Trending Topics:

In Bloomberg internal news memos, ‘there is no such country’ as Palestine

News
on 88 Comments

Last week Michael Bloomberg, the former NY mayor who owns a media empire, visited Israel to accept a prize, and met with an old friend, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Netanyahu later described Bloomberg’s devotion to Israel, funding medical facilities in memory of his parents, though he also hinted that the two men had privately disagreed. According to New York Times coverage on the weekend, Bloomberg “called the growing international movement for a boycott against Israel ‘an outrage’ that is ‘totally misplaced,’ but ducked a question about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.” Maybe because Bloomberg’s operation in Dubai is a cash cow.

Matt Winkler of Bloomberg News, at Zillow.com

Matt Winkler of Bloomberg News, at Zillow.com

What follows are leaked excerpts of two news memos to Bloomberg writers and reporters on how to treat the Israel/Palestine conflict. You will see that Palestine just doesn’t count in the world of Bloomberg News. “There is no such country.” It’s part of Israel, or it’s Jewish land: “The land historically belonged to the kingdoms of Israel and Judah.”

I am told these notes were sent out by Matt Winkler, a veteran editor who co-founded Bloomberg News, directs the Bloomberg editorial staff, and ghosted Bloomberg’s memoir.

The more recent Bloomberg memo describes the land as historically Jewish and sees the West Bank in part as Israel.

MARCH 5, 2010

…PALESTINE

Palestine signifies different territory in different contexts. The land historically belonged to the kingdoms of Israel and Judah. Palestine represented the area west of the Jordan River
that was a British mandate from the 1920s until the creation of modern Israel in 1948.
Today, Palestine includes parts of Israel and Jordan. Use Palestine in the context of geography, not as a substitute for the Palestinian Authority, Palestine Liberation Organization or any other political body.

The earlier Bloomberg memo says there “is no such country” as Palestine.

MAY 16, 2002

Avoid referring to Palestine, as in “Israel’s incursion into Palestine,” because there is no such country. Instead, describe the occupied areas by their names, as in the West Bank or Gaza Strip. Palestinian people or Palestine Authority is OK.

Someone who knows how Bloomberg works explains the significance of the memos:

The company pursues a very diligent and precise approach to its coverage globally, chastising journalists where they express any personal opinions or any remote sense of subjectivity. Those rules are not always adhered to when it comes to the coverage of Israel and the occupation of Palestinians. In fact very often they are completely ignored. When Hezballah and Hamas are mentioned they are always qualified as being considered terrorist organizations by the US. Hamas is rarely described as democratically elected, and rarely does Bloomberg use the word occupation.

Writes Scott Roth:

It seems like an attempt to avoid using the term Palestine in any way that would signify that it ought to be or can be a country on its own. In ’02 the policy was to call Palestine the WB and or Gaza. The ’10 directive is even stranger. It looks like something out of an AIPAC primer. The land historically belonged to ancient Israel and Judah? It also belonged to a lot of other people. Plus no reference to partition, ’48, ’67 occupation or millions of human beings living under Israel’s boot that have no vote.

Philip Weiss

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

Other posts by .


Posted In:

88 Responses

  1. just on May 28, 2014, 11:50 am

    Brilliant exposure gentlemen! This is how things come undone………especially nefarious things like codified lying and propaganda to benefit the Apartheid State by the media empire & conglomerate owned by the now exposed Bloomberg & Co.

    (honor your mother and father, how?)

  2. Zach S on May 28, 2014, 12:03 pm

    The United States of America does not recognize the “State of Palestine.” Does Phil sincerely expect Bloomberg to place Palestinian demands over loyalty to his country? In other words, be a Palestine-firster?

    • Woody Tanaka on May 28, 2014, 12:11 pm

      “The United States of America does not recognize the ‘State of Palestine.'”

      So what? Most of the world does. Bloomberg can do whatever it wants, but chooses to be Israel first advocates while pretending to be journalists.

      “Does Phil sincerely expect Bloomberg to place Palestinian demands over loyalty to his country?”

      Who says that Bloomberg does that? In fact, if you read the article and you’ll see that he seems to consider “his country” to be the Zionist entity as much as he does the US, to hear Netanyahoo talk.

      ” In other words, be a Palestine-firster?”

      Interesting that in your demonic ideology, fairness between the two is considered being a “Palestine-firster.”

      Hey Zach, have you seen the CNN video yet of the terrorists-in-uniform of the I”D”F murdering the Palestinian boy or are you still spreading blood libels??

      • Zach S on May 28, 2014, 12:20 pm

        So what? Most of the world does.

        Yeah but the USA doesn’t. And Bloomberg is an American.

        Who says that Bloomberg does that?

        He doesn’t. And that’s why Phil wrote this article. Phil wants him to sell out his own country for the Palestinians. Why, I don’t know.

        Interesting that in your demonic ideology, fairness between the two is considered being a “Palestine-firster.”

        No, placing Palestinian demands above loyalty to your own country is being a Palestine-firster.

        the CNN video

        Stop trying to change the subject.

        blood libels

        You shouldn’t use terms if you don’t know what they mean.

      • talknic on May 28, 2014, 3:18 pm

        @ Zach S The US has never recognized any territory beyond the ” frontiers approved by the General Assembly of the United Nations in its Resolution of November 29, 1947″ as belonging to Israel pal. http://www.trumanlibrary.org/whistlestop/study_collections/israel/large/documents/newPDF/49.pdf

        BTW The Israeli Government recognized Palestine May 22nd 1948 when it claimed to be in military control of (aka, occupying) territories “outside the State of Israel” … “in Palestine”

      • amigo on May 28, 2014, 3:26 pm

        the CNN video

        Stop trying to change the subject. jack s

        Come on zach s –you were the one who posted 15 times claiming that there was no IDF present at the murder of those two Palestinian children by the forces of the Rogue Apartheid nation of Israel.

        Now retract your lies and untruths because until you do , we will keep on bringing up the subject whether or not you like it.

