Trending Topics:

Netanyahu’s ‘battle for Jerusalem’ can’t end well for any of us

News
on 276 Comments

Did you read Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s speech following the attack on the West Jerusalem synagogue Tuesday? I found it bloodcurdling. He called on “the state of the Jews” to unite in a “battle for Jerusalem.” The leader of a country that is 20 percent non-Jewish, Netanyahu left his own citizens out of his call to arms:

this is the root of the conflict: The refusal to recognize – and educate for – the existence of the state of the Jews..Terrorism has followed us through all the years of the Zionist enterprise. We have always withstood it and we will do so this time as well.

There are those who would like to uproot us from our land and from our capital. They will not achieve their aim. We are in a battle for Jerusalem, our eternal capital. In this battle we must be united; this is the order of the day… We must put aside all of the little differences and unite around one major issue – defending Jerusalem, defending the security of Israel’s citizens

Calling Jews to put aside their little differences and take up arms for the “battle for Jerusalem” is a vision of holy war, with fascistic trimmings. The words “battle for Jerusalem” recall the Battle of Algiers in the late 1950s, a similar contest between overwhelming military force and terrorist attacks. And we know how that turned out, in a zero sum game, in which the colonizers felt they had to leave Algeria in 1962, even colonizers who’d been there several generations.

Netanyahu goes well beyond the early secular Zionists in this militant religious ideology. His government is now encircling and controlling all of Jerusalem, “the eternal capital” of the Jews, and choking off Palestinian life there. But as I have pointed out on many occasions, Theodor Herzl, the founder of political Zionism, promised European leaders including the Pope, the Sultan, and the Czar over and over again that Jerusalem and its holy places would be outside the Jewish state. The U.N. Partition plan of 1947 also called for Jerusalem to be internationalized; and UN mediator Folke Bernadotte was killed by Jewish terrorists in 1948 when he sought to maintain Jerusalem’s international character. They wanted Jerusalem then, and they want it now.

When I was at rightwing rallies in Jerusalem last week, two Israelis I met echoed what Netanyahu says in that speech. When I said the latest skirmishes began last June, they said, No, the conflict began in 1947, when the U.N. voted to partition Palestine. It’s not about the ’67 borders or occupation, they were saying, it’s about Zionism, the ideology of Jewish nationalism. Palestinians reject that ideology and don’t want a Jewish state here. And Netanyahu and his friends are returning the favor, denying any possibility of a Palestinian state by colonizing Jerusalem, defying Obama and all the liberal Zionists who talk about two states for two peoples.

Today in the U.S. I hear some Americans seeking to be post-Zionist. A one-state reality exists; let’s move on to the civil rights struggle, they say. Or, Palestinians can’t be expected to embrace Zionism, so don’t call on them to recognize a Jewish state. I agree with these voices; and I can’t wait to get there. But the problem is that things in Israel and Palestine are more desperate than they seem here. The two sides hate one another, and one side has all the power; and post-Zionism is a cafe on the beach in Tel Aviv. Netanyahu has now avowed a religious battle in which one group will control a city held holy by three religions. That can’t end well for any of us.

His speech reminds me of why I am an anti-Zionist. Zionism has produced a toxic form of nationalism that cannot imagine treating Palestinians as equals let alone understanding their desires and frustrations under occupation. The perpetrators of the Tuesday attack were “human animals,” Netanyahu said. Yes, I know; Palestinian resistance is also a root cause of the conflict, the refusal to accept Zionist dominion in their lands. But who can blame an indigenous people for that determination in the era of decolonization; and so I feel great urgency in convincing Americans that an ideology of Jewish domination of a center of civilization is alien to our values, to the principle of the separation of church and state, and a recipe for endless conflict.

The battle for Jerusalem is deadly for all of us. Americans must affirm that this city belongs to the world.

P.S. Here is Israel’s ambassador to Jordan, Daniel Nevo, describing religious tensions in Jerusalem yesterday on NPR (report by Emily Harris). It would be hard to come up with a more divisive and sectarian message than this one, in which Nevo implicates all Jews in the world:

DANIEL NEVO: Most of 1.8 billion Muslims in the world don’t really care about reality or about the facts. What they care is some of the imams will say that the Jews are conquesting or penetrating Al-Aqsa. It’s enough. And it is enough to put every Israeli and Jew all around the world in jeopardy.

Philip Weiss

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

Other posts by .


Posted In:

276 Responses

  1. Abierno on November 20, 2014, 10:39 am

    An impressive, well articulated analysis.

    • Krauss on November 20, 2014, 4:54 pm

      Broadly speaking, yes, but this little bit…

      The words “battle for Jerusalem” recall the Battle of Algiers in the late 1950s, a similar contest between overwhelming military force and terrorist attacks. And we know how that turned out, in a zero sum game, in which the colonizers felt they had to leave Algeria in 1962, even colonizers who’d been there several generations.

      Algeria/South Africa is different because the power structure is different. The French needed the Algerians; the Jews don’t really need the Palestinians(and don’t want them). If the French did massive ethnic cleansing, then the state would collapse. If the Israeli government did so, the economy would shrink to some extent, but a lot of people would be jubilant and Israel would go on. It survived hyperinflation in the 80s; it would survive this, too.

      With Clinton coming in by ’16 and probably sitting out eight years, that means we got at least 10 more years until we can have a president which would be more balanced. But even then it’s doubtful. The Arabs and muslims in general are too poor to challenge Zionist cash. Only WASPs can crush any opposition but these WASPs are too rich for their own good, think a guy like Bill Gates or Jeff Bezos. They’re apolitical, because they can be. They prefer cold fusion or atomic clocks.

      • Krauss on November 20, 2014, 4:56 pm

        Basically, I think that the only real way to stop the conflict is domestic politics in America. Only when America turns will Israel turn, and even then it’s doubtful if it will, but that’s the only realistic chance there is. As Phil noted, the power imbalance – militarily, economically – between the two is massive and probably unbridgable in many generations.

      • Citizen on November 20, 2014, 10:54 pm

        Unfortunately, I don’t think USA will turn in time to prevent evolution of US enabled I-P to WW3. The Palestinians are not useful to the plutocratic elite that runs the USA, which itself is fast becoming a big banana republic.

  2. eljay on November 20, 2014, 10:56 am

    Bibi is the war-mongering, supremacist leader of an oppressive, colonialist, expansionist and supremacist “Jewish State” founded on and sustained by a Jewish-supremacist ideology.

    What blows my mind is that so many people – Jews and non-Jews alike – choose to support the hatefulness, immorality and injustice that are Zio-supremacism and the supremacist “Jewish State” of Israel over the universal values of justice, accountability and equality.

    • Horizontal on November 20, 2014, 6:58 pm

      What blows my mind is that so many people – Jews and non-Jews alike – choose to support the hatefulness, immorality and injustice that are Zio-supremacism and the supremacist “Jewish State” of Israel over the universal values of justice, accountability and equality.

      I think the short answer to your statement is that BS works. A large part of the support is ill informed support. These people still think of Israel as the peaceful victims, forced to carry guns and kill people only because the mean old Arabs hate them and don’t ever want to make peace. Most Americans don’t know squat about history, so they don’t know a lie when they hear it.

      You have to remember, each country has its own set of elites who benefit from the same BS treatment that Israel gets and reap the same rewards for playing along. I believe one of the dangers of surrounding yourself with BS is that one day you come to believe it yourself.

      The other, darker, take on this is that maybe those beliefs of justice, accountability and equality aren’t as universal as we’d like to believe.

      • ziusudra on November 21, 2014, 2:25 pm

        Greetings Horizontal,
        ….Apropos BS……..
        All three Abrahamic Religions view Jerusalem as their personal sacred place. I don’t agree with any of them. The lengths that this Goebbels maniac is going to is as sickening as Pope Urban in 1095AD where he called out contiguous Euros to free Jerusalem from the godless Muslims beginning the ca 200 year Crusades.
        None of the Deities ever answered the supplications of any Religion.
        The Shem Semites didn’t enter Canaan till 1250BC. The 1st Kingdom of Hebron under Saul and the 2nd Kingdom of David, who capitol was Samaria, had no interest in Schalim, Canaanite for Jerusalem meaning the Twilight Goddness. The 3rd Kingdom of Judea made Jerusalem its capitol. All were gone by 586BC. After Babylon, small Groups came to Jerusalem in 520BC & 456BC, but being so puny they dropped the Hebrew & took up Aramean in 200BC & began migrating to Greece voluntarily & ‘Next year in Jerusalem’ echoed as a hollow goodbye till 1945AD. The Romans, Byzantine Empires & Crusaderss expelled them from Jerusalem for 500 years! Ironically it was Saladin tolerance of Religion that allowed them back in 1291AD! No evidence of any of the three religions’ reasons has ever been proven for making this City Special to them.
        ziusudra

      • Marnie on November 22, 2014, 8:05 am

        “Most Americans don’t know squat about history, so they don’t know a lie when they hear it. ”

        Most Americans don’t even know their own history, let alone the history outside its borders. I don’t know what other garbage aside from corn syrup, fat and chemicals only found in a laboratory goes into the food most Americans eat, but think they’ve been poisoned to the point they’re unable to think. The “news” they watch has been zionized to the point it makes Sheldon Adelson giggle like a school girl and Abe Foxman incontinent with joy.

    • CigarGod on November 21, 2014, 10:24 am

      The ancient texts support this behavior. It is the word of god. This one reason, is why this will go on and on…until we all reject the man made god…or we destroy ourselves.

  3. seafoid on November 20, 2014, 11:00 am

    The current state of play shows how right the UN were not to want to hand over the city to the Zionists. They couldn’t run a child’s birthday party without killing someone and accusing her of blood libel.

    • Horizontal on November 20, 2014, 6:44 pm

      How right you are. If only our current UN ambassador felt like that.

      • Moto on November 20, 2014, 9:15 pm

        Your current UN Ambassador (almost ALL US Ambassadors are) is Jewish. Non-contest, I’m afraid.

    • Daniel Rich on November 20, 2014, 7:40 pm

      @ seafoid,

      Q: They couldn’t run a child’s birthday party without killing someone and accusing her of blood libel.

      R: That’s funny, in a very, very sad way…

  4. pabelmont on November 20, 2014, 11:03 am

    Netanyahu is not bound by Herzl’s (apparent) promises. He’s not bound by Israel’s signatures on international agreements. He’s not bound by any pan-human rules of decency, human rights, etc.

    It’s time to call a spade a spade. Israel is an expansionist-imperialist-lawless-pogromist enterprise, and Netanyahu merely reflects this reality. He doesn’t create it, cannot destroy it. He is a follower not a leader. But of course he is an “inciter” to Jewish (and Palestinian reactive) violence.

    Bad times and worse are coming. It feels to me like Germany 1938 (when I was born, safely, in USA) — kristallnacht is to be anticipated in short order.

  5. Kay24 on November 20, 2014, 11:20 am

    It is so cunning the way they keep referring to it as “our capital” trying desperately to make it so. The UN, EU, the US, or any other nation, has recognized it as “their capital”. Only in their sick heads.

    This situation does not look good. They are now going fill their streets with trigger happy settlers. A very deadly situation. Expect more murders.

    “Israeli gun control eased in wake of terror attacks
    Public Security Minister Yitzhak Aharonovitch’s decision will allow tens of thousands of previously ineligible people to legally carry a weapon.

    Public Security Minister Yitzhak Aharonovitch has approved a broad easing of the rules for granting gun permits for private citizens. This will allow tens of thousands of people who did not meet the previous licensing criteria to now be allowed to legally carry a weapon.”
    Haaretz

    • amigo on November 20, 2014, 12:00 pm

      “Israeli gun control eased in wake of terror attacks
      Public Security Minister Yitzhak Aharonovitch’s decision will allow tens of thousands of previously ineligible people to legally carry a weapon”Kay 24

      Conversely, thousands will be denied that same right.So anyone not carrying a gun is an open target for for those carrying weapons and given the level of incitement by Israel,s leaders there will be no shortage of thugs/religious nuts to do their bidding.There will of course be Non violent Jews who will be victims as a result.

      Tough times ahead .

      Netanyahu wants suicide bombs to re enter the picture so zionists can play victims again.

      • Marnie on November 20, 2014, 2:34 pm

        I’ve thought for quite a while that Netanyahu sets up these scenarios specifically to result in israeli casualties, I know that sounds sick and I’m ready for the shit to hit the fan but I can look at this man without thinking why does he always have a smirk on his face as if everything horrible thing is happening just like he planned it. I suggested before, Masada 2.0.

        On another tack, Jerusalem should be a protected city, under the auspices of the UN or something, certainly not to be left in the hands of the israelis or Palestinians at this point. (I know, I don’t know anything……..)

      • annie on November 20, 2014, 3:42 pm

        Netanyahu sets up these scenarios specifically to result in israeli casualties

        wonders never cease.

      • Horizontal on November 20, 2014, 6:47 pm

        “Civilian casualties are the last thing that Israel wants.”

        ~ Senator Elizabeth Warren

      • Daniel Rich on November 21, 2014, 8:28 pm

        @ Horizontal,

        Q: …casualties…

        R: Warren thinks it’s the plural form of ‘casual,’ so, who can blame her?

      • Horizontal on November 22, 2014, 9:55 am

        I’m going to blame our invisible edit button for this one.

        As I’ve said before, “Typos are are freinds!”

  6. just on November 20, 2014, 11:31 am

    thanks for this analysis, Phil.

    His words are bloodcurdling. His methods are ruthless and genocidal.

    Is our government listening? Do they agree? Why is there a deafening silence? What does never again mean?

    • Horizontal on November 20, 2014, 7:02 pm

      Is our government listening?

      Yes.

      Do they agree?

      Yes.

      Why is there a deafening silence?

      See number two above.

      What does never again mean?

      We’ll have to wait and see.

      • just on November 20, 2014, 11:25 pm

        thanks.

        ;((

      • Marnie on November 21, 2014, 1:53 am

        What does never again mean?

        Never again for us; for the rest of my sisters and brothers, not so much.

      • Horizontal on November 21, 2014, 8:42 am

        just ~

        Sorry to get all rational on you. I know your questions were more or less rhetorical cries for justice which echo down the halls of congress, unanswered.

        ;((( indeed.

  7. seafoid on November 20, 2014, 11:43 am

    “There are those who would like to uproot us from our land and from our capital. They will not achieve their aim. We are in a battle for Jerusalem, our eternal capital. ”

    Yalla ya Falastin

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jS8IZcx7tJY

    Anyway I don’t believe Bibi the Butcher has any idea about tail risk

    Another Jewish genius never got it either

    “I made a mistake in presuming that the self-interests of organisations, specifically banks and others, were such that they were best capable of protecting their own shareholders…” http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/23/business/worldbusiness/23iht-gspan.4.17206624.html?_r=0

    • Horizontal on November 20, 2014, 7:06 pm

      seafoid ~

      I followed your link.

      How can someone with so many letters after their name be such a complete moron? When I think back to all those presidents listening to this crackpot my blood just boils.

      • Citizen on November 20, 2014, 11:30 pm

        Greenspan? He greatly underestimated the power of unleashed greed. He didn’t fully imagine what those Ivy League Wall St crackerjack kids would do with derivatives, nor, earlier, what was bound to happen with no wall between commercial and investment banking coupled with government desires for poor folk to own their own home, most especially urban poor folk.

      • Horizontal on November 21, 2014, 8:49 am

        I also remember too many on-line discussions with free marketers during the Occupy heyday who also, in my opinion, echoed Greenspan’s over-estimation of the market to correct itself or deliver anything like economic justice to a majority of Americans. Also included in the discusses were the non-existent moral compasses of the groups on Wall Street writing laws for their own benefit.

        Probably another topic for another day, but it’s still nice to see Greenspan receive this minuscule measure of comeuppance, for all the good that it does those who lost everything in the 2007 greed-fest.

      • seafoid on November 21, 2014, 4:29 pm

        Greenspan is an asshole

        “A necessary condition for my position is that this is a very rare event,” he says. The implosion of the debt bubble that had built up, and the extent to which it almost caused the entire financial system to stop working, was not anticipated by financial regulators.

        http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/2/f81f85a2-9b61-11df-8239-00144feab49a.html

  8. Laurent Weppe on November 20, 2014, 11:50 am

    The words “battle for Jerusalem” recall the Battle of Algiers in the late 1950s, a similar contest between overwhelming military force and terrorist attacks. And we know how that turned out, in a zero sum game, in which the colonizers felt they had to leave Algeria in 1962, even colonizers who’d been there several generations.

    There’s something else to remember when it comes to the collapse of french rule in Algeria: the Pieds-Noirs who had to leave in 1962 belonged to the middle and lower class:

    The big land and business owners who knew that the colonial regime was about to collapse had cranked up the jingoistic rhetoric during the war, always demanding for more young men to be sent from France proper to fight, kill and die to preserve “French Algeria”, but they had done so only in order to delay the inevitable for long enough to liquidate their algerian assets and organize their orderly retreat and golden exile into France proper.

    I’d be willing to bet my own neck that the israeli upper-class is, like its Pieds-Noirs counterparts, perfectly aware that the current political order is living on borrowed time: rapidly exhausting resources, people and international goodwill and are supporting Netanyahu’s jingoism for the very same reason: to gain a little time and preparing to abandon ship, leaving their plebeian compatriots alone to face the painful consequences of their rule.

    • American on November 20, 2014, 1:31 pm

      ” …. to gain a little time and preparing to abandon ship, leaving their plebeian compatriots alone to face the painful consequences of their rule. – ….Laurent Weppe

      Probably. Someone correct me if I am wrong but from what I’ve read the wealthiest in Israel are now a few Russians. Hopefully they will go back to Russia. Let Putin deal with them.

  9. Sulphurdunn on November 20, 2014, 12:05 pm

    If Jerusalem belongs to anyone, I should think it would be the Jebusites.

    • Horizontal on November 20, 2014, 7:08 pm

      Are they part of the Bush family?

      • just on November 20, 2014, 11:24 pm

        lololol. ahem.

      • Marnie on November 21, 2014, 7:32 am

        Can I use that too? !

      • Kathleen on November 21, 2014, 2:22 pm

        thanks for the laugh

  10. just on November 20, 2014, 12:11 pm

    Did JSIL just invite ISIL? Is this the beginning of the end? Is this all contrived to ethnically cleanse the Palestinians and leave Jerusalem for the “Jewish State” with our help???

  11. seafoid on November 20, 2014, 12:14 pm

    Netanyahu isn’t fit to wipe away the dust from Fairuz’s feet

    This song reminds me of poor Quds, from which so many decent people are banned just cos they aren’t Jewish

  12. Kathleen on November 20, 2014, 12:43 pm

    Phil “The U.N. Partition plan of 1947 also called for Jerusalem to be internationalized; and UN mediator Folke Bernadotte was killed by Jewish terrorists in 1948 when he sought to maintain Jerusalem’s international character. They wanted Jerusalem then, and they want it now.”

    Thanks for all of your hard work for peace and justice Phil and Mondoweiss team. So important

    • jon s on November 20, 2014, 4:52 pm

      The UN partition plan of 1947 did, indeed , call for the internationalization of Jerusalem.
      Need I remind you that the plan was rejected by the Arab side?

      • seafoid on November 20, 2014, 4:59 pm

        Can’t you at least call them Palestinians?

        I wouldn’t have accepted your people taking over my country either, Jon. Look at what followed.
        Imagine living in Majdal and being shunted off to Gaza to face 56, 67, settlers and all the crap since including white phosphorous, deliberate pauperisation, de development, 80% on food aid etc.

