READER COMMENTS ON

"Zionism & Israeli 'State Terrorism' - Political Third Rail or Long Overdue Debate?"

(153 Responses so far...)





COMMENT #1 [Permalink]

... Kevin Andrews said on 1/15/2010 @ 9:38 am PT...





Thank you for bringing this position forward. It is long past time that the United State align with the high-road of human dignity for all. The human rights violations of the Israeli governments cannot, in good conscience, be allowed to continue to drive this much needed conversation on American Foreign Policy. If a lasting peace is to be obtained it must represent all involved and not the exclusively Zionist position of the Israeli.

http://activecitizen54.wordpress.com/

COMMENT #2 [Permalink]

... Symbiont said on 1/15/2010 @ 10:12 am PT...





Again, another real great article, Ernest - deep, and important analysis. I did want to comment on one thing:

...such harsh rhetoric fails to take into account the deep seated Jewish insecurity which lies at the foundation of Zionism and which helps to explain why a Henry Waxman would erroneously equate a call for a peaceful, democratic "one-state" solution with a call for the destruction of Israel. Forgive my simplistic thinking here, but isn't the whole point of the state of Israel to be a "Jewish homeland"? If the one-state solution were pursued (which will never happen), and a multi-cultural democracy were established, the Jews - increasingly in the demographic minority in Palestine - would not be able to (democratically) assert their interests. Disclaimer: I have no Jewish ancestry, and I'm personally extremely critical of Israel's state-sponsored terrorism, and am heartbroken over the plight of Palestinians. Yet I believe every ethnic group should try to assert its own interests, and understand (if not condone) the desire to establish a Jewish homeland.

COMMENT #3 [Permalink]

... renzoku bb.com said on 1/15/2010 @ 10:48 am PT...





Thank you Ernest. Beautiful to see the ideas sorted out more clearly. Given Waxman's previous positions against Bush, we might be giving him too much credit here. Ideology is not enough to explain his ridiculous criticisms and betrayal of Winograd.

COMMENT #4 [Permalink]

... MarkH said on 1/15/2010 @ 10:54 am PT...





I don't know much about Winograd, but I can see how her argument would serve the larger purpose of discussing the situation in all it's aspects and of considering any kind of solution. By arguing for one state she could be entirely sincere and a secularist who wants a Democracy there. Or, she could be suggesting this is an inevitability unless today's Israelis recognize it as inevitable AND dangerous, so they will then begin to seriously consider other possibilities. The U.S. gov't has supported the 2-state solution for some time, but Israel has refused to move in that direction. Maybe Winograd, by pointing out the inevitability of the one-state if nothing is done, can inspire some kind of movement in Israel. The angry response against her indicates the difficulty some people have in considering any alternative to their current world. It's tragic that world-changing event will naturally creep up on them and change their world without their consent. Would we ignore a gradually changing world, as did the U.S. bankers who were part of our current economic crisis, and suffer the consequences when it's too late for us to change? The economic crisis has been incredibly painful. Would Israelis deserve to suffer when they might have taken the bull by the horns to design and choose their own future. Don't let other people choose your future! Begin now to listen to leaders like Winograd. Begin now to create your own future.

COMMENT #5 [Permalink]

... Mitch Trachtenberg said on 1/15/2010 @ 10:56 am PT...





said she favored a "one state solution" because you "cannot establish a democracy in a state founded on the institutionalized superiority or exclusivity of one of religion, ethnicity or culture." Isn't that called a "nation"? Sorry, but I split with much of the left about this. I won't belabor the point, because the two sides can never seem to come to understand one another.

COMMENT #6 [Permalink]

... Ernest A. Canning said on 1/15/2010 @ 11:03 am PT...





Mitch Trachtenberg said The two sides can never seem to come to understand one another.

___________________ Perhaps, Mitch, that is due to a lack of effort.

COMMENT #7 [Permalink]

... David Lasagna said on 1/15/2010 @ 11:10 am PT...





Excellent post, Ernest. Thank you for this. Bravo, bravo for your sense of fairness. For more of this liberating and inspiring fairness in a longer look at the history and issues here I higly recommend Rabbi Michael Lerner's "Healing Israel/Palestine: A Path to Peace and Reconciliation." to Symbiont--I'm with you about the point of the state of Israel being a Jewish homeland but the broader point is the necessity and challenge of simultaneously including the Palestinians' viewpoint and their right to their own homeland. They were not consulted about the conversion of their country into someone else's. Understandably a bit of a sticky wicket. Rabbi Lerner really is brilliant in going through the history and expressing with deep understanding and sympathy the realities for both sides and the perceptions those realities are likely to promote. He also is brilliant in offering many, many examples of available roads repeatedly not taken by both sides. Many, many not taken paths that sure look a whole lot more amenable to peace and reconciliation than paths taken. (disclosure--I'm of Italian, German Jew, Swedish, Norwegian descent)

COMMENT #8 [Permalink]

... SLSmith said on 1/15/2010 @ 11:14 am PT...





Venice Votes Winograd Rally 1/16-->Show Your Support For Marcy in Venice-->We Need You! Saturday January 16 @ 3:30 pm - 5:00 we will be holding a JOBS, NOT WARS - VENICE VOTES WINOGRADsigns in this peaceful rally. The rally will be at a well-trafficked corner in Venice with positive messaging about our candidate. Once we have established a healthy presence, we'll dispatch volunteers to pass out fliers and walk down Abbot Kinney, gathering petition signatures to get Marcy on the Democratic primary ballot on June 8, 2010. The rally will be held January 16 @ 3:30 pm - 5:00 pm at the corner of Abbot Kinney & Westminster Ave. Venice a well-trafficked corner on Saturdays. 1/16/10 VENICE VOTES FOR WINOGRAD rally details

COMMENT #9 [Permalink]

... Mitch Trachtenberg said on 1/15/2010 @ 11:17 am PT...





(I'd reply specifically to Ernest, but I can't see any way of directly emailing an author.) Yes, perhaps the inability of the two sides to come to an agreement is due to lack of effort. I think there's more involved than that, but perhaps more effort would help. In any event, I doubt a blog is the place that will lead to a solution. I admire those who try to find one.

COMMENT #10 [Permalink]

... billy said on 1/15/2010 @ 11:21 am PT...





It is a tricky topic but one that does need to be addressed. Especially with the US and its obvious pro-Zionist agenda. Where many in the world equate Zionism with racism, we as Americans, need to see how our policies effect the entire middle east and not just one group of people.

COMMENT #11 [Permalink]

... Big Dan said on 1/15/2010 @ 11:28 am PT...





Wiretap Recorded Rep. Harman Discussing Aid for AIPAC Defendants http://www.cqpolitics.co...ocid=hsnews-000003098436 One of the leading House Democrats on intelligence matters was overheard on telephone calls intercepted by the National Security Agency agreeing to seek lenient treatment from the Bush administration for two pro-Israel lobbyists who were under investigation for espionage, current and former government officials say. http://www.nytimes.com/2...1harman.html?_r=3&hp Are Members of Congress (and Maybe Even the President) Being Blackmailed? http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/node/41905 Were Other Congress People - Besides Harman - Also Blackmailed by the Bush Administration? http://www.washingtonsbl...ress-people-besides.html U.S. Might Not Try Pro-Israel Lobbyists

Meanwhile, Rep. Harman Denies Offering to Influence Case http://www.washingtonpos.../AR2009042102602_pf.html [Avigdor] Lieberman: U.S. will accept any Israeli policy decision http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1080097.html Gonzales ‘blocked prosecution of Democrat who helped keep lid on wiretapping story’ http://rawstory.com/08/n...id-on-wiretapping-story/ Hastert informed of Harman investigation? http://www.atlargely.com...arman-investigation.html From AIPAC with love... http://www.atlargely.com...rom-aipac-with-love.html Jane Harman: Stupid and Reckless, Not the Victim of Illegal Wiretaps http://emptywheel.firedo...tim-of-illegal-wiretaps/ James Bamford on Israeli wiretappers: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hI_k9Xt00YE

COMMENT #12 [Permalink]

... Symbiont said on 1/15/2010 @ 11:29 am PT...





I'm with you about the point of the state of Israel being a Jewish homeland but the broader point is the necessity and challenge of simultaneously including the Palestinians' viewpoint and their right to their own homeland. They were not consulted about the conversion of their country into someone else's. Yes, of course - totally agreed with you. "A land without a people for a people without a land" was factually incorrect, not to mention racist. I do not condone the Zionist land-grab, and I lament the suffering of the Palestinians. I was only defending Waxman's logic on that one particular point: A one-state solution logically implies the destruction of the state of Israel. The whole point of having a modern state of Israel was to establish a Jewish homeland, i.e., a homeland for a particular ethno-religious group. A state of Israel which were to comprise what is now Israel and what is now the Palestinian territories, and give full democratic rights to all ethnicities --- in short, an Israel that is a secular, pluralistic nation-state a la the US --- would mean the eventual non-existence of a Jewish homeland, because Jews just don't have demographic trends in their favor right now. That's all I'm trying to say --- the one-state solution is not in the interests of Israel, so it's not going to happen, unless imposed upon them by force in some distant future when Israel isn't getting foreign aid from the US. Not @ you, but @ everyone: I don't think the Arab-Israeli conflict's perennial nature is due to lack of effort; it's due to force and logic. An appeal to "if only we all tried harder and were more sincere" is sort of in the same vein as narcissistic-Evangelicalism --- which, of course, gets us "all fired up" here in the bradblogosphere. (I actually am basically on your side, Frank.) Hey, and while we're getting into heritages, I'm of German, Scottish, and French descent. And I want a Scotch-Franco-Germanic homeland, damit!

COMMENT #13 [Permalink]

... Orangutan said on 1/15/2010 @ 11:32 am PT...





More people need to know about the "Mossad" and their history and motto's. That's for sure. More people need to be aware of a lot of things. And not afraid to speak out and take action on them.

COMMENT #14 [Permalink]

... Orangutan said on 1/15/2010 @ 11:34 am PT...





This stuff needs to be unearthed. We spend way to much money propping up the state of Israel at the expense of too many other things. God may there be peace in this world. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VXDOlWcD4aM Very good history of foreign involvement by the U.S. and their interests.

COMMENT #15 [Permalink]

... Agent 99 said on 1/15/2010 @ 11:39 am PT...





Move Israel to the South Pole.

COMMENT #16 [Permalink]

... David Lasagna said on 1/15/2010 @ 12:13 pm PT...





