Despite boosting the idea of Mideast peace, President Trump shields Israel in its resistance to a workable agreement with the Palestinians, as ex-CIA analyst Paul R. Pillar explained in a Sept. 19 speech.
By Paul R. Pillar
President Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, whom the President has entrusted with, among many other things, searching for an Israeli-Palestinian peace, said regarding that task: “We don’t want a history lesson. How does that help us get peace? Let’s not focus on that. We’ve read enough books.”
Controversial maps showing the shrinking territory available to the Palestinians. Hardline Israelis insist that there are no Palestinian people, that all the land belongs to Israel and that it therefore inaccurate to show any “Palestinian lands.”
He’s wrong. Without taking into account the history of this conflict, one will never understand it adequately, much less be able to identify formulas that will furnish the necessary respect for, and meet the minimum needs of, both sides.
One could go way back, but let us instead skip to the point in history when war-exhausted Britain, responsible for administering the mandate of Palestine, was facing increasing violence from the contending communities of, on one hand, Arabs who had lived in Palestine for centuries, and on the other hand, Zionists who had begun to settle there over the previous few decades.
Britain dumped the problem into the lap of the United Nations, where the General Assembly approved in 1947 a partition plan for Palestine that would create two new states, one controlled by Jews and one by Arabs. The resolution approving the plan is the one internationally certified birth certificate of the State of Israel.
The population of Palestine at the time was about two-thirds Arab and slightly less than one-third Jewish, with the bulk of the latter representing immigration in the 30 years since the Balfour Declaration. Jews owned less than 7 percent of the land. Under the partition plan, however, the Jewish state would receive 56 percent of Palestine and the Arab state 43 percent, with the remaining one percent being an international zone in Jerusalem. The population of the projected Arab state would be almost entirely Arab, while the Jewish-controlled state would be 45 percent Arab.
In the war that subsequently broke out, the superior skill and organization of the Zionist forces resulted in conquest of territory beyond the boundaries of the Jewish state in the UN partition plan, such that, at the time of the resulting armistice, the new State of Israel comprised 78 percent of Palestine, with Arabs left in control of 22 percent. Large population displacement occurred during the war. More than 700,000 Palestinian Arabs were expelled from, or fled from, their homes. Between 400 and 600 Palestinian villages were sacked, and Palestinian city life was virtually extinguished. This set of events is what Palestinians came to refer to as the Nakba or catastrophe.
A Single Story
This history is part of a single continuous story of issues that are discussed today as the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the so-called peace process. One cannot excise that history. It is an inseparable part of attitudes, emotions, positions, and demands that exist today.
In 1948, some Palestinians, uprooted by Israel’s claims to their lands, relocated to the Jaramana Refugee Camp in Damascus, Syria
In the seven decades since those events of the late 1940s, Israel has grown into the state that is unquestionably the most militarily powerful in the entire Middle East, as well as being in many respects economically powerful. The next big accretion of territory under Israel’s control came from its conquests in the 1967 war, which Israel started with an attack on Egypt amid brinksmanship in the Gulf of Aqaba by Egyptian strongman Gamal Abdel Nasser.
Since that war, Israel has sustained a program of colonization of the conquered territories. Approximately 600,000 Jewish settlers now live outside Israel’s 1967 boundaries, in the West Bank and the eastern part of what Israel defines as Jerusalem.
Palestinian Arabs, in contrast, have remained sunken in a state of weakness and subjugation. For those in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, this status has included, among many other things, having nearly every aspect of life, from building of homes to daily movement to places of livelihood, subjected to the strictures of Israeli military occupation.
For those in the Gaza Strip, the subjugation has taken a different form, in which Israel has maintained control of air, sea, and, with varying degrees of Egyptian regime cooperation, land access to the Strip. With a suffocating blockade in effect much of the time, punctuated by the destruction of periodic military offensives, the Strip is one of the more miserable densely populated pieces of territory in the world.
Changes of Posture
The political and diplomatic positions of both sides have changed significantly over these seven decades. Whatever movement there has been in a direction that would appear to make resolution of the conflict more possible has come in response to some form of force or pressure. This has been true on both the Israeli and Palestinian sides. A detailed accounting of such changes, and of the circumstances that have led to them, can be found in the excellent book by Nathan Thrall, a senior analyst with the International Crisis Group, published this year under the title The Only Language They Understand.
Mahmoud Abbas, President of the State of Palestine, addresses the United Nations General Assembly on Sept. 22, 2016. (UN Photo)
On the Israeli side, for example, Israel’s limited territorial withdrawals from Syria and the Sinai following the 1973 war were in response to the shock of military setbacks and vulnerability that the war exposed, together with pressure from the United States, which had been stung by the Arab oil embargo. Prime Minister Menachem Begin’s acceptance at Camp David in 1978 of a framework for a projected, eventual negotiated resolution of the conflict was in response to pressure applied by Jimmy Carter and Anwar Sadat.
Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir’s agreement in 1991 to attend a peace conference in Madrid was in direct response to pressure from Secretary of State James Baker in the form of a threat to withhold $10 billion in loan guarantees for housing for Russian emigrants — which, by the way, was the last time the United States applied this sort of pressure on Israel.
The record refutes the idea that reassurance to Israel is what is most required to obtain Israel flexibility regarding the conflict with the Palestinians. But this idea persists because it is so politically comfortable here in the United States.
The same sort of dynamic has taken place on the Palestinian side. The positions and postures of the Palestinian mainstream have undergone a great evolution from a refusal to have any dealing with Israel and the waging of armed struggle against it, to explicit recognition of the State of Israel, commitment to a negotiated resolution of the conflict, commitment to two states living side-by-side in peace, and even an acceptance of pre-1967 Israeli military conquests and a reduction of territorial aspirations for a Palestinian state to the 22 percent of land that was left. The background to this evolution has been setback after setback to the Palestinians, including military defeats in Jordan and Lebanon, exile to Tunisia, and political weakness that is most apparent right here in the United States.
An Asymmetrical Conflict
While the two sides have exhibited similar histories regarding the relationship between pressure and flexibility, we are left with a huge asymmetry. There is an enormous difference in strength, obviously militarily but also economically and in terms of political leverage in the United States.
An Israeli strike caused a huge explosion in a residential area in Gaza during the Israeli assault on Gaza in 2008-2009. (Photo credit: Al Jazeera)
There has been a large difference in physical and human consequences. Far more Palestinians than Israelis have died in this conflict. Even going back to the Arab riots in Palestine in the 1930s, the ratio of Arabs to Jews killed was about ten-to-one. The discrepancy has been even greater in more recent conflict. During Operation Protective Edge, the Israeli military operation in the Gaza Strip in 2014, 2,100 Palestinians were killed, about two-thirds of whom were civilians. Israeli deaths from all causes totaled 72, all but six of whom were soldiers. The ratio in the last previous war in Gaza, in 2008-2009, was similar: 14 Israelis killed; over 1,400 Palestinians killed.
The asymmetry is also one between an occupier and the occupied. This seems to get overlooked in mentions of whether Palestinian leaders want a negotiated settlement. For the overwhelming majority of Palestinians, a negotiated two-state solution would be better than what they have now, and the overwhelming majority of Palestinians realize that it would be. They also realize that an agreement negotiated with Israel is the only way a two-state solution would ever be reached.
Conditions that Palestinian leaders have sometimes attached to negotiations should not be that hard to understand. A freeze on more construction of Israeli settlements is understandable because such construction obviously narrows the negotiating space for any peace agreement, and because nobody’s patience is unlimited for something called a peace process to be dragged out endlessly while more such facts on the ground continue to be established unilaterally, making a two-state solution ever harder to achieve.
Resistance to acceding to Israeli demands about calling Israel a “Jewish state” reflects how this demand was never made of Egypt or Jordan when they made peace treaties with Israel, how such descriptive demands are not part of normal recognition and diplomacy between states, how the PLO long ago explicitly recognized the State of Israel, how acceding to the Israeli demand would be an explicit Palestinian declaration that their Arab brethren within Israel are second-class citizens, and how such accession would be a step toward excusing Israel from accepting any responsibility, even symbolically, for the events of the late 1940s.
The asymmetry extends to how much there is left for either side to concede. Again, it is part of the basic difference between an occupier, who has the power to end an occupation, and the occupied, who does not. For the Palestinians, the story of this conflict, and of the diplomacy surrounding it, has been a tale of successive reductions in what they expect, and what they are expected to expect.
From being what was still the large majority of residents of Palestine even at the time of Israel’s creation, they have seen their prospective home go down to 43 percent of Palestine under the U.N. partition plan, to 22 percent after the warfare of the 1940s. And since the 1967 war, they have seen the 22 percent become not a floor but a ceiling in anything that is talked about as a future Palestinian state. The discourse is about a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of what had been their homeland.
Having been backed to a wall, there is very little room for still more backing up, at least in any way consistent with any Palestinian leader meeting the most basic nationalist aspirations and demand for respect for his people, failing which the leader himself forfeits respect and support.
On the Israeli side, one of the relevant pieces of background is the rightward trend in Israeli politics that has continued ever since Begin’s Likud displaced Labor as Israel’s dominant political party. Some members of Netanyahu’s government have been more direct than he has been in calling for things such as immediate annexation by Israel of most of the West Bank.
Israel and the Status Quo
Another relevant piece of background, consistent with the observation that the only significant movement in the position of either side has come when that side has been under pressure, is that the Israeli government simply does not feel sufficient motivation to end the occupation and reach an agreement with the Palestinians. From that government’s viewpoint, the status quo is tolerable, even comfortable.
Graffiti on the Palestinian side of Israel’s “separation wall” recalls the words of John F. Kennedy in decrying the Berlin Wall with the words in German, “I am a Berliner.” (Photo credit: Marc Venezia)
Israeli has its overwhelming regional military superiority. It has its prosperity; it is among the richest one-fifth of the countries in the world in GDP per capita, according to figures from the International Monetary Fund. As suggested by the previously mentioned casualty figures, the immediate physical and human costs of the conflict itself are sustainable and below levels that would make them a significant political liability for leaders. The ugly aspects of occupation are walled off, literally, and beyond the line of sight of most Israelis, meaning that they do not represent any kind of political imperative to change the status quo.
Sure, there is international criticism, but that is something else that Israeli leaders have long experience living with, deflecting, and even turning to their domestic political advantage as protectors of the nation against what are described as unfair critics and even enemies of Israel.
Most important of all, there is the unquestioning backing of the United States, and the political lock that underlies it. That backing takes the form of $3.8 billion in annual subsidies with no strings attached, no compensatory demands being made about Israeli policy, and a diplomatic posture that makes it news when, as once occurred late in the Obama administration, the United States merely abstained on, rather than vetoing, as it repeatedly has done, a U.N. Security Council resolution expressing the critical view that the overwhelming majority of the international community has of Israel’s colonization project in the territories.
Weigh all this against what the Israeli government would face internally if it were to move to end the occupation and help to create a Palestinian state. This would immediately create a severe domestic political crisis within the dominant political right, featuring the resistance of a settler population that now constitutes about a tenth of Israel’s entire Jewish population. It is easy to see why the current government is not attracted to a change of its current course.
It has been observed, correctly, that of three major possible attributes of the current, and future, State of Israel — namely, being Jewish, being democratic, and being in control of all the land between the Mediterranean and the Jordan River — Israel can be any two of those things, but it is impossible for it to be all three. It is impossible because of demographic facts about the peoples who live in that land.
Israeli leaders in power do not usually address that trilemma explicitly and publicly, but occasionally we get a more direct glimpse of the priorities. The Israeli minister of justice, Ayelet Shaked, has made clear she considers the democracy part to be subordinate to the Jewishness part. She has said that it was “not primarily Roman law or the democratic tradition of the Athenian polis that shaped and forged the modern democratic tradition in Europe or the United States, but Jewish tradition — joined, of course, by other traditions. It is precisely when we wish to promote advanced processes of democratization in Israel that we must deepen its Jewish identity.”
As for the role of civil and political rights in general, Shaked says, “Zionism should not – and I’m saying here that it will not – bow its head to a system of individual rights interpreted in a universal manner.”
Obsolete Transitional Arrangements
Meanwhile, on the Palestinian side, political dysfunction persists that is partly a legacy of failed peace process efforts of the past. The leader of the Palestine Liberation Organization, which is the recognized interlocutor for peace negotiations, is Mahmoud Abbas, who gets more attention for his other role as head of the Palestinian Authority.
President Jimmy Carter signing the Camp David peace agreement with Egypt’s Anwar Sadat and Israel’s Menachem Begin.
The P.A. was established under the Oslo process in the 1990s to be only a transitional mechanism. It was supposed to yield to something more permanent, like a real Palestinian state, in five or so years. The P.A. long ago passed its sell-by date. Many Palestinians now regard it, with good reason, as mostly an administrative auxiliary to the Israeli occupation. Stasis has set in. Abbas is now in the 13th year of what was supposed to have been a four-year term as P.A. president.
The P.A., and the Fatah-dominated PLO, also do not represent all of the Palestinian body politic. They do not represent refugees, and they do not represent the stream of opinion embodied in Hamas, which won the last free and fair Palestinian parliamentary election, has made clear it is prepared to live in peace in a Palestinian state side-by-side with the State of Israel, and has tried to observe the cease-fires negotiated after the last two Gaza wars.
Israel and the United States refused to accept that election result, and Israel has done everything it can to sustain division between Hamas and Abbas’s P.A., such as by withholding tax receipts owed to the Palestinians when the P.A. has made a move to resolve differences with Hamas. We can expect the same Israeli reaction to an initiative announced by Hamas this week, in which it says it will dissolve its own administration of Gaza in favor of a new joint administration with the P.A. and participation in fresh Palestinian elections.
Recent internal developments on the Israeli side, and specifically Netanyahu’s legal and political problems stemming from multiple corruption cases, only make matters worse regarding any peace process. The prime minister’s response has been to tie himself ever more closely to the right-wing coalition partners whose support he needs to stay in office. That means more of an inflexible hard line on anything having to do with the Palestinians. Netanyahu recently said to an audience of West Bank settlers, “We are here to stay forever. We will deepen our roots, build, strengthen and settle.”
Many informed observers believe that the two-state solution is dead. I don’t believe it is dead in the sense of technical feasibility. Despite how far the Israeli colonization of the West Bank has gone, it still would be possible to construct a peace agreement along lines that have been well known for quite some time, based on the 1967 borders with mutually agreed upon land swaps, and creative ways to deal with sticky issues such as right of return and control of holy places in Jerusalem.
But what the pessimistic observers accurately note, besides the ever-narrowing bargaining space from construction of additional facts on the ground, is how much of the edifice on which the so-called peace process is based has been regarded by one side as a basis for avoiding an ultimate peace agreement rather than building one. The Oslo formula that created the P.A. was based, on Israeli insistence, on the 1978 Camp David framework agreement, which in turn was based on an autonomy plan from Begin that was designed not to establish Palestinian self-determination but to prevent it.
This has been a matter of peace processing indefinitely while the side in control has created still more facts on the ground. Begin’s successor Yitzhak Shamir was quite candid about this when he said, ”I would have carried on autonomy talks for ten years, and meanwhile we would have reached half a million people in Judea and Samaria.”
Trump’s Posture
And now we have, in the country with the greatest potential outside leverage over all this, the Trump administration. Donald Trump said some things early in his campaign about being even-handed, but then he made his peace with (the intensely pro-Israeli billionaire) Sheldon Adelson, and from the time he spoke later during the campaign to AIPAC, most of what he has said and done on this issue would have easily passed muster in the Israeli prime minister’s office.
President Trump meets with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in New York on Sept. 18, 2017. (Screenshot from Whitehouse.gov)
His son-in-law the envoy comes from a family with connections to West Bank settlements. Trump’s bankruptcy lawyer, whom he has appointed as ambassador to Israel, has direct personal involvement in aiding a West Bank settlement, has likened liberal, pro-peace American Jews to Nazi collaborators, and recently departed from a long-established U.S. diplomatic lexicon by referring to the “alleged occupation”.
Trump has backed away from the two-state solution, which had been the explicit U.S. objective of the previous couple of administrations, Republican and Democratic, and the implicit objective of the couple of administrations before that, Republican and Democratic. In an extraordinary statement, the State Department spokeswoman recently said that to recommit to the two-state solution would constitute “bias.”
As former U.S. Ambassador to Israel Daniel Kurtzer commented in an op-ed, “her words indicate that the Trump administration itself is extremely biased — in favor of hardliners in … Netanyahu’s coalition who want the United States and Israel to abandon the two- state outcome.”
Those hardliners, and the Trump administration, have recently been looking to what is referred to as the “outside-in” concept — the idea the other Arab states will lean on the Palestinians to accept something less than a real state. But if the key to a peace settlement rested with those other Arab states, then Israel could pick up off the table what has been on the table for 15 years: the Arab League peace initiative, which offers full recognition of, and peace with, Israel by all Arab states and a formal declaration that the Arab-Israeli conflict is over, in return for an end to the occupation and establishment of a Palestinian state.
Genuine peace with the region still requires genuine peace with the Palestinians. Neither the Saudis nor other Arab leaders will sign off on bantustans for their Arab brethren in Palestine.
And so the prospect is for this long-running conflict to continue to run, with all of the substantial human, economic, political, and diplomatic costs that the conflict has entailed. Only a two-state solution can realize the national aspirations both of Jewish Israelis and Palestinian Arabs. Without it, Israel will continue not to have recognized borders, not be at peace with its region, and not be anything other than a heavily militarized state and in many ways a pariah state. It will, as Netanyahu has put it, “live forever by the sword.”
Without a two-state solution, Palestinians will continue to endure their all-too-well documented subjugation and suffering, and will exhibit the severe discontent that breeds extremism.
And without such a solution, the United States will continue to be associated with acceptance of this festering and undesirable situation, will be seen as condoning and supporting what the overwhelming majority of the world considers a gross injustice, and will continue to be the target of violent extremists who, again and again, cite this issue as one of their principal motivators and rallying cries.
(Pillar was speaking to the Worcester, Massachusetts, World Affairs Council.)
Paul R. Pillar, in his 28 years at the Central Intelligence Agency, rose to be one of the agency’s top analysts. He is author most recently of Why America Misunderstands the World. (This article first appeared as a blog post at The National Interest’s Web site. Reprinted with author’s permission.)
Notice Netanyahu’s hand is rotated to the dominant position.
A picture worth a thousand words.
Israel’s Systematic Land Expropriation, Displacement and Abuse of the Palestinian Bedouin Population in the Negev
Prior to the founding of the State of Israel, the Palestinian population in the Negev consisted almost entirely of 70,000-90,000 Bedouin, living mainly in the northern and northwestern parts of the region.
The 1948 war that followed Israel’s declaration of independence war brought about a dramatic change in this situation. During the fighting, over 50,000-65,000 Bedouin fled, were driven out, or abandoned the area, leaving their land behind.
By the end of the war, the Israeli government under Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion opposed the return of the Bedouin from Jordan and Egypt, just as it opposed the return of most of the
other Palestinian refugees. Furthermore, Ben-Gurion also wanted to expel the remaining of Bedouin remaining in the Negev. Eventually, Ben-Gurion changed his mind, holding that the Bedouin remaining in the Negev would not pose an obstacle to Jewish settlement there.
The remaining Bedouin represented just 19 of the original 95 tribal communities that lived in the Negev. The region was declared a military area that the Bedouin were banned from entering.
The Israeli state’s view is that the Bedouin have no land whatsoever.
The Israeli government declared most Bedouin land as state-owned property. Bedouin houses or other structures built on the confiscated land were deemed illegal. Israeli land acquisition laws ruled that unlicensed buildings could not be connected to facilities such as water and electricity.
Bedouin houses or other structures built on the confiscated land were deemed illegal. Israeli law ruled that unlicensed buildings could not be connected to facilities such as water and electricity.
Vast areas of Bedouin land were seized to create military bases, for various state development projects, and to promote Jewish settlement in the Negev.
The Israeli government broadly refused to recognize Bedouin families’ legal documents proving that they own their land. By various means of coercion, most of the remaining Bedouin population was “transferred” to the confines of a small number of government-created townships.
The Israeli government’s despicable history of displacement, expropriation, and abuse of its non-Jewish “citizens”, particularly the Bedouin in the Negev, is little known outside of Israel.
For more on Israel’s transfer and resettlement policies targeting Palestinian Bedouin of the Negev region see:
https://web.stanford.edu/group/journal/cgi-bin/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/Zuabi_SocSci_2012.pdf
It looks as if the Bedouin will be on the next Death March. From a search I just made:
“Israel Revokes Citizenship of Hundreds of Negev Bedouin, Leaving Them Stateless”
Some were citizens for 40 years, served in the army and paid their taxes, but had their status canceled with a single keystroke and no further explanation
Jack Khoury Aug 25, 2017 8:21 AM
h**ps://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-1.808886
For now the propagandists will wave their hands and speak glowingly of how “integrated” the pissant nation of Israel has been, but when push comes to shove they’re going to make it a Jewish State.
Israel’s Stall-Forever Nuclear, Biological and Chemical Weapons Plan
Israel’s nuclear installation is located in the Negev desert, about thirteen kilometers south-east of the city of Dimona.
Israel has not signed the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons.
The purpose of the reactor includes the production of nuclear materials for use in Israel’s nuclear weapons. Information about the facility remains highly classified. Israel maintains a policy known as “nuclear ambiguity” by officially refusing either to confirm or deny their possession.
Israel had produced its first nuclear weapons by 1967 and it has been estimated to possess up to 400 nuclear weapons. In addition to its nuclear arsenal, Israel has a stockpile of chemical and biological weapons.
Israel nuclear weapons delivery mechanisms include Jericho 3 missiles, with a range of 4,800 km to 6,500 km (though a 2004 source estimated its range at up to 11,500 km), as well as regional coverage from road mobile Jericho 2 IRBMs.
Additionally, Israel is believed to have an offshore nuclear capability using submarine-launched nuclear-capable cruise missiles, which can be launched from the Israeli Navy’s Dolphin-class submarines.
The Israeli Air Force has F-15I and F-16I Sufa fighter aircraft are capable of delivering tactical and strategic nuclear weapons at long distances using conformal fuel tanks and supported by their aerial refueling fleet of modified Boeing 707’s.
In 1986, Mordechai Vanunu, a former technician at Dimona, fled to the United Kingdom and revealed to the media some evidence of Israel’s nuclear program and explained the purposes of each building, also revealing a top-secret underground facility directly below the installation.
The Mossad, Israel’s secret service, sent a female agent who lured Vanunu to Italy, where he was kidnapped by Mossad agents and smuggled to Israel aboard a freighter. An Israeli court then tried him in secret on charges of treason and espionage, and sentenced him to eighteen years imprisonment.
At the time of Vanunu’s kidnapping, The Times reported that Israel had material for approximately 20 hydrogen bombs and 200 fission bombs by 1986. In the spring of 2004, Vanunu was released from prison, and placed under several strict restrictions, such as the denial of a passport, freedom of movement limitations and restrictions on communications with the press. Since his release, he has been rearrested and charged multiple times for violations of the terms of his release.
Safety concerns about this 40-year-old reactor have been reported. In 2004, as a preventive measure, Israeli authorities distributed potassium iodide anti-radiation tablets to thousands of residents living nearby. Local residents have raised concerns regarding serious threats to health from living near the reactor.
According to a lawsuit filed in Be’er Sheva Labor Tribunal, workers at the center were subjected to human experimentation in 1998. According to Julius Malick, the worker who submitted the lawsuit, they were given drinks containing uranium without medical supervision and without obtaining written consent or warning them about risks of side effects.