        Your people should have taken mass trauma treatment before going anywhere.
        Maybe Zionism would have stood a chance then

      • Horizontal on November 20, 2014, 6:12 pm

        Yes, but wasn’t it accepted by the Israeli side? So why not abide by its stipulations?

        Oh, right, because the Zionists had no intentions of actually abiding by any UN partition plan. They were always playing the long game, saying anything they needed to in order to get all of Palestine, and Jerusalem, too.

        Like it would be all peace and sunshine had the Palestinians actually accepted the partition plan back in 1947. Please.

      • amigo on November 20, 2014, 6:16 pm

        “Need I remind you that the plan was rejected by the Arab side?” jon s

        “One day after the UN vote to partition Palestine, Menachem Begin, the commander of the Irgun gang and Israel’s future Prime Minister between 1977-1983, proclaimed: “The Partition of Palestine is illegal. It will never be recognized …. Jerusalem was and will for ever be our capital. Eretz Israel will be restored to the people of Israel. All of it. And for Ever.” (Iron Wall p. 25) ”

        You were saying jon s.

      • seafoid on November 20, 2014, 6:25 pm

        Forever is really long, Amigo.
        I can’t see them holding off the Arabs forever.
        The Crusaders couldn’t do it. the Byzantines couldn’t do it.
        They have a narrow sliver of land on the wrong side of the Med.

      • seafoid on November 20, 2014, 6:27 pm

        When you fly into Ben Gurion airport you really see how narrow Israel is.
        And the desert beyond. With the Muslims. And they all hate Israel so bad.
        And they are unhinged by anti-Semitism.
        Actually, I think that applies to the Israelis.

      • ritzl on November 20, 2014, 6:49 pm

        Aw hell, jon s. This has been explained to you over and over and over. The Jews (before it was Israel) were operating OUTSIDE the partition borders in 1947. That was BEFORE the “Arabs” declined to sign the/any paper. Who accepted what again? And when?

        Would any normal person see an invasion of someone else’s territory and even begin to form the thought that the invaded people were to blame for war because they didn’t accept this condition? Not only no, but hell no! That is what you’re up against as more and more actual facts osmotically seep out into the ether of mass opinion formation.

        But you guys just say the same context-free quarter-truth like it’s the whole truth, over and over and over and over and over and over. Leon Uris/”Exodus” was so 1960s, but I hear an Andy Williams tune can stick in your head for decades.

        The bad news is that this myth[ology] has gone on for generations. The good news is that this mythology is decaying into dirt because it has gone on for generations. Every time you repeat it you add a little more heat and moisture. Keep talking please.

      • eljay on November 20, 2014, 6:58 pm

        >> jon s: The UN partition plan of 1947 did, indeed , call for the internationalization of Jerusalem. Need I remind you that the plan was rejected by the Arab side?

        So what? Israel accepted what it was offered. The greed of Zio-supremacists was not and is not justification for taking anything beyond what was offered and accepted.

      • Horizontal on November 20, 2014, 7:11 pm

        When you fly into Ben Gurion airport you really see how narrow Israel is.

        I don’t need to fly into Israel to see how narrow it is.

      • Shingo on November 21, 2014, 1:29 am

        Need I remind you that the plan was rejected by the Arab side?

        Need I remind you that Ben Gueuin declared the partition. To be only a temporary stepping stone toward conquering g the rest of Palestine, and that he vowed to abolish the partition once the Jewish forces were sufficiently well armed?

      • Kathleen on November 21, 2014, 2:16 pm

        Not difficult to imagine why it was rejected at the time

      • tree on November 23, 2014, 10:11 pm

        Jon

        You said: It’s an historical fact that the Jewish-Zionist side overwhelmingly supported the UNSCOP partition plan and actively lobbied for it at the UN.

        Actually, the UN records prove that is NOT a historical fact. As Hostage has pointed out several times, the representative of the Jewish Agency, Rabbi Abba Silver, in a statement to the Ad-Hoc Committee made on October 2, 1947 made clear that “if it would make possible the immediate re-establishment of the Jewish State with sovereign control of its own immigration, then the Jewish Agency was prepared to recommend the acceptance of the partition solution, subject to further discussion of constitutional and territorial provisions.” .http://unispal.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/5CE900D2DE34AADF852562BD007002D2

        In other words, the Jewish Agency, the governing Zionist body, had only agreed to the creation of a Jewish state with complete control over immigration. It particularly and overtly reserved acceptance of the provisions of the Plan that guaranteed full civil rights for all in the Jewish state regardless of ethnicity or religion and also reserved acceptance of the Plan’s territorial limits on the Jewish State. One does not need to postulate a “what if” to recognize that those two elements of the Plan were clearly neither accepted nor implemented by the State of Israel, so to say that the Zionists “overwhelmingly supported” the Partition Plan is to engage in sophistry. They merely accepted the idea of a Jewish State, and never accepted any of the guarantees that were essential elements of the Partition Plan itself. Being as how the creation of a Jewish State was the raison d’etre of Zionism, its downright laughable to insist that the Zionist governing bodies were making any tangible sacrifice in “agreeing” to the very thing they had planned to take from the beginning.

        On the other side, the Palestinian leadership (with the exception of the Communists) and all the Arab states were absolutely dead-set against partition, actively lobbied against the plan, and voted “no” in the GA.

        Again, thanks to Hostage for this correction:

        Quoting:

        the documentary record shows that the Jews were planning the military conquest of Palestine ever since the mid-1930s, beginning with the Avnir Plan. It also shows that the neighboring Arab states accepted the principle of partition, but not the ethnic cleansing or massacres that occurred after the UN proposed the plan of partition.

        *In “Pan-Arabism Before Nasser” (page 98), Michael Doran reported that Eliyahu Sasson made at least two trips in late 1946 to lobby Egyptian officials regarding the partition of Palestine. Sasson reported that he had been warmly welcomed by the Prime Minister, the Foreign Minister, and the Secretary General of the Arab League. Doran says that King Faruq and other palace advisers received reports on the partition talks and did nothing to scuttle them.

        *Joseph Heller, “The birth of Israel, 1945-1949: Ben-Gurion and his critics”, University Press of Florida, 2000, says that in the Spring of 1946 Sasson was dispatched to Egypt and that he reported that, with the exception of Saudi Arabia, there was a virtually unanimous consensus on partition among the members of the Arab League.
        *Before the Deir Yassin massacre, the US Minister in Saudi Arabia told Secretary Marshall that the Saudi’s and Abdullah of Transjordan had warned the other members of the Arab League (in March of 1948) that the partition was a civil matter and that the Arab states shouldn’t take any action that the Security Council might interpret as aggression.

        Prof. Shlomo Ben-Ami, PhD, is an Oxford University trained historian. He served as Israeli Foreign Minister and Minister of Internal Security and as the head of the School of History at Tel Aviv University. Ben-Ami relates that after the UNSCOP was formed in May of 1947, Ben Gurion explained that his acceptance of the principle of partition was an attempt to gain time until the Jews were strong enough to fight the Arab majority. He pledged to Mapai’s Central Committee that the borders of Jewish independence as defined by the UN Plan were by no means final and Yigal Allon said …”the borders of partition cannot be for us the final borders … the partition plan is a compromise plan that is unjust to the Jews. … We are entitled to decide our borders according to our defence needs.”

        Ben Gurion who upon his appointment as ‘defence minister’ in 1946 made it clear that the time had now arrived for a ‘showdown of force, a Jewish military showdown’, had been meticulously preparing for a war he was convinced, ever since the Arab revolt, was inevitable. See page 34 of Scars of War Wounds of Peace. link to books.google.com

        http://mondoweiss.net/2013/12/deconstructing-netanyahus-mandela#comment-620351

        (See Hostage’s comment in full to access his embedded links.)

        As for Jamal al-Husseini, the leader of the Arab Higher Committee, he opposed partition but argued on September 29th, 1947 before the same Ad-Hoc Committee, that

        ” once Palestine was found to be entitled to independence, the United Nations was not legally competent to decide or impose Palestine’s constitutional organization, the representative of the Arab Higher Committee outlined the following principles as the basis for the future constitutional organization of the Holy Land:

        1. That an Arab State in the whole of Palestine be established on democratic lines.

        2. That the Arab State of Palestine would respect human rights, fundamental freedoms and equality of all persons before the law.

        3. That the Arab State of Palestine would protect the legitimate rights and interests of all minorities.

        4. That freedom of worship and access to the Holy Places would be guaranteed to all.

        He added that the following steps would have to be taken to give effect to the above mentioned four principles:

        (a) A Constituent Assembly should be elected at the earliest possible time. All genuine and law abiding nationals of Palestine would be entitled to participate in the elections of the Constituent Assembly.

        (b) The Constituent Assembly should, within a fixed time, formulate and enact a Constitution for the Arab State of Palestine, which should be of a democratic nature and should embody the above-mentioned four principles.

        (c) A government should be formed within a fixed time, in accordance with the terms of the Constitution, to take over the administration of Palestine from the Mandatory Power.

        (same UN source as for Abba Silver’s remarks above)

        This Palestinian recommendation was entirely reasonable and just, so to pretend that rejection of partition somehow reflects negatively on the Palestinians and justifies the subsequent and continuing gross mistreatment of Palestinians by the “Jewish State” is to turn reality on its head. Given the previous half century history of the Zionist movement’s discriminatory actions against the indigenous Palestinians, the rejection of a “Jewish State” carved out of Palestine and run by these very same Zionists was entirely understandable, and subsequent history has proven their rejection to have been correct. I’d suggest you read Shira Robinson’s, Citizen Strangers. The 150,000 Palestinians who managed to remain, or were able to return without detection, and who posed no “demographic threat” to Israel’s artificial and violently created Jewish majority, were treated appallingly by the State of Israel. This is the kind of state that the Zionists had worked for since the beginning of their movement-one that oppressed the Palestinian minority and privileged the Jewish “majority”.

        I get that you probably have been raised on these convenient and, for you, reassuring lies and equivocations that you repeat, but you’re a grown adult now. Isn’t it time to think for yourself and stop mindlessly repeating falsities?

    • Horizontal on November 21, 2014, 8:51 am

      Yes, that famous Zionist, Karbaum, made a lot of surprise appearances back then.

      • Kathleen on November 21, 2014, 2:19 pm

        Ritzl you made some great points in your response to JonS.

      • jon s on November 23, 2014, 5:02 am

        In reply:
        First of all, I was referring to both the Palestinians and the Arab states . Hence: “the Arab side”.

        As to the rest, we need to separate facts from speculations.

        It’s an historical fact that the Jewish-Zionist side overwhelmingly supported the UNSCOP partition plan and actively lobbied for it at the UN. (It’s true that Begin, who was in a minority, in opposition to the mainstream leadership- was opposed). When the vote turned out favorably, the Jews literally danced for joy in the streets of Tel Aviv.
        On the other side, the Palestinian leadership (with the exception of the Communists) and all the Arab states were absolutely dead-set against partition, actively lobbied against the plan, and voted “no” in the GA.
        After the UNGA vote the Arab side still refused to accept the plan and set out to prevent its implementation, by force of arms. Palestinian forces mounted attacks on Jewish neighborhoods , towns and villages and the “Arab Liberation Army” invaded and began operating in the north.

        Those are facts. Now, we can speculate about Ben Gurion’s “real intentions” , or what would have happened if the Arabs had adopted a more moderate position- even as a tactic- and the two sides would have sat down to discuss implementation of the plan, and so forth. But that would be playing “what if?” with History. Who knows?

      • seafoid on November 23, 2014, 8:18 am

        Jon

        the 1947 UN GA vote was not going to get the 2/3rd majority required so the Zionists asked for a delay.

        And set about armtwisting and threatening.

        France was threatened with economic consequences. the Firestone corp took care of Liberia.
        Robert Nathan, a prominent Zionist , said “we used all tools at hand”
        Delegates of Latin American nations had mink coats sent to their wives.
        Haiti was promised international aid.
        The Philippines was threatened.

        The vote was a joke. The UN had no power to dispossess the Palestinians.
        Zionism has always been the same- Jewish money buys influence.

        The Achilles heel of Zionism is very little general public support for Jewish nihilism.

        And that is what is going to kill Israel.

        “and who knows? ”

        History repeats itself. Zionism can’t succeed where the Crusaders failed.

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OIL-uFB7cIc

        History repeats itself
        you didn’t learn, you wouldn’t listen
        you couldn’t see the books were on the shelf
        For your concern, you never missed ’em

      • CigarGod on November 23, 2014, 10:02 am

        Seafoid…this has kept me up at night for years. We have “short term learn”…but long term memory…which of course…we revise to fit our short term goals.

  13. a blah chick on November 20, 2014, 12:58 pm

    About two years ago an ex-Border policeman shot up a bank in Beersheva using a service weapon that he had never turned in. Apparently the armed services are laxed at times in confiscating these weapons. Then there is this concerning the ban on security personal taking their weapons home:

    “The temporary regulations allow security company employees to take their weapons home with them at the end of their shifts. The move, in effect for the next for the next 90 days, reverses a ban against the practice out in place last year after a number of domestic homicides were committed by security guards with guns they had taken home.”
    http://www.timesofisrael.com

    So what has changed? Are these guys less likely now to use these weapons on wives or estranged girlfriends like before? Hardly. This raising of gun restrictions is purely a sop to the public, to make them think they are doing something when they really aren’t. Are they expecting to find “terrorists” hiding under the coffee table?

    I predict that it will leave a few more women dead before the 90 days is over.

  14. NormanF on November 20, 2014, 1:28 pm

    Jerusalem has been Jewish-majority since the 19th Century. Phil Weiss airbrushes that fact out of his discussion.

    Of all the peoples in the world, Jews have no right no live – not in Jerusalem which has been the capital of every Jewish kingdom and state throughout history. This was the message delivered by Arab terrorists who remorselessly cut down Jews at peaceful pray in the city on Tuesday morning.

    The Jewish people reject it and they will defend their capital, their nation and their existence at all costs. Arabs decided to wage a religious war upon Judaism. That too, will end in failure. Arab terror against Israel and its people has been continuing for the past century and is self defeating.

    Those who kill pious rabbis in cold blood in deep-seated hatred of the Jews have forfeited the right to a state. The massacre at Har Nof is a game changer for the Jewish State, the region and the world.

    • annie on November 20, 2014, 3:55 pm

      Jerusalem has been Jewish-majority since the 19th Century.

      the area designated today as “jerusalem” was definitely not jewish majority since the 19th century. and i’m not sure i even believe the claim the small(in relativity) original jerusalem (before israel started adding illegal settlements they call “neighborhoods” and swallowing up more and more land surrounding it against international law) was jewish majority in the 19th century. i know i argued once before it wasn’t and did a bunch of research but i can’t be sure. either way it’s beside the point. the area of jerusale today definitely was not majority jewish in the 19th century.

      Jews have no right no live – not in Jerusalem which has been the capital of every Jewish kingdom and state throughout history.

      gag me with a spoon norman, and prey tell, what multiple “jewish kingdoms” might you be referring to. and no one said “jews” had no right to live there. don’t turn yourself into the victim here when the state you are representing has kicked millions of people off their land. throw yourself a pity party but don’t expect sympathy here.

    • Mooser on November 20, 2014, 4:58 pm

      “The Jewish people reject it and they will defend their capital, their nation and their existence at all costs.”

      Sorry, “Normie”, every single indicator shows that, as 21st Century information spreads, Zionism’s 19th Century blend of religio-facism, and ethno-supremacy effected by illegal and violent colonization grows steadily more and more unpopular, with Jews and everybody else. And the number of Jews generally is declining, and the number of out-marriages steadily increasing. Don’t you feel like you are just, well, fighting history, NormanF?

      I know, Normie, among the Geritol-and-Jewish set, it’s still very popular, they had an article on the survey here.

    • seafoid on November 20, 2014, 5:00 pm

      Jerusalem has been Jewish-majority since the 19th Century. –

      Bullshit, Norman. Jerusalem was majority Palestinian until 1948.
      What sort of a Jewish name is Norman, by the way. Is that Hebron area ?

      • amigo on November 20, 2014, 6:29 pm

        What sort of a Jewish name is Norman, by the way. Is that Hebron area ?.seafoid

        Maybe he is one of these Normans and maybe when the 1SS takes hold he will become more “Palestinian, than the Palestinians themselves.

        (Irish: Níos Gaelaí ná na Gaeil féin, Latin: Hiberniores Hibernis ipsis) is a phrase used in Irish historiography to describe a phenomenon of cultural assimilation in late medieval Norman Ireland.

      • Kathleen on November 21, 2014, 2:21 pm

        If Americans Knew – What every American needs to know …

        http://www.ifamericansknew.org

      • just on November 21, 2014, 2:33 pm

        thanks, Kathleen.

      • jon s on November 23, 2014, 7:19 am

        Norman is correct on the demography .Since the late 19th century there’s been a Jewish majority in Jerusalem.
        http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/jerupop.html

      • eljay on November 23, 2014, 8:51 am

        >> jon s: Norman is correct on the demography .Since the late 19th century there’s been a Jewish majority in Jerusalem.

        Even if NormanFeee is correct about the Jewish Palestinian majority in Jerusalem, he is incorrect that that majority entitles:
        – Jews to an oppressive, colonialist, expansionist and religion-supremacist “Jewish State” in Palestine; or
        – the “Jewish State” of Israel to occupy and claim for itself the free city of Jerusalem.

      • seafoid on November 23, 2014, 9:40 am

        http://www.americantaskforce.org/daily_news_article/2008/06/12/1213300189

        “Within the municipal boundaries of Jerusalem under the British mandate, which ended in 1947, “overall Jewish ownership had not exceeded 24 percent.” However, in the last months of the mandate, the Jewish forces captured 84.13 percent of the city, later called West Jerusalem, within which Jewish land ownership approached 30 percent. “What was left in Arab hands –East Jerusalem –constituted 11.48 percent” of municipal Jerusalem, reported Professor Walid Khalidi in a study he has undertaken for The Journal of Palestine Studies, now based in Washington, D.”