Agent 99-- Why not Texas? Make Texas Israel. Leave the poor South Pole alone. It's gonna be hot there soon enough. Move Austin to Cambridge. We could use the help. Let the other Texans,(the population of Fort Collins, Co) and Sarah Palin live on some reality show to be determined. Dick Cheney can be the host of the game show version of the reality show. There solved everything. Who says the world's problems can't be solved in the blogosphere?

COMMENT #17 [Permalink]

... Agent 99 said on 1/15/2010 @ 12:22 pm PT...





I thought of something similar to the Texas Solution first, but I think it would lead to too much trouble, pitting American Jews against Israeli Jews, when there's already something of a problem there. So I opted for the South Pole. My hero, Norman Finkelstein, seems to think that Israelis can be converted back into decent citizens of the world in the same way Germans were after WWII, and I can't really argue with that, except it seems we might have to have a WWIII first, and I will argue against that till my dying breath. So. South Pole.

COMMENT #18 [Permalink]

... renzoku bb.com said on 1/15/2010 @ 12:49 pm PT...





guess I'm the cynical doomer here. Not only is the "more effort is needed" theme vein and pointless, it's also a ruse. The two sides derive their legitimacy with their client sheeple because of the conflict and its irresolution, not in spite of it. When these rightwingnut hawks stop fighting and terrorizing each other's peoples, their domestic abuses will be obvious and undeniable. The War on Terror is a marketing campaign and excuse to murder and slander political opponents. Harmon's corruption required a coverup by other corrupt politicians who in turn require coverups from other corrupt politicians and the cycle continues. That's where Sibel Edmonds and other whistle blowers come in. Somewhere, the chain's gotta be broken. So far Bradblog's come the closest to getting those stories out there to break the chain. so what can any and all of us do to make bradblog more effective?

COMMENT #19 [Permalink]

... Agent 99 said on 1/15/2010 @ 12:56 pm PT...





The punchline to a great piece by John Pilger:

Just over a year ago, 1400 defenseless people in Gaza were murdered by the Israelis. On 29 December, Mohamed Jassier became the 367th Gazan to die because people needing life-saving medical treatment are not allowed out. Keep that in mind when you next watch the BBC "balance" such suffering with the weasel protestations of the oppressors. In it he describes some of the successes of the boycott and divestment movement, but I think there isn't such a great chance of getting the kind of involvement and resolve as we got against South Africa. The United States was never as heavily invested in South Africa, and South Africa did not have anywhere near the political clout here as Israel does. This long-overdue debate, which oughtn't even to be debatable, is a political third rail only because of the fantastic amount of money their political machine pours on our government officials. It's identical to Big Pharma, and Big Oil, and Wall Street, all the huge money interests buying and bribing and scaring the snot out of our politicians. Our government is broken because of this shit. So I think the boycott thing isn't so likely to get the job done... maybe not even tone it down.

COMMENT #20 [Permalink]

... Agent 99 said on 1/15/2010 @ 1:02 pm PT...





If you want an idea of what Winograd is up against, I heavily recommend you watch this hour-long Dutch documentary about AIPAC. No. Really. If you want to know why supposedly-decent "progressives" are backing Harmon, watch the video.

COMMENT #21 [Permalink]

... Mitch Trachtenberg said on 1/15/2010 @ 1:13 pm PT...





In a world without racism, Israel would be where Germany is today, and Palestinians would be in Palestine. The United States would have been pushed off of North America, or at least to a small corner of New England, for which it could pay rent. This is crystal-clear to me, and also "completely out-of-the-question". The question that always comes up for me, viscerally, as I hear citizens of the United States complaining about Israeli violence, is "are you completely without shame?"

COMMENT #22 [Permalink]

... Agent 99 said on 1/15/2010 @ 1:17 pm PT...





Truly. What pot is calling what kettle black?

COMMENT #23 [Permalink]

... Agent 99 said on 1/15/2010 @ 1:19 pm PT...





Which, none the less, doesn't mean we shouldn't stop supporting Israel's perfidies.

COMMENT #24 [Permalink]

... Brad Friedman said on 1/15/2010 @ 1:33 pm PT...





Renzoku asked: so what can any and all of us do to make bradblog more effective? For a start, DIGG, REDDIT, RETWEET, Fan/Like us on Facebook, etc! Honestly, it makes a difference! Swear to God! Next, donations (any) would help me get out of the daily grind of just trying to figure out how to pay the rent, and help move us towards being able to improve/expand the site. But, as mentioned, the easiest, most important thing to do is SPREAD THE WORD! And I keep trying to make it as easy as possible...

COMMENT #25 [Permalink]

... Brad Friedman said on 1/15/2010 @ 1:40 pm PT...





David Lasagna @ 7: the broader point is the necessity and challenge of simultaneously including the Palestinians' viewpoint and their right to their own homeland. They were not consulted about the conversion of their country into someone else's (Wading onto my own third-rail here?) But without the time to go into detailed specifics, in fact they were consulted. And essentially declined to be a part of the solution. I may regret not having the time right now to fully elucidate on the nuances of that point, but hopefully someone else can if my response actually comes up for contention here.

COMMENT #26 [Permalink]

... Ernest A. Canning said on 1/15/2010 @ 2:26 pm PT...





Mitch Trachtenberg said I doubt a blog is the place that will lead to a solution.

____________________ The purpose of this piece was not so much to offer a "solution" to the thorny Israel/Palestine conflict. My intent was to address the horribly constricted range of discourse on the topic that one presently finds either inside the halls of Congress or within the press rooms of the corporate-owned media. Since you will not find an article like this inside the pages of The New York Times or the Washington Post, or find meaningful discussion of its content discussed on CNN, MSNBC, let alone, Fox News, one has to turn to a more democratic forum --- and I know of no better forum for this type of content than The Brad Blog. If this leads to people ranging from hard-core Zionists to anti-Zionists and everyone in between to begin communicating with one another, all the better. So long as it is respectful, I would welcome comments from all quarters. I get the impression, Mitch, and correct me if I'm wrong, that you are of the opinion that individual actions towards a specific goal don't matter --- that if a piece like this does not promptly lead to a resolution of the thorny issues of the day, why try? I believe that in a democracy, respectful debate and dialogue pertaining to the vital issues of the day are essential. Yet, articles like that just posted by Brad --- Easily Hacked Diebold Systems to Decide 'Toss-Up' U.S. Senate Special Election in MA on Tuesday --- will go largely unreported in the corporate-owned media. Yet, Brad's persistent efforts over the last six years, along with those of many others in the election integrity movement, have had an impact. How effective that effort will ultimately be depends upon the willingness of individual citizens to educate themselves in an effort to make a difference, to pass on what is here at The Brad Blog and other valuable sites for others to see, read and, where appropriate, to act upon. If you got the impression from my article that I intended to suggest that democracy is easy, then I either failed to accurately communicate my intent or you misread it.

COMMENT #27 [Permalink]

... Mitch Trachtenberg said on 1/15/2010 @ 2:37 pm PT...





Ernest, You are well-named. But after years of finding the so-called Arab-Israeli conflict to be the single topic on which civil debate invariably (in my experience) devolves into shouts and tears, I guess I was being somewhat negative. Good luck with your efforts.

COMMENT #28 [Permalink]

... Ernest A. Canning said on 1/15/2010 @ 2:38 pm PT...





Big Dan, one has to be especially careful so that readers are not misled as to the source of a quote. The Haaretz article you cite pertains not to Joseph Lieberman but to Israel's foreign minister, Avigdor Lieberman. The article reads: The Obama Administration will put forth new peace initiatives only if Israel wants it to, said Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman in his first comprehensive interview on foreign policy since taking office. "Believe me, America accepts all our decisions," Lieberman told the Russian daily Moskovskiy Komosolets [ed note: I fixed it so there won't be any confusion. Thanks. —99]

COMMENT #29 [Permalink]

... Agent 99 said on 1/15/2010 @ 2:39 pm PT...





It's okay, Brad, I hear China and Mexico are making a deal to give California to the Tibetans. I'm sure we'll get the Governator right over to Beijing to object....

COMMENT #30 [Permalink]

... Ernest A. Canning said on 1/15/2010 @ 2:55 pm PT...





Not quite, 99. The Governator will be right over to Beijing to see what price he can secure in order to sell CA.

COMMENT #31 [Permalink]

... Agent 99 said on 1/15/2010 @ 2:58 pm PT...





Too true, Ernie, too true....

COMMENT #32 [Permalink]

... Disillusioned said on 1/15/2010 @ 3:00 pm PT...





Zionism, mostly because of how it was implemented, is an abomination that should have never been granted legitimacy, at least not through the Jewish terrorism acts that encouraged the British to cave and establish Israel. A one-state solution probably isn't feasible, although its interesting to note that there is ~3.9 million Palestinians, and ~5 million Israeli Jews, which would make for an interesting 2-party democratic system. From a philosophical and diplomatic position, I think discussing a one state solution has some merit even if its incredibly improbable.

COMMENT #33 [Permalink]

... Ernest A. Canning said on 1/15/2010 @ 3:06 pm PT...





On the other hand, Dan, your link to the Washington Post piece warrants further discussion. The piece recites: Transcripts of the FBI wiretaps depict a possible trade of favors in which Harman expressed willingness to discuss the American Israel Public Affairs Committee prosecution with senior administration officials and, in return, backers of Israel would provide Democrats with additional campaign contributions and support Harman's efforts to become chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, according to two sources with direct knowledge of the matter who spoke on the condition of anonymity. Then WaPo adds: She [Harman] told reporters yesterday that as far as she knows, the calls in question were conversations with U.S. citizens that took place within the country. That's an admission that conversations took place but a claim that Harman thought she was speaking with American citizens. In a letter to Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr., Harman said she never contacted the Justice Department or the White House to "seek favorable treatment regarding the national security cases on which I was briefed, or any other cases." The fact that she did not actually contact the JD or the WH does not equate to a denial that, during these admitted conversations, "Harman expressed willingness to discuss the American Israel Public Affairs Committee prosecution with senior administration officials," as alleged by "two sources." The article went on to note: Harman further called on the department to release in full any transcripts and other material involving her that were collected during the federal probe, so she could make them public. Now there's a point on which Harman and I are in full agreement.

COMMENT #34 [Permalink]

... David Lasagna said on 1/15/2010 @ 3:14 pm PT...