      • Ellen on May 28, 2014, 4:02 pm

        Zach over a period of two days and about 20 posts you worked really hard to dispel any idea that the youths murdered were possibly killed by the IDF. You came out fighting with all the lines about not falling backwards (which is nonsense) That there was no blood, and on and on…..

        Zach S May 20, 2014 at 3:39 pm with 3 replies

        Please present evidence an Israeli sniper shot these two Palestinians. There was no such evidence presented in the article above, or anywhere else that I can find.

        And now you appear here again with more nonsensical BS. Phil wants him to sell out his own country for the Palestinians. What does that mean???

        The subject has not been changed. If you want any ounce of credibility at all, how about the CNN video showing the snipers and how about the IDF admitting today that an IDF soldier did open fire onto the youths?

        http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/.premium-1.595881

        After all the energy you put into discrediting the possibility that the IDF could do that, and creating the scenario that it just have been a faked production, inquiring minds would like to know what you have to say to this.

        If you have nothing to say, why are you here posting?

      • just on May 28, 2014, 4:15 pm

        A walk on, “unauthorized” “communications” IOF’er? That’s how they explain it away? Suspended? Suspected of using rubber bullets– both of the kids were shot in the heart!!!!!!!!

        http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/05/28/us-palestinian-israel-shooting-idUSKBN0E827H20140528

        wtf?

      • Woody Tanaka on May 28, 2014, 5:10 pm

        “A walk on, “unauthorized” “communications” IOF’er? That’s how they explain it away? Suspended? Suspected of using rubber bullets– both of the kids were shot in the heart!!!!!!!!”

        Of course this is how it is going to go down. You don’t actually for a second imagine that the Zionist entity is going to actually punish on of its terrorists-in-uniform for murdering an Arab, do you? To the Zionist, they’re barely human and not worthy of any consideration, let alone human rights.

      • Woody Tanaka on May 28, 2014, 5:17 pm

        “Yeah but the USA doesn’t. And Bloomberg is an American.”

        You wouldn’t know it by the way he favors the Zionist Entity. But so what? Just because he is an American does not mean that he has to agree with American policy, especially when that policy is simply a symptom of the systemic damage that the AIPACers and the Zionist money have done to the US government.

        “Phil wants him to sell out his own country for the Palestinians.”

        Nonsense. Recognizing the fact that the State of Palestine exists is not “selling out his own country.”

        “No, placing Palestinian demands above loyalty to your own country is being a Palestine-firster.”

        And recognizing that the US policy is wrong and recognizing the fact that the State of Palestine exists is not placing Palestinian demands above loyalty to one’s own country. If you want to see someone selling out his country, look at your average Zionist.

        “Stop trying to change the subject.”

        Learn your place and watch your mouth. This isn’t Occupied Palestine where you Zionist bastards get to tell other people what to do.

        “You shouldn’t use terms if you don’t know what they mean.”

        I know exactly what it means and what you and the others did on the site about the murder of those two boys was as bad as the anti-Jewish blood libels in history. Damn your parents for not teaching you character, or yourself for not listening if they did.

      • just on May 28, 2014, 5:42 pm

        Great points, Woody!

        “If you want to see someone selling out his country, look at your average Zionist.”

        Or Congressperson…….or pretty much any government official– especially elected, uh, selected ones.

    • amigo on May 28, 2014, 1:19 pm

      “The United States of America does not recognize the “State of Palestine.” zachs.

      The United states does not recognize Jerusalem as the Capital of Israel.

      Btw, can we expect another 16 posts demonstrating you are a liar and a fraud just as you did when you attempted to defend the Apartheid rogue nations so called most moral army which is staffed by some of these most vile criminals in history.

    • Hostage on May 28, 2014, 1:41 pm

      The United States of America does not recognize the “State of Palestine.”

      No, the United States follows the customary practice of distinguishing between the recognition of a government and recognition of statehood. See for example Secretary of State Thomas Jefferson’s Opinion on the French Treaties, April 28, 1793 http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/jeffop2.asp

      Recognition of statehood is unconditional and irrevocable according to the terms of the Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of States (1932), a multilateral convention that the State Department lists as a “Treaty in Force”.
      * http://www.jus.uio.no/english/services/library/treaties/01/1-02/rights-duties-states.xml
      * http://www.state.gov/s/l/treaty/tif/index.htm

      Since 2 May 2014, the United States and Palestine are both state parties to the Vienna Conventions on the Law Of Treaties and Diplomatic and Consular Relations. The United States has a binding treaty obligation to deal with the government of the State of Palestine as another State, with the same same rights and duties as any other.

      The United States has even advised Israel that it cannot prevent Palestine from joining UN specialized agencies and treaty bodies as another state on the basis of sovereign equality. See US officials: We can’t stop Palestinian UN statehood bid if talks fail and note this: “Correction: A previous version of this story mistakenly quoted American officials as saying they “won’t be able to” stop the Palestinian UN bid should talks fail. The headline was now corrected to “can’t stop.” link to ynetnews.com

      The United States formally recognized the mandated state of Palestine. In the decision of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia in Kletter v. Dulles (1950) the Court ruled that the US government had recognized the State of Palestine:

      The contention of the plaintiff that Palestine, while under the League of Nations mandate, was not a foreign state within the meaning of the statute is wholly without merit. . . . Furthermore, it is not for the judiciary, but for the political branches of the Government to determine that Palestine at that time was a foreign state. This the Executive branch of the Government did in 1932 with respect to the operation of the most favored nations provision in treaties of commerce.

      link to dc.findacase.com

      It really doesn’t matter if you contend that Israel was formed by a partition or by an act of secession. It only requested recognition within the frontiers established by the UN. FYI, if you consider “Jordan” an occupying power, then under international law, “Arab Palestine” still exists and has legally recognized reversionary rights to the territory, i.e. The Restatement (Third) of the Foreign Relations Law of the United States reflects customary international practice and international law on the subject. § 201 Reporter’s Note 3 says: “The United States will treat States the territory of which is under foreign military occupation as continuing to exist.”

      In the 1990s the State Department published part of its declassified documentary record on US foreign policy contained in “a Memorandum of Conversation between William Crawford Jr. and Mr. Shaul Bar-Haim from the Israeli Embassy (February 7, 1963)” regarding Jerusalem. Bar-Haim said “The use of the term “Palestine” is historical fiction; it encourages the Palestine entity concept; its “revived usage enrages” individual Israelis”. Crawford replied “It is difficult to see how it “enrages” Israeli opinion. The practice is consistent with the fact that, ”in a de jure sense”, Jerusalem was part of Palestine and has not since become part of any other sovereignty. See Foreign Relations of the United States, 1961-1963, Vol. Xviii, Near East, United States. Dept. of State, G.P.O., 1995, ISBN 0160451590, page 341.

      The US State Department “Digest of International Law”; the State Department Bulletin; and the State Department “Foreign Relations of the United States”-series all contain documentary evidence that after the partition/secession of Israel, there was a country called “Arab Palestine”. President Truman and the US Congress approved $23 million in foreign assistance for projects in “Arab Palestine” after the United Nations dispatched the head of the TVA and other officials on a UN fact finding mission there. The Truman Administration also publicly recommended the UN Mediator’s proposal for a political union between “Arab Palestine” and “Transjordan” and recognized the new joint entity, “Jordan”.

      For example:
      *The State Department Bulletin Vol. 22 for January 1950 reported that the United Nations had sent the Clapp Mission to the Middle East countries of Lebanon, Jordan, Arab Palestine, and Syria. The Economic Survey Mission for the Middle East, headed by Gordon R. Clapp, chairman of the Board of Directors of the Tennessee Valley Authority recommended four projects involving the Wadi Zerqa basin in Jordan, the Wadi Qilt watershed and stream bed in Arab Palestine, the Litani River in Lebanon, and the Ghab Swamps in Syria. (Kindle version Locations 4706- 4727).
      *The State Department Digest of International Law 1963 devoted an entire chapter to “Territory and Sovereignty of States”. In § 8 “Annexation” there is a discussion about the acquisition of sovereignty over the West Bank by “Jordan” on the basis of the four resolutions of the Second Arab Palestine Conference (aka Jericho Congress) held on December 1, 1948. Note: A few weeks after the Congress the name of Transjordan was officially changed to the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan to reflect the new joint status (January 21, 1949). The Digest also described US recognition of the union between Arab Palestine and Transjordan as an expression of the sovereign will of the two peoples. Secretary of State Acheson stated at his April 26, 1950 press conference that “The elections which were held on the 11th were on the basis of the incorporation of Arab Palestine into the Hashemite Kingdom. Those elections have taken place and this action of the parliament will be to ratify that decision. Now, our American attitude is that we have no objection whatever to the union of peoples mutually desirous of this new relationship.” See pages 1163-1168 of Marjorie M. Whiteman (editor), Digest of International Law, vol. 2 (Washington, DC: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1963)
      *The 1950 FRUS contains a Memorandum of Conversation, between Mr. Stuart W. Rockwell of the Office of African and Near Eastern Affairs and Mr. Abdel Monem Rifai, Counselor, Jordan Legation in Washington, June 5, 1950 which officially documents the US recognition of the union between Arab Palestine and Jordan and the sovereignty of the new joint entity over the new territory. An Editorial note on the same page explains that Congress had funded the projects recommended by the UN Clapp Mission. See Foreign relations of the United States, 1950. The Near East, South Asia, and Africa, Volume V (1950), Page 921
      Truman upgraded Israel’s recognition from de facto to de jure on the very same day that he extended de jure recognition to the new joint Kingdom of Jordan.

      • RoHa on May 28, 2014, 7:28 pm

        There go again, Hostage, casting facts before Zionists.

        Ah, well. The rest of us appreciate them, anyway.

      • Daniel Rich on May 28, 2014, 9:49 pm

        Thanks, Hostage.

        Oh, ye solid rock.

      • bintbiba on May 29, 2014, 9:32 am

        Hostage… again riding in to the rescue , like a knight in shining armour!
        Honest, objective facts.

    • Basilio on May 28, 2014, 10:05 pm

      You have a point, but the United States does recognize the Palestinian authority and doesn’t go into the land being historically Jewish without mentioning any rights for the Palestinians, you chose to ignore that for some reason. It’s one thing if he simply said “The United States doesn’t recognize a Palestinian nor do we” and stopped there, but they engaged in a clear ethnic bias that seeks to completely ignore the indigenous people that were there before started leaving various parts of Europe and the Middle East (Jews) to settle in what was Palestine. They’re human beings, and, furthermore, most of them have some Jewish ancestry from the ancient Jews who remained on the land. That’s something huge that Israel firsters want to ignore. They are dispossessing people who are clearly native to the land. Ben Gurion recognized that.

    • Accentitude on May 29, 2014, 2:54 am

      Official recognition is Washington’s national policy. However, a reporter’s job is to be objective and report on the news without having a romantic kissyfest with the Israeli government and then using their talking points as a reference guide. Pretending something doesn’t exist doesn’t make it so. Whether you like it or not, whether Washington likes it or not, whether Bloomberg or Israel like it or not, Palestine is a country. It may not be a free country, but it is a country no less as recognized by an overwhelming majority of the Planet Earth. Had Israel not favored ethnic cleansing, forced displacement and colonial expansionism over building bridges and forging peace with its neighbors, the Palestinian leadership wouldn’t have gone to the United Nations. You Zionists only have yourselves to blame.

    • Kathleen on May 29, 2014, 7:17 am

      “The United States of America does not recognize the “State of Palestine.” Completely inaccurate. Completely. President after President, Secretary of State after Secretary of State have recognized the State of Palestine and the two state solution based on internationally recognized borders. Now have any of those Presidents and SoS done anything about Israel’s refusal to recognize those borders. Very few. Which has ultimately undermined U.S. National Security.

      • James Canning on May 29, 2014, 6:56 pm

        GHW Bush and Jim Baker wanted to resolve Israel/Palestine problem. This fact helped bring on Bush’s defeat in 1992.

    • ziusudra on May 29, 2014, 11:45 am

      Greetings MW,
      Duplication. It looks as if every zio has already said :
      Palestine is not a Country.
      ziusudra

      • ziusudra on May 30, 2014, 4:26 am

        Greetings MW,
        Much tks for de reprint.
        ziusudra

    • pjdude on May 30, 2014, 1:36 am

      one problem. how can it be a palestine firster when the recognizition of palestine is in the US interests? to be a palestine firster you’d have to be putting palestine’s interests ahead of the your own country?

  3. pabelmont on May 28, 2014, 12:07 pm

    As to Palestine, Bloomberg seems approx correct to me, altho seems to have a HEART OF ICE.

    One problem, tho. If there is no State of Palestine today (no boundaries AND no armed control of the territory), then there is also no Israel (tho it has an army, it does not have a declared territory).

    Of course, Israel does have a de facto territory (either pre-67 or the 1SS apartheid hoozy-whatsis we have today, equally de facto) but no de jure territory, since the boundaries with Lebanon and Syria (and Palestine) have not been made and declared, even unilaterally by Israel. And all as-yet so-called Israel’s “annexations” have been declared null and void by UNSC.

    So maybe Bloomberg should have restrictions (I didn’t read carefully enough to see if he did!) on use of “Israel” as a geographic term.

    • Walid on May 28, 2014, 2:01 pm

      Other than for mostly all our hearts here being with the Palestinians and rooting for them, technically speaking the Palestinians still don’t have an official state with recognized boundaries with full embassies representing them in most countries.

      But Bloomberg didn’t make his statement because of any technicality but because he’s an Israel-firster intent on helping Israel with its propaganda with his cheap stunts on how to describe Palestinians and their land that he calls Israeli land.

      • Woody Tanaka on May 28, 2014, 2:29 pm

        “Other than for mostly all our hearts here being with the Palestinians and rooting for them, technically speaking the Palestinians still don’t have an official state with recognized boundaries with full embassies representing them in most countries.”

        I disagree completely. It is a declared state, recognized as such by an overwhelming number of the world’s countries and peoples. It may be occupied, but it does not mean that it does not exist.

      • Walid on May 29, 2014, 1:24 am

        There’s absolutely no argument about Palestine’s existence; as far as I’m concerned, it is a state and has always been one but I’m waiting for the rest of the world to start treating it as one.

        Palestine has 50 embassies, 2 consulates and 14 other representations abroad. Ramallah and Gaza host 1 embassy (Morocco), 2 consulates (Spain and the UK that are actually located in East Jerusalem with a UK a rep office in Gaza and 26 other representations in Ramallah of which the only Arab states are Egypt, Oman, and the UAE with Qatar having a rep office in Gaza .

      • Accentitude on May 29, 2014, 2:58 am

        You forgot that the Kingdom of Jordan has an office in Ramallah as well.

      • Walid on May 29, 2014, 4:07 am

        “You forgot that the Kingdom of Jordan has an office in Ramallah as well.”

        Sorry and thanks, Accentitude; probably other omissions too. A shame the Arab representation on the list is not bigger. Took the names off a website:

        http://www.embassypages.com/palestine

      • Hostage on May 28, 2014, 7:39 pm

        technically speaking the Palestinians still don’t have an official state with recognized boundaries with full embassies representing them in most countries.

        Yes they do have an “official state” with armistice borders that are considered legally binding permanent international lines of demarcation under the terms of two Chapter 7 UN Security Council resolutions (62 and 73).
        * http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=S/Res/62%20%281948%29
        * http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=S/Res/73%20%281949%29

        Palestine has had full embassies with most of the world’s population for decades, e.g. The Russian Federation, China, India, and the OIC and Arab League states.

        There are:
        * 190 state parties to the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, including Israel and the United States; https://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=III-3&chapter=3&lang=en
        * 177 state parties to the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations; https://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=UNTSONLINE&tabid=2&mtdsg_no=III-6&chapter=3&lang=en#Participants
        * 114 state parties to the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. https://treaties.un.org/pages/ViewDetailsIII.aspx?&src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=XXIII~1&chapter=23&Temp=mtdsg3&lang=en

        All of those states parties have all been advised in writing by the UN Secretary General, acting as depositary, that Palestine is a new contracting state and that their legally binding international obligations under the terms of the conventions became active as of 2 May 2014. Likewise, the government of Switzerland advised the other high contracting parties that Palestine became the 196th high contracting party to the Geneva conventions as of 2 April 2014. http://unispal.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/1FF93AEC8D3186CF85257CBC00682857

      • Walid on May 29, 2014, 1:37 am

        “All of those states parties have all been advised in writing by the UN Secretary General, acting as depositary, that Palestine is a new contracting state and that their legally binding international obligations under the terms of the conventions became active as of 2 May 2014…”

        Very important for the Palestinians, but not for the US, Israel and other important countries. The UN also has a few other important resolutions to the benefit of the Palestinians that don’t appear to matter either. Palestinians don’t need more UN notices and resolutions, they need freedom, water and their land.

      • Hostage on May 29, 2014, 1:50 am

        Very important for the Palestinians, but not for the US, Israel and other important countries. The UN also has a few other important resolutions to the benefit of the Palestinians that don’t appear to matter either.

        Those are not resolutions. Those are reciprocal treaties, which are subject to ICJ jurisdiction. The US and Israel can’t violate them with impunity and expect to have their diplomatic immunity and consular rights respected by the other state parties.

      • Walid on May 29, 2014, 3:15 am

        “The US and Israel can’t violate them with impunity and expect to have their diplomatic immunity and consular rights respected by the other state parties.”

        Which countries are going to be treating Israel and the US differently if they don’t respect these treaties? I can’t think of any.

      • Hostage on May 29, 2014, 7:48 am

        Which countries are going to be treating Israel and the US differently if they don’t respect these treaties? I can’t think of any.

        Then you’re not paying much attention. Putin and the Russian Parliament aren’t missing any opportunities these days to impose sanctions on the US and China has been publishing its own reports on US human rights violations for years now. Mexico has taken the US to the ICJ three times for judgments and orders regarding US violations of the Vienna convention on consular relations. One result of that situation, is that US consuls have not been able to intervene effectively on behalf US citizens when other countries, including Israel, commit similar violations.

      • Walid on May 29, 2014, 8:48 am

        My question was about reactions against the US and Israel on behalf of Palestinians. Even the Arabs don’t do anything or even complain while Israel goes on clobbering the Palestinians; in fact, they have now become more chummy than ever with Israel. Putin doing a number on the US and the rest of its European clowns is in retaliation for their sanctions on him because of the Ukraine, not for Palestine.

      • James Canning on May 29, 2014, 6:53 pm

        The Saudis have tried to get Israel out of the West Bank, etc etc. Potential war with Iran has made it much more difficult to pressure Israel.

      • Hostage on May 29, 2014, 9:43 am

        My question was about reactions against the US and Israel on behalf of Palestinians.

        We are talking about three UN conventions and four Geneva Conventions – plus the additional protocol. I hope you’re pretending to be stupid. The UN General Assembly has convened a half dozen Emergency Special Sessions on behalf of Palestine. Acting on the request of the General Assembly, the Swiss government has reconvened the Diplomatic Conference of the High Contracting Parties on behalf of Palestine. The Conference declared the de jure applicability of the Geneva Conventions, the illegality of the Israeli settlements and the unilateral annexations. Many of those same states have already adopted sanctions and voted to upgrade Palestine’s status so it could join the conventions and Palestinians could finally pursue claims in their courts and the international courts.

      • Walid on May 29, 2014, 10:45 am

        You can talk about UN and Geneva conventions till doomsday, none of those are going to pull the Israelis back to the 67 lines or get the 2 million refugees out of the camps in Jordan, Syria and Lebanon. Europe can stop buying the soda machines, chickens and tomatoes from the settlements, but these too aren’t going to make them return to where they should be. UNSC Res 425 that was on the shelf gathering dust for 25 years didn’t get the Israelis out of Lebanon, the resistance did. The UN already has an album of about 65 resolutions, opinions, condemnations and whatever against Israel and none of those have taken the wind out of its sails; what’s a few more?

      • James Canning on May 29, 2014, 7:08 pm

        Half a century was needed, to get the USSR out of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. Maybe rather more will be necessary, to get Israel out of the West Bank.

      • Hostage on May 29, 2014, 12:18 pm

        You can talk about UN and Geneva conventions till doomsday, none of those are going to pull the Israelis back to the 67 lines or get the 2 million refugees out of the camps in Jordan, Syria and Lebanon.

        Countries are no longer just talking about the UN and Geneva Conventions. They have voted to give Palestinians the right to prosecute violations and have started taking actions on their own in the cases of the Comoros ICC complaint, the arrest warrants issued by Turkey for the IDF Generals in connection with the flotilla raid, and the EU sanctions on entities doing business beyond the Green Line.

        You can’t predict what Israel will be willing to accept, once it starts down the same road as the South African and Southern Rhodesia regimes.

      • Walid on May 29, 2014, 1:08 pm

        I sincerely hope to see you proven right and to see me proven wrong on that one.

      • ziusudra on May 29, 2014, 11:39 am

        Greetings Walid,
        State, Country, Boundries, who cares.
        The Catholic church has forever spouted:
        ‘Life before Circumstance.’
        The Semite Peleset People have endured
        on this territory for eons.
        Possession is 9/10ths. of de law.
        (Peleset is the historical Caaanite name of this land and lake.)
        ziusudra

      • talknic on May 30, 2014, 9:11 am

        @ ziusudra “Possession is 9/10ths. of de law”

        Yes. Thieves are convicted for being in possession of stolen property :-)

      • Walid on May 30, 2014, 10:15 am

        “Peleset is the historical Canaanite name of this land and lake.”

        Canaanites were on the land before the Jews.

      • James Canning on May 30, 2014, 2:21 pm

        And surely the Palestinians to some extent descend from the Canaanites.

  4. amigo on May 28, 2014, 12:22 pm

    So , if there is no Palestine and only Israel , then when can those non Jewish Israelis get their citizenship and equality.

    Surely Boomberk would not want to support an Apartheid nation.

    Would he??.

  5. irishmoses on May 28, 2014, 12:35 pm

    Actually Palestine has been a de jure state since the establishment of the Palestine mandate. Quigley’s book The Statehood of Palestine lays it all out pretty clearly. Only Israel’s military might (and greed) from 1948 on has prevented its de facto establishment. I believe Israel has a de jure status limited to the partition borders. Everything acquired after that is de facto, but illegal.

    So, the question isn’t how and whether to create the State of Palestine, it already has de jure status. The question is how to remove the illegal occupants and allow Palestine to finally have a de facto existence as state, freed of unlawful occupation.

  6. weareone on May 28, 2014, 1:17 pm

    Even though this may be off topic, it seemed an appropriate place for
    this article: “the-battle-of-words-in-palestine-it-is-not-apartheid-it-is-genocide”

    I have thought for some time that apartheid did not really convey what the Palestinians are experiencing. Genocide or, imo, 66 year holocaust seem more accurate.
    http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-battle-of-words-in-palestine-it-is-not-apartheid-it-is-genocide/5384292

    • Walid on May 29, 2014, 1:53 am

      weareone, Nahida is 100% correct, it is more a question of genocide than one of apartheid.

  7. Rooster on May 28, 2014, 1:33 pm

    Does Bloomberg make a distinction between Jerusalem and West/East Jerusalem?

  8. weareone on May 28, 2014, 1:45 pm

    66 year holocaust seems more accurate.

    ….which would make Bloomberg and company “holocaust deniers”-the 66 year Palestinian holocaust.

  9. StCuthbert on May 28, 2014, 1:49 pm

    If there is such a country as Palestine, then why haven’t the Palestinian refugees in Syria and Lebanon returned there? Why are they still in refugee camps?

    • eljay on May 28, 2014, 2:08 pm

      >> If there is such a country as Palestine, then why haven’t the Palestinian refugees in Syria and Lebanon returned there?

      Off the top of my head, I’d say Israel’s ON-GOING military occupation and control of Palestine has something to do with it.

      • StCuthbert on May 28, 2014, 2:53 pm

        Gaza has a border with Egypt, a newly revitalized Egypt that has thrown off the chains of Zionist and American oppression. Why can’t the Palestinian refugees return home through that border and join their brothers in the good fight against Zionist oppression?

        And even Israeli apartheid is better than the civil war in Syria.

      • Woody Tanaka on May 28, 2014, 4:09 pm

        “Gaza has a border with Egypt, a newly revitalized Egypt that has thrown off the chains of Zionist and American oppression”

        I guess you haven’t been keeping up with current events, but the Israelis told Washington to make sure that the Brotherhood was out and the Generals were back in place and so the chains are back on. So much for “democracy (when one decides to favor someone the Jewish state disfavors)”

      • eljay on May 28, 2014, 6:21 pm

        >> Gaza has a border with Egypt, a newly revitalized Egypt that has thrown off the chains of Zionist and American oppression. Why can’t the Palestinian refugees return home through that border and join their brothers in the good fight against Zionist oppression?

        I wasn’t aware that post-coup Egypt had “thrown off the chains of Zionist and American oppression”. Interesting.

        That aside, I notice that you conveniently omitted the West Bank and Jerusalem from this discussion. How do you propose that those refugees return to their homes and lands to “join their brothers in the good fight”?

        And when the refugees from Gaza are back in Gaza and the refugees from the West Bank are back in the West Bank and the refugees from Jerusalem are back in Jerusalem, how do you propose that an economically, politically and financially hobbled Palestinian leadership provide for and support all these refugees while they “fight the good fight”?

        And what about the refugees originally from Israel – do they get to return to their homes and lands and join in the “good fight against Zionist oppression” in their country of Israel?

      • James Canning on May 28, 2014, 6:42 pm

        @StCuthbert – – One problem you overlook is that Hamas is associated with the Muslim Brotherhood, which the Egyptian government is busy suppressing of late.

      • Shingo on May 28, 2014, 10:03 pm

        a newly revitalized Egypt that has thrown off the chains of Zionist and American oppression.

        You have to be kidding. Egypt still receives massive military aid from the US – which we all know is a bribe to Venice to Israel.

        When Sisi orchestrated the coup to remove Morsi, he was praised by Kerry for saving democracy. In Israel, they were hail on him as a hero,

      • talknic on May 28, 2014, 11:24 pm

        StCuthbert “Gaza has a border with Egypt, a newly revitalized Egypt that has thrown off the chains of Zionist and American oppression”

        Uh huh…. Whatever waffle you need. Fact is Israel is the Occupying Power, it has the final say as to when who & what can cross into or out of occupied territories.

        “Why can’t the Palestinian refugees return home through that border and join their brothers in the good fight against Zionist oppression?”

        A) Read the Israel/Egypt Peace Treaty
        B) Israel forbids the return of Palestinians to Palestinian territories it occupies and;
        C) Israel also forbids the return of non-Jewish folk who had a right to Israeli citizenship to Israel prior to being dispossessed by Jewish forces in 1947/48

        “And even Israeli apartheid is better than the civil war in Syria”

        Say…. Israel could offer refuge to Syrian refugees in “apartheid” Israel.

      • Walid on May 29, 2014, 2:31 am

        “… Israel could offer refuge to Syrian refugees in “apartheid” Israel.”

        Israel offered to a couple of months back, but the offer came with strings attached, something or other that the refugees would have to sign away their rights as refugees and Abbas for some mysterious reason refused to go along with it. The bogus offer was something along the usual Israeli PR stunt that it pulls with its earthquake sniffing dogs.

        On the other hand, Israel did offer temporary refuge to rebels fighting the Assad regime. It treated their injuries, provided them with military training, cash and arms and sent them back to the front. The FSA commander, Abdul-Ilah al-Bashir was trained or retrained in Israel after his injury last year.

      • Walid on May 29, 2014, 2:11 am

        “Off the top of my head, I’d say Israel’s ON-GOING military occupation and control of Palestine has something to do with it.”

        eljay, I remember from 15 years or so back when formal and informal talks were ongoing between Arafat and the Zionists that in any final settlement, Israel was insisting in not allowing unlimited returns of refugees into what would become an independent Palestine. In short, Israel did not want to allow any returnees into what has become Israel and at the same time, Israel did not want to allow returnees to an independent West Bank that would become the state of Palestine. This point has since been swept under the rug and away from from people’s attention, but the spectre of this ugly Israeli condition is always present. It briefly resurfaced a couple of years back within the leaked Palestine Papers in which Erekat admitted to an Belgian official that there won’t be many returnees to Israel and as to returnees to a Palestinian state, it would depend on the annual absorption capacity.

        This means that the millions of refugees are being given false hope because they wouldn’t be returning to anywhere.

    • just on May 28, 2014, 2:10 pm

      What a stupid question.

      Let me try to explain it to you. The theft of Palestinian land and resources continues apace. Israel has continued its grotesque Occupation apace. Movement in/out of the OPT is strictly and illegally controlled by the IOF. I could go on, but you might be one who chooses to be willfully deaf/dumb/blind.

      Thank you for your “question”.

    • Woody Tanaka on May 28, 2014, 2:53 pm

      “If there is such a country as Palestine, then why haven’t the Palestinian refugees in Syria and Lebanon returned there? Why are they still in refugee camps?”

      Because they are mostly from the part of Palestine upon which the Zionists erected their alleged state. Those Palestinians’ right is the right to return there, to their homes. However it is now in the control of a bunch of racist Jews who are preventing it. That’s why.

    • talknic on May 28, 2014, 3:23 pm

      @ StCuthbert “If there is such a country as Palestine, then why haven’t the Palestinian refugees in Syria and Lebanon returned there? Why are they still in refugee camps?”

      Israel is the Occupying Power, it refuses to allow them to return even to Palestinian territory.

      As for the dispossessed non-Jews who had a legal right to become Israeli citizens in 1948, they’ve a right to return to Israel, not Palestinian territories! Simple logic.

    • Accentitude on May 29, 2014, 3:04 am

      Because the country of Palestine is under military occupation by the ever expanding gelatinous blob known as Israel which enforces its control over Palestine’s land, sea, and air borders, and over who does and does not get to be a citizen or resident of Palestine. Palestinian refugees are Palestinian refugees because of the ethnic cleansing and terror campaigns waged by Jewish and Israeli militias since the start of this conflict. These people are displaced because of the actions of Israel and Israel is legally obligated to compensate them for their suffering, and as such the refugees are Israel’s problem and it needs to deal with them today or tomorrow.

  10. Ellen on May 28, 2014, 2:50 pm

    Bloomberg News has become less and less of a serious news organization. J. Goldberg is their Chief in house Clown and Propagandist for Israel.

    The last time they did any real Journalism is when the late (and great) Mark Pittman was on their staff. It is now staffed with stenographers.

  11. Kathleen on May 28, 2014, 3:17 pm

    Great exposure about the racism towards Palestinians that has been apparent within Bloomberg News. Always interesting to see whether it is on CNN, MSNBC, Cspan, Bloomberg etc when a map of the area is shown they never EVER show a map that is fact based map of the West Bank…How Israel has stolen most of the internationally recognized Palestinian land through illegal settlements or the illegal wall.

  12. seafoid on May 28, 2014, 4:02 pm

    Bloomberg tries his best but he can’t stop Palestine being supported across the world. There aren’t enough bots around to.impose likud discipline in galut. Zionism Is just too much effort.

  13. lysias on May 28, 2014, 5:46 pm

    Back during the Kosovo War, I had a part-time job transcribing CNN. I used to wonder why CNN’s on-air talent would never refer to the U.S. bombing of the Chinese embassy in Belgrade without using the stereotyped phrasing “accidental bombing”. I suspected at the time that they had all received a memo from CNN management instructing them to use that wording. I now see U.S. news operations do indeed use such memos.

    • Walid on May 29, 2014, 3:00 am

      “Belgrade’s Chinese Embassy’s “accidental bombing””

      Same as the 2 accidental US bombings of the Jazeera offices in Kabul and Baghdad. It’s good that Blair convinced Bush to not “accidently” bomb the Jazeera head office in Doha in 1994 when it was reporting on the Fallujah massacres by the US.

      • James Canning on May 29, 2014, 7:12 pm

        Surely the bombing in Belgrade was accidental.

      • Walid on May 30, 2014, 1:12 am

        James, from the Guardian:

        Nato bombed Chinese deliberately
        Nato hit embassy on purpose

        John Sweeney and Jens Holsoe in Copenhagen and Ed Vulliamy in Washington
        The Observer, Sunday 17 October 1999

        Nato deliberately bombed the Chinese embassy in Belgrade during the war in Kosovo after discovering it was being used to transmit Yugoslav army communications.
        According to senior military and intelligence sources in Europe and the US the Chinese embassy was removed from a prohibited targets list after Nato electronic intelligence (Elint) detected it sending army signals to Milosevic’s forces.

        The story is confirmed in detail by three other Nato officers – a flight controller operating in Naples, an intelligence officer monitoring Yugoslav radio traffic from Macedonia and a senior headquarters officer in Brussels. They all confirm that they knew in April that the Chinese embassy was acting as a ‘rebro’ [rebroadcast] station for the Yugoslav army (VJ) after alliance jets had successfully silenced Milosevic’s own transmitters.

        The Chinese were also suspected of monitoring the cruise missile attacks on Belgrade, with a view to developing effective counter-measures against US missiles.

        The intelligence officer, who was based in Macedonia during the bombing, said: ‘Nato had been hunting the radio transmitters in Belgrade. When the President’s [Milosevic’s] residence was bombed on 23 April, the signals disappeared for 24 hours. When they came on the air again, we discovered they came from the embassy compound.’ The success of previous strikes had forced the VJ to use Milosevic’s residence as a rebroadcast station. After that was knocked out, it was moved to the Chinese embassy. The air controller said: ‘The Chinese embassy had an electronic profile, which Nato located and pinpointed.’

        http://www.theguardian.com/world/1999/oct/17/balkans

  14. James Canning on May 28, 2014, 6:39 pm

    Fascinating! Bloomberg told to be a Zionist-expansionist propaganda machine?

  15. piotr on May 28, 2014, 8:35 pm

    It would be a great project to restore all countries to their “lawful owners” from the beginning of Common Era (or the birth year of Our Lord and Savior if you are a Christian). At that time there were no Slavic people in Poland, which could be returned to Goths and Vandals, no Germanic people in Britain (Saxons to Saxony and Angles to Angle!), no Turks in Turkey, no Mongols in Mongolia, no Thai in Thailand, which could be returned to the Mon people and so on.

  16. Kay24 on May 28, 2014, 10:31 pm

    IDF raids newspaper offices in Ramallah, and stops free speech. Israel claims to be a democratic nation, what a joke. The arrogance of a brutal occupier.
    Haaretz
    “Israel Defense Forces troops raided the offices of a Palestinian newspaper in Ramallah on Wednesday and ordered its management to stop printing three Hamas publications, according to Ma’an news service.

    “Officers informed us that Israel would not allow the printing and distribution of Falastin, Al-Resala, and Al-Istiqlal,” Al-Ayyam’s management said in a statement.

    Al-Ayyam has been printing the three papers since April, when Hamas and Fatah signed a reconciliation deal and agreed to establish a unity government. It was the first time in almost eight years that Hamas publications were available on West Bank newsstands.”

    http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/1.595925

    • just on May 28, 2014, 10:44 pm

      The odious IOF raid proves yet again that all of what remains of Palestine is indeed OCCUPIED.

      Israel hates it when their filthy and pathetic “divide and conquer” strategy does not work. They’ll never, ever understand that the Palestinians are one (1) people– no matter their religion or anything else.

    • Woody Tanaka on May 29, 2014, 7:23 am

      Not surprised. Fascists hate free speech. Zionist-fascism is no different.

  17. Kay24 on May 29, 2014, 7:05 am

    The Palestinians made a very wise decision to reconcile, and now have a united front. They should have done this long time ago. The fact that the US and the EU are okay with it, must be driving the divide and conquer occupiers, steaming mad.
    I am sure there is a bigger plan behind this show of unity, and it will be interesting to see how it all plays out.

    • James Canning on May 29, 2014, 6:59 pm

      GW Bush very foolishly wrecked the previous Unity govt. Or helped to wreck it. That govt. had endorsed 2002 Saudi Peace Plan.

  18. Hostage on May 29, 2014, 8:00 am

    The fact that the US and the EU are okay with it, must be driving the divide and conquer occupiers, steaming mad.

    Netanyahu was already suffering from what Abba Eban described is “Israel’s security psychosis”. http://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1964-68v19/d442 But nowadays he’s completely schizophrenic. See “Netanyahu is Palestinian Authority’s savior. Analysis: Israeli PM speaks about PA’s crimes day and night while bolstering it at the same time.” http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4524659,00.html

    • Walid on May 29, 2014, 8:15 am

      I’m not sure psychosis has anything to do with it; the man is a snake oil salesman that knows his product. In light of Israel’s military might, any Israeli that still sincerely suffers from security fears has to be mentally handicapped.

    • Kay24 on May 29, 2014, 10:40 am

      An excerpt from your first link:

      “Gaza territory was also security problem for Israel. Israel would like have the territory without the population but did not see how that could come about. He intimated there may even be an exchange of territory along the international frontier in favor of Egypt in return for Gaza Strip going to Israel. He thought Egypt might even be glad to be rid of Gaza Strip. Another possibility apparently under consideration was some form of international authority of Gaza Strip. (Eban noted this had been discussed in 1956 with US and that he had memcon with Dulles in his files about it.)3

      There is desperation in how they have tried to steal ALL from the Palestinian territories, and their resources. White phosphorous, precision bombs, and systematic killings, might be the effort to rid the Galilee of Arabs, but the Palestinians have put up with a lot of their violence, and are admirably very resistant. Bibi rants and raves like a lunatic, or despot tyrant, and his war mongering has backfired on him, still, he continues unashamedly to keep building more and more illegal settlements.
      Bloomberg has turned out to be a big disappointment, and like other zionist media, and operations in the US, seems to risk credibility, and reputation, to keep a despicable rogue nation looking like a victim, while the real victims are deprived of
      justice. Bloomberg obviously is not an honest person.

  19. Faisal on May 29, 2014, 9:24 am

    Can’t believe this is still a used hasbara line: “There’s no such country as Palestine”

    In the same way there was no country such as “Italy”; because people from the Apennine Peninsula were called after the cities/localities they’re from instead: “the Genoese”, “Neapolitans” or “Venetians”.

    That’s the way it was back then for the most part. And there were very few countries where people from there were called after them directly (e.g. the Chinese, Egyptians).

    The same is true about Palestinians; al-Maqdisyyin (from al-Quds/Jerusalem), al-Khodharyyin (from al-Khodheira/Hadera) or al-Tabaryyin (from Tabaryya/Tiberias) and so on.

    • James Canning on May 29, 2014, 6:50 pm

      Does Bloomberg himself actually buy this rot (that there is no Palestine)?

    • ziusudra on May 30, 2014, 4:16 am

      Greetings Faisal,
      Well put, Shucran.
      We all have had many names in our heritage.
      On a lighter note, the Canadians are called
      ‘Villagers’ after the Huron term Canada (Village)
      Hope you like that one? Mash’Salam
      ziusudra
      PS The name of a Sicilian town, Sciacca came about
      via the mispronounciation of the ‘Ex Aqua’ baths that the
      Sarazens (8th C AD) couldn’t pronounce, they said:
      Sciacca ( Shaka)

  20. bryan on May 29, 2014, 10:20 am

    Surely Mr. Bloomberg’s contention that Palestine is “part of Israel, or it’s Jewish land” must carry consequences: no one can continue to assert that Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East. With much of “Israel’s” population disenfranchised and denied basic human rights, America must stop providing it with aid, military equipment and diplomatic support, the EU must stop all cooperation, and all progressives must have an obvious obligation to support a change in the status quo by a policy of aggressive Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions.

  21. weareone on May 29, 2014, 1:17 pm

    Agreed, Walid.

    As Nahida points out in the article, just not sure how the terminology, apartheid vs genocide (or my term, holocaust), affects international law ( I have no knowledge of international law)- if as the article states: “crimes of apartheid does not carry the same weight in International Law as Crimes against Humanity,thus may be harder to prosecute.”

    From the article:http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-battle-of-words-in-palestine-it-is-not-apartheid-it-is-genocide/5384292

    “Calling “Israel” an Apartheid is a CONCEALMENT of GENOCIDE”

    “Calling the Zionist entity mere “apartheid”, i.e “separation”, would only serve in concealing the true genocidal nature of the Jewish state, and present it as a “normal” and “legitimate” political system with only few holes, some racist laws, and wrong policies which can be easily changed. Such use would promote the legitimization of this entity. From a legal aspect, crimes of apartheid does not carry the same weight in International Law as Crimes against Humanity,thus may be harder to prosecute.”

Leave a Reply