        Atlas of Palestine Stats

        1922 Jerusalem
        Palestinians 83365
        Jews 34439

        1944 Jerusalem
        Palestinians 140680
        Jews 100200

        I think those stats cited by Jon s and Norma Settler come from Peters

      • Zofia on November 23, 2014, 12:12 pm

        to jon s:
        Till this very day there are conflicting estimates regarding Jerusalem population at the very end of XIX century and XX. So please don’t state that Jews at the end of XIX century were 100% the majority of the Jerusalem population. It would be more accurate if you wrote that at the beginning of XX century…(still not 100% sure).
        The Ottoman census of 1878 indicated for the Jerusalem, Nablus, and Acre districts that Muslim population= 403,795= 85.5%; Christian=43,659=9.2%; Jewish=15,001=3.2%; Jewish (Foreign-born)= Est. 10,000=2.1%. It must be remebered that many Palestinians avoided the Turkish census (the same problem was the Brit.census) for these reasons mainly: a) to avoid taxes, b) to avoid military conscription. As non-Muslims were concerned there were better info about Jews then Christians, even though they were far more numerus (Gudrun Kramer).
        In 1806 in Jerusalem there were: 2,000 Jews; 4,000 Muslims; Christians 2,774(Sharkansky). In 1832: Jews=4,000; Muslims= 13,000; Christians=3,560(Kark and Oren-Nordheim). Ottoman censuses typically under-counted women and children- they made adjustments later if necesssary. Schmelz writes that in 1905 Ottoman census (counted only Ottoman citizens- Jews and many Christians were not Ottoman citizens) Jews= little over 13,000 Muslims+Christians= about 19,000. He used statistics available for the Jerusalem region, not for the urban population.
        Oh and don’t forget as Scholch writes that there was a tendency by Zionist scholars to exaggerate the undercount of non-Ottoman residents in Jerusalem in order to inflate the size of the Jewish population.
        The Brit.census of Palestine (1922) shows that Jews were only a slight majority- and still there are problems with its methodology, etc.
        As Michael Dumper writes:
        The population of the city increased from 1922 to 1946 from 62,000 to 164,000 with approximately 55–60 percent being Jewish. Elsewhere I have argued that these figures and the proportions within them of Palestinian Arabs and Jews are misleading [in: Michael Dumper, The Politics of Jerusalem Since 1967]. There was, for example, an overcounting of new Jewish immigrants who first came to Jerusalem then moved to Tel Aviv and an undercounting of Palestinians whose villages were excluded from the population count as a result of falling outside the municipal borders. What is also of interest is the segregated distribution of the population. Most Jews lived in the new northern and western parts of the city, in what became known as the New City. By 1947 it was estimated that only 2percent of the Jews of the city lived in the walled Old City. WHAT’S THE PROBLEM WITH THAT ONE MAY ASK? WELL…(as Dumper writes):
        During the closing years of the Ottoman Empire, congestion and unsanitary conditions inside the walls led to a rapid increase in the population outside the walls and the spread of urban areas. During the British Mandate period, from 1922–1948, this extramural expansion was recognized and new borders were designated to include a larger area of the walled city’s environs.
        What was controversial in these British changes is a pattern that has been followed to this day, which perhaps is also common to other contested cities— the designation of borders to defend or promote the interests of a particular ethnic or religious group in the city. The British borders swung in a wide arc west of the city to incorporate the new housing estates established by Jewish and Zionist settlers. In contrast, while large numbers of new settlers were being incorporated into the city limits, in the east the municipal borders slid between the walls of the city and the Palestinian villages virtually abutting the walls in order to exclude them. The prime intention of this blatant gerrymandering of the borders was to ensure an electoral advantage of the Jewish community of the city over its Palestinian residents- The rest you can read in: JERUSALEM UNBOUND, by MICHAEL DUMPER.http://books.google.com/books?id=hvQYBQAAQBAJ&pg=PA41&lpg=PA41&dq=What+was+controversial+in+these+British+changes+is+a+pattern+that+has+been+followed+to+this+day,+which+perhaps+is+also+common+to+other+contested+cities%E2%80%94+the+designation+of+borders+to+defend+or+promote+the+interests+of+a+particular+ethnic+or+religious+group+in+the+city.+The+British+borders+swung+in+a+wide+arc+west+of+the+city+to+incorporate+the+new+housing+estates+established+by+Jewish+and+Zionist+settlers.&source=bl&ots=5t8MWoRIaO&sig=kV-__3FW-vzW3sSyO4etHYFSZ6E&hl=en&sa=X&ei=NTRyVIjiAsWQigKH6oDwBQ&ved=0CCAQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=What%20was%20controversial%20in%20these%20British%20changes%20is%20a%20pattern%20that%20has%20been%20followed%20to%20this%20day%2C%20which%20perhaps%20is%20also%20common%20to%20other%20contested%20cities%E2%80%94%20the%20designation%20of%20borders%20to%20defend%20or%20promote%20the%20interests%20of%20a%20particular%20ethnic%20or%20religious%20group%20in%20the%20city.%20The%20British%20borders%20swung%20in%20a%20wide%20arc%20west%20of%20the%20city%20to%20incorporate%20the%20new%20housing%20estates%20established%20by%20Jewish%20and%20Zionist%20settlers.&f=false
        So the precise figures are difficult to establish. REMEMBER THAT THE INCREASE IN JEWISH POPULATION DIDN’T LEAD TO AN INCREASE IN JEWISH LAND-OWNERSHIP. PALESTINIAN ARABS OWNED MOST OF THE LAND IN AND AROUND JERUSALEM!!!
        All in all we have many incompatible data (different geographical areas and dates taken into account, etc). Not to mention that many accepted population figures are based on Arthur Ruppin works (he was the head of WZO Palestine Office before WWI)- he inflated the number of Jews in Palestine. Read more in: The Politics of Jerusalem Since 1967, by Michael Dumper.
        Or:
        Jerusalem: From the Ottomans to the British, by Roberto Mazza
        McCarthy, Justin. The Population of Palestine: Population History and Statistics of the Late Ottoman Period and the Mandate- just for start.
        There are new works on Palestine during Ottoman Period- worth reading.

      • annie on November 23, 2014, 2:29 pm

        while large numbers of new settlers were being incorporated into the city limits, in the east the municipal borders slid between the walls of the city and the Palestinian villages virtually abutting the walls in order to exclude them. The prime intention of this blatant gerrymandering of the borders was to ensure an electoral advantage of the Jewish community of the city over its Palestinian residents-

        i’m shocked!

      • tree on November 23, 2014, 7:09 pm

        To Zofia,

        Thanks for including that well research info on Jerusalem. I hope you will continue to comment here and do it more often. Your comments are always so informative. What with Hostage being gone from these pages lately, info like yours is especially helpful these days.

        BTW, I’m hoping that Hostage is just taking a short vacation from the comments section, and will rejoin the fray just as Mooser did after an absence of several months.

      • Zofia on November 24, 2014, 8:55 pm

        Tree- your post doesn’t have a reply button, so I am replying here: Thank you very much :) Great answer btw! It is worth mentioning that after Peel commission Zionists (not only Gurion) admitted that they planned to make way for their own vision of a “Jewish state”: for example “population transfers”, etc.; zionist conference at Biltmore hotel is another example of that old strategy (as you and Hostage pointed out: Jews were planning the military conquest of Palestine ever since the mid-1930s). Besides, the UN partition plan envisioned that there would be a Palestinian Arab majority in the “Jewish” part (Arabs=509.780, Jews= 499.020 in Ad Hoc Committee on the Palestinian Question. Report of Sub-Committee 2: unispal.un.org/pdfs/AAC1432.pdf on pade 41)- Zionists knew that very well… Palestinian support for the partition wouldn’t change much regarding Zionist political strategy… Plus, right after the vote Jews attacked Palestinian villages and people. Gurion even ordered to attack the villages that signed a non-aggression pact- he wanted to provoke Palestinians to fight (in Simha Flapan, The Birth of Israel).
        I miss Hostage too, hope he is ok!:)

      • Mooser on November 30, 2014, 12:37 pm

        Gosh, I love Zionist logic, don’t you? So accordiong to a Zionist a “Jewish majority” should result in Jewish control! Now, there’s an idea certain to make Jews welcome everywhere, the more the merrier.
        But, considering our ever-increasing numbers, and the ever more rigid tribal unity and political discipline we possess, I guess the world just better get used to it!

    • seafoid on November 20, 2014, 5:29 pm

      “The Jewish people reject it and they will defend their capital, their nation and their existence at all costs.”

      Spoken like a welfare queen.
      “At all costs” – including your left testicle?
      Would you eat maggots 3 times daily for the rest of your life if you got the calculations wrong ?

      ” Arabs decided to wage a religious war upon Judaism. That too, will end in failure. Arab terror against Israel and its people has been continuing for the past century and is self defeating. Those who kill pious rabbis in cold blood in deep-seated hatred of the Jews have forfeited the right to a state. The massacre at Har Nof is a game changer for the Jewish State, the region and the world.”

      Be a loyal plastic Jewish robot for a world that doesn’t care, Norman
      If the world cared you’d be winning on social media. You aren’t.
      Nobody cares about your revanchist fantasy outside the Hebrew bubble.
      Not even lonely people.

      It’s a common or garden colonial/apartheid struggle. The fact that Jews are involved is distasteful. There is nothing noble of chosen about racism and bigotry, even in a kippa with minyans and dayvans and campervans.

      The Jewish people are way better than your grubby ideology.

      – See more at: http://mondoweiss.net/2014/11/netanyahus-battle-jerusalem/comment-page-1#comment-724116

      • jon s on November 24, 2014, 4:30 pm

        Zofia,
        I agree that population estimates from the Ottoman period are, well, estimates and may not be entirely accurate. Nevertheless, all the figures that I’m aware of estimate a Jewish majority in Jerusalem: a relative majority (a plurality ) from the 1880s and an absolute majority by the end of the century. Those estimates are also consistent with the evolving urban geography , the building of new Jewish neighborhoods outside the Old City walls , such as Yemin Moshe , Nahlat Shiva, Mishkenot Sha’ananim and Me’ah Shearim.

        Here’s a non-Jewish, non-Zionist source, the Baedeker’s guidebook, 1898 edition:

        http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-uanTD0LkTaE/UeIbarvj7PI/AAAAAAAAATg/gMntnv1ZJ7U/s1600/Screen+Shot+2013-07-14+at+1.36.17+PM.png

      • Zofia on November 24, 2014, 9:49 pm

        Jon,
        It all comes down to methodology :) Your screenshot shows that in 1989 there were about 41,000 Jews, the city itself had 60,000. Is there a methodology provided? Ottomans registered only their citizens, other data were mostly regional not urban. If you compare his figures with other- some of them are available in Kark and Oren-Nordheim; U.O.Schmelz; Justin McCarthy books; you will see the big difference between their various sources and his. As I mentioned, Scholch writes that there was a tendency by Zionist scholars (not only) to exaggerate the undercount of non-Ottoman residents in Jerusalem (for example Arthur Ruppin works) and Ottoman censuses had their own methodological problems. There are many incompatible data (different geographical areas and dates taken into account, etc). I would be careful with basing any firm statement on one book, its data is quite different, comparing to others- about that period. About all that read also Roberto Mazza, Michael Dumper, Gudrun Kramer, Yuval Ben-Bassat, and the above mentioned. Also I will repeat: THAT THE INCREASE IN JEWISH POPULATION DIDN’T LEAD TO AN INCREASE IN JEWISH LAND-OWNERSHIP. PALESTINIAN ARABS OWNED MOST OF THE LAND IN AND AROUND JERUSALEM :)
        About those new neighborhoods read Dumper- or earlier post ;] At that time those neighborhoods were new, not that much populated, and the question is: if he considered them as part of the city itself or not (+ Arab neighborhoods too), how did he get to his estimates, etc., because his data is quite different from the other ones that can be found…

    • eljay on November 20, 2014, 5:56 pm

      >> NormanFeee: Of all the peoples in the world, Jews have no right no live …

      Jews have every right to live as people, among people and in societies that practice justice, accountability and equality. Jews have no right – no group of people has a right – to live as supremacists in a supremacist state.

      >> The Jewish people … will defend their capital …

      Jerusalem is not the capital of the Jewish people or of Israel. It’s a free city – a city that belongs to its inhabitants – which has, unfortunately, been occupied by an oppressive, colonialist, expansionist and supremacist “Jewish State” for decades.

      • Horizontal on November 21, 2014, 8:54 am

        Well said, eljay, although I think that Norman’s gone elsewhere for some reason.

      • jon s on November 25, 2014, 1:02 am

        Zofia, You mean 1898.

      • Zofia on November 25, 2014, 9:46 am

        Jon,
        Yes, of course, thank you :)

      • Zofia on November 25, 2014, 2:49 pm

        Jon,
        Yes, of course, thank you :)

    • amigo on November 20, 2014, 6:54 pm

      Of all the peoples in the world, Jews have no right no live – not in Jerusalem which has been the capital of every Jewish kingdom and state throughout history.Norman F

      Every Jewish Kingdom throughout history??.

      Do elaborate Norman.Maps, dates, historical references ,(Torah not accepted).Take all the time you need.

    • just on November 20, 2014, 7:11 pm

      psst Norman– Jewish people live lots and lots and lots of places…

    • Sibiriak on November 20, 2014, 8:17 pm

      NormanF: “The massacre at Har Nof is a game changer for the Jewish State

      ————

      No, the game remains the same. Expand; expel.

    • annie on November 20, 2014, 9:48 pm

      Those who kill pious rabbis in cold blood in deep-seated hatred of the Jews have forfeited the right to a state.

      well since they are dead now that’s sort of a moot point. or do you advocate assigning blame and retribution to all jews for the actions of one, or two?

      btw, i saw a tweet yesterday that might interest you.

      • annie on November 20, 2014, 9:59 pm

        and one more thing norm, how do you know they killed “in deep-seated hatred” for jews? maybe, they sincerely like them because they were civilians and were just trying to get the israeli citizens to change the regime and choose better leaders. i mean isn’t that israel’s excuse for slaughtering thousand of palestinians? pound them with bombs and they’ll choose better leaders? or do you think israel slaughtered so many palestinians because of the “deep-seated hatred” of all their soldiers and their government? or could it be you can only see inside of the mind of palestinians and not israelis. do tell norm.

      • Shingo on November 21, 2014, 2:31 am

        Wow thanks Annie

        Most of us here were probably unaware of that. Israelis killing Palestinians has become part of the peace and calm, but every time Palestinian kill Jews, it’s a pogrom.

      • Kathleen on November 21, 2014, 2:28 pm

        Senseless and brutal killing is very sad which ever side of this issue that it happens on. One can understand Palestinians pent up anger over loss of enormous amounts of lives, homes, land, jobs, trees etc. Persistent humiliation ..death of relatives in mass often turns into anger and violence. Not hard to understand but still horrific and wrong .

        Wondering if the houses of the Israeli citizens who burnt that Palestinian kid to death were bulldozed? Oh yeah different rules apply when Israeli citizens or soldiers commit cold blooded murder.

    • RobertB on November 21, 2014, 8:54 am

      Top Ten Reasons East Jerusalem does not belong to Jewish-Israelis

      By Juan Cole

      So here are the reasons that Netanyahu is profoundly wrong, and East Jerusalem does not belong to him.

      “1. In international law, East Jerusalem is occupied territory, as are the parts of the West Bank that Israel unilaterally annexed to its district of Jerusalem. The Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949 and the Hague Regulations of 1907 forbid occupying powers to alter the lifeways of civilians who are occupied, and forbid the settling of people from the occupiers’ country in the occupied territory. Israel’s expulsion of Palestinians from their homes in East Jerusalem, its usurpation of Palestinian property there, and its settling of Israelis on Palestinian land are all gross violations of international law. Israeli claims that they are not occupying Palestinians because the Palestinians have no state are cruel and tautological. Israeli claims that they are building on empty territory are laughable. My back yard is empty, but that does not give Netanyahu the right to put up an apartment complex on it.

      2. Israeli governments have not in fact been united or consistent about what to do with East Jerusalem and the West Bank, contrary to what Netanyahu says. The Galili Plan for settlements in the West Bank was adopted only in 1973. Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin gave undertakings as part of the Oslo Peace Process to withdraw from Palestinian territory and grant Palestinians a state, promises for which he was assassinated by the Israeli far right (elements of which are now supporting Netanyahu’s government). As late as 2000, then Prime Minister Ehud Barak claims that he gave oral assurances that Palestinians could have almost all of the West Bank and could have some arrangement by which East Jerusalem could be its capital. Netanyahu tried to give the impression that far rightwing Likud policy on East Jerusalem and the West Bank has been shared by all previous Israeli governments, but this is simply not true.

      3. Romantic nationalism imagines a “people” as eternal and as having an eternal connection with a specific piece of land. This way of thinking is fantastic and mythological. Peoples are formed and change and sometimes cease to be, though they might have descendants who abandoned that religion or ethnicity or language. Human beings have moved all around and are not directly tied to any territory in an exclusive way, since many groups have lived on most pieces of land. Jerusalem was not founded by Jews, i.e. adherents of the Jewish religion. It was founded between 3000 BCE and 2600 BCE by a West Semitic people or possibly the Canaanites, the common ancestors of Palestinians, Lebanese, many Syrians and Jordanians, and many Jews. But when it was founded Jews did not exist.

      4. Jerusalem was founded in honor of the ancient god Shalem. It does not mean City of Peace but rather ‘built-up place of Shalem.”

      5. The “Jewish people” were not building Jerusalem 3000 years ago, i.e. 1000 BCE. First of all, it is not clear when exactly Judaism as a religion centered on the worship of the one God took firm form. It appears to have been a late development since no evidence of worship of anything but ordinary Canaanite deities has been found in archeological sites through 1000 BCE. There was no invasion of geographical Palestine from Egypt by former slaves in the 1200s BCE. The pyramids had been built much earlier and had not used slave labor. The chronicle of the events of the reign of Ramses II on the wall in Luxor does not know about any major slave revolts or flights by same into the Sinai peninsula. Egyptian sources never heard of Moses or the 10 plagues & etc. Jews and Judaism emerged from a certain social class of Canaanites over a period of centuries inside Palestine. (See Daniel Lazare’s Harper’s article on the archeological disproof of the Bible, preserved at this website (I am not endorsing the web site).

      6. Jerusalem not only was not being built by the likely then non-existent “Jewish people” in 1000 BCE, but Jerusalem probably was not even inhabited at that point in history. Jerusalem appears to have been abandoned between 1000 BCE and 900 BCE, the traditional dates for the united kingdom under David and Solomon. So Jerusalem was not ‘the city of David,’ since there was no city when he is said to have lived. No sign of magnificent palaces or great states has been found in the archeology of this period, and the Assyrian tablets, which recorded even minor events throughout the Middle East, such as the actions of Arab queens, don’t know about any great kingdom of David and Solomon in geographical Palestine.

      7. Since archeology does not show the existence of a Jewish kingdom or kingdoms in the so-called First Temple Period, it is not clear when exactly the Jewish people would have ruled Jerusalem except for the Hasmonean Kingdom. The Assyrians conquered Jerusalem in 722. The Babylonians took it in 597 and ruled it until they were themselves conquered in 539 BCE by the Achaemenids of ancient Iran, who ruled Jerusalem until Alexander the Great took the Levant in the 330s BCE. Alexander’s descendants, the Ptolemies ruled Jerusalem until 198 when Alexander’s other descendants, the Seleucids, took the city. With the Maccabean Revolt in 168 BCE, the Jewish Hasmonean kingdom did rule Jerusalem until 37 BCE, though Antigonus II Mattathias, the last Hasmonean, only took over Jerusalem with the help of the Parthian dynasty in 40 BCE. Herod ruled 37 BCE until the Romans conquered what they called Palestine in 6 CE (CE= ‘Common Era’ or what Christians call AD). The Romans and then the Eastern Roman Empire of Byzantium ruled Jerusalem from 6 CE until 614 CE when the Iranian Sasanian Empire Conquered it, ruling until 629 CE when the Byzantines took it back.

      The Muslims conquered Jerusalem in 638 and ruled it until 1099 when the Crusaders conquered it. The Crusaders killed or expelled Jews and Muslims from the city. The Muslims under Saladin took it back in 1187 CE and allowed Jews to return, and Muslims ruled it until the end of World War I, or altogether for about 1192 years.

      Adherents of Judaism did not found Jerusalem. It existed for perhaps 2700 years before anything we might recognize as Judaism arose. Jewish rule may have been no longer than 170 years or so, i.e., the kingdom of the Hasmoneans.