Here allow me-- Brad @ comment #25-- You're right and I was being imprecise yet again. What I meant was more along the lines that the creation of a state of Israel in Palestine as a bold and necessary offer to the Jews who'd been pretty much shat on by everyone forever was not an idea that originated in Palestine. So yes, they were consulted. But it was on a mandate that was going to happen whether they wanted it or not. Isn't that correct? The element of choice seems a bit hamstrung in a situation like that. This is not to say that I think the Palestinians were correct in refusing to take part in the discussions of what was going to become of Palestine/Israel. I think it would have been to everyone's benefit if they had. A conciliatory and generous negotiating posture would probably have been much more likely to produce happier outcomes. I'm just saying we need to understand both sides' viewpoints throughout the history and our discussions of same. As Lerner elucidates the Palestinians had there own long and tortured past which gave them reasons to not want to partake of this dramatic sea change. Also, I don't believe the Palestinians were involved in the war talk, plans, and activities from surrounding hostile Arab countries that resulted in significant further acquisition of Palestinian land by Israel. At least according to Rabbi Lerner they weren't. Those actions were taken by the surrouding Arab states with the Palestinians (and Jews) suffering the consequences.(I'm speaking of the 1948-1967 period).

COMMENT #35 [Permalink]

... Ernest A. Canning said on 1/15/2010 @ 3:31 pm PT...





Symbiont said: If the one-state solution were pursued (which will never happen), and a multi-cultural democracy were established, the Jews - increasingly in the demographic minority in Palestine - would not be able to (democratically) assert their interests. Disillusioned adds: A one-state solution probably isn't feasible, although its interesting to note that there is ~3.9 million Palestinians, and ~5 million Israeli Jews, which would make for an interesting 2-party democratic system.

____________________________ Ah, how quickly we all forget history. I can recall the fears of white South Africans at the prospect of a democratic South Africa where black South Africans, who had suffered for years under the brutal apartheid regime, came to power. What transpired was remarkably at odds with what was expected. I'm not one to ordinarily recommend seeing a commercially produced film, but perhaps, for those who have not seen it, a trip to your local theater where you can watch Invictus (2009) would be educational. Moreover, last I checked, 5 million is greater than 3.9 million. And it's not a pure numbers game. Less than 2% of the U.S. population is Jewish, yet when it comes to US/Israel policy, those numbers mean very little. Have we all been locked into the status quo for so long that, this close to MLK day, no one can foresee a time when Jews, Christians, Muslims and atheists could judge one-another by the content of their character and not by their ethnicity or choice of religion (or lack thereof)? Finally, for those who did not follow the link I provided in the article, Friends of Sabeel is a Palestinian Christian international peace movement. The fact that Marcy Winograd addressed them on behalf of L.A. Jews for Peace reflects that the level of communication and understanding between Jews and Arabs is not merely possible but, in that instance, a reality.

COMMENT #36 [Permalink]

... Mark said on 1/15/2010 @ 4:33 pm PT...





This is a most disgusting bit of crap. To quote Finklestein with favor, who has demeaned the Holocaust and supports groups like Hezbollah who want to repeat the Holocaust, a man whose shoddy "scholarship" is something less than, say, the flat-earth society in support of such nonsense is incredibly disgusting and disgusting. And then to cite that anarchist terrorist Chomsky as well. Mark my words: whenever you see Finklestein and Chomsky, you can expect an antisemitic argument. It's kind of like quoting Uncle Tom on racism. Or Phyllis Schafley on feminism. Or a so-called "ex-gay" on homosexuality. Virtually every nation on earth, from France to Saudi Arabia, is based on national and religious identity. To deny the Jews of Judeaea a State in Judaea while allowing the Arabs of Arabia a State in Arabia AND Judaea makes as much sense as allowing the Germans both Germany and France and assigning French children to the ovens. Do you even know that Israel is the sole reason why millions of Jews are not massacred? Do you even know that a Holocaust --- a mass murder of millions of Jews --- is the goal of Hezbollah, an organization which regularly murders children and which Finklestein avidly supports? Do you even know that Finklestein's scholarship is about on par with Holocaust-denier Ahmanidejad and that no one, except the most vicious Nazi antisemites, takes it seriously? Canning, please explain why --- without resorting to antisemitism --- you believe Jews and Jews alone have no right to the use the First Amendment to petition their Government. And then address the fact that some 80% of Americans support the right of Israel to exist free from the murderous terror attacks supportedd by Finklestein (and presumably Winograd and Canning). So guess what? It ain't just the Jews! The vast majority of Americans, Democrats and Republicans, support the right of Israel to live in peace, free from repeated attempts at annihilation. How DARE you blame Jews for a position held by 80% of Americans? Do you blame blacks for wanting to end apartheid in South Africa, a position also supported by the majority of Americans? Do you blame Germans for worrying about East Germany (another position that most Americans supported)? So why blame the Jews? If you hate America's Israel policy, say so. But blaming American Jews is disgusting. Frankly, Brad, I'm surprised at you. And I'd be even more surprised if you had the intellectual honesty to leave this comment up. But I hope you do. And if you believe in the First Amendment, you will. Heck, even Carter apologized for his blatant antisemitism with regard to Israel. I think Canning, if he is intellecually honest and is willing to cite factual sources and decent scholarship, is redeemable as well. But seriously, it is "articles" like this one, which purport to based on "scholarship," that lead to violence. It is articles like this one that led to the rise of the Third Reich and will lead today to another fanatic Muslim trying to murder hundreds by putting bombs in his underwear. If you are against all political nationalisms and you want one-world government, then fine, you're a crazy idealist. But if you're against Jewish nationalism while supporting Arab nationalism and French nationalism and Russian nationalism and Muslim nationalism, etc., then you are, by definition, a Jew-hater, because you believe that Jews --- uniquely among the peoples of the earth --- do not deserve a state. Need I remind anyone that knows anything that the Jewish People predates the Jewish religion? That Jews are named by the land which they are from (Judeaea)? That they are as much from Judeaea as the Arabs of Arabia? That they are the ONLY people on earth for which millions STILL seek to murder every last one of them? And that Israel is the only thing that stands in the way of genocide? Need I remind anyone that Israel NEVER intentionally kills civilians while its opponents ALWAYS do? That Israel does its best to avoid civilian casualties, but when an Arab child dies, Hamas and Hezbollah celebrate! (which is why they put their weapons in schools and mosques) Need I remind anyone that "Palestinians" didn't exist until the 1960's, that the Arabs have 23 states, that there were were Jewish refugees than Arabs refugees in 1948, that the Arabs supported Hitler's Holocaust, that Israel has repeatedly offered the Arabs a State of their own that they have repeatedly refused, or that Israel completely left Gaza and that in leaving Gaza, the people now live in misery controlled by a terrorist dictatorship devoted to war and oppression? I could go on and on and on. But obviously the writer --- and sadly, most of the commentators --- don't know the first thing about Jewish or Arab history, about the State of Israel, or the State of Jordan. Please don't be willfully ignorant. But if you are willing to believe this complete hateful nonsense, I urge you still PLEASE to not strap on a suicide bomb. Jews are people too. Please do not try to kill them. They have a right to live, like every people on earth.

COMMENT #37 [Permalink]

... Ernest A. Canning said on 1/15/2010 @ 5:00 pm PT...





With all due respect, Mark, your hysterical rant suggests that you did not read past the headline of my piece, let alone Prof. Finkelstein's well-written, scholarly work. I find little in your diatribe to distinguish it from some of the off-the-wall claims the wing-nuts made about health care during the town hall meetings, e.g., nowhere in my piece did I so much as hint that anyone, including Israel, should not exist "free of terrorist attacks." Unfortunately, I do not see where you express any concern whatsoever for the right of Palestinian children to exist free of Israeli state terrorism. Calm yourself, take a deep breath, go to the library and check out Finkelstein's Beyond Chutzpah --- educate yourself on the facts and then return and I will be glad to hold an adult conversation with you.

COMMENT #38 [Permalink]

... BlueHawk said on 1/15/2010 @ 5:02 pm PT...





Mark @36 The term "Zionism" was apparently coined in 1891 by the Austrian publicist Nathan Birnbaum, to describe the new ideology. It is also used to describe anyone who believes Jews should return to their ancient homeland. Frankly Mark...your comment is too long to construct a meaningful response. So I'll just deal with Zionism, the belief that some Jews possess that tells them they are entitled their own homeland.

I'm sure many African Americans would be called friggin' nuts if they went to Ghana and demanded that it be declared their homeland ...and then made Ghanians live in a virtual concentration camp.

Our own Native Americans...don't they have a right to their own homeland ? Just where do you think they'll choose to make that homeland ? Zionism is simply western imperialism...a way for the west (mainly the U.S.) to have a presence in the oil rich, militarily strategic middle east. Suppose Buddhists from all over Asia decided to go back to India and declare it their homeland...?

I don't think the Hindus or Muslims will be too happy about that. European Jews are European Jews...their homeland is Poland, Germany, France, Russia etc. I want you to explain what gives European Jews the right to inprison Arabs and dominate a region simply by decree ?

A one state solution would be a return of Palestine to it's original state...Arabs and Jews living in Palestine as one people, 2 religions... Tell me that's a ludicious idea.

COMMENT #39 [Permalink]

... BlueHawk said on 1/15/2010 @ 5:08 pm PT...





And Mark...for the record...

Arabs don't hate Jews; Arabs hate Zionism. Arabs and Jews lived side by side in Palestine relatively peacefully for centuries. Their conflict didn't get heated until some mook introduced the idea of Jewish Zionism. It is you my friend that should do some even minded research.

COMMENT #40 [Permalink]

... Ernest A. Canning said on 1/15/2010 @ 5:11 pm PT...





Oh, and Mark, what do you have to say to those on the Right who claim this is a "Christian America?" Would you feel discriminated against if only Christians had first class citizenship and all the rest of us were relegated to second class status?

COMMENT #41 [Permalink]

... Big Dan said on 1/15/2010 @ 5:15 pm PT...





Those links are just info I have noticed and saved over time. Yes, I thought that, too, about Lieberman...that it was Joe Lieberman (but what's the difference? LOL!)

COMMENT #42 [Permalink]

... Big Dan said on 1/15/2010 @ 5:19 pm PT...





The one thing that gets me about Israel is: IT'S A FOREIGN COUNTRY! And we act like it isn't! It's just as foreign to ME, being an American, as any Arab country, or France, or ANY other country! And I don't understand why we seem to bend over backwards for this foreign country Israel all the time, and our media definitely is biased towards Israel. That's not even up for argument, that our media is biased towards Israel...which is a foreign country. Sometimes I think we bend over backwards for Israel more than for our own Americans. Did you know Israel has universal national health care? Did you notice the media NEVER mentions this?

COMMENT #43 [Permalink]

... Agent 99 said on 1/15/2010 @ 5:40 pm PT...





NORMAN FINKELSTEIN IS A HERO WITH MORE INTEGRITY IN HIS LEFT PINKY THAN MOST PEOPLE HAVE IN THEIR WHOLE BODY. Period.