In April 2016 the U.S. National Security Archive declassified dozens of documents from 1960 to 1970, which detail what American intelligence viewed as Israel’s attempts to obfuscate the purpose and details of its nuclear program. The Americans involved in discussions with Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion and other Israelis believed the country was providing “untruthful cover” about intentions to build nuclear weapons.
Very informative article. Thanks
The map showing the shrinking Palestinians’ ownership of the land is misleading.
Most of the land in the Mandate and pre-Mandate Palestine was state owned.
Very few people had the actual deeds to a piece of land. It was actually European Jews who started to accumulate land in the area, not the Arabs, although there were Arab land owners as well, but nothing on the scale shown in the article
The European Jews, a.k.a. the AshkeNAZIs.
FYI, Sephardic Jews came from Spain. As far as I know, Spain is still in Europe.
FYI the Zionists who infested Palestine & proceeded to fraudulently create Israel were AshkeNAZI Jews.
For Conventional (pro-Zionist) Hasbara propaganda troll “Sanych” and many team mates, those who pointing out the inconvenient truth about Israel are automatically labeled “anti-Semites”.
That is why “Sanych” and his team count on their very important team mate, Inverted Hasbara (fake “anti-Zionist”) propaganda troll “Paranam Kid”, to shout the word “nazi” at regular intervals.
Quite telling indeed.
Telling? In which way uncle Abe?
The maps that accompany this article are basically accurate.
Conventional (pro-Zionist) Hasbara propaganda troll “Sanych” and Inverted Hasbara (fake “anti-Zionist”) propaganda troll “Paranam Kid” are doing that now-familiar diversionary Hasbara two-step song and dance.
Here are the facts:
A leading canard of Conventional Hasbara (pro-Zionist) propaganda and the Israeli right wing Neo-Zionist settlement movement is the notion of an “unconditional land grant covenant” entitlement for Israel.
Land ownership was far more widespread than depicted in the fictions of Israeli propaganda. In reality, the Israeli government knowingly confiscated privately owned Palestinian land and construct a network of outposts and settlements.
Israel’s many illegal activities in occupied Palestinian territory encompass Neo-Zionist settlements, so-called “outposts” and declared “state land”.
The United Nations has repeatedly upheld the view that Israel’s construction of settlements constitutes a violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention (which provides humanitarian protections for civilians in a war zone).
The Israeli government’s policy governing settlements in Occupied Palestinian territories is implemented by a unit in the Israeli Ministry of Defense: the Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories (COGAT).
The West Bank branch of COGAT has its headquarters in Beit El, located in the hills north of Jerusalem, built on private Palestinian land seized by military order in 1970.
Palestinian land of al-Bireh and Dura al-Qar was confiscated by the Israeli army for a military outpost and later on consigned to settlers for the purpose of civilian settlement.
In 1977, seventeen families from the Religious Zionist movement encamped next to the Israeli army base. The settlement included right wing zealots Ya’akov Katz and Zalman Baruch Melamed.
While the government declared that requisition of the land was temporary, in the Beit El case of 1978 the Israeli High Court approved civilian settlement for reasons of “security”. The state declared that the right of the settlers to remain in Beit El would expire upon the termination of its “military necessity”.
On 10 April 1979, the Joint Settlement Committee of the Israeli Government and the World Zionist Organization endorsed a split into two settlements. In 1997, when Beit El was awarded local council status, it again became a single settlement.
A secret database published by Haaretz in 2009 revealed that Beit El was largely built on private Palestinian lands, without approval.
Private Palestinian property makes up 96.85% of the land occupied by Beit El, along with its outposts.
Israel’s stall-forever illegal occupation of Palestinian territory, its slow motion annexation, and the expansion of right wing Neo-Zionist settlement, are enabled by the Israeli military via COGAT, which is headquartered in Beit El.
https://www.idfblog.com/about-the-idf/idf-units/cogat/
They’re beginning to get out of the “slow motion” mode.
“Israel only occupies 2% of West Bank, says US ambassador”
The main difference between the ignorant jackass Trump and Hillary is that Hillary would have been a lot “slicker” about it. I doubt if she would have appointed such a jerk as Friedman, but the results would have been exactly the same.
h**ps://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/sep/28/israel-occupies-small-fraction-of-west-bank-claims-us-ambassador
The Hasbara troll army is actively recruiting
https://www.idfblog.com/join/
Fascinating discovery.
Quick, register & make yourself useful for a change. They should be interested in someone who is able to spew verbal diarrhoea like you can.
Those of us with the ability to read a map notice that the word “Owned” does not appear anywhere on the particular map in reference.
Speaking of the Negev and greed
https://web.stanford.edu/group/journal/cgi-bin/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/Zuabi_SocSci_2012.pdf
Of course, for Conventional (pro-Zionist) Hasbara propaganda troll “Sanych” and team mates, those who point out the truth are automatically labeled “antisemites”.
That’s why “Sanych” and the team count on their very important team mate, Inverted Hasbara (fake “anti-Zionist”) propaganda troll “Paranam Kid”, to shout the word “nazi” at regular intervals.
Quite telling indeed.
Ambassador Friedman used the misleading “2%” figure in an earlier interview with the Jerusalem Post published on September 1, 2017:
“If you listened to the Obama administration, you would think that the [Israeli] settlements had overtaken the West Bank. It’s still under 2% of the territory. I am personally convinced that there’s nothing in the current status quo with regards to settlements that precludes the resolution of the Palestinian [issue].”
The 2% figure is misleading because it refers restrictively to the amount of land Israeli settlers have built on, but does not account for the multiple ways these settlements create a massive, paralytic footprint in the illegally occupied Palestinian territory of the West Bank.
According to international humanitarian law, the establishment of Israeli communities inside the occupied Palestinian territories – settlements and outposts alike – is forbidden. Despite this prohibition, Israel began building settlements in the West Bank almost immediately following its occupation of the area in 1967.
The Israeli Supreme Court has repeatedly used the term ‘belligerent occupation; to describe Israel’s rule over the West Bank and Gaza. Indeed, Israel’s Supreme Court ruled that the question of a previous sovereign claim to the West Bank and Gaza is irrelevant to whether international laws relating to occupied territories should apply there. Rather, the proper question – according to Israel’s highest court – is one of effective military control. In the words of the Supreme Court decision, ‘as long as the military force exercises control over the territory, the laws of war will apply to it.’ (see: HCJ 785/87, Afo v. Commander of IDF Forces in the West Bank).
The Palestinian territories were conquered by Israeli armed forces in the 1967 war. Whether Israel claims that the war was forced upon it is irrelevant. The Palestinian territory has been controlled and governed by the Israeli military ever since.
Who claimed the territories before they were occupied is immaterial. What is material is that before 1967, Israel did not claim the territories.
Ariel Sharon, one of the principal architects of Israel’s settlement building policy in the West Bank and Gaza, recognized this reality. On May 26, 2003, then Israeli Prime Minister Sharon told fellow Likud Party members: “You may not like the word, but what’s happening is occupation [using the Hebrew word “kibush,” which is only used to mean “occupation”]. Holding 3.5 million Palestinians under occupation is a bad thing for Israel, for the Palestinians and for the Israeli economy.”
Whether one believes that these territories are legally occupied or not does not change the basic facts: Israel is ruling over a population of millions of Palestinians who are not Israeli citizens. Demographic projections indicate that Jews will soon be a minority in the land between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River.
Defenders of Israel’s settlement policies argue that the controversy over settlements is overblown, since the built-up area of settlements comprises only around 2% of the West Bank.
This “2%” argument is at best ignorant, and at worst deliberately disingenuous.
Since 1967, Israel has taken control of around 50% of the land of the West Bank. And almost all of that land has been given to the settlers or used for their benefit. Israel has given almost 10% of the West Bank to settlers – by including it in the “municipal area” of settlements. And it has given almost 34% of the West Bank to settlers – by placing it under the jurisdiction of the Settlement “Regional Councils.”
In addition, Israel has taken hundreds of kilometers of the West Bank to build infrastructure to serve the settlements, including a network of roads that crisscross the entire West Bank, dividing Palestinian cities and towns from each other, and imposing various barriers to Palestinian movement and access, all for the benefit of the settlements.
Israel has used various means to do this, included by declaring much of the West Bank to be “state land,” taking over additional land for security purposes, and making it nearly impossible for Palestinians to register claims of ownership to their own land.
Yesh Din: Volunteers for Human rights is an Israeli organization that collects and disseminates information regarding violations of Palestinians’ human rights in the West Bank. Yesh Din reviewed and analyzed methods used by various official Israeli bodies to take over land in the West Bank
https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/files.yesh-din.org/%D7%A4%D7%A8%D7%A7%D7%98%D7%99%D7%A7%D7%95%D7%AA+/Land+Takeover+Practices+-++English.pdf
The same pattern holds in East Jerusalem – where since 1967, Israel has expropriated around 35% of the land and used it almost entirely for settlements.
According to analysis of official Israeli government data, almost one-third of land that is included as part of the settlements in the West Bank is actually located on privately owned Palestinian land.
The bottom line is that while the built-up area of settlements is presented as small (the “2%” figure), the actual settlers’ control on the ground is huge in the occupied Palestinian territories of the West Bank. And the impact of Israeli settlements on the Palestinian population is far-reaching.
For nearly a century, Zionists and later the State of Israel have attempted to claim that the 1920 San Remo Conference, which allocated former Ottoman territories under the League of Nations Mandate System, granted “the Jewish people” a “legal” entitlement to the whole territory of mandatory Palestine.
Here are the facts:
THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS MANDATE SYSTEM (1919)
The League of Nations mandate system was established under Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations, entered into on 28 June 1919.
Drafted by the victors of World War I, Article 22 referred to territories which after the war were no longer ruled by their previous sovereign, but their peoples were not considered “able to stand by themselves under the strenuous conditions of the modern world”. The article called for such people’s tutelage to be “entrusted to advanced nations who by reason of their resources, their experience or their geographical position can best undertake this responsibility”.
All of the territories subject to League of Nations mandates were previously controlled by states defeated in World War I, principally Imperial Germany and the Ottoman Empire. The mandates were fundamentally different from the protectorates in that the Mandatory power undertook obligations to the inhabitants of the territory and to the League of Nations.
The process of establishing the mandates consisted of two phases:
1. The formal removal of sovereignty of the state previously controlling the territory.
2. The transfer of mandatory powers to individual states among the Allied Powers.
Article 22 was written two months before the signing of the Versailles peace treaty, before it was known what communities, peoples, or territories were related to sub-paragraphs 4, 5, and 6. The treaty was signed, and the peace conference had been adjourned, before a formal decision was made. The mandates were arrangements guaranteed by, or arising out of the general treaty which stipulated that mandates were to be exercised on behalf of the League.
The treaty contained no provision for the mandates to be allocated on the basis of decisions taken by four members of the League acting in the name of the so-called “Principal Allied and Associated Powers”.
QUESTIONS OF LEGITIMACY
The decisions taken at the conferences were not made on the basis of consultation or League unanimity as stipulated by the Covenant. As a result, the actions of the conferees were viewed by some as having no legitimacy.
In testimony before the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, a former US State Department official who had been a member of the American Commission at Paris testified that the United Kingdom and France had simply gone ahead and arranged the world to suit themselves. He pointed out that the League of Nations could do nothing to alter their arrangements, since the League could only act by unanimous consent of its members – including the UK and France.
United States Secretary of State Robert Lansing was a member of the American Commission to Negotiate Peace at Paris in 1919. He explained that the system of mandates was a device created by the Great Powers to conceal their division of the spoils of war under the color of international law.
The US failed to ratify the Treaty of Versailles which included the Covenant of the League of Nations so the US never joined the League. The US government subsequently entered into individual treaties to secure legal rights for its citizens, to protect property rights and businesses interests in the mandates, and to preclude the mandatory administration from altering the terms of the mandates without prior US approval.
The Official Journal of the League of Nations, dated June 1922, contained a statement by Lord Balfour (UK) in which he explained that the League’s authority was strictly limited. The article related that the ‘Mandates were not the creation of the League, and they could not in substance be altered by the League. The League’s duties were confined to seeing that the specific and detailed terms of the mandates were in accordance with the decisions taken by the Allied and Associated Powers, and that in carrying out these mandates the Mandatory Powers should be under the supervision—not under the control—of the League.’
SAN REMO CONFERENCE (1920)
The San Remo conference was a meeting attended by the four Principal Allied Powers of World War I who were represented by the prime ministers of Britain (David Lloyd George), France (Alexandre Millerand), Italy (Francesco Nitti) and by Japan’s Ambassador Keishir? Matsui.
Held in Italy in April 1920, conference passed Resolutions that determined the allocation of Class “A” League of Nations mandates for the administration of former Ottoman three territories in the Middle East: Palestine, Syria and Mesopotamia.
Class A mandates were territories formerly controlled by the Ottoman Empire that were deemed to “… have reached a stage of development where their existence as independent nations can be provisionally recognized subject to the rendering of administrative advice and assistance by a Mandatory until such time as they are able to stand alone. The wishes of these communities must be a principal consideration in the selection of the Mandatory.”
SOURCE DOCUMENT
The source document is available at The United Nations Information System on the Question of Palestine (UNISPAL), established by the Division for Palestinian Rights in response to successive General Assembly mandates. UNISPAL contains English texts of the most important UN documents on the Palestine issue.
The Conference at San Remo source document states:
“It was agreed –
“(a) To accept the terms of the Mandates Article as given below with reference to Palestine, on the understanding that there was inserted in the proces-verbal an undertaking by the Mandatory Power that this would not involve the surrender of the rights hitherto enjoyed by the non-Jewish communities in Palestine; this undertaking not to refer to the question of the religious protectorate of France, which had been settled earlier in the previous afternoon by the undertaking given by the French Government that they recognized this protectorate as being at an end.
“(b) that the terms of the Mandates Article should be as follows:
:The High Contracting Parties agree that Syria and Mesopotamia shall, in accordance with the fourth paragraph of Article 22, Part I (Covenant of the League of Nations), be provisionally recognized as independent States, subject to the rendering of administrative advice and assistance by a mandatory until such time as they are able to stand alone. The boundaries of the said States will be determined, and the selection of the Mandatories made, by the Principal Allied Powers.
“The High Contracting Parties agree to entrust, by application of the provisions of Article 22, the administration of Palestine, within such boundaries as may be determined by the Principal Allied Powers, to a Mandatory, to be selected by the said Powers. The Mandatory will be responsible for putting into effect the declaration [Balfour Declaration] originally made on November 8, 1917, by the British Government, and adopted by the other Allied Powers, in favour of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.”
CONCLUSION
Zionists and the State of Israel continue to claim that the language of the San Remo Conference source document quoted above, specifically the two words “in Palestine”, was an unconditional land grant ‘legally’ establishing the entire territory of the British mandate in Palestine as “a national home for the Jewish people”.
It is clear from the San Remo Conference source document that no such unconditional land grant was expressed and implied, nor did the British government have legal authority to do so under the League of Nations Mandate System.
Despite later claims about what was “understood” about the San Remo Conference proceedings, the source document clearly indicates that territorial claims by Zionists and the State of Israel based on San Remo are spurious.
Zionist enthusiasm for San Remo remains undiminished, fact be damned.
http://content.ecf.org.il/files/M00309_SanRemoConferenceResolutionEnglishRetyped.pdf
https://www.un.org/unispal/document/syria-mesopotamia-palestine-mandates-san-remo-conference-uk-france-italy-japan-resolution-non-un-document/
And yet, on the basis of that & Resolution 181, the Zionists went ahead with the creation of their state. This is another reason, in addition to the ones mentioned above, why their state lacks legitimacy, and they know it full well. In other words, their state is a “country”.
@Vincent Calba re the San Remo conference.
I look forward to Israel respecting the borders decided upon by Britain, France, Italy and Japan, per the San Remo text.
And what of ” it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine”,
collective punishment, displacement, military tribunals, denial of citizenship or property rights being the order of the day.
I think I am done with replying in the forum as it is very time-consuming, it’s often difficult to have factual discussions and there are a few people who are insulting or hateful. So I don’t thing debating will change anything for them.
For the others, please accept my apologies if I do not answer to the pending discussions.
Best
The following is a quote from the 1922 White Paper –
“These apprehensions, so far as the Arabs are concerned are partly based upon exaggerated interpretations of the meaning of the [Balfour] Declaration favouring the establishment of a Jewish National Home in Palestine, made on behalf of His Majesty’s Government on 2 November 1917.
‘Unauthorized statements have been made to the effect that the purpose in view is to create a wholly Jewish Palestine. Phrases have been used such as that Palestine is to become “as Jewish as England is English.” His Majesty’s Government regard any such expectation as impracticable and have no such aim in view. They would draw attention to the fact that the terms of the Declaration referred to do not contemplate that Palestine as a whole should be converted into a Jewish National Home, but that such a Home should be founded “in Palestine.” In this connection it has been observed with satisfaction that at a meeting of the Zionist Congress, the supreme governing body of the Zionist Organization, held at Carlsbad in September, 1921, a resolution was passed expressing as the official statement of Zionist aims “the determination of the Jewish people to live with the Arab people on terms of unity and mutual respect, and together with them to make the common home into a flourishing community, the upbuilding of which may assure to each of its peoples an undisturbed national development”‘.
Conventional (pro-Israel) Hasbara troll “Vincent Calba” thinks he’s done with what has no doubt been a “very time-consuming” one-man barrage of “hate” speech… from “Vincent Calba”
“hateful”
“blinded by hate”
“anti-semitic hate”
“hate culture”
“hate education”
“hate has taken the lead”
“I know people hate Israel”
“You are rabid hater and rude person”
“Vincent Calba” evidently has great difficulty with factual discussions.
http://images6.fanpop.com/image/photos/37200000/Haters-gonna-hate-chrissystyles1-37246818-469-353.jpg
“For Jews Only: Racism Inside Israel”
http://www.colorlines.com/articles/jews-only-racism-inside-israel
This part of your post triggered an odd thought from out of the blue. Yes, the US has an extremely “efficient” media machine, but what if Israel does as well?
Whenever I’m searching for the latest Israeli atrocity, even when it isn’t touched by the US Corporate Media, one or more Israeli site will usually cover it, and more often than not do a heck of a good job in the process.
WHAT IF this amazing liberal/honest reporting is something designed for American Jews to see – to allow them to keep pretending that Israel isn’t a lost cause, and that there might someday be drastic reforms in the little outhouse of a nation? That these Israeli sites aren’t under attack by the crazy and fanatical settlers suggests to me it’s an open though unspoken secret so as to keep the deception going as long as possible. “There Is Still Hope!”
In today’s world my main fear isn’t that I’m too paranoid, but that I’m not being paranoid enough. Especially regarding matters concerning the Neocons and their brethren in Holy Israel.
The US’s association and acceptance of gross violations of human rights in pursuit of its own agenda is well understood globally. But that ‘association’ is only part of it.
Studies of US ‘strategy of tension [NATO/GLADIO]’ ‘School of the Americas’ and ‘Phoenix’ type programs, are evidence that the US actually teach and practice said gross violations on civilian populations as a matter of course. And that the US has a media machine so efficient it can pretend to be isolated from it (R2P/Good-guy doctrine)holly(The great Wurlitzer)wood(plausible deniability)
Both Israel and US/NATO’s well reported alliances and collusion with all terrorist entities in the ‘so-far-failed regime change op’ in Syria – for example alNusra/ at Deir Ezzor http://theduran.com/russia-releases-photos-proving-ussdfisis-collusion-deir-ez-zor/ , and the recent NATO/Silkway expose https://trud.bg/350-diplomatic-flights-carry-weapons-for-terrorists/ , suggests every part played by US/IS in the ‘diplomatic arena’ toward Palestinian Justice, are simply ruse, to cover the expansion plan continuing with ever greater support from US administrative systems embedded in the ‘forever’ doctrine of the greater Israel project.
If there was such a thing as a greater israel project they’d have kept the Sinai and annexed it like they did the golan heights, and they’d have kicked the Jordanians asses so far they’d all have to go back to live in Saudi Arabia.
If there were no greater israel project the “country” would have vacated the Stolen Palestinian Territories a long time ago. That theft is in line with the Likud charter that “The Jordan river will be the permanent eastern border of the State of Israel.”
If there were no greater israel project the “country” would not have peddled its lies in & coerced the US to invade & destroy Iraq, would not have peddled its lies in & coerced the US to attack Syria, would not have kept Lebanon occupied for 18 years, etc.
The Middle East is starting to take shape as per the Yinon Plan.
Inverted Hasbara (fake “Anti-Zionist”) propaganda troll “Paranam Kid” is sometimes forced to take a breather and say something factually accurate without shouting the word “nazi”.
Yes, the original Likud Party platform of March 1977, under the heading “The Right of the Jewish People to the Land of Israel (Eretz Israel)” indeed does state that “The Jordan river will be the permanent eastern border of the State of Israel.”
The “Peace & Security” chapter of the 1999 Likud Party platform further rejects a Palestinian state: “The Government of Israel flatly rejects the establishment of a Palestinian Arab state west of the Jordan river. The Palestinians can run their lives freely in the framework of self-rule, but not as an independent and sovereign state.”
This platform has never been rescinded.
Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu was also exposed in a 2001 video bragging that he “stopped the Oslo Accords” after receiving US guarantees that Israel would not be required to withdraw from “specified military locations” – chosen by himself, including the whole of the Jordan Valley/eastern border of the West Bank.
Speaking at a home in the illegal Israeli settlement of Ofra on the West Bank, Netanyahu bragged: “I know what America is. America is something that can be moved easily, moved in the right direction”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i4XqR8h8fJI
Over the past decade and a half, which included tactical “disengagement” followed by regular bombardment of Gaza, Israel has continued to implement its stall-forever plan.
Conventional (pro-Zionist) Hasbara troll “Abronyc” and his team mate, Inverted Hasbara (fake “anti-Zionist”) troll “Paranam Kid” continue their made-in Israel propaganda two-step song and dance.
My made in Israel propaganda? OK, then I am quite happy to post it here for the 3rd time.
The simple truth, is that your beloved “country” is a
totalitarian-Nazi/onist-antisemitic-landgrabbing-colonising-terrorising-terror/sponsoring-butchering-blackmailing-apartheid/Hafrada-genocidal-jew/master race/Herrenvolk-ethnotheocracy that was founded fraudulently & is the only true travesty of democracy in the Middle East.
All your pseudo-scientific BS & refusal to admit this simple fact contributes to prolonging the status quo. Your criticism of Israel is pure window-dressing because at the end of the day you support the filth of that racist cesspool.
Now run to the management of your beloved “country” & ask them if they can confirm this is made-in-Israel propaganda. Then report back here, if you dare to put your money where your mouth is.
“made in Israel propaganda […] I am quite happy to post it here”
https://blog.codinghorror.com/content/images/2015/04/obvious-troll-is-obvious.jpg
It is impossible to rationally or morally defend the “positions” held by the Israeli state, its military, and the Israel Lobby.
Conventional Hasbara (pro-Israel / pro-Zionist) propaganda can’t conceal the Israel’s history of brutal ethnic cleansing, the gross injustice of its 50-year military occupation of Palestinian territory, and the real travesty of Israeli racism.
The Hasbara troll army cannot simply rely on Conventional Hasbara (pro-Israel / pro-Zionist) propaganda rhetoric.
Inverted Hasbara propaganda rhetoric uses fake “anti-Zionist” and fake “anti-Israel” verbiage, peppered with fake “anti-Jewish” and fake “anti-Semitic” epithets, including frequent use of the word “nazi”.
The antics of Inverted Hasbara “strawman sockpuppets” like “Paranam Kid” reveal the profound inner rot of Israeli state policy and the Israel Lobby.
Says the fanatic zionist posing as an anti-zionist/Israel “critic”. Your disguise is so transparent it is pathetic. Try something else to cover up your love for that racist cesspool, that putrefying boil on the face of the earth.
There is a lawyer joke which goes like this:
That’s relevant to the Zionist propagandists in that both the Facts and the Law are against them, so they have the New York Times and Washington Post and other Corporate media to Yell Like Hell for them.
While that is happening, of course the armies of internet trolls do foot-soldier work of lying like hell. We’ve seen a lot of that on this thread.
A site I rarely check is almost 100% Zionist Bull S***. I check it for the rare times when they accidentally publish some useful material. The example I’m showing isn’t one of the latter.
Title: “Iran Defies Nuclear Deal With Latest Ballistic Missile Test”
This is yet another example of Israel’s complete ownership of the US Congress which is supposed to represent US citizens. Instead these trained poodles do exactly what they’re told, and say exactly what they’re told to say. If Israel whispers “frog” to any of them, they jump!
Does the fact the Iran Nuclear Deal has nothing whatever to do with Iran’s missile tests mean a thing to the congressional *hores, the NYT/WP, or the trolls? Of course not.
Here is a link to what is supposed to be the Full Text of the Iran deal. See if you can find “rocket” or “missile” or any such in that text.
h**p://www.cnn.com/2013/11/24/world/meast/iran-deal-text/index.html
Yet another example of the Israel Lobby’s complete ownership of certain media organs, “Iran Defies Nuclear Deal With Latest Ballistic Missile Test” by Adam Kredo certainly qualifies as 100% Made-In-Israel Bull S***.
http://freebeacon.com/national-security/iran-defies-nuclear-deal-latest-ballistic-missile-test/
Kredo, a senior writer for the Washington Free Beacon, has worked for Washington Jewish Week, and has been featured in outlets such as the Jerusalem Post and the Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
The Washington Free Beacon was founded in 2012 by Michael Goldfarb, Aaron Harrison, and Matthew Continetti, who remains its editor-in-chief.
Goldfarb was contributing editor for William Kristol’s neoconservative redoubt, The Weekly Standard, and was a research associate at the Project for the New American Century. During the 2008 presidential race, Goldfarb served as John McCain’s deputy communications director.
Continetti became associate editor at The Weekly Standard and is married to Bill Kristol’s daughter, Anne Elizabeth Kristol.
Harrison is president of The Center for American Freedom (CAF) is a Washington based self proclaimed “conservative advocacy group”. The group is a 501(c)(4) organization and subsequently not required to disclose its donors. According to Goldfarb, its chairman, CAF has an annual budget of “several million dollars.”
The progressive media watchdog group Media Matters for America’s founder David Brock sent a letter to news organizations in 2014 saying, “If credible media outlets regard the unethical practices of The Free Beacon as valid, all of journalism will be debased.”
Wtf r u taking about ?!?! Through centuries of artifacts brought to light the only evidence is purely Jewish roots and ancestry in and around what is israel proper. If the law and the facts are against anyone it’s the fakeastinians that have the real problem as far as their case, and especially in the international courts.
1. what evidence are you talking about
2. if that “evidence” is true, that confirms that the “country” should return to within the confines allocated to it by the international community, i.e. pre-1967 borders.
In the May issue of the 1923 National Geographic there was an article titled “A Visit to Three Arab Kingdoms”. I’ve just uploaded that for downloading by any interested persons. I regret the 15meg file size. It could have easily been 5% of that size and still have readable text, but the photographs would have become blurs.
On page 27 is the part I want to highlight. In Palestine the Muslims were 77%, the Catholics 11.5%, and the Jews 10.6%.
h**ps://www.sendspace.com/file/d1mzb8
But with the British striving at every turn to help the newcomers, the arrogance of the Zionists grew, and of course so did their dislike by the vast majority of the population.
I know that Communism did some awful things, and that system deserves all the bashing it gets. But I’m going to contend that the British Empire was much worse, for it was at least as thorough in the evil things it did, and it lasted for centuries instead of decades for Communism.
Right on, and in addition the British Empire has affected a much larger swath of the world than Communism.
The latest troll on this thread has been waving around “the San Remo conference” as if it was an ultimate ‘end-of-discussion’ weapon. So I decided to try to locate a non-recent reference to the thing, and found a 1939 book by a professional journalist named Joseph Jeffries. I’ve uploaded the relevant chapters (20 and 21) so others can examine it themselves.
h**ps://www.sendspace.com/file/hs4wpo
It’s a sad tale of sneaky and underhanded dealing both in Europe and the US. For those who want to read all of “Palestine: the Reality” here is a link to archive.org:
h**ps://archive.org/details/PalestineTheReality
To buy your own hard copy here is a seller, and there are others.
h**ps://www.abebooks.com/servlet/BookDetailsPL?bi=22433158201&clickid=Vx32snThRxVdwZv3FJxZbVN6Ukmw45zSkwEMxE0&cm_mmc=aff-_-ir-_-73934-_-77797&ref=imprad73934&afn_sr=impact
Why don’t you read the source document itself?
Do you need somebody else help to understand the clear wording of the conference decisions of the mandate’s articles?
Of course, the wording does not suit your worldview so you have to find a Zachary Smith of the middle of the last century who will say that the wording means the opposite of what it means?
The full text source document is attached to my extended comment below which details the League of Nations mandate system (1919), questions concerning the legitimacy of the mandate conferences, and the San Remo Conference (1920) agreement on Palestine.
In short, the claims by Zionists and the State of Israel that San Remo somehow granted “the Jewish people” an unconditional “legal” entitlement to the whole territory of mandatory Palestine are false.
The clear wording of the San Remo source document is easy to understand.
But facts do not suit the worldview of “Vincent Calba” and the Hasbara troll squad encamped on this article.
“miscalculation arrived in 1967. In seizing the last fragments of historic Palestine but failing to expel most of the inhabitants, Israel made itself responsible for many hundreds of thousands of additional Palestinians, including refugees from the earlier war.
“The ‘demographic demon’, as it is often referred to in Israel, was held at bay only by bogus claims for many decades that the occupation would soon end. In 2005, Israel bought a little more breathing space by ‘disengaging’ from the tiny Gaza enclave and its 1.5 million inhabitants.
“Now, in killing hopes of Palestinian statehood, Mr Netanyahu has made public his intention to realise the one settler-state solution. Naftali Bennett, Mr Netanyahu’s chief rival in the government, is itching to ignore international sentiment and begin annexing large parts of the West Bank.
“There is a problem, however. At least half the population in Mr Netanyahu’s Greater Israel are Palestinian. And with current birth rates, Jews will soon be an indisputable minority – one ruling over a Palestinian majority.
“That is the context for understanding the report of a government panel – leaked last weekend – that proposes a revolutionary reimagining of who counts as a Jew and therefore qualifies to live in Israel (and the occupied territories).
“Israel’s 1950 Law of Return already casts the net wide, revising the traditional rabbinical injunction that a Jew must be born to a Jewish mother. Instead, the law entitles anyone with one Jewish grandparent to instant citizenship. That worked fine as long as Jews were fleeing persecution or economic distress. But since the arrival of 1 million immigrants following the fall of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s, the pool of new Jews has dried up.
“The United States, even in the Trump era, has proved the bigger magnet. The Jerusalem Post newspaper reported last month that up to one million Israelis may be living there. Worse for Mr Netanyahu, it seems that at least some are included in Israeli figures to bolster its demographic claims against the Palestinians.
“Recent trends show that the exodus of Israelis to the US is twice as large as the arrival of American Jews to Israel. With 150 Israeli start-ups reported in Silicon Valley alone, that tendency is not about to end.
“With a pressing shortage of Jews to defeat the Palestinians demographically, the Netanyahu government is considering a desperate solution. The leaked report suggests opening the doors to a new category of ‘Jewish’ non-Jews. According to Haaretz, potentially millions of people worldwide could qualify. The new status would apply to ‘crypto-Jews’, whose ancestors converted from Judaism; ’emerging Jewish’ communities that have adopted Jewish practices; and those claiming to be descended from Jewish ‘lost tribes’.
“Though they will initially be offered only extended stays in Israel, the implication is that this will serve as a prelude to widening their entitlement to eventually include citizenship. The advantage for Israel is that most of these ‘Jewish’ non-Jews currently live in remote, poor or war-torn parts of the world, and stand to gain from a new life in Israel – or the occupied territories.
“That is the great appeal to the die-hard one-staters like Mr Netanyahu and Mr Bennett. They need willing footsoldiers in the battle to steal Palestinian land, trampling on internationally recognised borders and hopes of peace-making.”
Israel gets creative to counter its demographic disadvantage
By Jonathan Cook
http://www.jonathan-cook.net/2017-08-31/israel-gets-creative-to-counter-its-demographic-disadvantage/
Historic Palestine in a region, Palestine has never actually had defined borders or recognized and a nation, ever.
But his ( Jared’s) e-mails…private server, but ZINGHAZI. Sure, Jared , the best peace plan ever. We will see Trump Tower in Gaza.
Brilliant. The author’s measured, and forcefully honest analysis of the problems stemming from the meticulously planned “stall”, deserves world-wide attention.
U.N. General Assembly Resolution 181, a “Plan of Partition with Economic Union”, was by no means “the one internationally certified birth certificate of the State of Israel”.
On November 29, 1947, the General Assembly had recommended the adoption and implementation of the Resolution 181(II) Plan for Partition of Palestine, a slightly modified version of that proposed by the majority in the United Nations Special Committee on Palestine (UNSCOP) Report to the General Assembly of September 3, 1947.
The vote for Resolution 181, which required a two-third majority, was a dramatic affair, ending with 33 votes in favor, 13 against, and 10 abstentions.
Resolution 181 was accepted by the Jewish Agency for Palestine, despite its perceived limitations, because Zionist forces were preparing to seize more territory by military means.
Resolution 181 was rejected Arab leaders and governments who argued that the Partition of Palestine violated the principles of national self-determination in the UN Charter which granted people the right to decide their own destiny.
During the 1948 Palestine war, between 400 and 600 Palestinian villages were sacked while urban Palestine was almost entirely extinguished.
The declaration of the State of Israel by David Ben-Gurion and the Jewish People’s Council gathered in Tel Aviv on May 14, 1948 was purportedly aimed at “implementing” Resolution 181. That was a convenient lie.
Approximately 250,000-300,000 Palestinians had fled or been expelled prior to the Israeli Declaration of Independence in May 1948; a fact which was named as a causus belli for the entry of the Arab League into the country, sparking the 1948 Arab-Israeli War.
The precise number of refugees, many of whom settled in refugee camps in neighboring states, is a matter of dispute, but around 80 percent of the Arab inhabitants of what became Israel (50 percent of the Arab total of Mandatory Palestine) left or were expelled from their homes.
Maybe if Hamas stopped lobbing missiles in Israel and encouraging terror attacks, Israel would elect a liberal government that could work with the Palestinians. But the extremists are in control in Gaza and the old corrupted men (M. Abbas et al) are in control in the West Bank so that’s how you get Netanyahu in office. Stop complaining about Israel and promote a secular progressive Palestinian leadership and things will change.
Israel was stealing land and murdering the Palestinians long before Hamas or “the old corrupted men” were in control of anything. But of course you know that already – this is just your throwing some SOS at the fan to confuse the issue.
You can’t steal the core of the land that is eternally yours, especially through very evident 3000 years of proven and universally verified history.
Proven by whom, your bible? Since when is that a document to base anything but make-believe on?
Verified? What? By whom?
Your beloved nazi-onist “country” has lacked legitimacy from day 1, and the nazi-onist scum running the government know it, hence their obsession with delegitimisation, which has already happened.
Here again we see the one-two punch of a Hasbara propaganda troll tag team.
Ever-more-desperate for attention, Conventional (“pro-Zionist”) Hasbara troll “Abronyc” bleats about “land that is eternally yours”.
Ever-more-desperate for attention, Inverted Hasbara (fake “anti-Zionist”) propaganda troll “Paranam Kid” finds a way to stick the word “nazi” twice in a sentence.
https://blog.codinghorror.com/content/images/2015/04/obvious-troll-is-obvious.jpg (x 2)
“totalitarian-Nazi/onist-antisemitic” / “Zionazi” / “you ‘people'”
https://blog.codinghorror.com/content/images/2015/04/obvious-troll-is-obvious.jpg
Inverted Hasbara propaganda trolls like “Paranam Kid” crank up the fake “anti-Jewish” and fake “anti-Semitic” verbiage when their fake “anti-Zionist” and fake “anti-Israel” rhetoric is exposed.
Propaganda troll “Paranam Kid” displays a distinctive affection for the word “nazi”.
Inverted Hasbara employs inflammatory rhetoric in an effort to discredit the valid fact-based position, sound argument, and rational critique of genuine anti-Zionist activists (both Jewish and non-Jewish) and real critics of Israel and Zionism.
The vile masquerades and abusive antics of Inverted Hasbara “strawman sockpuppets” like “Paranam Kid” reveal the profound inner rot of Israeli state policy and the Israel Lobby.
It is impossible to rationally or morally defend the “positions” held by the Israeli state, its military, and the Israel Lobby.
The legacy of ethnic cleansing, the brutal injustice of a 50-year military occupation, and the real travesty of racism in Israel are the reasons why the Hasbara troll army cannot simply rely on Conventional Hasbara (pro-Israel / pro-Zionist) propaganda rhetoric.
Israeli propaganda must also rely on fake “anti-Israel” Inverted Hasbara trolls who shout “nazi” at every turn.
Antisemitism, anti-Jewish, such big terms that, coming from a zio character like you, are completely meaningless. In fact, they are hilarious in this context.
The Life of a Hasbara Troll
https://thetrolldefensenetwork.files.wordpress.com/2017/02/hasbara.jpeg
The resolution approving the plan is the one internationally certified birth certificate of the State of Israel.
No, it is NOT: Res. 181 only recommended the partition, but the UN did not have the authority to recognise, much less “certify”. Israel’s creation was fraudulent, as was the additional land grab from 56% to 78%.That, in combination with its genocidal apartheid/Hafrada system, means Israel lacks legitimacy compltely.
The “country” needs to be dismantled completely & rebuilt from the ground up into a truly democratic state, as opposed to the travesty of democracy it is presently, with EQUAL rights for ALL its citizens, incl. Palestinians. Furthermore, the “country” need to get the hell out of the Stolen Palestinians Territories ad demanded by the international community laws, to which Israel has signed up.
On top of being an ignorant, you are stuborn when you hear facts.
Wishful thinking is not enough to realize your dreams.
Just read the wikipedia page about the conference of san remo, of even better, it’s consequence: the mandante of palestine.
I quoted it earlier but I will quote it again:
” establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country”
QED.
The only purpose of the the mandate was the creation of one state, a national home for the Jewish people.
Nothing replaced it.
The resolution 181 does not come from the UNSC but from the General Assembly which as no power to vote legally binding resolutions. For it to be applicable in international law, it need to be a treaty, ie, accepted by both parties. Since the Arabs refused, the lost the opportunity of having an Arab state in the area under international law.
Please revise your history books, resolutions and historical documents and try to come with facts instead of propaganda.
Vincent, Israel received no land through international law, and since you are obviously well-educated, you know it. The San Remo Resolution and its British Mandate, which you cite as legal justification for the ethnic cleansing of approximately 700,000 Palestinians from their land in the nakba, accomplished by terror and the cold-blooded murder of Palestinian activists, terminated in 1948, and even if it had not, it was simply a colonial diktat with no authority under international law to expel Palestinians from their lands. U.N. Resolution 181 was a non-binding resolution of the General Assembly. Look at the maps at the beginning of this article. Yet you dare assert that the sweeping Zionist ethnic cleansing of Palestinians that has been carried out during and since 1948 was legal and not a crime against humanity.
You told Paranam Kid to “please revise your history books.” Freudian slip much? Try reviewing your history books instead of revising them. It would do wonders for your credibility.
Thank you Alley Cat.
Alley cat,
1) San Remo and the mandate are a justification for establishing a national homeland, nothing more.
2) the Nakba happened when the Arabs declared war on Israel. Had they agreed with the resolution 181, they would still be there.
3) 850000 Jewish refugees had to flee the Arab countries as a result of ethnic cleansing.
4) I don’t dare anything on ethnic cleansing since my argumentation is mainly on legal rights and international law.
5) if the San Remo conference and the Mandate was a colonial diktat, depiste the fact that there is still nothing else that replaces it, international law has no value whatsoever and then the only thing that works for you is what worked since the dawn of humanity: the use of force. Then all your accusations are relative, there’s nothing objective and there’s no point debating since everyone creates it’s own laws.
Unless your are inventing know a third way internationally accepted and that only you and few know about…
Resolution 181 is what Israel desperately uses to justify its existence, so the fact that it is non-binding underscores my point that the “country” was created fraudulently, therefore lacks legitimacy.
The Palestinian Arabs did not refuse the opportunity to have their own state, they refused the “opportunity” to be incorporated in a racist state in which they would have no sovereignty. And they were right because the racist cesspool of you guys turns out to be exactly what the Palestinian Arabs did not want to end up with.
I respectfully suggest you not only revise your history books but have your brains cleaned thoroughly of all that hasbara garbage.
Here we see the one-two punch of a Hasbara propaganda troll tag team.
First we have “Paranam Kid” spewing an Inverted Hasbara (“false flag” Anti-Zionist / Anti-Israel) declaration that “Israel lacks legitimacy compltely [sic]”
Then we have “Vincent Calba” spewing a Conventional Hasbara (overtly Pro-Israel) spurious contention that by rejecting Resolution 181, Arab leaders “lost the opportunity of having an Arab state in the area under international law”.
Indeed, the Arab leaders immediately argued that Resolution 181 violated the very principles in the UN Charter which granted people the right to decide their own destiny. Arab delegations to the UN issued a joint statement the day after the Resolution 181 vote that argued: “the vote in regard to the Partition of Palestine has been given under great pressure and duress, and that this makes it doubly invalid”.
Addressing the Central Committee of the Histadrut (the Eretz Israel Workers Party) days after the UN voteon Resolution 181, David Ben-Gurion stated:
“the total population of the Jewish State at the time of its establishment will be about one million, including almost 40% non-Jews. Such a [population] composition does not provide a stable basis for a Jewish State. This [demographic] fact must be viewed in all its clarity and acuteness. With such a [population] composition, there cannot even be absolute certainty that control will remain in the hands of the Jewish majority… There can be no stable and strong Jewish state so long as it has a Jewish majority of only 60%”
In 1947, the Zionists in Palestine accepted Resolution 181, but planned to immediately expand the territorial boundaries of the “Jewish State” and reduce the number of non-Jews living within it by force of arms. This Zionist policy of territorial expansion and ethnic cleansing was pursued before and after the declaration of the State of Israel by David Ben-Gurion in May 1948, and it remains Israel’s political and military modus oprandi.
The propaganda regurgitated by “Paranam Kid”, “Vincent Calba” and the rest of the Hasbara troll army relies on public ignorance of basic facts about Zionist aspirations in Palestine and the real history of the State of Israel.
Modus operandi (often shortened to M.O.) is a Latin phrase, approximately translated as method or mode of operation.
The term modus operandi is used in criminal investigations to describe the actions used by individuals or organizations (including nation states) to execute a crime, prevent its detection and/or facilitate escape.
A criminal suspect’s modus operandi can assist in their identification and apprehension, and can also be used to determine links between crimes.
A crucial dimension of Israel’s modus operandi is the widespread dissemination of deception via paid Israel Lobby agents, think tanks and media partisans, as well the online troll army of conventional (“pro-Israel” / “pro-Zionist”) and inverted (false flag “anti-Israel” / “anti-Zionist” / “anti-Jewish”) Hasbara propagandists.
Abe is a perfect example of a Hasbara propagandist posing as an Israel critic.
You need to recheck the definition of hasbara because if there is 1 thing I have not been accused of it is that. As for the ignorance of the history of the “country” of Israel is concerned, you should do yourself a favour & read some real literature on the subject.
Legitimacy: lawfulness by virtue of being authorized or in accordance with law. Israel’s genocidal apartheid system & commissioning, its theft of land, and its flouting of international law means the “country” lacks any degree of legitimacy.
The governments have always known that, which is why they have always been obsessed with delegitimisation. That obsession is totally unnecessary, the “country” has always lacked legitimacy without the Palestinians having anything to do for it or with it.
Demonstrating the modus operandi of an Inverted (“false flag” Anti-Zionist / Anti-Israel) Hasbara propaganda troll, here we see “Paranam Kid” employing the following deceptive tactics :
– repeating the slur that Israel is a “country”, implying that somehow it is not a state. In point of obvious fact, Israel is an internationally recognized state, albeit an “outlaw” state due to its illegal settlement policies in the West Bank and Jerusalem, and numerous other direct violations of international law.
– insisting that readers “do yourself a favour & read some real literature on the subject” while citing no specific literature.
– declaring that Israel “lacks any degree of legitimacy”. In fact, there are no significant critics of Israel and Zionism who advance this sort of generalized argument.
For a fact-based discussion on the topic “legitimate” versus “illegitimate” disagreements concerning Israel, I recommend the following address by the American professor of political science, Norman Finkelstein
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yV3CvtIAA9A
Inverted Hasbara (“false flag” Anti-Zionist / Anti-Israel / Anti-Jewish) troll “comments” are peppered with obvious irrationality, often employ extremist rhetoric, and sometimes use overtly “anti-Jewish” racist language.
Inverted Hasbara is designed to discredit legitimate criticism of Israel and real anti-Zionist activism, which relies on accurate historical and legal evidence, and rational, fact-based discourse.
Legitimacy defined: Lawfulness by virtue of being authorized or in accordance with law.
Israel flouts international law as a genocidal apartheid state, which also refuses to vacate the Stolen Palestinian Territories as demanded by the international community. Based on these simple facts Israel lacks legitimacy, despite the fact that it is recognised by other countries. You even confirm it yourself by calling it an outlaw state.
The “country” knows it lacks legitimacy because each & every government since its creation has been obsessed with being delegitimised, unlike any other country in the world. Yes, Israel is exceptional in that sense only.
Rational, fact-based discourse is not the field of a Hasbara troll in disguise, a charlatan, who does not even have the guts to stand for his true feelings & opinions. You are merely a poseur.
Since its inception, the State of Israel has been obsessed with its own “legitimacy”.
The discourse of “legitimacy” plays in Hasbara propaganda in both its forms:
Conventional Hasbara (pro-Israel / pro-Zionist / pro-Jewish) propaganda holds that the Israeli state and its actions are “legitimate” or “have legitimacy”
Inverted Hasbara (“false flag” anti-Israel / anti-Zionist / frequently anti-Jewish or “anti-Semitic”) propaganda holds that the Israeli state and its actions are “not legitimate” or “have no legitimacy”.
Please note that the true purpose of Inverted or “false flag” Hasbara is to “de-legitimize” real critics of Israel.
Inverted Hasbara attempts to falsely portray anti-Zionist activists as irrational extremists or worse, virulent racists.
To bring some clarity to the matter, and to combat both Conventional and Inverted Hasbara propaganda, it is necessary to establish clear definitions. That is not difficult.
The noun “legitimacy” originates with the medieval Latin legitimatus ‘made legal,’ from the verb legitimare, from Latin legitimus ‘lawful,’ from lex, leg- ‘law.’
As “the quality or state of being legitimate”, the noun “legitimacy” has been in use in English with reference to children since the 1690s of children, of kings and governments since 1812, and in general use by 1836.