      8. Therefore if historical building of Jerusalem and historical connection with Jerusalem establishes sovereignty over it as Netanyahu claims, here are the groups that have the greatest claim to the city:

      A. The Muslims, who ruled it and built it over 1191 years.

      B. The Egyptians, who ruled it as a vassal state for several hundred years in the second millennium BCE.

      C. The Italians, who ruled it about 444 years until the fall of the Roman Empire in 450 CE.

      D. The Iranians, who ruled it for 205 years under the Achaemenids, for three years under the Parthians (insofar as the last Hasmonean was actually their vassal), and for 15 years under the Sasanids.

      E. The Greeks, who ruled it for over 160 years if we count the Ptolemys and Seleucids as Greek. If we count them as Egyptians and Syrians, that would increase the Egyptian claim and introduce a Syrian one.

      F. The successor states to the Byzantines, which could be either Greece or Turkey, who ruled it 188 years, though if we consider the heir to be Greece and add in the time the Hellenistic Greek dynasties ruled it, that would give Greece nearly 350 years as ruler of Jerusalem.

      G. There is an Iraqi claim to Jerusalem based on the Assyrian and Babylonian conquests, as well as perhaps the rule of the Ayyubids (Saladin’s dynasty), who were Kurds from Iraq.

      9. Of course, Jews are historically connected to Jerusalem by the Temple, whenever that connection is dated to. But that link mostly was pursued when Jews were not in political control of the city, under Iranian, Greek and Roman rule. It cannot therefore be deployed to make a demand for political control of the whole city.

      10. The Jews of Jerusalem and the rest of Palestine did not for the most part leave after the failure of the Bar Kochba revolt against the Romans in 136 CE. They continued to live there and to farm in Palestine under Roman rule and then Byzantine. They gradually converted to Christianity. After 638 CE all but 10 percent gradually converted to Islam. The present-day Palestinians are the descendants of the ancient Jews and have every right to live where their ancestors have lived for centuries.”

      http://www.juancole.com/2010/03/top-ten-reasons-east-jerusalem-does-not.html

      • just on November 21, 2014, 1:25 pm

        There you have it.

        Easy to read and grasp~ IF your brain isn’t warped.

        thank you, RobertB and Prof Cole.

      • Kathleen on November 21, 2014, 2:34 pm

        Cole almost always nails it. thanks for sharing this I missed it over at one of the best websites going..along with Mondoweiss, Emptywheel’s, Intercept.

        “3. Romantic nationalism imagines a “people” as eternal and as having an eternal connection with a specific piece of land. This way of thinking is fantastic and mythological. Peoples are formed and change and sometimes cease to be, though they might have descendants who abandoned that religion or ethnicity or language. Human beings have moved all around and are not directly tied to any territory in an exclusive way, since many groups have lived on most pieces of land. Jerusalem was not founded by Jews, i.e. adherents of the Jewish religion. It was founded between 3000 BCE and 2600 BCE by a West Semitic people or possibly the Canaanites, the common ancestors of Palestinians, Lebanese, many Syrians and Jordanians, and many Jews. But when it was founded Jews did not exist. “-

        This one really gets to me. What other group of people on the planet have tried to lay claim to a piece of land based on alleged holding of land over centuries ago?

      • Mooser on November 21, 2014, 3:45 pm

        Gee, why can’t the Jewish religious significance of Jerusalem be in giving it up? Works for me, and agrees with reality.
        Oh, wait, that wouldn’t get control of the city, would it? It would probably result in invitations to pray there, but what religion, what “normalized”, “self-determined” and (pace Yonah) “self-emancipated” religion would be satisfied with that?

      • wondering jew on November 21, 2014, 4:00 pm

        mooser- self emancipation is a pamphlet that was written by pinsker in 1881. very imperfect, flawed, but clairvoyant. but in 2014 the politics of 1881 is the topic of jokes and nonsense from you, so i offer this sentence with trepidation.

      • American on November 21, 2014, 5:24 pm

        ”self emancipation is a pamphlet that was written by pinsker in 1881. very imperfect, flawed, but clairvoyant. but in 2014 the politics of 1881 ”….. yonah

        Easy to see why you are so messed up.
        You cant deconstruct the pilpul. What Pinsker is saying:
        Is that Jews had to renounce some of *their own nationality*–do you understand what that means?—it means Pinsker viewed Jews as a *nationality* before he came to even seeing the need for a Jewish state piece of real estate.
        Then he goes to say that only when Jews are treated as a respected ‘nationality as other nations are can Jews be secure.
        Of course he blames the others of the nations for the Jewish plight because they dont treat Jews as ‘one of them’ in their nations AND at the same time respect them as individuals that are also a separate Jewish nation.
        Do you not see the dog chasing its tail problem here?
        You cannot be accepted on a equal or un-different status by other nationals if you have a belief that you are ‘still a separate or different ‘nation unto yourselves’ even if you assimilate into a nation in all other ways.
        This is exactly the point of debate between Jews and Rabbis during the Enlightenment when citizenship was offered them. They wanted the citizenship privileges but did not want to give up the claim that Jews comprised a ‘Jewish nation” that would have to follow some of its own laws instead of the nations laws.
        Now you have taken the formerly un-anchored to a piece of land Jewish nation and anchored it to the nation of Israel in Palestine.
        From where all Jews are told they are citizens of the ‘Jewish nation’ regardless of where they live.
        The circle keeps going round and round.

        http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Auto-Emancipation

        ”In seeking to fuse with other peoples they deliberately renounced to some extent their own nationality.
        Yet nowhere did they succeed in obtaining from their fellow-citizens recognition as natives of equal status

        .The world has yet long to wait for eternal peace. Meanwhile nations live side by side in a state of relative peace, secured by treaties and international law, but based chiefly on the fundamental equality between them.

        But it is different with the people of Israel. There is no such equality in the nations’ dealings with the Jews. The basis is absent upon which treaties and international law may be applied: mutual respect. Only when this basis is established, when the equality of Jews with other nations becomes a fact, can the Jewish problem be considered solved”

      • Mooser on November 21, 2014, 5:55 pm

        “but in 2014 the politics of 1881 is the topic of jokes and nonsense from you, so i offer this sentence with trepidation “

        I hardly think a person who announces their own personal commenting standards suffers from trepidation! Tropophobia, perhaps or Tocophobia, but “trepidation” you don’t got, Yonah. Nice word, tho.

        Anyway, 1881 is a very important year in Jewish history! It’s the year the Reform denomination was started by Rabbi Wiess, and went on to become the largest and most active denomination in Judaism! No, there’s no “nonsense” about 1881.

        Okay, what happened at the 1883 banquet, when the first class of Reform Rabbis was graduated from Rabbi Wise’s seminary is not my fault, and I do not approve of it. It was unfair and sorta cruel. Do you happen to have a video? I’d love to see it.

      • Mooser on November 21, 2014, 6:03 pm

        “This is exactly the point of debate between Jews and Rabbis during the Enlightenment when citizenship was offered them. They wanted the citizenship privileges but did not want to give up the claim that Jews comprised a ‘Jewish nation” that would have to follow some of its own laws instead of the nations laws.”

        See, American, when that happened, (Jews were offered political emancipation by the countries they live in) guess who loses the position they have? The position of being the intermediaries between the Jews and Gentile power structure. So when the States offered political emancipation, the only way those people could claim any authority was by persuasion and exterting moral influence. Gentiles would no longer help them to control Jews. And this was going to leave some people in a bad spot.
        Zionism isn’t just something Jews do to “Arabs”. Zionism is something Jews do to each other.

      • JohnB on November 23, 2014, 9:51 pm

        Rilly RonB ? Fascinating.

        It is my understanding that a recent wide sampling (DNA) of the current occupants of Jerusalem indicated less genetic connection to any ‘ancient Jews’ than might (likely would) be found in a typical Scandinavian,. The whole anti-Semitic thing seems like windweaving – name calling on the level of children. Aren’t the ‘Palestinians’ Semitic?

      • Mooser on November 30, 2014, 12:45 pm

        “connection to any ‘ancient Jews’ than might (likely would) be found in a typical Scandinavian,.”

        No wonder bagels and lox are as popular as lutefisk and lefthsa in Poulsbo, Wa.!
        Another NW mystery solved.

    • Abierno on November 21, 2014, 10:54 am

      To change your quote somewhat: “Those who kill innocent women, children, the disabled, the elderly and infirm in cold blood in deep-seated hatred of the Muslims have forfeited the right to a state. The series of massacres in Gaza (Operations Cast Lead, Pillar of Fire, Protective Edge)
      are a game changer – for the emerging Palestinian state, the region and the world.”

    • JohnB on November 23, 2014, 9:02 pm

      Piffle$nortz

  15. DaBakr on November 20, 2014, 1:47 pm

    “the battle for jerusalem” has been invoked by every single Arab leader since 1948 in 1000s of speeches, propaganda literature and rallying cries of government and not-governmental militias, (and many Muslim leaders have invoked it as as well) and now when Netanyahu invokes it its suddenly “blood curdling” . hmm. Is it equally as blood curdling when Arabs and Muslims say it, I wonder? Hopefully-as the world understands that the reality is all religions have the right to pray in their holy sites and have been since 1967 there will be no need to fear any type of violence in the cause of ‘liberating’ that which is already free.

    • just on November 20, 2014, 9:00 pm

      hyperbole, much? you are funny, though.

      sort of like NormanF above…

    • annie on November 20, 2014, 9:26 pm

      invoked by every single Arab leader since 1948

      can you link to musharraf. can you link to murarak. can you link to Bakr al-Baghdadi. what about abdullah of jordan.

      and what’s ‘every’ arab leader got to do with the leader of the cruel sadistic oppressive apartheid government ruling over jerusalem go to do with any of them anyway? are you comparing the leader of a country backed by the superpower with ..whom?

      he’s a bloviator just.

      • just on November 20, 2014, 11:14 pm

        “he’s a bloviator just.”

        exactly!

    • Mooser on November 21, 2014, 9:58 am

      “the battle for jerusalem” has been invoked by every single Arab leader since 1948 in 1000s of speeches”

      Yes, Norman al F calls the faithful to battle in his comment above.

      • just on November 21, 2014, 1:21 pm

        Norma al F….

        lol.

      • Mooser on November 21, 2014, 3:58 pm

        “just” every time I think that modren American life moves too fast, and change comes with dizzying rapidity, and the world is in love with the new, I return to the comment section in Mondoweiss, there to reassure myself that for some people, the same old Hasbara crap is just as good as it ever was.
        There I find stability, and an unchanging ideology.
        And the verities are always honored, the great unifiers of Hasbara are always evident, to witless:

        1) Israel rocks
        2) Arabs suck
        3)You suck
        4)Everything sucks

        Ahh! As comforting and constant as the “four questions” in the Hagaddah!!

  16. Kay24 on November 20, 2014, 2:18 pm

    So EIGHT US officials are carrying the water for Israel by attacking their own President, and the WH’s halting Israel’s dirty spy Pollard from getting parole.

    Eight senior U.S. officials have attacked the Obama administration for the “unjust denial of parole” for convicted spy Jonathan Pollard, calling the charge the government uses to keep him imprisoned “patently false.”

    A U.S. Justice Department parole board denied a recent request to free the convicted spy for Israel, according to the Committee to Free Jonathan Pollard.

    Pollard, who has repeatedly been denied requests for parole or for his sentence to be commuted, recently asked to be released under restricted conditions.

    “The defense and intelligence officials, including former CIA director James Woolsey, former Assistant U.S. Defense Secretary Lawrence J. Korb and former U.S. National Security Advisor Robert C. MacFarlane, sent a letter to U.S. President Barack Obama last week, asking him to commute Pollard’s life sentence.”

    http://www.haaretz.com/jewish-world/jewish-world-news/1.627616

    What is all this about? Shekels being used to get Pollard out of shackles? The mere fact that American leaders are going against their own President/country by pleading for the release for a spy who betrayed his country for an alien nation, simply shows an alien nation jerking chains and making American leaders dance. It would be interesting if they did the same say for a spy from Iran or Russia.

    • a blah chick on November 20, 2014, 2:49 pm

      “Shekels being used to get Pollard out of shackles”

      Kay, honey, you need to copyright that right away! “Shackles instead of Shekels!”

      Mondo-ites would probably buy you out.

      • Kay24 on November 20, 2014, 3:54 pm

        Ha, ha, Blah Chick I wish I could get rich so simply like that. I did like the way that came out too.:))

      • Kathleen on November 21, 2014, 2:45 pm

        Have read that there is a sizable group of individuals in the intelligence community who would go ballistic if Pollard were ever to be released. Part of his deal was based on all materials used to prosecute him went into the shadows. Sure that many would demand that the full story of just what Pollard did and the scope and scale of how his traitorous actions undermined US national security

        The Arguments For And Against Releasing Jonathan Pollard

        http://www.npr.org/…/the-arguments-for-and-against-releasing-jonathan-p

        Why Jonathan Pollard Got Life :: Middle East Quarterly – Middle …

        http://www.meforum.org/355/why-jonathan-pollard-got-life

        “Life imprisonment is apparently the harshest punishment ever meted out to someone found guilty of spying during peace time. Indeed, since the execution of Julius and Ethel Rosenberg in 1953, during the Korean War, no spy has received a harsher sentence, even during war time. The severity of Pollard’s sentence is in itself noteworthy.

        It is all the more so in light of two other factors. First, Pollard did not stand trial for his crime. Rather, he received his life sentence after entering into a plea-bargain agreement in which the government promised not to seek a life sentence. Entering into that agreement, Pollard relinquished his right to a trial, cooperated with government investigators, pleaded guilty — all, presumably, with the expectation that some leniency would be shown in his sentence. The expectation was reasonable, but it proved illusory. Secondly, Pollard was sentenced to life in prison despite the fact that he was never accused of delivering classified information to an enemy of the United States. Rather, he was accused of delivering such information to Israel, a close and staunch American ally. There may be no other case of a life sentence imposed for spying on behalf of a strategic ally.

        All of these factors lead one to assume that there must have been something extraordinary about Pollard’s crime — that it caused damage to the United States of such enormous magnitude as to justify a life sentence, after a plea bargain, for committing peace time espionage on behalf of an ally. What could that enormous damage have been?

        THE CRIMINAL INDICTMENT

        The logical starting place to find an answer would be the June 1986 criminal indictment, in which the government detailed its charges against Pollard. Yet the indictment provides nary a clue. On the contrary, it strongly implies that Pollard’s actions were not perceived as having caused great harm to American interests.

        Specifically, the indictment charges Pollard with violating 18 U.S.C. § 794 (c), the Federal law that makes it a crime to deliver defense information to a foreign government “with intent or reason to believe” that the information is to be used in one of two ways: “to the injury of the United States”, or, alternatively, “to the advantage of a foreign nation.” In its charge against Pollard, the government did not cite the first prong of the statute; rather, the charge against him simply cited the second prong, alleging that he had “intent and reason to believe that the [information] would be used to the advantage of ISRAEL.”2

        To be sure, the espionage statute contemplates no legal distinction between spying for an enemy, which clearly would satisfy the “to the injury of the United States” prong of the law, and spying for an ally; both are theoretically subject to the same penalties. But legal equivalence is not moral equivalence. Disclosing classified information to a friendly state, though a serious offense, obviously involves much less moral culpability than disclosing the same information to an enemy. The government’s decision not to charge Pollard with intending to harm the United States thus gave him good reason to anticipate something less than a life sentence; when he pled guilty to the charge of espionage “to the advantage of a foreign nation,” it was entirely rational to assume that the court would show some leniency in sentencing.

        Between the time of the plea bargain in May 1986 and the time of sentencing ten months later, however, the government sang quite a different tune. And it was in the Victim Impact Statement (VIS), obtained recently by Pollard as part of his pre-sentence interview report,3 that the government appears to have first started that change”

    • Horizontal on November 20, 2014, 6:20 pm

      Kay, I think your post illustrates nicely that what we used to think of as nation states are longer the main identifying link to our class of political elites. Common bonds like power, wealth, racism and xenophobia have replaced the old ones of Mom & Apple Pie.

      Of course, these same flag-waving jingos will loudly deny this, but to me, actions speak louder than words.

      BTW, I hope Pollard rots where he is.

      • American on November 20, 2014, 7:13 pm

        Horizontal…..
        ” Common bonds like power, wealth, racism and xenophobia have replaced the old ones of Mom & Apple Pie. -”……..

        Mom and apple pie reminds me, Jim Webb may run for President

        2016 Presidential race kicks off with Jim Webb
        http://www.cnn.com/2014/11/20/politics/jim-webb-2016-exploratory-committee-president/index.html?hpt=po_c2

        Maybe a Scots-Irishman with a temper can solve our Israel problem.
        I like him.
        The liberals hate him, the conservatives hate him, the elites hate him and the Zionist hate him.
        He’s perfect.

      • just on November 20, 2014, 8:21 pm

        HAH!

        I have been hoping so for a long time now~ especially when not one dem stood up and against the Gaza massacre.

        thanks, American.

      • Citizen on November 21, 2014, 12:13 am

        @ American

        Jim Webb is the right person; you’re right –all that sort of ilk hate him.

      • Kay24 on November 21, 2014, 9:11 am

        I agree that Pollard should rot where he is. He should be made into an example to other traitors, who are in bed with alien nations, especially with a supposed “ally”.

        American leaders have become susceptible to the influences exerted by a now considered deadly doctrine called zionism. They will even turn on their own leadership and undermine American policies, to do the bidding of this dangerous group. If the Obama administration has decided it is not in the best interest of the US to release this rat, then I think the entire country must support it, not act like mindless puppets. As I mentioned before you will not find these so called distinguished ex officials of this nation extending such concern if the rat was an Iranian or Russian one.

      • Horizontal on November 21, 2014, 9:16 am

        Well at least he opposed these resolutions when he was in the senate.

        S. Res. 138: (-) calling on the United Nations to rescind the Goldstone report, formally known as the UN Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict, which accused the Israeli government of targeting Palestinian civilians.

        S. Res. 185: (-) reaffirming the commitment of the US to a negotiated settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and calling for a US veto of any UN resolution on Palestinian statehood without a settlement.

        S. Con. Res. 23: (-) supporting Israel in maintaining defensible borders, and against Israel returning to the armistice lines that existed on June 4, 1967

        ontheissues.org

        At this point, anyone who can light a fire under Hilliary’s tail feathers and help nudge her party to the left is a good thing. Webb’s touting of his Vietnam-era military background I found a bit off-putting, as this to me seemed like a no-brainer to oppose, but, being a long time ago, I’m willing to give the man a listen.

        The democratic machine still has a lot of power, and these are the geniuses who gave us Kerry over Dean, and Hilliary, ugh, currently holds the keys to that machine.

    • just on November 20, 2014, 8:27 pm

      “Shekels being used to get Pollard out of shackles”

      brilliant. i’m stealing it, if i may.

      • Kathleen on November 21, 2014, 2:49 pm

        Thanks Horizontal. Interesting.

  17. Walid on November 20, 2014, 2:50 pm

    Silverstein is repeating seafood’s train wreck analogy:

    “Like Casey Jones of the American folk-myth, we are on a train careening down a mountain grade after losing our brakes. Furiously blowing the whistle to warn bystanders to get out of the way won’t help. We are headed for disaster and no one will be spared. It’s only a matter of time before it happens.”