COMMENT #44 [Permalink]

... Brad Friedman said on 1/15/2010 @ 8:44 pm PT...





Mark @ 36: a) You're lovably crazy. b) You said: Frankly, Brad, I'm surprised at you. And I'd be even more surprised if you had the intellectual honesty to leave this comment up. But I hope you do. And if you believe in the First Amendment, you will. The First Amendment, though we're ardent supporters, has nothing to do with what I decide to keep up on the private property of my blog. That said, we leave all comments up, unless they are in violation of the few commenting rules we have, which I don't believe you've violated (the one you came closest to was "knowing disinformation", but since I actually think you believe the bulk of the nonsense you just posted, I don't think it's knowing disinformation, just ignorant repetition of what you've been told by Rush, Dubya and friends.) Heck, even Carter apologized for his blatant antisemitism with regard to Israel. Really? Got URL? I'm unfamiliar with him apologizing for "blatant antisemitism" with regard to anything. c) You also said: I could go on and on and on. You already did. What were you thinking?! You should have been guarding against underwear bombers who want to kill you!!! Good luck to you and your blood pressure. Peace.

COMMENT #45 [Permalink]

... ron_woodward said on 1/16/2010 @ 1:52 am PT...





During my lifetime I have witnessed the decline of the US Republic into a corporate communist welfare/warfare state. The USA has conducted several preemptive wars excused by her declaration she is bringing "democracy" to various have-not nations. She implies the 7.2 millions Asians she has killed in the process are better off dead.

Similarly, the US citizen has no other choice but to follow the dictates of the military/industrial complex against his better interests. He has the chutzpah to assume only he has the proper moral outlook to judge the conduct of other nations.

Somehow, a number of self-styled experts insist they qualify to discuss "Zionism & State Terrorism."

I live 22 miles east of Egypt within the range of Iran-supplied missiles. Humbly, I ask the pundits to spend a little time conversing with ordinary folks in the region before they pontificate about policy.

COMMENT #46 [Permalink]

... Floridiot said on 1/16/2010 @ 4:50 am PT...





The "Seven Jewish Americans" that control the media doesn't include Haim Saban? hmmm http://www.brookings.edu/saban.aspx Thx fer link niners

COMMENT #47 [Permalink]

... BlueHawk said on 1/16/2010 @ 8:48 am PT...





ron_woodward @45 I live 22 miles east of Egypt within the range of Iran-supplied missiles. Humbly, I ask the pundits to spend a little time conversing with ordinary folks in the region before they pontificate about policy. And Arabs live under the threat of Israeli nuclear warheads supplied by the West... Pardon the well read and thoughtfully considered reporters and commenters on this blog for not living in Egpyt. Zionism is state sponsored terrorism...plain and simple.

Menachem Begin was Britain's most sought after terrorist; google Menachem Begin and the bombing of Jerusalem's King David hotel. That tidbit may seem unrelated to your comment...but a nation, Israel that used terrorism as a tool to independence and has nuclear arms pointed at it's neighbors at this very moment...can't all the sudden cry foul when it is threatened with the very same realities. call it karma, divine justice or what goes around comes around.... Zionism is at it's very core...imperialist, racist and unjust.

COMMENT #48 [Permalink]

... Mitch Trachtenberg said on 1/16/2010 @ 11:13 am PT...





Zionism is state sponsored terrorism...plain and simple. And so it goes, Mr. Woodward, so it goes. If you are a sabra, it doesn't matter. Americans will explain that you are illegitimate, because your grandparents were immigrants who actually had to fight to establish their country. They will ignore the fact that all citizens of the United States (except indigenous people) are living on land stolen only five to ten generations ago. They will explain that you are a Western imperialist, even if you came from the Soviet Union or Africa. They will cry tears for what your army does to civilian Palestinians, giving no though to what the surrounding states would do to your civilians if they had your strength. They will hold you to a standard no other nation is held to, certainly not their own, and they will cite chapter and verse of every excess in which your government has engaged, as if no other nation has engaged in excess. And, the galling part: they'll feel morally superior while doing it. I'm sorry.

COMMENT #49 [Permalink]

... Agent 99 said on 1/16/2010 @ 11:28 am PT...





Yes, well, Mitch, much as I agree with you about this pot calling kettle black thing, the upshot of that thinking is that because Americans are hypocrites about the genocide of the rightful inhabitants of a given location, it's actually okay for Israelis to keep slaughtering Palestinians. Whether our country was gained by identical means is moot. It doesn't make it okay to do this anywhere. Would that there had been international action against the murderating fucks who established the United States. We might be living in Eden now. Palestine might be Eden someday if Israelis stop slaughtering people, whether they do it in place or on the South Pole.

COMMENT #50 [Permalink]

... Mitch Trachtenberg said on 1/16/2010 @ 11:43 am PT...





When you insist that one people follow a different set of rules than others, that's bigotry. When you hold people to a different standard, that's bigotry. When you NOTICE one people's behavior more than others, that's bigotry. And I think you and others would be well-advised to follow Mr. Woodward's advice, and stop pontificating from afar about the behavior of a country that has been under attack since birth. Having said that, I'll engage in a bit of my own pontification, with all due embarrassment. I'm an American non-religious, non-believing Jew. I'm continually astonished that so many American Jews provide cover to the anti-semitism involved in attacks on Israel. I am convinced that there are psychological issues behind this, which I don't pretend to understand. Israel's behavior in response to attacks stands up against the behavior of any other nation in world history. You needn't look far. Compare the United States response to a few Saudis with knives --- Guantanamo, secret prisons, the invasion of Iraq, the reduction of domestic civil rights --- with Israel's reaction over 50 years of statehood under continual threat of annihilation. Yes, Israel is on land that doesn't belong to it, except by ridiculous claim to biblical history. Let's not pretend that, if we go back a few generations, the same cannot be said of every nation on the planet. The difference is, Israel is small, Israel is new, and Israel is Jewish. And now, I need to take my blood pressure pill.

COMMENT #51 [Permalink]

... Ernest A. Canning said on 1/16/2010 @ 11:56 am PT...





The "attacks" you describe, Mitch, are typical of those one always anticipates from an occupied people, as the French learned in Algeria. But since you and Mr. Woodward seem to imply that no one can have a valid opinion on the subject unless they live in harm's way, consider the words of Avraham Burg, Former Speaker of the Israeli Parliament and former Chairman of the Jewish Agency for Israel and the World Zionist Organization; author of The Holocaust Is Over: We Must Rise from its Ashes as he appeared on Democracy Now: AMY GOODMAN: Pull out all the settlements. AVRAHAM BURG: Yeah, it pollutes our morality, and it contaminates our policy. And we became hostages of the messianic and eschatological policy of the settlers, which actually leads Israel into a de facto one-state solution, which discriminates one people over the other people. In other words, in Burg's view, Israel has already moved toward a one-state solution --- one in which the Palestinian territories are analogous to Native American reservations as the Palestinians are accorded a subjugated status. Quite different from the "one-state solution" proposed by Marcy Winograd.

COMMENT #52 [Permalink]

... Mitch Trachtenberg said on 1/16/2010 @ 12:05 pm PT...





Scare quotes around "attacks"? They don't actually exist? They don't actually kill civilians? Don't misinterpret me. If you want to compare Israel's behavior with that of France in Algeria, or that of Yugoslavia, or Russia, or China in Tibet, or the United States versus the world, that's fine. If you want to compare the civil rights of Arab citizens of Israel with that of Arab citizens of Egypt or Jordan, or, hell, Jewish citizens of Saudi Arabia, fine. Talk about how nations should not commit genocide. Talk about how nations should respect the civil rights of minorities. Israel's no saint of a nation, thank god, and I wouldn't begin to excuse attacks by some of its forces on unarmed Palestinian civilians. But, again, Israel's behavior is, if anything, FAR BETTER than the typical behavior of a nation under attack. And yet the American left ALWAYS finds Israel to be the nation most worthy of complaint, partially because you can always get pictures and information out of Israel as events take place, and because people who speak out against the government are not immediately killed. It IS anti-semitism, it IS bigotry, and it IS disgusting. And now I'll just sit back and wait for the complaints about my "false accusations" to come pouring in, and I'll see if Brad Friedman is willing to say anything.

COMMENT #53 [Permalink]

... Mitch Trachtenberg said on 1/16/2010 @ 12:19 pm PT...





You talk about the French in Algeria. When the French were forced out of Algeria, was there any place in the world they could go? If Jews were to be forced out of Israel, is there any place in the world they can go?

COMMENT #54 [Permalink]

... BlueHawk said on 1/16/2010 @ 12:20 pm PT...





Conflating anti-Zionism with Anti-Semitism.... Mitch and Mr. Woodward ignore that Arabs and Jews lived in Palestine relatively peacefully pre-Zionism. It is Zionism that caused the Arab-Israeli wars...not anti Semitism. Mitch's and Mr. Woodward's arguments are intellectually fallible because they confuse the two. Mr.Trachtenberg I'm an African American...my presence here in America is unique to human history, just as the Jew's history is....

I understand injustice when I see it as others here do. Israel's moral standing as related to Zionism is weak. From my African American perspective ...seems the abused have become the abusers. Sadly that isn't unique to human history.

COMMENT #55 [Permalink]

... Mitch Trachtenberg said on 1/16/2010 @ 12:20 pm PT...





Besides, as someone on this thread suggested, the South Pole?

COMMENT #56 [Permalink]

... Mitch Trachtenberg said on 1/16/2010 @ 12:27 pm PT...





BlueHawk, Be careful about the difference between Zionism and the birth of Israel. Zionism, in my opinion, is pretty dubious at best. Israel came about because of the Holocaust. Israel is a home for the survivors of Europe's anti-semitism; because the donors were racists, it was exceptionally convenient to locate it on land that had "no one of any importance," and for which Zionists were clamoring. I am in complete agreement with anyone who thinks the vast majority of Palestinians have been screwed over by the West. My issue is that, with all the incredible cruelty that nations invoke on their minority populations, the one that always gets singled out as an example of modern-day Nazism is the one that was founded by a group of people with nowhere else to go.

COMMENT #57 [Permalink]

... BlueHawk said on 1/16/2010 @ 12:41 pm PT...





Mitch Trachtenberg @56 You're playing fast and loose with facts.

Israel exists because of Zionism. There are many holocausted people in the history of the world...Africans, Albanians, Jews, Cambodians, Native Americans...sadly I could go on...Not wanting to sound uncaring but the Jewish holocaust isn't unique to Jews. Zionism was first expressed in 1891...the holocaust was simply a Jewish justification for disenfranchiing Arab Palestinians. As I said... the abused became the abusers.

