionist Jews deplored or condemned this state of things. Many Jews, particularly those of the older generation, proudly laid claim to a certain Germanness: amongst them, the project held by young Jews to be a solution for the future was seen as a disaster in the making. The Germans authorized the setting up of uniformed Jewish paramilitary groups under a blue and white flag (the flag of the future state of Israel) albeit on the condition that they not parade in the streets, but only within their school grounds or barracks. Sometimes there were sporting events between young Zionists and young National Socialists.”

      speaking of maps, see this map Zionist training camps in Germany in August 1936
      link to vho.org

  2. Winnica
    July 13, 2012, 10:33 am

    The problem with the maps isn’t that they’re antisemitic. It’s that they’re factually false. The earliest looks at property owned by individual Jews, without asking what property was owned by individual Palestinians. The next looks at a line drawn by the United Nations, accepted by the Yishuv but violently rejected by the entire Arab world. The third tells of a limited agreement between nations, defined at the time by the Arab states as temporary. The fourth also tells of a temporary agreement, for the first time in the series one of them being Palestinian, and carefully omits Areas B & C, an essential part of that agreement, implying falsely that they are controlled by Israel in the same way as inside the Green Line.

    For the consecutive ones to be comparable with the first, it would have to show privately owned land of both ethnic groups, irrespective of citizenship, at all stages – or, perhaps, political control at all stages. Were it to do either, the graphic would be very different… but that’s the point. The creator of the map wasn’t interested in history, facts, intellectual coherence. He or she was interested in making a propaganda point.

    • talknic
      July 13, 2012, 2:56 pm

      Winnica July 13, 2012 at 10:33 am

      F*(%’n hilarious. That ol’ ziocaine sure is powerful stuff

      ‘real estate’, which is land Jewish folk bought, is not ‘territory’.

      ‘territory’ belongs to all the legitimate inhabitants of the ‘territory’, whether they own ‘real estate’, rent ‘real estate’ or are homeless bums living under a bridge.

      For example, foreigners owning ‘real estate’ in the USA (or any other country) have absolutely no ‘territorial’ rights.

      The amount of ‘real estate’ bought by Jewish folk in Palestine pre-15th May 1948, is minuscule compared to the amount of ‘territory’ the world’s Jewish population were granted COMPLETELY FREE for our homeland state.

      • ColinWright
        July 14, 2012, 4:47 am

        “…The amount of ‘real estate’ bought by Jewish folk in Palestine pre-15th May 1948, is minuscule compared to the amount of ‘territory’ the world’s Jewish population were granted COMPLETELY FREE for our homeland state.”

        Well, you weren’t supposed to drive the indigenous population off of it with fire and sword. That actually was specifically disallowed in the contract.

        I love reading all those contemporary professions of surprise about how ‘readily’ the Palestinians abandoned their villages.

        ‘We came in, shot the mukhtar and six randomly selected males, blew up the mosque, and told everyone we’d be back tomorrow and kill anyone who was still there.’

        ‘And they all left! Who’d a thought?’

      • Klaus Bloemker
        July 14, 2012, 8:09 am

        -“drive the indigenous population off” its land.

        You got that wrong Colin. The real ‘indigenoues’ people were the Zionist Jews who returned. The Palestinian Arabs were squatters on Jewish property.

        See how Benny Morris put it: “When the Jews returned they found strangers on their land.” (In an interview in a German paper in 2004)

      • Shingo
        July 14, 2012, 9:12 am

        You got that wrong Colin. The real ‘indigenoues’ people were the Zionist Jews who returned.

        That’s truly delusional. Zionism is only 114 years old.

        Those who’s families and descendents were there for centuries were squatters, but those who have no link the land beyind fairy tales are ‘indigenoues’ to the land?

        >> “When the Jews returned they found strangers on their land.”

        They might have been strangers to the European immigrants, but they were indigenous. In 1897 a Zionist delegation was sent to Palestine for a fact finding mission and to explore the viability of settling Palestine with European Jewry. The delegation replied back from Palestine with a cable:

        “The bride is beautiful, but she is married to another man.” (Iron Wall, p. 3)

        In 1891, Ahad Ha’Am similarly wrote of the Palestinians:

        “If a time comes when our people in Palestine develop so that, in small or great measure, they push out the native inhabitants, these will not give up their place easily.” (Righteous Victims, p. 49)

        I apologise for my tone if you were being sarcastic.

      • ColinWright
        July 15, 2012, 2:35 am

        “See how Benny Morris put it: “When the Jews returned they found strangers on their land.” (In an interview in a German paper in 2004)”

        Now this sort of thing drives me wild. This persistent return to the assertion that ‘Jews are from Palestine’ when they by and large are obviously not.

        It’s understandable that Joe Sixpac might assume they are (although those who allow him to believe it certainly are culpable) but somebody like Benny Morris knows perfectly well the notion that the Jews are ‘returning to their land’ is at best problematical.

        Yet he calmly repeats it as if it were a universally accepted truth. It’s as if he were saying ‘after all, we all agree the world is round.’

        If you brought up the point, he would probably even agree that indeed, Jews are not exactly pure Palestinian — like that Israeli academic quoted criticizing Sand here the other day. ‘Oh sure, that’s true enough.’

        But then the next interview, Morris would go right back to his lie. It’s as if one were arguing with a Mexican, and he agreed that ‘yeah — most Mexicans must be mostly descended from Indians.’ But then the next moment he’d turn around and say ‘as the only authentic heirs to the Visigothic Kingdom of Spain, our position is…’

        The dishonesty — whether internalized or not, whether conscious or not — is stunning. I think these people simply choose to refuse to acknowledge the falsehoods that are at the core of their doctrine. It’s like a man who goes on believing that his wife is faithful, in spite of the overwhelming evidence that she is not. Acknowledging the truth would be so inconvenient, you see.

      • pjdude
        July 21, 2012, 2:10 am

        the palestians weren’t squatters. how could it be jewish property when well jews never owned it. arabs have been in palestine for roughly 3000 years. to call palestinian arabs squatters is a strange notion indeed.

      • proudzionist777
        July 23, 2012, 2:58 am

        You should be sarcastic.
        Your, ‘Bride is beautiful’ quote has been debunked.
        Never was said. Never happened. Just more anti-Zionist agitprop.

        link to elderofziyon.blogspot.co.il

      • Shingo
        July 23, 2012, 8:46 am

        Never was said. Never happened. Just more anti-Zionist agitprop.

        elderofziyon doesn’t prove it never happned, just that the “rabbis” aren’t named , that no sources are cited . Even if that were the case, there are hundreds of quotes to that effect anyway, so you’re justy wasting everyone’s time cherry picking the one quote you can refute, while ignoring those you can’t.

        elderofziyon apprently believe that refuting this one quote makes a strong case, but it doesn’t. You haven;t even truied to address Ahad Ha’Am’s quote,

        “We abroad are used to believe the Eretz Yisrael is now almost totally desolate, a desert that is not sowed ….. But in truth that is not the case. Throughout the country it is difficult to find fields that are not sowed. Only sand dunes and stony mountains …. are not cultivated.”
        (Righteous Victims, p. 42)

        . Michael Bar-Zohar (one of Ben-Gurion’s official biographers) openly admitted that it was a myth that “Palestine was an empty land,” and to a certain degree, he managed to explain the evolution of the myth, he wrote:

        “Whatever became of the slogan: A people without a land returns to land without a people? The simple truth was that Palestine was not an empty land, and the Jews were only a small minority of its population. In the days of the empire building, the Western powers had dismissed natives as an inconsequential factor in determining whether or not to settle a territory with immigrants. Even after the [1st] world war, the concept of self-determination . . . . was still reserved exclusively for the developed world.”

        (Michael Bar-Zohar, p. 45-46)

        Or Israel Zangwill, in his 1905 speech to a Zionist group in Manchester that:

        “Palestine proper has already its inhabitants. The pashalik of Jerusalem is already twice as thickly populated as the United States, having fifty-two souls to the square mile, and not 25% of them Jews ….. [We] must be prepared either to drive out by the sword the [Arab] tribes in possession as our forefathers did or to grapple with the problem of a large alien population, mostly Mohammedan and accustomed for centuries to despise us.”

        (Expulsion Of The Palestinians, p. 7- 10, and Righteous Victims, p. 140)

      • Mooser
        July 23, 2012, 3:44 pm

        I think Klaus was attempting irony. He almost managed it, too!