    In addition to Phil’s take on where Zionism is dragging Judaism, Silverstein has an opinion along the same lines:

    http://www.richardsilverstein.com/2014/11/18/terror-rules-jerusalem/#comments

  18. g-minor on November 20, 2014, 3:11 pm

    I hope someone in Palestine/Israel is investigating the connections of the synagogue murderers. This is all just too convenient for Netanyahu, just as the recent alleged ISIS beheading is ever so convenient for Obama. Muslims and Arabs are being demonized and the Zionists and their US allies are turning up the volume. Please don’t tell me I’m a conspiracy theorist. It is well-known that Israel’s Mossad is connected to ISIS.

    • just on November 20, 2014, 8:16 pm

      anything is possible, for sure.

    • Horizontal on November 21, 2014, 9:20 am

      It is well-known that Israel’s Mossad is connected to ISIS.

      It’s also well known that Israel’s Mossad is connected to Israel. I think that’s enough.

      • Mooser on November 21, 2014, 10:00 am

        Well, since Israel shot a couple of Palestinians, declared them guilty, and there’s an end to finding out the truth.

      • Horizontal on November 21, 2014, 5:59 pm

        This is definitely one area where Occam’s Razor doesn’t shave close.

    • Kay24 on November 21, 2014, 11:21 am

      Anything is possible. A couple of things stand out – Israel seems unconcerned about ISIS, does not refer much to it and as usual does not have their precious armed forces, joining the US in this fight. ISIS is supposed to be threat t the entire region, and Israel seems to not worry about that. The US and Israel may be involved in far too many problems than we realize, and when we finally learn about it, it is always too late.

      • just on November 21, 2014, 1:20 pm

        yep.

        the only thing that #JSIL has done is try (unsuccessfully!) to morph them with Hamas.

        as if!

    • Kathleen on November 21, 2014, 2:56 pm

      Mossad has been tracked to some damn twisted and horrific actions. But do you have any sources for what you are claiming? Finally the talking heads in the Mainstream are bringing up the fact that many of the leaders in ISIS were part of the leadership in Saddam’s Army that Paul Bremmer disbanded for the neocons after the invasion. Putting hundreds of thousands of Iraq government employees out on the streets. As well as privatizing ownership of much of Iraq’s oil industry.

      One just has to wonder if the whole deal was to purposely turn the different factions in Iraq, Syria in on themselves. Sort of a much larger Sabra and Shatilla. Disassemble (divide and conquer), provide an environment for self destruction between these different factions. Just not sure how this would provide the US or Israel with much except the privatization of resources.

  19. gracie fr on November 20, 2014, 3:28 pm

    Today we have an unprecedented convergence of Mitel Europa political Zionism with radical religion-driven settler Zionism, a melding of epic proportions……
    At the beginning of July 1967, David Ben-Gurion spoke at Beit Berl, the “think tank” of the Israeli Labor party. He had about him the air of a prophet who had walked out of his tent to die, but had paused on this last journey to tell truths which the less farsighted could not see and which only a man possessed by the spirit would dare tell. He warned his listeners against the euphoria that had swept the Jewish world in the aftermath of the Six Day War. Ben-Gurion insisted that all of the territories that had been captured had to be given back, very quickly, for holding on to them would distort, and might ultimately destroy, the Jewish state. He made only one exception of consequence: the Israelis should not relinquish control of the whole of Jerusalem. Ben-Gurion’s most striking assertion that night was that he did not expect immediate peace with the Arabs; for its own inner health, he said, Israel needed only to give back the territories very soon in return for a workable set of armistice arrangements.

    http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/1987/may/28/israel-the-tragedy-of-victory/?pagination=false

    • eljay on November 20, 2014, 3:41 pm

      >> gracie fr: … Ben-Gurion insisted that all of the territories that had been captured had to be given back, very quickly, for holding on to them would distort, and might ultimately destroy, the Jewish state.

      Oppressive, colonialist, expansionist and supremacist “Jewish State” was already a distortion. What Ben-Gurion should have said was that holding onto the captured territories would further distort it. (And it has.)

    • piotr on November 20, 2014, 5:38 pm

      Do you mean Mitteleuropa ? In English there is a difference between “midling” and “middling”.

      • amigo on November 20, 2014, 7:30 pm

        ” In English there is a difference between “midling” and “middling”Piotr

        Zionists might refer to it as ,”MeddlingEuropa”.

  20. gracie fr on November 20, 2014, 3:28 pm

    Today we have an unprecedented convergence of Mitel Europa political Zionism with radical religion-driven settler Zionism, a melding of epic proportions……

    At the beginning of July 1967, David Ben-Gurion spoke at Beit Berl, the “think tank” of the Israeli Labor party. He had about him the air of a prophet who had walked out of his tent to die, but had paused on this last journey to tell truths which the less farsighted could not see and which only a man possessed by the spirit would dare tell. He warned his listeners against the euphoria that had swept the Jewish world in the aftermath of the Six Day War. Ben-Gurion insisted that all of the territories that had been captured had to be given back, very quickly, for holding on to them would distort, and might ultimately destroy, the Jewish state. He made only one exception of consequence: the Israelis should not relinquish control of the whole of Jerusalem. Ben-Gurion’s most striking assertion that night was that he did not expect immediate peace with the Arabs; for its own inner health, he said, Israel needed only to give back the territories very soon in return for a workable set of armistice arrangements.

    http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/1987/may/28/israel-the-tragedy-of-victory/?pagination=false

    • seafoid on November 20, 2014, 4:05 pm

      Thanks for the link. Really interesting

      1987. the religious fruitcakes were small minority
      Skinny little Nancy Callahan had grown up, filled out but in Israel
      Skinny little religious fascists had grown up and taken over the country.

      “Did not Menachem Begin win the election of 1981 by proclaiming himself to be the leader of the “national camp,” thus relegating all of those who were more moderate to the semitreasonable fringes?”

      Reminds me of an FT article about Ian Paisley

      http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/10b88bdc-cdd6-11e2-a13e-00144feab7de.html
      “By playing on the fears of ordinary Protestants he prevented more moderate unionist leaders from instigating the reforms that might have prevented the onset of community violence in the late 1960s.
      With his booming voice and intemperate oratory he symbolized the intransigence of Ulster’s dominant community ”

      He must have shared psychiatric symptoms with Netanyahu and Begin .

      And the Protestants in Ulster coasted just like the Jews of Israel coast today
      http://virtualmethodist.blogspot.ch/2009/09/coasters.html

      • gracie fr on November 20, 2014, 4:16 pm

        So sorry for the unintentional double post….these things happen.

        Your right about Begin Seafoid. From his lofty perch in government, he started the ball rolling and now we have an avalanche…..

      • seafoid on November 20, 2014, 5:02 pm

        That 77 election victory was so significant.
        They got the ball rolling as you say and they eventually took over.
        Begin was another sad excuse for a human. Trauma drove him.
        And he ended up a broken man.

      • Mooser on November 20, 2014, 5:03 pm

        And yet, the Zionists were willing to accept the status as Jerusalem as an international city when they accepted the UN partition? But by 67′ Jerusalem was the center of everything. Oh well, looks like the declination took a wild swing.

      • Horizontal on November 21, 2014, 9:27 am

        seafoid ~

        Your mention of The Troubles is relevant here, as we all recall what ultimately allowed a negotiated settlement, as well as peace, to be reached: Including the terrorist group Sinn Fein into the discussions.

        Amazing that the US ,who successfully brokered that deal, wouldn’t think of applying the same logic in reaching out to Hamas in order to settle “The Troubles” in Palestine.

        Maybe amazing isn’t the right word, as several others quickly come to mind.

  21. Chu on November 20, 2014, 3:48 pm

    Jonestown needs another city to conquer to avoid any self-reflection, and coming to grips the notion that their entire state is one massive land grab spanning 70+ years.

    Wow, how interesting is Israel and all it’s excuses. Israeli Strategy : how they get things, make excuses and obfuscation., Safety is Occupation, Up is Down, War is Peace.

  22. seafoid on November 20, 2014, 3:54 pm

    Yeah

    Jerusalem is like so TOTALLY Jewish that they have to buy the entire US Congress to get someone outside the Hebrew Bubble to say the words.
    It is SO Jewish that the first sound tourists hear every morning is the call to prayer !
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S_e7RnFW8jk

    La allah ila allah means “I don’t take orders from no Zionist”

    So Jewish that the most beautiful building in the city is a mosque.

    So Jewish that torture is the only way to keep the bullshit going

    • Kay24 on November 20, 2014, 4:00 pm

      Speaking of calls to prayer, I just wanted to share this beautiful one from inside a Church!
      I think it was a multi-religioius service and it looks awesome:

      • Kate on November 20, 2014, 4:16 pm

        Lovely, Kay24, thank you!

      • Kate on November 20, 2014, 4:19 pm

        Note that ‘Come to success’ in the call to prayer means ‘Come to salvation’.

      • ritzl on November 20, 2014, 7:03 pm

        Thanks, Kay.

      • just on November 20, 2014, 8:10 pm

        oh, thank you Kay…

      • Walid on November 21, 2014, 12:26 am

        You’ll surely like this too, Kay, a simultaneous muezzin’s call to prayer with the Ave Maria sung by the Lebanese Tania Kassis and meuzzins Farès Massad and Maan Zakaria at the Olympia; in Lebanon on very special occasions, you can hear the moving overlapping chime of the church bells with the calls from the mosques:

      • annie on November 21, 2014, 12:32 am

        this is so beautiful walid, i am listening now

      • annie on November 21, 2014, 12:41 am

        this is seriously addicting. i highly recommend listening to this on full screen. i’m bookmarking this.

      • annie on November 21, 2014, 2:27 am

        Tania Kassis “people of the world – save jerusalem”

      • annie on November 21, 2014, 3:22 am

        thank you kay, really beautiful

      • Walid on November 21, 2014, 3:37 am

        Annie, in the video you posted, Tania Kassis sings about Jerusalem being the city of the cross, the crescent and the star. Among the scenes in the video, is one of Jews at the wailing wall.

        Getting back to the Ave Maria video, if you look close enough, you’d see that the star is also represented. I think the third religion was subliminally represented and rightly so since it was the fountainhead of the other two. Maybe it’s wishful thinking on my part.

      • seafoid on November 21, 2014, 6:50 am

        Walid

        That Christian/Muslim video is zay el eshta as they say in umadunia. A sign of what can be.
        Magnificent
        Like the polar opposite of Zionism. Such a miserable runt of a political culture.

        Jewish history has all been about sharing with other cultures- where did the food develop out of, FFS ? Was it all written down in the Torah ?

        Nothing like cooking spices in schmaltz and then throwing in a few onions to bring out the flavour- why did Judaism become so insular ?

        In a similar vein to Tania here’s a Hindu/Muslim celebration

        Nusrat Fatih ali Khan (Pakistani) sings a song about the Hindu God Krishna in Urdu
        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GeQuiyjs648

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanson_Ki_Mala_Pe

        Sanson Ki Mala Pe (literally: On the rosary of breath) is a bhajan originally sung by Meerabai (c. 1498 – c. 1557 AD), a Rajput princess and a Hindu mystic from Rajasthan in praise of Lord Krishna. The song has been sung by many famous artists, and is one of the most popular songs of legendary vocalist, Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan and was first played by Khan when he first visited India in 1979.

      • Kay24 on November 21, 2014, 8:10 am

        Walid, that was absolutely wonderful. It is so moving. I loved it! I must send it to all my friends.
        This is what I want to see happen in the world, the coming together of religions, in song, in verse, whatever it takes. Thank you for posting.

      • just on November 21, 2014, 8:35 am

        ethereal. thanks, Walid.

      • Horizontal on November 21, 2014, 9:34 am

        Beautiful.

        Anything that can bring people together from the heart should be the true reflection of religious belief. All else is a perversion of that one pure goal.

      • annie on November 21, 2014, 7:23 pm

        yes walid, of course i noticed that at the beginning of the video they open w/the 3 religions represented and it’s also spelled out in the lyrics. (star cross and crescent).

        and ava maria i don’t think it’s just wishful thinking. it is a distinct 6 pointed star. it’s likely intentional.

    • just on November 20, 2014, 8:11 pm

      well said, seafoid.

      • just on November 20, 2014, 8:13 pm

        that was in response to your comment @ 3:54, seafoid.

        thx for the video as well.

      • Kathleen on November 21, 2014, 3:05 pm

        Thank you kay and Walid for the clips. Beautiful. Remember feeling high in Catholic church as a child during high masses with the singing and chanting in Latin. Not a believer but sure appreciate people’s faiths if they stay peaceful.

      • Walid on November 21, 2014, 6:46 pm

        Kathleen, Ave Maria that you had to recite before the start of classes every morning came under different versions: Mozart, Schubert, Brahms, Donizetti, Mendelssohn, Gounod and a dozen others and all of them very nice but my favourite is the one by Schubert, especially as sung by the late Pavarotti in 78 at Montreal’s beautiful Notre-Dame Basilica.

      • annie on November 21, 2014, 7:04 pm

        hi walid. i tried fixing it .. well, couldn’t find that one. but i think this has Ava Maria as the 5th track.

      • Walid on November 21, 2014, 7:10 pm

        Thanks, Annie, when I saw it suddenly appear, I knew it was you.

        Your link is to the full 1978 Christmas concert, The Ave Maria I was trying to post starts at 20:35 of the video. It’s from Pavarotti’s more serious days when he was younger and a bit less acrobatic than when he sang it at Caracalla in 94.

      • annie on November 21, 2014, 7:29 pm

        walid, if you’d prefer any other video i can switch it out. as an aside, i noticed when i opened your link it went to not one video but a collection. sometimes it’s more effective to copy the name of your selection into a youtube search and grab the single page url vs the url off the collection. but when i did that the video i was directed to wasn’t to the same concert hall you had referenced in Montreal. thanks for the time stamp i will check that out.

        btw, your “oops” video didn’t work either. that’s what alerted me something was amiss, reading your opps on the back pages ;)

      • bintbiba on November 22, 2014, 8:05 pm

        It seems to me that the civlising power of music over religion in our times is a hopeful element. Music was part of religious liturgies centuries ago , and developed deep within societies…and nowadays you find that music is considered in some religious fanatic sects to be sacriledgeous especially as sung by a woman’s voice.
        I am not at all religious …but sacred music can bring the tears flowing.
        Thanks Walid, seafoid for the beauty you brought us today.

    • just on November 21, 2014, 8:45 am

      Thank you all who posted the music. A much needed soothing reminder that we have much more in common than differences as HUMANS.

      I’ve really never met a Muslim who disparaged/disrespected Christianity nor Judaism… and I’ve met a lot of folks.

      Thanks to all, my bookmark folder became fuller. :)

      • just on November 21, 2014, 10:21 am

        anyone have a Jewish song that evidences respect of/acknowledgement of Christianity and Islam?

        i’ll wait.

  23. Kate on November 20, 2014, 4:14 pm

    This powerful resistance song about Jerusalem, written by the Rahbani Brothers in Classical Arabic and sung by the Lebanese Christian singer Fairouz, shows the Muslim connection to Jerusalem without forgetting those of other religions. From the lyrics: ‘Our eyes travel to you every day, moving about the hallways of the temples, embracing the old churches, wiping sadness from the mosques’

    Elizabeth Bell comments : ‘Fairuz often performs songs relevant to the situation of Palestinians and Zahrat al-Mada`in (Flower among Cities) is no different. It surrounds the problem of Jerusalem, which typically represents loss to Palestinians. For example, the lyrics include lines such as “crying for those who have been displaced, for the children without homes, for those who resisted and fell at the gates.” This obviously refers to how Palestinians lost Jerusalem to Israel in the Six-Day War, along with many other cities. However, the song also includes lines such as “the child is in the cave with his mother Mary,” which refers to the importance of Jerusalem to Christians. ‘ (Although. to be sure, there is a whole chapter in the Qur’an about the Virgin Mary and her child Jesus/Issa), this particular line seems to be referring to the Christian story)

    • just on November 20, 2014, 8:06 pm

      shukran, Kate. so beautiful, so true. this is truly a treasure.

      brings tears & more…

    • Kay24 on November 21, 2014, 11:57 am

      That is indeed very haunting and sad. Things should not stand like this in Holy places. There is no place for violence of any kind.

    • Maximus Decimus Meridius on November 22, 2014, 8:25 am

      The words of ”Zahrat al medaen” were written by Said Akl, a Christian Lebanese ‘Phoenician” poet – ie as far from a pan-Arabist or Muslim extremist as it’s possible to be. The music was written by the Rahbani brothers, who were Christian, as of course, is the great Fairuz herself.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Said_Akl

  24. seafoid on November 20, 2014, 5:05 pm

    Milikovsky and his combover to try and cover up the fact that his head is as bald as the hasbara cupboard.

  25. peter hindrup on November 20, 2014, 5:32 pm

    ‘DANIEL NEVO: Most of 1.8 billion Muslims in the world don’t really care about reality or about the facts. What they care is some of the imams will say that the Jews are conquesting or penetrating Al-Aqsa. It’s enough. And it is enough to put every Israeli and Jew all around the world in jeopardy.’

    He is right, but laying the blame in the wrong place. Cannot Jews understand that Israel has branded them fairly or not, as a part of the problem.

    Just why the Jews have not distanced themselves from this inclusion is difficult to fathom, for if the Israeli Jews ever take to throwing nukes around, there will be no place on earth safe for a Jew.

    Before people scream ‘racist’, I do not believe that any nation will get away with using nukes in today’s world. There was considerable angst over fire bombing of Dresden and Tokyo and that was at the end of a brutal war.

  26. Karl Dubhe on November 20, 2014, 5:32 pm

    Nope. This won’t end well at all.

    How could it end well? Too many have already embraced too much hate. :(

    I’m sorry, for everyone. Not that that does any good.

  27. JLewisDickerson on November 20, 2014, 5:45 pm

    RE: “Did you read Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s speech following the attack on the West Jerusalem synagogue Tuesday? I found it bloodcurdling. He called on ‘the state of the Jews’ to unite in a “battle for Jerusalem.” ~ Weiss

    MY COMMENT: Looking at Netanyahu’s eyes in that chilling photo (where the Star of David has apparently been oh-so-carefully positioned above his shoulder), I see the eyes of a madman (i.e., a lunatic).

    • JLewisDickerson on November 23, 2014, 8:12 pm

      P.S. That photo of Netanyahu so reminds me of Peter Sellers playing Dr. Stangelove.
      Personally, I think Netanyahu is an über-sadist (like Dick Cheney).
      Psychopath Netanyahu Lies Again to Lead Us into World War III [VIDEO, 01:30] – http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=946_1348660621
      Prime Minister of Israel and psychopath Benjamin Netanyahu has been dragging, along with his fellows in the US neoconservative cabal, the United States into wars based on the same lie, the threat of nuclear weapons from different nations in the Middle East.
      That lie has been proven false in Iraq back in 2002, why would anyone listen to this guy when Iran has explicitly stated that their nuclear capabilities are ONLY for peaceful purposes?

  28. JLewisDickerson on November 20, 2014, 5:58 pm

    RE: “The perpetrators of the Tuesday attack were ‘human animals’, Netanyahu said. “~ Weiss

    MY COMMENT: In that case, what better time is there to go on yet another “human hunt”*?!?!

    * REGARDING “HUMAN HUNT”, SEE: “Abu Khdeir murder suspect recounts grisly killing”, by Daniel K. Eisenbud, JPost.com, 8/13/2014

    [EXCERPTS] Chilling testimony from the main suspect in the July 2 murder of 16-year-old east Jerusalem resident Muhammad Abu Khdeir confirmed the brutal homicide was indeed rooted in revenge for the three yeshiva students abducted and killed by Hamas operatives in June. . .