COMMENT #58 [Permalink]

... Mitch Trachtenberg said on 1/16/2010 @ 12:51 pm PT...





Yes, BlueHawk, I agree that Zionism created the path towards the State of Israel. But I don't believe I'm playing fast and loose with facts when I say that Israel exists because of the genocide on the part of Germans and others against their Jewish populations. Of course there have been other holocausts in history, both ancient and modern. What you had following the German genocide was a situation where the survivors were offered a choice between staying in a society that had just demonstrated the depth of its hatred, or moving to a shiny new country of their own, promised to them by the world community via the League of Nations and the United Nations. It was through League/UN mandates that all the other nations in the area came to exist, as well. By what divine right is Saudi Arabia ruled by its King? Again, I don't mean to minimize the disaster that Israel has represented for Palestinians. But the Jewish population of Israel cannot return to, say, Germany. That does make the situation of Jewish Israeli's unique.

COMMENT #59 [Permalink]

... mick said on 1/16/2010 @ 12:59 pm PT...





A well reasoned article as usual Ernest .

And nobody can argue with the "third rail" analogy.

Political suicide/career suicide can result talking publicly about Israel's behavior towards the Palestinians ,Israel's behavior towards the Lebanese ,Israel's behavior towards Syrians ,Israel's behavior towards Iranians etc.

Imagine this story in your News paper or News media of choice,60 years late but a "Long Overdue Debate".

Also, "the religious and ethnic-based insecurity of Zionism" would be a hard statement to prove by example. And 99 your comments and awesome in their frankness ,you kick ass.

COMMENT #60 [Permalink]

... BlueHawk said on 1/16/2010 @ 1:00 pm PT...





Mitch @58 Germany was the only option Jews had for a place to live...not the U.S., not France, not England ? I thought the European Jews homeland was IN EUROPE. And please don't tell me that the United States was an unwelcoming nation for persecuted Jews. Mitch you're being obtuse...

COMMENT #61 [Permalink]

... BlueHawk said on 1/16/2010 @ 1:12 pm PT...





Mitch I invite you to read this link... Jews against Zionism I would be interested to hear your reactions...I'm not Jewish and I'm not claiming to an expert on Judaism. Your reaction to what this site proclaims will be helpful to my understanding.

COMMENT #62 [Permalink]

... Mitch Trachtenberg said on 1/16/2010 @ 1:15 pm PT...





BlueHawk, I've got to go, but I appreciate your willingness to limit your harshness to my being "obtuse." My email is account mjtrac at the mail site gmail.com, if you'd like to continue this off-blog, but I'll be away for several hours. If I haven't heard from you, I'll post a reply on the blog at some point.

COMMENT #63 [Permalink]

... mick said on 1/16/2010 @ 1:16 pm PT...





"Israel came about because of the Holocaust." WTF

The Holocaust has been used in the most disgusting way imaginable .

A more accurate statement would be "Israel came about because of State Sponsored Terrorism".

COMMENT #64 [Permalink]

... Agent 99 said on 1/16/2010 @ 1:22 pm PT...





Mitch Israelis can return to their native countries. Those who were born in Palestine can stay in Palestine or go to the native countries of their parents and grandparents... in almost all cases. Russia and Germany I'm sure would welcome any or all of them. The U.S. would welcome them. Plenty of humans across the globe might still be angry as hell with them for their murderating ways, hypocritically or not, but they'd take them and that would be an end to it. It's this homeland for a bunch of people who are their religion one minute and astonishingly hypocritically calling themselves a race the next, all of it held down from usability in the application of sense by the Holocaust Industry, that is preventing too many people from rushing in to stop the inexcusably evil activities of the Israeli government. We can't even console ourselves that the people of Israel do not back them because the atrocity in Gaza has something like 90% approval in the Israeli public... which, along with the clear intention to genocide their way into safety and supremacy in the Palestinian homeland, is why I am stumping for the South Pole instead of this whole planet full of more accommodating choices. And whether or not it is indeed your intention to minimize the disaster, you are minimizing the disaster.

COMMENT #65 [Permalink]

... mick said on 1/16/2010 @ 1:23 pm PT...





"Zionists chose not to acknowledge Birobidjan, the voluntary Jewish homeland (supported by American Jewry since 1928) of the Jewish Autonomous Region (on the border of Russia and China). To this day this is a flourishing Jewish homeland - a largely unsung region"

COMMENT #66 [Permalink]

... Agent 99 said on 1/16/2010 @ 1:32 pm PT...





Maybe I should remind everyone that the Nazis had similar excuses for exterminating Jews.

COMMENT #67 [Permalink]

... mick said on 1/16/2010 @ 1:48 pm PT...





"Few people know the facts about the singular event that helped spark what ultimately became known as World War II - the international Jewish declaration of war on Germany shortly after Adolf Hitler came to power and well before any official German government sanctions or reprisals against Jews were carried out. The March 24, 1933 issue of The Daily Express of London (shown here) described how Jewish leaders, in combination with powerful international Jewish financial interests, had launched a boycott of Germany for the express purpose of crippling her already precarious economy in the hope of bringing down the new Hitler regime. It was only then that Germany struck back in response. Thus, if truth be told, it was the worldwide Jewish leadership - not the Third Reich - that effectively fired the first shot in the Second World War. Prominent New York attorney Samuel Untermyer (above right) was one of the leading agitators in the war against Germany, describing the Jewish campaign as nothing less than a "holy war.""

COMMENT #68 [Permalink]

... Agent 99 said on 1/16/2010 @ 1:58 pm PT...





mick I have no idea if Willis Carto is in fact an anti-Semite, or if it's just the popular smear tactic at work, but I think it is ill-advised to cite material that can be traced back to him when trying to argue for the Palestinians' right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness....

COMMENT #69 [Permalink]

... mick said on 1/16/2010 @ 2:03 pm PT...





For Israel, a Reckoning

By John Pilger

January 15, 2010 "Information Clearing House"

COMMENT #70 [Permalink]

... David Lasagna said on 1/16/2010 @ 2:09 pm PT...





Dear Mitch,

I'm confused by many of your words and much of your tone in comments #48 #50 #52. 1. What happened to Mr. Manners?(just kidding) 2. You're angry about Israel being unfairly singled out? By whom? Commenters or posters here? Aren't the usual suspects here decrying injustice wherever it happens? That's what I certainly mean to be doing. My core curriculum people Zinn, Chomsky, Eqbal Ahmad, Naomi Klein, Glenn Greenwald, Amy Goodman, etc, etc, are not playing favorites on calling out crimes against humanity. At least not the way I read them. I'm confused about who you're mad at. 2. There are plenty of Israelis who are critical of their country. The Other Israel is a book of powerful essays written solely by Israelis. A number of them had been in the military serving in the territories. It's a real eye opener. 3. The book I mentioned earlier by Rabbi Michael Lerner--Healing Israel/Palestine:A Path to Peace and Reconciliation-- is extremely critical of both sides. He's a Jew, Rabbi, and psychiatrist who's spent a lot of time over many years in Israel talking to many people from all different sides of the issue. Can you show me or explain how he might be singling out Israel for unfair racist criticism? I just mean to point out again that I think there are plenty of fair, unbiased, non-racist, not anti-semitic people out there who are being critical not just on behalf of the Palestinians but because they see Israel going down a road to ruin and they want her to succeed with all their hearts. 4. Your cries of foul seem to be proving Ernest's point in the post, that this subject is taboo. And that we should be having more discussion. And so here we are.(watch out for sore shoulders from patting ourselves on the back) 5. When one reads the first hand accounts in The Other Israel and from articles written today by people over there witnessing events, I don't think you can reasonably make the claim that the Israelis are doing a much better, fairer, less punishing job of protecting themselves than others throughout history. I mean, hard to compare atrocities to determine if one atrocity is more humane than another, but to me it horrifically sounds like business as usual in demeaning and making life as impossible as possible for yet another "other". 6. Mitch, from me personally I want you to know that I do not feel special animosity or outrage for Israelis. Of course I may be deluded but in my own mind I'm not singling them out. I am heartbroken by our treatment of Native Americans for the last 500-600 years. I am heartbroken by our treatment of the Haitians that so contributed to their current misery. I am heartbroken and appalled at the treatment of the Jews from so many oppressors for so many years. And I'm heartbroken and angered at the oppression the Jews are now beleaguring the Palestinians with. I could go on and on but you get the point.

COMMENT #71 [Permalink]

... Ernest A. Canning said on 1/16/2010 @ 2:32 pm PT...





With all due respect, Mick, your suggestion in #67 that some obscure article appearing in London's Daily Express amounts to an "international Jewish declaration of war on Germany" that "helped spark what ultimately became known as World War II" is both "off-topic" and ludicrous. As revealed by Richard Evans in The Coming of the Third Reich, as early as 1921 Hitler declared he would imprison German Jews in concentration camps. Dachau was not an improvised solution, but a long-planned measure. Evans notes that from the moment Hitler ascended to the position of Reich Chancellor, "columns of paramilitaries marched past [President] Ludendorf’s window. Observers likened the moment to the spirit of 1914, overlooking that it was that spirit led to war. It was the Nazi’s intent from 1/30/33 onward to put the nation on a permanent war footing." Both World War II and the Holocaust were precisely what the Nazis had intended for Germany from the beginning. Their madness did not arise as a reaction to a real "international Jewish conspiracy" --- that was simply the propaganda the Nazis resorted to and which present day anti-Semites continue to cling to. I had hoped this piece would get people communicating with one another with an eye towards an empathetic understanding of the others point of view. That objective cannot be achieved if we are constantly sniping at one another about who has done what to whom. What is needed are constructive ways to move away from the madness that has had Jews and Palestinians killing one another for the past 60 years to a peaceful tomorrow in which all can learn to respect and appreciate one another.

COMMENT #72 [Permalink]

... mick said on 1/16/2010 @ 2:59 pm PT...





Ernest one thing that surprises me since "paying attention" to the Palestinians plight is the amount of hidden information .I was not suggesting that Jews started WW2 .But the media has been perverted from honest examination of things related to Jewish history .

If you are Palestinian Nekba would mean as much to you as the Holocaust means to Jews.

COMMENT #73 [Permalink]

... Agent 99 said on 1/16/2010 @ 3:18 pm PT...





What is needed are constructive ways to move away from the madness that has had Jews and Palestinians killing one another for the past 60 years to a peaceful tomorrow in which all can learn to respect and appreciate one another. Move Israel to the South Pole. Dissolve Israel and restore Palestine, with citizens of whatever religion, race or national origin enjoying equal status. Israel is dangerous for more reasons than it was wrong to instate it to begin with, all its murderation in the name of "self-defense" and its clear intent to do to Palestinians what was done to the Native Americans: With no Israel, the perfidies of the lobby are greatly diminished, and the Armageddon so many fundamentalists are spoiling for on its account is obviated. Stumping for the two state solution is hinky enough, though feasible, if the settlements are all abandoned and things restored to the pre-1967 borders, but completely pernicious to even talk about without those conditions... and that is what way too many are trying to do, incoherent as it is. There aren't any half measures short of the half measures of dropping everything, adhering to the UN resolutions, and instating an Israel and a Palestine with equal status as nations, that can approach Israelis and Palestinians learning to respect and appreciate each other. The feasible half measure has already been proposed and backed by the entire world, but the Israelis won't go there, and can't be made to because of our protection. So either stop protecting them and help make them adhere to the UN resolutions for the two state solution, or let the people who want to rectify matters in defense of the Palestinians who continue to be mercilessly slaughtered after over six decades bring about the one state solution. The Israelis have made it abundantly clear that it will be a one state solution, their way. If their way is unacceptable, and it is, let it be the other way.

COMMENT #74 [Permalink]

... Agent 99 said on 1/16/2010 @ 3:27 pm PT...





Seriously wonderful people have been screaming that it is against Israel's interests to let this continue for quite a while now and Israel and its proponents have done naught but get them fired from their jobs and prevented from holding others for having the audacity to impede them in their determination to have Zion. Insofar as they suffer any casualties from Arabs it is 100% a consequence of their clear imperative to kill any and all they can't drive out. The question is only whether the world can be made to shove its condemnation of this holocaust and be propagandized into calling it merely the unhappy way nations are established.

COMMENT #75 [Permalink]

... Agent 99 said on 1/16/2010 @ 3:28 pm PT...





It doesn't stop being a third rail until this is settled completely once and for all.

COMMENT #76 [Permalink]

... Brad Friedman said on 1/16/2010 @ 4:09 pm PT...





I'm still working hard on a deadline, so haven't been able to follow this thread closely today, and won't be able to over the next 24 or so. Seems most are being generally respectful of each other, and hashing things out in the "long-overdue debate" category. And that's fine. And I hope that such courtesy will continue. That said. A couple of replies to Blue Hawk at various, who said: And please don't tell me that the United States was an unwelcoming nation for persecuted Jews. Of course it was, BH. Sounds like your not familiar with the history of anti-semetism in the U.S. A fine place to start is with the story of the MS St. Louis which, in 1939, brought hundreds of persecuted Jews fleeing Nazi Germany, only to be refused port in the U.S. by FDR. They were sent back to the death camps. You can read more about that beginning here. the holocaust was simply a Jewish justification for disenfranchiing Arab Palestinians. That's utter nonsense, as others have spoken to here I believe (thank you, Ernie). I believe you're a good guy, BH, so don't believe you had any ill-will in your beliefs. But they are rather misguided --- and/or skewed by some pretty ugly (likely purposely anti-Semitic) propaganda --- on this point. Conflating anti-Zionism with Anti-Semitism.... The conflation happens for a reason. Because MUCH of the anti-Zionism in both the U.S. and around the world is, in fact, an easy mask for Anti-Semitism. That's just one of the reasons the discussion is so difficult to have, and one of the reasons why Jews tend to be so (understandably, but overly) touchy about it. Knowing you a bit via your comments here, BH, I don't suspect you have an anti-Semitic bone in your body, in truth. But it is clear from your comments on this thread, that you've been fooled by a number of anti-Semitic "talking points". There are many opportunists out there who use the mask of legitimate questions about Israel's behavior to mask their very real anti-Semitism. If you haven't figured that out yet, I'd urge you to pay a bit more attention. In fact, even as the discussion here has remained largely civil, there a couple of points of discussion which tread mercifully close to anti-Semitism. So again, I urge folks to tread carefully and respectfully on such a discussion, and mind where they are getting their "talking points" from. (eg. 99's case that Israel should be done away with and/or moved to the South Pole, is naive, over-simplified and potentially dangerous. While I don't believe she makes the point in an anti-Semetic way, I suspect she doesn't realize how others might use that same point to express very real anti-Semetic points of view. It also completely ignores hundreds of years of Jewish persecution, for which Israel was ultimately set up in response to....whether BH understands it as much that way yet or not.) And to Mitch Trachtenberg, on the other side of the coin, who said at various: the American left ALWAYS finds Israel to be the nation most worthy of complaint That's an extraordinary and inaccurate --- and yes, offensive --- over-generalization which I suspect you didn't actually mean, had you'd bothered to stop to ponder it before writing it in your zeal here. It IS anti-semitism, it IS bigotry, and it IS disgusting. And now I'll just sit back and wait for the complaints about my "false accusations" to come pouring in, and I'll see if Brad Friedman is willing to say anything. I've already said something about that above, in my comments in reply to BlueHawk. I believe it is often anti-Semitism, as noted, but it is not always and, in the bargain, legitimate criticism of Israel and U.S. policies towards it, have gone far too long as a third-rail, IMO. This thread, however, bears witness to just how difficult is to to have that conversation. That said, all in all, everyone seems to be doing rather well here and staying civil and respectful. Hope that continues. I'm continually astonished that so many American Jews provide cover to the anti-semitism involved in attacks on Israel. If they do, they should be ashamed. If you feel I have done that (or am doing so), I hope you'll call me out for it as appropriate. And again, I urge all to think before they post, in order to assure that their beliefs --- no matter which side of the debate you might fall on --- are based on legitimate points, as opposed to veiled hatred, from you, or from anyone else. Now back to deadlines...

COMMENT #77 [Permalink]

... Agent 99 said on 1/16/2010 @ 4:31 pm PT...





Not to split hairs, but stumping for moving Israel to the South Pole cannot be construed as anti-Semitic. While Brad has a point that people who hate Jews might like to use it, it doesn't distract from the fact that Israel needs to be made to stop murdering its neighbors or moved or completely dissolved. It is not anti-Semitic to have antipathy for Israel... to revile Israel's entire history of slaughtering Arabs and very apparent disinclination to stop. I know Israel likes to conflate itself with Judaism and many Jews like to do that too, but Israel is a rogue state and it must be stopped. One could also argue, from this same perspective, that the United States should be moved to the South Pole, and I would probably argue that vehemently if I weren't so busy dithering on whether I oughtn't move there myself to get away from all this corruption and killing and hating and polemicizing. A nice igloo with a good broadband connection sounds kind of preferable to me....

COMMENT #78 [Permalink]

... Ernest A. Canning said on 1/16/2010 @ 4:48 pm PT...





Of all the excellent points Brad makes in comment #76, the words "bothered to stop to ponder it before writing it in your zeal" which he applied to Mitch but which I believe appropriately apply to all who chose to weigh in on this topic, are perhaps the most significant. The "third rail" nature of this topic arises not only because of the constricted level of discourse here within the U.S. but because, on both sides of the Israel/Palestine divide, emotions are raw and "on edge." A good deal of time and thought went into this piece as I wanted to minimize the possibility that individuals on either side of the divide misinterpreted the deeply felt feelings I wanted to convey. For those who have followed my writing, you know that if I have a bias, it is one which favors peace over war, equality over the inequities of our capitalist system, honesty over corruption, brotherhood and sisterhood over racism and sexism, justice and accountability for war crimes as opposed to sophistries and political expediency. I wrote this article in large measure because I saw in Marcy Winograd's "One State Solution" speech an incredible level of courage to address a topic that, until now, has been taboo for any American running for public office --- even for progressive Jewish American politicians --- and I felt strongly that it is both wrong and hypocritical to refuse to condemn wars of aggression and violence irrespective of whether that violence comes from al Qaeda, Hamas or from any nation-state, including both Israel the United States --- especially from the U.S., which is, militarily, by far the most powerful nation on earth. The core point I made here is the one I've made elsewhere --- the need to acquire an empathetic understanding of the other's point of view. You are entitled to your opinions and can, within the rules of this blog, express them. I would only ask that, before you commit your thoughts to a posted comment, you ponder how they may be received by the other; that you ponder whether you are furthering a dialogue that can potentially lead to a better world; or simply being provocative in a manner that will inflame the other and cause them to shut their minds to what it is you desire to say.

COMMENT #79 [Permalink]

... Agent 99 said on 1/16/2010 @ 4:55 pm PT...





Oh, oh, and, well, that is also if one is inclined to just let Jews have Semitism all to themselves, and I am, because there are only so many windmills one can tilt simultaneously. It has been pointed out that Palestinians in fact qualify as Semitic too:

The term Semite means a member of any of various ancient and modern Semitic-speaking peoples originating in southwestern Asia, including Akkadians, Canaanites, Phoenicians, Hebrews, Arabs, and Ethiopian Semites. and so European Jews oughtn't have started using the term, but common usage has it that "anti-Semitic" means to be anti-Jew. So I know it's hard to keep all the terms and concepts straight, so long have they been obfuscated by propaganda and attempts to excuse the inexcusable and all the other forces that come to bear on thorny issues, but Israel is not Judaism or Jews. It's a state.

COMMENT #80 [Permalink]

... Ernest A. Canning said on 1/16/2010 @ 5:19 pm PT...





You are quite right, 99. The word, Semite, can apply to many peoples of the region, and to the extent that anti-Arab and anti-Muslim sentiments are deeply embedded in American culture --- as I've noted in my earlier articles dealing with hate speech --- it may be said that American culture is tinged by anti-Semitism, even as its government has adopted a pro-Zionist line. The problem I have with the thought of moving Jews from Israel to the North Pole or to any other region is the same problem I have with forcing Palestinians to leave the region. The thought behind Marcy's "One State Solution" envisions the survival of Israel, but not an Israel as strictly a Jewish nation any more than the United States should be a Christian nation. Her vision is of a truly democratic Israel, shared by Jews, Muslims, Christians (and hopefully a few atheists like me) who come to realize that the commonality of their humanity outweighs their differences. It is a vision of a nation and a region at peace. Hatred, hostility, mistrust, objectification of the other --- some of it expressed in comments posted here --- these are things that lead to perpetual war. The one question I would pose to Zionists --- though the question could be applied to all who choose war as their path: All the violence; the large apartheid wall; all the bombs; all the Palestinian homes that have been bulldozed; all the alleged "terrorists" who have been killed or tortured over these past sixty years --- After all that, do you feel safe? If not, how many more must die until you do?

COMMENT #81 [Permalink]

... Mitch Trachtenberg said on 1/16/2010 @ 5:26 pm PT...





BlueHawk, I said I'd get back to you about the Jews against Zionism link. I think I owe you my honest opinion, which is that I think the people behind the link are wacked-out religious nutcases. They are upset that Israel was formed without the proper decree trumpeted by Yahweh from the clouds. Mick, I hope you find peace. 99, We disagree, but if you find a good igloo, please let me know, and maybe we can split broadband charges. David Lasagna, Mr. Manners always gets dumped when the subject turns to Israel, sorry. Survival before etiquette, I'm afraid. W/r/t your point 3, I suspect Lerner articulates much of what I feel. W/r/t 6, I apologize to anyone if I've suggested that criticism of Israel is necessarily anti-semitic. All, I was born in the late 1950s and grew up in a Jewish neighborhood in New York. Collecting charity for "trees for Israel" was a regular activity, and we were all indoctrinated in Hebrew school about how the State of Israel was pure as the driven snow, and taught about how all the land was purchased from the Arabs. Everybody watched Exodus every year... it was like "It's a Wonderful Life" at Christmas. I don't know when I realized that what I'd been taught was not precisely true, but I'm sure it still informs my attitudes. Nevertheless, I do think much of the American left singles out Israel for criticism. This may actually be because of the major, vocal Jewish contingent in the American left and the guilt its members feel about the less-than-perfect behavior of Israel. Brad, If my hyperbole that the American left ALWAYS finds Israel to be the nation most worthy of complaint offends (yes, offends) you, let me correct myself: MUCH of the American left OFTEN singles Israel out in ways that are, in my opinion, unfair and inappropriate. I'll summarize my beliefs and opinions once more, and then leave the discussion to others: 1) Israel came into existence (after Zionism plowed the ground for its creation) as a result of the unprecedented actions of the German government under Hitler. Unprecedented because the entire government apparatus was used to incinerate a people, even when this activity hurt the German war effort. 2) No countries wanted to accept the Jewish refugees. Much of Europe, especially France, was still soaked through and through with anti-semitism, as they are to this day. The Vatican didn't lift a finger to protect Jews, and probably would have preferred that they (we) were all killed. 3) The Roosevelt government in the United States declined to bomb rail lines leading to the ovens, after being told their purpose, without rational reason. 4) The United Nations, acting on the world's shame over what it had allowed to have happen, allowed the State of Israel to come into existence (on, it must be noted, a very small portion of the original British mandate in Palestine). 5) The world thus ended up with an odd situation: a people who had been persecuted for at least 2,000 years, with the persecution culminating in the death of millions at the hand of Europe's "highest" civilization, were offered a refuge in land that already had a population. 6) Israel is thus a very odd nation. It is in a sense a remaining outpost of the colonial West, but it is also the homeland of a people that have been treated as second class citizens and outcasts throughout the rest of the world. The West supports Israel not because of who it is or where it is, but because it is a strategic asset in oil country. In my opinion, anyone who thinks the United States supports Israel thanks to our "shared values" or our "Jewish controlled [fill-in]" is a fool. The United States does what's best for US oil companies and other large corporations. 7) Israel has been repeatedly attacked by its neighbors. It is to a great extent at the mercy of world opinion, though it has nuclear weapons to use as a last resort. The world has forced Israel to give back land it has won in war. This land is now used to launch attacks against the state. 8) Israel has continually offered peace talks to its neighbors, who have continually rebuffed all offers. 9) More than fifty years into statehood, otherwise intelligent people think Israelis should be collectively punished for the inability of the state to fight back against terrorists without killing Arab civilians. Some think they should be forced to move to the South Pole. Others, as stated on the thread, see no problem with Israelis being forced to relocate to the United States, even if they and their parents were born in Palestine. 10) Whether the concept of the Jewish people as a "race" has any foundation in fact, Jews everywhere KNOW that many people consider us second-class Christ-killers, who would be better off dead. We are a group defined, if by nothing else, by the fact that a substantial percentage of the world wants us dead. 11) That definition, and Jews' self-awareness of it, is why Israel has survived, against all odds. The worldwide Jewish community has been fighting with its back against a wall. It is the willful failure of people to understand that the Jewish community feels it will be annihilated if Israel is lost that is my evidence of anti-semitism.

COMMENT #82 [Permalink]

... Agent 99 said on 1/16/2010 @ 5:38 pm PT...





Ernie Winograd's position on the matter is lucid, and laudable as heck, but the lobby will clobber her for it. They will have no part of that action. They have shown that, forcefully, many's the time. A one state solution with Palestinians in any other role beside dead, gone or serf with no rights is 100% unacceptable to them. Not only will they not have it, they will make sure that no one in the Democratic Party will support her, even if by some miracle she manages to get the seat anyway. That is why people are shocking us with their support for Harman. The only way Palestinians end up with their human rights on their home turf is as I have mentioned. This issue has been discussed to death everywhere by reasonable people and the facts on the ground there, or here, have not budged, have only gotten worse. It will be an improvement for American liberals to be able to discuss it without maniacs coming in and whining about Israel's safety, ignoring Israel's military might, backed by ours, and all the killing they've been doing over the course of their history, but that would only begin the long process of shaving a jot of the lobby's power away here, which has no effect on the emergency for Palestinians. Finkelstein stumps for the two state solution, not because it is the best one—the one Winograd speaks about is—but because that is what has the world's backing, and so therefore is feasible to make happen at all. Israel will not do either option—the one state or the two state—until they are forced and they won't be forced until we force them. In fact, until they are forced to stop, they will keep killing Palestinians and Lebanese until they have an expanded state with all the resources they feel are optimal and no Arabs at all. That has been made perfectly crystal clear. And, the people interviewed in that video I linked above all explain entirely too clearly that Winograd will get kicked to the curb for her heroism, and why. So while civil discourse with the ends you have in mind is completely wonderful, and certainly a step in the right direction for American politics, unless and until the Israel lobby here gets serious about saving Israel by forcing it to do the right thing, right away, Palestine is toast and Winograd defeated, even if she wins.

COMMENT #83 [Permalink]

... Mitch Trachtenberg said on 1/16/2010 @ 5:53 pm PT...





It will be an improvement for American liberals to be able to discuss it without maniacs coming in and whining about Israel's safety, ignoring Israel's military might, backed by ours, Cancel that broadband.

COMMENT #84 [Permalink]

... Agent 99 said on 1/16/2010 @ 6:07 pm PT...





If it's any consolation, Mitch, I wasn't thinking of you when I said that. I was thinking in general. I have spent a lot of time on this issue and there are always maniacs doing that. There are actually people paid to do that wherever they find the subject, and bands of volunteers. It's been done to death, everywhere, and it's maniacal, even murderous in its way, since it only ever serves to enable more slaughter. Israel wouldn't be unsafe if it wasn't killing people and stealing their homes and resources, and with their military advantage, and nukes, and us, it's even more ludicrous to invoke their need for safety.

COMMENT #85 [Permalink]

... BlueHawk said on 1/16/2010 @ 6:26 pm PT...





There is a lot to catch up on. Brad...point taken. I'm not in complete accordance with everything you wrote...but it's not anything to take big issue with. Thanks Ernest... Man...you nailed this issue...3rd rail indeed. 99...we're probably closer in mind than others here. Mitch...I suspected that maybe the site I posted was off-base. But I'm not that aware of Jewish culture and history to make a judgement...thanks for your clarification. Mitch I will attempt to tackle your points in comment @81 1) Israel came into existence (after Zionism plowed the ground for its creation) as a result of the unprecedented actions of the German government under Hitler. Unprecedented because the entire government apparatus was used to incinerate a people, even when this activity hurt the German war effort. Mitch...What happened to Jews at the hands of the nazis was unique only in method. Government sponsored holocaust was NOT UNIQUE to Jews.

Human history is littered with holocausts of all peoples at one time or another. My ancestors suffered a watery holocaust dubbed the middle passage...millions perished during the brutal trans-Atlantic crossing on slave ships. That's just one example. I don't want to tit for tat our persecution stories...I just want to demonstrate that what happened to European Jews wasn't singular to them. 2) No countries wanted to accept the Jewish refugees. Much of Europe, especially France, was still soaked through and through with anti-semitism, as they are to this day. The Vatican didn't lift a finger to protect Jews, and probably would have preferred that they (we) were all killed. May I remind you of Haiti...the present tragedy reminded me of the Haitian boat people turn away at American shores in the 80's I believe...

Again what you describe is not unique to Jews.

Most so called Christian nations have some anti-semetism, anti-Arab, anti African, anti-Asian elements to them...It's called life in the Anglo-Saxon era. 3) The Roosevelt government in the United States declined to bomb rail lines leading to the ovens, after being told their purpose, without rational reason. Maybe...but I don't see why Arab Palestinians have to suffer for that. 4) The United Nations, acting on the world's shame over what it had allowed to have happen, allowed the State of Israel to come into existence (on, it must be noted, a very small portion of the original British mandate in Palestine). "The world's shame"?

The world didn't slaughter Jews...nazi Germany did. Arab Palestinians didn't slaughter Jews...nazi Germany did. 6) Israel is thus a very odd nation. It is in a sense a remaining outpost of the colonial West, but it is also the homeland of a people that have been treated as second class citizens and outcasts throughout the rest of the world. The West supports Israel not because of who it is or where it is, but because it is a strategic asset in oil country. In my opinion, anyone who thinks the United States supports Israel thanks to our "shared values" or our "Jewish controlled [fill-in]" is a fool. The United States does what's best for US oil companies and other large corporations. BINGO!..."Outpost of the colonial west"

That my friend nails it for me...

Other than that it seems you're really displaying a persecution complex, that allows Israel to persecute Palestinians. 7) Israel has been repeatedly attacked by its neighbors. It is to a great extent at the mercy of world opinion, though it has nuclear weapons to use as a last resort. The world has forced Israel to give back land it has won in war. This land is now used to launch attacks against the state. You mean like most foriegn occupiers experience ?

Bear with me here...

From American media propaganda to Israeli public relations, one would think that Arab Palestinians were the invaders of their own land...and European Jews actually lived there all along.

After wars land usually returns to the people of it's legacy...only imperial invaders occupy a territory imperpetuity. 8) Israel has continually offered peace talks to its neighbors, who have continually rebuffed all offers. Peace talks under what terms ? 9) More than fifty years into statehood, otherwise intelligent people think Israelis should be collectively punished for the inability of the state to fight back against terrorists without killing Arab civilians. Some think they should be forced to move to the South Pole. Others, as stated on the thread, see no problem with Israelis being forced to relocate to the United States, even if they and their parents were born in Palestine. Israel used terror in it's fight with Britain. The British labeled Menachem Begin it's #1 terrorist.

