Member Profile

Total number of comments: 19 (since 2013-11-28 15:54:58)

Trendless

Showing comments 19 - 1
Page:

  • Top Ten Myths about Israeli Attack on Gaza
    • Correction: The person who said "I think it has got to do with Iran" was the Chief Rabbi of the United Hebrew Congregations of the British Commonwealth, not of Israel. And then the supine BBC apologized to him for allowing him to say it - apparently he thought he was off air. BBC's pro-Israeli coverage of the carnage in Gaza continues.

  • Washington Actions on Palestine don't Differ from Gingrich's Words
    • Second attempt to respond - last disappeared!

      link to desip.igc.org

      I quoted last time but this time I will paraphrase. The reason that post-war emigration of displaced persons (mainly Jews) to the US, UK and Canada was restricted was that the Zionist movement in the US lobbied against it. They argued that they could get money from rich American Jews for the Zionist project in Palestine if Jews migrated there but not if they migrated to the US.

  • Serri: Iran's UN Inspectors are Repeating the Iraq Mistakes
  • 10 Ways Arab Democracies Can Avoid American Mistakes
    • Let me clarify what "compulsory voting" means in Australia. It means that you must do one of the following:

      1. Attend a voting centre - once you get there and are recorded as having attended you may do what you like with the ballot papers - make a paper airplane, write obscenities on them, or just walk out. There is no record of your voting.

      2. Send a postal vote - again you may write what you like - it will not be identified against your name, or

      3. Have a good reason for not doing 1. or 2.

      Those libertarians who object to this minimal measure towards the preservation of democracy will undoubtedly ultimately lose it.

  • Top Ten Myths about Bin Laden's Death
  • Bolton was Contradicted by Bush on Iran's Bushehr Reactor
    • Well the US and even Chomsky may believe that Israel is serving US interests but the Israelis believe its the other way round and I'm afraid the evidence is pretty clear.

      "Every time we do something you tell me America will do this and will do
      that . . . I want to tell you something very clear: Don't worry about American
      pressure on Israel. We, the Jewish people, control America, and the Americans know it." - Israeli Prime Minister, Ariel Sharon, October 3, 2001, to Shimon Peres, as reported on Kol Yisrael radio.

      Then let's discuss Israeli spies on the US who are let free, Congress's overwhelming support for the Israeli attack on Gaza at the end of 2008. I could go on at length.

  • Abbas: Israeli Colonization Impedes Start of Direct Talks
    • What further concessions would you suggest the Palestinians make? They have already given up a very significant part of their land even if you start at the 1947 UN decision to cede part of their land to the Zionists or the 1967 borders. Should they just do what the Zionists want and go away completely so that the Zionists can have their Jewish State over the whole of Palestine? As to security guarantees, this is the old chestnut that the Zionists have used to grab more and more land.

      "The guideline of our policy has always been the idea that a permanent
      situation of no peace and a latent war is the best situation for us, and that
      it must be maintained at all costs. ... we are becoming stronger year by year
      in a situation of impending conflict where it is possible that actual fighting
      may break out from time to time. Such wars will usually be short and the
      results guaranteed in advance, since the gap between us and the Arabs is
      increasing. In this way we shall move on from occupation to further
      occupation. " (Yeshayahu Leibowitz, 30 November 1973)

      "The separation fence is marketed to the Israeli public as a reasonable
      security measure meant to separate Palestinians from Israelis; in reality, the
      only separation it offers is between Palestinians and their land." (Oren
      Medicks, 30 May 2003)

      For the fifty-odd years since the establishment of the
      state of Israel, successive Israeli governments whether Labour or Likud, and
      whether by force as at Deir Yassin, or by chicanery as at Oslo and Camp David,
      have followed the same policy of oppressing and dispossessing Palestinians to
      make way for an exclusively Jewish state. Even now, when Israel could have
      peace and security for the asking, Israeli governments persist in their
      original intention of conquering the whole of Palestine for the use of the
      Jewish people alone. And all this was done, and is still being done, by Jews,
      for Jews and in the name of Jews." (Paul Eisen, January 2003)

      "[In Gaza] there used to be 600,000 Arabs. Now there are 1.4 million people
      there . in a few more years what happened to South Africa will happen to
      us. The UN will decide that either we give the right to vote to everyone or we
      will be outcasts from the family of nations. Absurdly, the greatest danger
      that could befall us . is that the intifada would end - because then we would
      fall asleep and wake up to a binational state." (Yonatan Bassi, 29 July 2004)

      I agree unilateral concessions on one side alone will not work - let's see some from the Israelis. Period.