    . . . During his testimony, the alleged ringleader behind the kidnapping and subsequent torture of Abu Khdeir, said he first discussed seeking revenge following the funerals of Gil- Ad Shaer, 16, Eyal Yifrah, 19, and Naftali Fraenkel, 16.

    “We began talking about what happened, about the kidnapped youths, and decided that they needed to be avenged,” he said in his testimony.

    “I was furious at [the killers] while the entire country was silently praying.”

    According to Ben-David, the three then agreed to go on a “human hunt” for an Arab victim.

    “We planned to hurt a soul, meaning to kill… to torture him and kill him,” he told police, adding that he wanted his victim “to know that he was about to die as a sacrifice for the Jews that were murdered.”

    To that end, Ben-David testified that he filled three empty bottles with the gasoline used to burn their victim alive. . .

    ENTIRE ARTICLE – “http://www.jpost.com/National-News/Abu-Khdeir-murder-suspect-recounts-grisly-killing-370911

  29. JLewisDickerson on November 20, 2014, 6:30 pm

    RE: “He [Netanyahu] called on ‘the state of the Jews’ to unite in a ‘battle for Jerusalem’.” ~ Weiss

    NETANYAHU’S BATTLE CRY DECODED: Now is the time for Jews to secure their redemption* by taking full, complete, exclusive possession of the “exalted totem”! ! !

    * SEE: “Why rebuilding the Temple would be the end of Judaism as we know it”, By Tomer Persico, Haaretz.com, Nov. 13, 2014
    • The current drive of Jews, both Orthodox and secular, to ascend to the site of the Holy Temple and rebuild it, reflects a sea change in the Zionist camp.

    [EXCERPTS] There is one overriding question that accompanies the Zionist project, wrote Gershom Scholem, the scholar of Jewish mysticism – “Whether or not Jewish history will be able to endure this entry into the concrete realm without perishing in the crisis of the messianic claim, which has virtually been conjured up.” The entry into history to which Scholem refers is the establishment of the state and the ingathering of the exiles, borne, as they were – notwithstanding their secular fomenters and activists – on the wings of the ancient Jewish messianic myth of the return to Zion. However, when Scholem published the essay “Toward an Understanding of the Messianic Idea in Judaism,” in 1971, the adjunct to the question was the dramatic freight of Israel’s great victory in the Six-Day War, four years earlier. . .

    . . . It is not surprising, then, that the first group advocating a change in the Temple Mount status quo did not spring from the ranks of the religious-Zionist movement. The Temple Mount Faithful, a group that has been active since the end of the 1960s, was led by Gershon Salomon, a secular individual, who was supported – how could it be otherwise? – by former members of the Irgun and Lehi. It was not until the mid-1980s that a similar organization was formed under the leadership of a religious-Zionist rabbi (the Temple Institute, founded by Rabbi Yisrael Ariel) – and it too remained solitary within the religious-Zionist movement until the 1990s.

    Indeed, in January 1991, Rabbi Menachem Froman could still allay the fears of the Palestinians by informing them (in the form of an article he published in Haaretz, “To Wait in Silence for Grace”) that, “In the perception of the national-religious public [… there is] opposition to any ascent to the walls of the Temple Mount… The attitude of sanctity toward the Temple Mount is expressed not by bursting into it but by abstinence from it.”

    No longer. If in the past, yearning for the Temple Mount was the preserve of a marginal, ostracized minority within the religious-Zionist public, today it has become one of the most significant voices within that movement. In a survey conducted this past May among the religious-Zionist public, 75.4 percent said they favor “the ascent of Jews to the Temple Mount,” compared to only 24.6 percent against. In addition, 19.6 percent said they had already visited the site and 35.7 percent that they had not yet gone there, but intended to visit.

    The growing number of visits to the mount by the religious-Zionist public signifies not only a turning away from the state-oriented approach of Rabbi Kook, but also active rebellion against the tradition of the halakha. We are witnessing a tremendous transformation among sections of this public: Before our eyes they are becoming post-Kook-ist and post-Orthodox. Ethnic nationalism is supplanting not only mamlakhtiyut (state consciousness) but faithfulness to the halakha. Their identity is now based more on mythic ethnocentrism than on Torah study, and the Temple Mount serves them, just as it served Yair Stern and Uri Zvi Grinberg before them, as an exalted totem embodying the essence of sovereignty over the Land of Israel.

    Thus, in the survey, the group identifying with “classic religious Zionism” was asked, “What are the reasons on which to base oneself when it comes to Jews going up to the Temple Mount?” Fully 96.8 percent replied that visiting the site would constitute “a contribution to strengthening Israeli sovereignty in the holy place.” Only 54.4 percent averred that a visit should be made in order to carry out “a positive commandment [mitzvat aseh] and prayer at the site.” Patently, for the religious Zionists who took part in the survey, the national rationale was far more important than the halakhic grounds – and who better than Naftali Bennett, the leader of Habayit Hayehudi party, serves as a salient model for the shift of the center of gravity of the religious-Zionist movement from halakha to nationalism?

    How did the religious-Zionist public undergo such a radical transformation in its character? A hint is discernible at the point when the first significant halakhic ruling was issued allowing visits to the Temple Mount. This occurred at the beginning of 1996, when the Yesha (Judea, Samaria, Gaza) Rabbinical Council published an official letter containing a ruling that visiting the Temple Mount was permissible, accompanied by a call to every rabbi “to go up [to the site] himself and guide his congregation on how to make the ascent according to all the restrictions of the halakha.”

    Motti Inbari, in his book “Jewish Fundamentalism and the Temple Mount” (SUNY Press, 2009), draws a connection between the weakening of the Gush Emunim messianic paradigm, which was profoundly challenged by the Oslo process between Israel and the Palestinians, and the surge of interest in the mount. According to a widely accepted research model, disappointment stemming from difficulties on the road toward the realization of the messianic vision leads not to disillusionment but to radicalization of belief, within the framework of which an attempt is made to foist the redemptive thrust on recalcitrant reality.

    However, the final, crushing blow to the Kook-based messianic approach was probably delivered by the Israeli withdrawal from the Gaza Strip, in 2005, and the destruction of the Gush Katif settlements there. The Gush Emunin narrative, which talks about unbroken redemption and the impossibility of retreat, encountered an existential crisis, as did the perception of the secular state as “the Messiah’s donkey,” a reference to the parable about the manner in which the Messiah will make his appearance, meaning that full progress toward redemption can be made on the state’s secular, material back.

    In a symposium held about a year ago by Ir Amim, an NGO that focuses on Jerusalem within the context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Haviva Pedaya, from the Jewish history department of Ben-Gurion University in Be’er Sheva, referred to the increasing occupation with the Temple Mount by the religious-Zionist movement after the Gaza pull-out.

    “For those who endured it, the disengagement was a type of sundering from the substantial, from some sort of point of connection,” she said. “For the expelled, it was a breaking point that created a rift between the illusion that the substantial – the land – would be compatible with the symbolic – the state, redemption.” With that connection shattered, Pedaya explains, messianic hope is shifted to an alternative symbolic focal point. The Temple Mount replaces settlement on the soil of the Land of Israel as the key to redemption.

    Many religious Zionists are thus turning toward the mount in place of the belief in step-by-step progress and in place of the conception of the sanctity of the state. The Temple Mount advocates are already now positing the final goal, and by visiting the site and praying there they are deviating from both the halakhic tradition and from Israeli law. State consciousness is abandoned, along with the patience needed for graduated progress toward redemption. In their place come partisan messianism and irreverent efforts to hasten the messianic era – for apocalypse now.

    And they are not alone. Just as was the case in the pre-state period, secular Jews are again joining, and in some cases leading, the movement toward the Temple Mount. Almost half of Likud’s MKs, some of them secular, are active in promoting Jewish visits there. MK Miri Regev, who chairs the Knesset’s Interior and Environment Committee, has already convened 15 meetings of the committee to deliberate on the subject. According to MK Gila Gamliel, “The Temple is the ID card of the people of Israel,” while MK Yariv Levin likens the site to the “heart” of the nation. Manifestly, the division is not between “secular” and “religious,” and the question was never about observing or not observing commandments. The question is an attempt to realize the myth in reality.

    Assuaging Ben-Gurion’s concerns, Israel remained without the Temple Mount at the end of the War of Independence in 1948. Not until the capture of East Jerusalem in 1967 did it become feasible to implement the call of Avraham Stern, and the ancient myth began to sprout within the collective unconscious. After almost 50 years of gestation, Israel is today closer than it has ever been to attempting to renew in practice its mythic past, to bring about by force what many see as redemption. Even if we ignore the fact that the top of the Temple Mount is, simply, currently not available – it must be clear that moving toward a new Temple means the end of both Judaism and Zionism as we know them.

    The question, then, to paraphrase Gershom Scholem’s remark, with which we began, is whether Zionism will be able to withstand the impulse to realize itself conclusively and become history.

    ENTIRE ARTICLE – http://www.haaretz.com/news/features/.premium-1.626327

    • Mooser on November 26, 2014, 4:44 pm

      “Fully 96.8 percent replied that visiting the site would constitute “a contribution to strengthening Israeli sovereignty in the holy place.”

      Isn’t this the old birthright-for-mess-of-pottage thing come back?

  30. Horizontal on November 20, 2014, 6:40 pm

    And yet no matter how base Israel behaves, or how corrupt Netanyahu becomes, this will never make it into the heads of a majority of American people. The network gatekeepers, and those stellar power-mongers in congress will see to that.

    It’s too easy. America, as a whole, is already primed to hate the other. Congress, with apparently no adverse effects, actually increased funding for Israel last summer at the same time that Israel was committing war crimes in Gaza. Were people in the streets? Some, but certainly not enough.

    If Jerusalem blows up, we all know how it’s going to be presented. We’re going on 60 plus years of this nonsense. I would like to believe that this time will be different.

  31. Moto on November 20, 2014, 8:39 pm

    This is the same Netanyahu who said of the Iraq war – “…this war is good for Israel.”

    This is also the same Netanyahu who Ariel Sharon told “A liar you were and a liar you remain.”

    • just on November 21, 2014, 8:28 am

      “The Israeli newspaper Ma’ariv on Wednesday reported that Likud leader Benjamin Netanyahu told an audience at Bar Ilan university that the September 11, 2001 terror attacks had been beneficial for Israel.

      “We are benefiting from one thing, and that is the attack on the Twin Towers and Pentagon, and the American struggle in Iraq,” Ma’ariv quoted the former prime minister as saying. He reportedly added that these events “swung American public opinion in our favor.”

      Netanyahu reportedly made the comments during a conference at Bar-Ilan University on the division of Jerusalem as part of a peace deal with the Palestinians.”

      http://www.haaretz.com/news/report-netanyahu-says-9-11-terror-attacks-good-for-israel-1.244044

  32. wondering jew on November 20, 2014, 9:22 pm

    It is time for netanyahu to go, to quit, to be voted out by Likud or for Likud to be voted out of office. they/we will probably get someone more right wing than bibi (meaning: bibi made the bar ilan speech of 2009 and he who will follow bibi will disavow that speech, although bibi’s speech was not serious.) but that is better than bibi. someone fresh will give a chance for jerusalem to get a breather. it won’t last long, because the basic right wing policy is really the problem rather than bibi’s personality, but we need a break from bibi. he must go.

    just a personal note: my brother who is ultra orthodox knew three of the victims of tuesday’s attack. the attack on the train stop that took place two weeks ago, is three hundred yards from my parents’ apartment. even the hagana train station in tel aviv where a soldier was killed a few weeks ago is somewhere that i have personally used. i have lived five years or more of my life in Jerusalem. i don’t think that because i have a personal stake in jerusalem that my political conclusions are more valid than those who have spent in total less than half a year in jerusalem, but it does mean that as a human i have particularly feelings that are aroused by these attacks and therefore increased sensitivity to the insensitivity of an idiot like bibi and also to the insensitivity of many of the commentators here.

    • wondering jew on November 20, 2014, 9:26 pm

      the idea of separation of church and state is such an easy phrase to attract americans who favor the separation of church and state in america. jerusalem and the middle east is really not about the separation of church and state. the different churches: meaning mosque and synagogue, need to learn how to share and that is something more basic than the separation of church and state, a phrase that is convenient but basically irrelevant. it isn’t coming soon, but the ideal of jerusalem has little to do with separation of church and state and much to do with learning to share.

      • wondering jew on November 20, 2014, 9:36 pm

        Op ed from ynet writer calling for elections to replace Netanyahu:
        http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4593896,00.html

      • Citizen on November 21, 2014, 9:40 am

        When the state directly or impliedly or symbolically favors one religious group over another what is posited is the police power favoring a selected religious group, or groups, above others. This means sharing or not sharing is de facto result of a state policy not separating church and state.
        There’s a ton of US federal constitutional law cases involving, e.g., symbols of religion in the public square–often their result is to include additional religious symbols there, or to exclude all of them. So, you sere saying about what’s “really” at issue? Arab Americans are in the courts now on these issues, and, of course, many bible belt Americans see nothing wrong with welding together Church and state–so long as it’s their religion favored by the state or municipality; again, lots of court cases on this too, still going on.

      • Horizontal on November 21, 2014, 10:04 am

        The idea of separation of church and state is such an easy phrase to attract Americans who favor the separation of church and state in america. Jerusalem and the middle east is really not about the separation of church and state. The different churches: meaning mosque and synagogue, need to learn how to share.

        As one of those Americans easily attracted to the idea of the separation of church and state, I’d like to suggest that you not dismiss the concept so readily, as it is the basis of “learning how to share” in a society comprised of just about every imaginable sort of culture and religious belief. And there are plenty of Americans who fight the concept, mostly of the conservative Christian variety, who believe that America was formed as a Christian nation and would love to have public prayers to Jesus at every political gathering.

        Of course, if those prayers were to Allah instead of to Yehweh, then all hell would break loose, so the way to keep this from happening is to have no public, politically-sanctioned prayers at all. This agreement doesn’t please the Christians, who still want to “win,” but that’s the stubborn nature of religious belief, and a great reason why it’s not a good idea to mix religious belief with public policy. Seems like something that your neck of the woods could use a lot more of, not less.

        OK, enough lecturing about that.

        Not sharing is the entire basis of Zionism, which could have, had it wanted to, reached an accommodation with the inhabitants of Palestine from the beginning. It chose, instead, a history of ruthless appropriation which denied the original inhabitants the right to their own homes, their own lands. This unjust policy continues to this day. And now you talk about the need to share.

        Voting out Netanyahu isn’t going to fix this structural flaw, any more than a face-lift can cure cancer. Can you not see this?

      • Kathleen on November 21, 2014, 3:13 pm

        “learning to share”

        The UN can bring peace to Jerusalem by moving its …

        mondoweiss.net/2014/11/jerusalem-moving-headquarters

      • Mooser on November 21, 2014, 4:28 pm

        “the idea of separation of church and state is such an easy phrase to attract Americans who favor the separation of church and state in america.”

        Yup, Yonah, the jury is still out on that one! Is that “separation-of-church-and-state thing settled law yet?
        Gosh, if it’s not, I hope we Jews have a lobby in Washington which can get us a state or two out of the fifty for our own.

        Yup, “Americans who favor the separation of church and state in america”. Probably some tiny minority somewhere.

      • Mooser on November 21, 2014, 4:37 pm

        “The different churches: meaning mosque and synagogue, need to learn how to share”

        I’m sorry, Yonah, what have the Israelis offered to share. In fact rather than sharing, they just keep on taking. In fact, given the events, a person could get pretty insulted and upset by a sentence like that. Must be part of your famous “sensitivity”

      • Horizontal on November 21, 2014, 6:06 pm

        . . . but the ideal of Jerusalem . . .

        Ahhh, but whose ideal?

      • Mooser on November 21, 2014, 6:10 pm

        What is so hysterical is that all these Zionists how go on whining about persecution and discrimination, don’t know the difference between a privilege and a right. That’s something I normally associate with an aristocracy.

      • Mooser on November 23, 2014, 10:54 am

        “the idea of separation of church and state is such an easy phrase to attract americans who favor the separation of church and state in america”

        Yonah’s dismissal of the “easy phrase to attract Americans” is one of the more disgusting things I have seen from him.
        Hey, Yonah, aren’t you an, in the final estimation, an American citizen?

        Hey Yonah, would you like to take a wild, off the cuff, guess which religious cohort in America should get down on their friggin’ kneees, don tallit and tefillin and thank God every day for the separation of church and state in America? Can you guess which group that might be, Yonah.

        For God’s sake, Yonah, if you can figure out where it isn’t, you should move to Israel, and free yourself from this awful “separation of church and state”

        Fortunately, I know better than to air my opinions on a community which would do this to a person like you, Yonah, What the hell have they made of you, what have you made of yourself?

      • wondering jew on November 23, 2014, 4:54 pm

        mooser- like amerigo bonasera i believe in america, and that includes the separation of church and state, and if the whole world had separation of church and state the world would be better off, but to pretend that everywhere else in the middle east there is separation of church and state, except for israel, is patently false, so the absence of a separation is the fact of the world as given.

        mooser- you are a bully. try not to use my name when i am not involved in a thread, and please don’t use it more than once, when i am in a thread. overuse of a person’s name is a form of patronizing. ask any fifth grade teacher. they must have done it to you a lot when you were in the fifth grade and called into the principal’s office. shit rolls downhill so on the internet i have to get the leftovers from your fifth grade agita.

      • wondering jew on November 23, 2014, 5:03 pm

        horizontal- it is not clear to me that the zionists could have reached an agreement with the palestinians from the very beginning. i doubt that is true.

        as i have written elsewhere i favor separation of church and state and it would be ideal if the world eventually follows america’s example. but it’s not going to happen tomorrow. and so to base one’s argument on a feature of statehood or governance that is not widespread in the region of the middle east is to offer an argument that rings true in america, but does not jive with the reality of the middle east.

        the zionists are not now about to share. that is an issue that deserves attention. the sharing i envision is along the 67 cease fire lines and the israelis are not near to agree to that. that is a point that can be mentioned. to term it in phrase of separation of church and state rather than “recognized bourndaries” is to put it in american language that is largely irrelevant to the middle east.

      • wondering jew on November 23, 2014, 5:07 pm

        For example, the declaration of independence emphasizes Israel’s Jewish nature and democratic nature and these days the cabinet and soon the knesset wants to pass a bill emphasizing the Jewish nature and not mentioning the democratic nature. this is a step backward in Israel’s relation to the Palestinian (aka Israeli Arab) minority. and I would oppose it, not on the basis of separation of church and state, but based upon minority rights.

      • Mooser on November 26, 2014, 4:50 pm

        “horizontal- it is not clear to me that the zionists could have reached an agreement with the palestinians from the very beginning. i doubt that is true.”

        So, Yonah, my friend, are you saying that 1948 and the declarations of Israeli Statehood never happened, or that they were from the very beginning, a fraud on the Zionist side, all promises they intended to break as soon as advantageous?

        They did, in fact “reach an agreement with the palestinians (sic)”, but they were in violation of it as it was declared. Already operating outside their own territory.

    • Kathleen on November 21, 2014, 3:15 pm

      “learning to share” once again
      The UN can bring peace to Jerusalem by moving its …

      mondoweiss.net/2014/11/jerusalem-moving-headquarters

    • Mooser on November 21, 2014, 4:24 pm

      “but it does mean that as a human i have particularly feelings that are aroused by these attacks and therefore increased sensitivity to the insensitivity of an idiot like bibi and also to the insensitivity of many of the commentators here.”

      Yonah, you have already announced that you have your own private commenting standards, and they will include lying about posters, fabricating quotes, and personal attacks. You make that clear.

      It’s just that you are so darn cute you can get away with it!

      • wondering jew on November 21, 2014, 4:27 pm

        mooser- you’re a clown and a bully. don rickles comes to mind. i wonder what you’re like in person.

      • Mooser on November 21, 2014, 4:32 pm

        “mooser- you’re a clown and a bully. don rickles comes to mind. i wonder what you’re like in person.”

        Oh, I see. So I’m the “clown and a bully” who wrote this: (This is verbatim, and linked above)

        ANNOUNCEMENT TO ALL READERS OTHER THAN MOOSER:
        I consider Mooser, three quarters of the time, to be an utter waste of time. upon occasion i will react to his nonsense with name calling and mischaracterize his statements. For example: if he says, “of course those thieving settlers ought to be afraid” I will say that he is happy that they are afraid and in fact wants to see them dead, whereas in fact, he only says that they ought to be afraid.

        To Mooser- You are a junior high school bully, who justifies your immature behavior by saying that your cause is just. but in fact you are a bully because you like being a bully and the justice of your cause does not mitigate the fact that bullying people gives you a thrill.”

      • seafoid on November 21, 2014, 4:39 pm

        “You’re a clown and a bully”

        Ziocaine

        BTW Mooser I read recently that the character Yogi Bear is believed to have had Borscht Belt influences. Smarter than the average Bot.

      • Mooser on November 21, 2014, 4:43 pm

        “i will react to his nonsense with name calling and mischaracterize his statements.”

        So you blithely announce that, declaring your rhetorical intransigence for all the world to see, and I’m the bully?

        Yonah, you need to think about stuff, I remind you: nothing, not a square foot of ground stolen, not a single house stolen or demolished, not a single Palestinian killed or expelled, nothing can be accomplished for Zionism by people who are easily bullied. You, son, you are the one who should be doing the bullying, not me!

      • Mooser on November 21, 2014, 4:57 pm

        “i wonder what you’re like in person.”

        Yonah, everybody knows that.
        I have the cool, clear eyes of seeker of wisdom and truth,
        yet with the slam, bang, tang, reminiscent of gin and vermouth. I hear the sound of good solid judgment whenever I talk.
        Yet, there’s the bold, brave spring of the tiger that quickens my walk. What can I say? I believe in me.

      • Mooser on November 21, 2014, 5:19 pm

        ” Mooser I read recently that the character Yogi Bear is believed to have had Borscht Belt influences.”

        Yes, I’ve heard that.
        He spent two weeks in the Catskills, and he came home entranced with Kosher-style food. Seems it’s the only cuisine which doesn’t give him the heartburn.
        Anyway, when he went back to Jellystone National Park, Yogi had hired a Chef away from one of the resorts, and no longer suffers from dyspepsia.
        I’d been trying to get him to try a blueberry blintz for years, but, well, bears, you know…hard to get them to try anything new. Anyway, two weeks at Grossingers did the trick.

      • Daniel Rich on November 21, 2014, 5:46 pm

        @ Yonah fredman,

        Q: mooser- you’re a clown and a bully. don rickles comes to mind. i wonder what you’re like in person.

        R: My mom told me to pay close attention to any and all criticism made about myself. For, she argued, it would be an unprecedented treasure trove filled with, what those in the know refer to as, projection.

        OK, bummer, you’re the human equivalent of a Volkswagen, but that does not diminish the fact of Mooser’s fast paced, laughter roaring smartness having been Enzo’s inspiration to design a Ferrari.

        Those are the laws of the road, you know, and not only the ones that lead to Rome :o)

        If it makes you feel you any better, personally I never got passed that darn tricky tricycle license.

      • Horizontal on November 21, 2014, 6:13 pm

        yonah ~

        You seem to want some understanding, so instead of sparring with Mooser, perhaps you could tell us what you’re doing to make Israel a less Zionist place to be, or don’t you think that’s a problem?

      • wondering jew on November 22, 2014, 2:31 pm

        horizontal- I comment in other places on topic and have yet gotten into a discussion with you on any issue that i can recall. demanding a proposal from me is a rhetorical trick. i have no answer. i am not in charge. i am on the sidelines watching. from my behavior and reactions i see that i am opposed to BDS and the rhetoric i approve of comes from bradley burston and peter beinart. they have no answers either, but that’s where i am on this issue. if you wish to engage in discussion of the issues, go ahead. if you wish to demand how i will change the reality, you are being a bit of a street corner preacher and not a real discusser.

      • seafoid on November 22, 2014, 2:35 pm

        Yonah

        The murder of those 4 dudes brought the cost of the occupation home to
        Yossi Israeli.

        Fitch have just added to the bill

        http://www.haaretz.com/business/.premium-1.627862

        “Fitch Ratings is concerned with the state of the Israeli economy. Fitch did leave Israel’s credit rating at A, but lowered the long-term currency Issuer Default Rating (IDR) from positive to stable. The lowering of the IDR is what Israeli leaders feared over the past few months. The downgrade stems from a fear that the Israeli economy is slowing down, from the government’s growing investment in security, and from the raising of the government deficit target in the 2015 budget. Fitch’s decision has Israeli leaders worried over the consequences it may have on Israel’s standing in international markets, as well as on the upcoming credit announcements of Moody’s and Standard & Poor’s. ”

        Ma sha allah

        The name of the game for the 16 oligarchs who control Israel is money. they are nothing special and god doesn’t care about their money either. See Torah for details.

        So someone is going to have to tell Yossi Israeli what a downgrade means.
        And that YESHA is now on balance sheet.

        Jerusalem is eternal. Bukra fi mishmish.

      • wondering jew on November 22, 2014, 2:57 pm

        seafoid- give me 168 hours after the deed of har nof and then i might react less emotionally. but for right now i have to say that you are obviously someone who believes “the ends justify the means”.

      • seafoid on November 22, 2014, 3:58 pm

        Yonah

        It’s called feedback. You can’t kill 500 kids in 3 weeks and expect everything to stay hunky in the Hebrew bubble. That shit is tragic but it sure ain’t magic.

        You leave the Palestinians with no means of getting through to Yossi Israeli other than violence. YESHA was supposed to kill Palestinian nationalism but it’s now killing Israelis.
        And it’s a system problem like Northern Ireland was.
        The system is breaking down. You can’t make people afraid when they are sick and tired of the bullshit.

        It hardly matters that in this particular case they were Jews- what matters is that they were part of the oppressor community and that community thought they were untouchable.
        Northern Ireland was exactly the same. No dose of state violence could stop it.

        It appears as though it’s running as most systems of oppression do when the persecuted decide they have had enough. Maybe you think there is some sort of messianic angle to it but there isn’t.

        The location is special but the power plays happen everywhere.

      • wondering jew on November 22, 2014, 4:15 pm

        seafoid- the nature of the conflict between 2 hostile populations where one occupies and colonizes the other creates a predictable dynamic. fine.

        but you’re like a broken record repeating the same thing over and over again, and i really don’t want to hear it right now. i realize that the right wing assholes like caroline glick are not waiting 168 hours, so why should a dude like you wait 168 hours. all i’m saying is that at this point in time, i find you utterly obnoxious and stuck in your own frame of mind. i cannot really engage with you intellectually at this time. why is that so hard to understand? or are you just in a habit of getting up on your soapbox that you can’t stop even for thirty seconds?

      • seafoid on November 22, 2014, 4:25 pm

        Amos Harel

        http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/.premium-1.627718

        “For years, Israeli prime ministers have sworn by a commitment to Jerusalem’s eternal unification. But the erection of police roadblocks at the exits from Arab neighborhoods, and the plans for concrete barricades along the old “seam line” between the eastern and western parts of the city, along with the wave of dismissals of Arab workers in Jewish neighborhoods this week – all this serves the opposite goal. Those steps only contribute to the city’s division in practice, and underscore the mutual fears of the two populations. The barricades corroborate the Palestinian argument that the city was never unified, under Israeli rule, and never will be. “

      • seafoid on November 22, 2014, 4:29 pm

        From the same article

        “a new danger is looming: that the situation in Jerusalem will gradually evolve into a Belfast-like reality, with Palestinian terrorist attacks being answered by Jewish acts of revenge. The murder this summer of the Palestinian teen Mohammed Abu Khdeir, following discovery of the bodies of the three Israeli teens murdered in the Etzion Bloc, might turn out to have been the onset of a new and growing epidemic.

        For a few years, it was possible to believe that a convenient interim situation had been achieved, and large numbers of tourists, from Israel and abroad, returned to the Old City. But all that fell apart last summer. ”

        Also Yonah – 4 dead on your sad is obviously sad- how do you think Palestinians feel when your side kills hundreds ? Do you think that’s sustainable long term ?

      • wondering jew on November 22, 2014, 5:16 pm

        seafoid – you are clearly addicted to the soapbox.

      • seafoid on November 22, 2014, 5:26 pm

        Cheers Yonah !

        I think we are witnessing a very important moment in the conflict.
        I remember being in a sherut in Ben Gurion airport during the last intifada wondering for how long Israel would keep the occupation going .
        I decided to buy a photo book about Israel because I had a feeling it wouldn’t last. I wanted a big one with loads of pictures. I ended up buying Magnum: Israel at 50 years.

      • Mooser on November 22, 2014, 6:02 pm

        Gee, Yonah, what if your behavior here is an indicator of the values from which you make your judgements concerning Zionism?
        And, if I may be so bold, tells us a lot more about Zionism than particular thing you might say.

      • just on November 22, 2014, 6:19 pm

        yonah– if you need 168 hours, why don’t you step away from the keyboard, or go somewhere else where there are other folks who are in deep mourning or seeking revenge wrt the ‘deed of har nof’?

      • wondering jew on November 23, 2014, 3:59 pm

        Israel is in bad shape in its dealings with the Palestinian people. Things have worsened under Netanyahu, but the first war on Gaza occurred before netanyahu, so it’s not just netanyahu.

        Israelis are living in a bubble not realizing how this looks and how american support for Israel will end some day. i can’t predict precisely when it will occur, i can only predict that eventually the Democratic party will oppose Israel.

        i love the city of jerusalem and the further jerusalem goes down the rabbit chute of hatred, the more it pains me.

        i respect those who wish to help the Palestinians achieve justice. It will probably be a bloody path between here and there. if i oppose those who harden their hearts against the Palestinians, I feel it is a “natural right” to oppose those who harden their hearts against the Jews living in Israel.

        the equation of Israel with Nazi Germany is a license to harden one’s heart. the upcoming battle will involve killing and it is probably best to harden your heart. it is totally logical to harden your heart. then you have become a soldier in your cause.

      • Mooser on November 26, 2014, 5:05 pm

        “The equation of Israel with Nazi Germany is a license to harden one’s heart. the upcoming battle will involve killing and it is probably best to harden your heart. it is totally logical to harden your heart. then you have become a soldier in your cause.”

        I see, Yonah. So we can expect that Zionists will be willing to transmute any criticism of Israel into a comparison with Nazis, to help in the process of hardening of hearts needed to keep Zionism working! Thanks for the tip.

    • Mooser on November 26, 2014, 5:00 pm

      ” they must have done it to you a lot when you were in the fifth grade and called into the principal’s office.”

      Nope. I was a model student, a natty dresser, and in with the in crowd. Went where they went, knew what they knew. It doesn’t matter where you’ve been, you ain’t been nowhere, Yonah, ’til you been in!
      Sixth grade was another story, of course, but, I ask you, what isn’t?

      Anyway, Yonah, I get it. Separation of church and state is good enough for American Jews to (in my estimation, purely subjective) abuse, and it’s too good for the Jews in Israel, or not good enough for the Jews in Israel. Maybe you could explain which one (TG or NGE) it is?

  33. bryan on November 21, 2014, 3:47 am

    Netanyahu almost got it right: “this is the root of the conflict: …Terrorism has followed us through all the years of the Zionist enterprise” Terrorism got you into this fine mess. It led you there, and then you elected the major perpetrators like Shamir and Begin to be your Prime Ministers. The landmarks along your road are acts of terror – numerous assassinations (like Lord Moyne and Count Bernadotte), numerous bombings (like the King David and Semiramis Hotels), numerous massacres (like Deir Yassin, 1948, Qibya, 1953, Khan Younis, 1955, Kafr Qasim, 1956, Sabra and Shatila 1982, right up to Gaza, 2014), numerous acts of sabotage and false flag operations, like the Lavon Affair and the onslaught on the USS Liberty). Is it really that surprising that those who choose to live by the sword and the bomb also sometimes die that way?

    • just on November 21, 2014, 8:25 am

      +1

    • Citizen on November 21, 2014, 9:42 am

      @ bryan
      Pithy, succinct, educated comment–thanks! +2

    • Horizontal on November 21, 2014, 10:15 am

      What he said.

      • bintbiba on November 23, 2014, 1:49 pm

        Yup…! Me too, “What he said ” !!

    • seafoid on November 21, 2014, 4:45 pm

      Violence and lack of integrity are the DNA of Zionism. Sorry- I forgot about whining and expecting others to pick up the tab.

      For Milikovsky to have terrorism as the root of the conflict is like saying button down collars were the cause of the collapse of Lehman Bros.

      • just on November 21, 2014, 4:55 pm

        heh- heh!

    • American on November 22, 2014, 3:14 pm

      ” yonah fredman
      November 22, 2014, 2:57 pm

      ” you are obviously someone who believes “the ends justify the means”.>>>>

      Oh brother….more pot calling kettle black.
      Quote me a single zionist who hasn’t said that the seizing of Palestine for the Jews wasn’t a ‘end that justified the means’.
      Hypocrite.

    • American on November 22, 2014, 3:29 pm

      Applause as Israeli journo says the life of 1 Jewish child was more important to her than 1000’s of Palestinian kids

      http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/.premium-1.627369

      Has anyone in the US (besides the worse junk yard dogs in the zio kennel like old Bad Rachel ) ever actually said one child’s life was worth more than any others?

      If some journalist in the US said this would they lose their job? Probably depends on who they worked for if we want to be honest.

  34. Mikhael on November 21, 2014, 6:11 am

    Phil sez:

    “Americans must affirm that this city belongs to the world”

    Yup. Just like Paris belongs to the world, just like London belongs to the world, and just like New York City belongs to the world, the Israeli capital–JERUSALEM–is a world city. It’s still the Israeli capital, though, and it will remain that way.

    Some people believe in ethnic exclusivity for Jerusalem, though and look forward to the day when “Jerusalem will speak only Arabic”

    http://palwatch.org/main.aspx?fi=157&doc_id=13047

    • just on November 21, 2014, 11:33 am

      it’s NOT the capital of Israel except among the deluded.

      “The mayor of Jerusalem has called on Israeli authorities to revoke the citizenship of family members of terrorists. This proposal was made in response to growing tensions between Palestinians and Israelis.

      “We must be extremely focused [in our efforts] against evil people, to locate them and deal with them firmly,” Mayor Nir Barkat told Army Radio, Haaretz reported.

      Barkat said he had discussed the issue with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and the Cabinet.

      “I think they understand it, and will examine how to revoke the citizenship of terrorists’ families, as well as how to act more decisively against those who incite, cause disturbances and throw stones.”

      Barkat’s proposal comes a day after Itamat Shimoni, the mayor of Ashkelon, near the Gaza Strip, said he was planning to ban Arab workers from kindergartens.

      “I have nothing against Arab Israelis; they work with us throughout the year and do construction for us.” However, he said, when tensions are high, just as Jews should be prevented from entering the Temple Mount, “by the same measure, I think it is wrong to allow Arab workers into the kindergartens.”

      more here: http://rt.com/news/207659-jerusalem-citizenship-terrorists-families/

    • Kay24 on November 22, 2014, 9:55 am

      “It’s still the Israeli capital, though, and it will remain that way”.

      Says who? Israel? According to the rest of the world it is NOT. Israelis are entitled to be delusional, and just because they say so, does not automatically become so. But still, they can keep dreaming, pretending, and trying to marginalize the Arabs who have equal rights there too.

      “The United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) does not recognise Israel’s proclamation of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, which is, for example, reflected in the wording of General Assembly Resolution 63/30 of 2009 which states that “any actions taken by Israel, the occupying Power, to impose its laws, jurisdiction and administration on the Holy City of Jerusalem are illegal and therefore null and void and have no validity whatsoever, and calls upon Israel to cease all such illegal and unilateral measures.”[24]

      A total of six UN Security Council resolutions on Israel have denounced or declared invalid Israel’s control of the city, including UNSC resolution 478 which affirmed that the enactment of the 1980 Basic Jerusalem Law declaring unified Jerusalem as Israel’s “eternal and indivisible” capital, was a violation of international law. The resolution advised member states to withdraw their diplomatic representation from the city.

      The UN including the Security Council have consistently affirmed its position that East Jerusalem is occupied territory subject to the provisions of the Fourth Geneva Convention. The International Court of Justice in its 2004 Advisory opinion on the “Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory” described East Jerusalem as “occupied Palestinian territory.”[27]

      And let me give you the US position on this, after all it is Israel’s only “ally” and sends it the welfare checks every month:

      “The U.S. opposed Israel’s moving its capital from Tel Aviv to West Jerusalem following Israel’s declaration of Jerusalem as its capital in 1949 and opposed Jordan’s plan to make Jerusalem its second capital announced in 1950.[49] The U.S. opposed Israel’s annexation of East Jerusalem after the 1967 war.[49] The United States has proposed that the future of Jerusalem should be the subject of a negotiated settlement.[49][50] Subsequent administrations have maintained the same policy that Jerusalem’s future not be the subject of unilateral actions that could prejudice negotiations such as moving the U.S. Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.[49] In 2002, Congress passed legislation that said that American citizens born in Jerusalem may list “Israel” as their country of birth, although Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama have not allowed it.[51] A federal appeals court declared the 2002 law invalid on 23 July 2013.[52]”
      Wikipedia.

      Do let us know how many nations recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, it will interesting to know.

      • Mikhael on November 22, 2014, 8:17 pm

        Kay24
        November 22, 2014, 9:55 am

        “It’s still the Israeli capital, though, and it will remain that way”.

        Says who? Israel? According to the rest of the world it is NOT.

        Yep, according to Israel. The state that possesses the territory of the city and which has its cabinet meet there, maintains its parliament, maintains prime minister’s and presidential residences there, and the headquarters of all government ministries actually is the entity that gets to determine whether it is the capital or not. Whether the rest of the world persists in maintaining the fiction that Jerusalem is not Israel’s capital for fear of arousing the wrath of radical Muslims or the Vatican is really not relevant.

        Israelis are entitled to be delusional, and just because they say so, does not automatically become so.

        Next time you are in Jerusalem, you can take a tour and see all the official Israeli government buildings there–the Knesset, the Supreme Court, the Residence of the President. Maybe I am deluding myself, but they seem to be actual physical structures.

        But still, they can keep dreaming, pretending, and trying to marginalize the Arabs who have equal rights there too.

        I agree that the Arabs who are legally resident in Jerusalem have equal rights in Jerusalem. Most of them have blue Israeli ID cards which establish them as permanent residents of Israel who are entitled to vote in Jerusalem municipal elections although not for the Knesset, as they are not Israeli citizens (though they are entitled to apply for full Israeli citizenship), many more in recent years have exchanged permanent residency for full Israeli citizenship. Sadly, a small radical minority of them have exploited their Israel residency status, which gives them access to all of Israel, to carry out terror attacks on their fellow Jerusalemites who are of Jewish nationality.