However, the definition of “legitimacy” encompasses more than its legal sense.
In fact, the noun “legitimacy” has two basic meanings:
1. conformity to the law or to rules, the state of being legally or officially binding or acceptable; and
2. ability to be defended with logic or justification; the quality of being factually valid, sound or cogent
The adjective “legitimate” has three basic meanings:
1. conforming to the law or to rules.
synonyms: legal, lawful, licit, legalized, authorized, permitted, permissible, allowable, allowed, admissible, sanctioned, approved, licensed, statutory, constitutional
antonyms: illegal
2. able to be defended with logic or justification, valid, sound, well founded, reasonable, sensible
antonyms: unreasonable, irrational, unsound,
3. real, genuine, authentic, true, proper, authorized, rightful
antonyms: false, fraudulent
And finally, the verb “legitimate” mean to make legitimate; to justify or make lawful.
Equipped with clear and accurate basic definitions, we may proceed to examine the mishigas (Yiddish for nonsense or craziness) paraded by purported Israel critic, “Paranam Kid”.
“Paranam Kid” declared that Israel “lacks any degree of legitimacy” which is a generalized, rather extreme and obviously false statement.
Israel is recognized as a legitimate nation and is a member state of the United Nations.
What is illegitimate, which is to say, illegal and arguably unsound, are numerous actions by the Israeli state.
Inverted Hasbara employs extremist “anti-Israel” and “anti-Zionist” rhetoric in effort to short circuit rational discussion of the illegal, frequently irrational, and unquestionably illegitimate actions of the Israeli government and the Israel Lobby.
When called out for their mishigas, Inverted Hasbara trolls typically will tone down the extremists rhetoric and attempt to sound reasonable. “Paranam Kid” demonstrates this pattern admirably.
When they fail to evade detection, both Conventional and Inverted Hasbara trolls will either go silent, mumble and sulk off, or fire back with an irrational accusation as demonstrated in the case of “Paranam Kid”.
The recent uptick of Hasbara troll activity on CN indicates that more fun and games are on the horizon in the Middle East and Eastern Europe, two areas where the Israeli government and Israel Lobby are heavily invested.
Stay tuned for more mishigas from “Paranam Kid” and all his pals. They’re gonna have a whole lot more ‘splainin’ to do.
Poor old Abe, the only way he can hold a seemingly reasonable, well-thought-out discourse is by spewing his mile-long comments containing nothing but verbal diarrhoea composed of pseudo-scientific terms that are completely meaningless, such as his self-invented term “inverted hasbara”.
Positive contributions? Forget it, just an objective to shut everyone else up so he can monopolise the threads here. I m sorry to inform you that you won’t shut me up.
“Paranam Kid”
https://blog.codinghorror.com/content/images/2015/04/obvious-troll-is-obvious.jpg
Abe, getting desperate aren’t you, with your verbal diarrhoea running dry, knowing that your beloved “country” is exactly what it is portrayed as here:
a totalitarian-antisemitic-landgrabbing-colonising-terrorising-terror/sponsoring-butchering-blackmailing-apartheid/Hafrada-genocidal-master race/Herrenvolk-ethnotheocracy that was founded fraudulently & is the only true travesty of democracy in the Middle East that lacks any form of legitimacy simply because of its war crimes, crimes against humanity, and its flouting of international law.
Inverted Hasbara propaganda trolls like “Paranam Kid” function as “strawman sockpuppets”.
The “false flag” identity adopted by Inverted Hasbara trolls is created to make the anti-Zionist view appear extremist, foolish, or otherwise unwholesome, in order to generate negative sentiment against it.
The intended effect of inflammatory Inverted Hasbara “strawman sockpuppets” like “Paranam Kid” is to discredit more rational arguments made for the same anti-Zionist position.
In the example above, “Paranam Kid” vomits a 54-word hyphenated litany of purported Israeli Zionist misdeeds, most of which definitely have a factual basis and unquestionably merit censure.
However, masquerading as an “anti-Zionist” activist, Inverted Hasbara operative “Paranam Kid” frames these multiple, undeniable misdeeds of Israeli Zionism into a loud “troll” tirade.
In the Inverted Hasbara rants of “Paranam Kid”, legitimate points of fact-based anti-Zionist discourse are deliberately mashed together with irrelevant slander and pseudo-outrage.
Sound scholarly research and fact-based journalism are generally avoided by “Paranam Kid”.
When reputable sources critical of Israel and Zionism are cited by an Inverted Hasbara propaganda troll, the legitimate critical references are typically buried in a volley of extremist verbiage and crude calumny.
“Paranam Kid” informs us that exposure as a troll “won’t shut me up”. That’s good.
The troll rage campaign of “Paranam Kid” provides a highly instructive example of the specific propaganda tactics of Inverted Hasbara.
@ Abe
“Inverted hasbara”, “mishigas”, verbal diarrhoea, and copy/paste are your favourite words & pass time. You cannot get away from it, not even prove factually what you are spewing here. Your pseudo-scientific approach wrapped in mile-long tirade just shows incompetence to protect your beloved nazi-onist state from opprobrium. Carry on, cowboy, keep digging that hole.
Ever-more-desperate for attention, Inverted Hasbara (fake “anti-Zionist”) propaganda troll “Paranam Kid” finds a way to stick the word “nazi” in a sentence.
https://blog.codinghorror.com/content/images/2015/04/obvious-troll-is-obvious.jpg
@Abe
I don’t need to attract attention, I am getting plenty of it from you.
As for the “nazi” adjective, I understand you don’t like to be used for your beloved “country”, but what you & your ilk will have to realise, because it is the simple truth, is that your beloved “country” is
totalitarian-Nazi/onist-antisemitic-landgrabbing-colonising-terrorising-terror/sponsoring-butchering-blackmailing-apartheid/Hafrada-genocidal-jew/master race/Herrenvolk-ethnotheocracy that was founded fraudulently & is the only true travesty of democracy in the Middle East.
All your pseudo-scientific BS & refusal to admit this simple fact contributes to prolonging the status quo. Your criticism of Israel is pure window-dressing because at the end of the day you support the filth of that racist cesspool.
“I don’t need to attract attention”
https://blog.codinghorror.com/content/images/2015/04/obvious-troll-is-obvious.jpg
Inverted Hasbara (fake “anti-Zionist” / fake “anti-Israel) troll “Paranam Kid” spews inflammatory rhetoric to discredit the valid fact-based position, sound argument, and rational critique of genuine anti-Zionist activists (both Jewish and non-Jewish) and real critics of Israel and Zionism.
The masquerades and antics of Inverted Hasbara “strawman sockpuppets” like “Paranam Kid” reveal the profound inner rot of Israeli state policy and the Israel Lobby.
@Abe
You an anti-Zionist? That’s the biggest joke I have heard this year. You’re just a pure Zionist fanatic who poses as an anti-Zio hoping to cool down the opprobrium your beloved nazi-onist “country” deserves 24/7.
The filth of that cesspool of racism and “never again” hypocrisy knows no bounds, and the likes of you help to cover it up. How low can you stoop?
No, like any other country the Jews invoke the right of return law. All countries have this type of law. Get educated then talk.
This is the real Truth about the Balfour Declaration, not what is written in this Article.
The British Mandate controlled Palestine from 1917 to 1948. Palestine was one large area which included both Israel and Jordan together. When the League of Nations supported the formation of a Jewish homeland in 1920 the British partitioned Palestine into two states: They gave 77 percent of Palestine to the Arabs and called it Transjordan, because it was on the Eastern side of the Jordan River. They gave 23 percent of Palestine to the Jews, which was on the Western side of the river. The Arabs were permitted to live on either side, BUT the Jews were only permitted to live on the Jewish side. The name “Palestine” applied to both sides of the Jordan River in the original mandate. The smaller western part was originally called “Jewish Palestine,” before the State of Israel was born. The larger eastern part was originally called “Arab Palestine”.
The section of land called the West Bank was inside the borders of the 23 percent given to the Jews, on the western side of the Jordan River. This was part of the Jewish Homeland.
It was during the “war of independence” that about 700,000 Palestinian Arabs became refugees. This is how that happen: WHEN the five Arab states invaded Israel to attack and destroy her in 1948, they issued public broadcasts by radio and over public address loudspeakers, urging all Arabs living in Israel to flee to nearby countries so that the invaders could finish off Israel without hindrance. The invaders believed that they would make short work of destroying Israel, and then the Arabs could return to their homes. Those Arabs who did not heed the broadcasts, nor flee from their homes, still remain in their homes and properties to this day, and are successful citizens of Israel.
Arab refugees lived in Jordan and Egypt from 1948 to 1967 but were never admitted or absorbed into their own Arab country. During the same period, the newly born State of Israel absorbed an equal number of Jewish refugees who had fled without any possessions from the Holocaust and from hostile Arab nations.Since that time, these Arab Refugees have multiplied greatly and have borne children and grandchildren. They number in the millions and are still being kept in camps, and are still called ‘refugees’. There has never been another refugee situation in history where the children and grandchildren of refugees were granted refugee status.
This so-called “real truth” is quoted verbatim from Israel’s Prophetic Destiny: If I Forget Jerusalem (Psalm 137) by Jill Shannon. The book is a great example of Hasbara propaganda literature disseminated by pro-Israel Jewish Zionists for consumption by Christians Zionists.
The introduction to Shannon’s book is written by televangelist Sid Roth, an account executive for Merrill Lynch who claims to have wrested himself from the clutches of a “New Age spirit guide” https://sidroth.org/about/sids-story/
According to Roth, Shannon’s book is “a complete work concerning the Church’s responsibilities toward Israel and the Jewish people”.
The political purpose of such propaganda is to “help all Christians to move quickly into the place of informed intercession” on behalf of the State of Israel.
Roth is quite explicit: “the dividing line for the true Church and the church in deception will be their stand on Israel. The Lord is bringing all things to a climax in history, and it is no longer optional for Christians to take their costly stand with the Jewish people and the nation of Israel.”
Hasbara propaganda from the likes of Shannon and Roth is designed to keep Christian Zionists unaware of the real deception.
“God’s end time destiny”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=43&v=TYRRz8_jCpo
A mainstay of pro-Israel Hasbara propaganda and the Israeli settlement movement is the notion of an “unconditional land grant covenant” entitlement for Israel.
After the Six-Day War and the capture of the West Bank, a territory referred to in Jewish terms as “Judea and Samaria”, right-wing components of the Religious Zionist movement integrated nationalist revindication and evolved into Neo-Zionism.
Shannon’s book and similar Hasbara publications are a repackaging of Neo-Zionism for Christian audiences.
The international community considers Israeli settlements in the West Bank illegal under international law. The Israeli government does not accept this.
To grasp the Neo-Zionist mindset of the Israeli settler movement, it is necessary to delve into the religious propaganda that inspires it.
Arutz Sheva (Channel 7) is an Israeli media network identifying with Religious Zionism and the Israeli settlement movement. Israeli Orthodox rabbi Eliezer Melamed took part in the establishment of Arutz Sheva in the illegal West Bank settlement of Beit El.
Also known in English as Israel National News, Arutz Sheva offers online news in Hebrew, English, and Russian, including 24-hour updated text news, live streaming radio, video and free podcasts. It also publishes a weekly newspaper, B’Sheva, with the third-largest weekend circulation in the country.
Melamed’s yeshiva teachings on Torah study and the Talmud (Rabbinic Judaism’s central work) have been broadcast by Arutz Sheva to thousands of households throughout Israel. He serves as rabbi of the illegal West Bank settlement of Har Bracha.
According to Melamed’s radical Neo-Zionism, “The mitzvah of settling the Land of Israel requires Am Yisrael to conquer Eretz Yisrael”
http://www.yeshiva.co/midrash/shiur.asp?id=702
Interesting comment Abe.
Indeed, most religious Jews have a religious reason, argument for settling the land.
I am myself religous but, on purpose, I only use arguments based on international law that everyone is supposed to accept. But, apparently only a minority here accept international law as a basis.
“International law” was cheering on the sidelines while Jews were being exterminate in Europe. Especially the women and children, themire heinous the more thrill the interactions law observers felt.
Yep, and it is sitting on the sidelines as genocidal apartheid Israel has subjugated the Palestinians while it is commissioning their destruction, putting children through court martials & waging war on defenceless women & children. Such a heroic “country”.
Continued expansion of Jewish settlements in occupied Palestinian territories of the West Bank represent a violation of 4th Geneva Convention. Grave violations of this Convention – as for example the defiant refusal to dismantle the settlements as unlawful under Article 49(6), or to dismantle the separation wall as mandated by the International Court of Justice – appear to be war crimes of great severity under international law.
In addition, Israel has occupied Syria’s Golan Heights since 1967, built unlawful settlements, and established a permanent presence. Israel has refused to withdraw from the West Bank and East Jerusalem, as called for by unanimous Security Council Resolution 242.
Add to the numerous military attacks and infringements on the sovereignty of neighboring Arab states the destabilizing fact that Israel secretly and illegitimately acquired and has continued to develop an arsenal of an estimated 300 nuclear warheads, the only state in the Middle East that has a nuclear arsenal, and the only country in the world that refuses to acknowledge its possession of nuclear weapons.
In the face of uncontestable evidence of numerous Israeli violations of international law, Hasbara trolls “Abronyc” can only mumble the hysterical claim that international law observers were “cheering” the genocide of the Jews by Nazi Germany.
Arguments based on international law: just like Israel & its zionist surrogates. How nice.
Finally someone who knows about History and the source of the rights the state of Israel under international law.
Thanks for your comment
American political scientist Norman Finkelstein, whose primary fields of research are the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the politics of the Holocaust, knows about history, the State of Israel, and international law:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=9&v=ECA4IwdI_Hc
International law is a myth loosely defined defined and arbitrarily enforced
Thanks for the Finkelstein video…I wasn’t sure he was still around as he would never be a guest on msm. BTW you seem to be the St. Peter of gatekeeping here so this one’s for you:
https://mail.google.com/mail/ca/u/0/#inbox/15eb6b076d7e1f07
Hasbara troll “Abronyc” arrives on the scene to falsely claim that “international law is a myth”.
In fact, customary international law and peremptory norms are very much a reality and are obligatory upon state and non-state actors. Other areas of international law involve consent-based governance, meaning that a state member is not obliged to abide by this type of international law unless it has expressly consented to a particular course of conduct.
Public international law (or international public law) concerns the treaty relationships between the nations and persons which are considered the subjects of international law. Norms of international law have their source in either:
1) Customary international law (consistent state practice accompanied by opinio juris),
2) Peremptory norms (globally accepted standards of behavior known as jus cogens or ius cogens), or
3) Codifications contained in conventional agreements, generally termed treaties.
Article 13 of the United Nations Charter obligates the UN General Assembly to initiate studies and make recommendations which encourage the progressive development of international law and its codification:
“The UN Charter, in its Preamble, set an objective: ‘to establish conditions under which justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be maintained’. Ever since, the development of, and respect for international law has been a key part of the work of the Organization. This work is carried out in many ways – by courts, tribunals, multilateral treaties – and by the Security Council, which can approve peacekeeping missions, impose sanctions, or authorize the use of force when there is a threat to international peace and security, if it deems this necessary. These powers are given to it by the UN Charter, which is considered an international treaty. As such, it is an instrument of international law, and UN Member States are bound by it. The UN Charter codifies the major principles of international relations, from sovereign equality of States to the prohibition of the use of force in international relations. […]
“International law defines the legal responsibilities of States in their conduct with each other, and their treatment of individuals within State boundaries. Its domain encompasses a wide range of issues of international concern, such as human rights, disarmament, international crime, refugees, migration, problems of nationality, the treatment of prisoners, the use of force, and the conduct of war, among others. It also regulates the global commons, such as the environment and sustainable development, international waters, outer space, global communications and world trade.”
http://www.un.org/en/sections/what-we-do/uphold-international-law/
The dimwitted hasbara troll isn’t exactly wrong when Israel is involved. So long as they have the US covering for them at the UN and the US Congress shoveling taxpayer money to them, in practical terms the oafish Land Grab guy is right in that the rules don’t apply to his grubby little country.
This is true only for Israel, though.
Israel has gotten off scot-free almost every time they’ve tried something wicked. Murder of USS Liberty sailors? Check. Casual murder and starvation of Palestinians? Check.
I know of only one instance where they were got a nice lick to the chops – in 1956. Eisenhower made them give up the territory they’d snatched and planned to keep. There might be another such case, but I’ve never heard of it.
International law is real and it does matter a very great deal. Ask any trade negotiator.
Hasbara troll claims that “international law is a myth” are exactly wrong.
What is exactly right is that international law is seldom enforced with regard to Israel because of the efforts of the Israel Lobby in the United States.
Hasbara troll false claims that “international law is a myth” are an effort to minimize Israel’s numerous violations of international law.
Zachary, you mention President Eisenhower’s readiness to impose economic sanctions on Israel during Suez Crisis in 1956.
When Israel refused to withdraw its troops from the Gaza Strip and Sharm el-Sheikh (on the southern tip of the Sinai Peninsula), Eisenhower sought UN-backed efforts to impose economic sanctions on Israel until it fully withdrew from Egyptian territory.
Senate Majority Leader Lyndon B. Johnson and minority leader William Knowland objected to American pressure on Israel. Johnson told the Secretary of State John Foster Dulles that he wanted him to oppose “with all its skill” any attempt to apply sanctions on Israel. Dulles rebuffed Johnson’s request, and informed Eisenhower of the objections made by the Senate. Eisenhower was “insistent on applying economic sanctions” to the extent of cutting off private American assistance to Israel which was estimated to be over $100 million a year.
Ultimately, the Democratic Party-controlled Senate would not cooperate with Eisenhower’s position on Israel. Eisenhower finally told Congress he would take the issue to the American people, saying, “America has either one voice or none, and that voice is the voice of the President – whether everybody agrees with him or not.” The President spoke to the nation by radio and television where he outlined Israel’s refusal to withdraw, explaining his belief that the UN had “no choice but to exert pressure upon Israel”.
On 30 October, the Security Council held a meeting, at the request of the United States, when it submitted a draft resolution calling upon Israel immediately to withdraw its armed forces behind the established armistice lines. It was not adopted because of British and French vetoes. A similar draft resolution sponsored by the Soviet Union was also rejected.
On 31 October, France and the UK launched an air attack against targets in Egypt, which was followed shortly by a landing of their troops at the northern end of the Canal zone. Later that day, considering the grave situation created by the actions against Egypt, and with lack of unanimity among the permanent members preventing it from exercising its primary responsibility to maintain international peace and security, the Security Council passed Resolution 119; it decided to call an emergency special session of the General Assembly for the first time, as provided in the 1950 “Uniting for Peace” resolution, in order to make appropriate recommendations to end the fighting.
The emergency special session was convened 1 November; the same day Nasser requested diplomatic assistance from the U.S., without requesting the same from the Soviet Union; he was at first skeptical of the efficacy of US diplomatic efforts at the UN, but later gave full credit to Eisenhower’s role in stopping the war.
In the early hours of 2 November, the General Assembly adopted the United States’ proposal for Resolution 997 (ES-I); the vote was 64 in favour and 5 opposed (Australia, New Zealand, Britain, France, and Israel) with 6 abstentions. It called for an immediate ceasefire, the withdrawal of all forces behind the armistice lines, an arms embargo, and the reopening of the Suez Canal, which was now blocked. The Secretary-General was requested to observe and report promptly on compliance to both the Security Council and General Assembly, for further action as deemed appropriate in accordance with the UN Charter. Over the next several days, the emergency special session consequently adopted a series of enabling resolutions, which established the first United Nations Emergency Force (UNEF), on 7 November by Resolution 1001.
On 7 November, David Ben-Gurion addressed the Knesset and declared a great victory, saying that the 1949 armistice agreement with Egypt was dead and buried, and that the armistice lines were no longer valid and could not be restored. Under no circumstances would Israel agree to the stationing of UN forces on its territory or in any area it occupied. He also made an oblique reference to his intention to annex the Sinai Peninsula. The speech immediately drew increased international pressure on Israel to withdraw.
That day in New York, the United Nations emergency session passed Resolution 1002, again calling for the immediate withdrawal of Israeli troops to behind the armistice lines, and for the immediate withdrawal of British and French troops from Egyptian territory. After a long Israeli cabinet meeting late on 8 November, Ben-Gurion informed Eisenhower that Israel declared its willingness to accept withdrawal of Israeli forces from Sinai, ‘when satisfactory arrangements are made with the international force that is about to enter the canal zone’.
As a direct result of the Suez Crisis, Eisenhower asked Congress on 5 January 1957 for authorization to use military force if requested by any Middle Eastern nation to check aggression and, second, to set aside $200 million to help Middle Eastern countries that desired aid from the United States. Congress granted both requests and this policy became known as the Eisenhower Doctrine.
The lack of a peace settlement following the 1956 war and the rise of tensions between Egypt and Israel laid the groundwork for the Six Day War in 1967.
I’d give a pretty penny to know if the person spouting this nonsense is 1) an American Protestant Fundamentalist or 2) a Zionist Propagandist. The gullibility and/or dishonesty here is massive!
Thanks to Abe for saving me the time of making a long post myself.
The Holy Land is not ISRAEL’s to give away. JEHOVAH GOD’s Holy Word is plain that HIS NAME is on JERUSALEM, ISRAEL. BUT, HE has “promised” it to The Jewish People. Genesis Chapter 12, Chapter 15, Chapter 17.
2ND Chronicles Chapter 6 “Praise be to the LORD, the God of Israel, who with his hands has fulfilled what he promised with his mouth to my father David. For he said, 5 ‘Since the day I brought MY PEOPLE out of Egypt, I have not chosen a city in any tribe of Israel to have a temple built so that MY NAME might be there, nor have I chosen anyone to be ruler over my people Israel. 6 BUT NOW I HAVE CHOSEN JERUSALEM for MY NAME to be there, and I have chosen David to rule MY PEOPLE ISRAEL..’
7 “My father David had it in his heart to build a temple for the Name of the LORD, the God of Israel. 8 But the LORD said to my father David, ‘You did well to have it in your heart to build a temple for My Name. 9 Nevertheless, you are not the one to build the temple, but your son, your own flesh and blood—he is the one who will build the temple for My Name.’
10 “The LORD has kept the promise HE made. I have succeeded David my father and now I sit on the throne of Israel, just as the LORD promised, and I have built the temple for the Name of the LORD, the God of Israel. 11 There I have placed the ark, in which is the covenant of the LORD that HE made with the people of Israel.”
Elaine, quoting a religious text to justify crimes against humanity won’t get you much traction on this forum or anywhere else where common sense and decency prevail. Also, the account you posted about the Palestinian nakba bears no resemblance to the truth. If you want to know what actually happened, read Ilan Pappe’s extensively documented account, based on facts, not racist propaganda. Thanks!
Nicely put, alley cat!
The comment sections of internet sites that post articles critical of Israel and Zionism are infested by pro-Israel Hasbara propaganda trolls.
Hasbara propaganda has two forms:
– Conventional (“pro-Zionist / “pro-Israel”) Hasbara
– Inverted or “false flag” (“anti-Zionist” / “anti-Israel” / “anti-Jewish or ‘anti-Semitic”) Hasbara
Both conventional and inverted Hasbara propaganda are woven together to manufacture a dense fabric of deceit.
In the face of a sustained intellectual critique of conventional Hasbara propaganda claims of a “new anti-Semitism”, the inverted Hasbara propaganda activity was developed.
Inverted Hasbara operates based on false arguments advanced by individuals who masquerade as “harsh critics of Zionism and Israel” while spewing “anti-Semitic” epithets and abusive rants about “the Jews”.