    • ColinWright
      July 13, 2012, 2:59 pm

      “The problem with the maps isn’t that they’re antisemitic. It’s that they’re factually false.”

      You could go back and read the material that’s already been posted on this point. You’re repeating some very tired claims…and I don’t see why anyone should take the trouble to repeat what they typed yesterday.

      • Blake
        July 13, 2012, 4:14 pm

        Colin: I could swear it’s intentional they do that. They either have selective reading, are in denial or both.

    • Sumud
      July 13, 2012, 5:11 pm

      The next looks at a line drawn by the United Nations, accepted by the Yishuv but violently rejected by the entire Arab world.

      Liar.

      Winnica, if zionists accepted the UN plans the 49-67 and 2010 maps would be identical to the second map and we all know they’re not, and we all know why: because Israel chose to invade one half of the Palestinian partition in 1947/8/9 and the other half in 1967.

      It wasn’t an accident, and you can’t win land via war. The “violent rejection” of the UN plan started with zionist ethnic cleansing in Israel, before any arab state entered the conflict in mid-May 1948 zionist forces had already ethnically cleansed 250-400,000 Palestinians. Murdering them, stealing their land and looting their property.

      The arab states entered the conflict in a very half-hearted way and in the case of Jordan it was in collusion with the zionists. The arab state armies did not invade Israel they opted in the Palestinian partition and were attempting to prevent more incidents like the massacre at Deir Yassin.

    • Light
      July 13, 2012, 11:35 pm

      Tell us Winnie where did you learn your facts?

    • Misterioso
      July 14, 2012, 3:04 pm

      Winnaca
      Re: THE 1947 PARTITION PLAN, UNGA Res. 181
      Palestinians and their fellow Arabs did not agree to the Partition Plan because although Jews (90% of whom were of foreign origin), made up just 31% of the population (only 30% had taken out citizenship, thousands were illegal immigrants) and owned less that 6% of the land, the Partition Plan (recommendatory only, no legal status, contrary to the terms of the British Class A Mandate, never adopted by the UNSC) outrageously recommended they be given 56% of Palestine (including its most fertile areas) in which Palestinians made up 45% of the population. (10% of Palestine’s total Jewish population consisted of native anti-Zionist Palestinian/Arab Jews).

      Although native Palestinian citizens made up at least 69% of the population and owned over 94% of the land, the Partition Plan recommended they receive a mere 42% as a state. The 2% of Palestine comprised of Jerusalem, East and West, and Bethlehem was to be a corpus separatum under international control. No wonder the utterly unjust and illegal Partition Plan was rejected by Palestinians. Indeed, it proved so unworkable that when Polish born David Ben-Gurion (nee, David Gruen) et al. declared the “Jewish State” of Israel effective 15 May 1948 (after Jewish forces had already expelled and dispossessed 400,000 Palestinians as per the Jewish Agency’s Plan Dalet), the UNGA was in the process of shelving the Partition Plan in favor of a UN Trusteeship for Palestine. When war erupted due to the necessity of intervention by outnumbered and outgunned Arab state armies in order to stem the accelerating expulsion of Palestinians (e.g., 60,000 driven out of Haifa in late April; 70,000 out of Jaffa in late April and early May; 60,000 from West Jerusalem in March and early May) a US proposed cease-fire was accepted by the Arab League but rejected by Israel.

      During the ensuing war Israel seized 78% of Palestine, expelled a further 400,000 Palestinians and bulldozed nearly 500 of their towns and villages, including churches, mosques and cemeteries.

    • lyn117
      July 14, 2012, 6:27 pm

      “The earliest looks at property owned by individual Jews, …”
      No, quit making up lies. The first map looks at property owned by zionists, including zionist organizations such as the JNF which put racist covenants on it forbidding its use by non-Jews (land owned by Palestinian Arabs generally didn’t have such covenants). Public land at the time included land owned by Palestinian villages, it’s fair to call that Palestinian land. It also included land held by the Islamic trusts as well as “state” land, however, much of which was nevertheless used by the indigenous population, e.g. by Bedouins for nomadic grazing or seasonal farming. Such Bedouin tribes generally recognized tribal boundaries although they didn’t have recorded deeds, it’s also fair to call those lands Palestinian.

      Besides which, as someone said, the legend explains what is meant by each color in each map, and its perfectly accurate

    • traintosiberia
      July 21, 2012, 11:25 pm

      Winnica –
      Buy some lands here and buy more in this depressed markets and then declare a new country coming to existence then ask a powerful or two powerful conutries to admit the new entity as the newest nation on earth.

  3. Blake
    July 13, 2012, 10:39 am

    What a great man. Total admiration for him. Thanks for bringing it to our attention Phil.

  4. eljay
    July 13, 2012, 10:44 am

    >> You cannot make a map anti-Semitic.

    Mr. Clifford underestimates the determination of Zio-supremacists. One might almost think he is anti-Semitic… ;-)

  5. Basilio
    July 13, 2012, 11:04 am

    This whole thing about maps being anti-Semitic seems to mean as if Israel is a religion and God the whole world must worship, and if you criticize Israel then you are of the damned. This is kind of a dictatorial premise, and it doesn’t work. The more you suppress such things, the more people eventually rebel whether they’re Jews or gentiles. They get super annoyed and plenty of young Jews are not afraid to confront right wing Zionists in a vociferous way from my own experience and tell them to get lost. The scare tactics won’t work so well anymore.

    • Mooser
      July 13, 2012, 6:52 pm

      “The scare tactics won’t work so well anymore.”

      I don’t know about that, Basilio. Waskow just called me Mr/Ms and condemned me for a non-dialoguer. I’m not sure I’ll get through the night without resorting to the three R’s (razor, rope or revolver). I’m shattered!

      • ColinWright
        July 15, 2012, 2:38 am

        “…I’m not sure I’ll get through the night without resorting to the three R’s (razor, rope or revolver)…”

        Lol. Are these something like the four food groups?

      • Mooser
        July 23, 2012, 3:48 pm

        “Lol. Are these something like the four food groups?”
        No, it’s more like “Mustard” from Vivaldi’s “The Four Seasonings”.

  6. Kathleen
    July 13, 2012, 11:10 am

    “”I’ve been plowing this field for many years and I am absolutely astounded by the response I’ve received, and the news coverage,” the former financier said. “We’ve been begging for coverage for years. Now it’s pouring in.”

    Thank you Henry Clifford. Know folks who have been “plowing this field” for four decades. Lots of hard work, letters, direct lobbying..petitions, information panels etc etc Have been involved for several decades. Real shift taking place. Thanks Phil for his direct email. Will send a direct thank you

  7. BillM
    July 13, 2012, 11:16 am

    Great story. Great lesson, too. It models what I’ve seen that the money argument, however much it SHOULD resonate, just doesn’t. It doesn’t get people excited or angry. I dont know why that is, maybe because the amount of money is much too big for the individual to have any personal sense of (a billion is entirely abstract and unrelated to my life), but actually small compared to the other stuff our government wastes money on (e.g. invasion of Iraq)? But it doesn’t seem to work. The simple, clear, un-arguable emotional story works best.

    At the same time, this ad’s simplicity, and lack of any graphic/bloody images or harsh language gave the other side absolutely nothing to grasp on to try to distract from the issue. They tried of course, but the “maps are anti-semitic” line is so comically bad that their outrage is just increasing media attention without undermining the story at all.

    I hope folks study this example of an effective media move, and use the lesson going forward.

    • Kathleen
      July 13, 2012, 12:00 pm

      wonder how quickly they will be taken down like the LA adds. Folks can buy ads for their own local newspapers through If Americans Knew
      link to ifamericansknew.org

      • Citizen
        July 13, 2012, 2:28 pm

        Henry Clifford has a 30 day contract with the transit system. They could breach the contract, and pay the price, whatever that would be. Stay tuned on this issue. It might be something taxpayers should know.

  8. Les
    July 13, 2012, 11:33 am

    This is a great story which I will share across cyberspace.

    • Citizen
      July 13, 2012, 2:29 pm

      Me too, Les; good to share all of Mondoweiss across cybespace.

  9. Mndwss
    July 13, 2012, 11:42 am

    This reminded me about the Chomsky & Dershowitz Debate, where they were arguing about maps:

    ALAN DERSHOWITZ: I participated in the drafting in a small way of 242. I was Arthur Goldberg’s assistant at the Supreme Court. He drafted 242. He conferred with me and consulted with me. Two-four-two clearly contemplated Israel retaining some of the territories needed to create secure boundaries in 1967. The UN rejected a formulation of Israel returning all the territories, or “the” territories, and kept only “territories”, and as the result of that Israel accepted 242, and at Khartoum, all the Arab states and the Palestinians unanimously rejected 242 and issued their three ‘no’s: no compromises, no recognition, no peace.

    BRIAN MANDELL: If we can just…

    NOAM CHOMSKY: The truth of the matter is…

    BRIAN MANDELL: If we can just, uh…

    NOAM CHOMSKY: …easily discovered…

    BRIAN MANDELL: If we can just hold there…

    NOAM CHOMSKY: …from the foreign relations of the United States which points out that Arthur Goldberg…

    BRIAN MANDELL: …Professor Chomsky.

    NOAM CHOMSKY: …approached the Jordanians and the others and got them to agree to accept–a qualified acceptance of 242 on the condition that there would be minor and mutual adjustments with no substantial change to the map. There were curved lines and it was agreed that they should be straightened.

    BRIAN MANDELL: All right, what you can’t see behind the podium is that both of my colleagues are armed with several dozen maps and that could get…that could get dangerous in this part of the conversation so I’m gonna ask for some restraint so we make sure that we go directly to our participants. Yes, sir.

    **********

    NOAM CHOMSKY: Now, here’s a simple exercise. You can believe one of two things: the extensive published diplomatic record, which I gave you a sample of and you can find in detail in books of mine and others, or what Mr. Dershowitz says he heard from somebody. Which you can’t check.

    ALAN DERSHOWITZ: No, or — and check the diplomatic record.

    BRIAN MANDELL: OK. Professor Dershowitz, hold.

    ALAN DERSHOWITZ: Check the maps.

    link to chomsky.info

    For once i agree with Dershowitz on something. Check the maps….

    But if you do, then maps are dangerous in this part of the conversation or anti-something….

    What to do…?

    • Woody Tanaka
      July 13, 2012, 12:40 pm

      Dershbag: “I participated in the drafting in a small way of 242… The UN rejected a formulation of Israel returning all the territories, or ‘the’ territories, and kept only ‘territories’…”

      This is interesting. If the Dersh-hole is responsible for the fact that the English does not include the article “the,” he must know that the French reads differently and includes the article “des.” This means that the French controls and convoluted and unnatural reading that the zios put into 242 must be rejected. One wonders if the Dersh-wad feels he failed in his trick to try to advance israeli Lebensraum by failing to conform the French with the English.

      • lysias
        July 13, 2012, 7:23 pm

        When one authoritative text (in this case, the French version) is unambiguous, whereas another authoritative taxt (here, the English one) is ambiguous but permits the meaning of the unambiguous text, the ambiguous text is interpreted to have the meaning of the unambiguous text. This rule of interpretation is used all the time in various fields of law, notably contract law, but also in my field of expertise, pension law.

    • Mndwss
      July 13, 2012, 1:20 pm

      If the Little Glass Slipper fits then you are Cinderella.

      If the glove fits, then the killer is innocent.

      If the map fits, then let’s not use the map. Maps are dangerous.

      Send in the clowns:

      “Bozo Dershowitz the great confuser” will now sing a song for you:

      Oh yes, I’m the great pretender
      Pretending that I’m doing well
      My need is such, I pretend too much
      I’m lonely but no one can tell

      Oh yes, I’m the great pretender
      Adrift in a world of my own
      I play the game, but to my real shame
      You left me to dream all alone

      Too real is this feeling of make believe
      Too real when I feel what my heart can’t conceal

      Oh yes, I’m the great pretender
      Just laughing and gay like a clown
      I seem to be what I’m not, you see
      I’m wearing my heart like a crown
      Pretending that you’re still around

      Too real is this feeling of make believe
      Too real when I feel what my heart can’t conceal

      Oh yes, I’m the great pretender
      Just laughing and gay like a clown
      I seem to be what I’m not, you see
      I’m wearing my heart like a crown
      Pretending that you’re still around

      • American
        July 13, 2012, 4:15 pm

        LOL……that’s the perfect song Mndwss and going to be more and more accurate.

    • Citizen
      July 13, 2012, 2:34 pm

      Didn’t the French translation say all the territories were not to be had by Israel?

      • Woody Tanaka
        July 13, 2012, 3:03 pm

        Yes. The French, which is equally binding as the English, is unmistakably clear that they must hand over all of the territories.

      • mig
        July 13, 2012, 3:30 pm

        Citizen, this is correct.

      • Shingo
        July 14, 2012, 12:49 am

        Not only that Citizen, but the ansence of “the” is irrelevant, because so long as Iarael continues to occupy any land, it still remains in violation of 242.

        Then there is inadmissibility clause in the preamble, which removes any ambiguity. If terroritory occupied in the 6 day war is inadmissible, them all of it is.

    • Misterioso
      July 14, 2012, 3:16 pm

      These Zionist mouthpieces such as Dershowitz keep trotting out the myth that UNSC Resolution 242 does not mean total withdrawal from all Arab lands Israel invaded and occupied during the war it launched on 5 June 1967. To state the obvious, the UNSC cannot pass a resolution that violates the UN Charter which prohibits the acquistion of territory by war under any circumstances.

      As then Israeli Foreign Minister Abba Eban later revealed, he understood full well that Resolution 242 calls for Israel’s complete withdrawal: “The words ‘in the recent conflict’ convert the principle of eliminating occupation into a mathematically precise formula for restoring the June 4 Map.”

      During negotiations to determine Resolution 242’s wording, Abba Eban failed in his attempt to have the phrase “in the recent conflict” deleted. (Comment by Foreign Minister of Israel and Telegram 3164, UK Mission in New York to Foreign Office, 12 Nov 1967. FO961/24, quoted by McHugo “Resolution 242: A Legal Reappraisal…,” pp. 874-85).

  10. talknic
    July 13, 2012, 3:34 pm

    Dersh “the borders between Israel and the Palestinian state should be based roughly on the U.N. Resolution 242″ …. “Two-four-two clearly contemplated Israel retaining some of the territories needed to create secure boundaries in 1967.”

    Dersh is spouting runny Red Heifer sh*te.

    A) I have never been able to find any reference to his being consulted in ANY of the writings of any of the drafters of UNSC res 242.

    B) “territories occupied” and never un-occupied, are territories still occupied. UNSC res 476

    Furthermore, if he was involved, other than saying good morning passing in a corridor or water at a urinal, he’d know that UNSC res 242 was ONLY about ending hostilities between already existing states and;

    Israel’s borders with all the pre-existing states were by default of those states existing BEFORE Israel was declared a state. There was to be “respect for and acknowledgement of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force;”

    UNSC res 242 does not contain the word ‘negotiate’ ‘negotiated’ ‘negotiating’ link to wp.me

  11. hophmi
    July 13, 2012, 3:47 pm

    It isn’t the truth. It’s the Palestinian narrative. To present maps of 1946 and 1947 without presenting the history of 1939-1945 is to greatly simplify history. To present the entire Negev as part of “Palestine”, when, in fact, it was inhabited by under 100,000 nomadic Bedouin tribal people who would not identify as Palestinian then or today is a lie. To ignore the Arab role in denying the Palestinians a state under the partition plan (the 1947 partition map conveniently excludes Palestine from the Green part, and ignores the population division of the two prospective states) is a lie. To suggest that there are 4.7 million refugees as if Israel expelled them all, ignoring the fact that Arab states have refused to give them citizenship, and they are the only legacy refugees in the world is a lie. Ignoring the history of general Arab rejectionism is a lie. To ignore the fact that Jordan ruled the West Bank for 18 years and gave the Palestinians no sovereignty is a lie.

    It won’t make a difference, whether it stays up or not, and it won’t get the Palestinians any closer to a state.

    • Inanna
      July 14, 2012, 9:57 am

      Translation of the above post by hophmi:

      Remember the holocaust. Palestinians supported Nazis (even though most Palestinians who served in WW2 did so in British forces).

      Bedouins are not Palestinians (even when they call themselves that).

      Arabs violently objected to state of Israel (even though they entered battle after 400,000 Palestinians were already ethnically cleansed in 47/8).

      Gibberish, gibberish, gibberish.

      The descendants of refugees are not refugees (except for Mizrahi, Sephardic and Ashkenazi Jew).

      Other countries should clean up the mess made by Israel. We’re not responsible for the dispossession of Arabs or their continuing refugee status. All Arabs are the same, aren’t they?

      Gibberish, gibberish, gibberish.

      The Palestinian people don’t have a right to self-determination. The Jewish right to self-determination on Palestinian land supersedes all others.

      Nyeh, nyeh. You don’t have a state and we do. So suck it.

      • ritzl
        July 14, 2012, 11:20 am

        Bingo. All points.

        This though:

        Other countries should clean up the mess made by Israel. We’re not responsible for the dispossession of Arabs or their continuing refugee status. All Arabs are the same, aren’t they?

        always makes me wonder what kind of behind the scenes influence Israel has everywhere to get everyone to agree to pitch in to “clean up the mess” despite the destruction (or twisting beyond all recognition, re PA security/political suppression apparatus) of most attempts to do so. If it were me, after the second time (i.e. years ago), I’d start to question the wisdom of sending good money after bad and demand some demonstration of good faith, if not outright progress. But the I/C keeps doing it.

      • Misterioso
        July 14, 2012, 3:18 pm

        Well and truly stated!!!

    • Blake
      July 14, 2012, 4:26 pm

      Hophmi: Hows it feel when even your Israeli historians agree with the Palestinian “narrative”?

      • thankgodimatheist
        July 15, 2012, 6:21 am

        “Hophmi: Hows it feel when even your Israeli historians agree with the Palestinian “narrative”?”

        Hophmi is right-wing and does not accept Israeli historians’ conclusions that coincide with the Palestinians’ narrative because they’re on the left (even when they’re not as in Benny Morris case).

    • thankgodimatheist
      July 15, 2012, 5:29 am

      “it was inhabited by under 100,000 nomadic Bedouin tribal people who would not identify as Palestinian then or today is a lie. ”
      Say it ain’t true Hophmi! You can’t be that low, can you? The Bedouins that I knew in real life and on Facebook would have, factually, ripped you apart had they heard your despicable PR. Tfooh!

      • thankgodimatheist
        July 15, 2012, 6:10 am

        “nomadic Bedouin tribal people”
        And not even granting them the label “Arab”!! Talk about deceptive convolution!

    • pjdude
      July 21, 2012, 2:19 am

      no matter how much you lie Israel is still stolen palestinian land. your much like lady macbeth washing her hands to get rid of blood that just won’t go away.

      and before you go there yes i know lady macbeth was halucinating the blood. that only means she had more morals than you do. she felt guilt over her crimes. you and ISrael as a whole blame your victims.

  12. ColinWright
    July 13, 2012, 4:23 pm

    “The problem with the maps isn’t that they’re antisemitic. It’s that they’re factually false…”

    I think your problem with the maps is that they are essentially accurate. They show (and this is the message everyone gets) that

    1. The Zionists had managed to legitimately acquire only a few scattered parcels prior to 1947.

    2. That they were then (rather unjustly) awarded half the pie.

    3. That they then took more.

    4. That they have now set about herding the remaining Palestinians into fragmented ghettoes.

    Is it the inaccuracy of that that is the problem — or the accuracy?

  13. American
    July 13, 2012, 4:24 pm

    Bravo Clifford!
    I love it and sent him a thanks also.
    The response to the maps does make me have to rethink my contention that more people are upset by the money we give Israel. The money objection seemed to be the bulk of the anti Israel comments in the comments sections of msm articles on line..BUT?….perhaps there is a change or perhaps there is difference in the dedicated on line public and the less on line general public?

    Or perhaps and most likely the picture really grabs and shocks people…cause there is the ‘theft’ right before their eyes and is it astounding how much has been stolen…absolutely astounding.

  14. schlemiel
    July 13, 2012, 4:37 pm

    So this graphic is the latest magic bullet that will make all the sheeple wake up and see the light?

    As has been stated, it’s a somewhat selective interpretation of the data, but who cares?

    You can just as easily retitle the graph “The Missed Opportunity of a Two-State Solution.”

    Hardcore rejectionism of Israel didn’t begin when Phil Weiss started this site, or when the first American campuses started hosting courses about Zionism being colonialism.

    The hardcore rejectionism goes back to 1948 and before. The same confrontational, all-or-nothing rhetoric about Zionists being evil incarnate and soon to pay a terrible price for their misdeeds was bandied about back then as it is now.

    They could have taken their chances with partition, but they rejected it. They could have taken their chances with the 1949 Armistice lines, but they rejected that, too.

    I know that people here are fond of explaining why the Palestinians and the Arab world were right to reject the imposition of a new state in the region, but the point is they made their choices and that map is the result.

    You can keep doubling down on the rejectionism, and maybe this time things will finally pay off. After all, what more do you have to lose?

    The other part of the billboard is the mention of 4.7 million UN listed refugees. Of course, the UN has an entirely special category of refugees for Palestinians. That’s all part of the ‘keep the outrage alive rather than move on’ strategy.
    In the meantime, millions of other refugees were created and dealt with dating to the 1940s. But the Arab world chose the gambit of total rejectionism, and the map shows the results.

    I’m not really sure what the goal of all this is. Indeed, there doesn’t seem like a goal other than to wish Israel away.

    On the bright side, Israel is out of Gaza, and the “apartheid wall” looks a lot like a border. These were two developments that would have been unimaginable in 1990 based on Israel’s then-stated positions. My Peace Now buddies in the late 80s told me that “All Israel needs to do is withdraw from the territories and peace will happen.” And there was a certain ring of truth to that. After all, if the 2-state solution is logical to me and the Peace Now guys, why wouldn’t it be to everybody?

    But as we saw from the failure of Oslo, it’s not that simple. And as we see now, Gaza and the West Bank will never really be enough. The issue is Israel’s very existence.

    I guess the bus ads, as well as most everything connected with this website, are meant to make Americans “wake up” and develop negative opinions about Israel. Let’s say you succeed in making Americans hate Israel as much as some of you do, then what? Does that mean they’re gonna start loving the Palestinian cause? As the cost of Iraq has shown us, the 3 billion dollars in military subsidies to Israel is chump change.
    The Iraq experience has also taught us a lesson in the futility of nation-building, a trillion dollar lesson. How much would trying to get Palestine up and running cost?

    Of course, most people here aren’t concerned with that. They’re primarily concerned with getting America to stop supporting Israel, so we can walk away with heads held high and show the Arab world that we’re really not Zionist lackeys.

    Is the goal to get America to leave the Middle East, or to get us further involved by building a fair and just Palestine the same way we built a free Iraq? Hey, maybe if we contribute enough money, show enough contrition, and be less nice to Israel, there won’t be cheering on the streets the next time some terrorists fly planes into our buildings. Isn’t that a wonderful goal to strive for?

    Going after Jewish advocacy figures for calling these maps “antisemitic” is the low hanging fruit. And ultimately, that does seem to represent the level of fighting for the founders of this site. It’s Manhattan yuppies who have either never been to Israel or went for the first time at age 50 in 2006 arguing over a subway billboard as the help comes by to top off their wine glasses.

    • Woody Tanaka
      July 13, 2012, 6:28 pm

      The problem with your argument schlemiel, is that it presumes that if only the Arab world accepted the “reasonable” partition, then the Jews would have been happy and left them be. The history of the last 65 years has shown that to be bunk. The Jews weren’t happy with 75% of Palestine, so they schemed and calculated a way to start a war to get the rest and parts of Syria and Egypt, too. These people have been ethnic cleansers from the start, driven by a racist, diabolical ideology, and appear driven by the need to oppress Arabs and steal their land. (And when they’re done with Palestine, will they move on and find “excuses” to steal Sinai, Lebanon and parts of Jordan, too, suddenly “discovering” that these are part of some mythical “historical Jewish homeland”? I wouldn’t put it past these fascists.)

      Perhaps the Palestinians will never be free of these criminals. But at the very least, they’ll go down with their heads high and not like sheep. And perhaps it will prevent this cancer of zionism from spreading further.

    • Mooser
      July 13, 2012, 6:47 pm

      “So this graphic is the latest magic bullet that will make all the sheeple wake up and see the light?”

      Oh, I’m sure the ads can’t do the job by themselves, but as one among many things, they will help. But really, Schlemiel, I noticed a few lapses in you comment. Why not learn How to make the case for Israel, and win!

      And you can stuff all that nonsense about “wine glasses”. As far as I know, the Mondoweiss staff sticks to gin or tequila.

      • eGuard
        July 15, 2012, 12:16 pm

        Ha, here it is again: a link to the 1-2-3-4 and win. Mooser, do you have an explanation why this link is pointed to less and less these days? Could it be lazyness on our side (even forgetting the first lesson), or has zioargumenting changed away from these basics?

        Next Wednesday is the four year mark of that page. We should celebrate.

      • Mooser
        July 23, 2012, 3:57 pm

        “Mooser, do you have an explanation why this link is pointed to less and less these days?”

        I’m sorry, I’ll get back on the job with renewed resolve. It seemed to me that after months of my incessant linking, Gabriel Ash’s 1-2-3-4 formula had become an accepted way to deconstruct Zionist arguments, and was refrenced, if not linked, in many comments. But you are right, the article is so true, so simply and elegantly written, and so obviously applicable, I guess it could stand being linked a few more times. Besides, a link is known by the company it keeps, and I didn’t want to drag Mr. Ash’s reputation through the mud with me.

    • mig
      July 13, 2012, 6:52 pm

      schlemiel:

      Hardcore rejectionism of Israel didn’t begin when Phil Weiss started this site, or when the first American campuses started hosting courses about Zionism being colonialism.

      The hardcore rejectionism goes back to 1948 and before. The same confrontational, all-or-nothing rhetoric about Zionists being evil incarnate and soon to pay a terrible price for their misdeeds was bandied about back then as it is now.

      Yup. Told by King-Crane commission report 1919 :

      link to unispal.un.org

      They could have taken their chances with partition, but they rejected it. They could have taken their chances with the 1949 Armistice lines, but they rejected that, too.

      I know that people here are fond of explaining why the Palestinians and the Arab world were right to reject the imposition of a new state in the region, but the point is they made their choices and that map is the result.

      Hey ! Arabs didn’t force Israel to invade those areas. Peel commission partition plan was rejected by both sides. Resolution 181 rejected both sides. Arabs by desing, and Israel by action. Same thing 1949. And 1967. And today. So who is actually rejecting and what ?

    • Donald
      July 13, 2012, 7:07 pm

      All that faux world-weariness would have a better chance of seeming genuine if it weren’t so obviously one-sided. And this–

      “The Iraq experience has also taught us a lesson in the futility of nation-building, a trillion dollar lesson. How much would trying to get Palestine up and running cost?”

      is stupid. Iraq has 25 million people or a bit more and was under a brutal and unpopular American occupation. Whatever argument you could make against US aid towards nation-building in the West Bank, it’s going to have little or nothing to do with what happened in Iraq. Nobody plans on sending the American military to occupy the West Bank. If anything, the current situation with the Israeli occupation is more like the American occupation of Iraq, but I wouldn’t make the comparison at all because it is more confusing than clarifying.

    • Avi_G.
      July 13, 2012, 8:18 pm

      It’s easier for you to lie than to tell the inconvenient truth.

      The simple fact of the matter — and this has already been discussed 101 times on Mondoweiss — Palestinians were largely in favor of the partition plan.

      What changed the course of history was Israel’s ethnic cleansing that started a mere three weeks after the partition plan was ratified at the U.N.

      But go on, peddle the pathetically hackneyed meme that It’s those Arab rejectionists who caused all this mess by never missing an opportunity to miss an opportunity.

      And if all else fails, just throw around the anti-Semite charge and call it a day.

      You aptly called yourself a shlumiel; your Hasbara is quite clumsy.

    • ToivoS
      July 13, 2012, 11:31 pm

      Er Schlmiel, Zionism is colonialism. Zionism is a movement to steal even more lands from the Palestinians. Those are facts. If that is your goal then go for it. Us Americans do not believe it is our interests to support that goal. We are working to remove American foreign policy from that end. You want to steal even more land. Your choice. But do not expect the United States to support you indefinitely. Today you have that support but soon it will stop. And then you will be on your own. I really do not believe once the money from the US stops and the diplomatic support stops your tiny little country will last (unless, of course, you are willing to accede justice to the Palestinian people. Your choice.)

    • Shingo
      July 14, 2012, 1:33 am

      They could have taken their chances with partition, but they rejected it.

      That would have only delayed the outcome, it wouldn’t have changed it.  181 didn’t require either side to sign off on it, since neither party was a UN member at the time. Furthermore, Ben-Gurion said from the beginning that the partition was temporary and a stepping stone to reclaiming all of Palestine.

       Of course, the UN has an entirely special category of refugees for Palestinians.

      Another debunked hasbra talking point, but suffice to say you are wrong. The refugees are defined as per refugee law.

       Indeed, there doesn’t seem like a goal other than to wish Israel away.

      Talk about cognitive dissonance!! It’s pretty obvious from these maps who is wishing whom away. While you demonstrate the typical myopia about rejection of Zionism, you display notable silence about the fact that the Zionist argument has always been to deny the very existence of the Palestinians.  Not even the Palestinians are cloning Jews were invented or even mire remarkably, that they are recent arrivals when 99% of Israel’s entire population was created by immigration.

       On the bright side, Israel is out of Gaza, and the “apartheid wall” looks a lot like a border

      LOL. You mean like a border intended to ensure only one state would ever be viable.

       After all, if the 2-state solution is logical to me and the Peace Now guys, why wouldn’t it be to everybody?

      That depends on who’s interpretation of a 2ss you are looking at. The UN’s  or Netenyahu’s?

       And as we see now, Gaza and the West Bank will never really be enough. The issue is Israel’s very existence

      Typical Hasbra 101. There’s no use giving back what was stolen because they will want more.  Of course, there is no historical basis for this, just mountains of dishonesty.

      It reminds me of a rapist who tells himself that he might as well tape that attractive woman who’s had too much to drink because if he were to ask her consent, she’ll probably say no.

       Let’s say you succeed in making Americans hate Israel as much as some of you do, then what? Does that mean they’re gonna start loving the Palestinian cause?

      Does it make it harder for a crack addict to get high if his dealer stops selling to him? Does it make it easier for him family to get him into rehab?

      The 3 billion in aid to Israel is only the tip of the iceberg. In addition to the Liam guarantees, forgiven loans and tax exemption for charities that aid the settlements, the trade agreement is so distorted in Israel’s favor that it has been described as a 10 billon dollar annual grant.

      Then there is the insane level of diplomatic cover that the US provides.  Can anyone imagine what the situation would look like if:

      1. the US had not veto’s 40+ UNSC resolutions?
      2. the US had not worked feverishly to water down the ones that did pass, like UNSC 242?
      3. the US not only not blocked the PA bid for membership, but to use their own words, not embarked on a marathon effort to derail ongoing PA efforts to pursue membership?

      That’s only scratching the surface.

      Is the goal to get America to leave the Middle East, or to get us further involved by building a fair and just Palestine the same way we built a free Iraq?

      LOL. Thanks for the comic relief. May I ask what planet you are from?

       Going after Jewish advocacy figures for calling these maps “antisemitic” is the low hanging fruit.

      And here you are, offering a ladder.  Hostage posted recently the Herzl once stated that Zionism leads to poor intellect. You’ve just added weight to that theory.

    • Dexter
      July 14, 2012, 2:51 am

      That is some serious denial you’re in there buddy.

    • ColinWright
      July 14, 2012, 4:44 am

      “On the bright side, Israel is out of Gaza, and the “apartheid wall” looks a lot like a border. “

      Actually, the ‘separation fence’ looks a lot like a ghetto wall. Come to think of it, Gaza looks a lot like a ghetto itself.

      How nice. Israel is going to agree to cage the Palestinians on 10% of their own land.

      Others will have to feed them, of course.

      • Shingo
        July 14, 2012, 7:46 am

        Others will have to feed them, of course.

        But that won’t stop Zionists claiming that Israel are footing the bill.

    • pjdude
      July 21, 2012, 2:20 am

      so when confronted by thuggery just give up. I’m sorry but to blame the palestinians for standing up for their rights rather than the theives who stole from them is kinda of absurd

  15. Michael W.
    July 13, 2012, 5:30 pm

    Using Berncastle’s (look him up) figures, one can asses the accuracy of those maps. According to Berncastle, Israel confiscated 16,329,707 dunams (75%). Of that land, 10303110 dunams are uncultivable Negev land. That leaves you with 6,026,597 dunams from northern and central Israel (including uncultivable land), Jerusalem, and the cultivable land of Beersheba District/Negev. That is 28% of the 21,670,431 dunams that constitutes Israel.

    • Avi_G.
      July 13, 2012, 8:24 pm

      You mangle facts like a meat grinder minces meat.

      Several scholars have already researched — using Israeli archival data — land ownership from 1947 and onward.

      Professor Illan Pappe, for example, concluded that Jews owned and controlled merely 4% of historical Palestine.

      Dr. Salman Abu-Sitta did the same and reached similar conclusions.

      And finally, it’s nice to see the usual Hasbara trolls showing up and posting in panic mode, especially Winnica above who’s already accused everyone of being a Jew-hater, not different than yonah feldman’s (wondering jew) accusations in recent days.

      You people are running out of material.

    • tree
      July 14, 2012, 1:33 am

      Using Berncastle’s (look him up) figures, one can asses the accuracy of those maps. …

      There are two falsities included in your post.

      First off, Berncastle, who was hired by UNSCCP to determine how much land in Israel the Palestinian refugees owned and how much they should be compensated for the loss of their land, did not include in his figures any land that had been owned by Palestinians who had remained in Israel, even though many of them became the Orwellian “present absentees” who had their land likewise confiscated by Israel, and even those who weren’t so declared often had their land confiscated over the years to create more land for Jews. Since Berncastle’s figures only include land owned by the external refugees, they are artificially low in terms of calculating the total amount of privately held Palestinian land in what later became Israel in 1948.

      Second, you eliminated the land classified as “uncultivable” in the Negev from your figure of privately owned Palestinian land, when Berncastle himself INCLUDED such land. Israel certainly argued that such land should not be counted, but Berncastle included it, since it was not state land but rather land owned by Palestinian (in this case Bedouin) refugees. Most of it was collectively owned by various Negev Bedouin tribes. It’s rather dishonest to claim to be using Berncastle’s land figures and then proceed to ignore his figures and subtract parts that don’t support your point of view.

      Again, according to the British Mandate Palestine government in 1946, the UN and the Jewish Agency speaking in 1949, and even John Berncastle in 1951-2, the vast majority of land in Mandate Palestine was privately held by Palestinians, and as you indicated in your second sentence, 75% of the land that Israel claimed was owned by external Palestinian refugees..

      • Michael W.
        July 14, 2012, 2:10 pm

        I should have mentioned that I just used his figures, not his conclusions. However, I think his compensation value is a good estimate.

        I don’t have time to respond fully right now, but you can’t automatically say that any land in Mandate Palestine that wasn’t owned by Jews is automatically Palestinian Arab. How much is “state” land? How much land was owned by foreigners? What land is privately owned by Israeli Arabs (and are they internally displaced)?

  16. dbroncos
    July 13, 2012, 6:37 pm

    “They can’t. I have a contract. The ads are there and have been paid for. I can take legal action if they fail to abide by the contract.”

    CBS’s owner may well take down the ads as they did the billboards in LA. This will only fuel the fire especially since Mr. Clifford is willing to take them to court for breech of contract. The Zionists will be eager to paint the ads and Mr. Clifford as anti-semitic. Fabulous! Let’s hear it in court, how are these ads anti semitic? This story has legs!

    Thanks to Mr. Clifford! You’ve got a lot of fans out here.

  17. gingershot
    July 13, 2012, 10:14 pm

    This is my favorite map of the ethnic cleansing of Palestine – a map shorn of Israeli deceit

  18. ColinWright
    July 14, 2012, 12:16 am

    So CBS Outdoor played ball with these as well?

    I recall during that billboard thing that people were criticizing CBS for pulling down the billboards and assuming that CBS’s owner, being a wealthy Jew, must be a Zionist.

    I pointed out that (a) once the flak started, pulling down the billboards made excellent sense as a pragmatic business decision, (b) it is a bit odd that CBS didn’t catch the content of the ads in the first place if they are all Zionist flunkies, and that (c) the owner of CBS has a long record of charitable giving — but not one penny to Israel or to Zionist causes.

    Now this. Guess what? The owner of CBS may be Jewish, and he’s certainly wealthy — but I don’t think he’s a Zionist. He may not be a big supporter of BDS either, but…

  19. Sibiriak
    July 14, 2012, 12:41 am

    What efforts are being made to get more maps out like this, and how can that effort be supported?

    Maps are incredibly powerful. The opened my mind years ago. A lot of people visualize the West Bank as some kind of contiguous Palestinian area with settlements on the border. They don’t get the reality that settlements and the matrix of control lay all over the West Bank making any kind of sovereign, viable, contiguous Palestinian state physically impossible.

  20. upsidedownism
    July 14, 2012, 6:12 am

    If you want to see inaccurate maps, check out those provided by the government of israel itself at gov.il, from which we learn.
    The total area of the State of Israel is 8,630 sq. miles (22,145 sq.km.), of which 8,367 sq. miles (21,671 sq. km.) is land area. Israel is some 470 km. (290 miles) in length and about 85 miles (135 km.) across at the widest point. The country is bordered by Lebanon to the north, Syria to the northeast, Jordan to the east, Egypt to the southwest and the Mediterranean Sea to the west:
    THE LAND: Geography and Climate

    The web site mentions Palestinians, but from the information displayed, you’d never know where ‘Palestinians’ have lived in the past, or where any Palestinians live today. You could easily conclude that there are not any palestinans living west of the jordan river today. I’d be surprised if you see on any israeli government web site the hundreds of official maps from the 20th century and before which simply mark the entire area as ‘Palestine.’

  21. Sin Nombre
    July 14, 2012, 7:32 am

    You know, the apparent resonance that these maps have demonstrated may contain a very powerful lesson for those hoping to stop what’s going on in Israel and the occupied territories. (Beyond, that is, just occasionally publishing the maps again.)

    If, as I believe apparent, the truth is that in its own mind Israel itself has moved well beyond accepting any genuine Two-State Solution, the truth however also is that giving some occasional lip service to it pays Israel enormous dividends. Mainly but indeed hugely in diverting attention from the Ethnic Cleansing Phase inherent obvious in its One-State conception, and in giving the U.S. and Euro’s cover to pretend that such ethnic cleansing is not really going on already and that they are not really supporting it.

    So why continue to play on Israel’s ground of still talking mainly of a Two-State Solution? Still talking about who was supposed to get what in San Remo or in ’48 and what might or might not have been offered or accepted at Oslo or Camp David and all the other tonnage of similar crap? While academically interesting, as a practical matter all it does is play into Israel’s strengths: Its partisans can argue *forever* over that stuff, and indeed they have their points. But even if Jesus and Abraham came down tomorrow and said that Israel was wrong back in ’48 or ’67 or at Camp David or Oslo or whatever it wouldn’t matter a damn because there’s no way Israel would just shrug and say “Oh okay, we give; let’s give the Palestinians a do-over.”

    But where Israel *does* lack any argument is in the Ethnic Cleansing Component of its One-State Conception. That’s why these maps are so powerful after all, and with that clarity too is where you are going to find a more sympathetic (due to understanding) American sentiment in terms of challenging Americans not to be a party to same. Indeed, not to be a party to same any *more* given how stark that last map has *already* become.

    Accordingly, it’s just stupid to wait until *Israel* says “okay, we’re officially done with Single State idea, *now* your debate can move onto other things,” because if you leave it up to Israel it will keep talking about Second State negotiations until it has thrown the last Palestinian over the border into Lebanon or Jordan. Even if only to keep the U.S. satisfied with the Two-State fig leaf it pretends to support Israel under.

    So how to do it best? Well, just as with every other issue the best arguments are based on the most solid facts. So start a separate web-page Chronicle of Ethnic Cleansing facts and incident and events as they come in that can serve as a reference source for anyone and everyone out there. Headed perhaps by these maps that we’ve been talking about—updated as needed)—I’ve even got a delicious name for it courtesy of the New Yorker: Annals of Ethnic Cleansing.

    I know of course that here at Mondo we already have a regularly appearing column somewhat chronicling recent ME events in general, but that just disappears after a few days. And thus an Ethnic Cleansing Chronicle could be made a permanent side-page here, to be consulted by anyone and everyone interested in this issue beyond the Mondo community. (With updates made as necessary, and such updates appearing as regular entries herein.)

    Such a thing could even start by first collecting up (if possible) and reprinting those ethnic cleansing incidents already reported in those past Mondo general news entries, and if I’m not mistaken now is *especially* the time to keep an eye of such future ones. Regardless of whether Netanyahu or Israel *officially* accepts the Levy Report or not, I believe it is going to looked upon by same as the justification now for far more open and full-throated dispossession/ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians from the occupied lands.

    So now if ever is the time to start a detailed chronicling of those efforts to serve as a reference source not just for Mondo readers, but for everyone interested in this sub-issue, and to stop playing on Israel’s chosen ground.

    • Shingo
      July 14, 2012, 8:07 am

      But where Israel *does* lack any argument is in the Ethnic Cleansing Component of its One-State Conception. That’s why these maps are so powerful after all

      Good point. The right wing and the Zionist narrative has always taken advantage of sound bite type talking points, which usualyl go unchallenged. That always puts us Israeli critics at a disadvantage, because our responses are far more verbose.

      eg. An Israeli apologist can say Arafat walked away from a great offer at Camp David, or that the Arabs rejected UN181 and move on. We have to go to great detail to debunk these lies.

      This graphic turns everything around because a picture is indeed worth a thousand words.

    • American
      July 14, 2012, 8:24 am

      Excellent idea SN.

  22. HarryLaw
    July 14, 2012, 10:23 am

    Woody Tanaka, Interesting comment of yours on the french text, the Hague Regulations 1907 official text is also in French, phrases like public order and safety in English becomes public order and civil life in French in article 43. Forests have been cut down on the number of books disputing the vagueness of the word ‘the’ I am not going to add to them, except to say in my opinion it is not vague at all, .Article 43 refers to “public order and safety”. This
    translation of the authentic French words “l’ordre et la vie publics” has been criticized. The
    meaning of “la vie publique” is indeed much broader. The legislative history provides good
    reasons to consider that it encompasses “des fonctions sociales, des transactions ordinaires, qui
    constituent la vie de tous les jours” (“social functions, ordinary transactions which constitute daily
    life”).8 Many scholars and the Israeli Supreme Court have endorsed this critique.

  23. Remax
    July 14, 2012, 2:43 pm

    Try again. The success of efforts of this kind carries a serious danger of fostering unintended anti-Semitism.

    I really don’t see that the American people are any better informed than they were a year ago about this matter. There is a great amount of lack of knowledge, misinformation and even lack of interest. They think, ‘Oh it’s a mess over there,’ and then they yawn.

    They yawn, sure, and because they have been awakened in this particular manner they are likely to attribute the mess to ‘Jews’ before going back to sleep. If they are awakened again, their response will be the similar but the irritation will be cumulative.

    • ColinWright
      July 15, 2012, 2:47 am

      “Try again. The success of efforts of this kind carries a serious danger of fostering unintended anti-Semitism…”

      You’re right — but that’s a bit like opposing anti-Nazi propaganda in the thirties on the grounds that it would carry a serious danger of fostering unintended bigotry towards Germans.

      It is actually hard to disentangle one’s feelings about Jews from one’s feelings about Israel — and I for one, resent it. Israel definitely wasn’t my idea.

    • Mooser
      July 23, 2012, 4:04 pm

      “If they are awakened again, their response will be the similar but the irritation will be cumulative.”

      Of course, but don’t worry about it. Only the Jews in Israel matter. If the rest of us have to suffer on their account, why, it’s a mitzvah! God forbid Israel should feel any obligation towards us! And don’t worry, I prostrated myself towrds Jerusalem today.

      There is nothing, well hardly anything lower than a Zionist. Tell you what, Remax, baby, I’ll trust my future to American “anti-Semitism” before I trust it to the machinations of Israel. I know how much the Zionists care about me.

  24. JuliaNoel
    July 15, 2012, 4:56 am

    Yes, it is way past time for Jewish religious leaders to say that they condemn the state of Israel; these crimes are being committed in their names; unless they do so, Jews will be forever associated with a state that commits war crimes.
    Belonging to the Jewish religion should not mean supporting Israel; one is a religion and the other a state. Time to end this travesty.

  25. gazacalling
    July 15, 2012, 4:19 pm

    “Bring the truth forward” — whoo hoo! Great article.

  26. Ellen
    July 16, 2012, 2:53 pm

    Would love to see those ads, and any fact-based ads, run in the Midwest along I-75. That is where the real work needs to be done.

    Sadly many Americans believe that Israel is the US and that their beliefs are dependent upon a colonialist enterprise, which has used religion for the gig.

    • ColinWright
      July 17, 2012, 1:49 am

      Bingo, and definitely.

      There are relatively ‘information saturated’ markets where everyone has already made up their mind, and have pretty much inoculated themselves with arguments and attitudes that will render them almost impervious to persuasion: you’d have to somehow really rub their snout in what they are supporting to make a difference.

      Then there are markets where support is relatively casual, people are genuinely unaware of the facts, and presenting them with the data can make a real difference.

  27. ColinWright
    July 19, 2012, 5:22 am

    So…out of interest, how much did these ads cost?

    CBS Outdoor seems to be fairly cooperative. I don’t see any reason this couldn’t be repeated elsewhere.

    Just how much does it cost?

  28. Remax
    July 19, 2012, 7:58 am

    What high level plan could conceivably call for a man to wander round an airport with an explosive device for nigh on an hour? The unpalatable truth is that Israel is not liked and Israelis venturing abroad in identifiable groups, be they artists or tourists, are increasingly likely to attract organised harassment, and attention from murderous nut heads. This is the parallel consequence of Israel’s actions and their being made public by the efforts of Philip and others here, BDS and Henry Clifford et al; and the et al gets daily more numerous.

    The ever more urgent problem is that those who become awakened through such efforts are not capable of making a distinction between Israelis who do this or that and Jews in general. This is an underlying phenomenon and not peculiar to Jews, remember when Americans were pouring French Chardonnay away in response to an absence of French enthusiasm for the Iraq war? Furthermore Israel has made consistent efforts to conflate all Jews under an Israeli banner. Short of Israel mending its ways overnight, which I do not expect to happen, I see no way to avoid a resurgence of brain dead anti-Semitism such as surely motivated this ‘long-haired Caucasian in sports clothes’ in Burgas.

    • Mooser
      July 23, 2012, 4:10 pm

      “The ever more urgent problem is that those who become awakened through such efforts are not capable of making a distinction between Israelis who do this or that and Jews in general. This is an underlying phenomenon and not peculiar to Jews,”

      Well, Remax, if it’s “not peculiar to Jews” why couldn’t those genius Zionists think about it? Of course, not for them to give a crap about the rest of us Jews, no it’s our job to serve them. Take that crap and stick it. Were we close together I would end this with three words, one of which would get the comment banned, so I won’t.

  29. proudzionist777
    July 19, 2012, 8:58 am

    Mr. Clifford said, “”I have received nothing but positive responses with two exceptions [by email],”

    Really?
    The Elder of Ziyon blog sent Mr. Clifford an email that refutes the maps. Mr. Clifford wrote back to Elder acknowledging Elder’s email and saying that he [Clifford] would respond later when he’s not so busy.

    So. Two negative responses, one of which I assume is Elder’s, and Mr. Clifford is ‘too busy’.

    Sure. Let’s bet that Mr. Clifford will not respond.

    • Shingo
      July 19, 2012, 10:19 am

      The Elder of Ziyon blog sent Mr. Clifford an email that refutes the maps. Mr. Clifford wrote back to Elder acknowledging Elder’s email and saying that he [Clifford] would respond later when he’s not so busy.

      Obviously it wasn’t worth his time. The Elder of Ziyon blog is a propaganda web site with no credibility anyway.

      • proudzionist777
        July 23, 2012, 8:39 am

        I was wrong. Mr. Clifford responded to Elder’s propaganda web site.

        Here is Mr. Clifford’s brilliant refutation of Elder’s argument.

        ” I’m sorry, I have received at least 500 emails, 90% positive, am flooded with requests for comment or interviews, I just don’t have time to debate. The Palestinians have lost most of their homeland and the earth is not flat. You can’t change fact.”

        Well. Elder won’t be able to argue with facts like that!

      • Shingo
        July 23, 2012, 10:22 am

        Here is Mr. Clifford’s brilliant refutation of Elder’s argument.

        What’s brilliant about it?

        Stop spamming this site with your BS from eldersofzion Proudfascist.

    • Remax
      July 19, 2012, 10:41 am

      The issue is not the accuracy of the maps but the forces Henry Clifford’s campaign has awakened. As for him being busy, he is clearly a man of some delicacy and refinement with no desire to become embroiled in a slanging match with an ‘Elder of Ziyon’. There really should be a word for this type of desiccated diversionary tactic.

    • ColinWright
      July 21, 2012, 2:09 am

      “Sure. Let’s bet that Mr. Clifford will not respond.”

      I can sympathize. Talking to Zionists is like talking to a barking dog.

    • schlemiel
      July 22, 2012, 3:26 pm

      In fact Yaakov Luzowick laid out a very good response on his blog, explaining precisely why the presentation of the four maps is misleading and inaccurate. Clifford’s response was a terse one sentence evasion to the effect of “either way, the Palestinians have lost a lot of land.”

      So that’s it. The maps are a prop with no substantiating argument behind them, certainly not one that their sponsor is qualified to make.

      • Shingo
        July 22, 2012, 7:29 pm

        In fact Yaakov Luzowick laid out a very good response on his blog

        Actualyl, Yaakov Luzowick’s blgo post was full of crap and all the BS that Alan Baker presented before teh IVJ before he was laughed out of court. Luzowick can’t get his head around the fact that delcared borders mean a state and it’s citizens only enjoy jurisidiction and sovereignty within those borders. He also laments that the world has moved on since the 19th century, and colinialism and land acquisuition by force has since become illegal.

      • schlemiel
        July 22, 2012, 11:36 pm

        Not sure what any of that is supposed to mean, but the plain fact is that Mr. Clifford was unable to respond in any meaningful way to Lozowick’s commentary.

        Clifford is just like the people on this site. All he can do is be confrontational, he can’t even defend the content of his billboard.

      • Shingo
        July 23, 2012, 3:12 am

        Not sure what any of that is supposed to mean, but the plain fact is that Mr. Clifford was unable to respond in any meaningful way to Lozowick’s commentary.

        Like I said, Lozowick’s commentary is self contradictory and full of holes and the argument he employs have been refuted by expert in the field.

      • Citizen
        July 23, 2012, 8:26 am

        Shingo, yes, the world has moved on since the 19th Century, and colonialism and land acquisition by force has since become illegal–the Nuremberg Trails were a big marker, along with its Geneva progeny.

        And maps, after all are maps, whether on a billboard or T-shirt. For example:

        Map of America, circa 1789:
        link to en.wikipedia.org
        Early to late sequential maps of Alabama:
        link to alabamamaps.ua.edu

      • schlemiel
        July 23, 2012, 10:33 am

        No. He explains precisely why those maps are an example of using selective data and waits for a response from Mr. Clifford. There is no “self-contradiction” in his post. No “expert” has refuted anything.

        Clifford initially made the haughty statement that “facts are hard to argue with” or some such. Lozowick demonstrated for him in what ways these maps presented as a timeline are not factual and are deliberately misleading. When it was Mr. Clifford’s turn to respond, suddenly he had no “facts” to argue with about his own ad. Nothing. He merely had a pithy statement that “either way, Palestinians have lost a lot of land.”

        The guy who funded the ads and claimed the maps were irrefutable facts can’t even back up his own claims. Suddenly, whether his maps are factual or not no longer matters. In other words, it’s propaganda, not facts. Clifford knows this and doesn’t care. He says it’s hard to argue with facts, and then goes on to duck out of an argument as soon as facts are presented.

        He wanted to put up this piece where “high IQ” people could see it, apparently thinking that it works so well as propaganda that no one would bother to come up with a series of counter-questions about it, because despite all his haughty talk of high IQ people and facts being hard to argue with, he has nothing to offer beyond the crude propaganda piece.

      • JuliaNoel
        July 23, 2012, 3:33 pm

        You should go and live as an occupied indigenous Palestinian for a week, as many from around our world have done. I defy anyone with a conscience to go and see what Israel is doing to the persecuted Palestinians and not come away disgusted- putting it mildly. Your quibbling about the maps- which are indeed accurate- is beneath contempt. Meanwhile Israel continues to flaunt international law.
        What are your views on international law, specifically the Geneva Conventions? Do you view all human beings eqaully, regardless of race, colour and religion?

      • Mooser
        July 23, 2012, 4:14 pm

        “Clifford is just like the people on this site.”

        I really hate to break it to ya, sclimazel but about 60 years is actually a long time to come to a decision. Gee, maybe we could go on dialogueing until all the Palestinians are dead or driven away, and greater Israel annexed. Then, Israel can initiate a big mourning process for the Palestinians.

      • Shingo
        July 23, 2012, 7:08 pm

        No. He explains precisely why those maps are an example of using selective data and waits for a response from Mr. Clifford. There is no “self-contradiction” in his post. No “expert” has refuted anything.

        Talknic already refuted this BS. Israel delared independence which incluides tge self imposed obligations it contains, it’s plea to be recognized and its subsequent recognition based on that plea and the Declaration. Lozowick wants us all to pretend that never happened and that it’s still 1947, and that the borders Israel proclimed in 1948 don’t exist.

        Lozowick’s rants is so pathetic and sophomioric, it’s not with Mr. Clifford’s time to even bother addressing.

        Clifford initially made the haughty statement that “facts are hard to argue with” or some such.

        That’s what’s got Hasbrats like you in such a state, because the maps are absolutely damning and cannto be erased with hasbrat one liners and jongoism.

        Lozowick demonstrated for him in what ways these maps presented as a timeline are not factual and are deliberately misleading.

        No, Lozowick resorts to selective reasoning and conflation to avoid the fact that while one can indulge in minutia about the Palestinian share of teh land, the cancerous expasioon of the Zionist share is beyind dispute. That is a facft that speaks for itself.

        The guy who funded the ads and claimed the maps were irrefutable facts can’t even back up his own claims. Suddenly, whether his maps are factual or not no longer matters.

        No, that’s Lozowick’s claim not Clifford’s. Lozowick is clutching at straws and no one is buying it.

      • Shingo
        July 23, 2012, 7:14 pm

        I defy anyone with a conscience to go and see what Israel is doing to the persecuted Palestinians and not come away disgusted- putting it mildly.

        Bery true.

        Even Bush himself was shcoked by what he saw when he visited.

      • talknic
        July 24, 2012, 1:48 am

        schlemiel July 23, 2012 at 10:33 am

        ” He explains precisely why those maps are an example of using selective data”

        He provides no actual evidence what so ever.

        “and waits for a response from Mr. Clifford. There is no “self-contradiction” in his post”

        Does Mr Clifford know Lozowick’s twaddlespiel blog exists?

        The Jewish Agency stated UNGA res 181 was binding (follow the links therein)

        Israel was “… proclaimed as an independent republic within frontiers approved by the General Assembly of the United Nations in its Resolution of November 29, 1947″ … to … ” become effective at one minute after six o’clock on the evening of 14 May 1948, Washington time”

        Israeli Govt statements acknowledging Israel’s borders and Palestine as ” outside the State of Israel”

        UNSC resolutions. All ignored.

  30. ColinWright
    July 21, 2012, 11:56 pm

    In connection with the arguments that the map ad would promote anti-semitism, this is significant:

    “…The advocacy group American Freedom Defense Initiative sued the MTA in September 2011 after the transit agency denied its proposed ad.

    The ad said: “In any war between the civilized man and the savage, support the civilized man. Support Israel/Defeat Jihad.” The ad would have been posted on 318 city buses for four weeks…”

    They just won their suit. Apparently, it is okay to label opponents of Israel ‘savages’ — but may turn out to be inadmissable to put up a map showing Israeli territorial expansion.

    The ‘civilized man/savages’ is interesting. I think the rather dated word choice is intentional. Those posting the ad would seem to be trying to play on generalized racism in the audience. It elicits images of doughty (white) soldiers cutting down waves of screaming (black) ‘savages. Not coincidentally, Israel is usually promoted as ‘white.’

    Anyway, here’s hoping they run their ad. It’ll backfire. Those it would appeal to already think this, a whole lot who might otherwise support Israel or be indifferent will suddenly jump a couple of notches towards the anti-Israel camp, and the whole Muslim and Arab community is going to be galvanized.

  31. JuliaNoel
    July 24, 2012, 6:56 am

    To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize. –Voltaire

  32. ColinWright
    July 31, 2012, 4:34 am

    ‘To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize. –Voltaire’

    To learn who no longer rules over you, simply find out who you are now allowed to criticize.

    link to world.time.com

Leave a Reply