        Do let us know how many nations recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, it will interesting to know.

        Doesn’t really matter. All ambassadors of foreign nations present their credentials to Israel’s president at his official residence in Jerusalem. Many heads of state have addressed the Knesset, which convenes in Jerusalem. All of this is tantamount to de facto recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital.

        If you are going to be consistent in your denial of Israel’s sovereignty over Jerusalem as being against the long-ago nullified 1947 Partition Plan which called for its internationalization as a corpus separatum, you would equally condemn the Jordanians occupation/annexation of the eastern half of the city and the Palestinian Arab pretense that it is the capital of “Palestine” as a violation of Resolution 181. In a future deal, it might be reasonable, perhaps, for Israel to cede control over some outlying Arab neighborhoods in the eastern part of Jerusalem (which prior to 1967 were never considered part of Jerusalem proper in any case). The residents of these areas hold Israeli ID and are an extra cost to Israel’s social welfare system, most of us don’t feel a special attachment to places like Sur Baher. Unfortunately it might be difficult to implement, and many of the Arab residents of these neighborhoods, when polled, say they prefer to live under Israeli rule than that of the PA or a future Palestinian Arab state.

      • annie on November 24, 2014, 5:06 pm

        Do let us know how many nations recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, it will interesting to know.

        Doesn’t really matter.

        oh i don’t believe you. i think it matters very very much to israel that not one embassy is there.

    • eljay on November 22, 2014, 10:09 am

      >> Mikhaeleee: Just like Paris belongs to the world, just like London belongs to the world, and just like New York City belongs to the world, the Israeli capital–JERUSALEM–is a world city.

      Paris, London and NYC belong to their respective countries, but they are (relatively) open to the world. Jerusalem should be the free city it was intended to be – belonging to itself, but (relatively) open to the world.

      Thanks to a decades-old and on-going occupation by the oppressive, colonialist, expansionist and supremacist “Jewish State” of Israel, Jerusalem is not free.

      >> It’s still the Israeli capital, though, and it will remain that way.

      It’s Israel’s victim, not its capital, and it must be liberated.

      >> Some people believe in ethnic exclusivity for Jerusalem, though and look forward to the day when “Jerusalem will speak only Arabic”

      Ethnic supremacism in Jerusalem is just as wrong as religion-based Jewish supremacism in Israel and in all the non-Israeli territory (i.e., outside of its / Partition borders) it occupies (including Jerusalem).

      I condemn these and all other forms of supremacism.

  35. hophmi on November 21, 2014, 10:20 am

    “Calling Jews to put aside their little differences and take up arms for the “battle for Jerusalem” is a vision of holy war, with fascistic trimmings. ”

    You are overstating it because you insist on always putting the worst spin on everything. There have been at least four terrorist attacks in Jerusalem in last couple of weeks. There is no difference between Netanyahu’s call to fight terrorism and President Obama’s call to fight ISIS. There is nothing fascistic about defending the citizens of your country. And while Netanyahu speaks in terms of a Jewish state, his actions clearly seek to defend Jews, Christians, Muslims, Druze, Ba’hai, and all of the people of different faiths that live in Israel. It is the Palestinian terrorist who targets Israel’s Jews. Netanyahu’s pointing this out is not fascism. It’s reality.

    And of course, you engage in no analysis of rhetoric in the Palestinian world, which is far more sectarian, and far more religiously-tinged than this.

    • just on November 21, 2014, 11:35 am

      lolol! thanks.

      • Mooser on November 21, 2014, 5:07 pm

        “just” wait til Hophmi figures out that Mondoweiss is probably not going to do a feature story on the four dead Rabbis, with the murdered Rabbis the center of the story. He’ll never forgive Mondo. for that.

    • seafoid on November 21, 2014, 2:43 pm

      “There is no difference between Netanyahu’s call to fight terrorism and President Obama’s call to fight ISIS.”

      There is. Jews are running brutal occupation of East Jerusalem Hoph and Israel refuses to grant them rights., that has the square root of nothing to do with ISIS and you know it. Why can’t the Jewish state grant rights to everyone in Erez Israel? What is so hard about that ?
      Should Jews in London be denied rights ? why not ?

      ” There is nothing fascistic about defending the citizens of your country.”

      It’s not about defending Jews. It’s about defending Jewish privilege and there is a huge difference.

      ” And while Netanyahu speaks in terms of a Jewish state, his actions clearly seek to defend Jews, Christians, Muslims, Druze, Ba’hai, and all of the people of different faiths that live in Israel.”

      He makes life in Israel less secure by his actions.

      Tell us about your Jewish Muslim outreach work again Hoph. We need a few laughs

      • Mooser on November 21, 2014, 5:01 pm

        “Tell us about your Jewish Muslim outreach work again Hoph. We need a few laughs”

        What would be funny is if I went to the archives, and found how many goddam times that I-do-Muslim-outreach schtick has been used.
        I guess the amnesia episodes help a lot when it comes to producing any new Hasbara They forget they used it yesterday.

    • gracie fr on November 21, 2014, 3:25 pm

      ….”You are overstating it because you insist on always putting the worst spin on everything. There have been at least four terrorist attacks in Jerusalem in last couple of weeks……”

      Yes these attacks are indeed heinous, but how many attacks against Palestinians have been reported with Israeli “hasbara spin” or not reported at all…???? Then of course, there is the unacknowledged “back story” behind such acts of desperation……

    • gracie fr on November 21, 2014, 3:52 pm

      Precisely from such a society is one permitted to demand some attention to the Palestinian blood that is also spilled in vain; some understanding of the other side’s pain, or even a measure of empathy, which in Israel is considered treason.

      But this doesn’t happen. Aside from exceptional murders and hate crimes by individuals, there is total apathy — and the obtuseness is frightening. Killings (we dare not say murders) by soldiers and policemen will never shock Israel. The propaganda machine will whitewash everything, and the media will be its mouthpiece. No one will demand condemnations. No one will express shock. Few will even consider that the pain is the same pain, that murder is murder.

      How many Israelis are willing to give a thought to the parents of Yousef Shawamreh, the boy who went out to pick wild greens and was killed by an army sniper? Why is it exaggerating to be upset by, or at least give some attention to, the killing of Khalil Anati, a 10-year-old boy from the Al-Fawar refugee camp?

      Why can’t we identify with the pain of bereaved father Abd al-Wahab Hammad, whose son was killed in Silwad, or with the Al-Qatari family from the Al-Amari refugee camp, two members of which were killed by soldiers within a month? Why do we reserve our horror for the synagogue and not consider these killings disturbing?

      http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/.premium-1.627369

    • Horizontal on November 21, 2014, 6:29 pm

      There is no difference between Netanyahu’s call to fight terrorism and President Obama’s call to fight ISIS

      You’re correct in the sense that both instances are based on sketchy reasoning, overblown nationalistic hyperventilation and spring from actions set in motion by the so-called victims (possibly in Obama’s case; definitely in Netanyahu’s).

      You’re also right about us putting the worst possible spin on everything. Take your recent war on Gaza, for instance. That was such a nice war and look what we went and did with it.

    • eljay on November 21, 2014, 6:49 pm

      >> hophmi: There is nothing fascistic about defending the citizens of your country.

      So you agree that any country whose citizens happen to be visting or stealing and colonizing land in Israel has a right to attack Israel to defend them from vicious Israeli terrorism, yes? Because that’s not fascistic, right?

      >> And while Netanyahu speaks in terms of a Jewish state, his actions clearly seek to defend Jews, Christians, Muslims, Druze, Ba’hai, and all of the people of different faiths that live in Israel.

      You crack me up. If someone defending a supremacist “Muslim State” had made a similar comment about its leader speaking in terms of a Muslim state defending all of its Muslims and people of different faiths that live in it, you’d be calling bullshit. Your comment is no different.

      • Horizontal on November 22, 2014, 10:08 am

        You gotta admit, it does get us all talking about him, and maybe that’s the point.

    • just on November 22, 2014, 4:49 pm

      “There have been at least four terrorist attacks in Jerusalem in last couple of weeks ”

      hop– there have been many more than that————-mostly by the GoI goons and their settler militia.

  36. Kathleen on November 21, 2014, 3:10 pm

    Here is what Netanyahu (and many other officials in Israel over the decades) think about the US and the US congress. Never forget this.

    Netanyahu: ‘America is a thing you can move very easily’

    voices.washingtonpost.com ›

    Netanyahu: ‘America is a thing you can move very easily’

    The United States and Israel have made a huge effort this month to patch up the sometimes difficult relationship between President Obama and Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu. But a newly released video of Netanyahu, speaking in an unvarnished manner in 2001 about relations with the United States and the peace process, may cause some heartburn at the White House.

    “I know what America is,” Netanyahu told a group of terror victims, apparently not knowing his words were being recorded. “America is a thing you can move very easily, move it in the right direction. They won’t get in their way.”

    Netanyahu also bragged how he undercut the peace process when he was prime minister during the Clinton administration. “They asked me before the election if I’d honor [the Oslo accords],” he said. “I said I would, but … I’m going to interpret the accords in such a way that would allow me to put an end to this galloping forward to the ’67 borders. How did we do it? Nobody said what defined military zones were. Defined military zones are security zones; as far as I’m concerned, the entire Jordan Valley is a defined military zone. Go argue.”
    ‘America Won’t Get in Our Way…It’s Easily Moved’ – YouTube

    Video for Netanyahu we know how to move america you tube► 8:45► 8:45

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l9dLTOd3V

    • Citizen on November 21, 2014, 3:53 pm

      @ Kathleen

      Every time we make any sort of agreement with Israel we always get the shitty end of the deal–look at our first FTA, which, of course, was with Israel; it was the result of certain Jewish Americans giving away our negotiation plan in advance to the Israelis. Bibi was able to define “military zones” in the Oslo Accords on his own because “nobody said” what they were. Now, why was that? In the “contract” that was an obvious key phrase. The US doesn’t lack for decent attorneys to watch any government contract or “Accord” like hawks. When Israel’s involved, the US hawks always look the other way, it seems to me. The US mediocrity is intentional because of dual loyalties?

      • Horizontal on November 21, 2014, 6:36 pm

        Very astute.

        You’ve heard the phrase “money talks, BS walks?” Well, Israel’s done a lot of both. And I’m convinced that national identities are viewed as quaint throwbacks to the old days by these same self-serving elites, although feigned ultra-patriotism is still a useful tool to wave before the masses when needed.

      • Walid on November 23, 2014, 6:52 am

        “You’ve heard the phrase “money talks, BS walks?”

        Horizontal, it’s actually “money talks, nobody walks”. Those that are familiar with Charlie Greer’s all night show would know where that phrase came from.

  37. David Doppler on November 21, 2014, 7:19 pm

    “Netanyahu’s ‘battle for Jerusalem’ can’t end well for any of us” and the notion that they are playing a “zero sum game” are inconsistent. They are playing a negative sum game, in which the total of what will be left afterward is much less than what we started with. The Israelis and the Palestinians will lose the most, and, the Israelis have a lot more to lose, absolutely, but not proportionately. It will be cataclysm born of fear and hatred. Someone needs to take the Israeli right wing by the scruff of their neck and shake some sense into them, with equal parts lucid wisdom and stern authority. Both sides need to be distracted from the clear direction the Likudniks have been leading us these last 15 years and more, which keeps getting worse.

  38. 666 on November 22, 2014, 9:06 am

    I have been thinking hard, sweating at the brow, on what would be the best way to divide Jerusalem.after some serious thought I believe that a fault line would do the trick.an earthquake would go a long way to settle the problem once and for all

  39. just on November 22, 2014, 9:08 am

    This entire idea of a “religious war” in Jerusalem and beyond that I have spent several days reading about (in the MSM) is absolute Netanyahu BS. Flowing from his lame attempt to hitch Hamas to ISIL.

    It’s NOT a religious war. It’s a culmination of the collective, heinous, and illegal practices of Occupation and violence and everything else engineered by the Israelis. Occupation & Colonialism vs indigenous Palestinians.

    They and their adherents are making a farce out of the entire thing………while bombing, murdering, inciting, provoking, stealing, beating, etc.

    Muslims, Jews, and Christians lived together once ~ they married and raised families, too. This is Zionist colonialism writ large– with WMDs and Israeli- taught hatred and entitlement.

    Netanyahu– It’s not your land, nor is it your capital!

    • seafoid on November 22, 2014, 9:39 am

      I think Livni said the point of a religious war is that it is insoluble.
      Which is what he bots want.

      Nothing to do with justice or anything. Palestinians hate Zionists because they are Jewish, not because they are insufferable shortsighted ethnocentric arseholes.

      More BS

  40. Kathleen on November 22, 2014, 11:54 am

    Some of you may know that I have spent decades calling into national radio and cspan programs as well as linking questions and information on national host of media outlets on Facebook etc about the Israel/Palestine conflict and the situation with Iran.

    Several days ago I posted this on many (probably about 10 fb pages, including, Rachel Maddow, Chris Hayes, Chris Matthews etc) msm fb pages and now am somehow blocked from continuing to do so. Any ideas about how to get over this hump?

    “Iran signed the Non Proliferation Treaty long ago. As signatories to the NPT they have the legal right to enrich uranium up to 20% for peaceful purposes. Israel has and continues to refuse to sign the NPT and the Chemical Weapons Convention Treaty which Iran has signed along with many other nations.

    Over the last decade we have heard many of the same warmongers who pushed the invasion of Iraq based on unsubstantiated WMD claims push unsubstantiated claims about Iran’s legal nuclear program often referring to their program as a “nuclear weapons” program.

    As nations continue to negotiate with Iran on their nuclear program Israel and the Israeli lobby in the US congress continues to push false claims about Iran’s program. Please contact your Reps and President Obama and ask them to continue to negotiate with Iran based on facts. Contact mainstream media outlets and ask them to educate the public about the NPT and Chemical Weapons Convention Treaty. Who has signed and who has not. UNODA – Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT)”

    I did personalize each post to what I know about their generally willingness (Maddow has repeated unsubstantiated claims about Iran along with Diane Rehm, Scott Simon etc) to spread Weapons of Mass Deception about Iran. Asking all of these host to have the Leveretts on instead of going along with this decades long Weapons of Mass Deception agenda fueled by the Iraq warmongers

    http://www.un.org/disarmament/WMD/Nuclear/NPT.shtml

    • just on November 22, 2014, 4:37 pm

      a most worthy effort and message, Kathleen.

      I have no idea how to help you “get over this hump”. i am sorry!

    • Citizen on November 22, 2014, 5:20 pm

      I researched the problem, but came up with no solutions. Those media Facebook sites have their own agenda and your comments there don’t fit it. I don’t know what mechanism they use to block your comments, but I imagine it involves tracing via your e-mail account inter alia.

    • amigo on November 23, 2014, 1:50 pm

      Kathleen, post something nice and see if it is blocked.If it is , then they have blocked your IP address.I doubt you can do anything about that except get a new IP address.

      I apologise if I am pointing out the obvious.

  41. Citizen on November 22, 2014, 3:36 pm

    Murder in Jerusalem, context unavailable in US mainstream media: Murder in Jerusalem http://www.veteranstoday.com/2014/11/20/murder-in-jerusalem/

    • just on November 22, 2014, 8:23 pm

      thanks for that article, Citizen. at least some veterans can read about it.
      it’s way past time for the UN to send in the blue helmets, imho.

      • Kay24 on November 23, 2014, 10:11 am

        I think sending UN peace troops, is long overdue. I cannot understand why they UN who is primarily responsible for this bloody mess, cannot send in some UN troops into Gaza and even other Palestinian areas, so that they can make sure unnamed civilians are not harmed by the occupier. Are they waiting to be invited by the PA, Hamas or some other entity?

  42. Daniel Rich on November 22, 2014, 8:16 pm

    The US, Canadian and Ukrainian battle for Nazism can’t end well for any of us either….

    The row of countries that abstained is full self-explanatory.

    Sick. Very sick.

  43. 666 on November 23, 2014, 12:26 am

    Is anyone else having problems entering text in the text box using Android o’s

    mine has gone stràaaaaaange

    suck.very suck

  44. RobertB on November 23, 2014, 11:37 am

    In Israel, only Jewish blood shocks anyone

    By Gideon Levy

    November 23, 2014

    ” There was a massacre in Jerusalem on Tuesday in which five Israelis were killed. There was a war in Gaza over the summer in which 2,200 Palestinians were killed, most of them civilians. A massacre shocks us; a war, less so. Massacres have culprits; wars don’t. Murder by ax is more appalling than murder by rifle, and far more horrendous than bombing helpless people trying to take shelter.

    Terror is always Palestinian, even when hundreds of Palestinian civilians are killed. The name and face of Daniel Tragerman, the Israeli boy killed by mortar fire during Operation Protective Edge, were known throughout the world; even U.S. President Barack Obama knew his name. Can anyone name one child from Gaza among the hundreds killed?

    A few hours after the attack in Jerusalem, journalist Emily Amrousi said at a conference in Eilat that the life of a single Jewish child was more important to her than the lives of thousands of Palestinian children. The audience’s response was clearly favorable; I think there was even some applause.”

    http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article40297.htm

    • just on November 23, 2014, 5:12 pm

      What would the world do without Gideon Levy? He gives me hope that one day, a change will come. If he can persevere (with bodyguards), and Palestinians can persevere, then I cannot allow myself to become resigned to the status quo nor succumb to the willfully complicit PTB.

  45. 666 on November 25, 2014, 6:44 am

    with chuck hagel gone scores are going to be settled…. negioations have not yielded results.

  46. Egbert Talens on November 26, 2014, 9:12 am

    Now, after 269 responses, what is left to say, comment, remark, re the p-z-p: the polical-zionist project ‘der Judenstaat’ — nót the Jewish State, as some may think of the name Theodor Herzl copied — that was developed from approx. 1860? If by now it is not yet clear there is no proper solútion for the problems which arose in the Palestinian region as a result of this p-zp, one may best forget all about it…

    Amongst the various attempts, mentioned here, to settle or discuss these problems, I miss the one that most probably contained the best effort to reach a proper deal: the Ramallah-congress proposal of 1949. This was the first moment that Palestinians themselves — so far it had been Arab countries dealing with Palestinian troubles and/or interests — took matters in their ówn hands, and as such offered a golden chance to (the) Israeli negotiators. But the latter thought differently. In Lausanne (April, 1949) they responded haughtily and condescendingly to Nimr Al-Hawari and his three fellow-Palestinian representatives of the Ramallah-congress: Aziz Shihada, Nassib Bulos and Zaki Barakat. Those uncourtious, if not brutal, Israeli ‘counterparts’ were Eliyahu Sasson and Walter Eytan.

    Another factor missing in this collection of comments is the secret group of political-zionist conspiritors formed in 1951, plotting for the right moment to grab the remaining parts of Eretz Yira’eel; first in 1956, then in 1967. So ‘Suez’ and Six Day War were by no means accidental happenings, and were definitely not planned by any Arab neighbour, how much efforts have gone into hasbara-type delusions to convince the world of this picture…

    If UN-GA-res. 181-II, of November 29th 1947, is ever going to be implemented — which does nót mean a solútion for the problems at stake, but will definitely form a constrúction with positive aspects for good-willing people in both camps — thén the p-zp will have failed, and the chances for a brighter future for the Palestinian region will finally arise.

Leave a Reply