Commenter Profile

Total number of comments: 24 (since 2012-01-19 19:57:00)

Showing comments 24 - 1
Page:

  • Olympian at the checkpoint: why a Palestinian swimmer couldn't train in Jerusalem
    • I don't see Americans living under occupation or having to apply for permits to allow them to swim in a pool closest to their home or any that are refugees awaiting their right of return home - or are you going to make an excuse for that too?

    • No one seems to be bothered that she even needed to apply for a permit in the first instance?

  • My family's Nakba story
    • The act of denial by zionists was already described in painful accuracy in 1949:
      “ To be knowingly led astray and join great general mass of liars – that mass compounded of crass ignorance, utilitarian indifference, and shameless self-interest – and to exchange a single great truth for a cynical shrug of a hardened sinner.” –S.Yizhar, novelist, in his book “Khirbet Khizeh” (1949). Excerpt from Professor Oren Yiftachel, Geography Department, Ben-Gurion University. in his Forward to Noga Kadman's "Erased from Space and Consciousness.”

  • 'To defend western freedom,' U.S. must preserve Egyptian tyranny
    • Not just Egypt but Jordan and even Palestinian officials too are bought to buy co-operation with israel.

      Egypt & Jordan receive large sums of money (per capita about 1/20th of what Israel receives - that figure is about to get even worse) to buy their cooperation with Israel; Palestinians receive about 1/23rd of that to Israel, to repair infrastructure that Israeli forces have destroyed, to fund humanitarian projects required due to the destruction wrought by Israel’s military, & to convince Palestinian officials to take actions beneficial to Israel. These sums should also be included in expenditures on behalf of Israel.

  • Ozick hagiography in NYT does her the service of leaving out her views of Palestinians
    • Looks like the indoctrination worked well on her. I am sorry to say but people who cannot ask questions about what they were told when younger they honestly cannot be very bright.

  • Front-page article in 'NYT' exposes the lie that wall is a security barrier
    • In my opinion its just an apartheid era piece showing how great 'israel' is for the Palestinians How the 'primitive' natives rely on their white oppressors to survive

  • 'I am Palestinian and I am human' -- and Leanne Mohamad, 15, is disqualified from UK speaking competition
  • 'NYT' blames Hamas for civilian deaths in front-page article that sounds like Hillary Clinton
    • She cannot be that naive about the history. Its obvious why she is keeping her job at the nyt. Lying for filthy lucre.

  • Advice to British leftwingers on kicking racism out of their anti-Israel rhetoric
    • From the very beginning prominent members of the British Labour party fully endorsed this imperialist-colonial project in Palestine.

      The 1947-48 ethnic cleansing of Palestine was carried out under British Labour Party’s watch. Ken Livingstone’s hero, the late Labour politician, Tony Benn sold nuclear material to the Zionist regime when he was a government minister in the 1960s.

      The Haavara agreement lasted from 1933 until the start of the second world war, but the British Labour endorsement of Zionist colonialism began before the 1920’s and has continued to this day. So why is Ken Livingstone and his ilk keen to drag out Zionist collusion with elements in the Nazi regime yet never broach the subject of the British Labour party’s actual facilitation of the Zionist colonial project in the same period?

      It wasn’t the Nazis who issued the Balfour Declaration – it was Great Britain. Nazis didn’t have 20,000 soldiers in Palestine in the 1930s, the British did. It wasn’t Nazi Stormtroopers that proudly walked round with smashed Palestinian brains in their tobacco tins, it was Tommy. It wasn’t the Nazis that denied and crushed the Palestinian request for representative democracy in the 1930s, it was Great Britain. When Palestine was ethnically cleansed it happened under British Labour party watch, not Nazis. These are facts Livingstone and his wing of the British Labour Party could do well to note if they are to avoid accusations of anti-Semitism because let’s face it, the only truth Zionists have (or most likely, appropriated) is that some in the anti-Zionist movement are nothing but anti-Semites. A truth Ken Livingstone has provided credence to over the last week.

      link to churchills-karma.com

  • When 'Broad City' Went On Birthright, and taught us all a lesson about American Jews and Israel
    • 'Birthright' is defined as a 'natural or moral right.' I don't see anything natural or moral in the heist of Palestine

  • Another interview on Israeli TV
  • Finding 1 'Arab' in Israeli basketball, NY Times espouses Zionist racial theory
  • Israelis don't exist
    • “The Supreme court said they could not acknowledge having an Israeli nationality because that would undermine the very character of the state of Israel” – Ronnie Barkan link to youtube.com;

  • 2017 is a crucial year for the Palestine Question
    • MASS OF TRICKS: The point needs no pressing. The very fact the Balfour Declaration [from Nov 1917] was not proclaimed in Palestine until 1920 is sufficient proof of its character.