I saw no one suggest that Israelis be "forced" anywhere. I stated in response to your question that after WWII where would Jews have gone ? I suggested the U.S., England, France etc.

No one suggested that Jews be forced anywhere. 10) Whether the concept of the Jewish people as a "race" has any foundation in fact, Jews everywhere KNOW that many people consider us second-class Christ-killers, who would be better off dead. We are a group defined, if by nothing else, by the fact that a substantial percentage of the world wants us dead. There's that persecution complex again...Actually a substantial portion of the world has no ill feelings what so ever about Jews. 11) That definition, and Jews' self-awareness of it, is why Israel has survived, against all odds. The worldwide Jewish community has been fighting with its back against a wall. It is the willful failure of people to understand that the Jewish community feels it will be annihilated if Israel is lost that is my evidence of anti-semitism. As have most non-white, non Christian people...again Jews aren't unique in that attribute. The world is on the brink of annihilation. Because a portion of Jews feel it is their divine right to occupy a certain land...no other people in the world have made that kind of claim to land and had the UN grant it. Excuse the Arab Palestinians for feeling that the fix was in. It's amazing how this actually doves tails nicely to Frank Schaeffer's Endtimers piece...because the actuality of Israel plays very nicely into the Endtimers plans for Armeggedon. And Israel is playing right along.

COMMENT #86 [Permalink]

... BlueHawk said on 1/16/2010 @ 6:36 pm PT...





Ernest @80 The one question I would pose to Zionists --- though the question could be applied to all who choose war as their path: All the violence; the large apartheid wall; all the bombs; all the Palestinian homes that have been bulldozed; all the alleged "terrorists" who have been killed or tortured over these past sixty years --- After all that, do you feel safe? If not, how many more must die until you do? Ewrnest those are great words...and the question of the century.

COMMENT #87 [Permalink]

... Mitch Trachtenberg said on 1/16/2010 @ 6:56 pm PT...





BlueHawk @ 85, What can I say? Thanks for listening. But I feel that my comments @ 81 and your reply @ 85 pretty much sum up the problem --- people look at the elephant and focus on completely different parts. I understand you think I'm displaying a persecution complex. Perhaps I am. As they say about the paranoid, it doesn't mean nobody's out to get them. If I'm giving the impression I think the Jews are history's "best" victims, I apologize; that's certainly not my intention. I'm well aware of the enormous suffering of others, including that of Palestinians at the hand of Jews and blacks at the hand of slave traders and slave owners. But please recognize that not everyone that supports Israel is doing it because they think Jews have a divine right to that particular land.

COMMENT #88 [Permalink]

... mick said on 1/16/2010 @ 7:46 pm PT...





"But please recognize that not everyone that supports Israel is doing it because they think Jews have a divine right to that particular land. "

M.T. Then why are they blind to the many hypocrisy's .Just a single example for now.Iran wants a Nuclear Power Program (as they are entitled) ,they allow inspection (IAEA) and conduct open conversation about their desire and has signed the NPT.

Whereas Israel HAS NUCLEAR WEAPONS ,refuses to allow inspection and will not sign the NPT. And who is pressing the hardest for sanction against Iran ?Who is threatening to attack Iran ?Who is behind the lie that Ahmadinejad wants to "wipe Israel off the map." "'By Way Of Deception, Thou Shalt Do War'" is Mossad's motto and it seems to be embraced by many in Israel.

COMMENT #89 [Permalink]

... David Lasagna said on 1/16/2010 @ 10:27 pm PT...





Agent 99--(then Mitch) Just my impression--I can agree with much that you say through these posts but you say everything with what sounds like extreme attitude. I'm with you being upset at the treatment of the Palestinians and at the present time, since the Israelis possess overwhelmingly superior strength and means, I assign more of the responsibility of the current difficulties to them. But you sound so angry. You sound like you have no understanding or compassion for the fact that the Jews have been battered throughout history. You write as if the present injustices they commit are not connected to hundreds and hundreds of years of suffering and persecution. I'm afraid speaking of or to people who have not recovered psychologically or emotionally from centuries of mistreatment, a people who are, in my view, acting irrationally(and at times unconscionably) cuz they are freaked out, will only supply further justification for them to freak out, no matter how valid your points. Thus, I would guess, doing little to alter or interrupt the cycle of violence you're so upset about.

I think I see evidence of this in Mitch's responses. You're pushing his buttons. And he seems to be a thoughtful guy living thousands of miles away from the immediate tensions. I strongly concur with Ernest's sentiments and Rabbi Lerner's. To have any hope of movement, working through this vast complicated, longstanding conflict we must go further than we have before. We must realize and act from true mutual understanding, support, sympathy, absolutely even-handed criticism, love and generosity. Yes, the Jews are being the aggressors now but they are a battered and persecuted people. When you rail about these matters, no matter how much truth you have on your side, I can't imagine that a battered, persecuted people will likely be able to hear anything but somebody else ready to get them. Mitch, some of your words feel to me like a similar thing from the other side. I'm with you pretty well up to point 6, then, in places, I don't think you're giving the Palestinian side a fair shake. And I think you're stating some things that may not be accurate. For instance the Saudi Plan sounds like a pretty good possibility that was repeatedly offered(wasn't it?)that the Israelis wouldn't consider. And I don't have this at my mental finger tips but I've even read of Iranian concessions/acknowledgments that were rebuffed.(My memory of this is it was not part of any kind of anti-semitic rant. Maybe it was from Greenwald? Don't know really. Sorry, I'm just a guy reading a lot, taking some notes, and trying to pay attention. I don't know how Brad, and Ernie, and Greenwald have all these attributions at their fingertips all the time. Amazes me.) And the Israelis have initiated attacks too. And I think your caricaturizations of Israeli responses falls dramatically short giving an unrealistic and woefully mild representation of the severity of Israeli attacks on a battered and hostage population. So when I read Agent 99 and Mitch I agree with a lot of their points and history and then I either cringe or am saddened because it looks like the age old elements of not being truly fair to the other side rising again and again. Again, I agree with Ernie, Brad, and Lerner, that's the dynamic that must be changed. (I'm a peasant. I'm very slow. I taught myself to type sorta. These things take me forever to write. And it hurts my eyes.)

COMMENT #90 [Permalink]

... Mitch Trachtenberg said on 1/16/2010 @ 10:41 pm PT...





Mick @88, "President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said here Monday that the Zionist Regime of Israel faces a deadend and will under God's grace be wiped off the map." Source: Website of the Presidency of the Islamic Republic of Iran, located at http://www.president.ir/en/?ArtID=10114

COMMENT #91 [Permalink]

... Agent 99 said on 1/16/2010 @ 11:02 pm PT...



COMMENT #92 [Permalink]

... Brad Friedman said on 1/16/2010 @ 11:50 pm PT...





99 - You have said that Mitch is "just wrong", because that's apparently what you want to believe. But it doesn't seem as if you even bothered to read the link he offered. It is from Ahmadinejad's own official Iran presidency webpage (presumably, unless it's a very clever CIA fake or some such), in which it claims, in English, that he said: "O dear Imam (Khomeini)! You said the Zionist Regime that is a usurper and illegitimate regime and a cancerous tumor should be wiped off the map. I should say that your illuminating remark and cause is going to come true today. ... the Zionist regime faces a complete deadend and under God's grace your wish will soon be materialized and the corrupt element will be wiped off the map," said President Ahmadinejad. Now I personally believe the sturm and drang over Ahmadinejad is a whole bunch of bluster and nonsense, frankly, and largely inflated so as to give the U.S. (and Israel) the next great Satan, since God knows we just must always have one waiting in the wings. But despite what the author at your link argues --- and even that explanation of the comments shows Ahmadinejad repeatedly refusing the opportunity to disassociate from them or clarify them in multiple interviews --- if the official website of the "Presidency of the Islamic Republic of Iran" says what it does, as quoted above, I'm not sure how you can simply say "Mitch, You are just wrong." The author of your page goes on to argue that the comments were mistranslated, and then opportunistically abused. I have no doubt that opportunists have done everything they can to demonize Ahmadinejad (and he's given them plenty of easy reason to do so in the bargain, btw, as he doesn't appear to be the brightest bulb in the pack), but where Norouzi attempts to make the case that it's all just one big mistranslation and that "Big news agencies such as The Associated Press and Reuters refer to the misquote, literally, on an almost daily basis" and that "major damage has already been done" by that, "providing the groundwork for the next phase of disinformation: complete character demonization", well, it looks to me like Ahmadinejad has done that to himself, as evidenced by Mitch's link, and continues to do exactly that to this day. Sorry. But I'd have to call "advantage Mitch" on that particular point, for what it's worth (which is, in my opinion, not very much, btw.)

COMMENT #93 [Permalink]

... Agent 99 said on 1/16/2010 @ 11:53 pm PT...





Iran has never threatened to attack or to wipe Israel from the map. They have been the only people decent enough to help Lebanese and Palestinians defend themselves from attacks by Israel. Again, Israel would be perfectly safe if it did not keep murdering its neighbors, and it is safe from attack by another country because attacking Israel would be suicide. As it stands, compliance with U.N. resolutions would suffice to keep it perfectly safe for a very, very long time. They won't do it. They prefer slaughtering and torturing people, and keeping them locked up in ghettos without enough food, medicine, water or building materials to recover from periodic pogroms, where they use white phosphorus to burn women and children to unrecognizable remnants of blackened flesh, to complying with U.N. resolutions.

COMMENT #94 [Permalink]

... Agent 99 said on 1/17/2010 @ 12:00 am PT...





I read it Brad. It's the same translator, IRNA, as from the last time, and EVEN if he said what it says he said, that was not a threat to Israel. It wasn't even a threat to the Israeli government. It was a statement that these bad guys are dead enders and cannot last. But really, the Khomeini stuff Ahmadinejad is talking about was a reference to regimes disappearing from the pages of time. Decent people revile the actions of the Israelis, and for whatever else might be unlikable about the Iranian government, their defense of decency in this matter is actually beautiful, and no threat to people of good will. Ahmadinejad, in fact, when pressed on this question, the question of the resolution of the Palestine problem, he always says "Put it to a vote."

COMMENT #95 [Permalink]

... mick said on 1/17/2010 @ 12:01 am PT...





Mitch Trachtenberg from your linked site the ACTUAL quote was ...

"O dear Imam (Khomeini)! You said the Zionist Regime that is a usurper and illegitimate regime and a cancerous tumor s