  • Schumer's Sippenhaftung and the Children of Gaza
    • It is often that people who start their comments with "Nonsense" then produce an argument that is full of holes and this is no exception. Phud1 omits some significant differences between Israel and, say, the UK.

      1. The UK has not sought to remove non-Christians from the state. The ones who were native there when the Romans came 2000 years ago were by and large converted to Christianity. The Anglo-Saxons and Vikings interbred with the locals as did the Normans. None sought to systematically drive out the locals. Though all of this was too long ago to be relevant today.

      2. The UK allows immigration by non-Christians.

      Not only does Israel prevent immigration of non-Jews and tries to reduce the number of non-Jews in the country, it severely restricts conversion to Judaism by non-Jews living in Palestine. I do not think any other state in the world imposes conditions like this. Even the more extreme Muslim states (not that I am a defender of their policies) will allow people to convert reasonably easily.

      As to expulsion of the Jews - please read about the Lavon affair. Even Israelis accept that the majority of migrants from Arab countries either went to Israel because of encouragement by Israel or because of Mossad activities like the Lavon affair which either accidentally or deliberately created anti-Jewish sentiments.

      link to ifamericansknew.org

    • This is really a response to Phud1 but I don't seem to be able to reply to that comment.

      Now let me guess which member of the Security Council would veto any attempt to give Palestinians a vote at the UN ...

    • The issue is not about recognizing Israel, but about recognizing it as a Jewish State. This effectively means that it could never be otherwise, if a majority of its citizens were non-Jews, for example. About 20% of Israelis are not Jews, so to recognize Israel as a Jewish State would be to abrogate their rights.

      As to borders, I doubt if there are two other countries in the world where the difference between the versions of the borders proposed by the two sides differed so much as a proportion of the total land. I suspect if Israel were willing to cede that there should be a Palestinian state (recognized and with guarantees about non-aggression by Israel) whose borders gave it within, say 5% of its UN agreed borders as of 1947, they would be happy to accept and recognize Israel as a country. What about it?

    • Why talk about Hamas as though voting for it means that one is in league with the Devil. Hamas offered the people of the Occupied Territories an alternative to the corruption of Fatah.

      Here are some articles to read - in the MSM would you believe - that give the lie to most of what is said by US politicians and the MSM about Hamas.

      link to lrb.co.uk

      link to timesonline.co.uk

      link to sabbah.biz

      link to vanityfair.com

      So let's stop apologizing for Palestinians voting for Hamas - which they did in both the West Bank and Gaza.

  • Jewish Gaza Aid Flotilla Planned
    • I do not see your argument. The analogy just does not apply. The North Africans in France did not go there with the aim of evicting the locals through violence - and then claim that the violence was all the fault of the locals. Had the Zionists gone to Palestine, where they were at first welcomed, with the idea of building a sharing community with the locals at a time when they were under the control of first the Ottomans and then the British it might well have been the case that Israel would indeed have been good for Jews worldwide.

      Instead, the Zionists declared Israel to be "The Jewish State" - a home for ALL Jews - to the exclusion, as far as the rest of the world will let them get away with it, of all others. Of course they permit a 20% non-Jewish population just to prove that they are not really that bad - but they will not let it get to 30%. Read the statements of Weizman and ben Gurion. They have persecuted the local inhabitants in totally inhumane ways with the intention to persuade them to leave and when they resisted they have killed them. Thus far they might be seen to be little or no worse than any colonial power in, say, the Americas or Australia - I am not excusing either. However, what came next was a true act of Chutzpah - they blamed the locals for the problems that resulted and by and large persuaded Western Powers to suppor them in this. Certainly in the US and Australia, there is now a recognition of the need to make reparations to the locals. Israel, on the other hand, turns up the pressure.