The internet is a playground for both conventional Hasbara and inverted Hasbara trolls.
Inverted Hasbara deception includes “false flag” acts of violence and destruction, ranging from swastikas painted on synagogues to terrorist bombing campaigns, enacted by “pro-Israel” partisans in order to create and reenforce false perceptions of a “new anti-Semitism”, “threats” to Jews, and “danger” for Israel.
Such false perceptions can be leveraged to enact legislation favorable to Israel and Zionist interests, or used to justify war in the name of “defending” Israel.
The inverted Hasbara trolls aren’t difficult to spot: they’re the ones who bleat loudest about “Zionazis” and insist that inverted Hasbara is “impossible”.
Abe,…thanks for making that distinction. I believe it’s best in general not to respond to inflammatory language and this applies to other trolls, as well i.e. DNC or Ukraine. However, the more intellectual trolls should be open game for anyone to hone their wits as long as inflammatory language is avoided.
It is really nice and productive to have a site like CN where open criticism of Israel and Zionism is possible. We should however in my opinion, police our comments to point out those who would venture into open prejudice against all Jews. The great majority of Jewish folks are good people, and many are sharply critical of Israel and Zionism. I have been fortunate to have had, and still have some close Jewish friends whose values synchronize very well with my own. Need I mention Noam Chomsky as a paragon of what I am pointing to?
Ilan Pappe’s “The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine” is widely regarded as the most authoritative history of the nakba. Pappe pulls no punches. Zionists emigrated to Israel with the intent to steal Palestine by violence and terror, not share it.
A few comments:
The Zionist state can only achieve democracy by driving out all “untermenschen” and keeping them out. (Because Zionist ideology cannot, by definition, grant equal political rights to non-Jews.)
The so-called two-state solution is no solution at all. As long as Zionist supremacists remain in power anywhere in the Middle East, there can be no peace. By. Definition. Too many of them actually believe they have a divine right to rule over the region. And why not? They already rule over U.S. foreign policy, U.S. banks, and Wall Street, and they’re only 1% of the population! (Indispensable Nation, meet the Chosen People!)
The only “solution” to the Zionist problem is massive economic pressure. Maybe when enough people support the boycott, divest, and sanction movement, Israelis will choose to adopt a real secular democracy with equal rights for Palestinians, instead of economic collapse. It worked with South Africa and it can work with Israel.
(Of course, South African citizens never controlled key U.S. political and economic institutions.)
You might want to also consider STATE OF TERROR – How terrorism created modern Israel
Ilan Pappe gave it a nice cover endorsement.
http://state-of-terror.net/
I suspect that another Death March would qualify as “genuine peace” to most Israelis.
No? Then why haven’t I heard of the outcry from “the Saudis or other Arab leaders” about the open air prison camp which is Gaza? Last I heard, Egypt was a gleeful assistant with the outrages there.
Mostly this was a very good essay. My main concern about it is that Mr. Pillar may be entirely too optimistic. The murderous swine over there want it all, and with the US of A giving them all that “no strings attached” taxpayer money as well as playing Guardian Angel at the UN, why should they yield an inch?
We don’t care what the saudis will and won’t sign off on, peace or war, we are ready for both.
My reading of the “we” is that it refers to the Land Grab people who have a begging bowl in the hand facing the US Congress, and a nail-studded club in the other to manage the untermensch who previously owned the stolen properties.
Or are you speaking of some other group?
The land grab(s) are a direct result from fighting defensive wars, ex: see the Mexico American war, see the Canada American war, you start a war , you lose, you lose territory. Unless you’re anwar Sadat and you lose a war and come to Jerusalem on our knees begging for peace, then we have them the sinai back, under specific conditions of course.
Tell the truth, isn’t the Zionist master plan, first bomb Iran then turn on Saudi Arabia?
Joe, what these Land-Grabbers don’t understand is that behind Iran stands Russia. All the Land-Grabbers’ stirrings in Syria were halted when Russia finally said “enough.” Talk is tough. W/o US “aid” and slapping the Bear is a sure end for these Land-Grabbers.
Yes, while Russia was putting the fight to ISIS/al Qaeda, Israel was erecting battlefield hospitals to adhere bandaids to the same ISIS/al Queda the Syrians and Russians were defeating on the front lines.
Joe, Russia is getting vexed that they’re doing the heavy lifting and the US is trying to grab credit. Here is a very recent headline:
“Russian General Staff to US: ‘You’re Only Pretending to Fight ISIS – Get Out of Our Way'”
h**p://russia-insider.com/en/politics/russian-general-staff-us-youre-only-pretending-fight-isis-get-out-our-way/ri21025
An even newer title is this:
“Russian lieutenant-general killed in ISIS shelling near Deir ez-Zor, Syria – MoD “
I sincerely hope the US doesn’t have any fingerprints on this death. Maybe ISIS got lucky with a random mortar attack. Maybe the Russians got careless with security. But if the US tipped off ISIS and gave them firing coordinates, there is no telling what will happen.
Zachary while you hope no American finger prints end up on that Russian Generals death, I often wonder to if Mike Morell’s calling card (or threatening card C Rose 8/8/16) won’t be found on one of those dead Russian diplomats or on Putin’s chauffeur. Sad part is, all of these kind of unfortunate matters will maybe end up as just a footnote in history. For this reason, is why mother’s hate war.
No. This isn’t the master plan. I have deep inside info on this from the top of the top of the GOI.
Is there not some way to get Netanyahu to state openly what his party wants: all of the Arabs in Palestine to “go away”?
And those who refuse, to be, how shall one put it – “transported” to an Islamic Heaven. Palestinians could be given a Fair Choice: Go Away, or…..
Israel has enough nuclear weapons to accomplish this, since Palestinians live in crowded urban conditions. Neighboring Arab states could be blamed for refusing to absorb all of the unwanted. It could be called a “mercy killing”, or a “defensive reaction strike” – there are many clever people who know how to present War as Peace.
Dissolve Israel and re-establish it in Montana. Problem solved. It is deeply troubling to see today’s Israelis, in their relation to Palestinians, mimicking the worst aspects of their historical German destroyers.
Please, not Montana, the Native-American who reside there have been through enough already.
I know your joking, but I could just not help but make my plea. Maybe pick another place less inhabited.
There is a better shot at israel dropping hydrogen bombs and destroying the entire middle east and nobody can say what will happen to Europe than abandoning the core of the Jews ancestral homeland.
Is the Land Grab boy (or girl) talking about the Samson Option?
If so, they’re getting mighty “generous” with their threats over there. Allowing religious fanatics to get nukes was a big mistake, for sure.
Israel pulls the trigger and it’s game over for Israel. Queue Iran, And behind Iran is Russia (and in support is China). Israel is no match for the Russians: Russians halted Hitler.
As I said, human hubris knows no limit. You’re proving that point.
Russia is scared of Israel. So is Iran, that’s why they prop up hezbolla.
The Zionists really learned a lot from Hitler – you can see it in action in their treatment of the Palestinians.
It’s the old story of the abused becoming abusers in their own right.
The Jews treat their Arab neighbors and specifically the fakeastinians better than their own Arab brethren.
“fakeastinians ”
If the Land Grab guy hangs around long enough, we’re going to get an education about the wonderful vocabulary they’ve created to describe the subhuman Palestinians who are squatting on the land they’ve stolen.
Keep digging your hole dude. Your spiteful comments here only reinforce the already uber-negative racist stereotype that you Zionists have all over the world.
Here we come, as usual.
The US is a WAR STATE. Those who wish to deal realistically with the US have to understand that. No agreement with the USA is worth the paper it is written on. Power is the only law of the oligarchs who run the USA. We live in a totalitarian state. Get used to that fact – then we can think about what to do about it. Forget all the bullshit about democracy and freedom, it is only put out to confuse and control you.
Lay off the crack, Mikey.
The Land Grab guy becomes annoyed that the big Wag The Dog nation might wise up to being used by the little shithole nation. Holy Israel OWNS both houses of Congress, and any loose chatter about “democracy and freedom” would rock the boat in a bad way for the Murderous Thieves of the little Apartheid nation-state.
Well said Zach. That guy unwittingly only makes the Zionists look even worse with his offensive comments on this thread. Keep up the pressure. Kudos.
The Israeli nation and the Jewish people are strong and united. This means they’re pretty much invincible.
You’re going to end up looking like a crack-head when the US taxpayer is drained dry. Israel has guaranteed heathcare while the US, shelling out billions in “aid” to Israel per year, has none. Yes, the US taxpayers will eventually figure this out and grow tired of subsidizing Israel’s crimes. And when the “big kid” isn’t around anymore (all empires collapse) Israel is going to be staring right into that dark alley w/o a back-up. Good luck!
The state of Israel is a criminal terrorist state, as is the United States of America. To expect justice from these entities is fruitless. Those who do not understand this can go on and on with their “peace plans”, but neither Israel or America have the slightest intention to establish peace ANYWHERE!
Israel already proved they will make peace as they did with Egypt and Jordan so your argument is based on lies. Find a partner and maybe they can make peace.
No. He’s right and you are a hasbara troll. You Zionists are land thieves, and beneath contempt.
I love your contempt.
And I love your contempt of international law.
You should love the israelis according to you logic since:
1)might is right since international law can be shredded
2)your view is that Israel a rogue state (although false) and according to point 1 it’s the way to behave.
Blah blah blah…Israel violates international law as it refuses to go back to pre-1967 borders, per UN decree; Israel violates international law as it continues to build settlements on Palestinian occupied land, blah blah blah you old zionist windbag.
Response to your following comment to which the reply button does not appear.
It’s easier to say “bla bla bla” than to argue. I take it as a compliment that your speechless in front of my argumentation.
If you are not able to formulate an argument, I suggest you leave the forum to people of will be able to challenge my arguments with adult words.
The problem for people like you is that you don’t even know on what you base your arguments: 67 “borders” aren’t borders. they are cease fire lines and the belligerants (Jordan and Israel) specifically wrote on the document that this lines would not be in any case considered as future borders.
No: you are ‘blah blah blah’. You trot out the same old Zionist misrepresentations and revisionist history. Not only that, you add ad hominem slurs such as “adult” arguments. You people are ridiculous: you invade Palestine, attack the Arabs, steal their land, drive the rest into refugee camps–then you have the gall to come onto forums like this and attempt to justify the grotesque human rights abuses and land stealing that you keep doing! You convince nobody with your lies and propaganda. Like I said: you Zionists are all the same. You are not here for dialogue; rather you are here to ram your propaganda down everybody’s throats. Israel has NO RIGHT to occupying Palestine. You cannot just decide amongst yourselves, as you did, that “well..let’s see…we aren’t very well liked in Europe or Russia…so where do we go now? And why are we so disliked wherever we go? Well who cares about that. Hey!–I’ve got an idea: we can create a Zionist Jewish state in Palestine! They are primitive, backwards Arabs…easy to kill or drive them off the land! Then, if we bribe the Americans, French and Brits with enough money they’ll go along with it and we’ll be in like flynn!” Pretty much sums it up dude. You’re welcome.
Deschutes,
Facts and international law documents can be shredded as they result from bribes, manipulations, conspiracies and so on.
So, if there is no international law, it only leaves “might is right” as international rule, like during most of human history before contemporary history. Then Israelis are usurpers like almost all world people and nations who took their land from others (Americans, Franks, Angles, Saxons and all the Goths etc, etc) and after a few decades or centuries, usurpations are facts on the ground and we cannot go back to the ancient times and ancient claims
You shouldn’t care about the Israeli-Arab conflict then. It’s just another conflict like all the others in History. in 2 centuries, it will be too late to have claims against the Israelis.
I love the convenience of choosing a specific timeframe to argue the story to make it seem like the Palestinians are the victims. Why not go further back to the point where the jews were expelled from their lands in the first place. DNA evidence shows jews originated from that area in the world so the so-called immigration of jews to the area in the early 1900s and subsequently, is in reality, jews returning to where the ancestors were kicked out from in the first place. How convenient to leave that part out.
Also, very convenient to leave out that it were the Arabs that basically started all the wars in which territory was lost. So let me get this straight, you start a war to destroy a country and then lose territory from those wars and cry to the rest of the world you want you territory back.
There should be a peace plan based on the 1967 borders with land swaps to take into account facts on the ground. Until the Palestinians get their own house in order and have the government representing a large portion of their population calling for the destruction of Israel cease doing so as well as the Palestinians making unrealistic demands or silly ones such as stop building in settlements that will be swapped for other land anyway, it is ridiculous to expect there to be any peace and that is at the hands of the Palestinians and no one else. Maybe if the Palestinians looked out for what was best for them instead of what is worst for Israel then maybe they could start to end their cycle of misery they have brung upon themselves.
Your blame the victim trick really sucks. How dare these Arabs try to defend their land from theft, and even resist being confined in an open air prison. Don’t they know everything they have was given by God a long time ago to his chosen people? No wonder we have to torture them and kill their children……
Your denying facts really sucks. Jews were there first. Forget what the bible says. DNA evidence shows Jews were there so to say they are stealing the land that was stolen from them in the first place just denies the truth. As far as the open air prison goes, what about Egypt, they border Gaza on the other side or does it only suit you to blame Israel for trying to prevent terrorists who have sworn to destroy Israel from getting items to use against it which they have shown time and again is what they will do.
What a fine racist you make
You also seem to totally ignore that Israel pulled out of Gaza and the borders were not closed. It wasn’t until Hamas violently and illegally seized control of Gaza and started lobbing bombs into Israel did it clamp down. So in this case which came first, the terrorism or Israel trying to protect itself?
“Hamas has always been seen as a tool by which Israel could undermine the nationalist movement led by Palestinian Authority President and Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) Chairman Yasser Arafat. Similar statements by Arafat have been dismissed by Israel as “cranky” propaganda. In an interview with the Dec. 11 Italian daily Corriere della Sera, Arafat said, “We are doing everything to stop the violence. But Hamas is a creature of Israel which at the time of Prime Minister [Yitzhak] Shamir [the late 1980s, when Hamas arose], gave them money and more than 700 institutions, among them schools, universities and mosques. Even [former Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak] Rabin ended up admitting it, when I charged him with it, in the presence of [Egpytian President Hosni] Mubarak.”
http://www.larouchepub.com/other/2002/2902isr_hamas.html
Hamas like the Yinon Plan, are both excellent Israeli good ideas, but not. The Israeli Zionist have given new meaning to, the enemy of my enemy is my friend.
Here’s a MSM article although watered down, it seems to make the same connection, that Hamas was a Jewish inspired invention to counter the PLO.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2014/07/30/how-israel-helped-create-hamas/?utm_term=.7b5fbc02599f
I sure hope the Zionist don’t have any more brilliant ideas, because it’s killing the paid off gullible U.S..
I love the conspiracy theories. I imagine you also blame Jews for the Nazis and Israel for 9-11, etc., etc., etc.
The argument remains:
1) First Israeli signed the Oslo Accords
2) Then Oslo II
3) then there was the Taba proposal
4) then there was the Olmert proposal
5) then there was the Gaza withdrawal.
6) and know we are expected to do the biggest withdrawal, from the West Bank. Sorry, it won’t happen.
As Einstein said , only fools try the same experience again and again , expecting different results.
The Middle-Eastern culture is a not like the Western one. France and Germany were able to make peace because, despite the differences, they were part of the same civilization that valued peace. Peace in the Arobo-Islamic culture is only achieved through crushing the other side.
The problems have only been rising for Israel since they were ordered to try to make peace the western way.
Brilliant analysis of the law and history, truly you made a very strong case; then it comes to a screeching halt here:
“Peace in the Arobo-Islamic culture is only achieved through crushing the other side.”
This is where in essence you say that Arabs/Islamists are essentially animals and your sophisticated analysis of the rule of law is for western audiences and does not apply to these lesser humans.
Do you see how some people have a problem trusting Zionists?
Answer to turk151 as it’s not possible to reply to your comment:
I am not among those who abide by political correctness against evidence. I am a factual guy and I happen to have read the Quran from beginning to end and reading about History was my favorite hobby during my childhood and adolescence. I think it’s reasonable to say that historical evidence as well as scriptures back my statement that peace is achieved by the sword in the Arab/Islamic world. It has nothing to do with considering people as animals. Simply, western civilization and Islamic civilization have different customs on the matter and many people are not aware of that or do some denial about it. Is it patronizing to say that Arabs in the region have a tribal organization? It’s a fact in many places.
Same thing with the local rules of war and peace. Gestures are only made by the weaker side. That’s why Sadate made the request for discussing peace with Israel. Egypt exhausted the military options in 67 and 73 so they only option left was to request peace from the winner in order to get back the Sinai peninsula.
Hussein of Jordan proposed Arafat to be prime minister as he already ruled the facto on several areas of Jordan with check points. Arafat refused, humiliating the King by showing clearly that the King made the gesture and he, having the upper hand, refused it. the King had no other choice but to declare war on Arafat to save his throne, resulting in black September and the exile of Arafat and the PLO for Jordan.
there are countless other historical examples.
If you can show me more than one case where peace as been achieved between Arabs/Turks/Iranians through western-type goodwill gestures and peace requests from the strongest side, I would be happy to reconsider what I wrote.
If you don’t have examples, your intervention would just be one of the type “argumentum ad hominem”. I think this forum expects better than that.
Vincent, you have your hands full with Abe and I am not an Arab, so I will not debate you on the Palestinian issue.
If you would like to go as far back as the Ottoman Empire, the status of the Jews during that reign was as high as any minority group of the empire. In fact, the Sephardic Jews sought refuge during the inquisition in the Ottoman Empire. Many Jews that immigrated to Israel were from the Ottoman Empire and did not flee due to persecution, but left of their own accord when Israel was formed. There are many Synagogues that were established during Ottoman Empire, in fact, there is a problem of maintaining them today in Turkey.
Moving forward to Turkey, it is very clear for a historian such as yourself that Ataturk was in fact a modernist who established peaceful foreign policies with neighboring countries. In fact, Turkey was the first Muslim country to recognize the state of Israel in 1949. My father, was a medical student at Istanbul University in the 1950s, which was a top medical school in the region because Turkey opened up its doors to Jewish German professors who were being persecuted under Nazi Germany.
Conflating the current day Islam with the US/UK sponsored version of modern day Islam is quite disingenuous for an intellectual such as yourself. I am sure you are quite aware who installed the retrograde, radicalized House of Saud, and for what purpose, so that the UK and US can have an unstable and fantasized middle east, to ensure that there would never be an Ottoman or Arab solidarity. The Saudis, flush with money and oil revenue are have bastardized and the US/UK with their clandestine services are all too willing to promote that ideology and undermine the secular intellectuals who would have promoted peace and prosperity in the region. Gulen/Erdogan and undermining the once very strong secular generals is a US project, most likely with the support of Israel.
For the life of me, given the history of Empire in the US and it is continuous state of wars throughout its genocidal history, I have no idea what you are talking about when you claim that the US is abiding by some standard of the rule of international law. This propaganda is the primary assumption underlying all of your arguments of regarding the rule of law. It is conquest and rule, nothing more.
The worst atrocities inflicted upon the Jewish people, were not made by Muslims, but the Europeans, those that you claim adhere to the rule of law. My question has always been, why do the Muslims have to pay for the European holocaust on the Jews? The harm that the Muslims have perpetuated upon the Jews is minuscule compared to what the west has inflicted on them.
Thanks for your constructive comment turk151.
Indeed, the Ottoman Empire has been an heaven for persecuted Jews. I agree.
I agree that one of main reasons of the success of the extremist form of Islam is the support of the US/UK behind the curtain (and sometimes, not so behind the curtain). the Us has a vested interest in having long term ennemies and chronic geopolitical tensions to justify its military presence almost everywhere.
I totally agree that the current framework of international law and political & financial international bodies serves the US interests. And when it doesn’t, it by-passes them. But the problem is that until a big chunk of countries decide to withdraw from the UN and create a different international body/assembly of nations with different rules, the UN and its charter & rules is what determines international law and by being member states, most countries formally accept it.
Regarding your final question, there was an agreement between the Zionists and the Hashemites a century ago. the Hashemites agreed with the idea of the Jews having a national homeland. So at the beginning, it was not perceived as an injustice by the Arab leadership. And it was before the Holocaust. But once these agreements and international law decisions were denounced a few decades later, the tensions and the wars lead to injustices, on both sides. A similar number of refugees affected both sides, Jews and Arabs. My wife’s father and Grandfather had to leave Egypt with a suitcase, leaving all their belongings behind. They had nothing to do with Israel, when they left, they were not interested in going there. They left for Paris and they live in Europe until today. But they paid too. If war had not been declared, things would probably look less unfair on both sides.
BG, You say, “Hamas violently and illegally seized control of Gaza and started lobbing bombs into Israel …”
1) In 2006 Hamas did not violently and illegally seize control. Quite the opposite. Hamas was elected in a free and open election. Immediately, Bust declared the election unacceptable and Hamas a terrorist organization.
2) Hamas did not start lobbing bombs into Israel. Quite the opposite. Every single time the Israelis decided to lob bombs into Gaza [“mow the lawn” and kill “the little snakes” (Palestinian children)”, the Israelis bombed Gaza before the Gazans returned fire to defend themselves. It got darned sickening to hear our MSM moan and groan about “rockets raining down on poor Israel” who strangely enough had very few casualties….and almost all of them military personnel…because Hamas makes a point of never targeting civilians. The IDF (taught from infancy to hate Arabs) is the most well-funded and well-trained terrorist organization on earth.
CORRECTION: Bush not Bust.
It’s not their land, Arabs are from Arabia, Jews are from Judea.
If we here in the U.S. were to use your criteria as you provided with your example, then you Zionist ought to be speaking to the 500 Native American nations who’s Native American names still are proudly used to name everything in America from streams, rivers, mountains, to cities and states, not too mention streets and avenues, which bear Native American names. So with that maybe you Zionist should approach the real Americans, and see if they’ll help you out with those pesky Palestinians.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_place_names_of_Native_American_origin_in_the_United_States
The Land Grab guy forgets to mention that Palestinians are from Palestine.
Palestine isn’t a country has never been a country they’re just other Arabs left in the lurch by their own Arab brethren.
….and Arabs are Semites and Jews are not.
You Zionists all sound the same: the same tired accusations, the same tired propaganda, the same blame game, the same ‘poor me’ victimhood. The Palestine v Israel conflict is best summed up figuratively: you Jews left your home, what is today called Palestine thousands of years ago; then you decided you wanted your old house back. So you came by the boatload, and started banging on the door of the Palestinian house. When they answered the door, you shouted in their face “I’m back. Get out of MY old house!” and then you started attacking them pulling them out of their rightful home, kicking and screaming, killing many of them. This is how Zionist Israel was created, by stealing what was Arab Palestine. Since when is anybody entitled to a house you left so very long ago? No, never. You left it! You Zionists are not entitled to invade another people’s land, attack them and steal if for all for yourself. This is never acceptable, and this is why you are so strongly disliked all over the world.
The Jews were expelled by the Romans, your civilization ancestors after fighting fiercely to remain an independent nation.
Then 19 centuries later, your civilization, the western world, heir of the Roman legacy in a certain way, decided to repair what they did and gave back the home to the Jews and enshrined this right in international law.
Since when anybody is entitled to a house that he left so long ago? When the one holding the property title of the house decided to give it. Western countries holding that title after beating the Turks decided so.
Again, I will repeat it again and again: either you accept international law or you are for the law of the jungle. In both cases, we are covered.
Nice post. Kudos.
Vincent Calba: Your comments: “The Jews were expelled by the Romans, your civilization ancestors after fighting fiercely to remain an independent nation.”
I am not an expert in that History of two thousand years ago you are writing about. But from what I have read from European and Amerika’s History of the last five or six centuries, I have learnt that Jews have gone where there is money to make – like many people now who are immigrating to U.S.. In the Polish, Ukrainian, Russian part of the World, Jews were mainly merchants and money lenders. There were money lenders in the villages where I come from in South Asian Subcontinent as recent as eight or nine decades ago. They really sucked the blood of farmers (the class I belonged to), and I heard stories about it while growing up during 1950’s – though this institution was made illegal during late 1930’s. People hated these money lenders.
I have been a a secular person, with out religion, since I was about fifteen, and am not against any religion or people. But It seems to me that because Rome at the time was very rich and that the Jews went there to make money as they scattered in other directions – to different Empires – at that time to make money. Roman Empire was over a wide area of different peoples and cultures. Palestine area was just one of that. Jews were expelled – as alleged now – from that area is not probably what actually happened. They must have gone on their own accord.
If we believe in your thesis regarding making claims to lands based on the supposed History of two thousand years ago, then we all must pack up immediately and leave America and leave it to the Indians, it’s inhabitants for thousands of years – give the Title of the Land back to the American Indians.
History of the World has been cruel. These holocausts have taken place in all parts of the World over the last thousand years and before that. At least, we humans must learn now to respect the rights of other people and not create States based on Religion or Race. It is well past the Time of creating “Apartheid States”. It is painful to look at the West Bank people, the Palestinians; what they are going through, carrying passports/identity papers to show to these arrogant Israel soldiers with guns every day to move around in their own villages.
Thanks for your constructive comment.
I will answer in bullet points:
1) For an account of the Jewish-Roman wars, wikipedia is a good start. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish%E2%80%93Roman_wars
Before the Romans got to Judea, I cannot exclude that there were jews in the Roman Empire but what is sure is that there was no organised communities. Jews left the Holy land first when Nebuchadnezzar destroyed the first temple and exiled the population in Babylon. Many remained there.
Then the Greeks invaded the area. However the main jewish population centers remained the holy land and the Mesopotamia. When the Romans came and tried to force Jews out of their religion, they fought bravely. In Roman history books, the 3 main wars between Romans and Jews were considered difficult by the Romans and mobilized several armies. To punish them, the Romans exiled the jews and changed the name from Judea to Palestina. These are historical facts that you can check.
Jews were mostly peasants in their land and started to be mostly merchants, money kender or artisans in exile since in many places, they could not hold property on land.
2)I agree that under international law, you cannot claim soveregnty/propoerty 2000 year later. I think it’s the only post were I go back to the ancient times but it was rather to set the big picture. Not as a historical backing for the current soveregnty claim. My basis for that is only modern international law, based on the Conference of San Remo and the subsequent Mandate of Palestine and the absence of any other legal document overruling them, despite what we read in many places.
3) Basically, my subliminal argument, was that we got these rights to a national home by the western world. probably because some leaders felt that it was time to do it. Of course, there was a zionist movement but the final decision was the great powers’s decision of that time. So, if people are angry for the decision, they should blame at least also their own countries as the allies agreed that at the conference of San Remo.
4) I can understand if you have a painful look at Gazans, because under the Hamas rule they are under embargo from both Israel and Egypt with the approval of the UN. Living under Hamas rule is not that nice. But I can assure you, for leaving in Israel, that in the west Bank they live very well and israeli soldiers do not wander in their villages apart from exceptional terrorist catching operations. 99 % of Palestinians are under self-rule. nly around 50000 palestinians are in areas controlled by the israeli military.
Vincent Calba – You wrote: “Living under Hamas rule is not that nice. ”
That is what happens when you steal the lands and everything else from the people, pack them in ghettos, drive them into desperation. I bet you, most humanity is going to behave like that too if it is done to them.
Fifty two years of living here have taught me that people in the West behave in a civil manner you seem to indicate, because these countries are rich. Put them in the same situation like the Palestinians have been subjected to, or other oppressed people on Earth – the people in the West are going to behave not much different from those people on Gaza you are referring to.
From what I have read and observed since 1950’s, the people in Lebanon, Syria, Palestine, and in Iraq and Libya too, were largely secular. What we in The West have done to that area through Wars and destruction have basically ruined those secular societies – all by design. Now there is extremism as it is also beginning to show here too.
As for your citing Wikipedia for historical facts, it is not a very good evidence you are providing. Who is writing this Wikipedia? Is it a reliable source? These questions have to be settled first to have an impartial view of World History.
Dear Dave,
I do not disagree with all what you wrote. But I would mention that there are lost of people who leave in bad conditions and remain peaceful. Gaza receives huge amounts of money from the international community (there is a UN agency dedicated for palestinian refugees while all the other refugees are under the responsibility of one agency) compared to other conflict areas.
If you compare refugee camps in Africa to the refugee camps of Gaza, it’s like comparing tents to cities. Of course, now, after 3 wars between Gaza and Israel, infrastructure is deficient. But almost all the education in Gaza is paid by the UN, and many other things.
The high population density is not per see something that prevents a good quality of life, specially if the needs are cared for by the UN in great part. When the Oslo process started, it could have really worked. But hate has taken the lead. Gaza could have been a thriving city state it it had concentrated its efforts on developing itself instead of sending us thousands of missiles. there was a confidence building action: the Gaza withdrawal. We got missiles in response. Not a few 12000 or 14000, don’t remember exactly. What’s the proposed next step? What can be done? Ending the occupation? It’s ended since 2005 there. Ending the embargo? Why does the UN agrees with it and why don’t the Egyptians, their brothers, open their border. We have reached a dead end. there is no other goodwill gestures left to do in Gaza without undermining Israeli security in a proven way.
The main historical sources of information about the Jewish-Roman wars are Flavius Josephus, mainly, and also Cassius Dio. I cite Wikipedia because I assume that people do not have the time to read Josephus and Dio. So it provides a good summary that can be read quickly.
Vincent Calba,…You talk about “international law” and/or “the law of the jungle” but neither represents a spiritual evolution in civilization. Law that permits imperial powers to grant a deed to another people’s land is corruption. The U.S. was largely founded on “the law of the jungle” but that doesn’t make it right. Although it is difficult to redress historical grievances a genuine effort needs to be made to integrate the conquered culture. This doesn’t mean assimilation, it means respecting the other culture’s values through impartial laws. Since its founding Israel has not only chipped away at Palestinian land but also imposed archaic religious laws on the entire population of the country. The spiritual & intellectual values of Jewish culture have taken a back seat to fanatical religious dogma. Spiritual values bring peace; religious dogma can only bring more wars as recent history proves.
BobH – “Although it is difficult to redress historical grievances a genuine effort needs to be made to integrate the conquered culture”.
British Historian Philip Longworth In his book of Russian History (published 2005), says that the Russians were far more humane and better for integrating/assimilating the conquered people than the other Western Imperial Powers. The other Western Imperial Powers looked at the conquered people in Asia and Amerikas as inferior people.
Dave P…thanks. I believe your information is accurate…just by considering the number of Russian republics that have retained their indigenous customs & language. If only we were so considerate of Native Americans where our idea of integration has been missionary proselytizing, land abuse and a bottle of whiskey to forget! I grew up in a epoch when Westerns were still the rage on T.V. and cowboys& indians was common childhood play. Since then, schools have made efforts to expose historical injustices i.e. Wounded Knee & The Trail of Tears but today we seem to once again have regressed on the subject. I don’t believe we were over-romanticizing Native American culture when we consider the respect for nature given by the most war-like tribes and compare it to our own degradation of the planet. By the way, Standing Rock news has been eclipsed lately, but the united front there is hopefully indicative of a more active political stance by the Native American community.
Thanks for your constructive comment BobH.
I understand. I agree that the law of the jungle is really not the best. There must be something in order to handle relations between nations and it’s the current international law which is based of historical customs of interactions between nations. I agree it’s not perfect either. Why are ther 5 countries above the others? Why Germany and Japan are indefinitely out of the club? In the end, the new world UN order after WWII is and edulcorated application application of “might is right”. Certain powers clearly rule the UN and pressure other countries to conveniently use international law for their imperial hegemony. And when they cannot get the UNSC to vote for their goals, the skip that stage like for the second gulf war and others.
The irony of the whole Israeli-Arab conflict is that the Israeli position has been backed by international law but it is not accepted by most countries in the World, against their supposed acceptance of the UN rules. It’s really ironic and, eventually, it shows that it does not work. What still works and always works is might, be it military, numerical (number of countries) etc…
I will not argue that Israel is a perfect country regarding the way minorities are treated. There are problems, there is bigotry, and the conflict and terrorist attacks do not help to build trust between cultures. However, the minorities enjoy individual rights (and specially cultural and religious rights) that are much better than in France, were I used to live a few year ago. Muslims are not requested in any way to behave against their beliefs when it is the case in France (for jews too). You certainly heard about the municipal law that obliged people to get undressed in French beaches to forbid Muslim women to have full body swim suits. It’s just a glimpse of the regular problems religious people can face there. So, although the national rights are exclusively for a jewish national home, individual rights are for all. Of course, not perfect, but quite good to a certain extent, specially in a country at war with people with the same culture as its minorities.
Regarding the internal problems between Jews, I would argue that its an internal problem. I think Westerners would not take sides between Muslim factions (Shiite, Sunnis, who’s right?), different cultures in the Indian Federation or Zulus and Xhosas in South Africa. Why? Because we have not means to fully understand the position of each side. We are strangers to their conflict.
I understand that Western people see Jews as Western people and expect them to behave in a Western way or feel more connected to have an opinion. But I would argue that it is not the case. The opposition between the Jews in Israel is a kultur kampf. It is an opposition of two civilizations: the Western, and the tradition Jewish one. Although we are used to hear about Jewish literature, Jewish humor, and other Jewish cultural achievements, their have almost nothing Jewish in the traditional sense. These are Western civilization achievements made by individual Jews of Western Culture. this culture is quite new. Its premises are 300-400 years ago with Spinoza and a few, and it really started in the 19th century. The traditional Jewish culture is 3000 years old and based on the study of the Holy texts Torah, Talmud, Midrashim, etc. they have in common some Judeo-Christian moral values but they different. In order to be together in one country, the secular and the religious made a social contract that would be the basis of the “living together” and its called the status quo. Without the status quo, Ben Gurion understood that it could jeopardize the creation of the state. The religious never asked to change it. For them it was an agreement, and although far from perfect they gave their word. But for 2-3 decades, the secular have been pressuring for changing the status quo to accommodate for a more liberal culture towards which they have evolved. The religious don’t agree because it was the basis of their agreement. Like the US constitution is not replaced to cater to contemporary whims, the status quo was supposed to be a bedrock for generations. This is the way religious jews see the problem. Furthermore, the traditional jewish culture is what allowed jews to survive as cultural/religious group. So the problem is much more profound than religious extremism versus secular liberalism. It is rather a struggle for who will define what is the essence of being a Jew.
Vincent Calba,…Thank you for articulating your views. There are several points of disagreement that I will try to address here: I’m not going to argue the merits or drawbacks of the international law that you cited because I already expressed that I believe there is a moral ground that preempts it. Unfortunately this is not Israel’s position.
POINT #1- “the minorities[of Israel] enjoy individual rights (and specially cultural and religious rights) that are much better than in France, were I used to live a few year ago. Muslims are not requested in any way to behave against their beliefs when it is the case in France (for jews too)”
…once again I have to take issue with you. My wife is a native of France. I am familiar with the secular laws that ban religious symbols i.e. hijabs, yamulkas and crosses from government institutions(and,yes, burkas on the beach). I think it is a very sensible law and frankly I would have voted for Marine LePen had I been French. I am both a secularist and a product of Western culture and have the firm belief that neoliberal ideology has been a corrupting influence on that culture. But let’s not throw out the baby with the bathwater. Pluralism is a Western concept based on fairness that no doubt, was grounded in religious doctrine. The spiritual element of all religions unites people. Symbols of archaic religious dogma are divisive. The question of individual liberties(or the liberties of any minority) should be: Do those liberties come at another’s expense? France was largely a christian country that discarded much of the dogma in favor of public welfare. What’s wrong with that?
POINT #2-“Although we are used to hear about Jewish literature, Jewish humor, and other Jewish cultural achievements, their have almost nothing Jewish in the traditional sense. These are Western civilization achievements made by individual Jews of Western Culture.”
I have already stated that I am a product of Western culture and find it difficult to understand why you would want to regress to something that is divisive.
POINT#3- I live in another imperfect country where religious dogma interferes with citizens rights. Most of our shrinking middle class pays taxes. The catholic church and numerous protestant sects have exemptions for their vast properties and there are towns in N.Y. State with large populations of ultra-conservative rabbis(close to 2 households for every block) and none of them pay taxes! Don’t you think this might build up resentment?
BobH: Your comments :
“I am both a secularist and a product of Western culture and have the firm belief that neoliberal ideology has been a corrupting influence on that culture.”
“Although we are used to hear about Jewish literature, Jewish humor, and other Jewish cultural achievements, their have almost nothing Jewish in the traditional sense. These are Western civilization achievements made by individual Jews of Western Culture.”
“. . . I am a product of Western culture and find it difficult to understand why you would want to regress to something that is divisive.”
I agree with your comments 1000%. It is a shame how they are obliterating the Nation States and cultures with this neoliberal ideology. It seems to me that only pure Nation State they want left is Israel – the land of the chosen people. And they want to rule the whole Earth – no matter whatever the costs are.
BobH,
Regarding your Point #1:
Well, we are in real disagreement. You say “The spiritual element of all religions unites people. Symbols of archaic religious dogma are divisive.” It is a European continental way of seeing things. I have a rather Anglo-Saxon definition of Liberty. I think wearing any symbols of religious dogma are a human right and are both a part of freedom of expression and religious freedom. You further say “The question of individual liberties(or the liberties of any minority) should be: Do those liberties come at another’s expense?” I totally agree. But wearing a religious symbol or any symbol which is not religious in itself but indirectly connected to a religious belief (burkini) or a different worldview regarding modesty (not all women who cover their body are religious) is not coming at other’s expense. It’s a personal sovereign choice. And legislating to prevent that is a way of saying, “we, the state, know better than you what is good for you” a pandora box in terms of individual liberties.
France discarded the much of the christian dogma in it’s laws, but if it’s to impose a secular dogma, I don’t see the the advantage. As long as it avoids favoring a religion that’s fine. But it consists in forbbiding religion or benign manifestations thereof in the public sphere, I think it goes too far. But of course I agree with you when if really come’s at someone else’s expense.
Point #2:
I understand your difficulty to understand since I was an atheist in the past.
Since people of different religions or philosophical worldviews cannot understand each other, that’s why it’s better to avoid legislating how people should practice their own faith (when it’s not at other’s expense of course).
There are thousands of faiths. Of course God did not gave thousands of messages contradicting each other. So of course most faiths (and non-faiths) believe that all the others are totally or partially false. For the society to be inclusive and not exclusive, peaceful and not full of tensions, the political institutions should not teach people how they should worship their God(s).
Point #3:
I partially agree.
I am a minarchist, a classical liberal who thinks that the state should only deal with external security and rule of law (internal security and judicial courts). I am against income tax and redistribution. Because as soon as you take to give to another, tensions raise. Basically, I am for a system like the US in the 19th century, without the discriminatory ans slavery of course. Income tax was only created in 1913 in the US so it is possible. This freedom in all aspects of life (political, economical, religious) is what made the US a superpower.
I think the problem is not the people but the system. In Europe, many people accuse the immigrants of coming to Europe to live from welfare benefits. But people have to understand, some of them come from countries where there are no basic property rights. Their earnings can be taken by the stoke of a pen or through corruption. They reach Europe and they can receive +-1000 euros. And in Belgium, for example, they receive another +-500 euros if they have 3 children or 1000 euros if they have 4. the problem is the system.
Interesting discussion but I am afraid I will stop my participation in the forum in the near future because it takes to much time.
thanks for this fruitful discussion
Vincent Calba – First I want to say is that I am not antagonistic to Israel. Over life time, lot of my friends at work have been Jews from USSR, well educated people and very interesting to talk to on most of the subjects of interest to me.
But I fail to understand why this whole World’s fate hinges on these just fifteen million Jewish people on the planet out of more 7 billion people on Earth. Why so much energy has been and being spent on this issue. Two or three times a week, the main article in L.A. Times is about Israel. And it is true of other major newspapers in the country and TV news networks too.
It seems like that the other people in the World do not matter that much.
Vincent, please answer this question. It is important because there are so many other problems in the World which need attention, waiting to be solved.
That settles it for me. You are a slicker than usual troll, and one with no respect for reality.
I suggest you rewrite world history.
It will certainly be a best seller
I think I need to revise my view that the newest troll is totally without morality of any kind. The way he sticks to the claim that the Jews were expelled from Judea suggests to me that he actually believes it.
Add to that his profession of total ignorance about what Protestant Fundamentalist End Timers dream of, and I have to ask myself if this guy might not be quite sincere with the “stuff” he is posting.
In the US we have more and more situations where children have the crazy doctrines of nutty sects drilled into their heads from kindergarten onwards. Think “Quiverfull” and similar bunches of fanatics. I understand the Duggers of TV fame and 20 kids belong to that one. Raise a huge bunch of ultra-devout fanatics ready to fight and even die For Jesus. There are now universities where you can send your kids, and they’ll probably emerge with something of a ‘normal’ education while becoming even more fanatical. Think of Ted Cruz and the Dominionists. There are billionaires paying for these activities, and money-grabbing attention *hores like Ann Coulter pretend to be religious when they say things like “We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity.”
Few people are unaware of the same tendency among some Muslim sects. Filthy rich Saudi Arabia has been creating “Madrasa” schools all over the world, and from these emerge young men and women so indoctrinated that they’ll commit any crimes. Even blow themselves to bits with suicide bombs when directed to do so.
I’ve read of the rise of fanaticism in Israel, and how the young people there are getting the same treatment. The Torah has at least as many ugly passages as the Christian Bible and the Muslim Quram. Sensible people ignore the “ugly”, but not if you’re a child taught the BS from the moment you could talk. They didn’t have a chance.
That the new troll demonstrated excellent English led me astray. Now I strongly suspect he/she really believes the stuff he/she has been writing here.
The Jews were expelled by the Romans? That’s like me repeating the George Washington story about the cherry tree while believing it myself!. Or telling a kid that Paul Bunyon really lived — while believing it myself!
It just isn’t true, but if Mr./Ms. Calba ever does start doing independent reading, then he really is in trouble, for the fanatical Jews are at least as ugly as those of other religions. In the event he learns what really happened in both Jewish and Israeli history, he’ll become a heretic – or some other kind of outcast.
So I’m done with him. Arguing with and exposing a polished and dishonest troll is one thing, but jousting with a Jewish equivalent of a devout Protestant redneck is another.
I do wish him well, and hope he gets some real education before continuing to “testify” in the manner of our local US of A fanatics who scream (and worse) at abortion clinics.
Charles H. Manekin, Professor of Philosophy and currently Director of the Joseph and Rebecca Meyerhoff Center of Jewish Studies at the University of Maryland, specializes in the history of philosophy, specifically medieval Jewish and Islamic philosophy.
Acknowledging “the very real connection (imagined or not) between the Jewish people and Palestine”, Manekin observes:
“The rabbis, and even earlier Jewish scholars, tended to conflate the Babylonian exile with the later loss of independence among the Romans. As a formative moment in Jewish religious consciousness, the destruction of the first temple and the exile was vastly more significant than the destruction of the second temple; some, like Bible scholar Adele Berlin, have argued that parts of the Bible, and maybe even the Torah, were edited in light of the trauma of the Babylonian exile. What this means is that in Jewish (and Christian) consciousness destruction, exile, and return, became significant categories in light of which history was read. If there is any argument for a right to return, it is not based, in the case of the Jews, on being driven out of the land against their will. It is more because of the Land of Israel playing such an important role in the consciousness of many (though not all) Jews. This is a more modest claim than is generally heard; it certainly does not in itself justify Jewish hegemony over Palestine.”
See Professor Manekin’s discussion of historical sources at
http://www.jeremiahhaber.com/2007/07/no-rivkele-there-wasnt-roman-exile-of.html
The joke about your “International Law” meme is that Israel is constantly flouting and ignoring international law. Israel has a long and obvious history of ignoring international law: illegal settlements, blocking Palestinian access to land, looking the other way when settlers viciously attack and kill Palestinians, and the war crime that is Operation Protective Edge. Of course hasbara trolls such as yourself are quite silent on these crimes. You only mention international law when it is expedient for Zionist aims. You suck man!
International law is not determined by journalists.
Even in France, where the mantra of illegal settlements is firmly established, a court had no other choise that declare the settlements as not illegal according to international law, once the evidence was presented:
http://www.thetower.org/4461-wsj-french-ruling-on-legality-of-israeli-settlements-undercut-premise-of-paris-conference/
The problem of this conflict is that international law on the subject is not well know and frankly disregarded.
You can say that despite international law granting only a national jewish home in palestine, the palestinians are now a people and deserve self-rule, sovereignty etc. But saying the Israel is ignoring international law is false. In a previous post, i added two links on an international law lawyer who explains all the sources of law on the subject.
Regarding war crimes, please google Colonel Kemp’s testimonies in international bodies on the Israeli defense forces. No other army in the world does what the IDF does to protect civil populations.
In fact, international law is not determined by French appeals courts or pro-Israel Hasbara propaganda operatives.
THE ISRAEL PROJECT
For example, in the “comment” above, “Vincent Calba” presents a link to “The Tower” magazine, online arm of pro-Israel propaganda outlet, “The Israel Project”.
“The Israel Project” is managed by an American-born Israeli, David Hazony, whose brother is an advisor and speech writer for Benjamin Netanyahu.
Registered as an NGO, “The Israel Project” does not report any details of the origins of its funding.
In addition to managing “The Israel Project”, Hazony is editor for “The Tower” and a frequent contributor to major pro-Israel media and neoconservative organs like the New Republic, The Forward, Commentary Magazine, Moment, the Jerusalem Post, the Jewish Chronicle, the New York Sun, and Jewish Ideas Daily.
In 2004-2007, Hazony served as editor in chief of the Israeli Zionist journal Azure. He has also appeared on CNN, MSNBC, and Fox News.
Back in 2009, “The Israel Project” published a propaganda manual titled “Global Language Dictionary”
https://www.transcend.org/tms/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/sf-israel-projects-2009-global-language-dictionary.pdf
Written by Republican pollster and political strategist Frank Luntz, the Hasbara handbook of “The Israel Project” was labeled “Not for distribution or publication”.
The manual published by “The Israel Project” is a treasure trove of scripted propaganda canards. For example, page 96 of the manual recommends: “‘Defensive’ and ‘preventative’ are the words that best describe Israeli military action.”
Hasbara outlets like “The Tower” produce scripted articles, while “The Israel Project” staff write op-eds and make television appearances to disseminate pro-Israel propaganda,
PRO-ISRAEL PROPAGANDA
The “Vincent Calba” link is to an 18 January 2017 article published by unspecified “staff” of “The Tower”.
“The Tower” claimed that “the editors of The Wall Street Journal argued” that a 2013 French court ruling undermined a 2017 Paris conference to advance peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians.
However, it wasn’t “editors” from the Wall Street Journal who “argued” for Israel, but one individual:
Omri Ceren, a pro-Israel blogger who serves as “Managing Director for Press & Strategy” for “The Israel Project”.
Ceren main credentials for the job consisted of writing pro-Israel op-eds outlets like The Jewish Journal of Greater Los Angeles, published by TRIBE Media.
In his op-ed in Walls Street Journal, Ceren asserted that the Paris conference “failed” and quoted Netanyahu’s claim that the diplomatic effort was “useless”. (Netanyahu had refused to attend the Paris conference, claiming that it was “biased against Israel”.)
Ceren waged an all-out op-ed war in the Wall Street Journal against John Kerry’s pursuit of Israeli-Palestinian peace a major goal of his tenure as US Secretary of State.
LYING ABOUT A FRENCH COURT CASE
Ceren’s predictably pro-Israel argument in the Wall Street Journal about “what French courts have to say about those settlements” in Israeli-occupied Palestine is based on debunked Hasbara propaganda claims about a 2013 French court ruling.
A March 2013 Versailles Court of Appeals decision upheld a 2007 French court ruling in a suit the Palestine Liberation Organization and the Association France Palestine Solidarité had filed against Veolia Transport, Alstom and Alstom Transport.
Palestinians has argued that because French-built trains servicing the Israeli capital also crossed into East Jerusalem, which Israel captured in 1967, the French firms were complicit in Israeli violations of international law regarding military occupation.
Israel illegally annexed East Jerusalem in 1980.
The French court narrowly ruled that the French-manufactured Jerusalem light rail, which serves both the western and eastern parts of city, did not violate international law.
In 2013, pro-Israel propagandists immediately hailed the French court decision as some sort of major victory, falsely claiming it proved that Israel’s occupation of East Jerusalem did not violate international law.
Legal scholars quickly pointed out that the ruling didn’t actually say anything new and that the key focus of accusations of illegality in Israel’s policy vis-à-vis the Palestinians remains the settlements, which the French courts did not address.
Ever since 2013, false claims about the French court decision have been regularly broadcast from key pro-Israel propaganda outlets.
In January 2017, the long-ago debunked Hasbara claims about the French court ruling were repeated in “The Israel Project” flagship “The Tower” (Jan 22), “The Algemeiner” (Jan 19), the Wall Street Journal op-ed section (Jan 18), French-language American neoconservative outlet”Dreuz” (13 Jan), and numerous other media organs.
This and many other “comments” posted by “Vincent Calba” illustrate the breathtaking dishonesty of Hasbara efforts to lie about Israel’s land grab policy.
HASBARA PROPAGANDA FUNDAMENTALS
Investigation of specific “comments” at CN reveals the web of connections between the Israeli government, major pro-Israel media organizations, and the activity of the Hasbara troll army online.
In 2009, Israel’s foreign ministry organized volunteers to add pro-Israeli commentary on news websites. In July 2009, it was announced that the Israeli Foreign Ministry would conduct “internet warfare” to spread a pro-Israel message on various websites.
The program has expanded to a real Hasbara troll army that promotes pro-Israel policies in the press and online media.
US/Israel-backed al-Qaeda terrorists in Syria advance the geopolitical goals of Israel, which include permanent annexation of Syria’s resource-rich Golan Heights area that Israel has occupied since 1967.
The illusion of a “threat” to Israel guarantees an ever greater cascade of military and economic aid supplied by slavishly pro-Israel politicians in the United States.
Hasbara propaganda additionally aims at promoting fake news and conspiracy theories to divert attention from an actual and very public conspiracy: the efforts of the Israel lobby to manipulate politics in the United States.
The basics of Hasbara propaganda are easy to identify: simplistic phrases, repeated over and over, designed to engage emotions rather than produce rational arguments, all shaped to fit into a narrative of good (Western-oriented Israel, the Middle East’s only true democracy) versus evil (Arab/Muslim terrorists who seek not only to destroy the Jewish state but kill all Jews).
To persuade Americans to accept this impoverished account of the conflict, Hasbara propaganda rewrites history, rejects international law and ignores the struggle over land and resources that is at the heart of the conflict.
Hasbara propaganda relies on public ignorance of basic facts about international law and the history of Zionist land grab efforts in Palestine.
Conventional Hasbara (pro-Israel) propagandist “Vincent Calba” works in tandem with Inverted Hasbara (false flag “anti-Israel” and fake “anti-Zionist”) propagandist “Paranam Kid” and their team mates.
Recent “comments” by the Hasbara troll army aim to deceive, distract, divert and disrupt discussion of Israel’s recent celebration of its illegal 50-year military occupation of the Palestinian territory it seized in the 1967 war, and Israeli collusion with terrorist forces operating in Syria, Lebanon and Iraq.
We’re not invading other people’s land we’ve successfully reclaimed our sovereignty and wull continue to be in full control of our self determination in our own land, the land of our ancestors.
If ever there were a case to be made against colonialism, outside of what the European western civilization did to the Native-American, Israel for what they have done, and are still doing to the indigenous Palestinian, is a living example of how awful colonization really is. Both these examples I use, are but a couple of instances in history where the imperial powers overrun the indigenous, and stool their inherited land. All this is done by a conqueror who shows their superiority over the indigenous by stealing the very land these native inhabitants have thrived upon for hundreds, maybe even thousands of years. All this thief was done under the cover of being a civilization who abides by the ‘rule of law’. What law of these invaders exempts the right of the indigenous to beyond their own control, must they yield to these unwanted breed of said legal distinction?
What legal precedent does the Balfour Declaration have over the Palestinian? Where, and when, did the Palestinian even have an equal say so, next to their Zionist counterpart? Lastly, why, what gives the U.S. any say so in this matter?
Joe, check out your facts before you make an idiot of yourself next time. DNA evidence shows jews originated in that part of the world. They were driven away by the Arabs long ago. They are simply returning to their origins so who are the invaders/conquerors and who stole whose land in the first place or do you simply choose a period in time that suits your own argument and you don’t wish to be confused with actual facts?
Speaking of checking facts, how about the fact that NuttyYahoo and the rest of the ruling regime in israel are actually RUSSIANS who don’t have a drop of Abraham’s DNA in them?
Believe me, I go way back with the Jews. I was there when my Former Employer told old Abe that he would be the father of MANY nations, and then promised him a big piece of real estate for ALL of those nations (none of which were Russia, by the way)
I was also there when He told Abe to tie up little Isaac and gut him like a lamb, just as a joke. The Old Man always did have a bizarre sense of humour where you mortals were concerned.
Anyway, more to the point, there really should be a 4 state solution…. Since there’s really no practical way to maintain Gaza & the West Bank as a single entity, make them two seperate Palestinian states. Kick the illegal settlers out of the West Bank. I couldn’t give a cherub’s pink little ass about their financial losses, since they STOLE the land in the first place.
The 4th state would be Jerusalem itself. It should be an independent city state, open to all and controlled by neither Jews nor Arabs. Or Christians for that matter, as they also have a “spiritual” claim on the city. And spare me the “eternal capitol” dragonshit argument. Tel Aviv is a perfectly good capitol city, and besides (as I said) the “ruling class” of Israel has no genetic ties to old Abe or King David anyway.
Besides, as any good Fundagelical Christian could tell you, Jerusalem needs to be freed up for the eventual appearance of my son, the Antichrist who will rule the world from there one day soon.
(BTW, it’s the 23rd…. where’s that Rapture that the FundaMENTALists promised??)
Ummm, here are studies on the subject, where do you get your facts from or do you just make them up to suit your argument without any backup?
Recent studies have been conducted on a large number of genes homologous chromosomes or autosomes (all chromosomes except chromosomes X and Y). A 2009 study was able to genetically identify individuals with full or partial Ashkenazi Jewish ancestry.[8] In August 2012, Dr. Harry Ostrer in his book Legacy: A Genetic History of the Jewish People, summarized his and other work in genetics of the last 20 years, and concluded that all major Jewish groups share a common Middle Eastern origin.
Not according to a pretty well known and respected Johns Hopkins study on DNA from Jews from Europe which closely matches and proves that they are in fact the originating from the middle east. Btw neyanyahu is a Jew of polish descent, not Russian.
The Land Grab guy speaks of DNA. The crooked pig Netanyahu has done that too.
“Netanyahu may require DNA tests to prove immigrants have a Jewish ‘bloodline'”
http://mondoweiss.net/2013/08/netanyahu-may-require-dna-tests-to-prove-immigrants-have-a-jewish-bloodline/
Last I heard the Zionists were having difficulty with their “Ethnic Weapons” projects. That was a scheme to avoid another death march by having all the subhuman Palestinians dropping dead from a mysterious plague. Seems the DNA differences between the two religious groups was too small to provide a good “killing point”. I’ll admit my information is a bit dated, and with the floods of US taxpayer dollars the thieving and murderous inhabitants of the little cesspool of a nation may yet suddenly be free of the squatters on the land they’ve stolen.
Before the Hebrews first migrated there around 1800 B.C., the land of Canaan was occupied by Canaanites.
“Between 3000 and 1100 B.C., Canaanite civilization covered what is today Israel, the West Bank, Lebanon and much of Syria and Jordan…Those who remained in the Jerusalem hills after the Romans expelled the Jews [in the second century A.D.] were a potpourri: farmers and vineyard growers, pagans and converts to Christianity, descendants of the Arabs, Persians, Samaritans, Greeks and old Canaanite tribes.” Marcia Kunstel and Joseph Albright, “Their Promised Land.”
The present-day Palestinians’ ancestral heritage
“But all these [different peoples who had come to Canaan] were additions, sprigs grafted onto the parent tree…And that parent tree was Canaanite…[The Arab invaders of the 7th century A.D.] made Moslem converts of the natives, settled down as residents, and intermarried with them, with the result that all are now so completely Arabized that we cannot tell where the Canaanites leave off and the Arabs begin.” Illene Beatty, “Arab and Jew in the Land of Canaan.”
The Jewish kingdoms were only one of many periods in ancient Palestine
“The extended kingdoms of David and Solomon, on which the Zionists base their territorial demands, endured for only about 73 years…Then it fell apart…[Even] if we allow independence to the entire life of the ancient Jewish kingdoms, from David’s conquest of Canaan in 1000 B.C. to the wiping out of Judah in 586 B.C., we arrive at [only] a 414 year Jewish rule.” Illene Beatty, “Arab and Jew in the Land of Canaan.”
More on Canaanite civilization
“Recent archeological digs have provided evidence that Jerusalem was a big and fortified city already in 1800 BCE…Findings show that the sophisticated water system heretofor attributed to the conquering Israelites pre-dated them by eight centuries and was even more sophisticated than imagined…Dr. Ronny Reich, who directed the excavation along with Eli Shuikrun, said the entire system was built as a single complex by Canaanites in the Middle Bronze Period, around 1800 BCE.” The Jewish Bulletin, July 31st, 1998.
http://ifamericaknew.org/history/origin.html
Canaanites just like Hebrews just like the Israelites are all Jews.
Pretty soon we’ll all be Jews, by your account. I realize you are not here to debate, nor discuss, but to only get the last word. So, rather than you and I and BG talk about a 4,000 year old history that you and BG seem to feel you know everything about, I will just say that the Zionist occupation of Palestine is illegal, and your history is your own.
And I’ll leave you with this, remember the USS Liberty, as I never forget being an ex-Navy enlisted man, what a terrible ally Israel is too have. Now dispute that, as never happening, or will you just chock this off as an unfortunate mistake? Oh the fog of war. Yeah right!
Now that I’m through with you, I’m going to go hug a Jew, since I know plenty who are not Zionist.
Hopefully the Land Grab guy’s English lessons will make some progress.
Might be true, some DNA tests could validate such an assertion: but not all Jews are political Zionists
intent on grabbing land for a racist national project.
The DNA of the Palestinian Jews and Arabs is likely closer to that of the tribes you reference than the European Ashkenazim who along with the land are require the hijacking Jewish identity.
Witness the racist policies that declare Jews who take a different line on Israeli settler colonialism and its racist supremacist ideology which it projects onto most Palestinians and Arabs alike, no longer Jewish.
Israel is no respecter of International Law, nor of much else in the way of Human Rights; note its murderous piracy
on the high seas, Gaza’s coast and of territorial air space. The Zionist State uses the Torah as a brand and it’s moral soldiers sometimes leave a mark, sort of a calling card in the Palestinian homes they have temporarily occupied;
the star of David scrawled large with in feces.
IDF reservists from Breaking the Silence, whom I’ve heard speak about their experiences have asked for help
from Americans. Stop feeding the addiction to violence and hate. Cut off the funding that enables Israel to
destroy its own children which is necessary to perpetuate it’s racist land grab.
What kind of society develops from the acts documented in Thomas Suarez’s Nation of Terror – How Terrorism
Created Modern Israel? One whose core values and deeds too closely resemble those defeated in Europe in 1945.
That was the observation of some European immigrants and visitors to Palestine then, and perhaps why Israel bribes whites to move there now. British documents point out that Zionist terror was directed first at Jews who rejected their racist project, then the British and finally the Arabs who were, to their dismay, not responding sufficiently in kind to their acts of terror. Ilan Pappe also references that last point in his book “The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine”.
“BG”, check out your facts (etc.).
I doubt the Assyrian Empire made use of DNA. They
did use mass deportation as did many of the other imperial
powers of those times. (See Thomas L Thompson, THE MYTHIC PAST”
especially Part II.)
In their wars the Egyptians severed the genitals of their victims to
count the number. Since some were circumcised and some
were not, they found that it was not accurate. The Egypians then
changed to cutting off hands and counting them. “Jews” were
not the only tribes using circumcision.
Wars were hardly a thing of beauty, Plenty of gruesome violence
for all.
Since the “property” of the slain were distributed to the victors,
there were plenty of widows, mistresses, concubines for the victors.
They were, after all, “property” and an integral part of
“the booty”.
—Peter Loeb, Boston, MA, USA
Joe – Thank you. Your comments are invaluable. People who are on the receiving end understand it perfectly what you have said.
Again, stealing is not the right word.
Read about the San Remo Conference.
And if you don’t care about about international law (San Remo Conference, purpose of the mandate) by calling legal acts as stealing, then what’s the purpose of discussion? Then you beleave in “might is right” and we are all fine.
the Balfour Declaration has no legal meaing. It was only a letter on intent. This intent was agreed by the Hashemite king of the time who was also promised a big territory. But in the end, the British only gave him a part of what they promised him, like for the Jews. (the mandate included the territory of Jordan originally)
As you are one of the few who answered to my post I will try to reply.
Regarding the worst examples of colonization I know, I would mention the genocide in the Congo Free state for the personal enrichment of the Belgian King. You cannot overlook the fact that Arabs in Israel enjoy western standards of freedom, protected by a fiercely liberal Supreme Court. 2 years ago, I shared an hotel roome with an arab colleague from the city of Baka El Grabiah, during a company event. He told me that we he sees how the arab world was falling apart around Israel (Egypt, Syria, Libya) he thanks everyday Allah that he was born and leaves in Israel.
Even Palestinians leave mostly (~99%) under a broad autonomy or self-rule and Israel has no interest to get them back under its rule. They were supposed to debate on the final aspects of the peace agreement.
If I understand the rest of your first paragraph, you mean that although Israel got it’s land through decisions of international law, this does not make it legitimate. is that what you mean?
Again, I would argue that if you don’t value international law, what kind of “law” do you propose for international relations?
I will even go further: Do you you think it would be legitimate for Muslims in Muslim majority areas in Europe to declare their independence in a specific area where they are the majority? or Hispanic people to declare independence of California the day they would be the majority there? It isn’t that simple, you agree?
If you put totally aside the international law and were putting as supreme value the right of any group on any type of piece of real estate to make their own laws, then a majority in a municipality could declare independence and nobody could challenge it. But I bet it would be challenged by the central state authority, even in the freest states.
It’s just an illustration that you cannot decide that a collective group can simply put aside the law of the land or international law just as it wishes.
As I said in other posts, the Balfour declaration has no legal value. But the decisions of the Conference of San Remo have international legal value. These decisions were implemented by the League of Nations and then the by the UN. And until today, no other agreement or legal decision replaced them.
If the Arabs had accepted the General Assembly partition plan, then it would have been the legal basis for the territorial rights of Israel and an Arab State. The Jews accepted but the Arabs refused and waged war. Thus, it remained a consultative vote without legal value.
The only reason the Israeli-Arab problem has succeeded in sidelining the international law is because a big chunk of the UN members states (all arab states and many non-Arab Muslim states) supported the Palestinian side, against international law. Now, we are almost a century after the San Remo Conference and alsmost everyone forgot the legal basis of the decisions because, like in this forum, people chose their side independent of whose narrative abides by international law.
I agree with you, the palestinians didn’t have a say from a national point of view. It can be considered unfair, I understand. But actually, they were not a nation at the time. Even the Syrians, the Irakians, Jordanians were not considered as separate nations. The Arabs of the region were supposed to form a single state from the Mediterranean to the Persian Gulf, including the current Jordanians, Syrians, Irakians and some Gulf Arabs too. That’s the reason why they were not given a say specifically as “palestinians”. The Arab organization of that region at the time was mostly tribal. It still remains mainly tribal. There is even a former Colonel of the israeli military intelligence who is a noted scholar in Arab and Islamic culture who has proposed a peace plan based on palestinian tribal affiliations because, as an expert of the matter, he says that tribal bonds and allegiances are still the most stable and respected form of authority there.
Lastly, your last question, “what gives the US any say on this?” Basically, its the charter of the UN. Virtually all countries in the world are part of the UN and accepted the charter and the rules of the UN. In the UN, the body that “handles” or decides international law is the Security Council (UNSC). All members states are supposed to accept its authority since they accepted the charter and rules of the UN. In the UNSC, 5 countries have a veto and are thus above the other states. the US is one of them. Since the US is the only UNSC permanent member who cares about the previously decided rights of the Jewish state, naturally the Jewish state feels only obliged to the US. That’s what gives the US such a leverage on the Israeli-Arab conflict.
So far you are the only one who really replied on the topic of international la in a constructive way.
I am still waiting for other constructive reactions.
For further information, you can watch one of these presentations by an international law lawyer whose advice on the topic was sought by several western countries:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p-AqyFbBbmY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zf8cF1HYqN8
If the day ever comes whereas a Palestinian in Gaza has as much equal representation in a Israeli Palestinian federated government, well then maybe I’d quit harping on this subject.
The San Remo conference was at best a coalition of European, and American powers, who through their winning a world war they then go on to carve up the Middle East, as they did to Eastern Europe. These masters of their own universe did a great job didn’t they, as they partitioned geography of other people lands up pretty well. Just think of how the Sudetenland came to be, when recollecting of how at the end of the Great War these Allies made that possible with their new maps.
I will wish for the Palestinian what I wish for the Native-American, and all of those minority’s who have suffered under the heel of a overbearing conquering power, and that is that these ill treated people of minority will gain equal rights, and be able to retain their land and possessions. I’m not aiming just at Israel when I say this, but I’m also including the U.S., and any other nation who rides rough shot over another indigenous people.
Sorry, it took awhile Vincent to answer you, but I honestly didn’t notice you were writing this comment post to me. It’s a long post, and following the attachments to the lines of the originator is a scrolling nightmare. Well it’s not all that bad, but that’s my excuse, an honest excuse, but a valid one…if you know what I mean.
We can agree to disagree, but I’m appreciative that you Vincent have at least kept your comments to be written intelligently, and without the snarky remarks which often is the case with these comment boards.
Peace is what I’m all about Vincent, and regard for each humans right to enjoy their stay on this earth, is all the more of what I’m about. Trust me, in my past I have stuck up for Jewish people when the occasion arose, so I’m not being a racist with my comments. Deep down I want every human being to live a happy life, because in the end we are all the same, and our time here is short. Joe
Thanks Joe.
I used to spend hours a day in forums and discussions. I left them more than a decade ago precisely because, most of the time, it was not possible to have constructive discussions.
I discovered Consortium news recently through my favorite geopolitician, William Engdhal. And as I thought that such an alternative news website might attract people who are looking for the truth and wish to understand the source of the issues, I thought “let’s give it a try”, let’s try to debate again to see if it is possible.
I am glad to see that there are people like you and a few others with whom it is possible.
Vincent
Joe – U.S. tax payers paid 8 billion dollars in taxes to resettle the Russian Jewish immigres, most likely most of them on the West bank Settlements. U.S. Tax payers send about $4 billions every year as aid to that already fabulously rich people in Israel – many of them dual citizens.
One should go and have a look at Detroit. It looks worst than a ghost town: empty boulevards, once lined with grand and magnificent buildings, and now in ruins, rundown decaying homes, with broken window panes and these tired looking rundown people sitting on their porches and some walking around on those empty and broken roads. Indeed a very eerie scene – very frightening, to visit even during the day.
This scene extends seven or eight miles or more miles from Detroit down town. Once beautiful neighborhoods with two story brick homes and grand churches and parochial schools – my wife was born and grew up there – are in ruins with boarded businesses. It is dangerous to go there even during day.
Detroit is not the only city. It is true of many other U.S. cities. And we are sending aid to Israel!
And black Congressmen, along with others, are now big supporters of these bloated Defense budgets and Wars we are waging on the defenseless people on the planet. I wonder sometimes about the sanity of our Ruling Establishment.
Dave your referencing to how the U.S. should get it’s own house in order before continuing on with it’s poking its nose into other nations business, is an understatement to how wrong the priorities of the U.S. list of concerns there are. Think of the 3.8 billion American dollars Israel receives in military aid each year, then think about the lack of money there is to clean up America’s cities public drinking water, like in Flint MI., and elsewhere where this situation exist. Think of the underfunded Veterans Administration benefits, and then think of why this condition is a sad reality to how the U.S. chases after bogeymen who under normal circumstances these bad guys won’t even be a threat, if the U.S. would only serve it’s better interest over the U.S. attending to every desire Israel may conjure up to expand the dream of a Greater Israel. All this is brought to the U.S. by a system of lobbyists who pay our U.S. Legislators off to do what is in the best interest of the said lobby, as opposed to serving the American public’s basic needs. This is a result of a heavily corrupted government institution which puts money over dedication to the U.S. Citizen. In my mind this is traitorous.
Good comments Dave, I always look forward to reading your comment post. Joe
You have summed up very well Joe.
Although I agree with the author on the title and the idea that knowledge of history is a must to handle this unsolvable conflict, there are several errors or historical mistakes in the text:
1) It’s not a mistake but a missing introduction forgotten by virtually all mainstream media but I expect a serious investigative journalism website to acknowledge that premise: the purpose of the British Mandate of Palestine was the ” establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country”. The purpose was not the creation of a national home for the Palestinians of today.
2) the vote of the General Assembly on the partition plan was only consultative and had not legal binding whatsoever. It is part of the folklore of the supposed creation of the state of Israel but from a legal point of view, it has no value.
3) the “internationally certified birth certificate of the State of Israel” is either the decision of the conference of San Remo that dedicated the whole territory of Israel-Gaza-West Bank (and even more originally) to create a national home for the Jewish people, de jure, or the declaration of independence of the State of Israel and subsequent survival after the war of independence, de facto.
4) Until the present day, contrary to all the empty statements in the MSM, nothing replaced the rights of the state of Israel on the whole area west of the Jordan River pursuant from the conference of San Remo. Even the Oslo accords are not final accords and did not replace these rights. The only potential exception is the last UN resolution not vetoed by the Obama administration which should be analysed by international law lawyers to determine if it has an impact. Until then, nothing had replaced the decisions of the conference of San Remo.
The main reason why there is currently a problem is due to the fact that the Israeli leadership did not apply directly its full sovereignty on the newly conquered territories of Gaza and West Bank in 67 like they did with the territory they conquered during the 48-49 war. By this absence of action they lent they enemies an argument which most of the world uses today.
5) I would be interested to know what is the author’s source for stating that the “going back to the Arab riots in Palestine in the 1930s, the ratio of Arabs to Jews killed was about ten-to-one”. I have found no such information. The easily available sources mention similar number of casualties between the two groups.
6) the fact that since the PLO took the leadership of the palestinian authority after the Oslo Accords, the educational institutions work hard to educate palestinian children (and now, we can say a whole generation composing the majority of the palestinians) in anti-semitic hate is totally overlloked. This is the major reason why there will be no peace according to the Western blueprint (2 state solution). Only fools in Israel are willing to try a Gaza 2.0.
7) By the way, Gaza is not occupied any more. You can argue that they are embargoed but they still have a border with Egypt but they manage to upset so much the Egyptians that they are beaten much harder by them. The embargo is considered justified by the UN.
8) The impossibilty of the 3 attribute Jewish – democratic – greater Israel is not so current any more. The latest demographic figures show that jewish demographics are raising every decade and the arab and palestinian fertility is decreasing. Also, the demographics of the palestinian authority. When you leave Gaza apart, which most israelis agree, it is not so far fetched any more to annex the West Bank. The main obstacle are not the demographic figures any more but the hate culture that as been thriving since the PLO leadership took over.
9) the 67 borders are not border. According to the own legal document that created them, they are only cease-fire lines, nothing more.
I won’t go into the international agreements which were almost all prejudicial to the Palestinians, who after all, were the original inhabitants of the land(unless you want to go back to Biblical times and even then, the Canaanites would have a good argument). But let’s jump to your point #8 : “The latest demographic figures show that jewish demographics are raising every decade and the arab and palestinian fertility is decreasing.” Let’s suppose this is true…don’t you think it might have something to do with the future the Palestinians are being offered? We are all aware that the rising rates of Jewish demographics is mostly in the ultra-orthodox population; the same people that are willing to squat on other people’s land and divert the water for their own use(with govt. sanctioning). Americans are increasingly being asked to subsidize a religious state but of course, we too, have lower fertility because what’s left of the middle class can no longer afford a large family(or any family). Do you really want to live in a land where the religious population imposes archaic laws? …or perhaps you yourself are religious and somehow feel “chosen”over the others?
The fakeastinians are not even indigenous to the region that Palestine is/was defined by the Roman Empire or the Ottoman Empire or the British empire, these Arabs can go have their state, in Jordan.
This fellow probably has what passes for a fine education on the stolen West Bank.
The Jordanians who are really Saudi exiles occupied the West Bank – of Jordan, that’s why it’s called the West Bank. There has never been a nation state other than israel on that land, ever.
Man, you’d have thought that the zionists would have been a little smarter following WWII. But, they’re doing everything they can for a Holocaust II, which WILL come- nothing lasts forever, cycles happen. The pain inflicted will come back around.
Human hubris never fails to show its lack of limitations.
There’s no need to go back to Biblical times.
The only piece of international legal paper that still applies is the conference of San Remo. Any opinions are permitted on the San Remo conference and consequences. You can think it’s unfair, cruel etc, but squatter is not the right adjective since a squatter has no property title. In this case, the international powers that held property of Palestine (Turks surrendered it to the Allies) decided to transfer it to the mandate whose purpose was the establishment of a Jewish national home. QED. Very simple. Might be outrageous for many, I agree. But facts are facts.
Regarding demographics, it’s just an observation that I find useful to mention since you don’t find this information in MSM (even in Israel). It might help outsiders to understand why right wing israelis are less concerned with the idea of keeping some form of sovereignty on the West bank. The future of law-abiding palestinian individual citizens (as opposed to a national palestinian home) in a Israeli state is possible as the is demonstrated by the close to 2 million arab israelis. But of course, with more than 20 years of hate education in the PA, it would not be that simple to implement it.
The problems between religious and secular in Israel are their internal problems. Secular israelis already don’t understand most of the religious’ arguments. So how can foreigners pretend to understand it better than the locals? I am myself a former secular who became what you call ultra-orthodox so I can testify about that. The issue is mainly a problem of status quo that secular want to change and their ethos that they want to impose on the religious. So they fight back to keep the status quo ante.
Basically, Ben Gurion understood that if the Jews were not united and did not speak as one voice, they would never succeed to have state (like the palestinians today). The secular leaders of the past understood that they needed to have an agreement with the religous on the minimal requirements for them to accept the state they were planning. That’s how the status quo was born. Read about it’s details on wikipedia. Now, the secular want to challenge that but the religious rightfully say thatthis was the agreement to live together, it’s the social contract of this state. To change it, you need our agreement and we don’t agree.
In a nutshell. And by the way, most ultra-orthodox in Israel work, contrary to what is written here and there, including me.
I totally agree that the US should not give any money to any country. I also think the US should close most bases they have around the world. But if you are in this website you should know that all this foreign aid is a way of keeping other states vassals. Most big developments in the Israeli-Arab conflict since the 6 day war are orders from Washington
I don’t think you believe a word of this. If you do, it’s time to learn what the Zionists mean by “Holy Land”. The Israeli Muslim citizens suffer from increasing levels of discrimination, and they’re scheduled for expulsion too.
And it’s not just the Muslims.
‘Jewish extremists’ condemned for vandalising Jerusalem church
September 22, 2017 at 2:21 pm | Published in: Israel, Middle East, News, Palestine
h**ps://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20170922-jewish-extremists-condemned-for-vandalising-jerusalem-church/
Oddly enough, American Protestant Fundamentalists are quite willing to throw distant Christians to the wolves if doing so makes Armageddon more likely.
For them – at least for now, it’s all Go Israel
Later on Jesus will return and kill all the sinners and all Jews who didn’t become Christians. I’d expect out poster “Elaine Coker” (assuming “she” isn’t a Zionist troll) is fully on board with this.
Let’s be serious. I know people hate Israel but at least hate it for something real.
“Israeli Muslims suffer from increasing levels of discrimination and they’re are scheduled for expulsion”. Give me a break.
First of all come visit by yourself to make your own idea.
Second, of course not everything is fine. There is no love between the communities (I am talking about Israel) but show me a country were a decades old political or religious conflict triggers love between communities. Do you think Catholics and Protestants in Northern Ireland bare love each other? And Christians, Sunnis, Shiites etc in Lebanon. It’s a internal cold peace. But for a country in
Third, you might come from a Anglo-Saxon country were the concept of Liberty and respect for other cultures is very high but just look at most of continental Europe. There is widespread discrimination and I bet that soon, what you expect from Israel will happen there. More and more locals are become intolerant to immigrants and the results can be seen in the elections (France and Germany this year).
Did you know that there is an affirmative action in israeli higher education in favor of Arabs? And that hundreds of Syrians have been treated in Israel since the beginning of the Syrian civil war? Probably not. Israel doing something right is to interesting news.
How many headlines about churches being vandalized in Israel did you read? One in a decade? That’s enough to qualify a country as per the those extremists actions? Can the US reduce to a country of crazy mass shooting people because it happens form time to time?
Regarding your last sentence, I assume you believe in what you call the Ancient Testament. I suggest you read Ezekhiel, Chapters 38 and 39. That’s what will happen according to your own accepted texts. Different scenario than yours. And when you see all the mess in the world with the involvement of world superpowers in Syria and the North Korean issue, I bet we are going to live it in the very near future.
You are one dishonest sucker!
“48% of Israeli Jews Back ‘Expulsion’ or ‘Transfer’ of Arabs, New Pew Survey Says”
h**p://forward.com/news/israel/335292/48-of-israeli-jews-back-expulsion-or-transfer-of-arabs-new-pew-survey-says/
Given the way people in the US lie to pollsters if the answer makes them look bad, I’d expect the number wanting another death march is higher. Much higher.
Helping the poor local “darkies” succeed, despite their inherent subhuman nature? I’m afraid you’re misrepresenting the Official Propaganda Line on this one. The story is supposed to be that Nobel Israel Isn’t Really An Apartheid state. Better go back and review the latest Hasbara memos.
title: “At Israel’s MIT, education, not affirmative action, triples Arab enrollment
It’s kind of cute – a rich Israeli supposedly pays for a whole 300 guys!
Nice example of putting lipstick on a pig with this tokenism. The wiki for the Technion places says there were 13,700 students there in 2104. But the program sure looks purty, and propagandists like yourself can wave it around. No mention though of the apartheid at the Technion school itself.
title: “Arab and Jewish students live in separate housing at the Technion”
I’m amazed you actually brag about Israel’s helping al qaeda and ISIS.
I’ll assure you that not only did I know about it, but that knowledge turned my stomach.
What a dishonest person you are!
I cannot believe a professional Israeli propagandist pretends he/she doesn’t know about Revelations and the End Times doctrines among US Fundamentalists. Probably this nonsense reflects an instinctive reflex to muddy the water – lying just isn’t “dishonest” when you’re doing it for Yahweh and Country.
The Hasbara troll revealed a bit much here – Syria was going the path of Iraq and Libya until that second superpower intervened. Israel owns the US, lock, stock, and barrel, and is in the habit of using our soldiers as a disposable *** wipes. Destroying Syria, then stealing the best-watered parts was the game plan, and the evil Ruskies messed it all up. No wonder the dishonest guy is upset about this.
I feel for you, buster. Well, no, I don’t. :D
I see that there is no point discussing with you.
You are rabid hater and rude person who seems to hold SSPX style or similar views.
You should be called “mister headline” as anything can be reduced to headlines, specially when they are negative.
According to the article of your own headline, Haaretz (a well known left leaning newspaper) argues that “the Technion of “squeezing out” Arab students after raising the required score on the Hebrew proficiency exam from 105 to 113.” So yes, there is is a disguised partial affirmative action in this Technion program.
Google affirmative action israell and you’ll find:
http://www.jpost.com/Israel-News/Affirmative-action-bill-for-Arabs-goes-to-a-vote-490613
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sigal-alon/affirmative-action-israel_b_8958342.html
https://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/16/opinion/what-israel-tells-us-about-affirmative-action-and-race.html
https://www.timesofisrael.com/illiterate-arabs-grabbing-israeli-university-slots-mk-claims/
I argued about individual rights not about what people think. As I said, if you poll any recent former conflit areas (Northern Ireland, Lebanon and others) people of different communities do not like each other.
Furthermore, I argued that dispite having a decades long conflict along religious/ethnic lines, Israel is still quite OK compared to several Continental European countries who are not at war with their minorities.
Let’s take France as an example:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racism_in_France#Racism_against_North_Africans_.28Arabs_and_Berbers.29
“76% of those polled said that there were too many Arabs in France while 39% said they had an “aversion” to Arabs”. Aversion to an ethnic group where there is no war whatsoever against them…. quite frightening.
You will see your dreamed expulsions in Europe well before Israel, I promise you. Before 2040, you’ll see
Regarding separated dorms, given the nice epiteths against jews and your belief that Jesus will kill us, you also wouldn’t share a dormitory with a Jew. So who are you to teach others about this? What a nerve.
We would not treat Syrians, you would call us cruel. We treat them you also find it wrong.
Mister healine, please find me 10 headlines of different church vandalizations instead of calling names. At least on that one, you had nothing to answer.
Believe it or not, I never spent time on US fundamentalist literature, I have much better to during my limited time. But if you send me a few links, I would be interested in having a look at it.
I just made a comment, hit “post reply”, and it instantly and irretrievably disappeared. First time that has happened here!
So basically a repeat with only the links.
“53 Mosques and Churches Vandalized in Israel Since 2009, but Only 9 Indictments”
h**p://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/1.813790
“Christians Discriminated Against by Israel”
h**p://ifamericaknew.org/history/rel-christians.html
One remark: I just don’t believe a propagandist for all the murdering and thieving and apartheid in Israel hasn’t heard of the Protestant End Times plans for God slaughtering all the Christ Killers. Might the Hasbara school have taught him all the techniques for appealing to those types without mentioning any of their uglier quirks? It’s possible, but I doubt it.
Technically the only party that doesn’t have a legal leg to stand on are the Arabs calling themselves Palestinians, since there has never actually been a nation called Palestine.
The apartheid guy shows some promise of being a lawyer in that he makes a TRUE statement in order to slide in a lie.
You see, there was a PLACE called Palestine, and almost all the people who lived there were Muslims. Oh, a handful of Christians and an even smaller bunch of the Jewish faith were there too. But the vast majority were Muslims.
Some fanatical British folks got the idea of stealing the land and giving it to the Zionists. And that’s exactly what happened. For some odd reason the Brits called the place “Palestine” too. And they immediately started in helping the Zionists in every way imaginable. When the Zionists were able to get Truman on board, they were off to the first big Land Grab War. But definitely not the last one.
It does not matter if you care about international law, because according to international law (San Remo conference), the whole territory should be a Jewish national home with minorities with individual rigths but not with collective (national) ambitions.
It don’t care about it, you are for “might is right”.
So, in both cases, you should not bother. Right?
You’re trying to play both ends against the middle.
h**ps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Remo_conference#Text_of_Resolution
Even assuming this is some kind of “international law”, the Zionists of Israel have repeatedly broken it with their thefts and murders and arsons and and vandalism and institutionalized discrimination. That would make their “national home” null and void because THEY broke the terms.
You’re looking more and more like a Nice Polite Zionist to me.
Response to Zachary:
At least you read about the Conference of San Remo and recognize that it could actually be international law.
But you seem to have become an expert in international law very fast to decide the that decision is null and void. Interesting. It would be null and void because of exactions made after the (partial) application of the law. So it’s a retroactive nullification because israelis did not behave correctly (according to you) against people and countries who themselves did not and still do not accept international law?
If we were to apply your logic, most western powers should be nullified. Starting with the US since the exactions made against Native americans and African American would render the founding of the US null and void.
Impressive logic… I think there isn’t. Your logic is simply blinded by hate.
I have some links towards the bottom of the thread about your vaunted “San Remo Conference” which I notice you’ve avoided. I’m quite certain you’ll sneer at the hatred and ignorance of Joseph Jeffries when he discussed the secret and illicit horse trading going on at that precious “conference”. And I see no “international law” there. The alliance between the British Jewish Zionists and the British non-Jewish Fundamentalists and cynical divide-and-rule Power Elites led to the British government stealing from the inhabitants of the former Turkish province and giving both title and power to the Zionists. Only at this time there was no fig leaf of the Holocaust which provided cover for the military land grab 30 years later. A Jewish appointee was sent to Palestine, the laws and law enforcement was skewed in favor of the Zionists, and the path to today’s Israel was well started. It was naked theft.
Sir, you represent a vile and ugly little nation populated by monsters. Your defense of its ongoing thefts and murders and vandalism by referencing US atrocities which happened over a hundred years ago demonstrates to me you’re one of those monsters.
Your bigotry, racist remarks, and open hatred of the Arabs in the Middle East–even to the absurd point of denying Palestinians existed– is the real reason why there will never be any peace in that region. Zionists like you always play the victim game, yet wonder why Jews are so strongly disliked wherever they go in the world.
Easily available? It’s late, and I’m not going to dig out the official British reports, but the Wiki is sure “easy”.
British Security Forces:
262 killed
c. 550 wounded[8]
Jews:
c. 300 killed[9]
4 executed[8]
Arabs:
c. 5,000 killed[1]
c. 15,000 wounded[1]
108 executed[8]
12,622 detained[8]
5 exiled[8]
h**ps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1936%E2%80%931939_Arab_revolt_in_Palestine
Yes, you’re playing the “good troll” while the others are the nasty ones.
You can argue that they are embargoed….
A VERY dishonest “good troll”.
Given the advanced state of trolling software, all these may be one guy. Or one “office project” somewhere in the little shithole state.
Thanks for the link Zachary.
It was not dishonesty. I thought he was referring to the riots between Jews and Arabs like the one in 1929 when the number of victims was similar:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1929_Palestine_riots
According to the link you sent, he 36-39 riots “was a nationalist uprising by Palestinian Arabs in Mandatory Palestine against the British administration of the Palestine Mandate, demanding Arab independence and the end of Jewish immigration as the League of Nations had authorized in 1922”.
Read the introduction of the article: it was mainly a struggle of the Arabs against the British. How do you expect the jews to die as much as the ones who are revolting?
You are one dishonest sucker!
You challenged the author by claiming you’d never heard of his “source” – pleading ignorance. I provide a source, and all of a sudden you’re no longer an innocent ignoramus. You now change the subject to the comparatively insignificant 1929 riots is imperative. Dishonest.
…Arabs against the British. More dishonesty here. The British were simply an early example of “wag the dog” – they were the “official” and “legal” source of oppression used by the Zionists against the native Muslims, while the Zionist terrorists were the “unofficial” ones.
You are one dishonest sucker, for sure.
h**ps://palestinianmandate.files.wordpress.com/2014/04/cm-5479.pdf&sa=U&ved=0ahUKEwiuhKCOoMPWAhVB-2MKHbidCzYQFgggMAI&usg=AFQjCNGubieT7IaobVEHkJldDeBE7j218w
For others here, this ought to be the link to the official Peel Report. At 418 pages it is a long read. If and when I find time to skim it I’ll be interested to see if it is an honest report or if the Brits allowed it to be ghostwritten by the likes of propagandist Vincent Calba.
You sent me a link but you pick and choose the information you take.
The number of deaths serve your cause so you take it. But the narrative don’t suit your agenda so you scrap it.
Then at least send a link that says that these riots are only the Jew’s fault and Jewish fighter’s dids.
And you call me dishonest.
Thanks for that Mandate report link. But it’s not that useful for you. According to what you write, it must confirm your beliefs about the “vile and ugly little nation populated by monsters”, not serve as a factual basis to find truth. Truth is only when Jews are wrong, isn’t it?
Dishonest, yes.
The rest of it makes no sense whatever.
VINCENT CAKBA: “7) By the way, Gaza is not occupied any more. You can argue that
they are embargoed but they still have a border with Egypt but they manage to upset so
much the Egyptians that they are beaten much harder by them. The embargo is considered j
ustified by the UN…”
Thanks for the information V. Calba. It sounds like you are considering an imminent
move to this seaside city. There are beaches there too if your skin is not of a darker
hue. Otherwise you might be shot. Welcome to the “unoccupied” prison!
(Prisons are in a sense also “unoccupied”. Perhaps you would be happier in
a prison although there are no beaches.
—-Peter Loeb
Palestinians have been robbed of their land in broad day light – fault lies sorely with British – UN and USA – UN is not functioning – and it seems Isreal is above the law- settlements built illegally are not recognised by international community – 67 borders is the name of peace and UN should enforce it
The Jews will never give up the core of their ancestral homeland to these rag tag ethnic Syrians and Egyptians and Jordanians (who are really Saudi exiles).
Here is a lengthy article about Israel’s “borders”.
h**p://mondoweiss.net/2014/11/documents-borders-palestine/
And the Land Grab guy is telling it just the way his countrymen in the outhouse of a nation-state sees things.
What’s we’re occupying now is OURS, and, and what’s we’re not presently holding is up for grabs.
1. You mean the zionists will never give up the land that they stole. Zionism, a purely racist political ideology, has absolutely nothing to do with the religion of Judaism.
2.that has nothing to do with “ancestral”, that biblical crap is not applicable to modern international law, which israel is signatory to & which demands israel vacate the premises.
3. The Palestinians were an officially recogised group decades before the israelis, a rag tag ethnic bunch of AshkeNAZIS, Mizrahis, Falashas, etc., were recognised
Regarding your point 2, I answered below. The basis is not religious but international law.
International law grants only Israel national rights (to establish a national home) on this piece of real estate.
Its piece of real estate is 56% of Palestine, NOT the subsequent additional 22% stolen, NOR the subsequent rest stolen.
I assume that most of the readers of Consortium know that the
fabrication of “Abronyc” is pure Zionist PR.
Adolph Hitler relied on a German ideology of hundreds
of years and a heroic pure German history which was
pure and by definition supreme. Germans were also
“victims”.\
—-Peter Loeb, Boston, MA, USA
Good point Peter.
Any analysis of Israel’s fake “peace process” is sure to invite an orgy of conventional and inverted Hasbara propaganda troll troll “comments”.
There’s “Abronyc” loudly bleating about an “ancestral homeland” for those ethnic Russians, Ukrainians, Romanians, Poles, French, Germans and Austrians, and all the other Europeans, Africans, and Asians that Israel has dragooned in the ever-more-desperate effort to tip the demographic scales in occupied Palestine.
There’s “Paranam Kid” loudly raging about all “that biblical crap” and those “purely racist” Zionists who “will never give up the land”, climaxing in the ever-more-desperate effort to capitalize the word “nazi” in an abusive epithet.
And there’s “Vincent Calba” loudly declaring that “international law” is or isn’t the best argument to distort in the ever-more-desperate effort to justify Israel’s land grabs.
Hilarity ensues.
Thank you Paul Pillar for this review and analysis. On related developments I’d like to recommend this piece from Thierry Meyssan from Sept 22:
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/47878.htm
“According to US grand strategy, as defined by Admiral Cebrowski in 2001, and published in 2004 by his assistant Thomas Barnett, all of the Greater Middle East must be destroyed except for Israel, Jordan, and Lebanon.”
two state solution – 67 border is the name of peace as per UN
The 67 ceasefire lines are a non-starter as far as a border goes. Not to mention the fact the those borders are indefensible.
They don’t plan to return a square inch of the stolen land. I strongly suspect the plan is to grab more. LOTS more.
If there is another land snatch from Lebanon, Syria, or Jordan, I predict both my two Indiana Senators and my House guy will vote to give Holy Israel another 747 loaded with pallets of $100 bills.
Right on, Zach! Just like the Americas were stolen from the Indians and Rome plundered the known world. The Jews aren’t doing anything different than the rest have done since the beginning of time. What is good, bad, right and wrong doesn’t play a part in these activities. That’s left to the intellectuals to debate while the machine rolls along.
THE UGLY TRUTHS
Something that but a few of the educated analysts and
writers dare to admit in public is that not only is the
battle over, but from the Palestinian side it is lost.
I repeat: LOST.
The culture, the dignity of the Palestinian people is not “dead”
of course.
A review of the real (not “storied”/Biblical) history of Palestine
is available in Thomas L. Thompson’s book THE MYTHIC PAST.
There have been many losses, many mass deportations.
The victors have been many empires one after another
over millions of years.
Despite the deaths and carnage of Palestinians, their spirit
has remained.
One is reminded very much of the conquest and inevitable
defeat of North American Native Americans. Especially after the
massacre at “Wounded knee”, (only one of many massacres), there
was not going to be any “equal” Native American lands/territory. Not
anywhere. History has documented the fates of the various
battles, the deaths, the dispossessions.
“The very idea of an equal Palestine borders on the absurd.
Barring violence or some unforseen fall of the Israeli-American
empire in the thousands of years that will come, there can
be no “peace treaty”.
These are unpleasant realities and no one wants to face them.
The vanquished never cherish their defeat
Like Native Americans in North America, Palestinians (whether
Muslim or other) shall always treasure their culture, their history.
——
As to any so-called “peace” where the US is involved, this
must be pure fantasy. The US is a “dishonest broker”. It
has sided with Israel and before that Zionists for many
decades while providing them with weapons and guns.
Thomas Suarez’ THE STATE OF TERROR” provides some
of the more immediate history. The material from Thomas
Thompson ‘s MYTHIC PAST refers to millions of years of
Palestinian history, of battles so gruesome it is often difficult for
the contemporary mind to comprehend.
The tragedy is that at this point there can be no “peace”
with the conqueror. That may or may not happen thousands
of years from now.
Homage to those who have suffered falling to the evil aggressors.
—-Peter Loeb, Boston, MA, 02115
D5-5 – Very informative article. Thanks for the link.