      Into the Maze – Four Plain questions (examining the Balfour Declaration point by point):
      Mass tricks of Balfour Declaration
      1. What exactly is a “National Home”? Nobody knows. The expression was used because it was ambiguous. To Syrians it is explained as a home. Fifteen months after the British Government had declared that it viewed this ambiguity with favour, Mr Lansing, the American Foreign Secretary, was obliged to ask at the Paris Peace Conference in Paris what “National Home” meant. Dr Weizmann replied that it meant there should be established such conditions ultimately in Palestine that “Palestine shall be just as Jewish as America is American and England is English. “ Mr (as he was then) Balfour was very pleased with this reply. It is difficult to see why, since Dr Weizmann had removed with his frankness a good deal of ambiguity.
      2. “Nothing shall be done,” says the vigilant Declaration, “which may prejudice the civil & religious rights of non-existing Jewish communities in Palestine.” No phrase could sound better but what exactly are “civil rights”? Again nobody knows. That is why the Declaration is anxious to guarantee them. Observe that the phrase “political rights” is not used. Political rights would have been something definite. The political rights of a people are its ownership of its country. The right to have, as Syrian-Arabs demand, “a National Government created, which shall be responsible to a Parliament elected by the people of Palestine - Muslims, Christians, and Jews.” A Subterfuge: When the Zionists drew up their programme of October 1916, the first portion of that program reads thus: “The Jewish population of Palestine shall enjoy full civic and POLITICAL rights…” no mistake here and at the end of the Balfour declaration itself is it civil rights guaranteed to the Jews? Read and see: “the rights and POLITICAL status enjoyed by the Jews.” No mistake again.
      3. The third point is less important but worth noting. The people of Palestine are referred to as the “Non-Jewish communities in Palestine.” There are about 80000 Jews & 670000 non-Jews in Palestine [1922]. The word would give anybody the impression that the “non-Jewish communities” were some specialised sort of bodies & not the mass of the population.
      4. Nothing, according to the declaration, is to prejudice the “political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.” What does this mean? It means that Jews, besides being put on the road to establishing a Jewish state in Palestine, are also guaranteed against not belonging to it if they don’t wish. Political Zionism may look forward, therefore, to having their cake and eating it.
      The truth peeps out very clearly from this part of the Declaration. If there existed no intention in the minds of its framers of founding a Jewish state, why were they moving to protect their co-religionists from the necessity of belonging to it? If the National Home was only to be a home, the political status of Jews elsewhere could no more be altered by it than is the status of Englishman because thousands of them have homes in France & Italy. But if a state was erected in Palestine? Ah then!
      Excerpt from: Palestine Deception
      [Balfour Declaration] FORMULA MAKING:
      There was a meeting at the house of one of their number [British Zionist] in Feb 1917, Sir Mark Sykes was there “in his private capacity.” He was told there MUST be no internationalisation of Palestine because the Zionists desired a British protectorate with full rights to the Jews to develop as a nation. M. Nahum Sokoloff, the chief representative in Britain of the International Zionist Executive, was chosen, as the result of the meeting, to continue negotiations with Sir Mark Sykes & M. Picot, who acted for the French Government. The Zionist report says with satisfaction: “Thus opened the chapter of negotiations which ended 9 months later with the Balfour Declaration.” Still fearful of internationalisation, which would have made the Zionist state impossible, Mssrs Weizmann & Sokoloff spent some months vainly trying to get the Sykes-Picot Agreement cancelled. Though they failed in this, yet somehow internationalisation did drop out of sight.
      The goal was getting visible. A number of prominent Zionists, Ahad Ha-am, the writer, Mssrs Joseph Cowen, Akiva Yaakov Ettinger, Albert Hyamson, Simon Marks, Harry Sacher, Israel Moses Sieff, Leon Simon, Samuel Tolkowsky, Aaron Aaronsohn, Vladimir (Ze’ev) Jabotinsky, Samuel Landman, & others from continental countries, as they visited England from time to time, were gathered in to form a Political Committee. Their names are of great interest, since it was they, together with well-known Zionist leaders, who began work on the “Balfour Declaration.” Many versions of the suggested formula were drafted,” says the Zionist report, “by various members of the Political Committee.” Drafts went back and forth to the Foreign Office. “Some were detailed and elaborate,” but the Government did not want to commit itself to more than a general statement of principle. Finally, a “concise and general formula was agreed upon.” This was made known to and approved by President Woodrow Wilson, Sir Mark Sykes, and Baron Edmond de Rothschild. All seemed finished. On July 18 Lord Rothschild forwarded the Balfour Declaration to Mr Balfour [to sign].
      Source: “The Palestine Deception, 1915–1923: The McMahon-Hussein Correspondence, the Balfour Declaration, and the Jewish National Home” By: J. M. N. Jeffries
      Edited by William M. Mathew