      The Zionists have done their best to identify "Jewishness" with being Israeli with being Zionist. In particular they attack those who criticize Zionism as anti-semitic. While none of these identifications is accurate, it is not surprising, given the way the Zionists and their apologists frame the debate, that many people make them. The fact that some Jewish groups worldwide are openly opposing the Zionist adventure is wonderful news. There are also many wonderful Israelis who oppose Zionism - let us celebrate their courage and humanity.

    • How they'll spin it? Isn't that obvious? They're "self-hating Jews". That's how they've spun every criticism from the Jewish community so far. I agree with you, however, that this is great news.

  • Tel Aviv Rally Against Gaza Blockade;
    Wave of Protests, Gov't Condemnation
    • ". it's utterly hypocritical for Israelis to wonder aloud why Palestinians
      don't pursue a non-violent strategy. One obvious reason is that, whenever they
      have, Israel brutally represses it." (Norman G. Finkelstein, 11 September
      2003)

    • Why do Likudniks always ignore the facts? Hamas was willing to participate in 2008. It had a ceasefire with Israel which was holding - except that Israel was not upholding its part of the bargain: to allow the passage of goods into and out of Gaza. After around 5 months of this, Israel went a step too far and murdered several Hamas leaders with a rocket attack (how is it that Palestinians are the only ones described as "firing rockets"?) . This happened on US election day (I wonder why?) and the only mainstream newspaper to report it was the British "Guardian" as far as I am aware.

      The US press I read (NYT and Wapo) seem to think that Israel has always been there and that Palestinians are stealing Israeli land.

      While Israel had a government that could be described as "moderate", even though it had people who said:

      "We declare openly that the Arabs have no right to settle on even one centimeter of Eretz Israel... Force is all they do or ever will understand. We shall use the ultimate force until the Palestinians come crawling to us on all fours." Rafael Eitan, Chief of Staff of the Israeli Defense Forces - Gad Becker, Yediot Ahronot 13 April 1983, New York Times 14 April 1983.

      they had the support of the people of the US who were suitably propagandized by the MSM. Israel has always been radical - but was able to present itself as moderate. With a "right wing" government in power it may be possible to see light between the US and Israeli administrations.

  • Northern Ireland Condemns Israeli Raid on Rachel Corrie,
    "Completely unacceptable Use of Force"
    • Phud1:in the light of your last two comments I am led to believe you might have an understanding of Hamas that comes from the MSM. Would you read these:

      link to timesonline.co.uk

      link to sabbah.biz

      link to vanityfair.com

      None of these are from particularly radical sources. Indeed the first is from the Murdoch press.

      Of course the other Arab regimes don't like Hamas - it is a democratically elected Islamic government. That would threaten pretty well all of them.

  • Rachel Corrie Steaming toward Gaza
    Likud Vows it will Not Arrive
    • Is it not time to put the US media on trial? I looked at the NYT again today - once again it accepts the Israeli viewpoint without question - Israel's offer to take the cargo off the MV Rachel Corrie and transport it to Gaza. Consistently it mentions Hamas attacks on "unarmed civilians" while of course not mentioning ongoing and much more effective attacks by the Israelis on Palestinians both in Gaza and the West Bank. Though I have to admit they at least allow a spokesperson for Free Gaza to say that Hamas was "democratically elected"- usually the MSM say that Hamas gained power by overthrowing Fatah. On the other hand it allows the liar-in-chief Mark Regev to say that: "These are not human rights activists" and talk about Hamas' "appalling human rights record". Now that from an Israeli requires some Chutzpah!

  • The Hypocrisy of Netanyahu
    • I am writing this to thank you for showing that there is an ounce of sanity left in the US. I have just come away from the NYT truly sickened by the op-eds and the letters about the Israeli attack on the flotilla which appear to suggest that the peace activists were a bunch of terrorists. Their ignorance of the true roles of Hamas and the Israelis is so profound as to lead me to despair and this from apparently intelligent people. Until the people of US are given the truth, or more likely the American Empire disappears (how long can an empire persist on such lies). we can expect no improvement in the Middle East.

      For your readers who are willing to open their minds, let me suggest the following websites, none of which are particularly anti-Israeli. Indeed the first is from that staunch supporter of Israel, the Murdoch Press.

      link to timesonline.co.uk

      link to sabbah.biz

      link to vanityfair.com

Showing comments 19 - 1
Page: