Students at George Mason University organize graduation walkout on Apartheid profiteer Shari Arison

ActivismIsrael/PalestineUS Politics
on 0 Comments
Shari

Students Against Israel Apartheid campaign, Virginia, December 2013.(Photo: Haaretz)

Tomorrow, December 19th, George Mason University is presenting renown billionaire Apartheid profiteer Shari Arison, member of the Arison settlement-building family and Israel’s richest woman, an Honorary Doctor of Humane Letters at the university’s winter graduation ceremony. Arison will also be a speaker at the event.

George Mason University Students Against Israeli Apartheid (GMU SAIA), and Craig Willse, Assistant Professor of Cultural Studies, co-authored an open letter (below) stating GMU’s name is being used to “whitewash the activities of the Arison Group” diminishing “the academic autonomy and reputation of George Mason” and undermining the possibility “for teaching, learning, and practicing social justice on our campus.”

Haaretz:

Students Against Israeli Apartheid wrote a letter accusing the Arison Group of involvement “in the illegal occupation and colonization of Palestine … and turns the repression, discrimination and displacement of the Palestinian people into profit.” The letter charges the company’s various holdings with offering mortgages in the settlements, mining for minerals in an occupied portion of the Dead Sea, financing the Jerusalem’s light rail, construction at checkpoints and the separation barrier, and involvement in the Bedouin resettlement plan by financing a new military compound in the Negev. The letter also says Israeli Arabs are discriminated against at branches of Arison’s Bank Hapoalim.

In their opinion, the connection with Arison runs counter to GMU’s declared values and hurts its reputation. “Honoring Arison,” they state in an open letter, “makes Mason appear to be a PR machine for robber baron billionaires, rather than an autonomous public research university.”

A public outcry from graduating students, faculty and their guests “who did not wish to have their ceremony marred by Arison’s presence” ensued. Then, GMU SAIA successfully coordinated a walkout with GMU’s administration. According to a press release issued by GMU SAIA :

University administrators contacted Students Against Israeli Apartheid, responding to this public outcry. After a week-long period of discussion, the university met SAIA’s demand for accommodations for graduating students who did not wish to have their ceremony marred by Arison’s presence, and released the following statement:  “Graduates seated on the arena floor will be able to leave through an exit at the rear of the hall. These individuals will be provided an option of waiting in a reserved room. (…) An event staff member will inform those waiting when the commencement speaker’s remarks have concluded.  Graduates and guests can then re-enter the arena.” This is a historical opportunity for graduating students to demonstrate their commitment to human rights and stand in solidarity with the Palestinian students that have been personally affected by the on-going occupation of Palestine by Apartheid Israel. As the first campus that has resisted the Arison Group’s influence, Mason can set a strong precedent for rejecting the Arison Group’s whitewashing of Israeli Apartheid.

At our request, letter co-author Palestinian-American Tareq Radi, GMU Class of 2013 completing his undergrad degree in finance, offered a personal statement about the impact of GMU’s decision to honor Arison at his graduation ceremony, and the coordinated walkout tomorrow:

For as long as I can remember, my mother has been looking forward to attending my graduation. Growing up, she rarely mentioned any of the other conventional “landmarks” in a child’s life.

For the past year, every time I called my grandmother she made it a point to remind me of how excited she was for my graduation.

As if it weren’t enough that Shari’s wealth was built on the dispossession of my family -my people- she has to rob of us this joyous occasion as well?

The university’s capitulation to the demands of the community have resulted in a historical moment for BDS work, I could not have imagined a better way to end my undergraduate career.

Radi addressing attendees (Video):

Stand up and walk out on the right side of history with your fellow graduates..the university will be accommodating students, faculty and guests who are offended by the honoring of the Apartheid profiteer Shari Arison the opportunity to exit at the rear of the hall.

This is indeed an historical opportunity for graduating students, their families, and anyone/everyone in attendance to stand in solidarity with Palestinian students, and Palestinians everywhere, personally affected by the on-going, brutal and oppressive Apartheid occupation of Palestine, directly facilitated by the Shari Arison.

The following is GMU SAIA’s Open Letter: Doing Good: Social Justice or Corporate Whitewashing?

To the members of the George Mason community:

We are writing as a faculty member and student to express our concern with the relationship that George Mason University is building with Shari Arison. Arison recently donated funds for a “Doing Good Values” professorship within New Century College, and is being recognized at December commencement with an honorary degree and the opportunity to address the audience. President Cabrera has stated that “Arison’s example of practicing moral responsibility in business is one that we want to share with our students as they begin the next phase of their lives.” However, even a brief look at the operations of her company, the Arison Group, challenges the plausibility of this claim. We are concerned that our university’s name is being used to whitewash the activities of the Arison Group. This not only diminishes the academic autonomy and reputation of George Mason, but actually undermines possibilities for teaching, learning, and practicing social justice on our campus.

Arison claims to be a socially responsible investor committed to values-based businesses and morally responsible ventures. However, the Arison Investments portfolio consists of four major companies, three of which are directly involved in the illegal occupation and colonization of Palestine: Bank Hapoalim, Shikun & Binui, and Salt of the Earth. The largest bank in Israel, Bank Hapoalim (which is controlled by Arison Holdings) is a key player in the expansion of settlements into the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT). These settlements are illegal according to both United Nations Resolutions and the Laws of War and Occupation of the Fourth Geneva Convention. In addition to financing the construction of illegal settlements, Hapoalim operates branches in some of the most violent settlements in the OPT and directly profits by being the primary mortgage provider for settlement homebuyers. Additionally, by financing the Jerusalem Light Rail project, which aims to connect the illegal settlement blocs to Jerusalem, the bank is responsible for what has been described as the bantustanization of the OPT, permanently dividing neighborhoods and families and further limiting already restricted movement. The bank has recently embarked on a new project as part of Israel’s Prawer Plan, financing a military city in the Negev. This plan is responsible for the present-day displacement of up to 70,000 Bedouins and if fully implemented would result in the demolition of as many as 35 currently thriving Bedouin villages. The UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination has condemned the Prawer Plan as legalizing racist, discriminatory practices. Finally, Arison claims that Bank Hapoalim operates within her Doing Good model, by helping customers attain “Financial Freedom.” However, a recent investigation exposed the bank for discriminating against Palestinian citizens of Israel, denying Palestinian requests to transfer their accounts to other banks, while allowing Jewish customers to do so. Shikun & Binui, the real estate and infrastructure arm of the Arison Group, provides materials for the construction of checkpoints. It has also built a portion of the Apartheid Wall (declared illegal by the United Nations International Court of Justice), is constructing the cross-Israel Jewish-only highway, and operates an illegal factory for construction materials in the OPT. Finally, Salt of the Earth illegally extracts minerals from the occupied portion of the Dead Sea.

Arison boasts that the companies in its portfolio are ethical investments that constitute the pillars of the Israeli economy. It uses this empty rhetoric to mask that its “success” is based in extractive, repressive actions that violate international law. The Arison Group’s daily operations directly extend and entrench the illegal occupation and colonization of Palestine. It turns the repression, discrimination, and displacement of the Palestinian people into profit.

Given the central role the Arison Group plays in Israel’s illegal occupation and apartheid state, we are deeply concerned that Mason is honoring Arison at commencement. Through commencement ceremonies, universities present their public face to the wider academic community. We worry that Mason is being used to provide positive publicity for the Arison Group’s attempts to brand itself as moral and just, covering over the immoral and brutal activities that constitute its work. Publicly honoring Arison undermines the credibility of our university, particularly because Mason claims to value responsibility, community, ethics, and justice. Honoring Arison makes Mason appear to be a PR machine for robber baron billionaires, rather than an autonomous public research university. Graduation day celebrates the beginning of our students’ futures and the culmination of their families’ and friends’ support. Commencement speakers should embody the core values of an institution, and speak to the experiences and aspirations of graduating students, inclusive of all members of our diverse community. The selection of Arison as commencement speaker reduces the experience of graduation to a mockery for Palestinian students and their families, making it clear that their graduation experience is not of the university’s concern. To have this event marred by the presence and words of an individual whose family has built its wealth through the direct dispossession and oppression of Palestinians is an insult to those members of our community and to anyone who values justice.

It appears that Arison is being honored at commencement because of her donation of funds for a named professorship. As Mason increasingly relies on funding from external sources, we must be extremely cautious that those funds do not influence curriculum and undermine the autonomy of Mason’s educational, cultural, and social life. University administration has said that the professor of the endowed chair will be dedicated to research and education as exemplified by Shari Arison’s “vision.” It is deeply troubling that a war profiteer can not only redefine the standards for moral business practices, but also gain a direct line to communicate them to future business leaders. We are furthermore worried about the impact of Arison’s “values” on our campus community beyond the classroom. Arison is a major donor to NGO Monitor. Despite its innocuous name, NGO Monitor works closely with right-wing partners to suppress criticism of Israeli policy, defaming and sabotaging human rights organizations, independent publications, and other NGOs. It is difficult to reconcile Arison’s direct role in suppressing free speech and political organizing with Mason’s vision for “a more just, free, and prosperous world.” We worry that the cultural and ideological diversity that characterize our campus, of which we are deservedly proud, are under threat. We strongly feel that whatever financial resources Arison brings to Mason are not worth the damage done to our reputation, our autonomy, and our institutional integrity.

Mason has recently articulated the values of its mission: “our students come first; diversity is our strength; we honor freedom of thought and expression; we act with integrity.” In this partnership with Arison, our own core values are inverted—to undermine diversity, to squelch freedom of thought and expression, to tarnish our integrity, and to diminish the humanity of our students—for the price of a corporate whitewashing campaign. We are sure you are as unsettled by this information as we were when we first uncovered it. Please join us in rejecting this exploitation of the university as a platform for the Arison Group to expand its corporate and political influence to the detriment of our own institution. We encourage you to forward this letter to your peers and colleagues and welcome any questions you have. Thank you for taking the time to hear our concerns.

Craig Willse
Assistant Professor of Cultural Studies
[email protected]

Tareq Radi
GMU Class of 2013
[email protected]

wocall

About Annie Robbins

Annie Robbins is Editor at Large for Mondoweiss, a mother, a human rights activist and a ceramic artist. She lives in the SF bay area. Follow her on Twitter @anniefofani

Other posts by .


Posted In:

No Responses Yet

  1. OlegR
    December 18, 2013, 5:42 pm

    Please please walk out on Shari Arrison, i would
    You would be spared a talk about the “peace that begins within you” and such and such tedious New Age bs.

    • Hostage
      December 18, 2013, 8:47 pm

      Please please walk out on Shari Arrison, i would

      If you spend this much time and effort documenting the fact that a company with officers living in the USA has committed the crime of pillage as defined in Article 28 of the Hague Convention of 1907 and 18 USC § 2441 – War crimes, you should try to get those responsible brought to justice by the Attorney General. link to law.cornell.edu

      It frankly isn’t a matter that’s subject to the tort jurisdiction of the Israeli Courts after the many UN votes on the status of Palestine as an occupied state and the Article 12(3) declaration with the ICC. Israel is responsible for a total or substantial collapse or unavailability of the national judicial systems of Jordan and Palestine in the occupied territory.

      • OlegR
        December 19, 2013, 3:58 am

        You are almost as tedious as she is Hostage but now quite there.

      • Hostage
        December 19, 2013, 4:23 am

        You are almost as tedious as she is Hostage but now quite there.

        I still try to be more informative than ankle biting trolls and disingenuous Nakba deniers like yourself.

      • OlegR
        December 19, 2013, 7:00 am

        /disingenuous Nakba deniers like yourself./
        And a liar as well , Nakba deniers are banned on this site.
        I am still here , ergo either the moderators here are incompetent or
        you are lying since i have never denied the Nakba.

      • adele
        December 19, 2013, 2:46 pm

        OlegR says:
        July 22, 2013 at 6:51 pm
        You can’t steal what was yours in the first place.

      • Hostage
        December 19, 2013, 3:22 pm

        /disingenuous Nakba deniers like yourself./
        And a liar as well , Nakba deniers are banned on this site.
        I am still here , ergo either the moderators here are incompetent or
        you are lying since i have never denied the Nakba.

        I could take time out and go through the archives and send the operators and moderators a link to every example I’ve commented on. If you’d like, I can even post a copy under the comment policy thread and ask why you are still allowed to post here and why they have made an obvious exception in your case to the rules against trolling and Nakba denial?

      • OlegR
        December 19, 2013, 6:58 pm

        /You can’t steal what was yours in the first place./
        Adele Nakba is not about who has more rights to the land you call Palestine and i call Eretz Israel.
        Nakba is about specific historic events during and following the 1948
        Israeli War of Independence .

      • Hostage
        December 19, 2013, 9:10 pm

        Nakba is about specific historic events during and following the 1948
        Israeli War of Independence .

        Correct, but we are talking about forms of hate speech when we discuss Holocaust and Nakba denial. And this site is not supposed to be used for conversations or debates in defense of either. You supposedly can be banned here for publicly condoning, trivializing, or denying either the Holocaust or the Nakba – and there are ample historical eye-witness accounts to confirm that those crimes against humanity were committed.

      • OlegR
        December 20, 2013, 4:34 am

        You gonna prove i am a Nakba denier or are you gonna admit that you are a liar and that you smeared me as a debate strategy.

        Mods cut it out i don’t take these kinds of accusations lightly an i am tired of them.

      • talknic
        December 20, 2013, 5:38 am

        @ OlegR “Nakba is about specific historic events during and following the 1948 Israeli War of Independence”

        Israeli spin never stops… The War of Independence ended at 00:01 May 15th 1948 (ME time) the moment the Israeli Declaration of Independence came into effect … “the state of Israel has been proclaimed as an independent republic within frontiers approved by the General Assembly of the United Nations in its Resolution of November 29, 1947, and that a provisional government has been charged to assume the rights and duties of government for preserving law and order within the boundaries of Israel, for defending the state against external aggression, and for discharging the obligations of Israel to the other nations of the world in accordance with international law. The Act of Independence will become effective at one minute after six o’clock on the evening of 14 May 1948, Washington time.”

        The war that followed was and is still being fought over non-Israeli territory almost exclusively in non-Israeli territory.

  2. just
    December 18, 2013, 7:12 pm

    Thanks Annie. And thanks to Mr. Willse and Mr. Radi.

    Good luck to them and those with a conscience who walk out– I hope it’s a huge crowd!!!

    A terrible shame that GMU has chosen to honor this “person”.

    • Hostage
      December 20, 2013, 6:41 am

      @OlegR replying here

      You gonna prove i am a Nakba denier or are you gonna admit that you are a liar and that you smeared me as a debate strategy.

      Mods cut it out i don’t take these kinds of accusations lightly an i am tired of them.

      Here is an example of whataboutery that publicly condones, denies, and trivializes all of they war crimes and crimes against humanity that Israel has ever committed against Palestinians, including the Nakba: link to mondoweiss.net

      And here is where I pointed that out to you at the time: link to mondoweiss.net

      • Ellen
        December 20, 2013, 7:23 am

        Thank you Hostage for linking to the thread that includes Obsidian’s Nakba denial and other snarks. It is an interesting thread with many worthwhile comments, especially in light of the recently proposed legislation by Menendez, drafted by AIPAC.

      • Hostage
        December 20, 2013, 8:01 am

        Thank you Hostage for linking to the thread that includes Obsidian’s Nakba denial and other snarks

        Obsidian’s would fill a book, as would OlegR’s trolling. I just cited an instance of Nakba denial.

      • Sibiriak
        December 20, 2013, 8:45 am

        Hostage:

        I just cited an instance of Nakba denial.

        I took OlegR’s “bickering” comment to be a trivialization of the current ongoing I/P conflict– comparing it to the current strife in Syria and Egypt– not necessarily a trivialization or denial of the Nakba. That’s my view, but I’m not going to debate the point.

      • Ellen
        December 20, 2013, 9:31 am

        Opps, I meant OlegR’s blatant Nakba denial. Trolls repeat each other so much, and sound so much alike, I get them confused.

      • OlegR
        December 20, 2013, 10:19 am

        Oleg said /Surya is still a horrible conflict and an atrocious humanitarian disaster
        Egypt is unstable and maybe on the brink of a civil war or at least an Alegrian type insurrection.
        Compared to that our bickering with Palestinians is seen as just that.
        Like it or not these are the facts./

        Hostage said /If you don’t stop engaging in Nakba denial, you’ll overstay your welcome here pretty quickly./

        Nope Hostage i was not talking about the events of 1948 and the creation of Palestinian refugees.
        I was comparing our current conflict 60 years later with the atrocities that are committed around the world which are much worse from a human rights perspective.
        Only a dude with a very broad imagination can conclude that this was Nakba denial.

        You are still a liar .
        Try again.

      • Hostage
        December 20, 2013, 8:32 pm

        I took OlegR’s “bickering” comment to be a trivialization of the current ongoing I/P conflict

        I include everything back to the 1st Aliyah in the conflict between the Zionists and the Palestinians. In any event he’s still trivializing war crimes and crimes against humanity that target Palestinians according to the findings about Israel’s Geneva convention violations in the ICJ advisory opinion and the Goldstone report.

      • Hostage
        December 20, 2013, 9:41 pm

        Nope Hostage i was not talking about the events of 1948 and the creation of Palestinian refugees.
        I was comparing our current conflict 60 years later with the atrocities that are committed around the world which are much worse from a human rights perspective.

        See the State “Practice Relating to Rule 132. Return of Displaced Persons” in the ICRC Guide to Customary International Humanitarian Law.

        Israel started a conflict with the Palestinian refugees it exiled 60 years ago and its refusal to repatriate them in a timely fashion is an on-going war crime under the terms of international law. See for example Article 85(4)(b) of the 1st Additional Protocol. That on-going crime is still part and parcel of the so-called current conflict you are talking about. Full stop.

        In addition, Israel has been accused of the same deadly war crimes and crimes against humanity as the victims of the other conflicts you mentioned and you are engaging in hate speech when you attempt to deny, condone, or trivialize the suffering of the thousands of Palestinian victims as a case of “bickering”.

      • OlegR
        December 22, 2013, 6:50 am

        Now you are just trying to wiggle your way out of admitting that
        you were lying when you called me a Nakba denier
        by expanding the definition of the Nakba to the whole conflict.

        You are still a liar Hostage and this is the definite proof.
        Last chance, bring an instance of my Nakba denial
        i am sure you had time to sift through the archives by now.

      • Annie Robbins
        December 22, 2013, 10:42 am

        by expanding the definition of the Nakba to the whole conflict.

        the nakba is ongoing. link to ongoingnakba.org

        it won’t end as long as zionism is judaizing palestine and expelling palestinians from their land. denying the expulsion of palestinians from their land, in the past or present, is a form of nakba denial. it’s an ongoing crime. just like if nazis were still exterminating jews the holocaust would not be over.

      • OlegR
        December 22, 2013, 11:08 am

        Btw Annie even the site you linked to
        makes a clear distinction between Nakba and the term that you tried to use.

        link to ongoingnakba.org

        Palestine’s Ongoing Nakba

        The term Nakba (Arabic for ‘Catastrophe’) refers to the first round of massive population transfer undertaken by the Zionist movement and the State of Israel in the period between November 1947 (the issuing of the UN Partition Plan for Palestine) and the cease-fire agreements with Arab states in 1949. The Nakba was an act of forced population transfer (ethnic cleansing) undertaken for the purpose of establishing Israel as a state that would ensure permanent dominance of Jewish settler-immigrants over the indigenous Arab people of Palestine. More than 750,000 Palestinians were forcibly displaced from their homes and lands during these original Nakba years.

        The Ongoing Nakba refers to Israel’s ongoing denial of the rights of displaced Palestinians to return to the lands from which they were displaced, as well as the ongoing experience of forced displacement and dispossession of Palestinians from their homelands that has continued since the original Nakba years as a result of Israel’s policies and practices, namely Israeli apartheid, colonisation and military occupation.

      • Hostage
        December 22, 2013, 3:25 pm

        Now you are just trying to wiggle your way out of admitting that
        you were lying when you called me a Nakba denier
        by expanding the definition of the Nakba to the whole conflict.

        I’m glad you admit that there is a “whole conflict”. I just showed you that the failure to repatriate refugees in a timely manner is a war crime under conventional and customary law. It triggers individual international criminal responsibility for every Israeli official who continues to prevent the return of refugees expelled since 1948. It’s an on-going offense that applies to the current government and it will apply to the next one too, if it also refuses to allow the aging refugees to return.

        Now if you’ll just deny that once again, I’ll email Phil and Adam and ask them to define Nakba denial for you.

      • Hostage
        December 22, 2013, 6:53 pm

        The bottom line is that the refusal to repatriate 1948 refugees, and the others expelled since, is one of the root causes of the on-going conflict. It is also an on-going war crime and crime against humanity that the victims are still experiencing on a daily basis. It cannot be deliberately denied or trivialized as “bickering” without engaging in a blatant form of hate speech.

      • talknic
        December 22, 2013, 7:10 pm

        OlegR “i was not talking about the events of 1948 and the creation of Palestinian refugees.
        I was comparing our current conflict 60 years later

        Uh? It’s the same conflict. When did Israel withdraw from non-Israeli territories it illegally acquired in 1948/49 “outside the State of Israel”? When were these territories legally annexed to Israel?

        From precisely 00:01 May 15th 1948, Jewish forces have been at war in and in occupation over non-Israeli territory. There has never been a peace treaty between Israel and what remained of the State of Palestine

  3. ritzl
    December 18, 2013, 9:12 pm

    All which raises the larger question of why she is getting honored in the first place.

    What could overshadow her colonization profiteer negatives in GMU’s view? Did she contribute to/endow GMU? Or the more benign, graduate done good?

    What’s the connection here?

    Or maybe to put it another way, what’s GMU’s susceptibility to this kind of seemingly perverse honorific by a public university?

    • just
      December 18, 2013, 9:41 pm

      From the article:

      “It appears that Arison is being honored at commencement because of her donation of funds for a named professorship. As Mason increasingly relies on funding from external sources, we must be extremely cautious that those funds do not influence curriculum and undermine the autonomy of Mason’s educational, cultural, and social life. University administration has said that the professor of the endowed chair will be dedicated to research and education as exemplified by Shari Arison’s “vision.” It is deeply troubling that a war profiteer can not only redefine the standards for moral business practices, but also gain a direct line to communicate them to future business leaders. ”

      pee-yew!

      • ritzl
        December 20, 2013, 12:25 am

        Thanks, just. Skimmed over it. Again… :(

        “pee-yew” is right.

  4. markrcca
    December 18, 2013, 9:24 pm

    Annie Robbins and everyone else: before you point fingers and blaming other nations for “occupying someone’s land”, please go back to your respective European, Middle Eastern, or other countries as applicable. You are OCCUPYING the land of the Native American Indians, which was forcefully, unjustly, and cruelly taken from them. You are now settling on it, and you have no right to do so. Be so kind to vacate this land and return it to its rightful owners.

    Walk out of the speech, and head straight to the airport with your passport. Otherwise, your empty talk is nothing more than “The pot calling the kettle black”.

    • Sumud
      December 18, 2013, 11:05 pm

      You are OCCUPYING the land of the Native American Indians, which was forcefully, unjustly, and cruelly taken from them.

      Pls link to the appropriate UN resolutions outlining how the US is occupying Indian land. You know – like the dozens or more about Israel’s belligerent occupation of Palestinian land.

      Nobody is arguing that the US and my own country Australia were not settled in a way that was “was forcefully, unjustly, and cruelly taken from them.”

      Unlike you, some of us are determined to learn from the tragic history of colonialism and occupation empire(s) – not to use it to justify past, present and future unjust and cruel acts.

      In Australia we have been having a national reconciliation dialogue for decades now – we can’t undo the past but it can be addressed and amends made where possible. A significant event along the way is PM Kevin Rudd’s 2008 apology on behalf of the nation to the ‘Stolen Generations’. Watch:

      link to youtube.com

      Indigenous Australians didn’t get the vote in Australia until the 1967 referendum. Just months after this Israel began it’s military occupation of the West Bank and Gaza; nearly 50 years on Palestinians under occupation still have no vote.

      The things that Israel had done and is doing is unconscionable – it’s deeply immoral to criticise US colonialism as you have done, but then use it to justify Israel’s behaviour.

      • Sibiriak
        December 19, 2013, 8:18 am

        Sumud:

        Nobody is arguing that the US and my own country Australia were not settled in a way that was “was forcefully, unjustly, and cruelly taken from them.”

        Unlike you, some of us are determined to learn from the tragic history of colonialism and occupation empire(s) – not to use it to justify past, present and future unjust and cruel acts.

        Excellent response to that stock Zionist talking point.

      • OlegR
        December 20, 2013, 10:23 am

        Meaningless words since you can’t even begin to rectify the injustice brought
        on Native Americans or Aborigines .
        All you do is use your guilty conscience to attack somebody else.

      • markrcca
        December 19, 2013, 11:16 am

        Good, you’re from Australia, and I guess you’re not a Native Aborigine. So won’t you get out of the land you’re occupying, before you start blaming others? It is unconscionable that you keep doing that. It is more unconscionable that you are laying accusations on others, before looking at what you’re doing yourself.

        If you go back to Britain or your respective country of origin, then you can start accusing.

      • Sumud
        December 19, 2013, 11:52 am

        So mark are you going to provide those links? You’ve made accusations – back them up.

        How strange you think you have scored some points by aligning Israel’s behaviour with the way that the US and Australia were colonised.

      • talknic
        December 19, 2013, 12:27 pm

        @markrcca You’re digging yourself a smelly hole with a broken shovel

        Australia is acting within its legal borders and attempting to rectify as much as it can the mistakes of the past.

        Israel is in Occupied Territories and contravening the Laws of occupation, the UN Charter and hundreds of UNSC resolutions.

    • Peter in SF
      December 19, 2013, 1:49 am

      Annie Robbins and everyone else: before you point fingers and blaming other nations for “occupying someone’s land”, …

      Mark, I don’t understand why you make the implicit assumption that occupation is necessarily a bad thing for the people who experience it.
      First, there’s no need for anyone on this blog to “point fingers” or even “blaming other nations”: Israel’s own Supreme Court declared in 2004, as part of background to one of its decisions, that “Since 1967, Israel has been holding the areas of Judea and Samaria in belligerent occupation.
      link to elyon1.court.gov.il
      And second, the Arabs living in Judea and Samaria benefit from Israel’s occupation, don’t they? (Except when they choose to respond to Israeli generosity with suicide bombers, etc.) If you were a Palestinian, wouldn’t you prefer to live under the rule of what you would surely agree is the most moral army in the world, rather than suffer the alternatives of despotism or anarchy? Mark, if you can’t see the beneficence of the Jewish state’s belligerent occupation, you may need to think about whether your judgment is clouded by anti-Semitism.

      • markrcca
        December 19, 2013, 11:44 am

        >Israel’s own Supreme Court declared in 2004, as part of background to >one of its decisions, that “Since 1967, Israel has been holding the areas of >Judea and Samaria in belligerent occupation.”

        Here is the decision of the US Supreme court – not “a background statement” to something, but an explicit decision regarding the Native Indians:

        link to en.wikipedia.org

        Please read it. This decision was entirely ignored by President Andrew Jackson and most of the American settlers.

      • talknic
        December 19, 2013, 12:42 pm

        @ markrcca “Here is the decision of the US Supreme court – not “a background statement” to something, but an explicit decision regarding the Native Indians”

        1832

        “This decision was entirely ignored by President Andrew Jackson and most of the American settlers”

        181 years ago.

        Israel’s breaches of trust, law, the UN Charter and hundreds of UNSC resolutions are happening TODAY!

      • Hostage
        December 19, 2013, 7:02 pm

        Here is the decision of the US Supreme court – not “a background statement” to something, but an explicit decision regarding the Native Indians:

        link to en.wikipedia.org

        Please read it. This decision was entirely ignored by President Andrew Jackson and most of the American settlers.

        You’ve picked the wrong case. That one simply struck down an unconstitutional State law that prohibited whites from being on Indian land without permission from the government of Georgia. That left the Indians at the mercy of federal law and with no protection from state law that had kept missionaries and American settlers alike off Indian land.

        According to the constitution, President Andrew Jackson was the chief diplomat empowered to conduct any relations with the Indian nations. He and the Congress were never bound by the laws of Georgia in that respect and Georgia law did not limit their war powers either.

    • Cliff
      December 19, 2013, 4:07 am

      @mark

      Jewish colonialism and nationalism is on-going.

      None of us had anything to do with the extermination of the indigenous Native Americans and none of us are opposed to integrating them fully into American society as equals and with compensation, recognition, etc. etc. for our countries crimes against them.

      It’s you Zio-fascists/thieves/liars/etc who are the intellectual equivalent of Holocaust deniers, denying the Palestinians their justice and liberty and homeland.

      • markrcca
        December 19, 2013, 11:24 am

        YOUR colonialism and nationalism is on-going. You are currently occupying the lands that belongs to other nations. Many of them were killed by illegal settlers before you? How convenient. So I suppose you also wouldn’t have a problem if most Palestinians were butchered by Jews in 1948 and there weren’t enough of them to raise complaints today? That would be fine with you then?

        Before you lay accusations on others, look within yourself, and see if you have the right to lay such accusations.

      • Cliff
        December 19, 2013, 4:05 pm

        @marc

        I am not occupying ANYONE. There is no American colonialism.

        The Native Americans have been all but exterminated. Their situation presently is tragic and I said I believe they deserve justice.

        I would advocate the same in Israel/Palestine. YOU are presently colonizing Palestine and dispossessing Palestinians.

        So the world should turn a blind eye because AMERICA (America is not the world, you hasbarat!) did the same thing centuries ago?

        And it wasn’t as simple as ‘America’ dispossessing the Native Americans. Plenty of European powers had a role in the destruction of indigenous peoples in this hemisphere.

        But ISRAEL is the sole perpetrator in the destruction of Palestine. Israel is STILL COLONIZING Palestine.

        You do not get to get away with murder because other people have murdered.

        Would you defend SLAVERY because America practiced SLAVERY?

        You are SICK.

      • JeffB
        December 19, 2013, 1:32 pm

        @Cliff –

        Nonsense on the compensation for Native Americans. That most certainly is not the world’s position on them. They don’t get fair compensation and no one is even arguing they should. And most relevantly no one feels it necessary to use language like: “yankee-fascist/thieves/liars/etc who are the intellectual equivalent of Holocaust deniers, denying the Native Americans their justice and liberty and homeland”.

        As far as integrating them fully as equals. There are many Zionists that would love to do that. That’s up to the Palestinians, to admit that Palestine is as dead a state as the states of the Delaware Indians are today and join Israel, including the state religion.

      • Hostage
        December 19, 2013, 9:04 pm

        Nonsense on the compensation for Native Americans. That most certainly is not the world’s position on them.

        Compensation for the trans-Atlantic slave trade and compensation/land redistribution for Native Americans were among the agenda items under discussion for the Durban Conferences as well as the ground work for the 2007 UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. The latter does include international support for enforcement of treaties with Native Americans and other indigenous peoples.

    • ziusudra
      December 19, 2013, 4:17 am

      Greetings Mark.,
      After WWII Europe & the US respecting the Geneva Accords also started the process of the principles of the UN, like the stint to the Magna Carta of 13thC England.
      Even though King John Lackland went back on his word, he had to give in in the end.
      We, the US & Europe have also subverted both principles, we helped to set up.
      Mankind has managed to hijack every ideal & principle of every Institution that was created in Social, Religious & Political advancement, but stumbles in continuing to correct the ne’er ending hijacking & corruption of special interests.
      Mankind is Sissiphus forever climbing the hill. Democracy is ne’er static & must be renewed forever. Hegel: Thesis contra Antithesis. Where is the Systhesis?
      ziusudra
      PS Bravi, Sumud & Peter.

    • talknic
      December 19, 2013, 8:19 am

      @ markrcca “Annie Robbins and everyone else: before you point fingers and blaming other nations for “occupying someone’s land”, please go back to your respective European, Middle Eastern, or other countries as applicable”

      American Jews too?

      “You are OCCUPYING the land of the Native American Indians, which was forcefully, unjustly, and cruelly taken from them.”

      The US was occupied by the British, French, Spanish (Texas etc). NOT the US. Furthermore colonization occurred before International Law was adopted to prohibit the illegal acquisition of territory by war link to pages.citebite.com Israel is illegally acquiring non-Israeli territory TODAY

      “You are now settling on it, and you have no right to do so”

      BS

      “Be so kind to vacate this land and return it to its rightful owners”

      American Jews too!

      “Walk out of the speech, and head straight to the airport with your passport. Otherwise, your empty talk is nothing more than “The pot calling the kettle black””

      American Jews too!

      Say… are the American Indians calling for withdrawal by the Occupying Power?
      Is the US in breach of the Laws of Occupation?

      American Indians are citizens of the US, allowed to live, vote and travel freely anywhere in the US without passing thru any military check points. Occupied Palestinians cannot live, vote and travel freely anywhere in Israel. They can’t even travel freely in Palestine.

      What was your point? If America wasn’t colonized or if all non American Indians left, including Jewish Americans, then Israel would withdraw from all non-Israeli territories, taking its vile illegal settlers. Israel would suddenly adhere to the law, suddenly pay compensation to the Palestinians. Is that it?

      Or was it two wrongs make a right?

      Come back with something rational when you’ve thought things through a little, because your wholly holey Hasbara is real sh*te

      • markrcca
        December 19, 2013, 11:25 am

        Absolutely, American Jews too.

      • markrcca
        December 19, 2013, 11:31 am

        >>Say… are the American Indians calling for withdrawal by the Occupying Power?

        Why don’t you talk to them and see how they feel about their extermination and occupied lands. How would you feel if you were in their shoes? Or if you don’t care about it, then why do single out an issue halfway across the world from you?

        >American Indians are citizens of the US, allowed to live, vote and travel >freely anywhere in the US without passing thru any military check >points.

        Whatever remains of them. Most of them were forcefully removed from their lands and massacred. So if Israelis did the same with Palestinians, and allowed a small remaining portion to “travel freely and vote”, I guess that would be fine with you?

        >What was your point? If America wasn’t colonized or if all non >American Indians left, including Jewish Americans, then Israel would >withdraw from all non-Israeli territories, taking its vile illegal settlers. >Israel would suddenly adhere to the law, suddenly pay compensation >to the Palestinians. Is that it?

        My point is, all of us in the New World, we have no right to lay accusations on others, of something we are guilty of ourselves. If you were all back in Europe and other respective countries, then yes, you’d have a right to present such accusations. You want to make things right in the world so much? Start with yourselves before pointing fingers at others.

      • markrcca
        December 19, 2013, 11:56 am

        >The US was occupied by the British, French, Spanish (Texas etc). NOT the US.

        Entirely untrue. The British occupied the Eastern shore up to the Appalachians, and prevented settlement further West. One of the reasons for the American Revolution is that the settlers wanted to continue expanding into the Indian territory. Most of the US Indian territory was captured after the War of Independence.

        >Furthermore colonization occurred before International Law was
        >adopted to prohibit the illegal acquisition of territory by war link to
        >pages.citebite.com

        So it was occupying and massacring someone elses land was perfectly legal before that fateful meeting in 1934?

        >Israel is illegally acquiring non-Israeli territory TODAY

        You in the New World, are occupying another nations lands TODAY. Why doesn’t that bother you at least as much as your accusation against someone else?

      • Hostage
        December 19, 2013, 6:40 pm

        So it was occupying and massacring someone elses land was perfectly legal before that fateful meeting in 1934?

        There is always a first time for the application of any penal law. Pillage and population transfer were criminal offenses under the Lieber Code and Article 28 and 46 of the Hague regulations of 1907. FYI, Experts agreed even then that it would be really nice, once they were enforceable and weren’t flagrantly violated on a routine basis. The incorporation of war crimes trials in the Treaty of Versailles was a flop, but the post-WWII criminal tribunals, UN tribunals, and ICC were not. They have started enforcing the prohibitions. In the meantime, the UN has adopted declarations on reparations for victims of international crimes and reparations are being paid for past injustices in many cases. That’s one of the real reasons so many countries, including Israel and the USA, have avoided the Durban conferences and process.

        In any event, Israelis are no better than the dozens of defendants who are standing trial for pillage in the Hague right now – and their cases are not unique.

      • talknic
        December 20, 2013, 6:05 am

        markrcca
        ” You in the New World, are occupying another nations lands TODAY. “

        According to which UNSC resolution?

      • markrcca
        December 19, 2013, 12:01 pm

        >Furthermore colonization occurred before International Law was
        >adopted to prohibit the illegal acquisition of territory by war link to
        >pages.citebite.com

        There were a pile of similar laws and treaties before 1934. Here is at least one U.S. law, by the Supreme Court no less, explicitly making illegal the occupation of Indian land:

        ttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worcester_v._Georgia

        So tell me what happened to this law? As often happens, it went ignored.

      • Cliff
        December 19, 2013, 4:06 pm

        Why do all you Zionist trolls rely solely on Wikipedia?

        Do any of you read books?

      • Sibiriak
        December 19, 2013, 1:08 pm

        markrcca:

        Say… are the American Indians calling for withdrawal by the Occupying Power?

        Why don’t you talk to them and see how they feel about their extermination and occupied lands.

        Your analogy between Israel’s treatment of Palestinians and the extermination of Native Americans is thought-provoking, but I fear it may contribute to the delegitimization of Israel and Zionism.

      • Sibiriak
        December 19, 2013, 2:21 pm

        markrcca:

        My point is, all of us in the New World, we have no right to lay accusations on others, of something we are guilty of ourselves.

        So, those of European descent in the New World are guilty of the violent dispossession and genocide of Native Americans, therefore, they should not criticize Jews for doing similar things in Palestine… hmmm….okay.

        If you were all back in Europe and other respective countries, then yes, you’d have a right to present such accusations.

        So, the Europeans and Asians et al. should take the lead in condemning Israeli violations of international law and denial of Palestinian rights? Not a bad idea, actually.

        Certainly if all the guilty folks in the New World have no right to criticize criminal Israeli policies, they, a fortiori, have no right to support those policies either. I mean, one criminal supporting another criminal, patting him on the back, is as bad or worse than one criminal exposing another criminal’s criminality.

        I agree with you, and all that makes sense. One point I’m not clear on, though: if a guilty person in the New World admits his or her guilt regarding an indigenous population and takes action to make amends in that regard, does that person then gain the right to criticize Israeli violations of international law and Palestinian rights?

      • adele
        December 19, 2013, 4:01 pm

        markrcca, just in case you didn’t know:

        On Dec 15, 2013, “The Native American and Indigenous Studies Association (NAISA) has declared its support for the Palestinian call for the boycott of Israeli academic institutions.

        “As the elected council of an international community of Indigenous and allied non-Indigenous scholars, students, and public intellectuals who have studied and resisted the colonization and domination of Indigenous lands via settler state structures throughout the world, we strongly protest the illegal occupation of Palestinian lands and the legal structures of the Israeli state that systematically discriminate against Palestinians and other Indigenous peoples,” NAISA’s governing body announced in a “Declaration of Support for the Boycott of Israeli Academic Institutions.”

        Declaration of Support for the Boycott of Israeli Academic Institutions can be found at link to naisa.org

        (courtesy of EI report, link to electronicintifada.net)

      • Annie Robbins
        December 19, 2013, 10:55 pm

        markrcca, just in case you didn’t know:

        On Dec 15, 2013, “The Native American and Indigenous Studies Association (NAISA) has declared its support for the Palestinian call for the boycott of Israeli academic institutions.markrcca, just in case you didn’t know:

        On Dec 15, 2013, “The Native American and Indigenous Studies Association (NAISA) has declared its support for the Palestinian call for the boycott of Israeli academic institutions.

        oh my. well, mark certainly pulled off a thread highjack anyway.

        in case anyone is curious the walkout went fantastically today. i’m so proud of all those grads who walked out, and their supportive families too!

      • Hostage
        December 19, 2013, 7:19 pm

        My point is, all of us in the New World, we have no right to lay accusations on others, of something we are guilty of ourselves.

        Yeah, but you’ve not made the case that Indians are under belligerent occupation, that they don’t get to vote on the governments that make their laws, or that they don’t have the legal right of self-determination.

      • American
        December 19, 2013, 7:52 pm

        markrcca says

        My point is, all of us in the New World, we have no right to lay accusations on others, of something we are guilty of ourselves>>>>>

        First, if you’re a zionist you are not part of the New World, you’re a primitive throwback to CE70.
        Second, we have every right to lay accusations cause this is the 21 century —not the 17 and 18th century—- man evolves–justice and morality evolve.

      • RoHa
        December 19, 2013, 8:49 pm

        “My point is, all of us in the New World, we have no right to lay accusations on others, of something we are guilty of ourselves.”

        Why not? The accusations are claims of fact. If they are true, they are true no matter who makes the claims. Being guilty of the same sort of crime does not affect the truth of my claims about the crimes of others.
        If Joe killed Harry, then my claim “Joe killed Harry” is true regardless of the fact that I make the claim while slicing Josephine’s throat.

        Or are you suggesting that people who are guilty of the crime are not morally permitted to make true claims about other people’s crimes?
        If so, why not?

      • talknic
        December 20, 2013, 5:46 am

        markrcca “Why don’t you talk to them and see how they feel about their extermination and occupied lands.”

        Better still, you show us where the American Indians are calling for withdrawal by the Occupying Power.

        “.. if Israelis did the same with Palestinians, and allowed a small remaining portion to “travel freely and vote”, I guess that would be fine with you?”

        You can guess all you like, your assumptions have nothing what so ever to do with me.

        “My point is…”

        A pathetic attempt to whitewash Israel’s crimes under today’s laws

    • eljay
      December 19, 2013, 8:40 am

      >> markrcca @ December 18, 2013 at 9:24 pm

      Surprise, surprise: Yet another hateful and immoral Zio-supremacist points to (past) acts of injustice and immorality elsewhere in the world as justification for his supremacist “Jewish State’s” past and ON-GOING acts of injustice and immorality.

      What is it with Zio-supremacists and their inexplicable desire to be as bad as, or perhaps just slightly better than, the worst in the world, rather than to strive to be as good as the best in the world?

      • markrcca
        December 19, 2013, 11:36 am

        I this discussion, I’m not justifying anything. Before even discussing Jewish right to the land of Israel, I’m saying to you, all of you in the New World are CURRENTLY occupying lands which are not your own, and that doesn’t bother you one bit. It is unjust, immoral and every bit hypocritical that you’re now pointing fingers at others, and screaming occupation, when you yourself are guilty of this very crime.

        If you were in Europe, Asia, Middle-East, and living on your indigenous lands, then yes I’d actually have a different discussion with you. All of you in the New World, have NO RIGHT to even begin this discussion.

      • Sibiriak
        December 19, 2013, 1:41 pm

        markrcca says:

        If you were in Europe, Asia, Middle-East, and living on your indigenous lands, then yes I’d actually have a different discussion with you. All of you in the New World, have NO RIGHT to even begin this discussion.

        I’m not sure I follow. Are you saying Jews in America have no right to discuss Israeli policy, but Jews in Europe etc. do?

      • eljay
        December 19, 2013, 4:56 pm

        >> I this discussion, I’m not justifying anything.

        Of course you are.

        >> If you were in Europe, Asia, Middle-East, and living on your indigenous lands …

        I was born in Canada. How exactly is Europe my “indigenous land”?

      • Hostage
        December 19, 2013, 7:14 pm

        I’m saying to you, all of you in the New World are CURRENTLY occupying lands which are not your own,

        I think you are having problems making your point because none of the countries you are talking about actually do hold the territory in question under the effective control or jurisdiction of the military and the inhabitants are all citizens with constitutional guarantees of equal rights.

        That is not at all what is going on in Palestine after nearly a 100 years of on-going Zionist settlement and colonization. There are other countries that have been established with armistice boundaries, and even they don’t behave like Israel does towards their various minority ethnic groups.

      • Peter in SF
        December 20, 2013, 3:30 am

        I this discussion, I’m not justifying anything. Before even discussing Jewish right to the land of Israel, I’m saying to you, all of you in the New World are CURRENTLY occupying lands which are not your own, and that doesn’t bother you one bit. It is unjust, immoral and every bit hypocritical that you’re now pointing fingers at others, and screaming occupation, when you yourself are guilty of this very crime.

        Mark, you’re completely missing my point. To talk of the “occupation” of Judea and Samaria by the Jewish state is not an “accusation” of a “crime”, and not “pointing fingers”, but an expression of a simple fact. On this factual matter, what better authority to accept than the Jewish state’s Supreme Court, in a decision written by Aharon Barak, about whom Alan Dershowitz says a lot of nice things in The Case for Israel?

        Mark, think about what you’re doing. Let’s say you admire some celebrity, a man who happens to be openly gay. Then some homophobe posts some diatribe against him for being gay, and you get all riled up about this “accusation” that he’s gay — even though he IS openly gay. I don’t think the celebrity would appreciate your attempt to defend him. This is essentially what you’re doing with Israel and its occupation. It’s not that you’re denying there’s an occupation, it’s that you insist that anyone who mentions it is saying something bad about Israel!

      • Hostage
        December 20, 2013, 6:06 am

        Mark, you’re completely missing my point. To talk of the “occupation” of Judea and Samaria by the Jewish state is not an “accusation” of a “crime”, and not “pointing fingers”, but an expression of a simple fact.

        Any military occupation that violates a member’s obligations under the UN Charter is defined as the crime of aggression.

        *United Nations Charter:

        Article 2

        4. All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.

        link to un.org

        On a number of occasions the General Assembly has determined that Israel’s continuing occupation of Arab territories captured in 1967 in violation of the explicit terms of the Charter and UN resolutions amounts to an act of aggression.

        *UN General Assembly, 9th Emergency Special Session, resolution ES-9/1:

        Recalling its resolution 3314 (XXIX) of 14 December 1974, in which it defined an act of aggression as, inter alia, “the invasion or attack by the armed forces of a State of the territory of another State, or any military occupation, however temporary, resulting from such invasion or attack, or any annexation by the use of force of the territory of another State or part thereof, and provided that “no consideration of whatever nature, whether political, economic, military or otherwise, may serve as justification for aggression,

        Stressing once again that the acquisition of territory by force is inadmissible under the Charter of the United Nations, the principles of international law and relevant United Nations resolutions,

        Noting that Israel’s record and actions establish conclusively that it is not a peace loving Member State and that it has not carried out its obligations under the Charter,

        Noting further that Israel has refused, in violation of Article 25 of the Charter, to accept and carry out the numerous relevant decisions of the Security Council, the latest being resolution 437 (1981),

        1. Strongly condemns Israel for its failure to comply with Security Council resolution 497 (1981) and General Assembly resolution 36/226 B;

        2. Declares that Israel’s decision of 14 December 1981 to impose its laws, jurisdiction and administration on the occupied Syrian Golan Heights constitutes an act of aggression under the provisions of Article 39 of the Charter of the United Nations and General Assembly resolution 3314 (XXIX);

        9. Firmly emphasizes its demands that Israel, the occupying Power, rescind forthwith its decision of 14 December 1981 to impose its laws, jurisdiction and administration on the Syrian Golan Heights, which has resulted in the effective annexation of that territory;

        10. Reaffirms the overriding necessity of the total and unconditional withdrawal by Israel from all Palestinian and other Arab territories occupied since 1967, including Jerusalem,

        11. Declares that Israel’s record and actions confirm that it is not a peace-loving Member State and that it has carried out neither its obligations under the Charter nor its commitment under General Assembly resolution 273 (III) of 11 May 1949;

        *Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations

        The territory of a State shall not be the object of military occupation resulting from the use of force in contravention of the provisions of the Charter. The territory of a State shall not be the object of acquisition by another State resulting from the threat or use of force. No territorial acquisition resulting from the threat or use of force shall be recognized as legal.

        Article 8bis of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court:

        “act of aggression” means the use of armed force by a State against the sovereignty, territorial integrity or political independence of another State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Charter of the United Nations. Any of the following acts, regardless of a declaration of war, shall, in accordance with United Nations General Assembly resolution 3314 (XXIX) of 14 December 1974, qualify as an act of aggression:

        (a) The invasion or attack by the armed forces of a State of the territory of another State, or any military occupation, however temporary, resulting from such invasion or attack, or any annexation by the use of force of the territory of another State or part thereof;

        link to crimeofaggression.info

        *Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of States:

        Article 11

        The contracting states definitely establish as the rule of their conduct the precise obligation not to recognize territorial acquisitions or special advantages which have been obtained by force whether this consists in the employment of arms, in threatening diplomatic representations, or in any other effective coercive measure. The territory of a state is inviolable and may not be the object of military occupation nor of other measures of force imposed by another state directly or indirectly or for any motive whatever even temporarily.

        link to jus.uio.no

        *Charter of the Organization of American States
        Chapter IV
        FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AND DUTIES OF STATES:

        Article 21

        The territory of a State is inviolable; it may not be the object, even temporarily, of military occupation or of other measures of force taken by another State, directly or indirectly, on any grounds whatever. No territorial acquisitions or special advantages obtained either by force or by other means of coercion shall be recognized.

        link to oas.org

    • JeffB
      December 19, 2013, 12:06 pm

      @Markrcca

      Good someone raising the same points! Let me just point out that those European, Middle Eastern… countries are all built on murder and displacement. All countries arose from mass migrations. Our whole species exists because we displaced early hominoids.

      • Cliff
        December 19, 2013, 4:07 pm

        So JeffB, would you support slavery in Israel since slavery was common once among the various nations of the world?

        Would you support genocide, since genocide was common once?

        Would you support all sorts of violations of human rights since the very concept is relatively new?

        You Jewish colonists are disgusting.

      • eljay
        December 19, 2013, 5:00 pm

        >> Let me just point out that those European, Middle Eastern… countries are all built on murder and displacement.

        And Zio-supremacists want their kick at the can. Truly sick stuff.

      • Sibiriak
        December 20, 2013, 4:19 am

        JeffB:

        [...]those European, Middle Eastern… countries are all built on murder and displacement. All countries arose from mass migrations. Our whole species exists because we displaced early hominoids.

        And why stop there? Those early hominids murdered and displaced other species without moral compunction, and those species in turn did the same to others, and so on in an unending bloody drama, so that life, looked at realistically, is just one big slaughterhouse of predation, species eat species, tribe eat tribe, and all higher, universalistic values, expansive compassion, “human rights” regimes, ethical evolution etc. are illusory–the only real thing is victory for the strongest– the Will to Power– the Triumph of the Will.

      • talknic
        December 20, 2013, 6:13 am

        @ JeffB “Good someone raising the same points! Let me just point out that those European, Middle Eastern… countries are all built on murder and displacement. All countries arose from mass migrations. Our whole species exists because we displaced early hominoids.”

        Justifying murder and displacement .. cute

      • Ecru
        December 21, 2013, 9:20 am

        @JeffB

        Ah, the good old Social Darwinist (yes your rather vile approach to morality has a name) approach so beloved of, amongst others Adolf Hitler. You do keep interesting company don’t you in your “ubermensch” excuse making.

        So if you’re ever mugged or robbed I assume you just shrug your shoulders and accept that the criminal had the power to do that to you and thus his actions were perfectly OK? You’d never phone the police over something that the criminal had every right to do based on the fact people have stolen things in the past? Or let’s make it more extreme – since genocide had been practised in the past Hitler was perfectly within his rights to try it out on, amongst others, the Jews? That the various victims of the Nazi Party deserved all they got simply because they couldn’t stop it?

        Tell us, do you refrain from pardoning child abuse and rape based on the “might=right” argument or are you completely immoral?

    • Ecru
      December 20, 2013, 12:59 pm

      @ MarkYMCA

      So basically your justification for Israel’s current and continuing colonialism and genocidal policies is through appeal to historical precedent. “Other nations did it in the past so it’s OK for another nation to do it today” sort of thing.

      Well Mark there’s an awful LOT of historic precedent for all types of things. Including forcing Jews to live in ghettoes, wear special clothing and limit their options for employment to a very short list of approved activities. Would you still be for historical precedent there should some nation decide to start that type of stuff all over again? Somehow I suspect your attachment to history would suddenly vanish…….

      • tree
        December 22, 2013, 9:57 pm

        So basically your justification for Israel’s current and continuing colonialism and genocidal policies is through appeal to historical precedent. “Other nations did it in the past so it’s OK for another nation to do it today” sort of thing.

        Mark’s argument goes further than that, in that his position is that no one who is either the descendant of, or a current national of, someone or some country that committed genocide, ethnic cleansing and colonialism in the past has any right to complain about genocide or colonialism today. Its a specious argument that would bite him in the ass if he thought about it, since the Tanakh is full of genocide committed by Jews in the name of Judaism and G-d. Therefore by mark’s reasoning no Jew had or has the right to complain about the genocide committed by Nazi Germany. Stupid and faulty “reasoning” sucks.

        And in a more modern example, using Mark’s argument, no Israeli Jew can complain about Palestinian terrorism, since Zionist Jews committed numerous terrorist acts, killing many civilians, prior to 1948. Nor can they complain in the future if they are driven out of Israel since Israeli Jews drove out Palestinians in the past and continue to do so up to today. Frankly, he’s just excused any possible atrocity committed in the future by any Palestinian that matches the atrocities committed by Israel. I’m sure that wasn’t his intention, but its where his argument leads.

        As a side note, doesn’t Mark sound like former poster eee?

      • RoHa
        December 23, 2013, 6:22 am

        “Mark’s argument goes further than that, in that his position …. Its a specious argument…”

        He hasn’t actually offered an argument. He has just made a claim, but with no argument to support it. I asked for such an argument, but I seem to have missed the reply.

  5. Sumud
    December 19, 2013, 12:26 pm

    Any update or footage of the walk-out?

    • adele
      December 19, 2013, 3:49 pm

      Just saw this on Twitter:
      From @GMUSAIA
      The graduates who walked out! What courage! No honor in apartheid. BDS now!! #GMU #masongrad #arisonIDEA
      Photo here —-> pic.twitter.com/DHNRRpstJF

  6. Philip Munger
    December 19, 2013, 3:18 pm

    Markrcca,

    I’m part Comanche, but mostly European extraction. Should I be cut into pieces, leaving the Comanche part here, and moving the rest back to Norway, England, Germany? What am I to be in your mythical world – chopped liver?

    Shouldn’t you be worried about the Canaanites, Sea People, Phoenicians, Philistines and others the early Israelites forced out of their lands? Where is your compassion for these other long-lost peoples? Or, maybe, the Palestinians ARE representative of these long-lost peoples, and you just only want to go back a century or so in your wounded diatribe.

Leave a Reply