  • What's the big difference between Israel's 1967 occupation and its 1948 occupation?
  • Why Israel has silenced the 1948 story of Nazareth’s survival
    • Some excerpts from the Al Jazeera "Nakba" series:

      "There were 10000 people in Nazareth in 1948 soon that became 22000 with refugees from Ilut, al-Mujaydil & Ma’lul moved to Nazareth. Predominately Christian villages around Nazareth were not spared incl the village of Irqith in Northern Palestine which was stormed by zionist terrorists in Oct 1948. More than 800000 Palestinians were evicted in 1948. Only 130000 remained in Galilee, Negev and in some towns. In addition 30000 were added with the takeover of the so called triangle in early 1949. The total number of Palestinians living in “Israel” reached 160000. Today that number is 1.5 million. They remained on that land and that usurping state imposed its citizenship on them without their consent just like the way they took that land. That is the reality they have to deal & live with."

      "Israel UN membership: When “Israel” presented its credentials to become a member of the world body (UN) they had to give guarantees for the rights of Palestinians who remained within the state. Only then did Israeli Govt start talking about citizenship. There is another important issue most Palestinians who remained in their homeland were concentrated in Galilee & the Triangle awa in areas that according to the partition res of 1947 were supposed to belong to a Palestinian state. Israel wanted to extend its authority over these areas despite international opposition. It was unacceptable to USA, Russia & Arab countries. To ensure its sovereignty over those areas Israel gave citizenship to its inhabitants."

      "After the Nakba 150,000 Palestinians , both Muslims and Christians, remained inside “Israel”. Hillel Cohen, Israeli historian: “There was a decision regarding Nazareth City because of its holiness to Christians & links some people had with Vatican. Ben-Gurion himself took a decision when forces went into Nazareth that they should not hurt its people. When Nazareth was occupied it hosted thousands of refugees from neighboring villages like Saffuriyya, Al-Mujaydil, Ma’lul. They stayed there to be safe. But according to Israeli law they were not allowed back to their villages & so they became internal refugees inside “Israel”.” Saffuriya is less than 2km away from Nazareth but they are forbidden to return there.
      1948, In Galilee “Israeli” authorities did allow some Christian and Druze villages to remain in an attempt to foment sectarian feuds between the Palestinians. When they proposed to the Christian refugees from Al Bassa, there was absolute refusal and they took a firm position : “Either we and our Muslim neighbors return together to Al Bassa or we will not return at all”."

      "In 1949 “Israel” decided to expel the inhabitants of eastern district of Nazareth but the people of the district collectively confronted the “authorities” who were threatened but were not shaken and stood their ground trying to put men on trucks to throw them outside the border but they were blocked by the rest of the inhabitants who lay in the roads."

  • How Zionism helped create the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
    • "The mandate did not really exist & the British presence in Palestine was based on an elaborate system of deception & political fraud, for which the unfortunate British public had to pay the bills for. The United States was importuned to accept the mandate for Armenia. It refused to do so as the American people would not take the risk of constant complications & heavy expenditure in Asia. The British Empire had waxed great by “governing men as they wish to be governed”, & was not doing that in Palestine or Mesopotamia. In Palestine it was trying to foist on the Arabs the Zionist regime. In Mesopotamia and Kurdistan it was forcing the alien regime of King Faisal."
      Excerpt from: "The Palestine Deception 1915-1923: The McMahon-Hussein Correspondence, the Balfour Declaration, and the Jewish National Home" by J.M.N. Jeffries. Edited with an introduction by William M. Mathew

  • Palestinian source for feel-good 'NYT' story on Haifa says newspaper censored his political views
  • Permanently ghettoizing the Palestinian people is Yitzhak Rabin's true legacy
  • Criticizing Israel is not anti-Semitic . . . It's anti-racist
  • Photo essay: Continually displaced, Palestinian refugees spend Nakba day in Iraqi IDP camp
    • From "Against Our Better Judgment" by Alison Weir:
      "the total direct relief offered…by the Israeli government to date consists of 500 cases of oranges "(ironic when you consider they were stolen from Palestinians anyway).

  • Bedouin village razed 83 times must pay $500,000 for demolitions, Israel says
  • As pressure rises on Robbie Williams and UNICEF over Israel gig, conflict of interest emerges between singer and NGO
  • When occupation becomes apartheid
    • Dr. Hendrik Verwoerd, the South African PM in 1961 and architect of apartheid itself, said this at the time:

      “The Jews took Israel from the Arabs after the Arabs had lived there for a thousand years. Israel like South Africa, is an apartheid state”
      (Rand Daily Mail, 23 November 1961).

      Its always been an apartheid entity. Not only since 1967

Showing comments 24 - 1
Page: